Saturday, March 19, 2016
The X-Files Season 1, Episode 2: Deep Throat
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Sunday, May 24, 2015
Eurovision 2015
I feel as if I am the only person who is not a Eurovision tragic today.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/1370.0~2010~Chapter~Overseas%20born%20population%20%283.6%29 (note, the ABS does not give a break down of countries on this page).
I've never watched the broadcast, nor have I been particularly engaged with the event.
I was slightly bewildered when I heard that Australia would be participating in Eurovision this year. Australia? In a European song contest. Huh?
But I will confess that today I'm proud of what Australia has achieved in Eurovision. A top 5 finish. Fabulous. I didn't see Guy Sebastian's performance, but I have heard the song. I like it.
I think Australia in Eurovision makes sense - in a weird kind of a way. SBS has broadcast the contest for 30 years. Around 25% of Australia's population was born overseas. Of those, 44% come from Europe. These figures do not account for Australians who were born here to immigrant parents, of which there are many.
If you wanted more evidence of Australia's multicultural 'melting pot', you need only look at Guy Sebastian himself. According to Wikipedia, "...
Guy Sebastian was born in... Malaysia... His father ... was also born in Malaysia and is of Sri Lankin Tamil descent with distant colonial Portuguese roots, while his mother ... is of English and Portuguese descent and was raised in India. ..."
How marvellous is it to have an Australian, born in Malaysia, competing in Europe's premiere pop song contest?
As the song says "Tonight's so good".
Link refs:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/1370.0~2010~Chapter~Overseas%20born%20population%20%283.6%29 (note, the ABS does not give a break down of countries on this page).
Thursday, November 13, 2014
An uncharitable rant...
I seem to have found myself on multiple mailing lists for multiple charities.
I've just dealt with several letters asking for money - very few solicited!
Now, before I begin this rant, let me say: charities do good work. Times are tough. We need our charities more than ever. They need donors more than ever.
BUT...
How many address labels does one person need? Taking into account that Charity A does not know that Charities B, C, & D also send me address labels; Charity A has sent me enough address labels to cater for multiple letters a month. Who writes letters these days? (Well, I do... but apparently no one else does). I know address labels are simple, mailable. But please...
Don't send me crap.
I hate the labels, the calendars. Last week I got two different envelopes that each had a carry bag in them. A cheap, unpleasant carry bag. Dear Charity, please hope I don't actually use it. It's going to make you look bad and make me feel bad about you.
If you must send me cards, send me nice ones. I'm not sending those cheap and nasty cards to my friends. They are going in the recycling and that's a waste of time, money and resources for both of us.
Try to 'value-add' in a creative way.
I love what the Salvos do; for the Christmas appeal they include a card you can sign and send with your gift (a nice card!).
Dear Charities, please don't address your letter to "Dear Supporter" when I've never supported you before in my life. See me... I'm not a generic supporter.
Having said that, please don't mail-merge my name into every second paragraph. I know how to use mail-merge too you know.
I *loved* opening a letter recently that promised "no address labels you'll never use", "no gifts that we can't afford" (yay! good start!), but even though they didn't send me crap, they still managed to send a three page letter! I hate the long letters - who reads them? Do they advocate for this in fundraising school?
If I decide to send you a cheque, make your form fit in the pre-paid envelope you sent me. It's a small thing, but I hate having to re-fold the form.
Give me an 'unsubscribe' option. And don't hide it in the fine print.
Oh how uncharitable can one person be???
In my defence, I have a number of charities I support regularly.
I recommend The Wayside Chapel.
I've been 'friend' for some time and they do good work. They've never sent me address labels. But they do have a cool newsletter called "The Verge".
I support Australia for UNHCR. UNHCR are on the front line of assisting displaced people around the world providing clean water and shelter in times of need. They've also never sent address labels, but they do send email updates and a newsletter.
Supporting charities is such a personal thing. I hope if you're able to, you do. Don't let an uncharitable rant discourage you!
I've just dealt with several letters asking for money - very few solicited!
Now, before I begin this rant, let me say: charities do good work. Times are tough. We need our charities more than ever. They need donors more than ever.
BUT...
Don't send me crap.
I hate the labels, the calendars. Last week I got two different envelopes that each had a carry bag in them. A cheap, unpleasant carry bag. Dear Charity, please hope I don't actually use it. It's going to make you look bad and make me feel bad about you.
If you must send me cards, send me nice ones. I'm not sending those cheap and nasty cards to my friends. They are going in the recycling and that's a waste of time, money and resources for both of us.
Try to 'value-add' in a creative way.
I love what the Salvos do; for the Christmas appeal they include a card you can sign and send with your gift (a nice card!).
Dear Charities, please don't address your letter to "Dear Supporter" when I've never supported you before in my life. See me... I'm not a generic supporter.
Having said that, please don't mail-merge my name into every second paragraph. I know how to use mail-merge too you know.
I *loved* opening a letter recently that promised "no address labels you'll never use", "no gifts that we can't afford" (yay! good start!), but even though they didn't send me crap, they still managed to send a three page letter! I hate the long letters - who reads them? Do they advocate for this in fundraising school?
If I decide to send you a cheque, make your form fit in the pre-paid envelope you sent me. It's a small thing, but I hate having to re-fold the form.
Give me an 'unsubscribe' option. And don't hide it in the fine print.
Oh how uncharitable can one person be???
In my defence, I have a number of charities I support regularly.
I recommend The Wayside Chapel.
I've been 'friend' for some time and they do good work. They've never sent me address labels. But they do have a cool newsletter called "The Verge".
