oh captain, my captain

My girlfriend and I took in a movie last Saturday night - Captain America: The First Avenger. My girlfriend went in with moderate to low expectations, and was surprised that she enjoyed the film, thinking that it was pretty good. I think I enjoyed it just about as much as she did - however, I started with much higher expectations.

I found the portrayal of Steve Rogers to be near perfect. Chris Evans is tremendous in the role, and the story of his metamorphosis from skinny army reject to the iconic comic hero is captivating.

Unfortunately, the rest of the story and the exploits of Captain America after Rogers' transformation are less than compelling in the film. Moreover, the action was good, but not spectacular. In particular, I was disappointed with the portrayal of Hydra. Hugo Weaving is one of my favorite actors, but this is either not his best effort or not the best role for him - I lean towards the former.

Overall, it was a fun movie to go see and I'm quite pleased that my girlfriend enjoyed it - bodes well for future trips to the cinema to see titles such as The Dark Knight Rises, The Hobbit, and Superman: Man of Steel. And yes, it is just slightly pathetic that I'm already anticipating seeing movies coming out in Summer 2012, December 2012, and Summer 2013 - and I'm okay with that.

the making of a hero

Yesterday, I watched the recent Robin Hood film starring Russell Crowe on HBO. Having read and heard less than stellar reviews of the movie, I wasn't expecting much, but I found Robin Hood to be a very inventive and thorough depiction of the origins of the classic hero.

Most of our hero and superhero stories, especially the film versions, lack effective origins stories. In the first Superman movie, Clark Kent's transformation into the Man of Steel, which is assumed to take about 12 years, happens in a split second as Jeff East is suddenly replaced with Christopher Reeve. This is the manner in which most hero stories are told - so much time is devoted to telling who the hero is while little if any thought is given to how he or she became a hero.

To me, the origins is the most fascinating part of an hero story. That's why I'm such a big fan of the show Smallville and am already salivating in anticipation of next year's Superman: Man of Steel. Tim Burton's Batman films of the 1990s did a good job of sharing the origins of the Caped Crusader, but in general, paying attention to our heros' origins is a very recent trend initiated by Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins.

Ridley Scott's Robin Hood struck me as a truthful telling of the character's story. It effectively captured the history of the era and came up with plausible scenario (sort of) for how Robin Longstride became Robin Hood. The film wasn't great and reached its conclusion rather abruptly, but the attention to detail and the commitment to the character's origins make it a film worth watching.

Oscar

Awards shows are a lot like sports. There's intrigue, uncertainty, spontaneity, excitement, favorites, underdogs, mandatory breaks in the action and the potential for memorable bloopers. And come tomorrow morning, there will be loads of second-guessing. The Oscars are the Super Bowl of awards shows. I know from past experience that the awards show viewing experience is enhanced significantly by live-tweeting (2010 Grammy Awards), so tonight I'm going to see how much fun I can have watching the Oscars while live-blogging (a la the 2010 NFL Draft). So without further ado, here we go:

8:00pm EST: I was under the impression, incorrectly so, that the awards show started at 8:00. Guess this means I'll be listening to my sister, roommate and girlfriend discuss who does and does not look good in their dresses for the next half hour.

8:30pm EST: Finally the Oscars have started! Or... well... they will be starting after a 10+minute opening vignette featuring hosts James Franco and Anne Hathaway. It's actually a really well done opening, and yet I do kinda long for the traditional Billy Crystal song and dance routine. Franco and Hathaway are both very likable, and I suspect they'll do a great job...

8:37pm EST: And what have we here? The opening only lasted 7 minutes - good start to an awards show that's likely to last well past midnight.

8:40pm EST: Anne Hathaway is very awkwardly placing her hands on her stomach. My girlfriend can't tell if it's cause she's going to throw up or she doesn't know where to put her arms.

