2005 Archives

Major Goal: to read fifty books in a year.
I read nineteen.

Navigation

December 31, 2005

BOOK (#19 of 50)
The Legal Environment of Risk Management and Insurance
(CPCU 530)

The Chartered Property and Casualty Underwriter (CPCU) program from AICPCU.org is an 8-course college-level program designed to provide employees in various insurance fields a broader and deeper knowledge of the industry. This course covers the basics of American law, from crimes and torts to contracts and employment law. It was a meaty read, but one that organized the scattered bits and pieces of my understanding of these things into one cohesive and comprehensive compartment of my brain. I would encourage anyone who works in any area of insurance to read this book and take the exam.


November 30, 2005

BOOK (#18 of 50)
Talking from 9 to 5
by Deborah Tannen, Ph.D.

This book explores the way that women behave in the workplace versus the way men behave. Since the business world was created by men, it stands to reason that typical "male" behavior is more valued and rewarded than typical "female" behavior. Although women have since joined the workforce en masse, they still haven't penetrated the upper levels of the corporate world en masse, and this book explores why.

Basically, Tannen suggests that conversational patterns between women serve to keep each participant on an equal footing with the others, whereas conversational patterns between men tend to consist of each participant "one-upping" the others in an everlasting attempt to establish a pecking order. The most obvious examples are the "p's and q's"--women tend to pepper almost every interaction with "please", "thank you", and "I'm sorry", whereas most men rarely if ever use those phrases in normal conversation.

However, the purpose of the book is not merely to point out these differences, but to show why these differences tend to work against women when it comes to upper level promotions. Dr. Tannen provides scores of case studies and interesting insights into different major corporations to prove her point. I found this to be an enlightening and instructive book, one that I will keep in my library as a valuable reference, and I encourage men and women alike to give it a chance.


November 13, 2005

OBITUARY
Eddie Guerrero

Eddie was one of my favorite WWE wrestlers because he seemed to shine so brightly. After seeing how he constantly smiled, laughed, and played, whether on stage or off, and appeared genuinely loved by his fellow wrestlers, it was no surprise to learn that he was a born-again Christian.


November 11, 2005

MOVIE
Pride and Prejudice (miniseries)
Released 1995.

This version of the movie stars Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy--a better Mr. Darcy I have not seen! In addition, Elizabeth is played by Jennifer Ehle, whom I've never heard of, but she is beautiful and convincing--perfect for this part. This is the truest rendering of the novel by Jane Austen that I've ever seen. All of the salient scenes are included, played by a marvellous cast. The only complaint I would make is that Elizabeth's older sister, Jane, who is supposed to be the most beautiful of the daughters, is played by an actress with a rather masculine look about her face. I definitely did not find her very pretty. Other than that, this was a perfect film!


November 4, 2005

MOVIE
Girl with a Pearl Earring
Released 2003.

The painting "Girl with a Pearl Earring" is universally recognized. This movie purports to fill in the back story of how the painting came into existence. Though I don't know much about that period of time in Holland, the setting appears realistic and actually breathtaking. The colors used, both in costumes and props, are rich and deep. The dialogue is sparse, which places more of a burden on the actors' expressions to carry the plot along, which I'm glad to say they did admirably well. Colin Firth plays as the paintor, but I almost didn't recognize him, so much did he seem a part of the era. All in all, a great film with sublte themes. The ending made me gasp!


November 2, 2005

PHOTO
Noah Carson Freeman, My Nephew


Classic Pose


October 30, 2005

BOOK (#17 of 50)
Seeds of Time
by Kay Kenyon

It is rare to find a female science fiction writer, and even rarer to find a good female science fiction writer. But my search has ended with Kay Kenyon. I can't believe this is her first published novel, because it contains none of that awkward "feeling your way" plot set-ups that normally accompany first books. No, this lady writes professionally from the beginning.

SUMMARY: Clio Finn is a beautiful, independent woman who happens to be the best Dive pilot around. Because the Earth is quickly dying, she takes a spacecraft through Dive to different spots in the universe at different ages, trying to find a planet that is enough like Earth that its harvested seeds and plantlife will survive on Earth and regreen it. But the story is not all about Diving. It's more about Clio Finn, her hardships, her love life, her hopes and dreams. Don't let that last sentence fool you, though; this novel is not a sappy romance that just happens to be set in a technologically advanced future. In fact, you'll swear that the author is a man. Women just don't write science this well!


October 21, 2005

MOVIE
Gun Shy
Released 2000.

Liam Neeson stars as a top government undercover agent involved in busting up drug rings. But when the movie starts, he's just had a near-death experience on the job and does not relish the thought of going back in. He begins seeing a shrink and attending a support group, which gives him the opportunity to narrate a lot of the film. That's about as far as I can do without revealing too much. I found this movie to be intriguing and funny--in fact, there was one moment when I actually burst into laughter--and well worth the time spent watching it. As an extra, Liam Neeson's love interest is played by Sandra Bullock.


October 21, 2005

PHOTO
Noah Carson Freeman, My Nephew


Beautiful


October 19, 2005

MOVIE
Mystic River
Released 2004.

Though I dislike Sean Penn as a person, I must admit that he is a great actor, which is why I decided to view this movie. I enjoyed the suspense and rising tension. I thought the climax and resolution were satisfying and thought-provoking. I know this movie won some awards last year, and now I know why. Good film, with some disturbing themes, so not for young kids.


October 15, 2005

PHOTO
Noah Carson Freeman, My Nephew


Pony Ride


October 6, 2005

MOVIE
Saved!
Released 2004.

Another movie with great promise that ends in tatters. I guess it must be the fact that the plot in these kinds of movies is too thin and can only be resolved by increasingly absurd threads being woven together. The first 10 minutes of this movie were hilarious. Then it started getting dumber by the minute. I guess I expected this to be along the lines of "A Walk to Remember", but instead of affirming true Christianity (i.e., "Christlikeness"), which is many times missing in the popular Christian world, this movie made a mockery out of all Christianity and put forth the theory that non-Christians are more to be admired for their Christlikeness! There's no denying this came straight out of Hollywood, where most "stars" believe they are gods anyway.


October 3, 2005

PHOTO
Noah Carson Freeman, My Nephew


Mad Scientist


October 1, 2005

MOVIE
A History of Violence
Released 2005; Review appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 10-07-05.

This movie had some outstanding qualities usually lacking at the box office, including an intricate plot that drove the tension at a perfect pace. The settings felt authentic and contained many small details, and the dialogue, though sparse, resonated with realism. But I’ve given it two stars because it lacked any real climax and resolution, a situation which left me wondering what exactly the point of the film was. At the moment I anticipated the real meat of the movie to be explored, the screen went black and the credits began to roll. Maybe this is the first in a series?


September 30, 2005

BOOK (#16 of 50)
Of Tangible Ghosts
by L.E. Modesitt, Jr.

Another success by one of my favorite authors! This is the second novel I have read by Modesitt, and it is far more maturely written. The story is set against the backdrop of an alternate history, which is not a genre I'm usually attracted to because I do not have any depth of knowledge about history in general. But the story did not revolve around key issues in this alternate history that would require an understanding of true history, so it was easy to skim over with little detrimental effect on the story as a whole.

Summary: Dr. Eschbach, former government employee, works at a small university and tries to live his life as low-key as possible. He pursues Lady DuBoise, the music teacher, and struggles to teach his dull students about environmental politics, but his past keeps coming back to haunt him. In addition, this Earth in which he lives contains many visible ghosts who float around reliving the circumstances of their deaths, and it is one such ghost in particular, Carolynne, that captures Dr. Eschbach's attention and motivates him to study ghosts more intensely.

The writing is flawless and utterly convincing, as is the plot and setting. But what I like best about the novel is the way the author includes tiny details here and there that do not directly affect the action, but which sound a note of truth. Indeed, it is in reality a part of our mental make-up to notice details that seem irrelevant to others and that lead nowhere, yet that are somehow the result of a mass of our interconnected thoughts and feelings and are therefore vital pieces of who we are. Modesitt captures this phenomena superbly.


September 30, 2005

MOVIE
Walking Tall
Released 2004.

The Rock is getting better and better with his acting skills. Either that, or the roles he's been choosing simply match his real personality better. Whichever the case, I enjoyed this movie, where the underdog happens to be the "just cause" and those in power are the bad guys. This is a great feel-good film.


September 26, 2005

MOVIE
Spiderman 2
Released 2004.

I've heard a lot of folks say that this second Spiderman was much better than the first. I agree. The reason, I think, is that this film finally touched on something universal: the struggle to choose between what's best for all vs what's best for you. Some might say that the fight is really between communism vs individualism, but others would counter that the struggle is between responsibility vs selfishness. The difference is fine, but tangible, and I felt that the movie got it right. Of course, the supervillains just look ridiculous to me, but I was able to suspend my disbelief long enough to appreciate the theme.


September 20, 2005

BOOK (#15 of 50)
The Sensitives
by Herbert Burkholz

This is an "electrifying psychic superthriller", according to the book cover, which was what caught my eye and ultimately led me to purchase the novel. I've never heard of the author, but he turned out to write fairly well. I would give the book 3 out of 5 stars--it was entertaining, mildly riveting, and satisfying enough at the end.

