Nobody Knows Anything

We’ve been living in the rental house for a year now (yeah, the remodel will be done any minute now), so it’s probably time to check out how our experiment of dumping a cable connection is going.

Answer: it’s going really well. We’re not going back.

Turns out that we’re not alone, of course: a lot of people are saying farewell to cable.

Pre-move, we had DSL via Speakeasy for $145 a month, plus DirectTV for $95 a month, plus Netflix for $23 ($263 a month). We had lots of premium channels (HBO, Showtime), and we didn’t buy movies. We sometimes bought stuff via iTunes, for when our system broke down or recorded a poor copy of something.

When we moved, we cancelled Speakeasy (they couldn’t get us the speed we wanted) and picked up Comcast cable internet ($63…and roughly the same speed we had before *headdesk*). And we either watched shows via iTunes, Netflix DVDs, or Netflix on Demand. The kids in particular have taken to Netflix on Demand like a duck to your Sunday picnic. Over the past year we’ve spent $1453 on the iTunes TV store (wow, that looks amazing to write out like that), or $120 a month. Plus $23 for Netflix.

Which means we’re spending roughly $203 a month now. For shows without commercials, often in higher quality than the broadcast versions.

I think I’m going to change our Netflix subscription to be the one DVD + On Demand stuff, which is something like $10 a month.

True, we don’t get sports or 24 hour news stations, but we don’t care. We don’t have the movie channels (if we really need a movie, we’ll rent it from iTunes or wait for the DVD). Our house is right near the Santa Cruz mountains, which interfere with all broadcast stations, or I would get an antenna to cover local channels.

We recently had a small vacation and while staying in the hotel sacked out in bed to watch Food Network (oh, Bobby Flay, my daughter has missed you). Used to be we were annoyed by regular TV because we couldn’t pause or fast-forward over commercials, like we could with TiVo. Now we’ve found regular TV practically unwatchable. I don’t miss it at ALL.

Comcast keeps offering us deals where we can get a faster internet connection if we also pick up a cable subscription, and the combo will cost less than it’s costing now. Darin keeps responding, “How much for just the faster internet?”

Unless one of the kids suddenly develops a need to watch sports, we’re not going back.

Hi Hollywood. I know you don’t care about me on so many levels—I’m over 25, I’m a woman, I’m married, I have children, I don’t like vampires whether sparkly or not—but Jesus, you aren’t even trying any more, are you?

It’s JULY. That is MIDSUMMER, for those of you who never leave the office and have no idea. SUMMER is peak movie season.

There is nothing for us to go see. I mean, I’m digging deep here, people. I am putting everything on the possibles list, and it’s still slim-to-no pickings. And Darin and I are almost willing to see anything.

Yes, I said almost. The Twilight movies are RIGHT OUT, okay?

(By the way, for anybody out there who still reads this blog and may have a small girl child of your acquaintance who may be interested in reading Twilight in the future…I beg you to read this book NOW, so you may know of what you speak when you trash this book as hard as it needs to be trashed. But that’s an entry for another day.)

What have Darin and I already seen this summer? Let’s see:

• Knight and Day: we saw this last week. It’s pretty silly, but it revels in its silliness—the montage where we only see little bits and pieces of how Tom Cruise gets Cameron Diaz out of a series of harrowing situations is hilarious. And while Tom always comes off as batshit-insane to me, he is absolutely the best thing in this movie: he’s funny as hell, and wow, is he comfortable being a movie star. Both Darin and I were really impressed by how amazingly charming Cruise was in this.
• The A-Team: Yes, we saw this. Best thing by far: Sharlto Copley as Murdock, the crazy helicopter pilot—man, that guy is good. Worst thing: there’s a whole plot point about Man of Violence BA Baracus becoming a Man of Peace…and we know that all is right with the world when he becomes a Man of Violence again. Hoo-yah! Also: hard as hell to tell what is going on in some scenes because of the action editing. Does anyone choreograph any more? Am I showing my age?
• Toy Story 3: Saw this with the kids. Thought it was great.
• Get Him To The Greek: Okay, I admit: I thought this was hilarious. It was completely stupid and yet: freaking hysterical. “Stroke the furry wall!”

Mind you, I had to look at a list of movies currently playing to remind me what I may have seen in the past few weeks (with the exception of Toy Story 3, which I remember seeing just fine).

Yes, we’ve skipped The Last Airbender, MacGruber, Prince of Persia, Shrek Forever After (the kids saw that one with their Grandpa), and Sex and the City 2.