8:45pm EST: The first Oscar of the night is awarded to Alice in Wonderland - for art direction. I really enjoyed this film and thought it went seriously under-appreciated. This is a little ho-hum though - the Oscars should start with a stronger category, like cinematography...

8:46pm EST: It's like Tom Hanks is reading my mind!

8:57pm EST: Bit of an upset win for Melissa Leo as best supporting actress. Nice to see her exceptionally high level of excitement for this, but Kirk Douglas is proving to be a tough act to follow right now.

9:01pm EST: Mila Kunis' dress kinda makes it look like she has matching tattoos on each of her breasts. That's not a bad thing - I'm just pointing it out.

9:13pm EST: If Aaron Sorkin does not win best adapted screen play for the Social Network, I may have to stop watching the Oscars.

9:14pm EST: Ok good.

9:18pm EST: And with the King's Speech's win, the two best movies I saw this year now boast the two best screenplays of the year - fitting.

9:25pm EST: Wow - 55 minute wait for the first Charlie Sheen joke - way to go guy writing for James Franco. What was the over/under?

9:32pm EST: Christian Bale wins best supporting actor - does this mean Batman is going to have a beard in the Dark Knight Rises?

9:42pm EST: Time for best original score - should I be capitalizing the categories? This category will be an interesting referendum on how progressive the Oscars are or are willing to be.

9:43pm EST: Nine Inch Nails just won an Oscar! Great and appropriate win for Trent Reznor, Atticus Ross and the Social Network.

9:45pm EST: Not much love for Scarlett Johansson in our apartment.

10:04pm EST: The Oscars might save some time by not performing each original song nominee. I realize people like singing, but people also like getting to bed before 1:00am.

10:06pm EST: Chuck can sing! Is that in the intersect?!

10:10pm EST: As I'm doing this, I'm realizing that I'm more or less live-tweeting in my blog as opposed to live-blogging - oh well. Also, Anne Hathaway is stealing the show from James Franco - I think it's time to give Jimmy the hook.

10:27pm EST: Billy Crystal should still be hosting this show. His humor is funny, self-deprecating, classy and just right for this event. Anne Hathaway might have some of that in her - her jokes have been forced tonight but there's an endearing awkwardness to the way she does it, a la Crystal. Billy is giving a great tribute/roast to Bob Hope. One of my favorite moments in a slapstick comedy is when Bob Hope plays through Chevy Chase and Dan Akroyd's tent in Spies Like Us. And that was a great transition to introduce the next presenters with Hope.

10:31pm EST: Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law have about as much on-stage chemistry as they had on-screen chemistry in Sherlock Holmes, which is to say very little.

10:35pm EST: If the academy is just going to nominate all of the leading candidates for film of year for the film editing award, what's the point of having separate categories?

10:40pm EST: Just beginning to notice that the Oscars commercials have been far superior to this year's Super Bowl commercials (more or less). They should market this for the future. Just like women have Super Bowl parties to watch the ads, guys could have Oscars parties to watch ads - and knock-out actresses with Henna chest tattoos (thank you Mila Kunis).

10:54pm EST: I'm surprised Leslie Nielsen appeared so early in the dearly departed montage.

10:57pm EST: I've been noticing on twitter that the Oscars are getting trashed pretty hard for lacking personality and feeling this year - in my opinion most of this is James Franco's fault. It's become tragically popular to dis anything and everything on twitter, but I think the botching of the necrology segment demonstrates the criticism vividly. Muting the audience was a horrific mistake, as was not introducing the segment at all. And Halle Berry's tribute of Lena Horn, though sincere, was too brief to be at all impactful.

11:01pm EST: Time for the first of the major categories - best director. It was basically a two horse race that came down to Tom Hooper and David Fincher. While I am a total the Social Network mark, I'm happy to see Tom Hooper win. The King's Speech was a terrific film and was indeed very well directed.

11:10pm EST: Lots of two horse races left - Annette v. Natalie, Colin v. Jesse, the speech v. the stalking tool.

11:11pm EST: Make a wish.

