Movie Stats:
Released 2013 (Italy)
American & British, in English (several instances of non-translated foreign languages)
Director - Alfonso Cuaron
Stars - Sandra Bullock, George Clooney
Plot Summary:
After an accident leaves newbie astronaut Dr. Ryan Stone (Bullock) stranded in space, and cut off from contact with her superiors, she must find a way to return to Earth. Clooney co-stars as fellow astronaut Matt Kowalski.
Warnings:
Violence; minor gore; blue language.
Bad Stuff:
I think I’m in the extreme minority with this opinion, but I find this movie pretty dull. I feel like it’s mostly just an hour and a half of listening to Sandra Bullock breathe frantically, scream, and groan.
Some of the imagery is really overbearing/pretentious. My particular beef is with the “womb scene,” which made me roll my eyes SO HARD the first time I saw it. The frog in the water is pretty silly too.
It rides the thin edge of “I believe that character would actually be able to do that.” A few times, it crosses that line. If it wasn’t well established that Dr. Stone is very inexperienced, I would find it more believable.
Good Stuff:
Finally, a sci fi movie with a female lead! I have to admit I’ve been getting pretty sick of typing up my summaries and having to list the only females in the film as either the male lead’s love interest or the male lead’s assistant.
It does a great job of creating atmosphere. For example, the panic that Dr. Stone feels throughout much of the film is palpable. You feel it along with her. [SPOILER-ish] I was also moved by the scene where she gives up and accepts that she’s going to die. I’ve never come that close to death, but I’ve read a lot of stories from people who have and this scene rang very true. [SPOILER]
I really liked the soundtrack.
The Verdict:
Everyone but me seems to love this film. I certainly don’t think it’s bad. I’m just not enamored by it the way a lot of people seem to be. To me, it’s a fairly standard sci fi thriller. Low on character development, low on plot, high on the “if it can go wrong, it will go wrong” scale. I think where it excels is in the creation of atmosphere. You feel like you’re there right along with Dr. Stone.
I’ve heard people say that you can’t get the full impact of “Gravity” without seeing it on the big screen (I never did). To me, a great film should be able to transcend the method of delivery. I shouldn’t have to go to a theater to connect with a movie. So I don’t really like that argument, and it certainly doesn’t sway me to the “this is great” side. For me, it’s on the lower end of the “good” side.
I give it 3.25 stars.
Friday, December 23, 2016
Wednesday, December 21, 2016
Good Buys: Stitch Fix
Last year, a friend turned me on to Stitch Fix. As someone who hates shopping of any form - from clothing to gifts to household necessities to food - this sounded like a god send to me. I can pay a stylist to pick out trendy clothes and send them to me and all I have to do is try them on and decide whether or not to keep them? Sign me up! Unfortunately, I had to wait until it was financially feasible for us, but once it was, I was on their website in a hot minute.
I know people who love Stitch Fix and I know people who tried it with poor results. I fall in the former category. I think two things are key to having a good experience: 1. Being very clear on your profile, and in the feedback that you give the stylist after you get your boxes, what you do/don't like and why and 2. Being open to trying new things. Also, I never expect to like/keep everything I get in each box.
One negative thing I will say is that I think it's a little expensive. But I recognize that I've never been the type to spend a lot on clothes. I get the majority of my clothing at places like Target, from their clearance rack. Part of doing Stitch Fix, for me, was learning to spend more money on clothing that's a little better quality. However, since I don't want to spend a lot, I opted to get a box every other month, rather than every month.
My first box came in October. I chose to keep a shirt (which I get compliments on all the time) and a dress (which I haven't worn yet due to the weather):
If you've got the disposable income, I definitely recommend you try Stitch Fix out at least once. I'm enjoying it immensely!
I know people who love Stitch Fix and I know people who tried it with poor results. I fall in the former category. I think two things are key to having a good experience: 1. Being very clear on your profile, and in the feedback that you give the stylist after you get your boxes, what you do/don't like and why and 2. Being open to trying new things. Also, I never expect to like/keep everything I get in each box.
One negative thing I will say is that I think it's a little expensive. But I recognize that I've never been the type to spend a lot on clothes. I get the majority of my clothing at places like Target, from their clearance rack. Part of doing Stitch Fix, for me, was learning to spend more money on clothing that's a little better quality. However, since I don't want to spend a lot, I opted to get a box every other month, rather than every month.
My first box came in October. I chose to keep a shirt (which I get compliments on all the time) and a dress (which I haven't worn yet due to the weather):
My second box came this week. I'm keeping the shirt below, which looks much cuter on that it does in the picture. I took a back view of it as well so you can get the full effect:
And I'm probably keeping this shirt, which my husband loved the second I put it on:
If you've got the disposable income, I definitely recommend you try Stitch Fix out at least once. I'm enjoying it immensely!
Monday, December 19, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #60: "Quatermass and the Pit" (1967)
Note: This movie can also be found under the title “Five Million Years to Earth.”
Movie Stats:
Released 1967 (UK)
British, in English
Director - Roy Ward Baker
Stars - Andrew Keir, Barbara Shelley, Julian Glover, James Donald
Plot Summary:
When a crew working to expand an Underground station uncovers an ancient artifact, strange things begin to happen. Keir stars as Professor Bernard Quatermass; Donald as research scientist Dr. Mathew Roney; Shelley as Roney’s assistant, Barbara Judd; and Glover as Colonel Breen, the military man assigned to oversee the excavation of the artifact.
Warnings:
Violence; gore.
Bad Stuff:
It’s a bit dull. I had a hard time staying focused on it.
I wasn't wowed by the acting. In fact, some of it (mostly by minor actors) was cringe inducing.
Good Stuff:
I really enjoyed the ideas in it. [MAJOR SPOILERS] Specifically, the idea that, millions of years ago, aliens helped proto-humans to evolve in order to, in some small way, keep their own dying race alive. I wouldn’t call it innovative by today’s standards - I’ve heard the suggestion that an alien species helped out the early human race before - but 1. I don’t know how old that idea is, so it may have been new for the time and 2. Even though I’ve heard it before, I don’t see it explored often in film. Also, I liked the idea that this “help” came with consequences, i.e. that we got some of the bad characteristics along with the good. [SPOILERS] It felt creative and different. Also, with a few movies in my recent viewing history that were thin on plot, it was nice to see something with a lot of it.
The Verdict:
After seeing “The Damned,” I was so looking forward to this because it’s from the same production company (Hammer Films). I thought it was going to be another pleasant surprise. In some respects, it was. As I said, I greatly enjoyed the plot. However, it was just a bit too slow and boring. Also, I was surprised by the cheeseball acting, given that "The Damned" had some top quality acting. Different directors, though, so I suppose I shouldn’t have expected them to be so similar. Ultimately, I was simply disappointed. For me, it didn’t hit the right note.
Also, I have to say that this film was hard to get my hands on. Apart from “Cavalcade,” which is only available on VHS and was thus a huge headache to view, this one was probably the hardest. I nearly had to purchase a DVD of it! So glad that I didn’t, since I don’t think I want this in my collection.
I give it 3 stars.
Movie Stats:
Released 1967 (UK)
British, in English
Director - Roy Ward Baker
Stars - Andrew Keir, Barbara Shelley, Julian Glover, James Donald
Plot Summary:
When a crew working to expand an Underground station uncovers an ancient artifact, strange things begin to happen. Keir stars as Professor Bernard Quatermass; Donald as research scientist Dr. Mathew Roney; Shelley as Roney’s assistant, Barbara Judd; and Glover as Colonel Breen, the military man assigned to oversee the excavation of the artifact.
Warnings:
Violence; gore.
Bad Stuff:
It’s a bit dull. I had a hard time staying focused on it.
I wasn't wowed by the acting. In fact, some of it (mostly by minor actors) was cringe inducing.
Good Stuff:
I really enjoyed the ideas in it. [MAJOR SPOILERS] Specifically, the idea that, millions of years ago, aliens helped proto-humans to evolve in order to, in some small way, keep their own dying race alive. I wouldn’t call it innovative by today’s standards - I’ve heard the suggestion that an alien species helped out the early human race before - but 1. I don’t know how old that idea is, so it may have been new for the time and 2. Even though I’ve heard it before, I don’t see it explored often in film. Also, I liked the idea that this “help” came with consequences, i.e. that we got some of the bad characteristics along with the good. [SPOILERS] It felt creative and different. Also, with a few movies in my recent viewing history that were thin on plot, it was nice to see something with a lot of it.
The Verdict:
After seeing “The Damned,” I was so looking forward to this because it’s from the same production company (Hammer Films). I thought it was going to be another pleasant surprise. In some respects, it was. As I said, I greatly enjoyed the plot. However, it was just a bit too slow and boring. Also, I was surprised by the cheeseball acting, given that "The Damned" had some top quality acting. Different directors, though, so I suppose I shouldn’t have expected them to be so similar. Ultimately, I was simply disappointed. For me, it didn’t hit the right note.
Also, I have to say that this film was hard to get my hands on. Apart from “Cavalcade,” which is only available on VHS and was thus a huge headache to view, this one was probably the hardest. I nearly had to purchase a DVD of it! So glad that I didn’t, since I don’t think I want this in my collection.
I give it 3 stars.
Friday, December 16, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #61: "Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior" (1981)
Movie Stats:
Released 1981 (Australia)
Australian, in English
Director - George Miller
Stars - Mel Gibson, Bruce Spence, Vernon Wells
Plot Summary:
In the post-apocalyptic wasteland of Australia, drifter Max (Gibson) runs afoul of a nasty gang and discovers a group of people refining oil. Spence co-stars as Max’s sort-of-sidekick The Gyro Captain and Wells as a member of the gang, Wez.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; female nudity (breasts only); rape (mostly offscreen/non-graphic); very minor blue language. (IMDB claims there’s a scene where a woman’s crotch is shown but I don’t recall that.)
