N is for...

New Arrival!

My World, meet Scruffy, the newest member of our household.

Zach and I have both grown up with cats, and as much as I love Joey, we were missing having a cat around, Zach especially. Being allergic to hay, he's not as close to the bunny, and missed having the mellow, lets-you-pick-them-up-however-you-want sort of pet. Apparently two of his cats growing up were REALLY mellow, and he missed having that sort of fuzziness wandering 'round the house.

So, yesterday we went over to the shelter here, where a friend works as a vet tech, and took a look at the cats and kittens there waiting to be adopted. Zach had been really wanting a kitten, and especially an orange one (he's had good luck with sweet orange cats), As luck would have it, there was an orange kitten there. And in the cage above it was Scruffy. Not love at first sight, and as we were meeting all the cats there, the kitten remained a possibility. But as we were putting the kitten back up, Scruffy wanted to play. So we took him out to meet him too. Big solid cat, good strong neck (wouldn't be surprised if he's got some Maine Coon in him, looking at his size) and I've never met a cat more wanting to be loved! So, we debated on it, and decided that as cute as the kitten was, he would be easily adopted, but Scruffy is older (2 yrs) and so sweet and friendly that he really needed a home. So we brought him into ours!

He's definitely an affectionate cat. His whole first afternoon, he was practically underfoot, wanting to know where I was, begging for pets. If I was in another room and he couldn't find me right away, you could hear him calling for me. And though he's not a Siamese, he's still chatty enough that I don't just look at him and guffaw. Growing up with a pair of Siamese, all I can do is laugh at "those whimpy little mew kittens." We'll introduce him to Joey slowly, to give the two boys a chance to get used to each other. From people I've talked to online and from what I've read, cats and bunnies can get along well, so that's what we're hoping for. We'll give them a chance to meet gradually and be well-supervised, at least until they get used to each other.

I always like naming pets, but in this case, I can deal with Scruffy as a name. Funny thing is, he's not scruffy at all! Very shed-y though. And honestly, all I can hear when I say the name is the janitor's voice on Futurama (also named Scruffy, for those who don't watch the show). "Scruffy knows!" Makes me laugh, so we'll keep his name as-is, even if it doesn't really apply to him anymore :)

WIP Wednesday, a little belated

Zach had normal hours yesterday at work, so I didn't get a chance to hop on the computer. So, the Wednesday knitting update is coming on Thursday instead :)

Biggest news? The baby blanket, of course! As Zach said upon looking at the work in progress, "Such tiny stitches - That's gonna be a lot of work!"

But, that's also why I'm starting in July for a baby due in October! I'm making progress, too. Granted, like any baby blanket, the beginning will just fly along, and then you hit the slog-fest of the biggest portions of the blanket, or just the feeling that the same width blanket never seems to get any longer. The last baby blanket I did was like that. It was that standard baby blanket pattern, started at one corner then increased at each end until you reach the diagonal of the blanket, then decreased at each row until you end at the opposite corner of where you started. It's a great pattern, very simple to remember. The beginning and the end go very quickly, since you're at the narrower corners, but man! The middle of that blanket, working across the widest part, seemed like it would never end! Of course, I did have to remind myself regularly, that I had over a 4 ft length of stitches on my needles, since the blanket itself was 3 ft along each side. So of course those rows would take a while!

Anyway, this blanket is moving along well too. I'm at about 9 inches across (diameter) right now. It'll be about 3 feet across when it's done, I think. That seems to be a standard size for baby blankets. So, yes, a long way to go, but I'm starting early to give myself plenty of time! :)

Review: Troy

So, happy belated 4th of July to all you folks out there. Hope it was fun for you. Zach and I went camping over in Mojave National Park. Yes, we're the crazy people who went camping in the desert in July, but it really wasn't as bad as all that (actually cooler than here on post, since it's at a higher elevation!). Once again, I have pictures forthcoming of our fun trip. I should be getting them up this week, along with the pictures from Vegas a few weeks ago. Zach's working late this week, so I actually get time on the computer all to myself, without anyone pestering! Huzzah!

Anyway, since it's Movie Monday, time for the What We're Watching list to be updated :) So, after a string of some pretty good movies, we had one that was only OK. This week's movie: Troy.

According to the blurb on Netflix, the movie is based on the Illiad. You all know the story - Trojan War, epic heroes, Odysseus and his wooden horse, Achilles and his snit with Agamemnon, and that whole heel thing. Calling the movie "based on" the Illiad would be a stretch - "inspired by" is probably better terminology.