11:16pm EST: As someone who appreciates traditional values, it was very nice to see Natalie Portman's fiance hold her hand and walk her up the steps - strong work. And her acceptance speech is equally endearing.

11:24pm EST: I haven't seen 127 Hours, and none of the clips I've seen tonight have really make me want to either.

11:25pm EST: If Colin Firth starts stammering through his acceptance speech, does the academy consider taking his award back? Seriously though, he was great in the King's Speech and his win, albeit expected, is well deserved.

11:32pm EST: Never would have pegged Anne Hathaway as a "woo-girl" before tonight. I may have to rethink some of the compliments I've given her thus far.

11:33pm EST: Doesn't using the King's Speech to introduce the other movies nominated for best picture kinda give away the result?

11:36pm EST: And here's the answer to my previous question - yes it does.

Well, it is way past bedtime for the students of PS22 from Staten Island, NY, and it's nearing mine, but I'm shocked the Oscars concluded before midnight. While I can appreciate the attempt at brevity, I think what was sacrificed was perhaps the personality and emotion that tonight's telecast lacked. Still, I was happy to see so many deserving winners - makes sense given that it's an odd year (seriously, look back at the last two decades of Oscars - good films get screwed in even years) - and enjoyed the experience of blogging my way through the show. Likewise, hopefully you enjoyed reliving the experience through my words.

Harry Potter! Harry Potter! Harry Potter!

For the record, Harry Potter does not appear, or apparate as the case may be, when you say his name three times.

With my new-found spare time this summer, thanks to my achilles tendon rupture, I picked up where I left off last summer reading J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter novels. After completing the first four books a year ago, I intended to read Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince this year and wait until I'd seen the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows films to finish reading the series. But with the World Cup being over and my days being long, I tore through all three books in record time - for me. And as promised, here are my thoughts...

I reached an interesting turning point reading the fifth book in that the cinematic portrayal was done so well that it overshadowed the actual book. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was a fairly tedious and unenjoyable read. There was some additional information and insight gleamed through reading the book of course, but the movie unfolded the plot more effectively and captivatingly.

The same can be said for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. I was incredibly disappointed that the best scene in the film - the burning of the burrow - is not even in the book. But thankfully, there is a lot to be gleamed from reading this book in addition to watching the movies. The additional memories involving Tom Riddle and the additional explanation of a horcrux definitely add much that the viewing experience does not offer on its own.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was a more far more enjoyable and engaging read than either of the previous two books - perhaps because I had not already seen a movie that would outshine it. Rowling wraps up the saga of Harry Potter successfully and completely. I found myself left with few or any questions at its conclusion, which was very much appreciated. I would have liked for Harry to learn the truth about Snape while the pasty professor was still alive, but there was much more to Snape's story than I expected. I found the allusions, likely unintentional, to The Lord of the Rings and Le Morte de Arthur in the middle of the book amusing, yet also annoying - as Harry is traveling around with a locket around his neck on a chain and dives into a lake to recover the sword, I was not exactly convinced that Rowling was aware of the similarities to more classic works.

After completing the series I did find myself wishing that J.K. Rowling had watched more professional wrestling in her life - in general I think this is something from which all writers attempting to weave drama, suspense and action together would benefit. Her writing is at its clumsiest when she attempts to write a fight scene, a dramatic entrance or reappearance, such as when Harry returns from the dead. Thankfully, based on my satisfaction with the cinematic telling of the Harry Potter story, I'm confident that the Deathly Hallows films will tweak Rowling's plot just enough to clean up these scenes and inject the appropriate level of excitement.

blue people with ponytails

I finally saw Avatar last night - Friday, February 5th to be exact - with a friend, and in 3-D. I had received numerous and disparate reviews from many friends, in addition to those I had read, and entered the theatre without a strong expectation that I would enjoy the movie or not - though based on which of my friends said they liked it and which did not, I was leaning towards the enjoyment side. At the conclusion of the three hours, which I by the way feel is a great length for any movie attempting to unfold an epic tale, I left the theatre uttering just one word...