We’re planning on seeing Despicable Me with the kids this weekend, so that’s out.

What are our current choices for a movie to go see on date night? Cyrus, I Am Love, and Predators.

Any of these may, in fact, turn out to be a great movie-going experience. But none of them appears to be a must-see movie-going experience. I have high hopes for the upcoming Inception, but one movie out of…how many?…that might turn out to be not completely mind-numbing and shallow.

Jesus, I don’t know where the love of movies is going to come from in the next generation. It’s dire out there, Hollywood, and frankly, I’m blaming you for it.

Oh yeah, and 3D? Kiss my ass.

A few months ago I saw the Kick-Ass trailer and I thought, “Wow, that looks pretty cool.” I didn’t know it was based on a comic. (Although that should have been obvious.) In the last few weeks, several of the blogs/tweeters/sites I follow either highly anticipated this movie or had already seen it and loved it.

The first review I read of it, however, was Roger Ebert’s, and he loathes this movie:

Shall I have feelings, or should I pretend to be cool? Will I seem hopelessly square if I find “Kick-Ass” morally reprehensible and will I appear to have missed the point? Let’s say you’re a big fan of the original comic book, and you think the movie does it justice. You know what? You inhabit a world I am so very not interested in. A movie camera makes a record of whatever is placed in front of it, and in this case, it shows deadly carnage dished out by an 11-year-old girl, after which an adult man brutally hammers her to within an inch of her life. Blood everywhere. Now tell me all about the context.

Do you know what you have to do to get Roger Ebert to loathe your movie? Wow, I thought.

(Btw, if you haven’t been reading Roger Ebert’s personal blog, do yourself a favor and hie there now. He really is one of the best writers going at the moment—he was a great writer before his illness, and now he has just brought it to a whole new level. Whether you agree with him or not, you always know where he stands, and if you’re going to disagree with him, bring your A game.)

Then we got Entertainment Weekly, where our favorite movie critic, Owen Gleiberman, gave Kick-Ass a B+:

Kick-Ass, directed by Matthew Vaughn (Layer Cake), is an enjoyably supercharged and ultraviolent teen-rebel comic-book fantasy that might be described — in spirit, at least — as reality-based. When Dave, in costume, gets out into the world of grungy criminals, he discovers that putting a stop to evil is no picnic. A showdown with parking-lot thieves puts him in the hospital, and the fact that he bleeds real blood is part of what hooks you; the movie never makes it too easy for him. But it doesn’t mock him, either. Standing there in his silly/noble outfit, brandishing a pair of ninja batons, he looks just crazy enough to be a little scary, and when he chases off a pack of muggers and the exploit gets caught on video, it becomes a Web sensation. The legend of Kick-Ass is born.

We love Gleiberman so much that anything he gives over a C is an auto-see for us, so clearly we had to go see this one. I mentioned to Darin that Ebert was diametrically opposed to Gleiberman on this one and Darin said, “Ebert is the better writer, Gleiberman is the better reviewer.”

Well, you’ve probably guessed by now, but when we walked out of the theater we were each pretty much convinced one of those critics was right: Me, Ebert; Darin, Gleiberman.

Kick-Ass is the story of a 17-year-old comic book geek who decides he wants to be a superhero. So he buys a costume via mail order, throws a few punches at a mirror, and then goes out into the mean streets…where he promptly gets his ass kicked, hard. He gets a few mini-powers as a result (the ability to withstand pain, because his nerve endings are messed up…but, uh, you know that the body still suffers the injury, right? The writers conveniently skip over that fact in subsequent scenes), and continues to go out, where he becomes an Internet sensation.

Once the movie has set up that superheroes don’t exist in the real world, it throws into this mix a dad who’s training his daughter to be a superhero! And heck if it doesn’t seem like she has some serious superpowers. She bounds! She can throw a punch! She has the most amazing ability to aim, shoot, and absorb recoil from a gun ever! The actress who plays Hit Girl is fabulous young actress named Chloë Grace Moretz—I think we’re going to see a lot out of her. There is nothing Hit Girl can’t do.

You then have uber-powerful bad guys (the Mafia, natch), and shit happens. Really violent shit. Really violent over-the-top Diane-has-her-hands-over-her-eyes-for-minutes shit.