Summary: Ben Slade is one of 5 mindreaders working for the CIA. He is effectively a prisoner of the government, because if he doesn't obey his insttructions, he will be eliminated. He falls in love with a mindreader who's working for the Russian government, and the two of them plot to escape their respective jailors and live together in freedom. Their plan works. For several years they live happily together in a small town in Europe, until their betters ultimately find them--that's when the chase begins again.

The story was well-conceived and thoroughly looped up, but still I felt there was something missing, some sense of emotional depth that didn't quite come across as strongly as it ought to have.


September 18, 2005

MOVIE
Just Like Heaven
Released 2005; Article appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 9-23-05.

This movie had a cute concept with lots of untapped potential. I’ve always enjoyed stories in which the main character has some type of amnesia, and this film even promised some romance and comedy as well.

The plot line ended up being rather simplistic, so I’m not sure why the writers didn’t exploit some of the sidelines a little more. I mean, the romance was just barely hinted at until the end, and the comedy was consistently cut short right before any great payoffs could happen. Although all of the actors, including Reese Witherspoon, performed reasonably well, Jon Heder (a.k.a. Napoleon Dynamite) stole the show.


September 16, 2005

MOVIE
I, Robot
Released 2004.

I was afraid to see this movie, because when I'd read the book, the movie paled by comparison, at least in the previews. It appeared to me that the movie was more or less about robots gone bad, which was not the main thrust of the book. But I took a chance, and I'm glad I did.

SPOILER: the movie at first seemed to suggest that the robots were turning against humans because robots are just evil. But towards the end, it became clear that there were classes of robot, and that the "smarter" the bot, the more liberally it applied the three laws of robotics. This mirrors the development of humans from infancy to old age: the wiser we become, the better we can see around corners, and thus we change our interpretation of life's laws to fit our new vantage point.

By the end of the movie, I had completely changed my opinion of it, and now think it is one of the greats. And the special effects were truly awe-inspiring.


September 14, 2005

MOVIE
The Man
Released 2005.

Samuel L Jackson has never impressed me much. However, I had hoped that Eugene Levy would more than balance the scales, and I was interested to see Luke Goss in action. In the end, Eugene Levy was the ONLY highlight of a very dismal 2 hours.

In the first place, a "Shaft-like" cop, like the character played by Jackson, is completely unbelievable. A man can't be a sourpuss to everyone around him and still expect to keep his job till retirement comes rolling around. That element alone was a real embarrassment to the film--what were the writers thinking?? Then, to add to my disappointment, Luke Goss and his bevy of ne'er-do-wells were like characters out of a puppet show. Again, though Luke isn't the greatest of actors, the writers should bear the blame for giving him so little to work with. Finally, the storyline was completely ridiculous. Only a true master like Levy could make an utterly worthless film a little entertaining.


September 13, 2005

MOVIE
13 Going on 30
Released 2004.

I had been wanting to see this since it first came out, mostly because there were so many 1980s references. Well, the movie turned out to be as good as I had anticipated, and then some. Jennifer Garner did a great job as a 13-year-old in a 30-year-old's body, and Mark Ruffalo performed especially well as a sweet throwback to a better era. Even the child actors did well.

Though the movie appears on the surface to be one for preteen girls, I felt that it was more aimed at adults in today's "hip" environments who have lost the ability to be kind and gentle, who think that being wholesome and genuine is only for dorks, who have lost the ability to wonder at life. It's a great film, one I'll want to see again and again!


September 12, 2005

PHOTO
Noah Carson Freeman, My Nephew


Order Up!


August 31, 2005

BOOK (#14 of 50)

Manifold Origin
by Stephen Baxter

This is the third book in a trilogy of Manifold novels that I mistakenly read first. The writing is thoughtful and deliberate, sometimes full of tension, riddled with mysteries and occasional humor.

However, this is not usually the kind of novel I enjoy, because its main thrust is to explore the origin of species. Thus, it is full of living hominids of various intelligence, based on the theory of evolution. It must be said that Baxter is very imaginative, for in addition to coming up with all manner of "historical" reconstructions, he also envisioned the more brilliant descendents of homo sapiens as gorilla-type beings whose knuckles drag the ground and whose ears swivel around their heads. Bizarre.

To summarize [SPOILER]: Emma Stoney gets sucked into a portal in the sky while flying in a jet across modern-day Africa. She is deposited on what is called "the Red Moon" (as seen from earth), a planet very like earth on which multiple species of humans live in tight little clusters. Much of the first half of the novel describes her struggle to survive. Meanwhile, her husband back on Earth, Malenfant, succeeds in getting NASA to build a rocket in which he will fly to the Red Moon and rescue his wife, and another chunk of the novel revolves around his efforts, first to fly there, and then once he gets there, to survive himself. Finally, they find each other, just in time for Malenfant to die. Emma then goes on a quest to discover why this Red Moon barged in on Earth, why the Red Moon has so many different species of humans living on it, why the Red Moon appears to be portal-jumping to different planets every few months, etc. She finds the answer, and let me assure you that it was a disappointing one. I didn't feel satisfied with the conclusion at all. How about you?


August 29, 2005

MOVIE
Spartan
Released 2004.

I love Val Kilmer; I think he is one of the best actors out there. And this movie was subtly brilliant. The DVD had a special feature, which allowed me to view the film while listening to a running commentary by Kilmer. This revealed the level of research that went into his role as an off-the-record assassin for the US military--very impressive. The plot had small twists and turns which kept the tension high and promised continued action. The dialogue was sparse but effective. Great movie, one I'll own.


August 27, 2005

BOOK
The First Book of the Kings
Old Testament

This book of the Old Testament chronicles the death of King David and the reign of his son, King Solomon, who reigned over Israel for 40 years. King Solomon was called the wisest man who ever lived, and also the richest man who ever lived. It was to visit him that the Queen of Sheba travelled to Israel, and when she had finished interviewing him, looking through his palaces, and watching how he interacted with the people, she said, "It is a true report that I heard in my own land about your deeds and your wisdom. But I didn't believe it until I came and saw it with my own eyes, and behold, the half was not told to me. Your wisdom and riches exceed the fame which I had heard. Your men are happy and your servants are happy to stand in your presence daily and hear your great wisdom. Blessed be the Lord your God, who delighted in you, to set you on the throne of Israel. It is because the Lord loved Israel so much that he made you its king, to do judgment and justice."

Solomon built the temple in Jerusalem, which you might have heard about, with walls and floors of gold and precious stones. He also wrote "The Proverbs", which is the 20th book in the Old Testament (and happens to have 31 chapters, making it easy to read a chapter a day). But Solomon did have one fault--he loved too many women. He had 700 wives and 300 concubines who eventually turned his heart away from God in his old age. They were foreign women and they wanted him to build altars to their strange gods. He did so, because he loved them, and as a result, God told him that his seed would not rule all of Israel anymore.

Instead, God divided Israel into two kingdoms, and set Solomon's son as king over the smaller one. So, when Solomon died, Israel became two kingdoms: Judah and Israel. And the rest of "First Kings" chronicles the next several kings who ruled over Judah and those who ruled over Israel.


August 23, 2005

MOVIE
Underworld
Released 2004.

Outstanding! I've never cared for vampire films, but this one was cleverly developed and had a Matrix-like feel that made it very cool. I loved the plot, which twisted nicely, and the dialogue, which turned phrases admirably. But the best element of the film had to be the setting: rich, classy and sleek, with warddrobe to match. Even the sewer tunnels looked inviting!


August 16, 2005

BOOK (#13 of 50)
Mindkiller
by Spider Robinson

What a great novel! This is my first Spider Robinson novel, but it definitely will not be my last. His writing is beautiful, complex, thought-provoking, and hilarious. It is rare that a book with a serious theme can make me actually laugh out loud, but Spider's did it multiple times.

The plot is convoluted, so I won't go into it much, but the distortion works marvelously to step up the tension and suspense. When I was halfway through the book, I told my husband that I still wasn't sure what it was about. He said, "Why are you still reading it then?" and I smiled and said, "I can't stop!" The character development is outstanding. The setting is just right. There are no loose ends.

Unfortunately, the author seems obsessed with drug use and sex, so several scenes I found rather repulsive. However, the quality of the descriptive narrative amazed me, so I will share a few lines that I simply loved:
1. "He wore his hair moderately long; the wind had whipped it into a fantastic scultpure and kept revising the design."
2. "For the first few nights he bounced around his apartment like a Ping-Pong ball in a blender, a workaholic evading savage withdrawal."
3. "The air was inexpressibly clear and good, the smell of woods had all the subtle nuances of flavor of a truly great dessert, the earth was springy beneath his feet."
4. "Oh, my mind scrabbled around in my skull like a trapped rat."