Amazing.

Avatar is an amazing film. First, it is visually stunning. The filmmakers did a masterful job of bringing the world, or I guess moon, of Pandora and the Na'vi people to life. The 3-D experience really adds to this. At first it's kinda strange, but after wearing the glasses for about 15 or 20 minutes you seem to forget that they're on the brim of your nose. The effect is that you feel immersed in the jungle/forest alongside Jake Sully. The colors are incredible and the overall presentation reinforces the theme that the destruction of nature's beauty is indeed a heinous offense.

James Cameron's vision for Pandora and its inhabitants is flawless and breathtaking. The attention to detail, including the creation of a unique language for the Na'vi people, is overwhelmingly impressive. I also thought the technology in the film effectively matched its fictional setting. The paper-thin and portable screens and the interactive 3-D maps are believable advances in time. However, the military equipment and weaponry is disappointing. It looks like something appropriate for a movie set in 2004, not 2154. This didn't bother me significantly during the movie, but I do fear it will negatively impact its rewatchability over time.

The story Avatar tells is certainly not unique. It's a timeless struggle of the preservation of nature and its simplicity versus the destructive self-interests of man, and its retelling is eloquent and gripping. The film definitely pulled me in and made me a part of the conflict as it played before me, and I was consequently surprised James Cameron didn't go for the jugular in its climactic moments. Honestly, I was expecting the ending to be more sorrowful, with either Jake Sully or Neytiri giving their lives to save the other and/or their people. I'm inclined to think that the film's impact may have been greater had something along these lines occurred, but it was a powerful movie that made a lasting impression nonetheless.

I wasn't feeling good about Avatar's cast as the movie began. I'm not a big Sigourney Weaver fan and thought that more experienced or known actors might be needed to bring the appropriate altitude to the roles occupied by Sam Worthington and Stephen Lang. However, by the end of the film I was sold. Lang effectively made us hate him and Worthington's boyish, blue-collar-ish charm wound up being perfect for that role - though I do still wonder what it would have been like with Dicaprio. Oh, and Zoe Saldana is brilliant.

Overall, Avatar was an exceptional movie - not life changing and in my opinion not as good as Up In The Air, but definitely excellent and worthy of being the highest selling or grossing or whatever it is movie of all time. Anyway, no real important reason for this post, just since everyone else seems to have a strong opinion on Avatar I thought I'd chime in.

the backpack metaphor

I've now seen Up In The Air twice and find it to be the most intelligent film made in the last five to ten years and probably the best singular film to be released since Almost Famous. Jason Reitman depicts a middle-aged man coming to grips with the harsh realities of his own detachment from the world around him. I'd seen commercials for the the movie a few times before going to see it with my roommate and a few friends, and I expected that it would be a typical romantic comedy. It was anything but typical and the impact of the story really surprised me. I was torn with my decision to go see Up In The Air because the same night we ventured to the theatre William & Mary was playing Villanova in the NCAA FCS semifinal game on ESPN2 - and yes I do blame myself and my decision to leave the apartment for the Tribe's loss. Thankfully, Up In The Air was excellent enough to justify any sorrow I may have caused Tribe-nation - did I really just write "Tribe-nation"?

Reitman masterfully presents the emotional struggles of his lead character, Ryan Bingham, through the character's own motivational speaking. In the film, Bingham initially presents his audiences with a backpack and asks them to feel the weight of draping their lives over their shoulders while depicting himself as a superior being because of the weightlessness of his own existence. But by its conclusion, Bingham suffers a crisis of identity and impulsively rushes to stuff what he believes is the first true emotional connection he's experienced into his backpack and zip it shut before it can escape. Tragically, he discovers that Alex, who operates as his mirror functionally in the film, already has a full backpack of her own.

