Lost

Tonight's episode of Lost taught me that Cheech Marin is capable of making people fat with harmless "live a little, eat a candy bar" speeches. It also taught me never go inside any fictional chicken joints owned by Hurley when a meteor or cruise missile plans on going inside said joint.

Speaking of Lost, I spent no less than an hour and a half on Sunday putting together my super-duper Kate action figure that Priskiller got me. Yes, I'm bragging; it could have taken way longer. The box has no instructions, extra pieces and nothing fits logically together. There's not much shame in being outsmarted by inanimate objects, as long as it doesn't happen more than once a week or so.

My other complaint is that Kate doesn't look as sexy as she does on the show; her arms, in fact, resemble mummified tree branches. Also, the plane prop they threw in is rather a waste. I'd be much happier with a scantily clad photo of Evangeline Lilly instead. The action figure speaks, but so far I haven't heard "Oh L Bo, come carry me away in your big strong arms and let me be the other half of the equation when you sire our children. Please!" I hope Todd McFarlane puts out an updated version soon, like he does for his baseball series when a player gets traded to a new team.

Mystery of the day

Why does my cell phone's alarm, which is set to go off at 8 AM and again at 8:30 AM (due to my propensity to sleep longer than I should) Monday through Friday go off, without fail, EVERY SINGLE SATURDAY MORNING? Will this issue get worse with the whole Daylight Savings time coming earlier this year? Is my phone really that malicious and sinister that it plots to be the most annoying sound early Saturday, even more so than Dynamo's coffee grinder or air-raid-siren-teapot? Did Saturday become a weekday and I wasn't notified?

Professional Movie Review #1

I just saw Children of Men. It was really good.



Let's see your witty, intelligent and completely misspelled response to that, Anonymous! If that's even your real name, you cowardly commenter.

Imagin-haters

"Although the book was originally criticized for having a loose plot and poor characterization, it remains popular worldwide even sixty years after its first publication primarily for the enhancing illustrations and effective pacing."

-- Wikipedia's featured article on February 11th, on Make Way for Ducklings

Really? A loose plot and poor characterization? Effective pacing? This wasn't a Dickens' novel, this is the Caldecott Medal award winning children's book Make Way for Ducklings. Make. Way. For. Ducklings. As in, tiny, cute baby ducks. Doesn't it feel like attacking this book is the same as kicking one of those adorable previously mentioned tiny water fowl? Not to mention the book is intended for kids aged 3 to 8, who's idea of effective pacing is eating as much candy as possible and instantaneous travel (if you don't believe me, refer to "Are we there yet?")

This book starts off with " Mr. and Mrs. Mallard were looking for a place to live." Why can't a book about duck parents looking for a place to live just be that? What's next, criticizing Snuffleupagus' trunk as being anatomically incorrect in proportion to his IMAGINARY body?