Where I’m coming from when I tell you my reaction: I saw Kill Bill and I loved it. I saw Inglourious Basterds and I loved it (even if I did close my eyes for the head-bashing scene). If given a choice between a rom-com and an action movie, Darin doesn’t even bother mentioning both movies because he knows which one I’m going to pick. I write action and violence. My reaction to this movie is not about violence. It’s about what the hell the filmmaker was going for.

If we’re in the real world (ie, all of Act I), then Hit Girl really is killing all of those guys and psychopathically walking away with nary a blink. If this isn’t the real world, then what the hell is the point of this movie? Kick-Ass changes the rules on us mid-stream, and it leaves me waving a flag saying, “WTF?”

This movie wants it both ways: it wants us to think violence is real and does some actual damage, and it wants us to think it’s cool.

When the hero dispatches the bad guy with a bazooka and uses a goddamn cheesy Eighties-style sendoff line first, the movie wants us to think that’s cool. When the hero gets some serious fucking damage done to him in an extended torture scene and then walks away with nary a stutter in his step, the movie wants us to think that’s cool. I don’t care if his nerve endings are shot and he has metal replacements in his body; if he’s supposed to have his internal organs rearranged, he’s going to be puking up blood, not wondering how to help Hit Girl kill some people. And when we see Hit Girl moving through a warehouse with night-vision goggles picking off big scary men first-person-shooter style, we’re supposed to think that’s cool.

And then there’s simply what we see on screen, which is often an 11-year-old girl blowing guys’s heads off with a gun as big as she is, or conversely getting her scrawny butt kicked. You can’t watch that and say, Well, it’s just a comic book. My eyes are watching it happening.

My biggest question when leaving the movie theater was, Did director Matthew Vaughn call up Mark Strong (the actor who plays the big bad guy) and say, “I have a script here. The climax is you beating the shit out of an 11-year-old girl,” and did Strong immediately respond, “Okay, I’m in”?

And then, of course, there’s the standard (and yet: still necessary) complaint, which is, “Jesus H Christ, am I tired of the portrayal of women in these things.” You have your dead/comatose women (the moms (of course!) of Kick-Ass, Hit Girl, and another superhero, Red Mist), and you have your fucktoys (the English teacher, the hooker in the apartment, and the girlfriend). That’s it. That’s what women get to be.

Oh, and then there’s Hit Girl, but since she’s 11 or 12, I’ll cut her some slack. She has about 6 years before she’ll be someone’s fucktoy.

The guy who posted he wishes he could take his daughter to this movie, but she’s too young? Dude, you have some serious rethinking to do.

Anyhow. I’m clearly not a fan of this movie. I understand why Darin likes it—he doesn’t flinch at movie violence the way I do, where I seem to experience every punch in real time—but I am not feeling the love at all.

Darin and I are still trying to see every movie that comes down the pike and even during Oscar-bait season we sometimes still have a hard time finding one. And forthwith, a short review of what we’ve seen at the multiplex recently:

• Avatar: Blue indigenous people good, technological whitey bad. (Unless techie whitey is pretending to be one of the indigenous people, in which case he’s the best fucking indigenous person ever.) Go read this. Then this. And this. That’s how I feel about Avatar.
  
       Walking out of the theater I said: “We’ll nuke it from space. It’s the only way to be sure.” Because technological whitey wants “unobtanium” a LOT. Also: I saw floating mountains in World of Warcraft three years ago.
  
       Rated: Underwhelmed.

• Sherlock Holmes: Ah, Robert Downey Jr. Seriously, he is currently the holder of the “Errol Flynn Memorial I-Can’t-Believe-I-Get-Paid-For-This” crown. I’m not sure what he’s doing is actually acting, but who cares? He’s having an awesome time. Some stuff happened in this movie, none of which I need to tell you about, other than Holmes and Watson exchanging banter. Not sure anything that happened was particularly Holmesian, but everyone appeared to enjoy themselves. I’m sure there will be a sequel and that you will not need to remember any of the plot points from this one.
  
       Rated: Fun!

• Invictus: Walking into the theater you know how this one is going to end, and it doesn’t matter: director Clint Eastwood is going to make you feel stirring emotions, dammit. Which he does, often and with no small doses. The combination of real-life drama, crowd scenes, and stirred emotions is enough to kill you during the before the opening credits sequence, so you can imagine how you feel by the climax. For me this was a must-see, because in my book Matt Damon can do no wrong, and once again he’s solid here. Darin said that Morgan Freeman’s Mandela was the best non-imitation interpretation of a real-life figure since Langella’s Nixon, and I think that’s about right. Bring hankies.
  