The casting was pretty well done. Orlando Bloom can strike me as too much of a pretty boy sometimes, but here he played Paris. Pretty Boy is called for. Brian Cox was Agamemnon, and let's face it - I've loved his voice since the Sharpe's series on BBC. The whole suppressed power, sort of purring voice. The kind of voice you just let read - give him a phone book, a dictionary, whatever. That kind of voice. Even better in a soft Irish accent, a la his character in Sharpe's, but unfortunately, Irish was not called for here. :( Peter O'Toole was Priam - very nice in the pained, dignified old monarch role. Sean Bean was Odysseus (Ulysses on the Netflix DVD slip - VERY WRONG!! That's the Roman name!!!!!! Yes I am a dork...) That casting made me happy. I like Sean Bean (again, since the Sharpe's series), and somehow he ends up getting cast as a villain a lot in American movies - National Treasure, Patriot Games, even in Fellowship of the Ring he was Boromir! Seeing him as a beloved good guy was a nice change. The actor that surprised me was Eric Bana, playing Hector. He was actually very much as I would have pictured Hector - a little brooding, responsible, dutiful, heroic, kind... Good choice there.

My biggest gripe with the cast was Brad Pitt as Achilles. He just grated on me for some reason. I realize that Achilles is in a snit through most of the story anyway, but even before the war started, in the preliminary scenes, Achilles just squinted and pouted and killed people in battle. Maybe Brad Pitt is one of those actors who just don't work in period pieces. You know, those actors that look wonderful in certain eras (mostly 20th century), but put them in say, Jane Austen's England, or Ancient Greece, or Tudor England, and it just doesn't work. They just belong in a certain setting and it doesn't work for them otherwise. Maybe that's why I didn't like him in it - too modern-American sounding and acting to gel with the ancient battle. At any rate, he was definitely the one that didn't seem to fit as well in the setting. Oh, and Helen definitely wasn't pretty enough to launch a thousand ships. Pretty, yes, but not as beautiful as she could have been - personally, Andromache was prettier.

The directing was alright. There were some things that were very nicely handled, and some that irked me. The music choice got a little old after a while. The director really like the wailing wordless mournful female-voiced songs in the background. It was very effective in the sacking of Troy scenes, but it needs to be used a bit more sparingly than what was done here. As far as the filming went, it was beautifully shot. Nice and epic, and the CG effects were not overpowering.

My biggest gripe overall was playing fast and loose with the original mythology!! I do like some movies that play with the mythology (Clash of the Titans, Disney's Hercules), but even in those, the major discrepancies irk me. I know that may sound very silly, but I took 6 years of Latin, and have always loved mythology. Must have been that little series of books we had on our shelves as kids, covering a bunch of the Greco-Roman myths. The stories are so good to begin with - they've lasted for 1000s of years, for crying out loud! They don't need Hollywood's re-editing to make them 'more entertaining.'

Some of my grievances with their separation from the original material are smaller, but some are major. For instance... THE TROJAN WAR WAS 10 YEARS!!!! It was a frickin' siege! The Illiad begins after 9 years of besieging the city of Troy. In the movie, the war seems to last about 3 weeks, from the landing on the beaches to the wooden horse and the sacking of Troy. I realize that filming a 9 year siege isn't possible for the filming or for keeping audiences entertained, but some little note at the bottom of the screen would have been nice.

Some of the more minor grievances...

• Aeneas (who makes a brief appearance during the sacking of Troy scenes) was about 18, a youth. In the Aeneid, he's in his 30s or early 40s - his SON was a youth. He's mentioned as one of the heroes who fought valiantly during the battles, and the teenager who made his cameo in Troy was certainly not old enough to be fighting. At least they got that he was helping his father escape too...
• Menelaus does not die at Troy, but returns to Sparta with Helen. A nice movie scene (particularly emphasizing how much a coward Paris was, which is accurate) but still, he didn't die.
  
• Agamemnon did not die in Troy. I know that makes for a nice just-rewards scene in the movie, but really, he did make it home from Troy (where he was killed by his wife and her lover, but that's another story).
• Achilles did not die during the sacking of Troy, but in battle before the wooden horse was built. There was actually another tiff amongst the Greeks over who would get his armor and shield. He was indeed killed by Paris, and the whole arrow-in-the-heel story, but there was no running through the streets looking for Briseis, no Paris killing Achilles in front of her, etc. Again, makes for good movie, but irks the classicist.
  