Bad Stuff:
It’s a little thin on plot, although it frankly has more than Fury Road does.
Hated the soundtrack.
Although it’s not a long movie, I got bored. Maybe I didn’t see the crotch scene because I started playing a game on my phone. It’s a lot of “drive around a kill people/destroy things.”
Good Stuff:
The action sequences are pretty bad ass.
It’s actually a little bit funny. Not laugh-out-loud funny, but amusing in parts, especially when The Gyro Captain is onscreen.
I really enjoyed the cinematography. It's stark but beautiful.
The Verdict:
I never saw this before, so it was interesting to see it after Fury Road and recognize that Fury Road paid homage to it. The plot lines are relatively similar without being exactly the same, unlike another recent sequel I could name (*cough* The Force Awakens *cough*). That being said, I thought it was just okay. It’s a solid action movie, full of a lot less of the ridiculousness that plagues modern-day action movies, and the practical effects are really cool. Other than that, though, there’s not much to it. There’s no message. Nor is there much character or world building. It’s not a thoughtful film. Not that it was intended to be, but, I don’t know, it simply didn’t grab me. Perhaps too many action movies in the 35 years hence have copied it, which made it feel rote to me.
I give it 3.25 stars.
Released 1981 (Australia)
Australian, in English
Director - George Miller
Stars - Mel Gibson, Bruce Spence, Vernon Wells
Plot Summary:
In the post-apocalyptic wasteland of Australia, drifter Max (Gibson) runs afoul of a nasty gang and discovers a group of people refining oil. Spence co-stars as Max’s sort-of-sidekick The Gyro Captain and Wells as a member of the gang, Wez.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; female nudity (breasts only); rape (mostly offscreen/non-graphic); very minor blue language. (IMDB claims there’s a scene where a woman’s crotch is shown but I don’t recall that.)
Bad Stuff:
It’s a little thin on plot, although it frankly has more than Fury Road does.
Hated the soundtrack.
Although it’s not a long movie, I got bored. Maybe I didn’t see the crotch scene because I started playing a game on my phone. It’s a lot of “drive around a kill people/destroy things.”
Good Stuff:
The action sequences are pretty bad ass.
It’s actually a little bit funny. Not laugh-out-loud funny, but amusing in parts, especially when The Gyro Captain is onscreen.
I really enjoyed the cinematography. It's stark but beautiful.
The Verdict:
I never saw this before, so it was interesting to see it after Fury Road and recognize that Fury Road paid homage to it. The plot lines are relatively similar without being exactly the same, unlike another recent sequel I could name (*cough* The Force Awakens *cough*). That being said, I thought it was just okay. It’s a solid action movie, full of a lot less of the ridiculousness that plagues modern-day action movies, and the practical effects are really cool. Other than that, though, there’s not much to it. There’s no message. Nor is there much character or world building. It’s not a thoughtful film. Not that it was intended to be, but, I don’t know, it simply didn’t grab me. Perhaps too many action movies in the 35 years hence have copied it, which made it feel rote to me.
I give it 3.25 stars.
Wednesday, December 14, 2016
Up with Geography: Comoros
Country Name:
Comoros
Capital:
Moroni
Continent:
None; it's an island chain off the east coast of Africa
Map:
Neighbors:
None; the closest are Mozambique to the west & Madagascar to the southeast
Water Borders:
Mozambique Channel; Indian Ocean
Total Area:
863 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Moroni, Moutsamoudou, Fomboni, Domoni, Sima
Famous Geographical Point:
Mount Karthala
Famous Person:
Nawal, singer/songwriter & musician
Book Set In/About:
Last of the Pirates: The Search for Bob Denard by Samantha Weinberg
A non-fiction book about a French mercenary who took refuge in the Comoros, where he helped to overthrow two presidents before being overthrown himself and then disappearing.
Movie Set In/About:
"L'Ivresse d'une Oasis (Ashes of Dreams)" (2011), directed by Hachimiya Alameda
I'm not completely sure what this is about, as the description doesn't seem to be written by a native English speaker, but it's a documentary and it involves a road trip across the Comoros so that sounds interesting.
Headline of the Day:
"Tanzania: Dar Strengthens Trade Ties with the Comoros" on allafrica.com.
Comoros
Capital:
Moroni
Continent:
None; it's an island chain off the east coast of Africa
Map:
 |
| Note: There is a fourth island that is claimed by Comoros but officially belongs to France. I chose not to include it. |
Neighbors:
None; the closest are Mozambique to the west & Madagascar to the southeast
Water Borders:
Mozambique Channel; Indian Ocean
Total Area:
863 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Moroni, Moutsamoudou, Fomboni, Domoni, Sima
Famous Geographical Point:
Mount Karthala
Famous Person:
Nawal, singer/songwriter & musician
Book Set In/About:
Last of the Pirates: The Search for Bob Denard by Samantha Weinberg
A non-fiction book about a French mercenary who took refuge in the Comoros, where he helped to overthrow two presidents before being overthrown himself and then disappearing.
Movie Set In/About:
"L'Ivresse d'une Oasis (Ashes of Dreams)" (2011), directed by Hachimiya Alameda
I'm not completely sure what this is about, as the description doesn't seem to be written by a native English speaker, but it's a documentary and it involves a road trip across the Comoros so that sounds interesting.
Headline of the Day:
"Tanzania: Dar Strengthens Trade Ties with the Comoros" on allafrica.com.
Monday, December 12, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #62: "Dark City" (1998)
Movie Stats:
Released 1998 (USA)
Australian & American, in English
Director - Alex Proyas
Stars - Rufus Sewell, Kiefer Sutherland, William Hurt, Jennifer Connelly
Plot Summary:
When John Murdoch (Sewell) wakes up in a hotel room with no memories, he soon discovers that he’s part of a vast conspiracy perpetrated by an alien species. Sutherland co-stars as Daniel P. Schreber, a doctor with a murky agenda; Hurt as Frank Bumstead, the police inspector trying to track down Murdoch; and Connelly as Murdoch’s wife, Emma.
Warnings:
Nudity (male buttocks, female breasts); violence; gore.
Bad Stuff:
I didn’t like the big fight scene. Compared to the rest of the film, it seemed both goofy and cliche.
I didn’t care for most of the soundtrack.
I’m not entirely sold on the aliens’ agenda or its execution. Like, if I don’t think about it too hard, it holds up, but if I start to examine it, there are a lot of holes I can poke.
Good Stuff:
Absolutely gorgeous cinematography. There were several scenes that made me gasp in surprise because they were so stunning.
The acting is phenomenal. Everyone’s really good, but Sutherland was my favorite. Really different from a lot of other roles I’ve seen him play.
Great pacing. It never felt like it dragged.
The Verdict:
I saw this once before after reading repeatedly online that it was a must-see. I remember not liking it much, or at least thinking to myself, “That’s it?” So I wasn’t feeling especially keen to watch it again, although I couldn’t remember a thing about it, apart from Kiefer Sutherland.
In the end, I liked it much better this time around. I don’t think it’s revolutionary, but it felt really different from the other films I’ve seen so far on this list. Somehow, the mash-up of film noir and sci fi works. The great pace of it kept me from getting impatient as the mystery unfolded. And I liked the resolution of that mystery. The concept was intriguing, even if it had a few problems. I really think, though, that it’s the cinematography and acting that make this film. If I were compiling a list of “must-see” sci fi films, I would indeed include this one.
I give it 3.75 stars.
Released 1998 (USA)
Australian & American, in English
Director - Alex Proyas
Stars - Rufus Sewell, Kiefer Sutherland, William Hurt, Jennifer Connelly
Plot Summary:
When John Murdoch (Sewell) wakes up in a hotel room with no memories, he soon discovers that he’s part of a vast conspiracy perpetrated by an alien species. Sutherland co-stars as Daniel P. Schreber, a doctor with a murky agenda; Hurt as Frank Bumstead, the police inspector trying to track down Murdoch; and Connelly as Murdoch’s wife, Emma.
Warnings:
Nudity (male buttocks, female breasts); violence; gore.
Bad Stuff:
I didn’t like the big fight scene. Compared to the rest of the film, it seemed both goofy and cliche.
I didn’t care for most of the soundtrack.
I’m not entirely sold on the aliens’ agenda or its execution. Like, if I don’t think about it too hard, it holds up, but if I start to examine it, there are a lot of holes I can poke.
Good Stuff:
Absolutely gorgeous cinematography. There were several scenes that made me gasp in surprise because they were so stunning.
The acting is phenomenal. Everyone’s really good, but Sutherland was my favorite. Really different from a lot of other roles I’ve seen him play.
Great pacing. It never felt like it dragged.
The Verdict:
I saw this once before after reading repeatedly online that it was a must-see. I remember not liking it much, or at least thinking to myself, “That’s it?” So I wasn’t feeling especially keen to watch it again, although I couldn’t remember a thing about it, apart from Kiefer Sutherland.
In the end, I liked it much better this time around. I don’t think it’s revolutionary, but it felt really different from the other films I’ve seen so far on this list. Somehow, the mash-up of film noir and sci fi works. The great pace of it kept me from getting impatient as the mystery unfolded. And I liked the resolution of that mystery. The concept was intriguing, even if it had a few problems. I really think, though, that it’s the cinematography and acting that make this film. If I were compiling a list of “must-see” sci fi films, I would indeed include this one.
