text:
Hey Everyone!! 🙂
This has been another fun week up in Port Angeles! It started out way slow but some awesome things have been happening this weekend! So the Elders in the area next to us have been killing it lately! They have had a baptism every weekend for the last 3 weeks. It's been so cool and I honestly don't know how they do it! So in order for us to be able to go to another baptism we have to have an investigator there so Sister Gehring and I have been working so hard to get someone there and we have had no success for the first two but this week we were so determined to have someone to go with. On Saturday morning we had 3 investigators planning on coming with us but about 2 hours before the baptism started we got 3 texts in a row saying that they couldn't come anymore… Ahhh we were pretty heartbroken! We had a meeting with our ward mission leader that afternoon and right when he got there he told us that he had invited his neighbor to go to the baptism with him who wasn't a member and he wanted us to go with him so we could meet her! Holy cow best news ever! So we went with him and his neighbor and when we got there we met another guy who isn't a member either who just moved into our area! We talked to him for so long after the baptism and he is so ready for the gospel. He just doesn't know that quite yet but we have been praying that we'll have a good opportunity to talk to him again. It has been so cool how these miracles have been happening lately! Things never seem to work out exactly how we hope they will but the Lord seems to always be covering up our disappointments with more opportunities. It has been way fun seeing how the lord is blessing us and how he is making all these miracles happen. 🙂
Yesterday we had the coolest experience ever! We were knocking doors and we were to the last one of the night. We knocked and this guy answered we introduced ourselves and gave a brief summery of the restoration just like we always do and we asked if he'd be interested in learning more and he told us no but he asked if we could leave our number with him incase he was ever interested! So we gave him a card and walked away. As we were about halfway down his driveway he came outside and yelled at us to come back. Haha. We were so surprised but we ran back up to his house and he said he wanted us to come in and teach him more!!!! We taught him more about Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon and then he started asking us all about the word of wisdom and plan of salvation and all about the crazy misconceptions that people have about our church and we were answering all his questions for the rest of the night! He was soooo funny! He didn't like what we had to say about the word of wisdom at all but he invited us back to have dinner with him and his wife on Friday and we are so excited! Hopefully he doesn't try to get us drunk Haha jk. 🙂 He is so great! I hope we can get him and his wife to start progressing towards baptism! They are going to be so much fun to work with!
I love you all so much! 🙂 Talk to ya next week!
Love Sister Horgesheimer
Hurricane Ridge Last Monday! These pictures are nothing compared to what it looks like in person! It was soooooo pretty!! And finally got a picture by a Forks sign 🙂


text:
About Us. About the Ultra Manly Book Club The Ultra Manly Book Club started with a vision. A vision: That one day we men of the world could be more educated, have El Dorado Royal – Exotic Travelers Club – El Dorado Royale, a Spa Resort by KarismaThe Bugatti Type 41, better known as the Royale, is a large luxury car built from 1927 to 1933 with a 4.3 m (169.3 in) wheelbase and 6.4 m (21 ft) overall length.The Domino is the new, refined dining experience completing Hotel Café Royal's return to London's vibrant social scene. Revivifying the glamour of entertaining Royal Club benefits + UXX. Enjoy the Royal Service and the Xcaret XperienceInstantly get Points for your Xbox 360, PSN, Wii, Warcraft and iTunes No need to drive or wait for your code Your code will be sent to your email instantly !Las Vegas Top Ten Values Since 1983 the Las Vegas Advisor has provided hundreds of thousands of Las Vegas visitors with a monthly list of the best bargains in town.Principal photography for Casino Royale commenced on 3 January 2006 and concluded on 20 July 2006. The film was primarily shot at Barrandov Studios in Prague, with Book Royale Takitumu, Rarotonga on TripAdvisor: See 281 traveler reviews, 331 candid photos, and great deals for Royale Takitumu, ranked #2 of 12 specialty In 2015, this property was one of our most booked in London! Amba Hotel Marble Arch 4-star hotel This property has agreed to be part of our Preferred Property Program
Incoming search terms:
- https://yandex ru/clck/jsredir?from=yandex ru;search;web;;&text=&etext=1822 PkH4OZ86le_l70fog8fCJbxHBNvnSQIknpjG1ZBdmVmy3ShVJgdnSTL-Wd977Okl3w0CgCSmXOyi119BOxD4TQ 0e9adb5112615fd437ea817a3e1f2591b9320fff&uuid=&state=_BLhILn4SxNIvvL0W45KSic

subset: commoncrawl


text:
No, Dorcas's wasn't among those passports signed today. Could be tomorrow, but since I don't have a crystal ball I won't even guess. Not even sure there will be room with the foster family if Shane is able to travel Saturday. With her crooked trachea issue, he really needs to stay there so foster family can show him how they've been feeding her.
But then there's the when do we reschedule? We sure don't want to pay another $125 after this one. I'm almost for waiting until November.


text:
I hate drawing the line and counting my blessings as one is supposed to be as the calendar year approaches its end. For me, the whole deal with New Year Eve's party craze and resolutions is a bit forced and fake. Just because the calendar changes does not mean anything in your life would necessarily be different. And in order to stick to a resolution, you should make it when the time feels right and not because you are almost expected to.
Apart from feeling towards NY's Eve the same way as the Grinch towards Christmas, I can as well partially look back and assess what took place in the past 365 days. From one hand, it was a good year because I was lucky that nothing too bad happened to me. No one that I loved died, no one broke my heart, and I did not miserably fail in a number of things.
Yet, due to some personal problems and difficulties in my job, I found myself severely depressed at the very beginning of this passing year. So much so that I decided I needed to take some serious measures and change the way I perceive things before they completely overrule me. Somehow I stumbled across the 100 happy days challenge (you can read about my experience with it here ). The idea was simple. You take a photo of something that makes you happy every single day for 100 days and post it on social medium of your preference. And believe me, after spending 4 hrs commuting, running in the rain, and teaching some students who could not care less about the subject, you might have to dig really deep to come up with something positive. I literally had to photograph my food a number of times. Yes, I became one of those people. But I stuck to the challenge and I finished it. And maybe I did not become happier per se, but at least it created a nice habit. Till this day, I am on the lookout for a bright moment in my day and take a mental photo of it.
Then, I improved my running. First, I did a personal best in the 10 miles (16km) distance. Then, I spent the summer and fall preparing for a marathon. And I did successfully run my first marathon (see here). It was excruciating but I was very very happy and proud of myself for finishing without being devastated afterwards.
I also managed to successfully finish my reading challenge — to complete 50 books by the end of the year. Currently I am at book 55. But this one was not so much of a challenge as reading is one of my hobbies. But I have to admit that sometimes I consciously traded reading for going for a walk or a movie, for instance. And though that one was not much of a challenge, I am still happy I managed to keep up with some made-up number,
I also improved in a foreign language and plan to do so in the coming year. I did not travel as much as I wish I could but I visited a new country and saw fascinating things that moved me and impressed me, which, in a way, made me appreciate also the place I live. And I've loved and been loved. So maybe it has been the year of conquering challenges after all?


text:
Grilled Corn and Bean Salad
This is from "Cooking Light" Magazine, and it actually is called "Pinto, Black, and Red Bean Salad with Grilled Corn and Avocado" but I shortened the name up a bit for obvious reasons. This salad is just so good - it doesn't take too long to make, and it is really fresh and healthy. It also keeps in the fridge for about 3-4 days which is awesome. It makes a big batch, and you can eat it as a salad for lunch, side at dinner, wrapped up in a piece of iceberg lettuce, etc. I made it for a BBQ, and then have made it twice since just for Aaron and I to eat during the week. The grilled corn makes it delicious!
Turkey Taco Lettuce Wraps
These are from Skinny Taste and they could not have been any easier to make. And we loved them! Instead of all the spices (there are 6), I just used a packet of taco seasoning, and it worked great. But, I am sure it might taste a bit better if you use all the ingredients too. Sorry I had to use the website pic because I forgot. Two of these wraps (without cheese and sour cream) are only 4 weight watchers points total.
Crock Pot Buffalo Chicken Lettuce Wraps
Um. Amazing. Skinny Taste is great! I loved these...they are so good and I can't believe they are healthy! I made the low-fat blue cheese dressing with these too, and it was really tasty! I used Frank's for the hot sauce, like she suggests, and it was perfect. Not too spicy, but definitely has a kick. I will for sure be making these again. It makes 6 wraps that are only 3 weight watchers points each (not that I am counting right now), plus a few more if you add cheese and the dressing. Plus, this is a really easy recipe to make.


text:
In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjun asks Krishna to describe a person established in the Self. How does such a person walk, behave, etc. Does external behavior determine if a person is enlightened or not?
Well, not really! You can't judge anyone just by his/her external actions and behavior. You really can't make out whether this person is enlightened or not as there is no hard and fast rule for an enlightened person that he/she has to or must behave in such and such manner only. Even a kid can be enlightened and you may never know about it! I know that human nature is bound to judge anybody by his/her appearance, behavior and actions but at the same time we must keep in mind that most of the people in fact Arjuna didn't know about Lord Krishna till the time he saw him in his "AVATAR" form. He only used to considered Krishna as his best friend and not a God! This is because Lord Krishna was living with Arjuna and all other people like just another normal person or a human being. He never reflected it that he is a God not even to his mother. So, it also depends on the enlightened person whether or not he/she wants us to know about their "Holy Knowledge". Its purely up to them to let us know about their enlightenment.
You may follow me on twitter: @divs68 and You may also Like me @ https://www.facebook.com/divyaa68.twimh