I find the backpack metaphor incredibly insightful and thought-provoking. The great struggle of life is akin to the difficulty of deciding who and what to keep in our backpacks and who and what we should or need to let go. Like many aspects of life, it's all about balance. You can weigh yourself down by carrying too much emotional baggage or maintaining relationships that are counterproductive. Releasing your hold on these items does free you to continuously encounter new experiences and move perpetually in new and progressive directions. Yet at the same time, if your backpack is empty it's highly likely that your life lacks emotional fulfillment.

In addition to the metaphorical backpack forever slung over my shoulders, I actually do often carry a backpack - it's really a laptop case, but if it looks, feels, smells, sounds, tastes, talks, walks and acts as a backpack, then I guess it's a backpack. In my physical backpack I carry the items I need to get through a given day, and to keep myself from being uncomfortably weighed down, I try to limit the backpack's contents to those items. Still, there are some constants in its contents - items I almost always carry because of their essential nature and/or their importance to me. The standout among these items is unquestionably my MacBook Pro, which is seemingly, and perhaps frighteningly, an integral instrument in all facets of my daily life.

Considering my metaphorical backpack, it's certainly not empty. It's full of good friends and amazing experiences. However, I do feel as though it's a little light for its size, meaning that my connections to its contents are not as strong, or as heavy, as I would like. I've focused on this lately, feel that I am doing a better job of adding meaningful weight to my life and am grateful to creators such as Jason Reitman for reminding me of the importance of doing so. The biggest challenge, both because of its difficulty and the personal obstacles I face, is attempting to find and secure the MacBook Pro of my personal life within my metaphorical backpack, which may be the least romantic analogy ever made - yeah I should stop writing now.

the goblet of fire, 2.0

Finally finished Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - my pace has slowed substantially since returning to Boston. I really enjoyed reading this book. Its plot added so much to what I was already familiar with from watching the movie, and also made me crave extended versions of the Harry Potter movies - these have to exist right? There were a few moments in the book that I really wished I had been able to see in the movie. Harry learning the whole truth of Neville's parents and Mrs. Weasley showing up to support him before the third task would have been overwhelming scenes in the film.

Moreover, the third task is significantly more exciting in the book. The challenges and dangers Harry encounters add much suspense to his traversing of the maze. Much is added to Voldemort's resurrection in the book as well. Even though the chapter gets a bit cliche - Voldemort unravels his plan for Harry like a cartoon villain - the information presented is well developed and pertinent in understanding both the Goblet of Fire and other books in the series I believe. Likewise, the chapter in which Barty Crouch is found out illuminates the purpose of many of the books mysterious events.

Lastly, I especially enjoyed the larger role Serius plays in the book. I think this strengthens the bond between Harry and him and injects greater emotion into the events of the fifth book. And, having seen the sixth movie, twice, I liked that Snape is starting to become a much more important character.

So, I have two more installments of Harry Potter to read this summer and a little over a month til class begins in the fall. I should be able to get them read - though that's not to say I will - and after finishing the fourth book I am very much looking forward to it.

the goblet of fire, 1.0

I'm about halfway through reading Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, and since it's taking me considerably longer than the first three books - it's much longer and I'm not back in Boston which leaves me a little less time for reading - I wanted to post my impressions thus far. This book much more than the previous installments of the Harry Potter series presents stark differences from its cinematic counterpart. In a way, it's fairly remarkable to read the book and digest the full plot, and then reflect upon the movie and understand how and why certain characters and events were portrayed in a certain way.

There are a lot of little plot differences between book and film, and a couple significant ones. The explanation of the Dark Mark is helpful in comprehending the series. Harry's relationship with Serius, while portrayed as close in the movie, is really heightened by their correspondence and Harry's concern for his freedom in the book. Also, it's intriguing how Cedric Diggory is not universally loved by all Hogwarts students in the book. Most Gryffindors actually appear elated that Harry is one of the champions and possess a detest for Cedric. This seems to be creating a tension among students at the school that I could see developing into a plot element later on.