I give it 3.75 stars.
Friday, December 9, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #63: "Je t'aime, Je t'aime" (1968)
Movie Stats:
Released 1968 (France)
French, in French (There was also a small amount of what sounded like German or Dutch to me. I watched with English subtitles.)
Director - Alain Resnais
Stars - Claude Rich, Olga Georges-Picot
Plot Summary:
A suicidal man, Claude Ridder (Rich), is tapped by a research institute to be the first human participant of a time travel experiment. Georges-Picot co-stars as Catrine, Ridder’s girlfriend (Maybe wife? The movie never makes that point clear).
Warnings:
Very minor gore; implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
While it’s more sci fi-related than some of the other movies on this list, it’s still a bit light in that regard.
It’s sort of pointless.
Good Stuff:
I was transfixed. It was so hard to look away because I perpetually wanted to see what would happen next. When it ended, I wanted more.
I thought it was an accurate, sensitive portrayal of how emotionally taxing it is to be a caregiver for someone who’s mentally ill. It was also a pretty accurate portrayal of depression. My favorite exchange of the film was when, after picking Ridder up from the hospital post-suicide attempt, one of the researchers asked him (paraphrased), “How does it feel to be alive?” and he responded, “It doesn’t.” Too real, movie. Too real.
This is one of the few movies I’ve seen that does time travel in a way that feels right.
The Verdict:
Much to my surprise, I really liked this. It had all the hallmarks of a film that I would hate: 1960s, French surrealism, a time travel theme. All things that typically frustrate me and make me roll my eyes. But it was really well done. I liked both the concept and the execution. For example, it jumps around a lot in terms of time line, but it does a good job of easing you into that slowly. I never wondered what was going on. It was a fine bit of filmmaking. I also liked how the movie basically got right to the point, rather than dithering around for half an hour before telling you what it’s all about. That was refreshing. I would definitely watch this again. I feel like I could watch it repeatedly and get something different out of it each time.
I give it 4 stars.
Released 1968 (France)
French, in French (There was also a small amount of what sounded like German or Dutch to me. I watched with English subtitles.)
Director - Alain Resnais
Stars - Claude Rich, Olga Georges-Picot
Plot Summary:
A suicidal man, Claude Ridder (Rich), is tapped by a research institute to be the first human participant of a time travel experiment. Georges-Picot co-stars as Catrine, Ridder’s girlfriend (Maybe wife? The movie never makes that point clear).
Warnings:
Very minor gore; implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
While it’s more sci fi-related than some of the other movies on this list, it’s still a bit light in that regard.
It’s sort of pointless.
Good Stuff:
I was transfixed. It was so hard to look away because I perpetually wanted to see what would happen next. When it ended, I wanted more.
I thought it was an accurate, sensitive portrayal of how emotionally taxing it is to be a caregiver for someone who’s mentally ill. It was also a pretty accurate portrayal of depression. My favorite exchange of the film was when, after picking Ridder up from the hospital post-suicide attempt, one of the researchers asked him (paraphrased), “How does it feel to be alive?” and he responded, “It doesn’t.” Too real, movie. Too real.
This is one of the few movies I’ve seen that does time travel in a way that feels right.
The Verdict:
Much to my surprise, I really liked this. It had all the hallmarks of a film that I would hate: 1960s, French surrealism, a time travel theme. All things that typically frustrate me and make me roll my eyes. But it was really well done. I liked both the concept and the execution. For example, it jumps around a lot in terms of time line, but it does a good job of easing you into that slowly. I never wondered what was going on. It was a fine bit of filmmaking. I also liked how the movie basically got right to the point, rather than dithering around for half an hour before telling you what it’s all about. That was refreshing. I would definitely watch this again. I feel like I could watch it repeatedly and get something different out of it each time.
I give it 4 stars.
Wednesday, December 7, 2016
Up with U.S. Geography: Vermont
State Name:
Vermont
Capital:
Montpelier
Date of Entry:
March 4, 1791
Maps:
Neighbors:
Canada, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York
Water Borders:
Lake Champlain, Connecticut River
Total Area:
9,616 square miles
*Five Largest Cities:
Burlington, South Burlington, Colchester, Rutland, Essex
Famous Geographical Point:
Green Mountains
State Nickname:
The Green Mountain State. A truly fun fact: The word "Vermont" comes from "vert mont," which is French for "green mount." Nearly the whole state is covered by the Green Mountain range.
Famous Person:
Lindsey Jacobellis, snowboarder (silver medalist in the 2006 Olympics)
It was shockingly difficult to find someone famous from Vermont who met all my criteria: not a politician, someone who had a positive impact, born & raised there, and a name I recognized. Lots of famous people move there in adulthood, though.
Book Set In/About:
Northern Borders by Howard Frank Mosher
A coming-of-age tale set in rural northern Vermont during the 1940s/50s. It sounds enchanting.
Movie Set In/About:
"Dead Poets Society" (1989), directed by Peter Weir
Set in a fictional private school in Vermont, a dynamic English teacher inspires his students.
Headline of the Day:
"Vermont's $200 Million Mountain of Trouble" in the Boston Globe.
*Literally every list I looked at was different, which is highly unusual. I went with one dated 2015 because I figured I'd stick with the most current.
Vermont
Capital:
Montpelier
Date of Entry:
March 4, 1791
Maps:
 |
| Map of USA. Vermont outlined in dark ink, shaded & with arrow pointing to it. |
 |
| A close-up of Vermont & its neighbors. |
Neighbors:
Canada, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York
Water Borders:
Lake Champlain, Connecticut River
Total Area:
9,616 square miles
*Five Largest Cities:
Burlington, South Burlington, Colchester, Rutland, Essex
Famous Geographical Point:
Green Mountains
State Nickname:
The Green Mountain State. A truly fun fact: The word "Vermont" comes from "vert mont," which is French for "green mount." Nearly the whole state is covered by the Green Mountain range.
Famous Person:
Lindsey Jacobellis, snowboarder (silver medalist in the 2006 Olympics)
It was shockingly difficult to find someone famous from Vermont who met all my criteria: not a politician, someone who had a positive impact, born & raised there, and a name I recognized. Lots of famous people move there in adulthood, though.
Book Set In/About:
Northern Borders by Howard Frank Mosher
A coming-of-age tale set in rural northern Vermont during the 1940s/50s. It sounds enchanting.
Movie Set In/About:
"Dead Poets Society" (1989), directed by Peter Weir
Set in a fictional private school in Vermont, a dynamic English teacher inspires his students.
Headline of the Day:
"Vermont's $200 Million Mountain of Trouble" in the Boston Globe.
*Literally every list I looked at was different, which is highly unusual. I went with one dated 2015 because I figured I'd stick with the most current.
Monday, December 5, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #64: "Sleeper" (1973)
Movie Stats:
Released 1973 (USA)
American, in English (IMDB says there’s some Yiddish but I don’t recall it; probably just a commonly known word here and there)
Director - Woody Allen
Stars - Woody Allen, Diane Keaton
Plot Summary:
After a minor surgery goes wrong, Miles Monroe (Allen) is cryogenically frozen without his knowledge and reawakened two hundred years later. Keaton plays Luna Schlosser, a woman whose life becomes intwined with Miles’s.
Warnings:
Very minor violence; drug use.
Bad Stuff:
It’s not even remotely as funny or as clever as it thinks it is. I think I laughed twice.
Woody Allen.
People constantly talking over one another/not listening to each other. See: Woody Allen.
Good Stuff:
While I found the character of Luna rather annoying, I thought Keaton did a great job and it was fun to see her playing out of type.
The stuff about the government/dictator was interesting.
The Verdict:
I’d seen this once before, couldn’t recall much of it besides the beginning (maybe I fell asleep) but was pretty sure I didn’t like it. I was right. There was a time, when I was in my late teens/early 20s, that I found Woody Allen movies relatively amusing. I’m not sure when, exactly, that time passed, but it’s long gone now. Even movies of his that I previously liked, when I watch them again, I’m not sure why I liked them before. His humor just doesn’t tickle my funny bone. I felt annoyed far more frequently than I felt either entertained or amused.
I think, if you enjoy Woody Allen’s schtick, you would probably like this film. I know a lot of people who do. If, however, you’re like me and you’re not into him, I would advise that you skip it. There are plenty of other movies out there with similar themes that are more enjoyable.
I give it 2 stars.
Released 1973 (USA)
American, in English (IMDB says there’s some Yiddish but I don’t recall it; probably just a commonly known word here and there)
Director - Woody Allen
Stars - Woody Allen, Diane Keaton
Plot Summary:
After a minor surgery goes wrong, Miles Monroe (Allen) is cryogenically frozen without his knowledge and reawakened two hundred years later. Keaton plays Luna Schlosser, a woman whose life becomes intwined with Miles’s.
Warnings:
Very minor violence; drug use.
Bad Stuff:
It’s not even remotely as funny or as clever as it thinks it is. I think I laughed twice.
Woody Allen.
People constantly talking over one another/not listening to each other. See: Woody Allen.
Good Stuff:
While I found the character of Luna rather annoying, I thought Keaton did a great job and it was fun to see her playing out of type.
The stuff about the government/dictator was interesting.
The Verdict:
I’d seen this once before, couldn’t recall much of it besides the beginning (maybe I fell asleep) but was pretty sure I didn’t like it. I was right. There was a time, when I was in my late teens/early 20s, that I found Woody Allen movies relatively amusing. I’m not sure when, exactly, that time passed, but it’s long gone now. Even movies of his that I previously liked, when I watch them again, I’m not sure why I liked them before. His humor just doesn’t tickle my funny bone. I felt annoyed far more frequently than I felt either entertained or amused.
