Queen Kelley

I thoroughly enjoyed reading the Twilight series. I sighed with romantic glee as I read about Edward—his beauty, humility, and chivalry. I saw myself in some of Bella’s longings, in the way she let love take precedence over friendship, in her unhindered focus on the desire of her heart. I also saw myself in Bella’s friends, who questioned her devotion to such a strange and possibly dangerous boy and felt hurt by her withdrawal from them. The fifteen-year-old girl I used to be remembers these things well.

Though time and distance make me a bit more objective about certain situations, I will never completely lose sight of my teen self. My feelings raged so powerfully that I could barely contain them—frustration with my parents versus my deep love for them, powerful romantic love versus the ache of a broken heart, a desperate need for my friends versus a desire to be alone. If Stephenie Meyer does anything well in these books, it’s the way she portrays the roller coaster of the teenage heart. In reviewing the first film adaptation of the novel, NPR’s Kenneth Turan says, ”…the film of Twilight…treats those high-pressure high school emotions with unwavering, uncompromising seriousness; Laurence Olivier essaying Shakespeare didn’t approach his material with more reverence than is on display here.” He’s right. Meyer never pokes fun at the emotions, hopes, dreams, and yearnings of young people. That’s what struck me most about her books. (Well, right behind my head-over-heels fantasy love for a certain 104-year-old vampire, which was later challenged by my intrigue over the 16-year-old werewolf in book 2.)

The book series, translated into more than a dozen languages, has sold millions of copies and garnered mostly positive reviews. (See “Booksellers Find Life After Harry.”) Overall, I’ve viewed it positively as well. Recently, though, someone proposed the idea that maybe teen girls are taking away something unhealthy from these books. It’s all well and good for a grownup to read them with perspective, but what are they saying to young women?

What do you think, girls? Do these books/films inspire you to gravitate toward the “bad” boys? Do they support the idea that pining away for the one you love is acceptable when you’re 17? Are they suggesting that such powerful love and desire are okay when you’re still in high school? Do they make you seriously consider finding the love of your life and getting married right out of high school, not to mention pregnant? What do you think of Edward’s morals? Is he truly concerned with treating Bella respectfully, or does his inherent danger as a vampire outweigh his care? What do you think of Jacob’s words of caution to Bella? Is he right to insist that she takes Edward way too seriously, or do you think he simply wants her for himself and tries to make Edward less attractive?

I want to hear from you, Twilight fans! I’m especially interested in what teens and young adults have to say, but I also welcome comments from those like me who are decidedly NOT teens. Let the discussion begin!

WARNING: SPOILERS GALORE

After waiting far too long for a delayed release, I’ve seen it twice, and I’m hoping for a third viewing in a few weeks. Yes, it was that good. Here’s what I liked and what I didn’t like about the long-awaited film, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince:

What I liked:
- The three main actors. Emma, Dan, and Rupert have portrayed Hermione, Harry, and Ron for nearly ten years now. Watching them grow, both physically and as actors, is a treat. Increasingly over the span of six films, the chemistry between them radiates from the screen. In this one more than any other, each actor seems completely at home in his or her role.

- The adults. As always, an outstanding lineup of British actors portrays the roles of professors and Death Eaters, and they’re all brilliant. Three stood out in this film: Gambon as Dumbledore, simultaneously communicating confidence and uncertainty; Rickman as Snape, whose delivery of his lines is perfectly chilling and yet indicative of his inner conflict; and Broadbent as Slughorn, expertly showing us both his nervous guilt over a secret from his past and his greedy delight over various “collected” students.

- The teen angst and romance. The actors obviously had a blast portraying the ups and downs of teenage emotions. Jessie Cave was hysterical as Ron’s love interest Lavender Brown. Hermione’s jealousy was palpable, as was Ron’s smug attitude. Harry’s side glances at Ginny were amusing, as were Cormac’s revolting advances toward Hermione. The scene between Hermione and Harry after Ron kisses Lavender is touching and wholly believable.

- The Weasley Burrow. It’s always fun to walk through the Weasley’s magical home, with its impossible staircases and passages. I enjoyed seeing Arthur’s shed full of “Muggle artifacts.”

- The Felix Felicis scenes. Dan’s portrayal of Harry after he drinks “liquid luck” and follows its lead to discover Slughorn’s secret is excellent. The change in Harry is immediately evident: he’s confident, smug, and brash. His interactions with Slughorn are hilarious.

- The memories of Tom Riddle. The two actors who played Tom were spot-on—creepy, arrogant, confident, chilling. I truly believed those youngsters would grow up to be Voldemort.

- The cave scene. Both frightening and heartbreaking, the scene in the cave is well done. Dumbledore’s struggle to drink the potion and uncover the suspected horcrux was horrifying to watch, and I felt Harry’s urgency and agony as he forced his beloved headmaster to swallow until the liquid was gone.

- Draco’s inner battle. Tom Felton did a fine job of showing Draco’s conflict over doing what the Dark Lord required of him and being true to himself. For the first time, I was able to feel sorry for Draco, and that’s saying something.

- The scene at the tower and the pursuit. It wasn’t long enough, but it was superbly acted by all—Bellatrix’s madness, Draco’s struggle, Snape’s reluctant intervention, Dumbledore’s convincing pleas, and a wide-eyed Harry watching it all from below. Then came Harry’s anger as he chased Snape and charged him to fight back, effectively communicating both rage and grief over what he had witnessed.

- The tribute to Dumbledore. It wasn’t what I expected, but the raised wands that blotted out the Dark Mark in the sky, the genuine tears over the immense loss, and Harry slumped over Dumbledore were incredibly moving.

What I didn’t like:
- The attack on the Burrow. Like a few other unnecessary added scenes that took time from more important segments of the film, I thought this contrived attack was melodramatic and unbelievable. Enough said.