The most intriguing difference to me so far is the composition of the students from the visiting schools during the Tri-Wizard tournament, Beauxbaton and Durmstrang. Why these schools are portrayed as male and female in the movie, but are co-educational in the book is a change I don't quite see the purpose of as of yet. Sure making one female and the other male does enhance the characterization of the students, and allows for the dramatic entrances of the students as depicted in the movie, but ultimately it feels like an odd alteration to make.

Lastly, Hermione's obsession with the House Elves is an added element in the book of which I'm not yet realizing the relevance. I'm told that the House Elves play a vital role in the later books, so I guess for now I'll just be patient.

So far I feel that the Goblet of Fire is a much better work of writing than the first three books and in contrast to its predecessors, which I was looking forward to finishing, I am very much looking forward to continuing my reading of this book.

the prisoner of azkaban

Finished Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban this evening while half-heartedly paying attention to a snoozer of an All-Star Game - someone please remind me to post about what's wrong the MLB's All-Star Game and Home Run Derby and how to fix both in the near future. I really enjoyed how much the book added to the story I was already familiar with thanks to the movie. I also enjoyed the immense improvement in Rowling's writing from book two to book three - I'd start referring to the Prisoner of Azkaban as a novel if not for how horribly she butchers the book's ending.

Overall, the Prisoner of Azkaban follows the movie's plot pretty well, though there are noticeably more differences between the book and movie with this installment. For the most part they are minor and understandable to make the movie flow easier and faster, but some do stand out. One aspect of the book that stood out to me while reading was the growing tension placed upon the friendships between Harry, Ron and Hermione. I was aware of these tensions from watching the fourth film, but to discover their seeds in the third book was pretty cool. Also, there is a lot of quidditch in the third book. I kinda wish this element had made its way into the movie as quidditch is a lot more fun to watch than read, but oh well. The last observation I'll make is that Professor Snape is a much more prominent and detestable character in the books than the movies, especially in this book. I am surprised by this as I found Snape to be an intriguing character in the movies and actually one of my favorite characters - of course that could just be because I am a big fan of Alan Rickman.

Lastly, I do want to gripe about the book's ending. I like the conclusion to the story - Rowling's concept of the book's climactic moments is brilliant. However, it is so poorly written. It's like she didn't know how to bring everything together in the end and explain what she so eloquently foreshadows throughout the book succinctly, so she drones on for what seems like 6 chapters to conclude her story. Perhaps I would have read this more favorably had I not known how the story was going to end, but honestly it took way to long to reach its end. That is just a small complaint though from what was otherwise a very enjoyable read. Now on to number four, which I'm noticing is a little bit longer than the first three (combined?).

the chamber of secrets

By the end of the first chapter of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets I was already pleased with the upgrade in Rowling's writing over the first book - I greatly appreciated stumbling upon a Kafka reference in the narration of Harry's struggles with the Dursleys. I'm not quite ready to start referring to the second book as a novel, but it's a lot closer than the first one. It was another pleasant read and a bit more memorable this time.

Again, the intensity of the rivalry between Harry and Draco Malfoy is far greater in the written than film version of the tale. However, I did feel that the movie created a stronger sense of drama and suspense in my favorite scene - Harry speaking Parselmouth during his duel with Draco - than the book. It's interesting how the book and the movie coincide almost uniformally in the plot elements, but do contrast quite a bit in the plot timeline. I think I prefer the way the story unfolds within the book - it builds better towards the climactic moments than the movie.

Tom Riddle is an intriguing character in the Chamber of Secrets and a very creative way of introducing Voldemort into this volume's story. I would have liked there to be more about Tom throughout the book - he was really only introduced in the final chapters. I find the making of either a hero or a villain fascinating and felt that an explanation of how and why Tom went bad was lacking from the book. Though, having seen previews for the Half-Blood Prince, I know that more insight into Tom's story is on its way.