I think, if you enjoy Woody Allen’s schtick, you would probably like this film. I know a lot of people who do. If, however, you’re like me and you’re not into him, I would advise that you skip it. There are plenty of other movies out there with similar themes that are more enjoyable.
I give it 2 stars.
Friday, December 2, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #65: "The War of the Worlds" (1953)
Movie Stats:
Released 1953 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Byron Haskin
Stars - Gene Barry, Anne Robinson, Les Tremayne
Plot Summary:
An invasion force from Mars lands on Earth. Barry stars as scientist Dr. Clayton Forrester; Robinson as his gal pal, Sylvia Van Buren; and Tremayne as Major General Mann.
Warnings:
Violence.
Bad Stuff:
I really could have done without the overt religiosity.
It’s pretty cheesy, especially a lot of the special effects.
[SPOILER]
If the Martians planned this invasion as meticulously as the movie would have me believe, I think they might have accounted for the alien diseases they would encounter.
[SPOILER]
Good Stuff:
One thing I really appreciate about 1950s sci fi is that it’s big on problem solving. It actually shows scientists working on and testing theories, whereas more modern movies seem to gloss over scientific work (I’m guessing because modern moviemakers think the audience will find that boring).
I’m pretty impressed that it featured Sylvia, a woman with a Master’s degree (although she was sort of a damsel in distress) AND a female scientist, Dr. Duprey (Ann Codee).
It’s genuinely horrifying in parts; quite a bit darker than I was expecting.
The Verdict:
The religiosity was a huge turnoff to me. I didn’t think it was overbearing so much as it felt out of place. The whole movie was about the human struggle to figure things out and survive and then, bam, “tra-la-la, God saved us.” Um, okay? Other than that and the questionable special effects - they probably would have looked better in black and white - I thought it was decent. The story was interesting. I liked the main characters. It’s short and moves along at a quick pace. And it’s way better than that abomination Tom Cruise starred in back in 2005 (Seriously? That was in 2005? Wow.)
I give it 3.25 stars.
Released 1953 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Byron Haskin
Stars - Gene Barry, Anne Robinson, Les Tremayne
Plot Summary:
An invasion force from Mars lands on Earth. Barry stars as scientist Dr. Clayton Forrester; Robinson as his gal pal, Sylvia Van Buren; and Tremayne as Major General Mann.
Warnings:
Violence.
Bad Stuff:
I really could have done without the overt religiosity.
It’s pretty cheesy, especially a lot of the special effects.
[SPOILER]
If the Martians planned this invasion as meticulously as the movie would have me believe, I think they might have accounted for the alien diseases they would encounter.
[SPOILER]
Good Stuff:
One thing I really appreciate about 1950s sci fi is that it’s big on problem solving. It actually shows scientists working on and testing theories, whereas more modern movies seem to gloss over scientific work (I’m guessing because modern moviemakers think the audience will find that boring).
I’m pretty impressed that it featured Sylvia, a woman with a Master’s degree (although she was sort of a damsel in distress) AND a female scientist, Dr. Duprey (Ann Codee).
It’s genuinely horrifying in parts; quite a bit darker than I was expecting.
The Verdict:
The religiosity was a huge turnoff to me. I didn’t think it was overbearing so much as it felt out of place. The whole movie was about the human struggle to figure things out and survive and then, bam, “tra-la-la, God saved us.” Um, okay? Other than that and the questionable special effects - they probably would have looked better in black and white - I thought it was decent. The story was interesting. I liked the main characters. It’s short and moves along at a quick pace. And it’s way better than that abomination Tom Cruise starred in back in 2005 (Seriously? That was in 2005? Wow.)
I give it 3.25 stars.
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
Out and About: Seattle and Other Miscellany
Just a few pictures from recent travels and a hike.
Pico House in downtown LA, outside of Union Station. It's formerly a luxury hotel built by Pio Pico, the last Mexican governor of California, after his tenure. I was in LA the weekend of Halloween & discovered this building, plus a Day of the Dead celebration in a nearby plaza, on my way home.
My friends got married on a boat docked in Lake Union. Here are some shots from the venue.
On my last day, I visited the Seattle Art Museum. It was a thoroughly pleasant way to spend a few hours. I particularly enjoyed the Yves Saint Laurent exhibit. Below are pictures of two of my favorite dresses. If you are anywhere near this museum before January 8 of next year, I highly recommend you check out this temporary exhibit. It was an all-time favorite of mine.
Pico House in downtown LA, outside of Union Station. It's formerly a luxury hotel built by Pio Pico, the last Mexican governor of California, after his tenure. I was in LA the weekend of Halloween & discovered this building, plus a Day of the Dead celebration in a nearby plaza, on my way home.
In mid-November, I went to Seattle for a wedding. Below are some pictures from that trip.
 |
| Fall colors. |
 |
| A philosophical street sign. |
 |
| My friends live in an awesome houseboat under this bridge. |
 |
| Something about the composition of this shot really appealed to me. |
 |
| Sunset over the Lake Washington Boat Canal. |
 |
| View of downtown Seattle. |
 |
| Boat details. |
 |
| Boat details. |
 |
| Arty shot through a porthole. |
Last but not least, a hike at Torrey Pines the weekend before Thanksgiving. The clouds were amazing that day.
Monday, November 28, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #66: "The Abyss" (1989)
Movie Stats:
Released 1989 (USA)
American, in English
Director - James Cameron
Stars - Ed Harris, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Michael Biehn, Todd Graff, Leo Burmester
Plot Summary:
When a nuclear sub crashes, the Navy hires a civilian deep sea diving crew to look for survivors. Along the way, they face serious dangers and alien creatures. Harris co-stars as Virgil “Bud” Brigman, leader of the diving team; Mastrantonio as Lindsey Brigman, designer of the civilian rig & Bud’s soon-to-be-ex-wife; Graff and Burmester as, respectively, Alan “Hippy” Carnes and Catfish DeVries, members of the diving crew; and Biehn as Lt. Hiram Coffey, leader of the Navy team.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; blue language; brief female nudity (breasts only).
Bad Stuff:
No one seems all that bothered by the fact that they’re trapped deep undersea with very little chance of surviving. They don’t even really talk about it. It annoyed me to no end, like can you have one conversation about how you’re all going to die?
The romance … just, why? So cliche and unnecessary.
It’s at least an hour longer than it needs to be.
Nothing was explained. Not just the stuff with the aliens; even the underwater stuff went largely unexplained. I had to keep asking my husband (who was in the Navy and served on a submarine) to explain stuff because I didn’t understand what was happening half the time.
Good Stuff:
Acting was good.
It’s sort of fun.
Despite the fact that it’s too long, the pacing is pretty good. It moves along at a nice clip. Perhaps that’s due to all the action.
The Verdict:
I just don’t think it makes a whole lot of sense in terms of human behavior. Here these people are, trapped so far down that even if they could get out themselves, they’d die of the bends, and they know that a) rescue will be delayed because of a hurricane and b) their air is running out, and all they seem to care about is the aliens. Which, for the most part, they’re not afraid of, but giggle and smile over repeatedly. As for the aliens, you never learn who they are or where they came from or why they’re there. I guess if I don’t think about it too much, it’s a reasonably entertaining, somewhat goofy, good-natured, harmless sci fi/action flick. In the future, I’d rather watch it again than some of the other duds I’ve seen on this list.
I give it 3 stars.
Released 1989 (USA)
American, in English
Director - James Cameron
Stars - Ed Harris, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Michael Biehn, Todd Graff, Leo Burmester
Plot Summary:
When a nuclear sub crashes, the Navy hires a civilian deep sea diving crew to look for survivors. Along the way, they face serious dangers and alien creatures. Harris co-stars as Virgil “Bud” Brigman, leader of the diving team; Mastrantonio as Lindsey Brigman, designer of the civilian rig & Bud’s soon-to-be-ex-wife; Graff and Burmester as, respectively, Alan “Hippy” Carnes and Catfish DeVries, members of the diving crew; and Biehn as Lt. Hiram Coffey, leader of the Navy team.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; blue language; brief female nudity (breasts only).
Bad Stuff:
No one seems all that bothered by the fact that they’re trapped deep undersea with very little chance of surviving. They don’t even really talk about it. It annoyed me to no end, like can you have one conversation about how you’re all going to die?
The romance … just, why? So cliche and unnecessary.
It’s at least an hour longer than it needs to be.
Nothing was explained. Not just the stuff with the aliens; even the underwater stuff went largely unexplained. I had to keep asking my husband (who was in the Navy and served on a submarine) to explain stuff because I didn’t understand what was happening half the time.
Good Stuff:
Acting was good.
It’s sort of fun.
Despite the fact that it’s too long, the pacing is pretty good. It moves along at a nice clip. Perhaps that’s due to all the action.
The Verdict:
I just don’t think it makes a whole lot of sense in terms of human behavior. Here these people are, trapped so far down that even if they could get out themselves, they’d die of the bends, and they know that a) rescue will be delayed because of a hurricane and b) their air is running out, and all they seem to care about is the aliens. Which, for the most part, they’re not afraid of, but giggle and smile over repeatedly. As for the aliens, you never learn who they are or where they came from or why they’re there. I guess if I don’t think about it too much, it’s a reasonably entertaining, somewhat goofy, good-natured, harmless sci fi/action flick. In the future, I’d rather watch it again than some of the other duds I’ve seen on this list.
I give it 3 stars.