• Likewise, if Achilles died before Troy was sacked, so did Paris.... except in this movie. I always particularly liked Paris' death, as it seemed he deserved it so much, for all the trouble he caused. In case you didn't know, he was shot by a poisoned arrow, then tried to go back to his wife, a nymph, who had medicine to cure it. Because he had abandoned her to run off with Helen (and then forgot her for 10 years until he needed her again), she refused, and so he died. Frankly, he deserved it. But, killing Orlando Bloom as a shmuck on-screen probably wouldn't have gone over too well with the fangirl population.
• I did like the Trojan horse. Very ominous and foreboding looking (made from the black wood of the ships). However, I missed Laocoon getting crushed by the serpents sent by Athena because he doubted that the horse was genuine. The movie overall, avoided the gods-and-goddesses aspect of the story. That's alright, I suppose - just a different interpretation of the story (also keeps it a bit simpler for the big screen). I missed some of those aspects, like why Achilles was invincible, but it wasn't as distracting to me as the 9 years of siege being glossed over.
  

Anyhoo... overall, I'd say maybe 2.5 of 5. It wasn't a bad movie, and most of the cast was really good. It was beautifully filmed, nice and beautifully epic. Really, it was the fast-and-loose mythology that put me off the most. Some stories don't need Hollywood-ification to make them acceptable. Frankly, I'm the type of person who likes books, and likes movies, and likes movies based on books. I like seeing characters I love in my head come to life on screen. However, when a movie is made of a beloved story, there are a few criteria to be met in order to keep me happy. The movie must stand alone (I shouldn't have to have read the book recently to understand what's going on in the movie) but it should still reflect the original material. Some good examples: Lord of the Rings, Princess Bride, Pride and Prejudice (the A&E/BBC Colin Firth version). This one stands alone, but strays too much from the original material for me to be happy.

WIP Wednesday!

Hey, I actually remembered this week! :)

Three projects to talk about this week, all in different stages of progress:

Finished the first June dishcloth (I seem to be running about a dishcloth behind, but I'm kinda keeping up!) It is a palm tree, good summery image, but all I could do was laugh. Amy, this one's for us!! After living in SC, you either love or hate the palm tree. Why, you may ask. Well, the state tree/mascot/iconic image is the palmetto. It's EVERYWHERE!!!!!!! Every 3rd car has a palmetto & moon sticker of some sort (and, in the Upstate where I used to live, also about 6 pieces of Clemson paraphernalia). You can't escape it, and odds are (especially for non-native South Carolinians like Amy and myself) you will get sick of it. As soon as I saw the pattern, I decided to send it to Julie with the baby blanket, as a baby's washcloth. They live in FL, so they'll appreciate the palm tree, and they just moved there, so they aren't sick of it yet :)

Speaking of the baby blanket, MY YARN CAME!!! :) I'm casting on tonight, so it will officially be a WIP by the time I go to bed today!

Finally, one project still on the needles, Square Cake has another handle done (I'm on number 3 now). I hope it will be done next week by the time I post again (at least the knitting part - no guarantee on the lining part), but I think that might be a little optimistic. With the holiday weekend (We're going camping! In the desert!) and the excitement over the new project, Square Cake might need to wait a little longer before it's finished :)

Review: Ratatouille

So, this didn't get posted yesterday (on Movie Monday), because I was busy and Zach was breaking in a new game on the computer. The computer, by the way, is also brand new, to replace the old laptop whose hard-drive crashed. So bear with us as we get this new one up and running (we're still downloading and installing a lot of stuff on the new machine).

Anyhoo...

We watched Ratatouille this weekend! Yay Pixar!

If you didn't know the story already (surprising, as it was a well-marketed Disney movie, but just in case), Ratatouille is a tale of a young rat (Remy), blessed with an exceptional sense of taste and smell, who dreams of being more than a thief and muncher of garbage, as a rat is destined to be. He wants to be a chef! Fate smiles upon young Remy when he meets Linguini, a hopeless in the kitchen, who happens to be working in the kitchen of a (formerly) five star restaurant.

For years now, Pixar has been raising the bar in computer animation, and in animation in general. You watch these characters, and the world they live in is so rich and detailed. Fog on the Seine, or Paris lights in the background, or the Rose window at Notre Dame... so many touches that enhance the movie so beautifully. Or raindrops on the river, looking almost real. And the characters' facial expressions are priceless!! I really liked that Remy and Linguini communicate, but never talk. So much more is handled through their facial expressions and body language

Pixar's writing is classic, always a nice blend of jokes the adults get, and ones for the kids. A lot of nice subtle visual effects too. For example, Anton Ego (a villain of sorts) is a food critic reviewing the restaurant. He's known as the Grim Eater because of his restaurant-breaking reviews - take a look at his study as they first show him. So many clever little touches!