- The reaction to Dumbledore’s death. I noted above that the wand-raising was moving, but I still needed more closure to the loss of such a fascinating individual. Aragog the spider got a funeral. Why didn’t Dumbledore? I hope the seventh film offers a bit more reaction. It would be a fitting way to open part one of the Deathly Hallows.

- Ginny’s interactions with Harry. I’ve always enjoyed Bonnie Wright’s portrayal of Ginny, but it strikes me that she really hasn’t had much of a role thus far. In this film, when she needed to step up and prove herself a powerful force in Harry’s life, one strong enough to attract him to her, I think she fell a bit short. She’s a lovely girl, but I didn’t feel that she communicated Ginny’s fiery passion. At all.

- The omission of Tom’s family history. I thought we needed more of Tom Riddle’s background to understand the last two films. As my friend Monica said, Harry’s certainly going to need his friends’ help to find the remaining Horcruxes since he missed so many essential memories about Tom.

- The length of the climax and the absence of the battle. It’s been long enough since I read the book that I can’t fully remember the climactic events at the end of it. Even so, the confrontation on the tower and the following brief interaction between Harry and Snape, though brilliantly acted, weren’t quite enough for me. I knew something was missing, and I needed more.

Overall reaction:
Fabulous adaptation of the sixth part of Harry’s story, even with its glaring additions/omissions. Strongly acted, beautifully scored, and powerfully moving. How long until November 2010?

I like lists, both making them and reading them. When I get to the end, I feel like I’ve accomplished something. For today’s list, I thought about sharing what with you. Then I figured why is a lot more interesting. So here’s my list of why, part 1.

1. Why I prefer reading and writing children’s literature. By children’s, I mean anything from picture books to teen fiction. I’ll admit I haven’t read much adult fiction, so my opinion is definitely biased. From the few pieces I’ve read, though, I have to say that children’s literature seems to offer more imagination, hope, and freedom to dream. Whether it’s fantasy, coming-of-age, or some other kind of tale, I’m completely pulled into books about or directed toward young people. In the best of these books, the characters are palpable, the life lessons subtle, the humor abundant, and the endings nearly always hopeful, if not necessarily happy. I enjoy writing for this age group for similar reasons. I’ve found that I don’t need explicit descriptions of sexual encounters to sense passion between individuals. I don’t need long, drawn-out, brutal death scenes to appreciate depth of loss. I don’t need excessive profanity to understand the fire behind a character’s words. The bottom line is that I simply think children’s literature is more fun and fulfilling to read. With limited reading time, I go with what I love.

2. Why Harry Potter is an obsession of mine. My infatuation with all things Harry Potter ebbs and flows with the book and movie releases. Recently, I’ve rewatched movies 3 and 4 and will soon watch 5 to get ready for the release of 6 next month. Of course, the books trump the movies any day, but time constraints don’t allow me to reread them in the way I’d like. As for Harry, there’s something incredibly moving about witnessing him transform from a small, awkward, and unaware young wizard into a force that defeats the wizarding world’s greatest enemy. Perhaps most fascinating is that he doesn’t actually evolve all that much. While his perspective on life and death and good and evil greatly matures, he is still Harry at the end of the series—awkward, slightly unsure, not at all self-glorifying. There are things to complain about regarding some of Rowling’s logic and lack of editing, but overall the series is powerful, captivating, and enduring. I look forward to reading the books with my kids in a few years. (As for the religious controversy over the books, I say it all comes back to Glenda’s question in The Wizard of Oz: “Are you a good witch, or a bad witch?” Clearly, Harry is good, as hard as it is to be good in a world where evil is so tantalizing.)

3. Why I put my kids to bed at 8:00 every night. Plain and simple, they need the sleep, and the King and I need the time to ourselves. Additionally, my children wake up by 6:30 nearly every morning, regardless of when they go to bed, so why not get them down early and extend the night for everyone? Although you can never be certain of a family’s reasoning, I still cringe when I’m at a grocery store at 9:00 pm and see small children gallivanting around with their parents. Put them to bed already!

4. Why I believe in God. Science intrigues me. The more I learn about our amazing universe, the more I feel certain that there is a Higher Power behind it all. I simply can’t accept the fact that everything, from the enormity of the sun that sustains our life to the tiniest particles that make up our cells, randomly exploded into being. As for the particulars of how, when, why, and exactly what, most days I’m content to discover those things as God chooses to reveal them. I know many intelligent, logical, reasonable people disagree with this belief in a Supreme Force. But I believe. I’ve found that I can’t do otherwise.

5. Why I’m a Baptist. I’d like to say it’s because I admire Baptist principles like freedom of interpretation, separation of church and state, priesthood of the believer, autonomy of the local church, etc. Those are indeed lofty principles when applied to the way one worships God. To be honest, though, I’m a Baptist because I was born into it. Who knows how it would be otherwise. I might just as easily be a Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Catholic, some other religion, or not a believer at all. I’d like to think I’d be attracted to the Baptist faith as an outsider, but my particular denomination of Christianity has a poor reputation these days. However, being mature enough now to explore other groups, I choose to remain a Baptist mostly because of the historic principles listed above.

6. Why I give money to childhood cancer research/support organizations. Everyone needs a cause—a place to direct his or her money, time, and passion. For the King and me, it’s childhood cancer groups. Our main inspiration appears occasionally on my blog. A little girl with a big story, Catie Marie Wilkins battled medulloblastoma (aggressive brain tumor) for nearly four years. She passed on at age four in January 2007, just a week before her younger sister’s birth. I still follow the family’s journey, which Catie’s mother Jenny writes beautifully on her blog. What these children face is beyond horrifying. What their parents endure is unimaginable. The strength they all exhibit is breathtaking. The King and I are committed to caring for these kids and their families as much as we can, and hopefully we can increase our support and involvement as our own children mature.