August 8, 2005

BOOK (#12 of 50)
Five Patients
by Michael Crichton

This is a nonfiction book that Michael Crichton wrote in 1970 that chronicles the rise of the "modern" American hospital by recounting the experiences of five different patients at the Massachusetts General Hospital. As you may know, Crichton finished medical school back then, before he began his career as a novelist, and so was privy to a lot of insider information in the field of health care.

Although the book is 35 years old, it is still fascinating, and much of the information has not changed significantly, based on what I've seen of the hit television series by Michael Crichton: ER. However, not being too much interested in medicine myself, and having a history of hating hospitals, much of the discussion was over my head, but not by far, because Crichton is truly gifted at breaking down complex ideas or procedures into bitesize pieces of information that any layman can digest.


August 3, 2005

PHOTO
Noah Carson Freeman, My Nephew


Little Man


July 31, 2005

BOOK (#11 of 50)
Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula
by Loren D. Estleman

Estleman wrote this book before he wrote _Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Holmes_. In fact, this first novel was a better seller than the latter, though it is the inferior of the two. If I had read this book first, I doubt I would have continued on to read another, for this one was superficial and unbelievable, as well as having the kind of plot that attempts to use innumerable twists and turns to mask the fact that nothing truly is happening.

I suppose that Dracula fans will have to read this simply because it is published, though I fear that no new or unique glimpses into the count's character, pain or motivations grace these pages. In fact, he is presented as a rather two-dimensional boring character, when the world knows he is far more complex.

On the other hand, Sherlock Holmes is here depicted as possessing less brilliance than normal while Dr. Watson seems to have vastly and inexplicably improved his sleuthing skills. Being something of a purist, I found this viewpoint unsettling and disappointing. In addition, the author persisted in explaining Holmes' conclusions when they appeared extraordinary, but the explanations themselves were bizarre and trite and lessened the respect Holmes deserves for his analytical prowess. All in all, a less than satisfying read.


July 18, 2005

MOVIE
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Released 2005; Review appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 07-22-05.

This movie reminds me of “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” for kids: it has the same kind of quirky humor, slow action, and minimal dialogue, only everything is dumbed down and unoriginal. Sure, I know this was a remake, but Johnny Depp is no Gene Wilder. If you have kids, they’d probably like it, but if you are an adult looking for that warm and fuzzy feeling one gets from revisiting a classic, I’m afraid you’ll be disappointed.

I can’t think of much worse things to do on the weekend than fold myself into a narrow foreshortened theatre chair and watch a movie in slow motion on the big screen for two hours. Yes, in slow motion. You see, this movie, while colorful and crisp and eye-catching, nevertheless dragged on interminably. This movie is probably best viewed at home while relatives are over for Thanksgiving dinner, because you can chat idly with Great Aunt Edna and have no fear of missing a crucial scene.


July 11, 2005

THOUGHT
The Temptation of Christ

There is a story in the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the Bible) of Satan appearing before Jesus Christ and tempting him to sin. The very existence of the story presupposes several key doctrines of Christianity:
1. that Satan exists;
2. that sin exists;
3. that Satan actively interacts in the lives of men, tempting them to sin against God;
4. that Jesus Christ exists;
5. that Jesus Christ was sinless, a state which Satan desperately desired to change.

Now, this was probably not the first time Satan had tried to tempt Christ, and it was certainly not the last time (since we know that Satan tried to use Peter to tempt Christ later). So why is this included in the Scriptures? Elsewhere, the Bible indicates that the Scriptures are for our benefit, teaching us how to live and how to react to life. So how can this temptation of Christ, which seems to be a war between ultimate good and ultimate evil, actually teach us mere mortals how to live?

This temptation has three phases where Satan presents an alluring sin to Christ, and Christ rejects it based on some passage of Scripture. I will here present each of these three sets, adding my own interpretation to Christ's responses (and please note, these are written in the margin of a Bible I have had for decades, so I'm not sure if I personally thought of this, or if I heard it in a sermon once). Bear in mind that it has been 40 days since Jesus ate.

Set 1: Satan's first attempt addressed Jesus' hunger: "If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread." This sounds reasonable, doesn't it? Satan is concerned that Jesus might faint from hunger, right? Now listen, we read stories about Count Dracula all the time, how he lived for 400 years or something and so was very adept at subtle manipulation. Wouldn't we believe that a being who has been around since before the Earth was formed would really know how to work a man? And so we look at Satan's request again and note that he is putting a condition on Jesus: If you are almighty... It looks like Satan is trying to get Jesus to prove by a powerplay that he truly is God's Son. Well, and what is so wrong with that? How could that be a sin? I mean, didn't Jesus later heal the sick and raise the dead, actions which require much more power than turning a rock into a roll?

But Jesus responds to this by saying: "It is written, that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God." Okay, we all agree with that, but what has that got to do with commanding stones to become bread when you are really hungry, Jesus? It doesn't seem like Satan and Jesus are talking about the same thing here.

But Satan's question is not whether Jesus has the power to do it. They both know he does. The subtle question is truly, Will Jesus do what he wants, even if God has not directed him to do it? Will Jesus act on his own to meet his own needs, or will he wait on God? Is Jesus independent of God, or is he dependent on God for every little thing? Does Jesus believe that something so simple as eating still requires direction from God? Boiled down to its very essence, Is Jesus God's puppet?

And the answer is unequivocally YES. More times than I can count did Jesus tell his disciples that he only does what his father wills. Remember what he said in the Garden of Gethsemane, when he prayed to God that the cup he would have to drink (the crucifixion) might pass from him? He said, "Not my will, but thine." In the big things, Jesus obeyed God. And he's telling Satan right now that this is also true in the little things. My paraphrase for what Jesus answers is: "I would rather obey God than meet my own needs."

Set 2: Satan's second attempt to tempt Christ to sin addressed Jesus' ambition by showing him all the kingdoms of the world and then saying: "If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine." It is easier to see the evil in this statement than in the previous one. Satan wants Jesus to worship him in exchange for all the glory of all the kingdoms of the world. After all, didn't Jesus come to be the Savior? What better way to save mankind than to remove Satan's control over them? Why not do a little evil for a greater good?

But Jesus responds to this by saying: "Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." We recognize that he is quoting the First Commandment. But we wonder, aren't there times when one needs to disobey God on ths front in order to achieve a victory for him on that one? After all, isn't every situation relative, making our response to it relative as well? Aren't there truly times when God's commandments are inconvenient for God's own purposes? He doesn't ALWAYS know best, does he?

But Jesus viewed this temptation in a very black and white way, and that way meant keeping God's commandments at any price. My paraphrase for what Jesus answers is: "I would rather be totally pure before God and appear a failure before men, that be spotted before God and appear successful before men."

Set 3: Satan's third and final attempt to tempt Christ to sin addressed Jesus' energy by taking him onto a high tower and saying: "If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence." And then, to add support to this temptation, Satan quotes an Old Testament prophesy about the Messiah, which says, "He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone."

Let's examine what the temptation actually was, because it seems a little foggy. Christ is tired, not having eaten for 40 days. Satan lifts him up and deposits him on a high tower. How is Jesus going to get down? Satan suggests that Jesus just jump, for aren't the angels going to carry him anyway? When we look at that suggestion, we wonder what is so wrong with it. Jesus has the power to jump, the angels are going to take care of him, so why is that a sin? Again, this is just a question of Jesus thinking for himself. Will he do what is convenient for himself, even though his Father in heaven hasn't directed him to do it? Can the Father really care how Jesus gets down from the tower??

But Jesus responds to this by saying: "It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." This statement could be looked at in several ways. I have heard sermons where this statement was meant to rebuke Satan for tempting Jesus, thus proving that Jesus is "the Lord thy God." But since Satan has been tempting Jesus all this time, one would wonder why Jesus would wait so long to rebuke him. No, I believe that Jesus is talking about the temptation itself and saying that if he jumped, he would be tempting God.

This leads into a question of what it means to tempt someone. What is temptation anyway? We use it jokingly about a rich piece of cake: "Oh, don't tempt me!" But in the Biblical sense, I believe that it means trying to manipulate someone into doing something that goes against God's wishes. Obviously, trying to get someone to sin goes against God's wishes, but trying to get God to do something that was not part of his plan--like catching Jesus from a fall when God never told him to jump in the first place--can also be considered a temptation. My paraphrase for what Jesus answers is: "I would rather take the difficult way out than try to manipulate God on behalf of my laziness."

After these three questions, Satan went away defeated, and angels appeared to Jesus and ministered to him. I hope you have read something here today that helps you in some way. I would love to hear about it, or to get any further comments you may have on the subject. Email me!


July 3, 2005

MOVIE
Anchorman
Released 2004.

I didn't expect too much from this film, because I've not seen any comedies with Will Ferrell that I found very funny. I think my low expectations helped me enjoy this movie more, because although there were moments where I smiled, there were no 'laugh-out-loud' moments.

This is basically a romantic comedy in which the lead anchor in a male-dominated newsroom falls for a lady who wants his job. Most of the comedy comes from silly one-liners and sillier physical situations. In fact, several times I felt like I was watching an unsuccessful sequel to Hot Shots. I won't be seeing this movie again and I wouldn't recommend it either, but I've posted the link just in case there are any die-hard Christina Applegate fans out there.