Ok, time to start book 3. It took me longer than expected to read book 2 - I went out the last couple nights to hang out with friends instead of getting reading done - so I'm a little behind schedule. I still feel confident that I can work through books 3 and 4 prior to seeing the Half-Blood Prince, and maybe finish book 5 before I see it for a second time.

the sorcerer's stone

Just finished Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. It was an easy, enjoyable albeit unmemorable read. I appreciate the additional insight gleamed by reading the book - more background info on Harry's aunt, uncle and cousin, a stronger declaration of the rivalry between Harry and Draco Malfoy, and the presence of academic pressure on the young students. Particularly, I found it compelling how little familiarity Harry has with the world of wizardry upon arrival at Hogwarts. His naivety is accentuated much more in the book than the film. Also, though the scenario of sneaking Norbert the Norwegian Ridgeback out of the school seems implausible, even for a Harry Potter book, the information and back story about dragons is very cool. One thing I found troubling in the first book is that Dudley has a "gang" at school. Really? Seems to me that Dudley would be picked on and made fun of in a normal school setting just as much as Harry, though for very different reasons.

Rowling's writing in the first book, which I'm refraining from calling a novel for the following reason, is quite plain. I do recognize this as a consequence of her intended audience and am looking forward to reading the subsequent installments as I've been told her writing improves and matures along with Harry, Ron, Hermione and the rest. And now, on to the Chamber of Secrets.

Summer School at Hogwarts

With the impending release of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, I have been, for the lack of a better term, "challenged" (inside joke that will be understood by a few individuals who should be reading this blog - whether or not they are is a different matter) to read the first five Harry Potter books before the new film's release/my first opportunity to see the new film. I'm taking a "vacation" for the next week and a half, which means that I'm going home to Lancaster, PA to spend time with friends and family, and let mom buy food and things for me in an effort to save money during what is the last summer break of my life - a good topic for a later post. So, as a means of motivating myself towards completing my challenge, I plan to post at least one entry with my reactions to each novel as I read them.

I should start my reading tomorrow evening after my long drive from Boston to Lancaster, assuming I can still see straight at the end. It's probably important to mention that I've seen each of the first five movies, several times, and I am definitely a big fan. However, I have never been motivated enough to start reading the books until now. I'm reading just the first five because I do want to watch the sixth film without any knowledge of what's going to happen - and my friends who have read all of the books want me to do that too so they can enjoy my reactions to it when I see it with them.

So if you have any interest in Harry Potter, or more importantly me, I hope you'll look forward to experiencing or reliving the tales, trials and tribulations of Harry Potter with me.

salty discharge

I just finished watching Field of Dreams for probably about the thousandth time. It's one of those movies that sucks me in like a vacuum. I own it on DVD, yet anytime I catch it on television, I'm watching. I love how the story unfolds, I find the theme of faith woven throughout the plot compelling, and I'm a sucker for Ray and John Kinsella having a catch. No matter how many times I've seen it, that scene always draws a tear or two out of me, and sometimes quite a few more.

Granted, I'm not one to shy away from a few tears, at least as far as guys are concerned. I'm not sure if my colleagues were aware of this or not, but I actually got a little choked-up during a committee discussion of an applicant one time. Listening to the Scott Van Pelt Show on ESPN Radio several weeks ago, Scott posed the question: what movie always makes you cry? The closing scene of Field of Dreams was the first thought that came to my mind. It reminds me of watching the film for the first time, with my father.

Good or bad, whether causing pleasure or pain, it's important to experience our emotions. As my migration to New England moves to a less distant point on the horizon day by day, and I start the sobering process of saying my goodbyes to my life in Virginia, I'm certainly experiencing an interesting wave of emotions, and I'm shedding tears on what seems like a daily basis. The thought of moving so far away, and so far away from what has become comfortable and familiar is scary, and it's lonely. But as I say these goodbyes I'm reminded that, like everyone else in this world, I'm not alone - and there will always be people in my life for whenever I want to have a catch.