7. Why symmetry drives me crazy. My husband is an engineer. For his work, symmetry is essential and even at times a life-and-death matter. However, he brings this into the home. The rugs must be completely straight, the pictures perfectly aligned, the colors mirror images of each other. We laugh about it because my instinct is to bump things slightly askew, to scatter the colors, to break the reflection. It makes life more interesting and unpredictable. Of course, John would say just the opposite.

8. Why I wear my seatbelt and switch off lights. It’s my dad. From the time we were small, he insisted that we buckle up while riding, and this was before seatbelt use was the law or even popular. Luckily, the habit stuck with me even through my teen years, when many of my friends considered seatbelts annoying and uncool. Now I have the law on my side, so I will accept no excuses from my own kids. As a Georgia Power engineer, my dad also nagged about us leaving lights on in unused rooms. At this point, I probably use more energy than I conserve because I flip off the lights even when I leave a room only for a few minutes. Thanks, Daddy. (:

9. Why I care about the Earth. I have a hard time understanding why anyone, especially those who believe in God, think caring for the Earth is some liberal, new age way to live. For me, it merely makes sense. When I think about the technological advances that have consumed our world in the past century, our progress blows my mind. Accompanying our advances in America is, unfortunately, a tendency to produce more waste that takes years to decompose (if it ever does), to collect material possessions in excess of anything anyone would ever need, to use our resources as if they are limitless (they’re not), and to disregard the fact that people across the sea still can’t count on clean water, much less electricity to power their lives. Why any Christian would think it’s not important to care for the Earth is totally beyond me. I can’t do it all, but I’ll do my best to recycle, reuse, and choose my food and products carefully in this little corner where I live.

10. Why I take a break from reading to read. The King simply shakes his head at me when, after a couple of hours of nightly editing, I crawl into bed to open a book and read for a few minutes. Let me assure you that there is an enormous difference in reading  someone’s writing in order to correct it and reading someone’s writing in order to enter another world. There is nothing—not movies, not vacations, sometimes not even time with friends—like sneaking away into the world created by a fiction author. I’m so thankful for books and only wish I had more time to read them.

To be continued….

I love going to the movies. Before I choose a film to watch on the big screen, I check reviews. Yes, I’m one of those annoying people who says, “That got terrible reviews. The critics hated it!” or “The reviews were good. Most of the critics seemed to like it.” Then I’ll go a step further and shell out my hard-earned bucks ($8.00 a ticket!) for the ones the “professional movie watchers” like. Recently, though, I’ve only gone to the theater for movies I know I’ll enjoy, at least a little. Here are my thoughts on the last three I saw on the big screen:

1. Inkheart. This film is based on author Cornelia Funke’s brilliant trilogy (Inkheart, Inkspell, and Inkdeath) about a girl whose father can read characters out of (and, unfortunately, can read people into) books. The novels are lengthy, fully developed sagas packed with fascinating characters, suspense, life and death, and even romance. Translating the first book into a film seemed to me a daunting task. It turns out the critics were right about this one. Though the cast, including Brendan Fraser as the father Mortimer Folchart and Paul Bettany as Dustfinger (a character Mo reads out of a book), was well chosen and talented, the script fell flat. Full of cliches and special effects, the movie completely doused the passion in the novel, and the ending was terribly redone. I don’t want to see it again, and I’d like to ask the filmmakers to kindly leave my favorite books alone.

2. Star Trek. Unfortunately, I missed the Star Trek ship when it took off sometime in the late 1960s. I remember seeing bits and pieces of the entertaining/somewhat hokey TV show as my parents watched it. They moved on to the later series, meeting characters like Data and Wesley Crusher and Captain Picard. I did not. At first, I felt indifferent about this movie, but after its release, when the critics gave it rave reviews and many of my friends agreed with them, I decided to see it. It was, in a word, awesome. My sketchy Star Trek memory served me well as I recognized the young characters—Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott, Chekov, Uhura, Sulu. This film, which reveals the origins of the initial Enterprise crew, tells the story from a new perspective that leaves previous films unaffected. The clever writers and director can now build a series that hopefully won’t alienate lifelong fans. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It made me laugh and it made me think.

3. X-Men Origins: Wolverine. I didn’t like this movie as much as I wanted to. My mother read the comic book series and enjoyed the first two X-Men films, which tell stories about mutant humans who are mistreated because of their strange powers. Neither of us appreciated the third, The Last Stand, which heaped on the special effects at the cost of the story’s soul. Wolverine, the first film in what will supposedly be a new series, did the same. Even the presence of Hugh Jackman couldn’t compensate for the shallow story, hollow character development, and over-the-top special effects. The movie lacked intelligence. I felt played to as an audience member. Sure, it was fun to watch, but overall a disappointment. And you know what? The critics agreed.

Maybe these mysterious critics have some benefit after all. Or am I simply influenced by them so that I go into a film biased? Either way, I still love going to the movies.

As my King mentioned on his post about our gift-wrapping date last night, we watched the Mel Gibson movie The Patriot. I decided that, rather than renting movies we think we want to see, we might as well utilize our significant DVD library and rewatch a few proven favorites. It will be fun to see how they look on the new TV. When I mentioned my list of possibilities to the King, he was keen on my war and special-effects suggestions but slightly less interested in the ones that featured Johnny Depp or Brendan Fraser. Hm.

Anyway, we popped in Gibson’s flick about a motherless family during the Revolutionary War. The movie is not without a large helping of cheese. It’s full of moments contrived simply to make one feel a big dose of American pride. (Though, as I watched the scenes with the African American soldier, I couldn’t help thinking, “This brave man is fighting for a country who won’t give him true freedom until the 1960s, at which point the damage will be so entrenched in the lives of his descendants that they’ll spend years struggling for equal treatment.”)