July 2, 2005

MOVIE
Van Helsing
Released 2004.

I got enough of Hugh Jackman in the X-Men movies and didn't relish the thought of seeing him in every frame of another. Besides, I've heard that this movie was sub par, but I do enjoy the old myths like Dracula, Frankenstein, and werewolves, and this movie had them all.

I have to say that Jackman didn't annoy me nearly as much as I'd anticipated: he is a good actor and he was accompanyed by a relative newcomer to blockbusters, Kate Beckinsale, who performed credibly. In addition, my annoyances were redirected to Richard Roxburgh, who played Dracula, because he was not convincing and neither was his wardrobe. Nevertheless, action abounded and the soundtrack was great. I probably won't ever see this movie again, but I don't regret seeing it once.


June 30, 2005

BOOK (#10 of 50)
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Holmes
by Loren D. Estleman

Being a fan of anything Sherlockian, I jumped at the chance to read another mystery with the esteemed detective as the main character. Though there are a few books out by Laurie R. King with Holmes centrally involved, I haven't taken to them because the setting was not 19th century London, which is where I always feel that Holmes belongs (though one day I swear I am going to write a story called "Sherlock in Space").

This novel combines the authentic setting and style of the original Holmes with another very famous character of the same century: Dr. Jekyll. I felt that this Holmes' behavior and dialogue ran consistent with the original, and that the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde was fleshed out a bit with this version of the events. I only wish I had not previously known about Dr. Jekyll's power to become Mr. Hyde with a chemical, because that would have made the mystery aspect of the novel quite appealing.

I thoroughly enjoyed the book anyway, and have begun reading a similar book by the same author called "Sherlock Holmes Vs. Dracula." Look for my review of that book in July 2005.


June 20, 2005

BOOK
The Second Book of Samuel
Old Testament

This book chronicles the reign of King David from the death of Saul, his predecessor, to the death of Absalom, his son. In this narrative, we see the unconventional ways that David responded to negative events and the subsequent ways God blessed him for it. The most famous of these negative events was spawned by David's own sin: he saw a beautiful woman bathing on her housetop and brought her to the castle for an immoral interlude. Later, when she told him she was pregnant, he had her husband killed and then he married her. This woman was the infamous Bathsheba. The penalty for this sin of David was the death of the baby. Nevertheless, David kept his faith in God and repented of his sin. As a result, God then gave Bathsheba a second son named Solomon, who turned out to be the third king of Israel and the wisest man who ever lived, and from whom Jesus Christ was descended.

This book is full of action and adventure, romance and intrigue, politics and betrayals. Yet it is only about 30 pages long. Go ahead and read it!


June 19, 2005

MOVIE
Star Wars III
Released 2005.

I'm not a Star Wars nerd by any stretch of the imagination: I didn't have Hans Solo action figures or models of the Death Star as a child. But I did see the first three (or last three) in the '70's along with everyone else and thought they were great movies. But knowing that I enjoyed those movies as a child prepared me for the disappointment of seeing the prequels as an adult--I haven't really expected to like any of these last three (or first three), and I really didn't much care for I and II. But believe me, this third prequel makes up for the other two abundantly.

There are many mysteries in the original three movies whose solutions have been merely hinted at in the first two prequels, but the teasing ends with the final prequel, in which all mysteries are solved, even tiny ones. This wrapping up/revealing the future storyline works well and is believable. The timeline is tight and the action is just long/short enough to appreciate/endure. I can't wait for this Christmas, when all six movies will come out in a great box set, because then I will have a Star Warstravaganza!


June 18, 2005

PHOTO
Noah Carson Freeman, My Nephew: Two Years Old


Like Father, Like Son


June 4, 2005

MOVIE
Collateral
Released 2004.

It's been several weeks since I watched this movie, and I still don't know why they named it "Collateral." If anybody has a theory, please email me.

Aside from that conundrum, the film was action-packed and the tension was high, with both Tom Cruise and Jamie Foxx performing incredibly well.

The story line itself was completely unbelievable. A cabbie picks up a guy one night who has 5 stops to make, and the guy turns out to be a hit man. He has the cabbie drive him to each of the 5 hits in succession while chatting about the meaning of life and death. In fact, a lot of the dialogue attempted to raise some tough philosophical questions, but actually only succeeded in further muddying those already hazy waters.

Nevertheless, I'd recommend it for the action alone.


May 31, 2005

BOOK (#9 of 50)
Fortress in the Eye of Time
by C.J. Cherryh

I like fantasy books, but normally I imagine fantasy is to science fiction what romance is to literature, and I normally go for fantasy or romance when my mind wants an easy read. But this book broke out of my stereotypes with an exhaustingly mental ride.

First of all, the writing itself is dense--no words are wasted. Second, the subject matter turns on delicacy, subtlety, and nuance--covering the depths of not only court intrigue and political alliances, but also of love, friendship, and awareness. Finally, the protagonist suffers from a form of amnesia, so he is constantly doubting himself or remembering something that may or may not be significant to the current situation, and the reader must carry these bits and pieces of information in the forefront of his mind throughout the story just in case some of them become relevant.

Whether a person will enjoy this story depends on his maturity level, his education, and his attitude toward introspection (namely, does he believe that intuition equals action?). For myself, I found the story, the writing, and nuance to be powerful and interesting, and do not hesitate to recommend it. But after reading the worst reviews on Amazon, it becomes clear that one man's "nuance and subtlety" is another man's "too detailed and boring." Buyer beware.

To summarize: A powerful wizard pulls a soul from death to take life again, but when this Shaping appears, he is a baby in a man's body--he has to learn even how to walk. He has no memory of who he was in his previous life, a fact that devastates the wizard, who gives up hope of ever using this Shaping to defeat the Enemy, which had been the reason to bring him into existence in the first place. The wizard is soon killed, and the Shaping runs away down a long dark road. Eventually, the Shaping is taken in by a nearby prince for amusement purposes, but as the Shaping learns how to live and has increasing revelations of memory, he begins to overshadow the prince in every way. Meanwhile, the prince is trying to keep the kingdom together and ward off invasion, and is never quite sure if this Shaping is friend or foe. In fact, even the reader is not sure! Events play out in a rather predictable way, but it is the players who are unpredictable and who provide the source of most of the action. The ending is somewhat of a let-down, but obviously sets the stage for a second book, and I hear that there are now 4 books to this series.


May 30, 2005

MOVIE
The Longest Yard
Released 2005; Review appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 06-03-05.

I can’t comment on parallels with the original, but this remake had a straightforward and predictable plot, with cookie cutter villains and two-dimensional heroes. The humor worked, but emotional and comedic elements were intertwined a lot, something typically only attempted in romantic comedies, and this made the film feel like a parody. Although the target audience is obviously men of all ages, be aware that some scenes are too violent for preteens. Parts of the movie were slow and other parts were riveting, and the cast was crowded with cameos of past football greats whose one-liners referred to real life events.


May 21, 2005

BOOK
The First Book of Samuel
Bible (also called The First Book of the Kings)

This Old Testament book chronicles the life of the prophet Samuel, from the cradle to the grave, and even beyond the grave. In addition, the book describes how the first King of Israel was raised up and brought low--that would be Saul, son of Kish.

According to the Biblical account, Saul was a handsome man who stood head and shoulders above the average Israelite. The people were pleased to have him as their king because of his strong appearance. And Saul began his reign with wisdom, but soon the fame and power went to his head and he lost his kingdom over it.

Here's what happened: The Lord told Saul to take his army and destroy a certain enemy. When the Lord said "destroy", he meant "utterly wipe out man, woman, child and beast." So Saul takes his army and destroys all the people, but brings home all the oxen and sheep as spoils of war.

As he comes into town, the prophet Samuel stops him and asks him why he didn't obey the Lord and kill all the animals. Saul's reply was ingenious: "I brought the best of the sheep and oxen back here so we could sacrifice them to the Lord." How noble! What a righteous man he must be!

But Samuel pressed him again, asking why he didn't obey the Lord and kill all the animals. This time Saul feels the pressure and comes up with a better answer than before: "I personally obeyed the Lord; it's the army who decided to bring back the best of the sheep and oxen to sacrifice to God. I tried to tell them, but they wouldn't hear me." Now Saul has shifted the blame off himself--so if the Lord is angry, the Lord can punish the army, not Saul.

And the prophet Samuel's response is eternal: "Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice." And Saul was rejected as King.

Enter David, a shepherd, youngest of 8 sons of Jesse. He was fearless in the face of evil, because he had so much faith in God. And he was chosen as the next King. But the transition wasn't easy, because Saul was stubbornly hanging on to his throne. The way Saul pursued David, and the way David consistently responded, is definitely worth reading. Won't you read it today?

And as you read, keep in mind that Jesus' earthly father, Joseph, was the direct descendant of this same David.