       My question: Why has a sport as violent and in-you-face as rugby not made it here in America? N.B.: You do not need to understand or like rugby to enjoy this film.
  
       Rated: Exciting! Inspiring! Exhausting!

• The Princess and the Frog: Now, this is what I’m talking about for family entertainment. Great songs! Feisty heroine! Joy! Sadness! Musical numbers! We loved this movie, although there’s a sad bit toward the end that really bothered the 7-year-old.
  
       Rated: Whoo!

• Up in the Air: What you have to know is that I love George Clooney. I have no idea what the actual man is like, nor do I want to know. He is the current reigning holder of the “Cary Grant Memorial Of-Course-You-Want-To-Be-Me,-Even-I-Want-To-Be-Me” crown. And while I enjoyed him muchly in this film (as always), I think the film as a whole is deeply overrated. For one thing, it looked like TV—there was nothing that screamed “Major Motion Picture” about the story, the cinematography, or frankly the acting. For another thing, the story was nothing special. This movie has gotten so much love and so many accolades I’m wondering if we saw the wrong cut or something.
  
       Rated: Unexceptional

• Fantastic Mr. Fox: Again: the Clooney Meister wins. This is a really fun animated movie about anthropomorphic animals and their hijinks. It’s been a few weeks since we saw it, so I can’t remember anything in particular about the script or the story I liked, but I know that just thinking about it makes me smile, so there you go.
  
       Rated: Foxy!

• Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel: Yeah, we haven’t had a chance to catch this one.
  
       Not yet rated

We went to see Food, Inc. last night—we are at the cornucopia section of the summer, where there are so many movies we want to see, yet instead of the three options I usually send Darin for our movie choices, I sent him only this one. It’s a documentary, it’s not a fun topic, gosh only knows how long it will be in theaters. So off we went to see it, and of course Darin ran into someone he knows. (This is a fairly frequent occurrence, honestly.) I did get my usual Red Vines, but Darin passed on the popcorn. Which, really, was all for the best.

Food, Inc. is sort of a greatest hits of current factory farming/industrial food complex criticism that we’ve read about from such writers as Eric Schlosser (Fast Food Nation) and Michael Pollan (The Omnivore’s Dilemma), both of whom are featured prominently in the film. Their theses are, to logline it: We have become removed from the source of our food; if we knew what went into our food we’d demand serious change; it is in everyone’s best interest to be fully informed about what the food manufacturers are presenting to us.

The movie presents an overview of the major factors involved with the industrial-caloric complex: the political, the economic, the medical, and the environmental. The political, showing the toothlessness of the federal government (when the USDA can’t even shut down processing plants known to be producing unsanitary food). The economic, where food—by which I mean food “product,” or the crap that litters our stores—is made so cheap by the vast corn subsidies our government gives “farmers,” by which mean the multibillion dollar conglomerates like Archer Daniels Midland or ConAgra or Tyson. The medical, where there’s no debate about how our modern Western diet is killing us. The environmental, where the runoff from the CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation, where animals are grown and live their entire lives in a cesspool of their own manure) is destroying watersheds, killing towns, and encouraging the growth of diseases like our old friend, e coli.

I also have to criticize the movie for sacrificing depth for breadth. For example, one section of the movie is the story about the low-income family who can afford dinner for a family of 4 at the Burger King drive-through (primarily because everything at Burger King is heavily processed food, dependent on the ubiquity of cheap corn). The family goes to the supermarket to find healthier, fresher choices and they simply can’t afford it. Broccoli is not deeply subsidized. Burger King is. The father is taking various medications for diabetes, the cost of which severely reduces their food budget even more. The younger daughter is now at risk for developing diabetes soon. The film gives us lots of statistics about the rise of diabetes in our country…but then assumes we know the connection between this food and the diabetes, because it sure as hell doesn’t explain it to us.

The clear culprit of our current food system is the corn subsidy. Surprisingly, the film doesn’t call for the subsidy to be ended (or at least severely changed). That may be the take-away they’re hoping we get from it, but it never says it out loud. Of course, maybe they’re worried about being sued about that kind of thing. The film does explain that, unless you’re Oprah and have the money to pay the team of lawyers to fight the Man, you’d better shut up and keep your head down, or otherwise the ranchers/Monsanto/other will sue you to kingdom come.