Even with its problems, though, there’s no doubt that this film, and others like it, pull at my emotional heartstrings and make me ever grateful to those who serve our country, then and now. I may not agree with the initiative for our current war, and I honestly don’t advocate war as a way to solve problems, but the fact is that our world is fallen, and war is the way we deal with our issues. As long as that’s true, women and men will continue to leave their families and journey to a faraway place. They will risk their lives daily in hopes that their many sacrifices will somehow help the world.

The most memorable quote from the movie last night came from Benjamin Wallace (Mel Gibson’s line paraphrased): “Why do we think we can justify death? Is it because we’re arrogant?” I thought about that. We do try to justify the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed over the centuries on both sides of our wars. And it does indeed seem like arrogance.

But we’re human, and we need explanations for the horrors in our world. This Christmas, I can’t explain why a young girl will lie in bed missing her mother, why a teenage boy will sit in a tent somewhere writing a letter to parents on the other side of the world, why a mother and father will weep at the sight of an empty chair at their traditional dinner. This goes for all “sides” fighting in the war.  I can, though, say thank you to these families and individuals. I can remember them. I can choose not to take their sacrifices for granted. I can light a candle to honor them and say a prayer to a God whom I believe advocates the way of Peace.

Happy Holidays to all who sacrifice for their countries! May you be blessed no matter how far apart you are from your loved ones.

Grrr. Just when I was getting excited about the latest Harry Potter movie (if you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m a shameless fan), the studio goes and changes the release date from this November to next July. That’s right; we have to wait nearly a whole year for the release of this movie. Never mind that I got to see the totally enticing short trailer on the big screen last weekend when it aired before Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2 (a super chick flick, by the way). Never mind that it’s been more than a year since the final book release for the series. Never mind that Monica and I were already talking about planning our next Potter party to celebrate the film. An article on The Leaky Cauldron website explained the rubbish reasoning behind the change:

The press release says the reason for the move was two-fold: First, the studio says summer releases are better for “family tentpole” events, and second, they are still feeling the aftereffects of the writers’ strike and need the time to make sure the film reaches the widest audience possible.

Translation? “We want to milk this cash cow for all she’s worth!!!” And of course, who can blame them? They’re in the business to make millions, if not billions, of dollars, and J. K. Rowling’s imagination has significantly padded their wallets. They know postponing this film will in no way decrease the number of viewers. Admittedly, it might even increase that number.

Even so, grrr. It’s frustrating to have my anticipation stymied like this. All who are sympathetic to my grumbling, please comment and make me feel better.

After watching a preview that ran at the beginning of one of Butterfly’s DVDs, the two of us decided we needed to rent Pooh’s Heffalump Movie. Since we rented it on Saturday, she’s watched it at least five times. (Bad Mommy Alert: Yes, I know that’s probably too much screen time.) The premise behind the film, which stars Lumpy, the most adorable stuffed elephant I’ve ever seen, is that the Hundred Acre Woods creatures fear the mystical “Heffalumps” and vice versa. It turns out that “heffalump” is simply Pooh’s mispronunciation for “elephant.” It also turns out that the heffalumps, though they speak with British accents, look big and strange, and live in another land, are actually quite similar to Pooh and friends—they enjoy having fun, love their family members, and delight in making friends. The first one to realize this is young Roo, who goes out in search of a heffalump with the intent to capture one and bring it back to the Hundred Acre Woods. Of course, he meets sweet Lumpy, and the two become fast friends and share many saccharine moments together.

After watching the film with Butterfly on one occasion, I talked with her about the theme: “They each thought the other was scary because he was different. But it turns out that they’re a lot alike, and they can be good friends, even though they don’t look the same or live in the same places. A heffalump is really just an elephant, right?” Well, Butterfly had her own opinions. ”Mommy, Lumpy is an elephant, but there are bad heffalumps out there! Let’s pretend to catch a heffalump.” And off she went to find string for rope and an object to use as a gun. Apparently, she wanted to kill the heffalump! No amount of my explaining otherwise could deter her mission. So off we went hunting heffalumps. (At first I wondered how she knew what to do with a gun, but then I remembered her recent obsession with Disney’s Pocahontas, in which John Smith and his other English comrades wield guns against the “savages.” Sigh. At least these Disney films have been fodder for conversations and make-believe play.)

Really, though, just look at Lumpy. How cute is he? Just wait until you hear him talk and sing.

The King and I experienced a tremendous date this weekend. With the girls happily secure at GG and Pawpaw’s, we drove to Atlanta and dined at Cafe Intermezzo (thanks, Monica, for the recommendation!). As my husband so eloquently details on his blog, it was delicious. My favorite part? The huge display cases of cake, pies, and tortes. Choosing only two was insanely difficult, but the derby pie and white chocolate raspberry torte were both amazing.

After our meal, we drove to the Civic Center to watch the Broadway tour of Disney’s The Lion King. In a word, Wow. In more words, the show was absolutely breathtaking. I wouldn’t say I’m a live theater buff, but I do enjoy the occasional cultural experience of actors playing roles right before my eyes, utilizing body language, vocal inflection, facial expression, and costumes to deliver a live spectacle in only one take. I’ve always loved the animated film about Simba and his realization of his place in the circle of life. The opening sequence of the cartoon is particularly dazzling, and the theater magnified it for me. A reviewer describes it:

It’s been said that the first 15 minutes of The Lion King are the most sublimely theatrical experience you can have in a theatre. When the performers—as cheetahs, zebras, rhinos, gazelles, buzzards and ostriches—proceed from the rear of the auditorium to the stage the audience invariably reacts with awe.

The sequence is extraordinarily moving for its very simplicity. The wonder is not at how much the actors look like animals, but in witnessing the human creativity that can take simple sticks and fabric to create the idea and beauty of a giraffe.