The voice actors in this are great. Anton Ego is Peter O'Toole, for crying out loud!! And Colette is Jeanine Garoafalo, a favorite of mine for playing cute-but-tough little spitfire characters. And Patton Oswalt, the voice of Remy, is a W&M grad (Tribe Pride!!). Neither here nor there, but I liked the trivia :)

Don't forget, if you're watching the DVD, to watch the extras. The Pixar short on this one ("Lifted") is hysterical. Once again, no talking but so much said with body language. Anyone who's ever had a performance review or taken a driver's exam will appreciate this one. My all-time favorite is still "Birds on a Wire", but that's because I know those birds!! Also on the DVD is the short, "Your Friend the Rat" hosted by Remy and his insatiable brother Emile. A hysterical history of ratkind-mankind interactions.

Overall, definitely a 5 of 5. Pixar has yet to have a miss, at least in my book (well, I haven't seen Cars yet, but it's on the Netflix list, so eventually I will!) Great characters, beautiful animation, clever writing. Two thumbs up all around. I want to see Wall-E now that it's out too, but we need to find a better theater than the one in Victorville. (sigh) the trials of living in the middle of nowhere!

M is for...

Mandalay!

Now I know it sounds pretentious when I talk about "my grandparent's riverhouse," but it's really nothing like what you're thinking. More of a swamp house, so not so high class. :) It's an old house along the Aucilla River in north Florida, right next to the St Marks Wildlife Refuge (that's on the other side of the river). So, really, it is located smack in the middle of a swamp, but just happens to be next to the river :)

Mandalay was a hunting lodge back in the 1930s, when there weren't roads leading out to it, but a small train line. It's an old 9 bedroom house, with two big porches and no central air, and a big dining room, and an enormouse kitchen. It's been a sort of time share since at least the 1970s, when my grandparents got involved with it. Nothing big and official with options to swap weeks at Cancun, but just five families rotating weeks at this old house on the river.

It's a great place to grow up! Grandmother would make sure that when my branch of the family came down to visit each summer, we'd have at least part of our stay down there. It wouldn't always line up with fishing seasons, or scalloping, but we'd always have plenty of time on the boat, and swimming off the dock, and just playing at the house. It's an old house, as I've said, and for years they didn't have anything but a tiny little 13 in black and white TV there (I do remember hearing about Hong Kong being turned back over to China on that TV). But that's a great thing for active kids in summer - it forces us to go and play outside instead!

One of my favorite pictures from Mandalay - our supplies table! More kinds of sunscreen and bugspray than you can shake a stick at! We're a fair people spending lots of time in FL (not a one amongst us who tans easily!), so we have to protect ourselves!

This hammock is a right of passage, I believe. The porches at Mandalay are wide enough that they can hold a hammock stretched across them. It's a nice place to watch the river, read, sleep, and stay away from the bugs and enjoy the ceiling fan's breeze. There's pictures of me and Anne and Dad all piled in there when we were very tiny, of me and Anne when we were in grade school and high school, and of now when we're not so tiny. :) This picture was from March (it's very rare to see pictures of me at Mandalay when I'm not in summer clothes). Zach and I stopped in FL to visit family as we moved cross-country, and were able to spend a day down there. So, yes, a picture of him in the hammock too.

Mandalay also has some intensely sad and painful memories for me, but those memories are so different from everything else I have in my mind about the place, that it's almost a second category in my mind, not connected with Mandalay at all. When I think about it though, it just means another reason why this place remains so important to me.

L is for...

LATE!! Got so busy with LESSONS and a trip to LAS VEGAS that I was LATE with my post (L's all around!) Whoops!

No, really, L is for London, one of my favorite places in the world!

Obviously, I didn't take all these pictures, as I'm in some of them, but I took most of the others in this post :)

I've been to England three times since 1997, and I love it more each time I visit. This particular picture above was during a trip in 2005. I was also there with a family trip in 97 and for a study abroad in 2003. Granted the study abroad was really in Cambridge, but that's only an hour's train ride from London (God bless public transportation!)

London is just such a neat place to visit. I love the history and culture, the big-city fun of the shows and restuarants and people and cultures gathered there, the museums and the gardens, the couture shops to window shop, and the open air markets, and... and ... and.... Yeah, I just love that city!

I'm not really a big city person, for all practical would-you-live-there purposes. I like a little more space around me, and a little less cost of living. But for cities to visit, London definitely is consistently high on my list!

PS - for those who noticed, yes we were in Las Vegas this past weekend. I'll have more on that when I get my pictures sorted! :)