text:
A majority of books in this genre focused on tragic, but unfortunately realistic stories of LGBT teenagers. They accepted who they were, maybe found a significant other, were kicked out of their home by their parents, and they moved on with their life. In the mid-2000s, "Boy Meets Boy" by David Levithan felt nearly revelatory simply because it had a happy ending. The boy got the boy and there was very little bigotry involved.
Levithan's oeuvre continues to be one of the more optimistic entries in LGBT young adult fiction, although there are increasingly more novels being written about teens who identify as LGBT who get a happy ending. In a manner similar to "Boy Meets Boy," there's something oddly refreshing about "Simon vs. the Homo Sapiens Agenda" by Becky Albertalli, which was published in 2015. Even though the premise comes across as a little intense–Simon, a closeted gay teenager, finds himself falling in love with a pseudonymous pen pal known as "Blue," but his emails to Blue are discovered by another student, who blackmails him–it feels like an effervescent book with an incredibly happy ending. Reading it to me felt like being wrapped up in a comfortable blanket and watching my go-to comfort food movies or clips of American Treasure Robert Preston performing. (None of the books I read repeatedly are particularly cheery, although I do get an immense delight over Dante's descriptions of how popes are tortured in hell.)
Albertalli's novel is the basis for the movie "Love, Simon," which was released last month. The big news with the film is it's the first film released by a major studio (20th Century Fox) to focus on a gay teenage romance. While there has been some criticism and reflection on the fact there's a heavy emphasis on how Simon is an average guy–a monologue that brought to mind a short speech Nathan Lane gives in "The Birdcage" while wearing a suit as an attempt to seem more masculine–as well as how Simon is seemingly contrasted to Ethan, another gay student, the movie does present itself as very approachable, which is arguably good as it had a wide-release and is being distributed internationally.
This approach also presents a gay man who does not fit into the feminine stereotypes assigned to most queer male characters in major projects. To my mind, the only other lead queer male characters in major screen projects who hew closer to masculine gender norms are Will on "Will and Grace" (more on that later), Jack and Ennis in "Brokeback Mountain" and Armond in "The Birdcage," and even his character wore foundation, owned a drag club, and did an incredibly kinetic bit of dance choreography. As deeply frustrating as it is to have yet another major studio project focusing on a gay man who is portrayed as fitting in more with male gender norms, it is worth noting it does go against the overwhelming portrayal of gay men being incredibly feminine, which oddly feels like a form of progress, even if it simultaneously comes off as regressive to have a character trumpeting his averageness.
More startling is the fact the film does have a happy ending. If you look just at the more significant LGBT-focused films released recently–"Carol," "Moonlight," and "Call Me By Your Name"–two of them end with ambiguous endings and one ends with a devastating scene. Even if the end of "Love, Simon" is interpreted as ambiguous, it still feels more uplifting than the final moments of "Carol" and "Moonlight" because, in the world of the teen movie, we assume the couple at the center finds happiness and stays together forever. It's aspirational, while in adulthood we start to realize how much harder life is.
One of the main reasons why I loved it was because it feels like there are still very few happy storylines given to LGBT characters on screen. Even though there's an increasing amount of LGBT characters in television and movies, they are often secondary characters. There are still plotlines about characters struggling with their identity, which isn't a bad thing since Simon not being out is one of the things that drives the plot of "Love, Simon" and questioning your sexual orientation or gender identity can be done deftly, as in the case of "Brooklyn Nine-Nine," "Crazy Ex-Girlfriend", and "Transparent," all of which have multiple LGBT characters.
This isn't nearly as TV shows still killing off gay characters, particularly lesbians, a trope the website Autostraddle memorialized in enamel pin form. With the recent love of rebooting and reviving TV shows, there have also been more outdated portrayals of gay men. "Will and Grace" brought back with it the butch-femme dynamic of friends Will Truman and Jack McFarland. "The Tick" had an unfortunate subplot where the gay sentient Artificial Intelligence on a weaponized boat has a crush on another character and sexually assaults him, which is played for laughs. (I have not seen any episodes of the "Roseanne" revival and cannot comment on the gender non-conforming character.) While one of these is much more troubling than the other, the way Will and Jack are portrayed on the show, even if it seems outdated, is wildly viewed to have helped make most of America more accepting of gay people. It was there on network television and in a way that felt palatable to most people.
"Will and Grace" wasn't the cultural pieces that told me it was okay to be gay–those would be "Victor/Victoria" and "Six Feet Under"–it likely helped teenagers struggling with their sexuality to realize they too could have a future and be successful in life, even though the masculine Will is the one portrayed as having the steady career. In the time between the original finale for "Will and Grace" and its return, LGBT representation in the media seems to have grown and characters can now even be found on shows on Disney Channel and Cartoon Network. We have also seen the rise of social media, which ultimately does connect people with similar interests, and an expansion of how people can consume stories with streaming platforms and podcasts.
On the podcast "The Adventure Zone," brothers Justin, Travis, and Griffin McElroy, along with their father, Clint, get together to record themselves playing roll-playing games, which results in a gripping piece of storytelling. The four hosts routinely have characters, both playable and NPCs, in their role-playing campaigns who are canonically not straight white men like themselves. In the first season of "The Adventure Zone," the Balance Arc, one of the three main characters, Taako, was an aloof gay wizard who dressed in a feminine manner but used he/him pronouns. Throughout the series, there are multiple lesbian characters who are often more competent than the main trio. More impressive than the inclusion of these characters is the dedication of the McElroys to listen to the constructive feedback from the podcast's fans regarding the representation of marginalized people on the show. It is one thing to have diverse characters in storytelling, it is another thing to do it well, something a lot of writers still struggle to do.
As the arc continued, listeners met Taako's sister, Lup, who is a transgender woman. Lup is an unapologetic badass who will hurl a fireball without blinking an eye, a contrast to her brother. While there tends to be a narrative around trans people having them adhere strictly to the gender norms matching their identity, the podcast presents a character who is simply allowed to be herself, without any criticism. It provides people listening another positive representation of transgender women, further reflecting the world we actually live in, despite it being set in a fantasy world.
What is even more heartening is Lup is seemingly a fan-favorite and a frequent subject of fanart and cosplay. This means it is quite possible to create a well-rounded LGBT character who fits outside of the standard characterization and have them embraced by fans. There is, of course, a huge difference between a podcast, albeit a very popular one–Travis, Justin, and Griffin McElroy also host the immensely popular podcast "My Brother, My Brother, and Me"–and a TV show on a major network or a movie released by a major studio. If "The Adventure Zone" was less successful than it is, there is significantly less loss posed to the McElroys and Maximum Fun, the podcast's distributor, than a movie studio or TV network that spends millions of dollars on a project. But it means it can be done and should be done. (It is worth noting Sara Ramirez is currently playing a masculine-of-center bisexual character on CBS' "Madame Secretary")
Seeing as how "Love, Simon" performed very well at the box office, it would be nice to see major studios releasing movies focused on LGBT characters, even making those portrayals more diverse. This can come in a variety of forms, be it race, disability, or gender expression. But at the same time, there should be a hopefulness to the stories presented, something being done increasingly well in media. Let LGBT characters have a happy ending because it allows real people to see everything will be okay.]]>
Outside of the news regarding how many principal people have had to be replaced for this production, this "Tosca" carries the noteworthiness of being a new production of "Tosca" a little more than eight years after the Met debuted another version.
The 2009 production was done by the late Luc Bondy and was famously met with boos from the audience. The production contemporized the opera, set in 1800 Rome, but also vulgarized it with aspects such as Scarpia feeling up a statue of the Virgin Mary. Although not the most controversial production the Met has done during the tenure of Peter Gelb as General Manager–that title would go to 2014's "The Death of Klinghoffer"–it was one that became noteworthy because of the response from the Met's audience.
In the program notes for the new production, Gelb addresses the reason for going with a new, more traditional production of "Tosca":
The Bondy production taught me a significant lesson in what Met audiences want. When it comes to a classic like Tosca, they want beautiful scenery.
"Tosca" is undoubtedly a classic, largely because of the legendary 1953 recording with Maria Callas performing the titular role. Like two other Puccini operas–"La Boheme" and "Madama Butterfly"–and Wagner's Ring Cycle, it is an opera a person who has never attended the opera has likely heard of.
The underlying issue with Gelb's comments regarding his mea culpa for the Bondy production is he seems to miss what people want when it comes to the classics, overlooking the repertory of his own company.
There is a very good reason why I mentioned "La Boheme," "Madama Butterfly," and The Ring Cycle a couple of paragraphs earlier because they are operas that are done many times by opera companies. If you look at The Met's season, they will likely have "La Boheme" and "Madama Butterfly" every year because those are operas people like attending. The current production of "La Boheme" has been around for decades and was done by Franco Zeffirelli, who did the production of "Tosca" that had been in the Met's repertory before they decided to give it a gritty reboot in 2009. You might also recognize Zeffirelli's name because he directed the 1968 film version of "Romeo and Juliet," which is probably still shown in freshman English classes. Zeffirelli is a director who sticks to the original setting and is very ornate in the production design. If you see something that was directed by Zeffirelli it will be very beautiful to look at in a way similar to a Renaissance painting. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it doesn't work for everyone, possibly even feeling a little shallow.
The current production of "Madama Butterfly" done by The Met was overseen by Anthony Minghella and premiered in 2005. In this production, the opera starts off with two performers on stage appearing to raise the curtain, revealing the stage flooded with red light. A woman ascends the stage, a train of multiple fabrics trailing behind her, and she raises a fan aloft before beginning a pantomime incorporating a second fan. She performs in silence for nearly 90 seconds, coming into the light, before the action of the show really starts as Lieutenant Pinkerton is to marry Cio-Cio-san. The image of a woman standing at the top of the very modern, almost metal, staircase, her fan held aloft as we see her silhouette surrounded by red light has become an image not just used to advertise "Madama Butterfly" at The Met, but to advertise the institution itself beyond the annual marketing campaign. (The current one is "The Voice Must Be Heard," which I like, even if nothing will top Lyric Opera's "Long Live Passion" campaign.)
The Met has quite a few productions that are modern takes on classic works. Be it their productions of "Madama Butterfly," "Elektra," the surrealist take on Humperdink's "Hansel and Gretel," or Julie Taymor's uniquely Julie Taymor version of "The Magic Flute," the last two of which are performed every year as the "family operas" during the holiday season. Anything that is a classic can evolve with the time and be adapted to fit a director's vision, as long as they understand and respect the text. This is often seen in the theater where you can have revivals of plays where a production can shine a light on a text in a new way, or the intent of the author is vulgarized. One of my favorite theatrical productions of this decade was Milwaukee Repertory Theatre's "Othello," which set the action of the play within a motorcycle gang. As a direct result of Mark Clements understanding and revering the text, the concept worked very well, resulting in a production that was particularly haunting and moving.
The trouble with the performing arts is walking a fine line between boldness and satisfying donors and subscribers and respecting a text to the point it isn't allowed to breathe. In Sir David McVicar's "Tosca" at the Met, the grandness of the set almost suffocates the emotion of the production, particularly in Act One. McVicar understands how to stage "Tosca" and the production consistently proves it understands how to have the performers move around the stage at the right musical cues, but the production ends up having the problem of being very pretty to look at. This shifts in act two when Sonya Yoncheva sings "Vissi d'arte…" because of her incredible vocal performance and the fact she can act. Act three is when the production really succeeds and it is aided by the scenic design. The design of the Angel Terrace at Castel Sant'Angelo helps add to the gloom of the act–opera is rarely subtle. It also helps this evokes an open space, which honestly allows what is occurring to be emotionally effective, filling every part of the space.
This isn't a criticism of McVicar in general as I found his staging of "Elektra" at the Lyric Opera of Chicago with Christine Goerke singing the titular role to be utterly stunning. The problem is the Met, particularly Gelb, thought the way to rectify the misstep of Bondy's staging was to go with a production as traditional as possible. The result is a production that can be performed for decades and will please subscribers and donors. It's not bold, it's not something to make you think on the subway ride home, but it will provide for an enjoyable evening at the opera.
There is a reason to be concerned opera might become too traditional and shy away from more daring productions. There will be missteps–I've seen plenty of modern interpretations in theater that have missed the entire point of a text–but those must be made in order to find something that works. The Met's current version of "Madama Butterfly," an opera that is enough of a classic to result in scores of adaptations, could have failed, but it has instead become a production audiences can see over and over.
As opera finds itself trying to move towards the future, particularly as the Met itself struggles financially, a compromise must be made in order to attract a new, younger audience. The question comes as to if you have a very lovely production that will please your current audience, or if you go out on a limb and create a new vision in order to make a classic survive for decades to come.]]>
I am a millennial and I haven't been to an Applebee's in four years, which makes me part of the problem. I have, in the past year, been to IHOP, Red Lobster, Cheddar's, and the greatest of all chains, Village Inn. I also made it to a TGI Friday's and a Chili's (too) in the time since I've made it to an Applebee's. I live in the largest city in Wisconsin and am the type of cool, hip millennial — I compost and there's currently an IPA from a Wisconsin brewery in my fridge — they are trying to appeal to, but is inevitably killing the restaurant.
I have an odd fondness for casual dining chains.
As I enjoy bringing up, I grew up in Iowa. Many of the chains mentioned were in the area I grew up in and I have many memories tied to going to those restaurants. Breakfast on the weekends with my family at IHOP, going to Applebee's and Olive Garden for a nice dinner, eating at Chili's with my mom the evening before we visited Rockford College, eating Village Inn whenever we damn well felt like it because pie is good, blasting Billy Joel from my mom's car in the parking lot of the Cedar Falls parking lot while dancing with a friend at 11 p.m..
Red Lobster is more emotionally tied to a good memory as it was often the choice of food when my dad was in town after my parents divorced. The Red Lobster in Waterloo with its muted blue color scheme and coastal decor comes to mind when I sit down at one of the gussied up restaurants in the chain in the Milwaukee area. As I sink my teeth into one of the Cheddar Bay Biscuits, memories of me, my sister, and our father seated in a booth, making "Blazing Saddles" references and talking about school come to me.
Cheddar's, a chain I learned about while attending Michigan State University, provided me some comfort while traveling through Iowa in November. While the mistake was made of playing Michelle Branch's "Breathe," I found I enjoyed my food and it did exactly what I needed it to do, which was provide me with a filling, tasty meal in a comfortable setting that also helped stave off my migraine.
When I eat out, I don't frequent larger chains.
This largely comes from most of the chains having restaurants in the suburbs, while I live in the city (Applebee's has a location in Milwaukee near where I worked a couple of years ago, but I always forgot about Applebee's when I got lunch and instead went to Rocky Rococo or a Jewish deli with a location in the Grand Avenue food court). There are several wonderful locally-owned restaurants in the Milwaukee with delicious food. Two of my favorite Milwaukee restaurants are in walking distance of my apartment, which is convenient as I hate driving. I am also a granola-munching, Birkenstock-wearing, composting Millennial, so I am immediately inclined to support local businesses. The bigger issue for me is I actively enjoy cooking and use it as a stress reliever, which is the main reason I don't go out eating as much as some people.
This would be different if I lived in lots of parts of Iowa. While I can get delicious baked goods at Comet Cafe or Honeypie, my best option in Iowa would likely be the Holy Righteous Village Inn. There are plenty of great locally-owned restaurants in Iowa–Montage in Cedar Falls, Bar La Tosca in Ames, The Brown Bottle in Waterloo, which I admittedly like for its atmosphere–but there's not nearly the abundance you find in areas like Chicago or Milwaukee. Even in East Lansing, I found myself usually going to chain restaurants when I ate out with my father.
There is a problem with me admitting that I would likely go to chain restaurants more often if I lived in Iowa, which is that it plays into the snobbishness found in urban areas towards chain restaurants. Most people in urban areas think chain restaurants are for the "thems" in Middle America, the type the media keeps claiming Hollywood and liberals don't know anything about. They automatically assume all chain restaurants are bland, tacky restaurants with a lot of cheesy shit on the walls and the only people who eat there are conservatives.
This was even brought to me by someone who was from Huntington Beach. As he sneered about how people in Iowa are probably depressed and think gourmet food is Olive Garden, I fired back and bought up how a lot of good memories that are tied to those restaurants. I also pointed out he's from Huntington Beach, which sounds like a SimCity scenario waiting to happen and doesn't even get an authentic Don the Beachcomber.
And I'm incredibly liberal and happen to love cheesy shit on the walls, especially if it fits the theme of the restaurant (I love tiki bars for this very reason). When I went to Village Inn, I actually enjoyed the cutsey orange signs plastered on the walls while I ate breakfast for lunch, listening to the familiar elevator music. I will be the first to admit there are very bland chain restaurants–I know I've been to Ruby Tuesday, but I cannot tell you anything about the food or atmosphere–and some that seem to have bad business models. But some of the restaurants have food I genuinely enjoy. Besides, where else am I going to be able to get a breakfast platter at 10 p.m. and a slice of pie?
What people need to admit is there can be bland food at locally-owned restaurants. Small towns might have greasy spoons straight out of a movie, but the food might not be very good. Even popular, locally-owned businesses can fail to deliver with good food, even though people will continue to throw accolades their way because they perceive a locally-owned restaurant as being innovative. Red Light Ramen has overpriced, bland food with putrid smelling and repugnant tasting drinks, but people will continue to go there because it's something different and popular from an acclaimed local chef.
Allow people to enjoy the restaurants they like. If you enjoy a national chain, there's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean you have to stop voting Democrat or you have no interest in food. If you only eat at locally-owned restaurants, that's also okay. If you think Red Light Ramen is great, I might lose some respect for your food choices, but you can keep enjoying $13 ramen and alcoholic beverages that assault your tastebuds. There's no reason to look down at people for eating at different restaurants and maybe chains like Applebee's will stop trying to reinvent themselves. Maybe we just want what we liked in the first place. Then, maybe the younger generations will come back.]]>
"Descendants," which premiered on Disney Channel in 2015, ended up being something I liked far more than I expected. It had flaws, although most of those flaws are solved by reading Melissa de la Cruz's "Descendants" novels. When the second movie was announced, I was mildly excited and intrigued, which is a feeling that has only grown since reading De la Cruz's novels. Besides, it can't be the worst thing I've seen this year.
The movie picks up a few months after the first one as Mal (Dove Cameron) is trying to get used to her role as the girlfriend of King Ben (Mitchell Hope). While she starts to crack from the stress, Evie (Sofia Carson) is busy designing dresses, Jay (Booboo Stewart) remains his athletic self, and Carlos (Cameron Boyce) is struggling to ask Jane (Brenna D'Amico) out to the cotillion. Ben eventually discovers Mal has been relying on magic to cope with the pressures of being his girlfriend (and queen to be), and the two have a falling out. Mal returns to the Isle of the Lost and confronts her old foe Uma (China Anne McClain), the seapunk pirate daughter of Ursula. Uma, bitter about not being selected to go to Auradon, teams up with Harry Hook (Thomas Doherty), to try to bring Mal down while Ben, Evie, Jay, and Carlos try to save Mal.
There is a glaring problem with most movie musical spectaculars on Disney Channel and it's the over-produced songs. This goes back to at least "Camp Rock," where there's a song where Joe Jonas is sitting on a tree and there are a lot of background vocals, but he's the only person in the frame and Demi Lovato is just standing there, listening. The running joke in my family is the leaves and twigs have incredible singing voices because there the audio has this incredible melody, but the only person singing is Joe Jonas.