This person is exactly right. Before the show began, I warned the King that I would probably cry a few times. “But it’s a CARTOON!” he exclaimed, shaking his head. Later, after one particularly poignant moment, he nudged me and said, “I got chills!” (He may not relish me telling you that, but I swear it happened.) There were many moments like that throughout the production, but this opening sequence truly set the mood.

The mostly African American cast (and some native African) sang heartily and acted passionately. Harmonies, deep rhythms you literally felt in your heart, and swelling crescendos all worked together to move the story along.

Most amazing were the costumes. Most of the actors essentially played two parts—delivering their own expressions and spoken lines and also moving the gorgeous puppets that melded with their bodies. That director and costume designer Julie Taymor was able to conceive of such a beautiful way to present the animals is awe-inspiring. Rhinos, birds, lions, cheetahs, antelope, wildebeests, even elephants and giraffes paraded across the stage (and wound through the audience) at various moments during the show.

My favorite new songs were “They Live in You,” which reminded Simba that his father Mufasa (and all the great kings of the past) live on within him, and “Shadowland,” which reworked a melody from the original film score by adding moving lyrics for Nala to sing.

Back at the in-laws’ house that evening, I ordered the original cast recording and can’t wait to receive it. What a special date! I’m grateful that my man is willing to get some “culture” with me every now and then. I suppose he doesn’t mind too badly when it comes with white chocolate raspberry torte.

Monica sent me a link to my favorite website for Potter news, The Leaky Cauldron. Obviously, I don’t check this site much anymore, or I would have known the news before she emailed it. Thanks, Monica! What do my fellow Potter fans think about this news? Given the incredible depth of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and the gravity of the subjects it addressed, I think a film in two parts will do it justice. Apparently, it will be a Lord of the Rings style filming–all at once, then released several months apart. Filming the two parts at once will give it continuity, which is essential especially when young, rapidly growing actors are involved. It will also bring greater flow to the whole.

On another note, I had forgotten that Half Blood Prince releases this fall! Yet another Potter debut to look forward to. My blog may have been quiet on the Potter front since the excitement from book 7 and movie 5 faded, but never fear. The multiple Potter posts shall return!

As far as bras go, I’m usually wearing the standard white. Lately I’ve branched out a bit to pink and, most recently, black. This was merely because there were no more white pairs available in my size for the style I liked. Today, I put on the black bra. Butterfly entered the room as I pulled my shirt over my head, and she immediately stopped her singing. “Mommy,” she began, “is that a new bra?” Um. Maybe it’s time to stop changing in front of my kid. “Uh-huh,” I replied. She smiled sweetly and said, “It looks like Ursula’s bra!” Compliment or disguised way of expressing her true opinion of me? You be the judge. (Yes, I blogged about bras today.)

This is an update on my earlier post, “Give the Man an Oscar, Already!” It’s also related to my Sweeney Todd review.  Johnny and his longtime partner Vanessa Paradis made the walk down the red carpet last night. I’m assuming they sat through the three-hour affair, along with dozens of other nominees and their supporters. I did not tune in to hear Jon Stewart make jokes between presentations. The whole thing is a big popularity contest, fashion show, and self-infatuated party that lasts too long. Still, I know it is an honor for those who win the coveted trophy.

For the third time, Johnny wasn’t one of them. I’m sure he didn’t cry over his breakfast cereal this morning, but it would be nice if the Academy recognized him for his work, which is always daring and different (and frequently odd). The members of the Academy tend to choose dark, depressing dramas, and I suppose some films in that genre require a bit more talent to communicate the absolute despair and heavy pathos of the characters. Again, it would be nice to see the Academy recognize a comedy (like Juno) and its players as making a significant contribution to the world of film. At least they have conceded to noting musicals lately!

I’m sure Johnny will continue to choose risky projects that defy any attempts to elevate him to typical superstardom. And I’m sure, in a few years, he’ll get another Oscar nod. Time will tell if he’ll ever take one home. But certainly, it’s not this year.

I discovered this morning that Disney is making a bold move next year. A film called The Princess and the Frog will debut in theaters. This is not your typical Disney princess movie. For starters, the princess, Tiana, is FINALLY an African American girl. Also breaking with tradition, the story takes place in the recent past–the 1920s–and on American soil in the South of all places–New Orleans. One envisions the O’Hara Plantation, Tara, as a backdrop and wonders where the lovely, doe-eyed princess will fit in. According to some sources, at least, it seems she was originally intended to be a chambermaid. Yikes! In looking at the list of potential characters, I find a Southern debutante and a plantation owner in addition to the princess, and I learn that the main character’s mother was the former nurse maid of the debutante.

Of course, this has excitement and controversy written all over it. It is likely that even those who’ve longed for a black Disney princess for years (including, I’ll admit, myself) will take issue with some of the film’s ways of addressing a highly sensitive time and topic. Even while I cringe at the thought of overly affected Southern accents and wonder just how Randy Newman (of Toy Story, Monster’s Inc., and Cars fame) will replicate the incredibly soulful sounds of Louisiana jazz, I look forward to a film that will diversify Butterfly’s princess collection even a little bit. Right now, the most ethnic we get is Princess Jasmine from the Middle East–and we haven’t even been able to find her likeness in the tiny dolls my daughter loves so much.

When will they elevate Pocahontas or Mulan to princess status? I mean, after all, not all of the lauded six (Belle, Ariel, Jasmine, Aurora, Snow White, and Cinderella) were actual, true princesses. Still, I suppose it IS difficult to accessorize a Native American who appears in her film in scant animal-skin clothing or an undercover Asian warrior who wears chain mail for the majority of her movie. I wonder, too, if Princess Tiana’s main focus will be securing a prince. That story line’s getting old as well. In this multimillion-dollar industry, such a change is probably too much to hope for.