Many people say, If the price of food rises, people won’t be able to afford it! The answer to that one is pretty goddamn clear to me: we can’t afford what we’ve got going on now, and if people can’t afford it, it’s time to pay them some more goddamn money, isn’t it. (And stop making them spend most of their food budget on diabetes medications.) Our American way of life is not sustainable, and we have to rethink what our real priorities are here. If Food, Inc. gets people curious about the topic, so much the better.

If you are interested in this topic and don’t know where to start, here are some great books to check out. They’re popular science, meaning they’re written for normal human beings to read. (With the possible exception of The China Study, which has lots and lots of scientific studies and research for the biggest wonk to wade through, but you can still read plenty of stuff in there without going cross-eyed.)

• Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser.

• The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan.

• In Defense of Food by Michael Pollan. This is a good overview of the problems and issues confronting us in the modern food age and asks us to really think about what we’re going to do about it.

• Food Matters by Mark Bittman. I like Bittman’s food writing for the NY Times a lot, and this book is another good overview of the issues we need to deal with, like, NOW about our the industrial-caloric complex. Plus: recipes!

• Food Politics by Marion Nestle. This is an excellent in-depth investigation of what makes it to your plate and why.

• What To Eat by Marion Nestle. After Food Politics so many of her friends said, “So what am I supposed to eat, anyhow?” Nestle then went into a supermarket and investigated what the hell is actually on the shelves. Wonderful reference tome.

• Fat Land: How Americans Became the Fattest People In the World by Greg Critser. Critser investigates where all this cheap corn came from (the Nixon administration) and the effects it’s had on our food and our health. If you want an explanation of what high fructose corn syrup is and why it’s bad for you, check this out.

• The China Study by T. Colin Campbell. If, like me (being a good indoctrinated American), you said, What on Earth can we learn from the Chinese about nutrition, the starvation of whom we’ve been made guilty about for years? Well, this ain’t the Cultural Revolution and China exports food to us. (Think about that.) Campbell makes it pretty clear that the absolute first line of defense against what’s known as “the Western diseases” is what goes into our mouth. You can argue with his conclusions—but this is a pretty dense scientific tome and he’s published, y’know, actual scientific papers on these topics.

• The Way We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter by Peter Singer and Jim Mason. Singer is a philosopher who specializes in the ethics of our food choices, which seems specialized and arcane until you realize it touches just about every single aspect of our lives. The book uses three families who have very different food philosophies (fast food, organic and free range food, vegan) as the jumping-off point to investigate where we get our food from and why it matters. I absolutely will not eat turkey ever again after reading this book (sorry, Aunt Lil, but no way, no how, am I eating turkey this Thanksgiving, or ever again at any other time). Singer is vegan but he doesn’t disparage the families who choose to eat meat: he investigates why and and where their food is coming from.

Feel free to suggest others in comments.

In my continuing quest to go vegetarian cut way back on the amount of animal products I consume (I’m sorry, I’m such a weenie, I’m just not a labels person), I have started made it my default behavior to search restaurant menus for the most vegan meal possible. That is to say: a salad without cheese as a main listed ingredient >> a salad with cheese >> a salad with fish >> fried chicken sandwich with slab o’cheese and mayo.

Holy God, it’s nearly impossible.

Seriously, play this game at the next restaurant you go to. Look for the vegetarian dish. Find the meal where you can easily remove the animal products and have anything left. When vegetarians complain about pretty much being offered green salad (and usually iceberg at that) or maybe some roasted vegetables on pasta, they are not kidding. There is such a huge range of vegetarian cuisine out there and the general public does not see any of it, unless they go to an ethnic restaurant, such as Indian or Ethiopian. (Many vegetarian entrees at Chinese restaurants are often cooked in chicken broth, so that’s a big ol’ No.) And there’s an upper limit, even for me, on the amount of falafel and hummus I can consume. Admittedly, it’s a pretty high upper limit, but a limit nonetheless.

No wonder people think vegetarians are odd: they’ve been crammed into the odd corner.

I’ve taken to using apps such as VeganXpress and VegOut to try to find someplace in the neighborhood to get something to eat. I think I need a few new ones to help me out. If you have any suggestions, leave ‘em in comments.

After the movie last night we went to Rock Bottom Brewery, where I played the “anything but iceberg lettuce” game—I have nothing against salads, salads are the best, I actually love eating huge gigantic salads now, but I don’t want that to be my only thing—and came up with… the Tex-Asian vegetable potstickers. Which turned out to be (more or less) samosas in a vaguely potstickerish wrap. Well, I guess it’s a start.