This problem rears its ugly head during what, otherwise, is the best number of "Descendants 2," "What's My Name." If you listen to "What's My Name" on the soundtrack, it's a great hip-hop number the cynical would argue is designed to make people excited for the film. But in the movie, all of the engineering of the number ends up detracting because the audio levels are so horribly uneven, causing some of Uma's lyrics to become muddled and all of Harry's verse to be lost.
Many songs for Disney Channel movies seem designed to be big radio hits, no doubt on Radio Disney. I'm sure there are no Disney executives losing sleep about how the production of the songs on Disney Channel movies will affect them, but it is incredibly distracting and I wish, as odd as this sounds, there was an element of realism to the songs.
Aside for three glaring problems, "Descendants 2" manages to be superior in almost every way to its predecessor. It possibly benefits from having the world of the film established already, but there's a feeling by cutting out the Disney characters people love and focusing on their children, the movie manages to be enjoyable. The movie is even a full minute shorter than its predecessor and feels tighter in terms of story, failing to drag at any moment. Even the musical number that feels superfluous, which comes right at the end of the movie, is a delight to watch.
More importantly, you can tell almost every actor has grown in the time between the first and second films. No actor has improved more than Carson, whose jazzy version of "Rotten to the Core" remains one of my favorite things about this series. In the first movie, Evie was an enjoyable character, but Carson largely felt overshadowed by Cameron, whom I thought was bound to be a star if she kept improving after the first film. In every scene she's in, Carson seems thoroughly engaged with what is happening around Evie and steals nearly every scene she's in just by her presence. One only hopes she gets non-Disney Channel acting work because she proves in this movie she has the chops (and before anyone says, "Disney Channel stars can't act," I suggest you turn your attention to Cole Sprouse, who is giving a fantastic performance as Jughead Jones on The CW's "Riverdale.")
The villains in this movie also seem to be better cast. As much as I love Kristin Chenoweth, I don't think she's a great Maleficent. With that movie, it felt more like she was cast for her singing chops than if she was right for the role. Here, the addition of McClain and Doherty makes the film instantly better. Even if there weren't a number of improvements, their performances are so delightful you could still enjoy the movie. McClain, who has a history as an actress and musician before this film, is, like Carson, so throughly engaged in every scene she appears in, you can't stop watching her. While villains, as I have often pointed out on this blog, do not need to be written with nuance, McClain's body language and line delivery brings the character the depth it might not have gotten with other actors. Doherty gives a performance so deliriously over-the-top, the script acknowledges it, and it makes the film better as a result. No one wants to see a muted version of the son of Captain Hook. The character of his father is already a mustache-twirling villain in the animated film–as well as Dustin Hoffman's performance in the underrated "Hook"–so it makes sense the character here would be the same.
The songs in this film, largely written by people not involved with the first movie, are catchier and seem to propel the plot along better. There even fail to be any hip-hop covers of songs from the Disney renaissance done horribly wrong. The choreography, done by Disney favorite and director Kenny Ortega with Tony Testa, is more impressive and, in many numbers, feels more natural. As always, the costumes are incredible, particularly with three very important dresses during the cotillion. You even get the sense the set decorators had more fun with this movie with clever signs on the Isle of the Lost–although "Chum" listed as a size in Ursula's Fish and Chips made me think of Chip Zdarsky's comics.
The film stumbles with the performance given by Cameron, who unfortunately had the most to shoulder in terms of plot. Her lip syncing is not particularly good and she's largely surrounded by actors who are giving better performances than her. There was one moment when I paused the movie when Evie and Mal are seated next to each other and I came back to notice how Cameron was just there, while Carson is actively reacting to what the other characters are saying. What helps Cameron is she was already really good in the first film–I was predicting her to be a star after the movie–so the movie doesn't suffer too much by having a pretty decent actress in the lead role. I just hope before the third film–especially since Uma gives a "You're not gonna believe this" moment–she grows more as an actress, even though she has been working hard on her music career.
The other problem is Hope is just very bland as an actor. I had initially thought it was the result of how the villains were more compelling in the first film, but Ben is a very well-drawn character in the novels. Hope, who has a larger role in this film, barely registers in this movie in terms of a presence, except when he's singing in "Chillin' Like a Villain." Every line delivery is so flat and uninteresting, it destroys every single important moment he has. What's worse is the audience really needs to care about about him and Mal, and I care a lot more about Evie and Doug and Carlos and Jane than I do about them because of how utterly uninteresting Cameron and Hope are as leads.
While this franchise is not the place to look for originality, it bothers me to no end Uma wants the Fairy Godmother's wand so she can go to Auradon, angry over not being invited by Ben. I'd like to think they could have gone after some other noted magical object in Auradon instead of going after the one from the first film. It causes the movie to have the problem of nearly following the same plot as the first one.
If you're not a stickler about your Disney movies and want something, anything, to provide some mindless diversion from the current world, <i>Descendants 2</i> while not high art, is enjoyable. Thankfully this movie doesn't flounder around, considering Disney Channel only released this movie this year. One hopes the series continues to improve if they make another film and Sofia Carson gets some work outside of Disney Channel.]]>
Then we have "Despicable Me 2," which is a cartoon that, despite one flaw, manages to understand how people, particularly children, behave on a day-to-day basis better than "The Book of Henry" or quite a few other scripted TV shows and movies.
"Despicable Me 2" is an interesting film to write about because it feels like it's the result of a pleasant surprise, similar to "Toy Story 2." It's likely Illumination Animation would have gone on to continue to release more films, especially when you look at how they already had "Hop" scheduled for release the next year. But "Despicable Me" managed to be a massive hit, probably bigger than anyone could have expected. Yes, that does mean some people have pre-judged the series, but it has spawned what, based on the second movie, are pretty enjoyable films to help escape the current world.
Gru (Steve Carrell) has retired from villainy to become a full-time father. After a research station is stolen by a giant magnet, he is recruited by the Anti-Villain League to find who stole an experimental serum. While undercover in a bakeshop with AVL agent Lucy Wilde (Kristen Wiig), Gru begins to suspect Eduardo (Benjamin Bratt), the owner of a Mexican restaurant, is the presumed dead villain El Macho and behind the theft. Meanwhile, the Minions begin going missing from Gru's home and lair.
The "Despicable Me" movies fall back on some of the tired, annoying problems common in animated films, such as fart jokes, butt jokes, and pop culture gags that sometimes seem out of place. In the universe of "Despicable Me," there isn't nearly as much of a problem as in other films. In this film, there seems to be more than in the previous film–one character is named "Ramsbottom," but I laughed–but it prevents the film from being too bogged down. No, I'm not sure I needed the Minions to make me wonder why none of the members of The Village People ever donned drag and went as the Chiquita lady, but the movie still works.
This is largely because "Despicable Me" often feels like what would happen if you made a Bond film without James Bond that was told from the perspective of the villains. Steal the moon? Steal the Great Pyramid? Steal the Times Square jumbotron? These are all things that have not only happened, but are completely plausible in the universe of the film. The area where the second movie trips up is with the villain. The motivations for the villains in the universe of these films is often, "Why not?" or a means of getting their names out there. But here we're given a villain whose motivations often feel incredibly murky. Why this? Why now? Yes, we get a nice "Hoboken" gag out of it, but it feels underdeveloped.
The two other problems with the film stem from it losing its bite from the first film. It might be a problem with it becoming such a beloved film–it will be interesting to rewatch the "Shrek" films–but it also has the issue of Gru retiring from villainy. At heart, he's still a bad guy, but he's a bad guy with a heart of gold. He still never leaves home without his freeze ray and his knowledge of villains ends up saving the day in this movie. But without his plotting, the film feels like it lacks something.
The other key problem is the Minions, which is no doubt the result of them becoming such popular characters. While they do have a role in the plot of this film, they seem to spend more time on screen than in the first movie, which just feels unnecessary. They at least get their own movie, which will be interesting to watch, and it should be interesting to see how the third movie handles them as characters.
But at the end of the day, "Despicable Me 2" manages to be a fun, escapist comedy. This feels incredibly strange since it is an animated film with a certain fine balance of realism and playful absurdity. Even minor things like a joke at one point about how Agnes is reciting something for an assembly manages to be hilarious because of how true to life it is. It manages to be a family movie that isn't stupid, which feels like it's becoming increasingly difficult to make. It still is clever, with plenty of relatable moments and delightful sight gags. Even as an adult, after having my brain fried, albeit on my own terms, this was the right thing to watch and feel better.
There is a place for animated movies that aren't the high art of Pixar films and are just enjoyable family entertainments. That might be what Illumination's place in cinema is and there's nothing wrong with that, especially since the studio seems to be good at doing that based on the "Despicable Me" movies and "Sing."]]>
The plot of "The Book of Henry" is an utterly bonkers idea that I can't believe a bunch of a-list people signed on to do this movie both in front of and behind the camera. I also am a little surprised this has a distribution company as major as Focus Features would distribute this, but then I remember "Collateral Beauty" exists. As I texted a friend after this movie, this a movie where almost every narrative decision is a hard left turn. And because of that, I'm going to let you know I am going to spoil this movie because I can't talk about the insanity of this plot without spoiling it.
Henry (Jaeden Lieberher) is a 12-year-old wünderkind who is an investment genius, an inventor, a co-parent, and apparently went to medical school. In fact, in a movie that largely does not know how children behave–except in a moment with a great joke in the cafeteria late in the film–the only way we can excuse Henry's stand-up philosophy in his fifth grade class is the fact that we are shown he's such a genius, he can beat out the girl in "Gifted." Henry largely takes care of his waitress mother, Susan (Naomi Watts), and his brother, Peter (Jacob Tremblay). He even has a crush on the girl next door, Christina (Maddie Ziegler).
The movie has a distinct feel in the first 15 minutes of being a heartwarming film for the whole family, which would explain the fact I was the only person who went to the theater alone. Michael Giacchino even has a nice peppy score for the opening scenes as we see the idyllic small upstate New York town the characters live in.
But then we get to the first hard left turn, where the movie momentarily turns into an after school special on child abuse. Henry suspects Christina is being abused by her stepfather, Glenn (Dean Norris), but he seems to be the only person who cares. After the school principal (an underutilized Tonya Pinkins) explains to Henry she can't do much because Glenn is the police commissioner, he decides to take it upon himself to figure out how to kill the police commissioner.
At that first twist, I wasn't too surprised because that's what I knew from the reviews on the internet. In fact, the general word about this movie was that it's the movie about the boy genius who decides to kill the head of the police. And yet, that's not the craziest thing about this movie. While Henry is in the process of his plot, he has a seizure and is diagnosed with a brain tumor by a doctor (Lee Pace), who is left speechless as Henry rambles off everything he can assume about the tumor. The movie then has the cojones to kill off its title character halfway through the movie. While this is such a stunning move, the big question is how the movie can sustain itself for the rest of the run time. In the midst of their grieving, Peter finds his brother's notebook. From there, his mother is coached through her oldest son's notes into killing Glenn.
That's right. This is a movie in which a 12-year-old boy genius dies from a brain tumor and then, from beyond the grave, coaches his mother into killing the police commissioner, who is abusing his stepdaughter.
The movie really doesn't become interesting until it gets to the point where we realize what the movie is becoming. In fact, you spend a majority of the movie up until Henry's death wondering if we're supposed to root for him. He is presented as such a smug asshole, you don't know why every fawns over him. Then he starts plotting in intricate detail how to kill his neighbor and you actually hope he gets caught, that someone pauses and wonders what is going on with this beloved boy genius. And quite frankly, it's a little slow up until the point where the script actually makes the decision to kill him off–with the tone, I was actually expecting for a miraculous recovery–and turn the movie into, "Hey, I'm going to have my grieving mother kill an abuser."
The movie, which is written by crime novelist Gregg Hurwitz, feels more like it was written by a robot than someone who actually lives among people. If we explain Henry away as being a sociopath–or even being raised to be cold, like the Holmes family in the Charlotte Holmes novels–his behavior actually makes sense. Susan is portrayed as a doting mother who also wants to be cool, a woman who can barely get herself dressed most days, and a woman who feels lost while she's raising this genius. I actually thought from the beginning of the movie this was going to be a poor man's "20th Century Women," which is actually an insult to "20th Century Women." Peter is one-note and the rest of the characters feel so poorly fleshed out. Sheila (Sarah Silverman) is Susan's co-worker that might be an alcoholic, but the movie is done with that character development as soon as it introduces it. Pace's doctor keeps showing up for reasons that don't really make sense and it is just explained away that he's checking up on the family. Even Christina, who should arguably be one of the characters you care the most about, is reduced to an empty vessel that keeps insisting she's fine. Like many of the films in this series, it creates characters just to fill up the screen, which is a major problem in a movie that should have a lot of emotional heft.
The script also has handles child abuse in a very clumsy manner. At one point, Henry comes bursting into the principal's office and begins listing off the signs of child abuse. Child abuse in this film is treated as little more than a list of warning signs, including a moment where Peter offers Christina a cupcake when she's not eating in the cafeteria and she says, "No." While the movie does end up with the big murder plot entangling Susan, the child abuse is really just a moment for Henry to save the day. Much like how rape is often treated in storytelling, the child abuse in this movie is of more narrative importance for Henry than the actual victim. The closest we come to seeing any of the real emotional trauma she's experiencing is when she's dancing at the talent show, but I've also seen enough art and dance performances to know that most good performers emotionally connect to what they're doing.
The worst part about this movie is it's a very well-cast in what is ultimately a very competently made movie. Everyone involved here is just saddled with such a rotten script it ends up becoming a bad movie. There's certainly something that could be salvaged from this movie. There could be a movie solely about a boy genius who tries to win the heart of the girl he has a crush on. You could have a movie about a single mother who, with the help of her two overly precocious children, helps her co-worker overcome alcoholism. You could have a movie about a mother grieving the loss of her oldest son who is pushed towards dating the neurologist who treated her late child, which would actually help answer the question of "Why does Lee Pace keep showing up?" You could even start the movie at Henry's seizure and death and go with his mother discovering his notes and learning about his plot and her trying to deal with all of those details. Any of those would be better than this baffling mess of a script that led to us possibly having the biggest "What on earth did I just see?" of 2017.]]>
Jeffrey Katzenberg had been at Walt Disney Animation, there during its 1980s lull and the start of the "Disney Renaissance." After a fight with Michael Eisner, he left Disney and started Dreamworks SKG with Steven Spielberg and David Geffen. The first film announced to be released by the animation division would be "The Prince of Egypt," an animated musical telling the story of Moses. While some people view it as a massive "Fuck you" to Disney, it came at a time where every movie studio was desperately trying to emulate Disney and either succeeding ("Anastasia," "The Prince of Egypt") or failing massively ("Quest for Camelot," "The King and I").
In the midst of the Disney Renaissance was the release of "Toy Story," which proved to be a big hit for the brand new Pixar. While Pixar proceeded to work on a sequel on "Toy Story," they also announced a project called "Bugs," which would focus on a neurotic ant who ends up being a hero, while also falling in love with the princess of the colony. The same year of the release of what was retitled "A Bugs Life," Dreamworks released what ended up being its first film, "Antz," a movie about a neurotic ant who ends up being a hero, while also falling in love with the princess of the colony. I will firmly argue "The Prince of Egypt" is not a giant middle finger to Disney, but if this film isn't, I don't know what is.
"Antz" does follow the barebones narrative description of "A Bugs Life," but it also could be described as an animated Woody Allen film. It is a movie with a distinctly mature sense of humor that deals a lot with our place in the world. It's also a movie in which Woody Allen plays an overbearing creep who kidnaps the female lead, whom he's obsessed with.
Allen voices Z, a neurotic worker ant who struggles with his day-to-day life in the colony. While he gets along well with fellow worker Azteca (Jennifer Lopez) and Weaver (Sylvester Stallone), a soldier ant, he still finds himself depressed. After Princess Bala (Sharon Stone) decides to visit the bar the colony congregates at, Z becomes infatuated and poses as a warrior ant. After surviving a battle with termites, he is welcomed home as a war hero, but decides to kidnap Princess Bala, who is currently engaged to the fascist leader of the army, General Mandible (Gene Hackman).
When writing about "Despicable Me," I addressed the idea of what is adult humor in animated films. Animation can result in movies strictly for adults, such as "South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut," or it can result in family movies that have incredibly mature jokes that are clever and sophisticated, such as in quite a few Disney films, "Despicable Me," and "The Peanuts Movie*".
Then there is the type of bawdy, gross out humor you find in Dreamworks movies, which I'll refer to as "Dreamworks Humor." Dreamworks Humor is often associated with all computer-animated Dreamworks films post-"Shrek" and tend to deal in double entendres that kids won't understand, gross out humor kids will find funny, and sometimes implied or outright sexual discussions. Dreamworks Humor is found throughout "Antz," which between that and how dark the film is, I am tempted to suggest it's not actually a family film and is instead an animated film that managed to get a PG rating. I stopped keeping track of all of the jokes and lines in this film that surprised me, but I did count a comment about drinking from the anus of an aphid, a joke about inbreeding, a scene with bugs eating poop–which, to be fair, is realistic–and a line where Z says Bala had a chance to be in his "erotic fantasies."
None of these lines make you go, "Oh my God, I can't believe they went there," like some lines in "Shrek." It feels more like you're watching a comedian who thinks they're edgy saying a bunch of things in an attempt to shock you and make you laugh like Sarah Silverman, Amy Schumer, or Ali Wong, but they instead just make you have a really uncomfortable night at a club. This is Dreamworks Humor taken to an extreme, which might be the result of it being the studio's first film and it ultimately being a film to answer the question of, "What if Woody Allen were an ant?"
The film also has the distinct feeling of being rushed. The animation looks awful, although you have to credit Dreamworks on getting the anatomy of bugs right. It doesn't have the eye-searing shoddiness you find in "Delgo" or "Foodfight," but there is a very rough feel to every single detail in this film. What particularly hurts it is the fact it was released the same year as both "A Bug's Life" and "The Prince of Egypt," which show us you can have very unique and beautiful animated details of grass, water, and leaves and that Dreamworks did have the technology to have richly detailed CGI in animation, even though "The Prince of Egypt" is a traditionally animated film. The timing of this just feels unfortunate, but when would have been a good time to release a movie that is little more than the equivalent of sending a bag of dicks to Michael Eisner and telling him to eat it? A movie doesn't have to match the level of artistry found with Pixar movies, but even "Despicable Me," which was made on a smaller budget, had a unique and even whimsical look to it. The film also has an annoying feeling of several frames looking like they were all put through a tilt shift lens, which feels weird since this is animated, but most of the film has a very clear area that is focused in the middle, and the rest looks very blurry. Maybe this was because I was watching it on Netflix on my laptop, but it added to the film feeling like it had a rushed production.