My favorite and admittedly bizarre actor, Johnny Depp, has been nominated for an Oscar. This is his third time as a nominee (Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, Finding Neverland, and, now, Sweeney Todd).

He makes strange film choices and is probably the one actor who actually embodies a bit of every single oddball character he’s played. After years of freewheeling, rather irresponsible living, it appears he has settled down a bit–at least for him. With a longtime beloved, two kids, various homes (including one on a private island in the Bahamas; hey, if you’ve got money, I’d say your personal island ranks right up there in things to buy!), and a film career that allows him to play outrageous characters and pass on the more mainstream roles, he’s got reason to feel comfortable and settled.

I’ve already reviewed Sweeney Todd. I loved the movie and am still enjoying the soundtrack. Johnny was, of course, outstanding in the film, as were his costars who are getting a bit less press. Suffice it to say that I believe it’s high time he was awarded the highest honor for a film actor, even if he ends up chucking the statue into the sea or melting it down to form some sort of crazy piece of art.

Give the man an Oscar, already!

For the first time, after viewing several different versions (most notably the Mickey Mouse animated one), I read Charles Dickens’s A Christmas Carol. [NOTE: SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK.] Imagine my surprise in finding that Jacob Marley is not, in fact, a tall, gangly, dog-like creature. Of course, like any great book that’s converted into a movie, the original offers much more detail and back story, like the fact that Scrooge attended boarding school and was rather ostracized by his peers. Oh, and he actually saw his own dead body lying in bed, decaying and abandoned. You won’t see that in any Disney version! The same themes are there, though. A reformed man vows to live life anew, considering each breath a gift to pay forward rather than a way to curse fellow human beings. (”Bah!”) Dickens is also quite humorous, sprinkling the entire work with funny lines.My favorite passage, in fact, is one that emphasizes the significance of a sense of humor:

It is a fair, even-handed, noble adjustment of things, that, while there is infection in disease and sorrow, there is nothing in the world so irresistibly contagious as laughter and good humor.

I’ve known several people who live like this, and trust me, they’re a lot less stressed than the rest of us, no matter what comes their way. Judging from his writing, I think Dickens himself was probably a funny man.

As soon as I read the plot summary for Enchanted, I knew I had to see it. My kids’ playroom shelf holds dozens of puffy-boxed videocassettes of beloved Disney films I received as gifts during middle school and high school. I used to dream of being a Disney animator; never mind that I can’t draw any of the characters without looking at a sketch and copying it line for line. I totally bought the “happily ever after” ideal of romantic love portrayed by Ariel and Eric, Snow White and Prince Charming, Belle and the Beast, Jasmine and Aladdin.

Then I got married.

What can I say? Reality is reality. The King and I have a healthy marriage, and it’s hard work! Imagine that.

Anyway, seeing the doe-eyed, perfect-figured, totally innocent, and lovesick princess come to flesh-and-blood life sounded like fun to me. Enchanted’s animated opening sequence is hilarious; Disney pokes fun at every key aspect of being a Disney princess, from dreaming of a handsome prince to singing cheerily while woodland animals help clean house. Then our princess Giselle becomes REAL, and Amy Adams nails it throughout the rest of the film, never once losing her lovableness or princess qualities, even as she faces the daunting real world. It’s a world where people (gasp!) stop loving each other and get divorced, where people steal from others, and where the threats to happily ever after are sometimes greater than even dragons and wicked queens.

Aside from the fact that McDreamy (Patrick Dempsey, of course) is totally dreamy here as real-world Robert, the other cast members do a fine job, especially the fairy tale folks who bombard New York City (James Marsden, Timothy Spall, Susan Sarandon) and the little girl who plays Robert’s daughter (Rachel Covey).

The point of this movie, other than the fact that it is plain, happy fun, is that it’s okay to strive for happily ever after. Sure, the real world is tough and people hurt each other. Marriage is work. Women aren’t always beautiful and men aren’t always studs. Life is not all about being a princess (or being the prince who gets her). Even so, it’s better to revel in the fairy-tale moments than to drown in cynicism. Those moments are there, and they can happen often if we let them.

Friday evening, I attended, as my friend called it, “the bloodbath that is Sweeney Todd.” Having watched a staging of the musical by fellow college students several years ago and seen most of the previous Burton/Depp films, I entered the theater familiar with the story and prepared for a dark and twisted interpretation. I left surprised by a forgotten element of the story and reeling from the blood spatter and joylessness of the film.

Somehow, it was a feast for the eyes and ears, despite its utterly disturbing premise. The character of Sweeney Todd is loathsome, but I found myself rooting for him anyway, at least until he lost all signs of needing sympathy and went stark raving mad. Even then, my eyes were drawn to him whenever he appeared onscreen–and not merely because he’s Johnny Depp. His rough voice was perfect for the character, and his perpetual brooding frown signaled a barely contained rage at the entire world.

Helena Bonham Carter was fabulous, as were Alan Rickman and Timothy Spall. I thoroughly enjoyed the vocal talent of the young boy Toby, played by Edward Sanders. This kid hasn’t gotten enough credit in the reviews I’ve read.

From Mrs. Lovett pounding dough for her meat pies (amid scuttling cockroaches), to Todd’s almost loving way of handling his razors, to the bright colors of Lovett’s dream song, to the sight and sound of grinding human meat, and, yes, even the spurting blood, Tim Burton’s direction made the film palpable and raw.

It is disgusting, disturbing, strange, haunting, terribly tragic, and absolutely wonderful. 