May 11, 2005

BOOK (#8 of 50)
Hyde Park Headsman
by Anne Perry

This book was not on my original reading list for this year, but I was in the mood for an old-fashioned mystery. Most of Anne Perry's novels are set in the late 1800's and her writing reminds me of a modern Charlotte Bronte. Yes, that's both good and bad. Good because all of the nuances of society life are included, bad because all of the nuances of society life are included.

Honestly, it took about 30 pages of laborious pressing forward until I began to get into the rhythm of the story enough to not dread opening the book again the next day. I read about 30 pages a sitting and, while I enjoyed the story line, the pace was sometimes excruciatingly slow. The total number of pages in the hardback is 392, which probably could have withstood cutting to 300 without losing any substance whatsoever.

To summarize: Thomas Pitt has just been promoted to Police Superintendent when a series of 4 murders occur. All of London is in an uproar for the police to do something, because it wasn't long before that Jack the Ripper had terrorized the city and never been caught. Superintendent Pitt's job is on the line unless he can arrest the serial killer, but he has nothing to go on for the majority of the book until finally he is relieved of his job, a situation which jolts him to an awareness of who the killer must be (in the last 10 pages). Meanwhile, his wife Charlotte is putting up wallpapers and furnishings in their new home and gossipping with her sister, Emily.

I didn't care about the aspects of furnishing the new home, or some of the other subplots that included Charlotte's mom dating a musician. To me, these were all filler pages and I read through them rather quickly each time in order to get back to Superintendant Pitt's predicaments, which I did find very interesting. Would I recommend this book? Only for true devotees of Anne Perry.


May 3, 2005

MOVIE
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Released 2005; Review appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 05-06-05.

Staying true to the book, this movie is difficult to categorize, a fact that interferes with the neat and tidy boxes of life and provides an unusual kind of enjoyment. The plot is so odd that I couldn’t look away. The mix of commonness and the bizarre in every character enchanted me. Sometimes the not-so-subtle social commentaries of the narrator offended me, other times I got quite tickled. I must say that this movie is one of the funniest I’ve seen in a long time. Go see it, and be sure to listen carefully to the soundtrack...


April 30, 2005

BOOK
The Book of Ruth
Bible, Old Testament

Contrary to popular uninformed belief, the Bible is full of heartwarming love stories, and I believe this is one of the best.

To summarize, a woman named Naomi went with her husband and two sons to a distant land to escape the famine in Israel. In this distant land (Moab), each of the sons took a wife. During the course of about 10 years, Naomi's husband and two sons all die, leaving her alone with the two daughters-in-law. Naomi hears that the famine in Israel is over, so she returns, but one of her dauthers-in-law, Ruth, wants to go with her and live with her.

The pair travel back to Israel and the next day, Ruth goes out into some fields to start picking grain for food. She just happens to end up in the field owned by a rich older man named Boaz, who just happens to be a distant relative of Naomi's dead husband. Boaz tells her that he's heard about her, that the whole town knows how virtuous and good a woman she is, and that because of this, Boaz wants her to always come to his field and no one else's.

Finally the end of the growing season arrives, and Boaz hasn't made a move. So Naomi tells Ruth to make it clear that she wants to marry Boaz. Ruth does so, and Boaz ends up blessing her for not wanting to marry a younger man. In the end, the two are married and have a son named Obed. Obed is the grandfather of King David, the greatest king of Israel, the friend of God.

To me, besides being a great love story, this is a prime example of the principle that goodness and virtue travel down through generations. After all, King David is in the direct line of Jesus' lineage.


The Interpreter

MOVIE: Released 2005; Viewed 04-24-05; Appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 04-29-05.

This movie had the suspense of a fast-paced thriller while somehow also being a poignant emotional drama. Both Kidman and Penn were utterly believable, giving the kind of deep rich performances that differentiate great actors from pretenders (e.g., Reese Witherspoon). Kidman adopted a beautiful accent for the role, and though I’m not an expert on African languages, I felt that she did an excellent job learning her lines. The plot was richly woven with teases and mysteries, so much so that I’m still not sure I understood everything. But that’s okay, because I plan to see this movie again anyway...

Win a Date with Tad Hamilton

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 04-23-05.

For some reason, I thought this would be a comedy and that a lot of the humor would result from the main female character's goofy behaviour while starstruck, but that situation only had a small percentage of air time.

The storyline is pretty predictable: pretty girl in a small town wins a date with a hot movie star, who then falls for her and pursues her back in her home town, much to the distress of her less-than-hunky childhood friend who is also in love with her. It was touted as a romantic comedy, and though there were some funny moments and some tender moments, the movie ultimately felt incomplete in both areas. It was a short movie, so I'm going to guess that the producers had to cut some of the more meaty parts, but they did so to its detriment, I think.

I would give the movie a 3 out of 5 and call it average. It would be good for a teen sleepover.

Emerald Windows (#7 of 50)

BOOK: Terri Blackstock

Terri Blackstock is a successful Christian fiction author and I thought it was past time that I checked her out. While I felt that there was some awkwardness in the multiple plot lines coming together, I did see a diamond in the rough.

The story begins 7 years after a scandal rocks a small Mississippi town--a teacher having an affair with a student. The story ends with--well, I can't really tell you that if you plan to read this, but it ends on the opposite pole. During the journey, the author weaves several themes into the storyline, including trusting God, forgiving others, and facing your fears.

To be a little bit critical, the action seemed manipulated all too often by the author, and that made events take on an unrealistic slant. I know this is fiction, but I like to be so enveloped in a story that it feels completely real, and this book didn't quite achieve that. But it was written in 2001, and I'm sure Terry Blackstock is only getting better...

The Book of Judges

BOOK: The Bible, Old Testament

The seventh book of the Old Testament, Judges overflows with action and adventure. It is in Judges that we find the story of Samson and Delilah, arguably the most famous couple in history. But Samson is only one of thirteen great warriors chronicled in this book who rescued Israel from slavery to other nations. One of these warriors was a woman, Deborah, and because of her strength and fortitude, babies even today are commonly named after her. This is astounding when you look at the names of some of the other judges: Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Barak, Tola, Jair, Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon. I've never met anyone with these names, have you?

The judge I left out is another very famous man who, though babies aren't named after him much, still gets a lot of great name recognition, at least in the church. He was Gideon, and he's famous because he doubted God. Gideon was a man who needed a lot of reassurance. First, an angel came to him with the message from God, that he would deliver Israel. Gideon doubted, and so THREE TIMES he asked the angel, "Are you sure?" and the answer was yes.

But Gideon still doubted, so he asked for a sign, and the angel made fire come out of his staff. A few days later, when the time for action had come, Gideon again doubted God. He asked for a second sign--that the morning dew would not touch the ground the next day, but only Gideon's fleece of wool would be wet. God did it. What a miracle! But still Gideon doubted. He asked for a THIRD sign--that the next morning's dew would be all over the ground but not on his fleece of wool. God did it. Finally, after all these signs, Gideon decided to believe.

What I find fascinating about this story is that God didn't get upset with Gideon. And when I think of Doubting Thomas, who didn't believe that Jesus had appeared to the other disciples after his crucifixion, I remember that Jesus didn't get upset with Thomas either. He just gave him the sign he needed so that he *could* believe.

Legacy (#6 of 50)

BOOK: James A Michener

This is my first experience reading James Michener. I found his style to be straightforward and easy to follow, but with that gift of simple profundity so common in great writers.

The book was short but captivating, as it followed the generations of the Starr family, a fictional lineage that traveled the spheres of great men and women of the United States from the Declaration of Independence to the Iran-Contra Affair. The reader is introduced to our founding fathers in a manner that reveals their humanity as well as their innate nobility. In addition, the Constitution of the United States is reprinted in full at the end of the book.

This was an educational and entertaining read that I would recommend without reservation.

State of Fear (#5 of 50)

BOOK: Michael Crichton

We've all heard the rumours that global warming is unsubstantiated, but who has the time to sift through hundreds of scientific journals in order to extract the necessary data to prove the point?? Michael Crichton does, for one, and he has presented his findings in this book, and wrapped his research into a suspenseful and thrilling fictional plot line to make it more palatable.

He sets up the book by describing various happenings along a mysterious timeline, which, as they unfold, seem to point to some ominous man-made world catastrophe. Along the ride, some of the main characters are pro-global warming and some are anti-global warming, and the two sides have plenty of opportunities to exchange ideas and opinions. Much of this dialogue is presented with footnotes that point to the specific publication or scientific journal where it was originally presented, and the footnotes are all real. The end result is a more informed reader and a tidy plot resolution.

I have enjoyed Michael Crichton's books for many years, and having recently seen him interviewed on television, now have a greater appreciation for his intellect and capacity for reasoning. And he is extremely articulate, both live and on paper. I would recommend this book without reservation.

Man on Fire

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 04-10-05.

When I saw that Dakota Fanning starred in this movie, I was reluctant to see it even though I'd heard it was good, because I just don't care for children actors. Fortunately, the child star here was overshadowed by Denzel Washington, who could not have pulled off a more credible performance as a tortured soul seeking redemption.