What's worse is Dreamworks' first outing is incredibly boring, even if it briefly addresses totalitarianism and fascism. Not every animated film needs to be filled with bright colors, but the script is needlessly tedious. It wasn't until 19 minutes into the movie I laughed, and that was at a good sight gag. There can even be very serious animated films–minus three massive flaws, I would argue "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" is darker and more adult than this–but this is just dull and feels like a first-draft of a movie.
There are some situations where beating a competitor can pay off, but this shows it doesn't help when there's a subpar product. Thankfully, there were two better films released that year, one of which was made by the same studio that made "Antz."
Of course, "Despicable Me" is a franchise that seems inescapable, largely due to the Minions. If anything, the near ubiquity of the Minions led me to avoid watching the series until recently. They seemed to be annoying cute little sidekicks, the kind I don't enjoy in children's movies. This changed when I saw a trailer for "Despicable Me 3" before a film in the winter–possibly "Moana," which I still have a lot of affection for. If you were wondering what is a good way to hook me into film series I've almost intentionally avoided for six-and-a-half years, promise me there will be an 80s-Themed villain in your movie. After the trailer ended, I turned to my mom and said, "We might need to catch up on these movies." My willingness to at least give this series a shot increased after watching "Sing," another Illumination film, which had a cute, fun premise, with a surprising amount of depth.
I finally sat down and watched "Despicable Me" after months of thinking I would one day watch the movies. I didn't go in with low expectations or hopes of it being the greatest animated film of the year. I just decided to sit back and see how it was, which worked very well when I saw "Sing."
The movie follows Gru (Steve Carrell), a villain who decides to try to steal the moon after Vector (Jason Segal) steals the Great Pyramid. Due to cost constraints, Gru and his collaborator, Dr. Nefario (Russell Brand), decide the best way to carry out this scheme is to shrink the moon and then steal it. Following being foiled by Vector, Gru adopts three orphan girls, Margo (Miranda Cosgrove), Edith (Dana Gaier), Agnes (Elsie Fisher), to aid in carrying out his plot, but finds himself growing attached to the girls.
The risk you often run when watching most animated family films is finding humor that is too mature, often becoming bawdy, like any of the "Shrek" films. "Despicable Me" operates at a very smart, clever level of a lot of its humor, right down to a sight gag involving Lehman Brothers. Even how showing how Gru is a moderately successful villain by having him mention to the Minions how he stole the miniature versions of famous landmarks from Las Vegas hotels is skillfully done through Carrell's timing in his voice acting. It's refreshing to watch a movie that understands good humor doesn't mean stooping to jokes about cars having diarrhea.
It's also nice, being someone who recently bemoaned the lack of good villains in children's movies–although Gaston felt more deranged in the live-action "Beauty and the Beast," so good on Disney–to see a movie about villains where the characters are outright bad. Gru takes joy in a child's misery in our first introduction to him, uses a freeze ray a little too freely, and adopts three orphans as a means to the end of his scheme to steal the moon. Vector shows us at multiple moments he doesn't care for the safety of children, which kept reminding me of a point made about villains in "The Incredibles." It is possible to write a movie with a villain who is evil and make him not very good. Perhaps because of the concept of writing a film focused on bad guys, this movie succeeds at having villains who both succeed at driving conflict and being good antagonists on both ends of the spectrum. It might be difficult to believe Gru would really switch so fast to liking the trio he adopts, but to jump on this film for plot contrivances seems a bit harsh since the top-grossing animated film of this decade (and currently, all time) has a plot that makes no sense. It is possible to believe Gru, who has issues with his own rough childhood, would turn and feel immense love for the girls.
The Minions also manage to not bog down the movie with their silliness. As I've addressed elsewhere on here, it's very difficult to have a sidekick who doesn't feel out of place. The Minions largely work because when they're on screen, they're there to serve a purpose, which is be minions. They happen to be cute, tiny yellow guys who speak a nonsense language, but they actually have a reason to appear on screen. Perhaps due to their popularity they start to overwhelm the subsequent movies–although they did get their own prequel, which I will look at–but at least here, there's nothing inherently wrong with them.
There's nothing high-art or heart-wrenching about "Despicable Me," but for a film that has likely been written off by many as mindless due to the popularity of one group of characters–one friend questioned my sanity when I told her I liked this movie because of the Minions–it manages to be smart, clever, enjoyable film that looks like it could appeal to everyone in a family.]]>
Best Picture
"Hacksaw Ridge"
"Hell or High Water"
"Hidden Figures"
"La La Land"
"Manchester by the Sea"
Will Win: "La La Land"
Should Win: "Moonlight"
Should Have Been Nominated: "20th Century Women"
La La Land is a very charming, visually stunning film that I saw twice. Both it and Moonlight have that distinction, although I could see La La Land a million times because it's like comfort food followed by an emotional suckerpunch. While I think Moonlight is the better film and I would prefer it to win, I think it will go to La La Land because of the traction it has, backlash be damned.
I also wish 20th Century Women had been nominated as it was a visually interesting film with a funny but moving story. I also thought it was immensely better than Beginners, but I also didn't care for Beginners.
Best Director
Denis Villeneuve, "Arrival"
Mel Gibson, "Hacksaw Ridge"
Damien Chazelle, "La La Land"
Barry Jenkins, "Moonlight"
Kenneth Lonergan, "Manchester by the Sea"
Will Win: Damien Chazelle, "La La Land"
Should Win: Barry Jenkins, "Moonlight"
Should Have Been Nominated: Paul Verhoven, "Elle."
As I said earlier, "La La Land" charmed my pants off and I think a lot of that has to do with Chazelle's direction of a tribute to classic movie musicals. However, I feel in terms of structure and feel, I would give it to Jenkins instead. I also would have liked to have seen Paul Verhoven nominated for "Elle," which is an incredibly taut thriller, but that would have required foregoing the Mel Gibson redemption narrative.
Best Actor
Casey Affleck, "Manchester by the Sea"
Andrew Garfield, "Hacksaw Ridge"
Ryan Gosling, "La La Land"
Viggo Mortensen, "Captain Fantastic"
Denzel Washington, "Fences"
Will Win: Casey Affleck, "Manchester by the Sea"
Should Win: Anyone on this list who is not named Casey Affleck
Should Have Been Nominated: Tom Hanks, "Sully" or Ryan Gosling, "The Nice Guys"
I do not see anything stopping the Casey Affleck train, but it does really annoy me that in a year where we saw Nate Parker's career and film destroyed, Casey Affleck gets to face sexual abuse allegations and sweep awards. I heard Andrew Garfield was fantastic in "Hacksaw Ridge," Ryan Gosling is charming as ever in "La La Land," although I wish this was for his performance as an alcoholic private investigator in "The Nice Guys." I have not seen "Captain Fantastic" because it has not played in my area, but Denzel Washington was fantastic in "Fences," especially showing all of the facets of Troy. Seriously, give the award to anyone but Casey Affleck.
Best Supporting Actor
Mahershala Ali, "Moonlight"
Jeff Bridges, "Hell or High Water"
Lucas Hedges, "Manchester by the Sea"
Dev Patel, "Lion"
Michael Shannon, "Nocturnal Animals"
Will Win: Mahershala Ali, "Moonlight"
Should Win: Mahershala Ali, "Moonlight"
Should Have Been Nominated: Tracy Letts, "Indignation"
I was stunned when Mahershala Ali lost the Golden Globe and if he loses, I will be shocked again. He's fantastic as what is essentially a surrogate parent in the film and he plays a character who is often an archetype in films that tell black stories, but he does so in a way that creates a person on the screen, not a cartoon. He's the presumed winner and deserves the award.
I will shut up about this after writing this paragraph, but Tracy Letts gave one of the best performances I saw all year as the dean in "Indignation." In a just world, he would have had Oscar buzz, but unfortunately, he was not in the film adaptation of a Philip Roth novel that seemed poised for the Oscars.
Best Actress
Emma Stone, "La La Land"
Natalie Portman, "Jackie"
Ruth Negga, "Loving"
Meryl Streep, "Florence Foster Jenkins"
Isabelle Huppert, "Elle"
Will Win: Emma Stone, "La La Land"
Should Win: Emma Stone, "La La Land" or Isabelle Huppert, "Elle"
Should Have Been Nominated: Viola Davis, "Fences" and Annette Benning, "20th Century Women"
You probably read what I wrote for "Should Have Been Nominated" and thought I made a mistake. No, I saw "Fences" and that movie was the Denzel Washington and Viola Davis show. She should have been considered for Best Actress, but is instead considered a Supporting Actress.
I think Emma Stone will win this award because she sings and dances in "La La Land" and is generally agreed to be the stronger half of the duo. While the movie as a whole made me cry, a lot of that was on the back of Emma Stone's performance. Since she's not up against Viola Davis, I think she'll win. I also thought Isabelle Huppert was phenomenal in "Elle" and if the Academy really wanted to stun us, she will win the award.
Annette Benning's performance in "20th Century Women" as the adrift single mother of a teenage boy was also sorely overlooked. She gave a very dry performance that alternated between hysterical and quietly heartbreaking, notably during every scene where she's alone in her bedroom smoking.
Best Supporting Actress
Viola Davis, "Fences"
Octavia Spencer, "Hidden Figures"
Nicole Kidman, "Lion"
Michelle Williams, "Manchester by the Sea"
Naomie Harris, "Moonlight"
Will Win: Viola Davis, "Fences"
Should Win: Viola Davis, "Fences"
Should Have Been Nominated: None
This is an incredible category because all of these are great actresses and I can confirm three of these performances deserve these nominations. Were Viola Davis nominated for Best Actress, I would say it's a toss up. But this was the category Viola Davis was nominated for, so I think it's locked up for her and she deserves it for delivering an astonishing performance in "Fences" and putting up with Jared Leto.
Best Original Screenplay
Mike Mills, "20th Century Women"
Taylor Sheridan, "Hell or High Water"
Damien Chazelle, "La La Land"
Yorgos Lanthimos and Efthimis Fillippou, "The Lobster"
Kenneth Lonergan, "Manchester by the Sea"
Will Win: Damien Chazelle, "La La Land"
Should Win: Mike Mills, "20th Century Women"
Should Have Been Nominated: None
I loved "The Lobster," but I don't think it's going to win because it's such a weird, divisive film. Speaking of divisive films, I do think it's going to go to "La La Land" because it's an original musical. I wouldn't be shocked if it would go to "Manchester by the Sea" or "Hell or High Water," which I could see this being the award it takes home.
Best Adapted Screenplay
Eric Heisserer, "Arrival"
August Wilson, "Fences"
Allison Schroeder and Theodore Melfi, "Hidden Figures"
Luke Davies, "Lion"
Barry Jenkins and Tarell Alvin McCraney, "Moonlight"
Will Win: Barry Jenkins and Tarell Alvin McCraney, "Moonlight"
Should Win: Barry Jenkins and Tarell Alvin McCraney, "Moonlight"
Should Have Been Nominated: Todd Komarnicki, "Sully"
I'm really happy to see Allison Schroeder on this list as she is the only woman nominated in the screenplay category. As a fan of August Wilson's work, I'm also thrilled to see him get a posthumous nomination for the screenplay of "Fences," based on his great play. All that said, I think this is going to "Moonlight" and I don't see it going to anything else.
Best Animated Feature
"Kubo and the Two Strings"
"My Life as a Zucchini"
"The Red Turtle"
Will Win: "Moana"
Should Win: "Moana"
Should Have Been Nominated: "Sing"
I haven't seen "My Life as a Zucchini," or "The Red Turtle," but I think "Moana" is the strongest of the three other nominees and I'd like to see it win. "Kubo and the Two Strings" was in the summer and visually the most interesting, while "Zootopia" came out in the spring and has a lot of problems with it, although moments of the animation are really great. If it goes to something else, it's "Zootopia," which I don't understand the love for although I do recommend watching it, or maybe "My Life as a Zucchini." (And I genuinely liked "Sing," but I'm happy "Trolls" wasn't nominated.)
Best Original Song
"Audition (The Fools Who Dream)" from "La La Land"—Music by Justin Hurwitz, Lyrics by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul
"City of Stars" from "La La Land"—Music by Justin Hurwitz, Lyrics by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul
"Can't Stop the Feeling!" from "Trolls"—Music and Lyrics by Justin Timberlake, Max Martin, and Karl Johan Schuster
"How Far I'll Go" from "Moana"—Music and Lyrics by Lin-Manuel Miranda
"The Empty Chair" from "Jim: The James Foley Story"—Music and Lyrics by J. Ralph and Sting
Will Win: "City of Stars" from "La La Land"
Should Win: "Audition (The Fools Who Dream)" from "La La Land"
Should Have Been Nominated: "Runnin'" from "Hidden Figures"
Remember in 2014 when a song from "Alone Yet Not Alone" was nominated, but then had its nomination revoked? That's what I feel like happened with "The Empty Chair" because I think a lot of people, myself included, expected something from "Hidden Figures." Pharrell's music for that film is catchy and I've had "Runnin'" stuck in my head long after seeing the film.
I had initially predicted this would be the final piece of Lin-Manuel Miranda getting a PEGOT, but then I saw "La La Land." "How Far I'll Go" is a really good "I Want" song that manages to be good in the context of the film and also in the end credits, where it's performed by Alessia Cara. Unfortunately, it's going to "City of Stars," which is a good song, but I think "Audition (The Fools Who Dream)" is the best song as it comes at what is the emotional turn of the film.
Finally, I'm not surprised "Can't Stop the Feeling!" was nominated, but what a bland piece of average pop music. I had managed to catch it–hi, Eurovision!–but because of how far in advance it had been released before "Trolls," I failed to realize it was tied to the movie, which for the longest time I didn't really think was a movie, even while I sipped from a collectors cup while seeing the "Ben-Hur" remake. It's kind of the "Happy" of this year, but I actually liked "Happy" the first couple of times I heard it.
Best Original Score
"Jackie," Mica Levi
"La La Land," Justin Hurwitz
"Lion," Dustin O'Halloran and Hauschka
"Moonlight," Nicholas Britell
"Passengers," Thomas Newman
Will Win: "La La Land," Justin Hurwitz
Should Win: "Moonlight," Nicholas Britell
Should Have Been Nominated: "Moana"
Justin Hurwitz has created a fantastic jazz-inflected score for "La La Land," which fits perfectly in the world of the film. However, Nicholas Britell's haunting minimalist score for "Moonlight" was the most affecting of the nominees. (I listened to all of the nominees.) "Moana" featured a fantastic adventure score that utilized the traditional music of the area its story takes place and really should have been nominated.
Best Foreign Language Film
"Land of Mine"
"A Man Called Ove"
"The Salesman"
"Toni Erdmann"
Will Win: "The Salesman"
Should Win: "Toni Erdmann"
Should Have Been Nominated: "Elle"
I have a gut feeling "The Salesman" will win and I'm more than okay with that since I'm a huge fan of Asghar Farhadi's work. But maybe in a world where "My Life as a Zucchini" can be nominated even though no one had heard of it until a month ago, maybe a critically-acclaimed three hour-long German comedy can win.
Best Documentary Feature
"Fire at Sea"
"I Am Not Your Negro"
"Life, Animated"
"O.J.: Made in America"
Will Win: "13th"
Should Win: "13th"
Should Have Been Nominated: None
This is normally the category I have the strongest opinions about and I don't this year. "13th" will win because it tackles institutional racism in America while also being very accessible, even if you want to constantly hurl your laptop against a wall and scream at Ronald Reagan while watching it.
"Moana," the latest animated Disney film, has many of the conventions of beloved Disney movies. It features a princess, toe-tappingly good songs, a comedic sidekick and a weird animal. What "Moana" misses is a villain, although there is an argument to be made that Te Ka, a lava demon, is the villain of the film.
"Moana," unlike many other post-"Tangled" Disney films, manages to work without the presence of a villain. With nearly every other Disney film struggles with lacking villains or red herrings, "Moana" manages to succeed because it's structured as an adventure film, with some buddy-comedy aspects.
The disappearance of villains in animated films seems to be a bit of a new trend, one that doesn't always seem to work. This seems to have been something stolen from Pixar since a lot of animation studios seem intent on stealing from what is arguably the most acclaimed animation studio out there. What seems to be the most beloved Pixar films–"Finding Nemo," "Cars," "Wall-E," "Brave," "Inside Out," "Ratatouille"–tend to have no villain. Granted, plenty of other great Pixar movies, ones that I personally prefer, have villains in them, notably "Toy Story 3," "Monsters, Inc.," and "Up." (For the record, "Ratatouille" is my favorite Pixar film, but Skinner is more of an antagonist and Anton Ego is Addison DeWitt-lite.)
Pixar, however, tends to make movies children and adults can enjoy, ones that even seem to be a little more cerebral. Most children's entertainment seems to try to pander to kids and dumb things down for them, ignoring how children sometimes have a heightened sense of the world for how it is. Pixar's approach to movies is similar to Laika, who has produced "Coraline," "ParaNorman," "The Boxtrolls," and "Kubo and the Two Strings." While Laika films don't have villains in the traditional sense of classic Disney films, the films produced by that studio tend to delve into truly dark territory beyond the picture's aesthetic.
Even several Dreamworks films feature villains, especially when we consider the "Shrek" films are essentially just parodies of films from Disney's "renaissance" period. When Dreamworks, the biggest purveyor of the unnecessary animated dance party to close out a movie, still has villains in its movies the question arises as to what happened to villains.
In the Disney films myself and many others grew up with, there is the immediate introduction of a villain, usually noted by their dark clothing. (Think about it: Cruella De Vil, Gaston, and Captain Hook are really the only Disney villains who wear clothing where the dominant color isn't black or purple.) Disney villains are often distinguished by their desire to stop at nothing to get what they want, be it King Triton's trident, gold in Virginia, or Esmerelda and state-sponsored discrimination against a specific race of people.
What's more striking is the motivation of those characters for committing often heinous acts is usually made very clear from the beginning. In the instance of Professor Rattigan in "The Great Mouse Detective," he is motivated to kidnap Flaversham and his daughter because he knows both of those pieces can help him with his plan to overthrow Mouse Britania. His end game is to rule all of "mousedom" and outsmart Basil, which fuels everything he does in the movie.
This isn't really the case with a lot of modern Disney movies. In "Frozen," we are initially shown the Duke of Weselton, who has a strong desire to capture the mysteriously cut-off kingdom's trade resources. Based on everything that goes on in the film, right down to him calling Elsa a monster when her powers are revealed, you would assume he's the villain.
This is one of modern Disney's favorite strategies in story telling: the red hering. The villain of Frozen ends up being Prince Hans, Anna's love interest. While I am all in favor of twists in storytelling, the reveal of Prince Hans being the villain just doesn't work. He has very little motivation for what he does in the movie other than what is revealed in the film's third act. Furthermore, his reasons for courting Anna for marriage make no sense. If he just wanted to get close to her and gain her respect, it's safe to assume he could have just tried to befriend her. It's well-established in the film everyone in the surrounding kingdoms knows about how reclusive Anna and Elsa have been since their parents' death, so it's safe to assume if Hans wanted to just befriend her, she probably would have given him her unyielding loyalty.
A similar thing happens in the plot of "Big Hero 6," although in that film the issue is more so that the presumed villain was framed by the actual antagonist, which is much more forgivable.
The other common failure of storytelling in modern Disney films is when the villain is a mystery. Generally, as seen in "Zootopia" and "Wreck-It Ralph," something is wrong with the universe of the film and there is an antagonist who is causing the problem, which the protagonist has to solve. (Arguably, this is also what happens in "Moana.") In "Wreck-It Ralph," there are glitches in the games, which seemed to have been caused by Ralph jumping from game-to-game. As it turns out, these were actually caused by the actual antagonist of the film, who also sabotaged the game, resulting in the glitches seen in Vanellope. This one works because in the plot of the film the end results all make sense.
This works less well in "Zootopia," a film everyone enjoyed more than me. In the world of the film, predators and prey live in harmony, but this is threatened when some prey go feral. After an initial false ending and increased prejudice in Zootopia, it is later revealed the timid sheep who works as the assistant mayor is behind the prey going feral. This ends up feeling very rushed and coming out of left-field for the same reasons why the Hans reveal doesn't really work in "Frozen." The motivations feel very haphazard, as if someone realized the final version of script was due to Disney and they didn't have a villain. While the overall ending of "Zootopia" works, the reveal of the antagonist feels like such a twist, it catches one by surprise for all the wrong reasons.
But having an animated film with no villain can work. Studio Ghibli has made many films with no villains and they continue to endure, never ceasing to be a delight on every viewing. Illumination's "Sing" is another film that, while not high art, manages to be a fun, light-hearted movie without a villain, although I would like to think capitalism is the villain in "Sing." The movie is ultimately about a bunch of animals in a singing competition and it fulfills its mission. It's fun and the plot actually makes sense, even if it seems largely like an excuse to have a bunch of stars singing popular songs from the past forty years.
While an animated film can succeed without a villain, the tendency to not have a villain as seen in classic Disney films can result in films not working because of poor scriptwriting. There is no reason why films should try to avoid a menacing villain as children can handle characters who behave in an almost unbelievable way. After all, we have enough people in the government and other positions of power whose behavior isn't too far removed from the villains we saw in cartoons as children. Shouldn't art imitate life, even if it's to provide an escape?]]>