Friday, November 25, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #67: "The Thing from Another World" (1951)
Movie Stats:
Released 1951 (USA)
American, in English
Directors - Christian Nyby & Howard Hawks
Stars - Kenneth Tobey, Margaret Sheridan, Robert Cornthwaite, James Arness
Plot Summary:
When scientists at a remote arctic research center report an unexplained aircraft crash, an American Air Force crew is sent to investigate. They soon find themselves up against a hostile alien. Tobey stars as the leader of the Air Force crew, Captain Patrick Hendry; Cornthwaite as the leader of the scientists, Dr. Arthur Carrington; Sheridan as Carrington’s secretary, Nikki Nicholson; and Arness as The Thing.
Warnings:
Violence; gore.
Bad Stuff:
It’s not exactly a thrill a minute. A bit boring.
I’m side eyeing a lot of the smaller details. I’m no scientist, but I’m not so sure a greenhouse would actually work in a place that doesn't get sun for large portions of the year. And geography isn’t my strong suit, but I don’t think you can just jaunt over to the North Pole from Anchorage like it’s no big deal. These are the things that distract me during films.
Ned “Scotty” Scott (Douglas Spencer), the persistent news reporter, was super annoying.
Good Stuff:
I liked what The Thing turned out to be. I thought that was pretty clever and unexpected.
I enjoyed the battle for control between the scientists and the military men. That felt like something that would happen in real life.
I have such a soft spot for characters that face adversity with bravery and wisecracks.
The special effects are surprisingly good. Clearly lacking a budget, they wisely chose to show The Thing as little as possible, and usually in dim lighting. Even so, they managed to do some really cool stunts. That fire scene was insane. I doubt modern-day moviemakers would get away with endangering their employees like that.
The Verdict:
Based solely on the cover, I thought this was going to be extremely cheesy, which is weird, because it isn’t at all. The cover doesn’t remotely represent the content. For example, it shows Nikki screaming in terror, something she never actually does in the film (in fact, at one point, she casually jokes about having been on fire). I figured it would just be okay. But I actually really liked it. I wish it had a little more action, but in general I found it entertaining. The acting is decent, the premise is interesting, and the soundtrack is fun. I also enjoyed the questions it raised mankind’s place and purpose in the universe.
I give it 4 stars.
Released 1951 (USA)
American, in English
Directors - Christian Nyby & Howard Hawks
Stars - Kenneth Tobey, Margaret Sheridan, Robert Cornthwaite, James Arness
Plot Summary:
When scientists at a remote arctic research center report an unexplained aircraft crash, an American Air Force crew is sent to investigate. They soon find themselves up against a hostile alien. Tobey stars as the leader of the Air Force crew, Captain Patrick Hendry; Cornthwaite as the leader of the scientists, Dr. Arthur Carrington; Sheridan as Carrington’s secretary, Nikki Nicholson; and Arness as The Thing.
Warnings:
Violence; gore.
Bad Stuff:
It’s not exactly a thrill a minute. A bit boring.
I’m side eyeing a lot of the smaller details. I’m no scientist, but I’m not so sure a greenhouse would actually work in a place that doesn't get sun for large portions of the year. And geography isn’t my strong suit, but I don’t think you can just jaunt over to the North Pole from Anchorage like it’s no big deal. These are the things that distract me during films.
Ned “Scotty” Scott (Douglas Spencer), the persistent news reporter, was super annoying.
Good Stuff:
I liked what The Thing turned out to be. I thought that was pretty clever and unexpected.
I enjoyed the battle for control between the scientists and the military men. That felt like something that would happen in real life.
I have such a soft spot for characters that face adversity with bravery and wisecracks.
The special effects are surprisingly good. Clearly lacking a budget, they wisely chose to show The Thing as little as possible, and usually in dim lighting. Even so, they managed to do some really cool stunts. That fire scene was insane. I doubt modern-day moviemakers would get away with endangering their employees like that.
The Verdict:
Based solely on the cover, I thought this was going to be extremely cheesy, which is weird, because it isn’t at all. The cover doesn’t remotely represent the content. For example, it shows Nikki screaming in terror, something she never actually does in the film (in fact, at one point, she casually jokes about having been on fire). I figured it would just be okay. But I actually really liked it. I wish it had a little more action, but in general I found it entertaining. The acting is decent, the premise is interesting, and the soundtrack is fun. I also enjoyed the questions it raised mankind’s place and purpose in the universe.
I give it 4 stars.
Wednesday, November 23, 2016
Music Love: "We Gotta Get Out of This Place" by The Animals
I grew up listening to a lot of classic rock. I think this is in part because it’s what my older brothers listened to (along with punk rock and heavy metal). Whatever they listened to, I listened to. I think it’s also due in part to the fact that radio choices were limited in my small town. Since I was one of those kids who thought disliking popular music made me cool, the only other options were easy listening or classic rock. It may come as no surprise to you that I chose classic rock.
My absolute favorite classic rock band is Jethro Tull. Someday, when I can finally commit to just one song of theirs to showcase, I’ll do a post about them. Until that time, I’ll just keep talking about other music.
I wouldn’t call myself a “fan” of The Animals. Until recently, I didn’t even own any of their music. But they’re one of those bands that I always enjoy. I never turn the channel when they come on. Whenever I hear them, I think to myself, “that band never got the love they deserved.” Lately, I’d been hearing their version of “The House of the Rising Sun” on the radio a lot. “I always liked that song,” I thought to myself. “Maybe I should buy it.” However, I’m a cautious buyer, so I decided to listen to it a few times on YouTube before committing. And that’s when, through the magic of the internet, I was reminded of my love for “We Gotta Get Out of This Place.”
This song almost perfectly captures how I felt about my hometown. My mother, working and slaving her life away, in bed, gray and tired (dead before her time was due for sure), and me, saying to myself,
We gotta get out of this place
If it’s the last thing we ever do
We gotta get out of this place
Girl, there’s a better life for me and you
The lyrics aren’t amazing, and they’re repetitive, but they’re almost painfully true. That bass line thumps hard in your chest. And when Eric Burdon, one of the best voices of the 1960s IMO, belts it out, especially when he does that primal scream, a chill runs down my spine. Now that I’ve been listening to them more, I’m thinking that maybe I never gave them the love they deserved either. It's time to rectify that.
Note: I normally prefer to post videos with the studio version of the song, because I feel studio quality is far superior to live quality, but how could I pass up showing this stage set to you?
Monday, November 21, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #68: "Westworld" (1973)
Movie Stats:
Released 1973 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Michael Crichton
Stars - Richard Benjamin, James Brolin, Yul Brynner
Plot Summary:
At the amusement park Delos, vacationers can spend $1,000 per day for one of three authentic experiences: Roman World, Medieval World, or West World. However, when the robots that populate these worlds begin to malfunction, terror ensues. Benjamin and Brolin co-star respectively as Peter Martin and John Blane, two friends on an adventure together in West World, and Brynner as the malfunctioning gunslinger that hunts them down.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
It doesn’t seem to have much of a point. Or, if it does (humans trying to play god is bad, perhaps), it doesn’t try to showcase it at all.
I would say it falls a little more on the horror/thriller end of the scale than it does on the sci fi end.
Good Stuff:
The pacing is very good. Peter and John are just two friends having a good time playing cowboys while the noose slowly settles around their necks without them even realizing it. It’s actually quite chilling. (The scene where Peter and John finally realize that something has gone terribly wrong is excellent.)
Acting was great. Benjamin and Brynner were my favorites. I also enjoyed the cameos from Dick Van Patten (as another West World vacationer) and Majel Barrett (as brothel owner Miss Carrie).
I thought it was realistic. The explanation for what went wrong with the robots was plausible. The reaction of the company - the inclination to keep running so as not to lose out on money - seemed true to business form. I also liked how the humans didn’t magically become bad asses once the robots turned on them; they didn’t suddenly know how to fight or use weaponry, they just did the best that they could with whatever they could find.
The Verdict:
I enjoyed it. It’s not deep or meaningful. It’s not going to make you think. This is one of those pure entertainment films. You watch it for the thrill, not for mental stimulation. It’s a little cheesy, but it’s good in pretty much every way imaginable. And at barely an hour and a half long, it’s an excellent choice for one of those nights when you want to sit down with some popcorn and an action flick.
I give it 4 stars.
Released 1973 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Michael Crichton
Stars - Richard Benjamin, James Brolin, Yul Brynner
Plot Summary:
At the amusement park Delos, vacationers can spend $1,000 per day for one of three authentic experiences: Roman World, Medieval World, or West World. However, when the robots that populate these worlds begin to malfunction, terror ensues. Benjamin and Brolin co-star respectively as Peter Martin and John Blane, two friends on an adventure together in West World, and Brynner as the malfunctioning gunslinger that hunts them down.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
It doesn’t seem to have much of a point. Or, if it does (humans trying to play god is bad, perhaps), it doesn’t try to showcase it at all.
I would say it falls a little more on the horror/thriller end of the scale than it does on the sci fi end.
Good Stuff:
The pacing is very good. Peter and John are just two friends having a good time playing cowboys while the noose slowly settles around their necks without them even realizing it. It’s actually quite chilling. (The scene where Peter and John finally realize that something has gone terribly wrong is excellent.)
Acting was great. Benjamin and Brynner were my favorites. I also enjoyed the cameos from Dick Van Patten (as another West World vacationer) and Majel Barrett (as brothel owner Miss Carrie).
I thought it was realistic. The explanation for what went wrong with the robots was plausible. The reaction of the company - the inclination to keep running so as not to lose out on money - seemed true to business form. I also liked how the humans didn’t magically become bad asses once the robots turned on them; they didn’t suddenly know how to fight or use weaponry, they just did the best that they could with whatever they could find.