The setting is Mexico City, the actors are mostly Mexican, and the drama is riveting. Denzel Washington's character has been hired to protect the young daughter (Dakota Fanning) of a wealthy businessman, because kidnappings for ransom are at an all-time high. To say any more would be to reveal some of the mystery of the plot, so I will hold my tongue.

Though the story line is superb, I believe the cinematography is what makes this movie so great. The scenes are shot from several angles and the camera frequently zooms in on a particular object which clues the reader in to what is happening much more quickly than traditional filming. I found this fascinating to watch--it was done very cleverly.

In addition, as I said before, Denzel Washington was at his finest in this movie. And Christopher Walken performed at his usual high standards. Watching this movie has interested me in reading the book, and I discovered that AJ Quinnell, the author, also wrote "In the Name of the Father", which happens to be one of my favorite movies starring Daniel Day Lewis. But unfortunately, it turns out that "In the Name of the Father"--the movie--was actually based on a book by someone else called "Proved Innocent". Oh well.

March 2005

Einstein's Brain (#4 of 50)

BOOK: Mark Olshaker

If someone is going to write a thriller which is full of suspense because of a mysterious element that will only be made clear in the last five pages of the book, then I have a word of advice: don't give away the mystery in the TITLE of said book!

It's hard for me to say how well I enjoyed this book because of that fact. If I had NOT known why three people felt powerfully drawn to one another when they had little in common, if I had NOT known why several organizations were secretly protecting each of them or trying to kill each of them, if I had NOT known why each of them felt strangely drawn to Albert Einstein, and if I had NOT known why each of them had mysteriously survived a terminal brain tumor a few years after Einstein died, then maybe this would have been a better book.

Now, I know that many times it's all about the journey, not the destination. But when your entire journey is fueled by a mystery, the rules change. I also know that many times an editor will come up with a title that may override the title the author prefers, all for the sake of marketing. And I must acknowledge that the only reason I picked up this book was that the title intrigued me. But surely they could have found a title that wasn't quite so obvious...

Mean Girls

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 03-12-05.

All of us remember the beautiful yet heartless girls in high school who ruled the masses. We hated them and at the same time secretly tried to emulate them. This movie perfectly captures that sentiment.

A 16-year-old girl who has been homeschooled all her life (because her parents lived in Africa working with the animals) finally returns to the states and enters public high school. She is very different from everyone else but because she is beautiful, the "plastics" (that's what the mean girls are called) take her under their wings and teach her how to behave and dress. Of course, they are mean to her, but they are mean to everyone, even each other, and in the end they create a monster.

The movie has many humorous lines and some situational comedy, as well as a bit of heartfelt romance and familial love, and the ending makes everything right again, though I swear you will not be able to predict what happens. I thought this was a great movie, though the language was a little too loose.

Silence of the Lambs

MOVIE: Released 1991; Viewed 03-04-05.

I dreaded seeing this movie because everyone says it is so scary. I don't do scary very well, as I'm still a little afraid of things that go bump in the night, and I still have nightmares. But with my sweet hubby by my side for protection, I took the plunge. Turns out, the movie was less scary than Forensic Files. I have to think that we must have so much more exposure to brutal murders that are real nowadays than they did in 1991; otherwise, who says this is scary??

The fact that the movie stars Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins practically guarantees a very credible story, and neither of those actors performed less than excellent. I found the plot, with its twists and turns, totally unpredictable, and I'm aching to see the sequel, "Hannibal".

Laws of Attraction

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 02-27-05.

My principle attraction to this movie had to do with Pierce Brosnan, as I had a schoolgirl crush on him in the 1980's when he starred in Remington Steele. Fortunately, he played his part well, and the character was loveable and witty, just as I have always imagined the actual actor to be. I'm sure I'm wrong here, but one can always dream, right?

Anyway, the movie is about two high-powered lawyers who finally face each other in the courtroom and are a pretty even match. The female lawyer, played by Julianne Moore, has a secret sugar addiction and doesn't date, but finds herself strangely attracted to her male counterpart. The typical cat-and-mouse romance ensues, and even takes the couple to Ireland for a weekend. Do they get together or kill each other? I can't give that away. This is a good flick for a Sunday afternoon.

Hitch

MOVIE: Released 2005; Viewed 02-13-05; Appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 02-18-05.

Finally, a romantic comedy that’s actually worth seeing! Both Will Smith and Kevin James do a superb job in a plot that’s rife with physical and situational comedy, although most of it is a little far-fetched.

On the down side, the movie is a bit too long. There are moments that drag, mostly because the romantic side of the conflict is difficult to resolve without resorting to sappy and entirely unconvincing emotionalism. Plus, one of the major plot lines touted in the synopsis, that Will Smith’s character would struggle to overcome his own barriers to finding true love, is flimsily portrayed because stuffing the film with so many laughs leaves little time to delve into the characters’ psyches.

In fact, the laughs were so well paced that one didn’t notice or didn’t mind how loosely the plot was woven together. The writers even saved a few laughs for the very last scene. I would recommend seeing this movie in the theatre, as long as you don’t bring your crying 4-year-old with you. Yes, I'm talking to you.

King Arthur

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 02-10-05.

I am usually skeptical about new movies portraying well-worn storylines, but since this one didn't have any big name actors, I thought I'd give it a chance, and I'm glad I did. The story is more like a derivitive of the standard tales of Camelot, and suggests centuries of mythic characteristics have been layered onto the true story, which was actually quite simple and common.

The premise is that King Arthur's knights were average men from far away who were drafted into the Roman army when their villages were conquered, and forced to serve 30 years in the farthest outpost of the Roman empire, the British isles. The way Arthur won their hearts, the way he met Guinevere and who she was, and what went on between Guinevere and Lancelot are all non-standard events in this movie that actually fit well with historical data.

I found these lesser known actors performed convincingly well and moved me to tears quite effortlessly. The cinematography was beautiful and the costumes were believeable. All in all, a great movie that I wouldn't mind watching again.

The Wedding Date

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 02-06-05. Appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 02-11-05.

This is the same chick flick that comes out every quarter, so the ending is highly predictable. Although Dermot Mulroney’s character is the male version of Julia Roberts in Pretty in Pink, this movie tries to add a little bit of class to the part by making Mulroney a philosopher of sorts. Hearing him spout bits of wisdom all the way through the film gave me the impression that he was going to turn out in reality to be a therapist or a writer or something instead of a “male escort”, but these expectations were disappointed. In the end, I was only left to surmise that the primary goal of the movie was to demonstrate that prostitutes are wiser, wittier, and more self-disciplined than the average white-collar worker.

The dialogue, plot, and setting were all average, as were the performances of Mulroney and Messing. I felt that the writers missed several opportunities to make this more comedic, and the humor they did include fell flat most of the time. All in all, there was nothing outstanding about this movie. I’d suggest waiting for the DVD release.

Shaun of the Dead

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 02-06-05.

If you want to see a truly humorous rendering of Dawn of the Dead, you must watch this film! I don't think I've ever laughed harder at such a gory and callous movie since Blazing Saddles, and in all honesty, I could only understand about half of the dialogue, since the characters all had thick British accents.

The premise of the film is about what you'd think: the main character, Shaun, is followed through his daily life as the world around him is turned upside down by flesh-eating zombies. Truly a funny movie, though I wouldn't watch it again for a while since the suspense is over for me.

Envy

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 02-04-05.

This is about the 10th movie I've seen where Ben Stiller plays himself. I'm seriously beginning to doubt that he has any true acting ability whatsoever, since every role he accepts tends to fit the following profile: awkward in social situations; stuttering; bumbling; smart but gets no credit for it; sweet but makes a mess of things.

What I'd like to see is Ben Stiller as a crazed sociopath who sets upon a course of frenzied mass murders in DC. Or Ben Stiller in a serious drama as the father of an autistic child. But come on, would anyone believe him in those roles? I mean, could anyone actually picture Ben Stiller as the next James Bond? I don't think so.

But to get back to this movie, it was awful. The premise is that of two neighbors and best friends, Stiller is the smart one and Jack Black is the airheaded one. When Black invents something that makes him a millionaire, Stiller is eaten up with envy and tries to even the score. You can see how this has great potential, but evidently the writers couldn't. There were few funny moments, and most of those involved Jack Black. The movie took a long time to cover each situation, and nearly became too bad to continue watching. But I stuck it out, so you wouldn't have to. Save your time and money and stay away from this bomb.

January 2005

The Book of Joshua

BOOK: The Bible, Old Testament

This is one of my favorite books of the Old Testament because it chronicles the successes of Joshua the son of Nun, a man nearly crippled with fear and self-doubt, who is chosen by God to succeed Moses as the leader of the nation of Israel. It's his job to lead the people in war against the inhabitants of the Promised Land before the Israelites can settle in what is now known as Jerusalem and the surrounding area.

But Joshua doubts his own worth as a leader. Can he really pull this off? God knows that Joshua needs encouragement, so He gives it to him time and time again, never tiring of speaking words of comfort to His servant:

The Footprints of God (#3 of 50)

BOOK: Greg Iles

I picked this book up for two reasons: first, it has a celtic symbol of the trinity on the cover, and second, I liked the title. The book turns out to be a scifi thriller that takes place in the here and now of (mostly) the United States.