text:
Search 590,000 properties worldwide.
Search over a million flights, hotels, packages, and more
No Expedia cancellation fee to change or cancel almost any hotel reservation.
The cheapest tickets to Kakadu available within the past 7 days were $393.36. Prices quoted are per person, round trip, for the period specified. Prices and availability are subject to change. Additional terms apply.
You have an appetite for exploration, but this time you need more than the classic staycation. You need more than what the suburb next door has to do and see. It's about time you take to the skies, and arrive in a unique place. We're here for you, with flights to Kakadu! You'll have loot left over for all of Kakadu's superb shopping, evening entertainment, and eateries thanks to our economical flights. Put your trust in Expedia.com once you're outlining your next holiday.
If you need to recharge before you set out to see the sights, today's your lucky day. All the qualities you want are within your grasp with Kakadu hotels from Expedia.com. You can reserve close to the runway at one of our airport hotels in Kakadu.
We definitely understand you're the visitor sort who dives into exploring as soon as possible. In Kakadu, you will have lots of things to do; that's the reason you've landed here. To begin with, check out all the activities we offer in Kakadu and see for yourself.
Don't delay any longer! Get an affordable flight today and see the city up close and personal. In need of Kakadu flights? No other travel company can surpass Expedia.com. We have the best selection and pricing out there. Load up your suitcase, say goodbye to your colleagues, and witness Kakadu for yourself!
Expedia.com lets you search across the largest number of airlines and Kakadu flights, which means that you'll be able to find a great flight deal at the perfect travel date and time. Our simple-to-use booking engine makes looking for terrific bargains easy and hassle-free; just enter your travel dates and departure city, and let Expedia.com do the rest! Adjust your travel dates and explore connecting flights to find an even better deal on your Kakadu flight!
Browse through dozens of options and rest assured that you're seeing the best price guaranteed! Our friendly customer service representatives are here to serve you 24 hours day to provide assistance and answer any questions that you may have about booking your Kakadu trip. There's simply no substitute for great prices suited to your travel needs and backed by excellent customer support.
Combine your Kakadu flight with a hotel and/or car rental for a package deal designed to save you even more money! Discover additional savings by booking in advance or find a last minute deal. There are tons of ways to save on your flights to Kakadu with Expedia.com. Use us as your stop travel destination and have the confidence that you're getting a bargain!
Jet star was very nice on return flight. Seats were much more comfortable than Virgin
Great food and service
just great comfortable flight virgin the only way to fly
Jamie is one of the best flight attendants ever.