If you’ve been reading my blog since the beginning, you won’t be surprised that I’ve read Philip Pullman’s controversial Dark Materials trilogy and–gasp!–enjoyed it. Fantasy is one of my favorite reading genres. Something in me loves the magic, the mystery, the fanciful creations, the vast expanse of numerous worlds other than the one we know. As a child, I snuggled next to my sister (my brother played busily with this toys on the floor), while Mama read to us from Lewis’s Chronicles of Narnia. I identified with Jess and Leslie as they imagined a mythical world in Paterson’s Bridge to Terebithia. Later, in college, I tackled Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings trilogy and his The Hobbit. I also discovered Cooper’s Dark Is Rising series and embarked on the powerful journey that is Rowling’s Harry Potter. Since then, I’ve thrilled to Funke’s Inkheart and Inkdeath, Bray’s historical fiction/fantasy trilogy that begins with A Great and Terrible Beauty, and, yes, Pullman’s His Dark Materials.

What’s all the fuss about fantasy? Why is it such a current fascination with readers? And why does it make some people feel so threatened?

I’ve at least figured out why I like it. In 2003, I read an article written by Natalie Burg, then a senior English major at Michigan State University, for the school’s publication The State News. She wrote, 

People are drawn to “the chosen one” much more so than they are the ordinary hero. A plot with a prophecy is always more exciting. Miraculous powers seem to be a hit as well. Wait a minute…chosen one, prophecy, miracles, conquering evil…there seems to be another book based around these things. …My devotion to Harry Potter is a result of my devotion to my faith. J. K. Rowling has made a little messiah. And I’m buying it.

As I read Natalie’s words, I realized that something in me is indeed drawn to this type of mythical hero. I also thought of something I once read about C. S. Lewis and his pal J. R. R. Tolkien. Late into the night more than half a century ago, Tolkien, Lewis, and others talked about faith. By the time the sun came up the next morning, Lewis was convinced that Tolkien was right: as Lewis had always thought, Christianity was a great myth–complete with war, betrayal, curses and blessings, and of course a tragic hero (who just happened to be not so tragic in the end). What Tolkien had conveyed to Lewis, however, was that this myth was different from fantastic stories invented by human minds. This myth was true. Lewis became a Christian and the rest is history.

I don’t know how accurate that story is, but it’s been told in biographies and writings about both men. I cling to it because it validates what is truly my obsession with stories like Frodo’s, Harry’s, Lyra’s, and even Luke Skywalker’s. It’s okay for me to get caught up in their adventures and perils because, ultimately for me, they point to the greatest adventure of all–that of being a follower of Jesus Christ. (Plus, they’re simply fantastic reads!)

As to why some people feel threatened by fantasy books and films, I imagine it’s because they’ve been told fantasy is dangerous and counter to the teachings of God; that any mention of witches or wizards, magic, sorcery, spirits, etc. constitutes evil. Of course, I tend to disagree. For me, fantasy, which highlights the classic battle between good and evil and frequently employs imagery like that found in the biblical book of Revelation, often parallels or at least complements my faith. I certainly can’t make up another’s mind, though, and I must leave it to each person to decide.

I see nothing wrong with reading fantasy books or viewing fantasy films. Every individual is entitled to his or her opinion, but I do hope such opinions are at least researched and grounded on facts, rather than hearsay. It is ridiculous to me that people take up arms against something they personally know little or nothing about.

In closing, I recommend this blog article by Jeannie Babb Taylor. Her first two paragraphs say it all to me. Enjoy!

This article is definitely controversial. As evident from my earlier posts about Harry Potter, I tend to agree with those who find Christian themes in the books. But I know that many disagree wholeheartedly. What do you think?

When pressed to name a favorite book, film, or song, I always freeze. The pages of my mind flip through years of great entertainment and powerful lessons, and I’m loath to choose just one. Here, then, is a list of my favorites (plural!) in several categories. These titles have made me laugh and cry, reflect and rejoice, think and relax. Maybe some of them will be your favorites too, or perhaps you’ll want to read, see, or hear them for yourself.

BOOKS
Life of Pi by Yann Martel
Aside from being an immersing story about a boy lost at sea on a boat with several wild animals, this book made me think deeply about survival, imagination, and the fine line between reality and truth.
The Giver by Lois Lowry
Lowry creates a future world in which diversity, imagination, and individuality are wiped away in favor of keeping everyone “safe.” Her young hero, Jonah, is entrusted with receiving the Giver’s memories of all the pain, color, and joy of the past. The story points to the importance of our freedom to experience everything about being human.
The Lord of the Rings trilogy by J. R. R. Tolkien
This is one of the greatest stories ever created. In a way, it’s about all of us–being on a journey, feeling burdened, clinging to loyal companions, fighting for what is right, losing much in the process, but triumphing anyway.
(You’ll be surprised by this one, but…)The Harry Potter series by J. K. Rowling
Simply great entertainment, but plenty of themes about life, death, friendship, good versus evil, politics, economic class.
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Obviously one of the classics, it evokes a striking picture of racial issues that, unfortunately, still exist (though more subtly) in the twenty-first century. The spunky young heroine, Scout, is one of the most touching voices I’ve ever read in fiction.
The Ramona Quimby series by Beverly Cleary
I understand that Cleary was one of the first to write from the perspective of a believable child. Ramona’s take on the world, which spans several years of her life, is sure to be a classic coming-of-age story set in modern times.
Inkheart and Inkspell by Cornelia Funke (and probably the forthcoming third in the trilogy, Inkdeath)
Funke’s writing, even when translated from the original German, is beautifully poetic. Her characters are flesh and blood, real enough to touch, and her environments completely visible in my mind. I also love the idea, frightening though it is, that we could read characters into existence in the real world.
Most Dr. Seuss books, particularly Green Eggs and Ham, Hop on Pop, and How the Grinch Stole Christmas
Reading these to Butterfly and Ladybug, I thrill at the way the words feel as I say them. It’s almost like eating. Suess was a master of humor, of course, but he was also adept at using alliteration, rhyme, and rhythm.