The book reads quickly--a real pageturner--and keeps the tension rising with a smooth and constant progression. The plot was the best thing about the book: until the last few pages (529 of them), I had absolutely no idea where the story was going. Really. Nothing about the story was predictable--including the way it ended--except that the main characters didn't die halfway through.

I'll be interested to read Iles' new book coming out in February called BLOOD MEMORY.

Einstein, A Life (#2 of 50)

BOOK: Denis Brian

This is the first Einstein biography I've ever read, though I started one a few years ago that set out to prove that Einstein had been a communist, and I couldn't get through it. On the contrary, this book proves by Einstein's own letters and speeches, and also by first-hand testimony of friends and relatives, that the great scientist was also a great humanitarian.

The book is one of the first to have access to many deeply personal materials available about Einstein since the death of Otto Nathan, Einstein's posthumous and self-appointed gaurdian. For years, he kept a lot of material about Einstein supressed in order to protect Einstein's reputation, but now legal action has released these materials and allowed Denis Brian to paint a much more accurate picture of the scientist than has been previously portrayed.

After reading this, I feel so much love for the man and so much admiration for the scientist. Like all of us, he had some skeletons in his closet because of some errors in judgment as a young man, but he more than made up for those in later years. The book also touched on the development of physics, but not so much so that I couldn't follow along easily. All in all, I felt that I got a rounded and complete picture of the greatest scientist of the 20th century, and I enjoyed every page of it.

Helliconia Summer (#1 of 50)

BOOK: Brian W. Aldiss

This is a tale of adventures of foreign people on a strange planet in outer space, but Aldiss paints his human characters with such intimacy and familiarity that the average reader cannot help but strongly relate. It's one of those books that doesn't come across as science fiction, even though it's replete with descriptions of a cyclical ecology that could theoretically work in real life.

Helliconia Summer is the second of a trilogy. The first book, Helliconia Spring, takes over half of its space describing the evolution of the planet and, consequently, the humans inhabiting it. The last fourth of the novel zooms in on one small but key town and follows the goings on of about 10 characters. Helliconia Summer opens in the same zoom on a new set of characters many centuries later, and follows them until the very end, where about 8 pages are zoomed back out to describe the evolution of the planet again.

Aldiss won the John W. Campbell Award in 1983 for Helliconia Spring, but to my surprise, has not won any awards that I know of for Helliconia Summer, which in my opinion is a far better book. I am hoping that the final book, Helliconia Winter, will finally be the best!

THOUGHT: Good vs Evil

January 29, 2005

I watched Schindler’s List last night. It's so, so sad. And what’s sadder still is that it was not an isolated event with Jews as the only victims of mass murder. Kosovo, South Africa, the Congo, and Iraq tell us otherwise (just to mention a few).

There truly is evil in the world, and it is present at any given time. It always begs the question--what should we do about it? Of course, Burke’s famous quote comes to mind: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Well, and if I agree, what then? What is the thing that good men should do?

Should they, like the United Nations, stand back and wring their hands, making verbal threats they don’t have the manpower to back up? Should they abhor physical maneuvering and rely solely on the hope that eventually the innate goodness of the perpetrator will finally bubble up through the miry blackness of his soul and stay his hand from brutally murdering millions more? History proves that killers never stop killing of their own accord. Evil only ever becomes darker.

If words are ineffective, should good men then rely on prayer to end apartheid? The Bible assures us that “the fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” Now we have touched on something that actually has worked before. But the problem here is that prayer is unpredictable: we don’t know when it will work, when God will stop the evil and when he will let it continue. Many have intimated that the Jewish holocaust was imminent, prophesied by Old Testament preachers as Israel’s punishment for disobeying God’s laws. Are they then saying that the death of six million Jews was God’s will?

No one will concede that. So it stands to reason that if God did not actively will for these deaths to occur, he must have had some other motive in mind for not intervening sooner. If we believe that God is truly good, as I do, then we must believe that he respects the gifts he has given mankind, one of which is free will. God allows us to make our own choices, and freedom to choose evil over good is still freedom.

Therefore, if evil men are free to actively choose evil deeds, aren’t good men free to actively choose good deeds? No one would argue that rescuing millions of potential victims is a good deed, but what if that rescue operation necessitated killing some of the bad guys? Is it still a good deed to kill an evil man?

Some would point out that America has her own holocaust: aborted babies. It's easy to see how a fanatic could kill an abortion doctor and feel justified, and yet, taking a life in the name of good seems awfully convoluted. But would a Jew have been justified in killing Mengele? Or would that have made the Jew a murderer, worthy of death himself? More people have been murdered by abortion than by Auschwitz.

Besides, there is always the debate over what constitutes evil. An abortion doctor might be a generally well-liked person who cares for his family and pays his taxes, and who feels passionately that unwanted children should not have to struggle alone in this evil world. He might view himself as an angel of mercy. This would not be odd at all, in fact, for history teaches us that most mass murderers do not view themselves as evil. It’s just not something one can sleep with at night. Since it’s much more palatable to dehumanize the identity of the victim, the abortion doctor might believe that babies are only tissue, much like the Germans believed that Jews were only rats.

So if words don’t work, prayer is unreliable, and killing evil men is not truly a good deed, what’s left?

Can we look to Jesus, the ultimately good man, and see what he did? Granted, there wasn’t a holocaust going on in Jerusalem in his day, but evil men still prospered. Jesus convinced, argued, and debated. Then he prayed. A couple of times, he manhandled. And all these things only worked to a certain extent, because eventually he was crucified. The good man did something, and yet evil still triumphed. Or did it? Perhaps Jesus showed us that death is not the ultimate defeat, because in dying he did something revolutionary, something that turned men inside out, that changed the world as we know it, and that still defeats evil men to this day.

He forgave.

And that, as Oskar Shindler said, is true power.

Schindler's List

MOVIE: Released 1993; Viewed 01-29-05.

I wouldn't say that this is the best movie of all time, because even though it was over 3 hours long, I found it somewhat incomplete and oftentimes confusing. However, the subject matter in itself elicits so many powerful emotions that the movie can be termed a success based on that alone.

As always, I enjoyed the performances of Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, and Ben Kingsley--three truly great actors, with Neeson in the forefront. And the setting was authentic and lent itself to the disturbing events it chronicles. At the end of the movie, I was deeply touched to watch the steady stream of real holocaust survivors walking past the real Schindler's grave and placing stones on it for a monument to his heroism and ultimate goodness.

The movie brought up many philosophical questions in my mind about the nature of humanity, and you can read a sampling of these thoughts here.

Million Dollar Baby

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 01-28-05.

There's a lot of hype going around about this movie, mostly because of the Academy Awards. And even though I typically don't care to see sports movies, I felt that if Clint Eastwood directed the movie, it had to be worth seeing.

It turns out that the actual sport of boxing takes a back seat to the powerful and mature themes explored by the characters. The characters aren't the most eloquent, yet the maneuvering of each scene allows so much to be said nonverbally that the overall effect is poignantly beautiful. The ending is a shocker, but with hindsight, totally predictable and appropriate. All in all, I thought this should be named THE best movie of 2004. Hands down.

Are We There Yet?

MOVIE: Released 2005; Viewed 01-23-05. Appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 01-28-05.

As with most movies made for children, everything that happened in this one was beyond implausible. But once I allowed for that, I began to actually enjoy the film. Ice Cube turns out to be an above-average actor, which is good, since he’s in nearly every frame. Nia Long was as convincing as the crazy script allowed her to be. But the two kids performed terribly, and at times I didn’t know if they were supposed to be really crying or really faking, because there was no discernable difference.

I had prepared myself to hear the dreaded “are we there yet” question a hundred times, but fortunately, I only heard it once. Kudos to the directors for not making this film as annoying as it could have been! I wouldn’t think many adults would want to see this film without their kids, but judging from the uproarious laughter in the theatre, the kids should really enjoy it.

Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood

MOVIE: Released 2002; Viewed 01-21-05.

The name of this movie has turned off many potential viewers, myself included. In the first place, I'm averse to anything that smacks of feminism, and "sisterhood" is therefore not particularly attractive. Second, the clips of this movie inevitably show old ladies in crazy costumes shouting "ya-ya"--again, not particularly attractive.

However, the fact that it stars Sandra Bullock and Ashley Judd is what finally won me over. And I must say that the movie turned out to be far, far better than I'd anticipated.

The theme touches on how the trauma of one person can filter down into the next generation, even when these events happened before the child was born. The person each of us becomes is heavily influenced by negative things that we endured in our life, and who we are inexorably influences who our children become as well. I felt that the movie was advocating that parents should disclose their entire lives to their children at some point, because children have an uncanny ability to believe they are entirely responsible for their parents' miseries.

I thoroughly enjoyed how the movie explored these themes, and I discovered that the "ya-ya sisterhood" of the movie wasn't half as annoying as I'd feared.

Elektra

MOVIE: Released 2005; Viewed 01/16/05. Appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 01/21/05.