text:
four. Use the arrow buttons to regulate the time over the video display to match the volume of hours your determined over.Now Permit's discuss a lot of the characteristics this model has. It includes twelve recipe settings, the majority of which can be for various bread varieties. This contains the standard ones for instance Basic, French, Comple… Read More
The Directions are in-depth and you will discover guidelines and hints which can be helpful. Baking is a science and measuring elements specifically tends to make a change in The end result. So, make use of a liquid measuring cup for liquids, dry measuring cup for dry ingredients and measuring spoons. With bread equipment, It's important to put the… Read More
This was a modern reward for me. I am employing it to make my own gluten absolutely free breads. It takes somewhat recipe altering to obtain it where you want it, but that didn't acquire extended. I have created both equally sandwich bread and cinnamon raisin bread.If you're looking for a machine that'll really push your skills as a baker and c… Read More
An proper representation with the asked for resource couldn't be located on this server. This error was generated by Mod_Security.Their slide-in package deal at $five,000 features a slide-in assortment with convection and warming drawer. You even have a convection microwave, so you have two ovens plus a warming drawer for cooking. Also included is … Read More
Bring out your inner chef With all the Breville the Scraper Beater Bench Mixer. Powered by a seven-hundred-watt motor that wipes the edges and the bottom with the bowl with each and every turn, this Scraper Mixer causes it to be simple to make cakes, biscuits, breads and even more.Some of the equipment ran quick, which created it simple to overproc… Read More