The Verdict:
I enjoyed it. It’s not deep or meaningful. It’s not going to make you think. This is one of those pure entertainment films. You watch it for the thrill, not for mental stimulation. It’s a little cheesy, but it’s good in pretty much every way imaginable. And at barely an hour and a half long, it’s an excellent choice for one of those nights when you want to sit down with some popcorn and an action flick.
I give it 4 stars.
Friday, November 18, 2016
Found Item: Skeleton Mermaid Postcard
I was in Seattle last weekend for a wedding. One evening, I went to a pub to watch a soccer game, and found the above postcard sitting abandoned on a table. If you know me at all, you know that this artwork is so me. Therefore, I thought it an amusing coincidence that it ended up in my hands.
I intended to transcribe what's written on the back, but the more I read it, the more it feels too intimate to share, even though I would never post the names of who wrote it or who it was sent to. It's a Billie Holiday quote, coupled with a longing sentiment. It's both lovely and sad.
I feel so lucky to have stumbled across this find.
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #69: "Logan's Run" (1976)
Movie Stats:
Released 1976 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Michael Anderson
Stars - Michael York, Jenny Agutter, Richard Jordan
Plot Summary:
In a post-apocalyptic future, people live in absolute comfort in an idyllic city with one big flaw: no one is allowed to live past the age of 30. York stars as Logan, a cop (basically) whose belief system is shaken by a task he’s given; Agutter as Jessica, a woman who yearns for something more out of life; and Jordan as Francis, Logan’s BFF.
Warnings:
Violence; minor gore; female nudity (breasts and butt).
Bad Stuff:
Nothing is explained. Who built the city? Why? Why does everyone have to die at 30? Where did Box (Roscoe Lee Browne) come from? And why does he do what he does? Where did the Old Man’s (Peter Ustinov) parents come from? Etc. I guess there were some hints about the answers to these questions, some inferences that could be made, but nothing concrete. The movie ends without any true resolution.
The vast majority of the soundtrack is horrendous.
The special effects are laughable.
Good Stuff:
Most of the acting was pretty good, especially from the top billed people.
Costuming. I particularly liked the police uniform.
[SPOILER-y]
I have to admit that, although I hated the ending, the Old Man’s face when he was suddenly surrounded by people, after having been alone for most of his life, warmed my heart. That was a stellar moment from Ustinov.
[SPOILER]
The Verdict:
It’s a bit of a hot mess. I think the concept is interesting. I wouldn’t mind reading the book it’s based on and/or seeing a modern remake (something lacking the 1970s weirdness, with better special effects). This version, however, I wasn’t a fan of. The ending was the absolute worst. [SPOILER] Who are Logan and Jessica to decide how everyone else lives their lives? If given the choice, I’m sure some would have preferred a life of luxury and death at 30 to a life of toil and death at an indeterminate age. I thought it was pretty terrible of Logan to destroy the computer, and thus the city. I mean, wasn’t that what the whole movie was about, that people should have the right to choose? It wasn't sophisticated enough to be making a statement about hypocrisy; it's clear the ending was intended to be joyful. It doesn't make sense. [SPOILER] While it had a few good moments, and solid acting, in the end, I felt like, “[I]t is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
I give it 2.5 stars.
Released 1976 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Michael Anderson
Stars - Michael York, Jenny Agutter, Richard Jordan
Plot Summary:
In a post-apocalyptic future, people live in absolute comfort in an idyllic city with one big flaw: no one is allowed to live past the age of 30. York stars as Logan, a cop (basically) whose belief system is shaken by a task he’s given; Agutter as Jessica, a woman who yearns for something more out of life; and Jordan as Francis, Logan’s BFF.
Warnings:
Violence; minor gore; female nudity (breasts and butt).
Bad Stuff:
Nothing is explained. Who built the city? Why? Why does everyone have to die at 30? Where did Box (Roscoe Lee Browne) come from? And why does he do what he does? Where did the Old Man’s (Peter Ustinov) parents come from? Etc. I guess there were some hints about the answers to these questions, some inferences that could be made, but nothing concrete. The movie ends without any true resolution.
The vast majority of the soundtrack is horrendous.
The special effects are laughable.
Good Stuff:
Most of the acting was pretty good, especially from the top billed people.
Costuming. I particularly liked the police uniform.
[SPOILER-y]
I have to admit that, although I hated the ending, the Old Man’s face when he was suddenly surrounded by people, after having been alone for most of his life, warmed my heart. That was a stellar moment from Ustinov.
[SPOILER]
The Verdict:
It’s a bit of a hot mess. I think the concept is interesting. I wouldn’t mind reading the book it’s based on and/or seeing a modern remake (something lacking the 1970s weirdness, with better special effects). This version, however, I wasn’t a fan of. The ending was the absolute worst. [SPOILER] Who are Logan and Jessica to decide how everyone else lives their lives? If given the choice, I’m sure some would have preferred a life of luxury and death at 30 to a life of toil and death at an indeterminate age. I thought it was pretty terrible of Logan to destroy the computer, and thus the city. I mean, wasn’t that what the whole movie was about, that people should have the right to choose? It wasn't sophisticated enough to be making a statement about hypocrisy; it's clear the ending was intended to be joyful. It doesn't make sense. [SPOILER] While it had a few good moments, and solid acting, in the end, I felt like, “[I]t is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
I give it 2.5 stars.
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
Up with Geography: Colombia
Country Name:
Colombia
Capital:
Bogota
Continent:
South America
Maps:
Neighbors:
Panama, Venezuela, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador
Water Borders:
Pacific Ocean, Caribbean Sea
Total Area:
440,831 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Bogota, Medellin, Cali, Barranquilla, Cartagena
Famous Geographical Point:
Andes Mountains
Famous Person:
Sofia Vergara, actress
Book Set In/About:
Killing Pablo: The Hunt for the World's Greatest Outlaw by Mark Bowden
A non-fiction book about Colombia's most infamous drug lord, Pablo Escobar, by one of my favorite authors. It's a great snapshot of both Escobar and that time period of Colombian history.
Movie Set In/About:
"Los viajes del viento (The Wind Journeys)" (2009), directed by Ciro Guerra
A man makes a journey across Colombia to return a musical instrument to his elderly instructor. This movie sounds like a lovely showcase of Colombian terrain and music.
Headline of the Day:
“Passengers Evacuated from SMOKING Plane on Emergency Slides in Colombia” on express.co.uk.
All caps theirs, not mine.
Colombia
Capital:
Bogota
Continent:
South America
Maps:
 |
| South American continent. Colombia outlined in dark ink & shaded. |
 |
| A close-up of Colombia & its neighbors. |
Neighbors:
Panama, Venezuela, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador
Water Borders:
Pacific Ocean, Caribbean Sea
Total Area:
440,831 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Bogota, Medellin, Cali, Barranquilla, Cartagena
Famous Geographical Point:
Andes Mountains
Famous Person:
Sofia Vergara, actress
Book Set In/About:
Killing Pablo: The Hunt for the World's Greatest Outlaw by Mark Bowden
A non-fiction book about Colombia's most infamous drug lord, Pablo Escobar, by one of my favorite authors. It's a great snapshot of both Escobar and that time period of Colombian history.
Movie Set In/About:
"Los viajes del viento (The Wind Journeys)" (2009), directed by Ciro Guerra
A man makes a journey across Colombia to return a musical instrument to his elderly instructor. This movie sounds like a lovely showcase of Colombian terrain and music.
Headline of the Day:
“Passengers Evacuated from SMOKING Plane on Emergency Slides in Colombia” on express.co.uk.
All caps theirs, not mine.
Monday, November 7, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #70: "Iron Man" (2008)
Movie Stats:
Released 2008 (Australia)
American, in English (multiple foreign languages, sometimes translated, sometimes not)
Director - Jon Favreau
Stars - Robert Downey, Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Jeff Bridges, Terrence Howard
Plot Summary:
After being wounded and captured by a group of terrorists, billionaire ne’er-do-well Tony Stark (Downey) decides to do more with his life by becoming a superhero. Paltrow co-stars as Pepper Potts, Tony’s personal assistant; Bridges as Obadiah Stane, Tony’s business partner; and Howard as James “Rhodey” Rhodes, Tony’s BFF.
Warnings:
Violence; gore.
Bad Stuff:
It suffers a bit from “action movie physics” syndrome. I’m willing to suspend a lot of disbelief in action movies simply to enjoy myself, but it only goes so far. For example, I highly doubt that a suit made in a cave out of metal scraps is going to protect the person inside of it from injuries due to fire or falling from great heights.
The villain goes from 0 innocuous to 1,000 crazily evil rather quickly, and without much explanation. That character needed some better development/more screen time.
Good Stuff:
I really enjoy Tony’s story arc. I like that the trauma he experiences makes him become a better person without changing the essence of who he is. It brings out the better parts of him that were hidden under the surface, but it doesn’t smooth all of his edges. That feels much more realistic than characters who go from sort-of-bad to all-good.
I like that Pepper isn’t a damsel in distress.
Great pacing. Starts with a bang, and rarely takes its foot off the gas the whole way. This is not a film that’s likely to bore you.
Most of the special effects have held up really well.