This movie surprised me. I expected next to nothing in the way of plot and dialogue, coupled with an overabundance of martial arts and glamour shots of Jennifer Garner in every scene. To my amazement, the plot proved quite complex and even offered a genuinely unexpected twist near the end. The dialogue was sparse yet believable. Most astounding of all, however, was that Jennifer Garner played her part quite convincingly. I had grouped her in with no-talent beauties like Reese Witherspoon, but I was proven wrong—her performance made this film compelling.

The other protagonist cast members weren’t too shabby, either. Goran Visnjic played the perfect father and Kirsten Prout his perfect daughter, while Terence Stamp could deliver great lines blindfolded (pun intended). The only disappointments this film held were the flat performances of everyone on the dark side—none of them were believable, and some were even laughably bad.

But on the whole, this was a great action movie with plenty of cool Matrix-like stunts, as well as a pinch of romance and a dash of humor. I’d recommend seeing it on the big screen if possible.

Bourne Supremacy

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 01-14-05.

I didn't care for this movie at all. It wasn't offensive and it wasn't pleasing. In fact, I felt like I was actually watching a less thrilling, less compelling remake of the Bourne Identity.

The movie starts out with Jason Bourne still trying to figure out who he is. He's living in seclusion with his girlfriend, yet the bad guys manage to find him anyway. The chase is on, and Bourne takes a million chances and always makes it, and the bad guys get theirs in the end. There was nothing original about this movie whatsoever.

To make matters worse, the camera swings on a pendulum the entire time, so that no shot is ever steady. If you are as prone to motion sickness as I am, you'll need to take a Bonine before watching this movie.

Napoleon Dynamite

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 01-14-05.

If you were a nerd in high school in the early '80s, this movie will transport you back in time and actually give you credit for being cooler than most of the popular kids, though you never looked it.

Napoleon is a teenager who embodies the word "goon". And yet, it takes an eye for subtlety to see that he is truly very resourceful and thoughtful, but not in a hokey way. There are no "laugh-out-loud" moments in this movie because it doesn't rely on that kind of humor. Instead, it is quietly pleasing, and will elicit genuine grins from those of us who can relate to his predicaments.

Garden State

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 01-07-05.

I've watched Scrubs a few times and thought that Zach Braff was a funny actor, but I wasn't sure how well he'd be able to pull off writing, directing, and starring in a serious drama. I'm glad I saw the movie anyway.

I would have rated this as one of the top movies of 2004 if I'd seen it earlier. Not only does Braff perform convincingly, but the themes he wrote about not only deep and perceptive, but also timeless and universal. He writes about the way children feel responsible for the tragedies of their parents, about the way success to many people can actually be an embarrassment to you, about the way the death of a loved one can truly be a rebirth for the survivors, and about the way that genuine acceptance of warts and all can thaw a numbed heart.

On top of all that, the cinematography was outstanding--very visually appealing. There were also a couple of moments of true humor that made me laugh out loud. It's a sweet movie, but not necessarily a chick flick. And Natalie Portman is, as always, extremely charming.

Best of 2004

Appeared in Gwinnett Daily Post on 01/07/05.

“The Lord of the Rings” trilogy was a hard act to follow, but many movies of 2004 did a stand-up job. “The Passion” moved me to angst and bliss simultaneously, “Hero” awed me with its beauty, delicacy, and color, and “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” completely enveloped me in a fantastic love story with an optimistic ending.

“National Treasure” was entertaining and educational, and “The Chronicles of Riddick” added some scifi and elevated my adrenaline. But “The Village” was the best adventure of 2004 for blending elements of fantasy, horror, and romance into a surprising and satisfying plot.

It was also a good year for comedies, including “Starsky and Hutch”, “Shrek 2”, and “Bridget Jones.” But we identify masterpieces only by contrasting them with the norm, which included the so-so comedies “Dodgeball” and “Along Came Polly”, and the painfully flat romantic comedy “Raising Helen.”

Finally, 2003’s “Matrix Reloaded” was bumped out of first place for the worst movie ever by 2004’s “Vanity Fair”, in which the abysmal performance of Reese Witherspoon sucked the joy out of life and produced yet another reason for high school English students to hate 19th century literature.

Meet the Fockers

MOVIE: Released 2004; Viewed 01/05/05.

Evidently no one with a sense of humor was permitted to work on this script. Oh, it's well-known that a sequel rarely outshines the original, but with a series of such promise as this one, it's unfathomable how a follow-up could put one to sleep. The first problem was that the script including lines delivered by a toddler. This wasted precious segments on attempts at humor that fell flat. The second problem was that the supposed lines of conflict in the movie were much less compelling than what we witnessed in the first movie. I'm sorry, but having kooky parents can't be all that uncommon, now, can it?? My recommendation is for you to never view this film. Ever.

THOUGHT: Bill Gates vs Bono

January 3, 2005

Many people in the world today like to curse Bill Gates. In fact, they like to use his own products to do so. They type up scathing articles in Microsoft Word, and then use the mail merge feature to shoot out 1001 emails with Microsoft Outlook about the evils of big corporations. They keep their constituents organized in Microsoft Access, and track donation dollars with Microsoft Excel. They create web pages with Microsoft Frontpage, or go online via Microsoft Internet Explorer and post these curses in chat rooms worldwide. They create brochures and flyers using Microsoft Publisher, and present slide shows using Microsoft Powerpoint.

Or maybe they don't use Microsoft products anymore. They've pitched their PC for a Mac and started towing the Jobs line because he's not Bill Gates. These advanced thinkers have upgraded to Writer, Calc, Impress, and Draw, or even to Pages, Keynote, and iWork, all in an effort to steer clear of the first pioneer. The irony is that Microsoft's products paved the way for most of the "non-Microsoft" software currently available.

The big question is, why all the hate? What was so evil about blazing a trail through cyberspace and bringing exotic applications into the average person's living room? Bill Gates is the modern-day Prometheus, who stole fire from the gods to give it to the common man. This gift ignited the flames of invention and productivity in the common man, so that within a relatively brief span of time, the entire world as we know it was transformed.

As a result, he became fabulously wealthy. And because of this wealth, the common man has turned on him. If Bill Gates donated every penny of profit from his products to feed the poor and house the homeless, would he and his products continue to be villified? Au contraire, mon frère.

This leads one to the inevitable conclusion that these Bill-bashers hate the man for his money. Money, they believe, has created this disparity within the species, where Bill is up there and they are down here. Money, not intelligence. Money, not the entrepreneurial spirit. Money, not strategy. You see, most Bill-bashers believe that they are just as intelligent and strategic as Gates (if not more). They believe that every man is born with the entrepreneurial spirit, not just the Bills of the world, and it is only the misfortunes and importunities of life that decide who lands in which financial caste.

I call these people communist hypocrites. Communist, because to hear their vapid slurs against Bill Gates, one would assume that they wish all men to have equal amounts of money, equal amounts of power, and equal amounts of success. Hypocrites, because this desire for equality only applies to certain fabulously wealthy men of the world, not to all of them.

Take, for example, the case of U2's lead singer, Bono. Much like Gates, Bono came from an average family with average prospects and ended up grabbing the reins of opportunity, taking chances other men sneered at, and arriving at the enviable position of world-renowned rock idol. Much like Gates, Bono produces products for the common man for the primary purpose of padding his own wallet. Like Gates, Bono's creative processes have been molded and formed by the proven influence of the almighty dollar. I mean, when a concert ticket costs US$150, one has to wonder how much dough is baking in Bono's oven.

But, curiously enough, these same Bill-bashers seem to have no problem with Bono's wealth. They love to render Bill's corporation as Micro$oft, but you never see them referring to Bono's latest tour (which was the second highest-grossing tour in the history of rock and roll) as Eleva$ion.

Why is Bono heralded as compassionate and generous while Bill is not? Sure, Bono may work to leverage his fame for donations from the common man to go to his favorite charities, but Bill gives his own money to his favorite charities. If anything, Bill should be lauded as more generous than Bono. So again I ask, why all the biased hate?

It's clear that Bill-bashers don't hate cyberspace. They don't hate intelligence, strategy, or the entrepreneurial spirit. In fact, observing their blessings on Bono, we can even go so far as to say they don't hate wealth in general. I present to you, dear reader, that these Bill-bashers hate nothing more than to be considered average by those whom they admire. Thus, if a person admires those who use the Mac, that person will display hatred for the PC in an effort to be smiled upon by the Mac users. This has nothing to do with the inherent shortcomings of the PC, and everything to do with the desire to be accepted.

The average computer user out there uses Microsoft products and thinks they should be named the 8th wonder of the modern world. But some one person will one day discover the Mac, and will enter a new world made up of people who think they are smarter than the average computer user. Smarter, and therefore better. That little average guy will want to break away from the Microsoft lemmings and join this elite group of smarties. And what better way to prove he has made such a leap of faith than to bash what he formerly held dear? "Down with Bill Gates! Microsoft must go!" This has nothing to do with the inherent shortcomings of Microsoft products, and everything to do with the desire to be accepted.

© 2005 Jenni McKinney