text:
Hi my name is Keiron, I am 21 years of age and I live in Clase
I went to Tycoch College and studied Plumbing Services and Electronic Engineering I passed both, I worked in a bar while at college but the hours became to chaotic and had to focus on my studies instead. Once I passed the course, I then realised I didn't want to spend all my time in college so I applied with the Job Centre to try and find work (easier said than done), while looking for work I also started volunteering in a local charity shop.
After this course I am hoping to either get a full time job or apprenticeship, I am also hoping to achieve the skills and experience required to be a successful IT Practitioner and expand on my own knowledge.
Some of my weaknesses are that I have rather poor money management skills and if I get overwhelmed I tend to close myself off
My strengths are that I have a strong understanding of different computer systems and that I consider myself a very enthusiastic person when it comes to technology
My previous experience with IT is that I have constructed my own Gaming PC by purchasing each individual parts and constructing it, then over time buying new parts and replacing parts with newer pieces as time goes on.


text:
Superb arrangement and performance of the Weather Report classic tune, Birdland. Performed by Mnozil Brass and trumpeter James Morrison.
Want to learn more about the best ways to practice? Get an e-mail with a discount code when The Practice of Practice by Jonathan Harnum is published (June, 2014). To learn more about the book, check out a sample from The Practice of Practice.
Related articles
- A 2-Man 18 pc Big Band: James Morrison (talkingtrumpet.wordpress.com)
- Essential Books for Trumpeters (talkingtrumpet.wordpress.com)
- Recording trumpet – Condenser or dynamic (gearslutz.com)
- Trumpeter Eric Vloimans has learned 'to let it all go' (triblive.com)