FILMS
The Shawshank Redemption directed by Frank Darabont, screenplay by Darabont
Andy Dufresne’s story is about the triumph of the human spirit in some of the darkest of circumstances. It’s a beautiful film.
The Lord of the Rings trilogy dir. Peter Jackson, sp Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, and Jackson
I think these screenwriters did a superb job of capturing Tolkien’s world and beloved characters. Their arrangement of the material translated wonderfully to the big screen. The music, actors, and settings were all fantastic.
Forest Gump dir. Robert Zemeckis, sp Eric Roth
Who can forget Forest and his enduring spirit? Humor, tragedy, war, politics, love, loss–this film has it all. And that’s all I have to say about that.
Cast Away dir. Robert Zemeckis, sp William Broyles Jr.
This movie blew me away. For most of the two-hour running time, we have one man in one setting with one companion–a volleyball. Tom Hanks’s performance kept me rapt with attention to every effort he made for survival and rescue. I cried like a baby when he lost Wilson.
Finding Neverland dir. Marc Forster, sp David Magee
Aside from the fact that I’m a Johnny Depp fan, I’m drawn to watch this movie repeatedly because of the great tribute it is to imagination. I don’t know how true it stays to J. M. Barrie’s life, but in the film his character sees the world through a child’s eyes–both the fanciful aspects and the harsh realities. It’s also a movie about writing fiction, and it inspires me to create.

ARTISTS (AND SELECTED SONGS)
Harry Connick Jr., “It Had to Be You,” “I Could Write a Book,” “Lazybones”
I’ve not been a Harry fan long enough. Only in the past few years have I discovered his talent. At his big-band concert, I had a fabulous time. He clearly enjoyed every minute of the music he made with his friends and fellow musicians, often giving them the spotlight as they played solos. He is funny, energetic, and amazingly gifted. And his voice is extremely soothing.
Billy Joel, “Piano Man”
Obviously one of Billy’s biggest songs, this is one I’ve loved for many years. Billy’s skill on the piano is matched by the way he captures human nature in his lyrics.
Steven Curtis Chapman, “Fingerprints of God,” “I Will Be Here”
Steven’s written dozens and dozens of great songs, and these are two of my favorites. The first, for his daughter, focuses on true beauty found within a person. The second describes the kind of marriage I strive to maintain with my husband.
Nichole Nordeman, “Gratitude,” “I Am”
I identify with the way Nichole questions her faith. In her songs, she never claims to have everything figured out. She never makes blanket, dogmatic statements about God. Instead, she reveals her constant journey to what she realizes is a bigger and more wonderful mystery than anyone could ever explain.
Third Day, “Love Song”
These Atlanta guys know how to rock. Mac Powell’s voice is bold and powerful, and his bandmates complement him and each other in a smooth, tight sound. This song is a simple but telling presentation of what Christians believe Jesus did.

I apologize to readers who aren’t Potter fans, but this is a Potter week, after all. In less than 10 hours, the last book of the series will be available, though I imagine I’ll wait and get it in the morning (first thing, of course).

I was as excited as any young teen on my way to the movie Saturday. Whether that was due mostly to my love of the story or to the fact that my inlaws and the King offered to stay home with the princesses is up for debate. Regardless, the film met and even sometimes exeeded my expectations. I’m not a purist. Films need not duplicate books exactly to satisfy me. I enjoy books on one level and movies on another, though I feel the movies should stay faithful to the heart of the story. In my opinion, the Potter films have done that.

SPOILERS BELOW

Here’s what thrilled me about this film:
-Harry’s building anger and sense of isolation
-Dumbledore’s struggle between helping Harry and avoiding him in order to avoid Voldemort
-Luna Lovegood! Evanna Lynch was spot-on for me. She’s exactly the way I viewed the character–breathy, eyebrows raised, constant look of either being pensive or dopey.
-Pacing, for the most part. It can be no small task to condense a 900-page book into a movie slightly longer than 2 hours. My kudos to the screenwriter, Michael Goldenberg. He kept the essential moments and added fun touches.
-Dolores Umbridge (played terrifically by Imelda Staunton), who was horribly wicked and sickeningly sweet. I laughed with delight the first time she cleared her throat in the Great Hall (hem-hem).
-The obvious chemistry between Ron and Hermione. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson played this well. Though Ron will get a girlfriend in the next film, he and Hermione are destined for each other, and their interaction in this film sets the stage for that.
-On the same track, I liked the shots of Ginny. Though not frequent enough, it is clear that she and Harry have some chemistry too.
-Fred and George’s fireworks display as they leave Hogwarts. Great fun!
-Alan Rickman, Alan Rickman, Alan Rickman. He is the absolute perfect Snape. Can’t wait to see what’s in store for this dynamic character.
-The soundtrack. Mostly dark and brooding, it also catered to the lighter moments of the film, such as Fred and George’s exit.
-Gary Oldman as Sirius Black. His subtle expressions communicated so much and were a riot.
-The patronus scene in the Room of Requirement, where Harry is teaching the students how to perform their own. Delightful!

Here are the few things that disappointed me:
-The length. Yes, the condensed version is impressive, but with such a long and intricate book, I felt that perhaps some parts were deleted unnecessarily.
-The scenes at the Ministry of Magic. The sets were all spectacular, but I missed some of the fabulous rooms at the ministry as described by Jo. The scene with Sirius’s death in particular seemed somewhat rushed.
-(added July 21)In light of the early pages of book 7, I must mention something I forgot when writing this earlier. Sirius did not give Harry the two-way mirror in the movie. I missed it when I watched, and now it seems that it may be important in the end. And that’s all I’ll say about that.

If you like the Potter world, I think you’ll enjoy the film, even though you may have a few beefs about what was changed/deleted. All in all, I think it was skillfully made and entertaining.