The Verdict:
I like this film. I saw it in the theater when it came out. I enjoyed it then and I’ve enjoyed it every time I’ve seen it since. I wouldn’t call it fun because, honestly, it’s kind of heavy. But it’s certainly entertaining, and they throw in a good measure of Tony’s snark to lighten the mood (the banter between Tony and Pepper is also quite amusing). The villain definitely needs a little more fleshing out (I assume that this character is better developed in the comic book). Other than that, I think it’s a pretty solid story with believable characters and a satisfactory climax. Is it ground breaking? Earth shattering? No, but this is one superhero movie that was done right.
I give it 4.25 stars.
Released 2008 (Australia)
American, in English (multiple foreign languages, sometimes translated, sometimes not)
Director - Jon Favreau
Stars - Robert Downey, Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Jeff Bridges, Terrence Howard
Plot Summary:
After being wounded and captured by a group of terrorists, billionaire ne’er-do-well Tony Stark (Downey) decides to do more with his life by becoming a superhero. Paltrow co-stars as Pepper Potts, Tony’s personal assistant; Bridges as Obadiah Stane, Tony’s business partner; and Howard as James “Rhodey” Rhodes, Tony’s BFF.
Warnings:
Violence; gore.
Bad Stuff:
It suffers a bit from “action movie physics” syndrome. I’m willing to suspend a lot of disbelief in action movies simply to enjoy myself, but it only goes so far. For example, I highly doubt that a suit made in a cave out of metal scraps is going to protect the person inside of it from injuries due to fire or falling from great heights.
The villain goes from 0 innocuous to 1,000 crazily evil rather quickly, and without much explanation. That character needed some better development/more screen time.
Good Stuff:
I really enjoy Tony’s story arc. I like that the trauma he experiences makes him become a better person without changing the essence of who he is. It brings out the better parts of him that were hidden under the surface, but it doesn’t smooth all of his edges. That feels much more realistic than characters who go from sort-of-bad to all-good.
I like that Pepper isn’t a damsel in distress.
Great pacing. Starts with a bang, and rarely takes its foot off the gas the whole way. This is not a film that’s likely to bore you.
Most of the special effects have held up really well.
The Verdict:
I like this film. I saw it in the theater when it came out. I enjoyed it then and I’ve enjoyed it every time I’ve seen it since. I wouldn’t call it fun because, honestly, it’s kind of heavy. But it’s certainly entertaining, and they throw in a good measure of Tony’s snark to lighten the mood (the banter between Tony and Pepper is also quite amusing). The villain definitely needs a little more fleshing out (I assume that this character is better developed in the comic book). Other than that, I think it’s a pretty solid story with believable characters and a satisfactory climax. Is it ground breaking? Earth shattering? No, but this is one superhero movie that was done right.
I give it 4.25 stars.
Friday, November 4, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #71: "The Prestige" (2006)
Movie Stats:
Released 2006 (USA)
American & British, in English
Director - Christopher Nolan
Stars - Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, Michael Caine
Plot Summary:
When magician Alfred Borden (Bale) is accused of the murder of his bitter rival Robert Angier (Jackman), their story is told through a series of flashbacks. Caine co-stars as Cutter, mentor to both men.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; very minor blue language.
Bad Stuff:
Bale’s accent is questionable.
Good Stuff:
I need to gush. See below.
The Verdict:
I love this movie so much that I’m having a hard time figuring out how to express to you how good it is. I saw it in the theater when it came out & my mind was blown. I’m not a particularly big Nolan fan. I think his stuff is hit or miss. This one is very much a hit, quite possibly the best film he ever made. There’s so much about it that’s excellent. The story is interesting & engaging. I didn’t see any of the numerous twists coming. The acting is out of this world. For example, I feel relatively neutral about Hugh Jackman. I neither love nor hate him; when I see he’s in a film, I don’t think, “gotta see that,” but he is phenomenal in this. The cinematography is stunning and the costuming, oh my god, so good. If I have any criticism other than Bale’s iffy accent, it’s that I’m not sure this film is ever as good as the first time you see it. The twists are that amazing; they completely blindsided me the first time I saw it. So, while I greatly enjoyed it this time around, I wasn’t as blown away as I was before (although it’s fun to watch it with an eye toward catching the clues that tip off the twists, once you know what they are).
If you’ve never seen it, why on earth not? Go rectify that right now. I’m not even kidding. You should not miss out on this gem.
I give it 4.75 stars.
Released 2006 (USA)
American & British, in English
Director - Christopher Nolan
Stars - Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, Michael Caine
Plot Summary:
When magician Alfred Borden (Bale) is accused of the murder of his bitter rival Robert Angier (Jackman), their story is told through a series of flashbacks. Caine co-stars as Cutter, mentor to both men.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; very minor blue language.
Bad Stuff:
Bale’s accent is questionable.
Good Stuff:
I need to gush. See below.
The Verdict:
I love this movie so much that I’m having a hard time figuring out how to express to you how good it is. I saw it in the theater when it came out & my mind was blown. I’m not a particularly big Nolan fan. I think his stuff is hit or miss. This one is very much a hit, quite possibly the best film he ever made. There’s so much about it that’s excellent. The story is interesting & engaging. I didn’t see any of the numerous twists coming. The acting is out of this world. For example, I feel relatively neutral about Hugh Jackman. I neither love nor hate him; when I see he’s in a film, I don’t think, “gotta see that,” but he is phenomenal in this. The cinematography is stunning and the costuming, oh my god, so good. If I have any criticism other than Bale’s iffy accent, it’s that I’m not sure this film is ever as good as the first time you see it. The twists are that amazing; they completely blindsided me the first time I saw it. So, while I greatly enjoyed it this time around, I wasn’t as blown away as I was before (although it’s fun to watch it with an eye toward catching the clues that tip off the twists, once you know what they are).
If you’ve never seen it, why on earth not? Go rectify that right now. I’m not even kidding. You should not miss out on this gem.
I give it 4.75 stars.
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Up with U.S. Geography: Rhode Island
State Name:
Rhode Island
Capital:
Providence
Date of Entry:
May 29, 1790
Maps:
Neighbors:
Massachusetts, Connecticut
Water Borders:
Pawcatuck River, Narragansett Bay, Block Island Sound, Rhode Island Sound, Atlantic Ocean
Total Area:
1,214 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Providence, Warwick, Cranston, Pawtucket, East Providence
Famous Geographical Point:
Block Island
State Nickname:
The Ocean State. Presumably due to its proximity to the Atlantic Ocean.
Famous Person:
H.P. Lovecraft, horror author
Book Set In/About:
The Prince of Providence by Mike Stanton
This is a non-fiction book about Buddy Cianci, the controversial long-term mayor of Providence.
Movie Set In/About:
"Evening" (2007), directed by Lajos Koltai
A dying woman tells her daughters about her young adulthood, including her romances.
Headline of the Day:
"Rhode Island Sues HP Enterprise Over DMV Computer System" on ABC News.
Rhode Island
Capital:
Providence
Date of Entry:
May 29, 1790
Maps:
 |
| Map of USA. Rhode Island shaded & with arrow pointing to it. |
 |
| A close-up of Rhode Island & its neighbors. |
Neighbors:
Massachusetts, Connecticut
Water Borders:
Pawcatuck River, Narragansett Bay, Block Island Sound, Rhode Island Sound, Atlantic Ocean
Total Area:
1,214 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Providence, Warwick, Cranston, Pawtucket, East Providence
Famous Geographical Point:
Block Island
State Nickname:
The Ocean State. Presumably due to its proximity to the Atlantic Ocean.
Famous Person:
H.P. Lovecraft, horror author
Book Set In/About:
The Prince of Providence by Mike Stanton
This is a non-fiction book about Buddy Cianci, the controversial long-term mayor of Providence.
Movie Set In/About:
"Evening" (2007), directed by Lajos Koltai
A dying woman tells her daughters about her young adulthood, including her romances.
Headline of the Day:
"Rhode Island Sues HP Enterprise Over DMV Computer System" on ABC News.
Monday, October 31, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #72: "Seconds" (1966)
Movie Stats:
Released 1966 (France)
American, in English
Director - John Frankenheimer
Stars - Rock Hudson, John Randolph, Salome Jens
Plot Summary:
Middle-aged banker Arthur Hamilton (Randolph) is given the opportunity to start over with a new identity, but that opportunity comes with a price. Hudson co-stars as Hamilton in his new identity, Antiochus Wilson, and Jens as Nora Marcus, Wilson’s love interest.
Warnings:
Minor gore; full female nudity; brief male nudity (butt only); non-graphic rape.
Bad Stuff:
It’s a little slow.
I didn’t like the soundtrack, especially in the beginning, which sounded like a 1930s horror flick. It was over-the-top.
I’m having trouble expressing how I felt about the bacchanalia scene. It was certainly weird and could be construed as out of context with the rest of the film, although I do think it fit. Still, I didn’t like it. I think my problem is that it was both too long and too repetitive.
Good Stuff:
I loved the concept, and was particularly entertained by the notion that the “start over with a new life” company was essentially a pyramid scheme, with the same kind of false promises.
Randolph and Hudson were both very good.
I enjoyed the exploration of a midlife crisis, and the related pursuit of finding meaning in one’s life.
The Verdict:
This is not an uplifting film. It’s pretty unrelentingly dark, and the ending is grim. However, I liked it. I didn’t know much about it going in - I decided not to read anything more than the brief IMDB synopsis - and I’d never heard of it before, so it was a rare moment of getting an almost completely pure take on a movie. While I found the beginning in particular slow, I soon warmed up to watching the story unfold. I don’t have many serious complaints about it. It’s a really good story told in an interesting way, with solid cinematography and great performances. It will give you something to think about, and I believe that’s the hallmark of a good sci fi film.
I give it 4 stars.