text:
I've been informed of more success for the Viner sponsored Agiskoviner squad recently. The club was formed in 2004 and since then has notched up an impressive palmares, including world championships medals, all astride Viner frames.
Recently, John McClelland has added to the club's long list of medals. Blasting round the Newport Velodrome on his made to measure alloy Primus frame he took gold in the 750m TT (pictured above) at the recent National LVRC championships. He then swapped his lo-pro for his custom carbon Perfecta and added Sprint and Points gold along with a bronze in the Scratch race.
John then took this great form to Portugal for last weeks UCI World Masters Track Championships. He took a fine silver in the Points race to round off an impressive few months on the track.


text:
Disneyland Paris will be launching a series of events for Disney fans we think, well to be honest we aren't too sure and neither is the rest of the Disney fan community….
After a cryptic tweet was published on Thursday 31 August from Euro Disney Président Catherine Powell promising more information the following day, many fans were left disappointed and confused when 1 September arrived and the Disney FanDaze press release was circulated.
Sadly once again it appears that Disneyland Paris still has major problems when it comes to communicating with its fans as the press release contained little to no information about FanDaze.
Disneyland Paris has promised that further information about these events to be released the 1 October.
I guess we will just have to wait another month and see what all the fuss is about.
Disney FanDaze, a new series of ultimate fan experiences, specifically for Disney Fans!
On the heels of the excitement surrounding the 25th Anniversary of Disneyland Paris, the resort is launching a new series of fan experiences, inspired by and created especially for Disney fans around the world. Disney FanDaze is a series of experiences designed to entertain and thrill those who know and love Disney better than anyone else: Disney fans.
There is little doubt that Disney fans are among the most devoted, passionate, and enthusiastic people in the world. Since the inception of Disneyland, the number of fans of Disney theme parks and their beloved Disney Characters, has grown exponentially. Events, festivals, and other celebrations held by and for Disney fans occur daily all across the world.
Since Disneyland Paris opened its gates 25 years ago, Disney fans – from all over Europe and beyond – have been traveling from far and wide to celebrate anniversaries, seasonal festivities and other special events at the European resort. Thousands of fans come every year to relive their favorite memories and to make new ones, and many others revisit time and again to meet Disney Characters and immerse themselves deeper in the stories that have always delighted and inspired them.
Now is the time to launch entertainment experiences created especially for these Disney fans.
So if you dream of spending more time with your favorite Disney Characters and you're a fan of delightful days and dazzling nights, then Disney FanDaze is for you! Stay tuned and follow us on our Twitter account #DisneyFanDaze account for more details. Each tweet is a date with Magic that no fan will want to miss.
Disney Fan Daze events will be FAN-tastic – full of fantasy and fun, created for the young and the young at heart. Stay tuned for more exciting news, coming your way very soon!


text:
Tuesday Not-Hangover
I can't compete with River's weekends, but I'll try.
Usually, the husband and I are boring people, because we have a two-and-a-half-year-old and we just sit around on the weekends and go to the park and other baby stuff. But this weekend, we were going to a wedding. Ooh la la.
Believe it or not, going to one event is an insane amount of prep, and I don't mean hair. First, we had to get his parents to come down to babysit – which meant we had to sanitize the house.
The project to sanitize the house was going well until the kid got sick. When I say sick, I mean projectile vomit all over the place, at which point I say something stupid like "it's ok to throw up on mommy" and my kid says "get paper towel." It's gonna take more than a paper towel.
Things we don't tell the grandparents: "oh, the kid threw up right there. On the sofa. Where you're sitting." These things are on a need-to-know basis, and nobody needs to know.
As for weddings in Texas: they just shouldn't occur in the summer. Not even indoors. It's just too damn hot to be in a room, even an air-conditioned room, with a bunch of other people. Hell, by the time I got to the wedding, my hair looked like this:
Good thing I wasn't an "important" guest, so there are few pictures memorializing the humidity fail.
And that was my weekend.
One Response to "Tuesday Not-Hangover"
Lol, you are a great artist. Sorry the baby was vomiting a lot. I had that this spring with my 8 year old. He was throwing up, but stopped and told me he felt great. I asked over and over if ge was fine and he said yes. I was like, great we can go out and get lunch. On the way to Subway he vomited without warning in my car over and over again. I'll never do that again. If they are suck, we stay out my car.


text:
tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-65624093786752750362018-03-07T07:04:14.012-08:00In Home Training Los AngelesChris Kruegerhttp://firstname.lastname@example.com:blogger.com,1999:blog-6562409378675275036.post-71707015748175283812013-12-16T13:55:00.000-08:002013-12-16T14:03:48.042-08:00In Home Training Los AngelesIn Home Training LA serves celebrities, professional athletes, and elite clients in Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Hancock Park, WeHo, West LA, Century City, Brentwood, Bel-Air, and Holmby Hills.

Our Team:
Randel Schultze, MPT
Randel is a physical therapist focused on rehabilitation, range of motion, and functional movement to help you live a happy pain-free life.

Chris Krueger, CSCS
Chris is Strength Coach and Personal Trainer adept at helping you get the most out of life through strength training and core stabilization to firm your body and help you look, feel and be your best.

Our Service
We work with elite clients on an individual basis. We will help you achieve long-term results through challenging and constantly varied workouts. We are recognized for our expertise in functional training and commitment to developing and implementing innovative fitness techniques.

With over 15 years experience, our dynamic approach, boundless energy, and humor only add to the effectiveness of the experience our clients enjoy. With a client list as diverse as our training methods, we emphasize strength training modalities that can be transferred from the gym to daily life, from training camp to championship game. We have worked with star athletes and many NCAA sports teams. Film and Television celebrities seek our guidance in preparing for roles and have stayed on to become devoted clients.

We have a very limited client roster, but we would love to give you a free consultation and see if training with us is the right fit for you. Please email email@example.com to set up your free consultation today. Use the subject line "In Home Training LA" and we will get back to you at our earliest opportunity to set up your first session.

Best,
Chris & RandelChris Kruegerhttp://email@example.com


text:
Laxminarayan Temple in Shimla
Laxminarayan Temple Overview
Built by Raja Sahil Varman in the 10th century, Laxminarayan Temple is located around 80 km away from Shimla in Chamba town. This shrine houses six stone temples dedicated to the Hindu Gods – Shiva and Vishnu.
Flaunting Shikhara style of architecture, this religious edifice features a Mandapa that is decorated with wooden chhattris and shell roof to safeguard against the weather. A Bimana, which has a shikhara and garbh griha with a small antralaya, is another architectural aspect of the temple.
A metallic image of Garuda – the vahana of Lord Vishnu is embellished on the dwajastamba pillar at the main gate of the shrine. In 1678, Raja Chhatra Singh placed gold plated pinnacles on the top of the temple, as a reaction to Aurangzeb's orders of demolishing the temple.
The intricate carvings on the pillars and walls of the shrine are fine examples of the architectural expertise of the artisans of the 10th century. Within the complex, there are many small temples dedicated to Radha Krishna, Shiva and Gauri Shankar. The beauty of the temple complex is accentuated by the serene landscape surrounding it.
Opening Closing Time Open all days
Entrance Fee Free
Similar Religious in Shimla
Arki, 173208, Himachal Pradesh