In no particular order:

• Much to my own amazement, since my decision not to drink alcohol because it’s interfering with my exercise plan, I have not in fact had any alcohol. There was one night I actually wanted to have a cocktail, but we didn’t have a lot of time and I did have to work out the next day, so I passed. Saying no to margaritas at La Fiesta is pretty goshdarned hard, though. They make a very tasty, and very deadly, margarita.

• I know I need to post some pix of My! Amazing! Transformation!™. I need to get batteries for my camera. How lame of an excuse is that? And yet: oh so true.

• My guilty pleasure these days: SecretTweet. I have no idea if these are real or not, but unless they start mentioning space aliens or something, they could be. This is the kind of thing that makes me appreciate my own life more.

• Movies we’ve seen recently:
  • Sin Nombre: I don’t know the provenance behind this movie. I was looking for something to see and I used the Rotten Tomatoes score to come up with one. It’s a film in Spanish with subtitles about a family trying to get to US from Honduras, and a boy who’s part of a violent, territorial Mexican gang, how they meet, and what happens. The simplicity of the storylines and the tightness of the focus on the story I think shows it’s clearly a first film by a young writer/director, but he’s a very talented writer/director who is interested in issues that have no easy and clean solutions.

  • Adventureland: It’s a very sweet look at summer 1987 after a kid graduates from college before he starts grad school. I’m kind of disturbed that 1987 = historical flick though. I liked it, but it was a small movie. I’m also kind of tired of movies in which everyone’s shared experience is one that I have nothing in common with. At least it’s not as bad as when I watch a high school movie and might as well be watching an artifact from a lost African culture for all I have in common with it.

  • Sunshine Cleaning: An interesting indie film that suffered from one too few passes on the script. Yes, the scriptwriter is saying this. There was some really good material in here, but it needed…I don’t know. Some kind of oomph. And less randomness.

  • I Love You Man: Paul Rudd is every girl’s fantasy boyfriend—the fantasy boyfriend you could bring home to mother. (You save the other fantasy boyfriend for…well…you know.) It was definitely an enjoyable flick, and I remember very, very little about it, other than they didn’t do the obvious (and so overdone) thing of having Rudd’s character end up in a fracas with another woman, leading his girlfriend to draw the wrong conclusions! which I was definitely expecting.

  • Monsters vs. Aliens: Jesus, does Pixar make it look easy, and then everyone else makes it look so hard. I don’t even remember that much about MvA, other than I was impressed that Hugh Laurie can do yet another accent that isn’t his normal voice. Such a great title though. Man, such a great title.

• There are simply no words to describe how much “Lost” has rocked since they, in the words of Entertainment Weekly, decided to “let the freak flag fly.” You know none of the actors signed up to be part of a sci-fi/ancient Egyptians/ghosts/assassins/time travel/comedy/romance/action/adventure spectacular, and you know just as hard that the writers/creators could give a flying fuck what the actors signed up for. They have an end date! They don’t have to spin this out forever! Let’s ROCK this town!

• Darin says the official “Lost” podcast by Damon and Carleton is Teh Awesum, so you should listen to that. (I have zero time to listen to anything, I’m finding, so I have not added it to any of my iPods, but I laugh like a hyena when Darin recounts the latest one.)

• And, as always: Actors, there are no small parts, only small actors. Michael Emerson signed for two or maybe three episodes. And he took over the entire damn series. You can do it, folks.

• I thought “The Unusuals,” a new cop show on ABC, was going to be about a precinct of detectives in NYC who have very strange, minor superpowers. I like my idea for the show much better than theirs: It turns out to be a very boring police procedural about a bunch of cops Who Are Quirky. We took it off the list of stuff to be recorded during the first half hour.

• I was mostly satisfied by the “Battlestar Galactica” finale—so long as they ended without Galactica, say, plunging into a nearby sun with everyone on board I was going to be okay. (The show was so dark for the last half season I honestly didn’t know what they were going to do.) As Ted Tally says, you have to give your audience a little glimmer of hope at the end. Just a tad. I think the BSG guys didn’t have as tight a grip on their stuff as the Lost guys do, but there was still so much wonderful stuff in there over 4 years I don’t care. (For example: if you’re going to start every episode with the statement that the Cylons have a plan, get a kilo of cocaine, lock all the writers in a room for the weekend, and figure out that damn plan before you go Season 2, okay? Remember that for next time.)