Released 1966 (France)
American, in English
Director - John Frankenheimer
Stars - Rock Hudson, John Randolph, Salome Jens
Plot Summary:
Middle-aged banker Arthur Hamilton (Randolph) is given the opportunity to start over with a new identity, but that opportunity comes with a price. Hudson co-stars as Hamilton in his new identity, Antiochus Wilson, and Jens as Nora Marcus, Wilson’s love interest.
Warnings:
Minor gore; full female nudity; brief male nudity (butt only); non-graphic rape.
Bad Stuff:
It’s a little slow.
I didn’t like the soundtrack, especially in the beginning, which sounded like a 1930s horror flick. It was over-the-top.
I’m having trouble expressing how I felt about the bacchanalia scene. It was certainly weird and could be construed as out of context with the rest of the film, although I do think it fit. Still, I didn’t like it. I think my problem is that it was both too long and too repetitive.
Good Stuff:
I loved the concept, and was particularly entertained by the notion that the “start over with a new life” company was essentially a pyramid scheme, with the same kind of false promises.
Randolph and Hudson were both very good.
I enjoyed the exploration of a midlife crisis, and the related pursuit of finding meaning in one’s life.
The Verdict:
This is not an uplifting film. It’s pretty unrelentingly dark, and the ending is grim. However, I liked it. I didn’t know much about it going in - I decided not to read anything more than the brief IMDB synopsis - and I’d never heard of it before, so it was a rare moment of getting an almost completely pure take on a movie. While I found the beginning in particular slow, I soon warmed up to watching the story unfold. I don’t have many serious complaints about it. It’s a really good story told in an interesting way, with solid cinematography and great performances. It will give you something to think about, and I believe that’s the hallmark of a good sci fi film.
I give it 4 stars.
Friday, October 28, 2016
Sci Fi Top 100, #73: "The American Astronaut" (2001)
Movie Stats:
Released 2001 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Cory McAbee
Stars - Cory McAbee, Rocco Sisto, Gregory Russell Cook
Plot Summary:
It’s a space western musical in which trader Samuel Curtis (McAbee) sets out on a mission that will earn him a big payday. Sisto co-stars as Professor Hess, Curtis’s frenemy who’s on his tail, and Cook as The Boy Who Actually Saw a Woman’s Breast (yes really), who’s part of Curtis’s get-rich scheme.
Warnings:
Minor violence; blue language.
Bad Stuff:
It’s utterly absurd. Whether or not you find that entertaining is entirely subjective.
Character development is poor. It’s a movie full of caricatures rather than a movie full of people.
It sort of feels like what would happen if a bunch of guys who’ve known each other a really long time got together and made a film. “Wouldn’t it be funny if we did XYZ?” “Haha, totally, man, write that down!” In the vein of, say, “Pineapple Express,” only more ridiculous.
Good Stuff:
I really liked the visual effects and cinematography. It’s clear that they didn’t have much money, but they found inventive ways around it so that in the end it looks cool rather than cheap.
It’s funny. I can’t really explain how it’s funny. There were times when I was laughing and I had no idea why. Some of it was just so wacky (like the “Hey boy!” scene in the bathroom) that all I could do was laugh.
It made me uncomfortable in the best sort of way.
The Verdict:
I honestly can’t believe I’m saying this, but I loved this film. I was skeptical until the opening credits began to roll. Then, as I laughed through the sequence, I knew everything was going to be okay. It’s certainly a very strange movie. I know a lot of people who wouldn’t like it at all. Personally, I found it compelling. One of the rare times that something was really weird without being off-putting. In fact, I was so intent on it that I didn’t hear a timer go off in the next room! My pizza spent an extra five minutes in the oven (it turned out browner than I like but still edible). I really wish someone else I know would watch this so I could hear what they think about it.
I give it 4.25 stars.
Released 2001 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Cory McAbee
Stars - Cory McAbee, Rocco Sisto, Gregory Russell Cook
Plot Summary:
It’s a space western musical in which trader Samuel Curtis (McAbee) sets out on a mission that will earn him a big payday. Sisto co-stars as Professor Hess, Curtis’s frenemy who’s on his tail, and Cook as The Boy Who Actually Saw a Woman’s Breast (yes really), who’s part of Curtis’s get-rich scheme.
Warnings:
Minor violence; blue language.
Bad Stuff:
It’s utterly absurd. Whether or not you find that entertaining is entirely subjective.
Character development is poor. It’s a movie full of caricatures rather than a movie full of people.
It sort of feels like what would happen if a bunch of guys who’ve known each other a really long time got together and made a film. “Wouldn’t it be funny if we did XYZ?” “Haha, totally, man, write that down!” In the vein of, say, “Pineapple Express,” only more ridiculous.
Good Stuff:
I really liked the visual effects and cinematography. It’s clear that they didn’t have much money, but they found inventive ways around it so that in the end it looks cool rather than cheap.
It’s funny. I can’t really explain how it’s funny. There were times when I was laughing and I had no idea why. Some of it was just so wacky (like the “Hey boy!” scene in the bathroom) that all I could do was laugh.
It made me uncomfortable in the best sort of way.
The Verdict:
I honestly can’t believe I’m saying this, but I loved this film. I was skeptical until the opening credits began to roll. Then, as I laughed through the sequence, I knew everything was going to be okay. It’s certainly a very strange movie. I know a lot of people who wouldn’t like it at all. Personally, I found it compelling. One of the rare times that something was really weird without being off-putting. In fact, I was so intent on it that I didn’t hear a timer go off in the next room! My pizza spent an extra five minutes in the oven (it turned out browner than I like but still edible). I really wish someone else I know would watch this so I could hear what they think about it.
I give it 4.25 stars.
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Out and About: San Diego Zoo Safari Park
I've wanted to visit the San Diego Zoo Safari Park since I first heard of it, but decided to wait for cooler weather. Recently, some friends were in town and wanted to go as well. We lucked out: it was a cool, mostly cloudy day. And since it was the off-season, it was blissfully quiet.
Located at 15500 San Pasqual Valley Road in Escondido, the safari park is part of the San Diego Zoo system. A one-day adult pass costs $50 (parking is $12; there are a couple of electric charging stations). It includes access to all the walking areas of the park plus the tram through the African safari. There are other "safaris" you can pay extra for, such as a zip line safari, a balloon safari, and many more. My friends and I chose the one-day pass.
The park is enormous. I highly recommend you plan to spend your day there. We arrived about an hour after opening and stayed nearly until close. We did every walking section except for the World Garden, plus the Africa tram, but we only achieved that without stopping for food (my friends wisely brought snacks). When you visit, you should wear comfortable walking shoes, dress appropriately for the weather, and wear sunscreen & a hat.
We saw lots and lots of animals. Here are some of the pictures I took.
This one is pretty dark. There are at least three birds in it, and while I can't remember what they're called - laughing something; thrush maybe - I wanted to include it because they were SO noisy & it did sound like they were laughing.
Located at 15500 San Pasqual Valley Road in Escondido, the safari park is part of the San Diego Zoo system. A one-day adult pass costs $50 (parking is $12; there are a couple of electric charging stations). It includes access to all the walking areas of the park plus the tram through the African safari. There are other "safaris" you can pay extra for, such as a zip line safari, a balloon safari, and many more. My friends and I chose the one-day pass.
The park is enormous. I highly recommend you plan to spend your day there. We arrived about an hour after opening and stayed nearly until close. We did every walking section except for the World Garden, plus the Africa tram, but we only achieved that without stopping for food (my friends wisely brought snacks). When you visit, you should wear comfortable walking shoes, dress appropriately for the weather, and wear sunscreen & a hat.
We saw lots and lots of animals. Here are some of the pictures I took.
This one is pretty dark. There are at least three birds in it, and while I can't remember what they're called - laughing something; thrush maybe - I wanted to include it because they were SO noisy & it did sound like they were laughing.
Loved the colors on this bird but don't remember what it was called either.
The park had several of these trees with pretty pink blossoms. Notice the park map in the lower right corner of the picture.
Beautiful scenery in Escondido. It was so peaceful there. I loved it.
I love to take pictures of warning signs. I thought this one was a little poorly drawn. "No Cheetos for Eels" became our motto for the rest of the day.
Some animals.
 |
| The tigers were very vocal. The one nearest the camera is the mom; the rest are her cubs. |
 |
| Flamingos. They were cranky. |
 |
| The silverback of the gorillas waiting for his lunch. |
 |
| Lorikeet staring me down. |
 |
| Bats chillin'. |
 |
| The bats seemed to enjoy hanging from the air vents to catch the breeze. |
 |
| Elephants chowing down. |
 |
| Lazy male lion. |
 |
| The "prey" animals. This is the area our safari traversed. |
 |
| Vultures. One of my favorite animals. |
 |
| Rhinoceros. This one looked like it had a black eye. |
This water area in the African Outpost was magical. That's the balloon safari in the background of the first picture.
On our way back through the lion area, a lady lion had come to perch near the glass. Being this closer to her, even with glass between us, was nerve-wracking. Her paws were as big as my head. Definitely not anything you'd want to stumble across in the wild. I wish my pictures weren't so dark but I did what I could. By the way, like the tigers, the lions were very vocal.
The balloon safari peeking out from behind a pole.
A male cheetah eyes me up after the cheetah run. You could pay extra to get up close to the cheetah after the run. I wish we'd done it, although it wasn't clear from the sign we saw what you got for the extra money.
Another view of the scenery after the sun came out.
This little fox, who we saw at the end of the day, accurately sums up how I was feeling.
I loved the safari park. It was a great experience. You should definitely visit the next time you're in the San Diego area. I know I'll be going back.