Quick hits on today’s nominations:

It’s good to see the Academy leaned strongly toward popular movies that people might have actually seen this year. At least a little bit. (C’mon, Academy: meet us halfway.) I know Benjamin Button got some ungodly number of noms, but I also don’t know anyone who’s seen it, whereas I know tons of people who saw, loved, and talked up Slumdog Millionaire. If they know what’s good for them, they’ll vote lots of awards for the little movie that has long stretches take place in Hindi. It’s the multicultural future, people!

Best Motion Picture of the Year:

One Thanksgiving holiday tradition is that a whole group of the family goes to a movie and leaves the kids with other family members who don’t mind watching them. This year the tradition got changed a little: now all the kids go to a kids’ movie with their watchers, and the rest of us go to a non-kids movie. And this year that movie was Quantum of Solace.

Let me start by saying: this movie is a lot better than you think…however, you have to go in thinking it’s going to be bad.

It isn’t bad, exactly. The worst thing about the movie is that it thinks it’s smart, and wow is it ever not smart. There are movies that can get away with letting you fill in the details—Syriana, any of the Bourne movies—and you feel smarter because the movie didn’t lead you by the hand through every last bit. Then there’s Quantum of Solace, which lets you fill in the details to the point where you go, “That doesn’t make any fucking sense!”

Too much handwaving, and what you have is an action movie where you’d better not think about anything for more than a moment. It has to have a story, or you’re just watching nice explosions and amazing fight choreography. Mind you: it doesn’t have to be a good story. I’m not expecting Shakespeare. I am expecting something where A –> B –> C, instead of A –> 76 –> @ –> Y9.

For example: why does Bond go to Haiti? It’s the initial start of this adventure, and the explanation given by the MI-6 guy makes no goddamn sense, no matter how you look at it. It sounds very intelligent, but it’s complete gibberish. Bond has to go to Haiti because if he doesn’t, there’s no damn movie.

On the way home we decided our favorite moment of the movie was (spoilers!) the bit involving Miss Fields. Miss Fields is sent from the embassy to babysit Bond in a hotel room and make sure he doesn’t get into any sort of trouble (like killing everyone he comes across, or destroying entire hotels, or any of the things we’ve seen him do up until this point). Bond of course does what he usually does with a pretty girl in a hotel room, and then he leaves the hotel room to get into trouble…and when he finally gets back to the hotel, Miss Fields has been cruelly dispatched (as seems to happen to Bond girls so very frequently). M then chastises Bond, saying that Miss Fields was murdered because of her connection to Bond and it’s all his fault.

Uh, lady? Who in the hell decided that it was a good idea to send a pretty girl to babysit Bond in a hotel room the first place? Sorry, but that responsibility goes straight to the top, so get over yourself already.

There are some incredible action scenes, and I can see why Daniel Craig is clearly going to die filming one of these movies some time before he finishes his contract. But if they don’t work a wee bit harder on giving us a story, no one’s going to freaking care.

Darin and I had our croissants and coffee at the local patisserie for breakfast* as we read the newspaper. Darin came across this item:

Affable everyman Seth Rogen has built an impressive and lucrative career playing doughy slackers in movies like “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” and “Knocked Up,” but is he now tampering with his winning formula, important ingredients of which apparently are beer, weed and econo-size bags of Cheetos?

Because Rogen’s next role is that of a superhero (the Green Hornet), and for the part he has lost a bunch of weight, the very thing that made him such an unlikely leading man.

“Oh right,” Darin said. “He’s going to lose some weight and suddenly morph into George Clooney, only Jewish.”

Okay, I thought that was hilarious.

* We are so French and sophisticated, mais non?

Got an unusual comment from Christina the other day:

You were a joy to read… before twitter. Now, not so much. Seriously, have you not better things to say?

Well, the Twitter is basically a way to have something to say, frankly. I suppose everyone who’d be interested in my tweets have probably added me to their own Twitter lists, so I could probably stop posting them here. (I’m DianePatterson on Twitter, btw, in case you’re looking for me.)

But to answer your question: at the moment I haven’t found a particular raison d’être for this blog. Many of the things I’d like to talk about really aren’t fair for me to talk about much (for instance: my kids—yeah, I know, I win some kind of Mom-points for finally figuring that out) and others are just…well…

Read more…