I support Australia for UNHCR. UNHCR are on the front line of assisting displaced people around the world providing clean water and shelter in times of need. They've also never sent address labels, but they do send email updates and a newsletter.
Supporting charities is such a personal thing. I hope if you're able to, you do. Don't let an uncharitable rant discourage you!
Saturday, September 06, 2014
The Sopranos: Season 6, episode 4
I've started watching The Sopranos season 6 for the first time. I'm up to episode 4 (The Fleshy Part of the Thigh).
It's been a long time since I've sat with these characters. I *think* season 6 was broadcast on Oz TV after my daughter was born. I couldn't watch it. Too violent.
Of course, it's still too violent!
But... It's fascinating to come back to these characters in a season where they are questioning their identity.
Hal Holbrook guest stars in episode 4. He plays a 'rocket scientist' who talks about Schrodinger's equation and how we are all part of the same quantum field. According to the IMDB, "Hal Holbrook is an Emmy- and Tony-Award winning actor who is one of the great craftsman of stage and screen..." He has a face that you know you've seen somewhere before. IMDB says "He is best known for his performance as Mark Twain", but I'm sure I've seen him in many things. His character brings an interesting perspective to this piece.
This episode also focuses on Paulie. This is a character I have always liked, but he is so dark! In this episode he discovers that his family is not what he thought it was. Paulie says, "I'm not who I am". I disagree. In my worldview, we are all who we are. However, in The Sopranos (a universe where identity is so closely entwined with 'family'), I understand why Paulie feels this way.
I always love the way this show uses music.
Wikipedia says :
And finally, there's some clever camera work in this episode. The segue from Tony looking at the wind-blown trees to Paulie's meeting with Jason is cleverly done.
It's been a long time since I've sat with these characters. I *think* season 6 was broadcast on Oz TV after my daughter was born. I couldn't watch it. Too violent.
Of course, it's still too violent!
But... It's fascinating to come back to these characters in a season where they are questioning their identity.
Hal Holbrook guest stars in episode 4. He plays a 'rocket scientist' who talks about Schrodinger's equation and how we are all part of the same quantum field. According to the IMDB, "Hal Holbrook is an Emmy- and Tony-Award winning actor who is one of the great craftsman of stage and screen..." He has a face that you know you've seen somewhere before. IMDB says "He is best known for his performance as Mark Twain", but I'm sure I've seen him in many things. His character brings an interesting perspective to this piece.
This episode also focuses on Paulie. This is a character I have always liked, but he is so dark! In this episode he discovers that his family is not what he thought it was. Paulie says, "I'm not who I am". I disagree. In my worldview, we are all who we are. However, in The Sopranos (a universe where identity is so closely entwined with 'family'), I understand why Paulie feels this way.
I always love the way this show uses music.
Wikipedia says :
- The song that plays as Jason Barone is rowing and Paulie and Patsy come to meet him is the first verse of "The Three Bells" by The Browns. ... .
- The song that Tony plays on the stereo while meeting with Phil is "Foreplay/Long Time" by Boston.
- The song playing during the end credits is a condensed version of "One of These Days" by Pink Floyd.
And finally, there's some clever camera work in this episode. The segue from Tony looking at the wind-blown trees to Paulie's meeting with Jason is cleverly done.
Monday, June 09, 2014
How to train your dragon... #blogjune
We took our Miss to see an advanced screening of How to train your dragon 2 today.
We are late-comers to this franchise.
I haven’t read the books (I know, what kind of librarian am I?!?).
I did not see the first How to train your dragon movie on its theatrical release. In fact, we only watched the DVD this year.
The reason we bought the DVD is because we had been watching Dragons: Riders of Berk on ABC TV (ABC 3). We originally started watching because it looked interesting… and further episodes confirmed that it was! Wikipedia and the IMDB tell me that it is an award-winning animated series.
So, that brings us to today… **text is spoiler free!**
I really enjoyed this movie. I laughed, I cried. I was fully engaged and engrossed - and that’s not always something you can say about an animated film. I should note here that I was an animated film fan before I was a parent, but perhaps my film choices were more selective then than they are now!
I think the tale was pitched a touch too ‘old’ for our Miss 7, though she still loved it. The main characters are now in their early 20s and they face serious issues.
I love the film review by Peter Debruge in Variety where he writes:
“… this time around, [Director] DeBlois commits to the idea that dangerous acts have serious consequences: Major characters will be asked to make huge sacrifices to protect the ones they love. In that sense, “Dragon” aspires to join the ranks of epic poetry, resulting in scenes that make “Bambi” and “The Lion King” look like mere cartoons..”
The scene Debruge refers to here is the most challenge of the film. Bring your tissues. I recommend Debruge’s review - there is plot exposition (of course), but no spoilers for the plot twists.
I wonder, though, if you need to live in a cave to not know the plot twists in this (and any other) movie. Between trailers and the media are there surprises to be found in film anymore?
Do you read reviews before you see a film? Do you rely on movie trailers? Our Miss has picked up that trailers do not always accurately reveal what a movie is about.
This trailer is pretty good, but it gives away a major character development… that’s obviously a conscious choice by the film makers. How much is a ‘spoiler’ and how much is “I’ve gotta see this movie because X happens in it - did you see the trailer?”. I wonder…
Sequels
The challenge of the sequel for me is: does it honour the original, but build on it? Does it stand alone? I don’t believe you should have to see all the films in a franchise for a franchise movie to work. This is one of the slight irritations of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The films don’t really stand alone. But this movie does.
In addition, as I mentioned, I came to this movie via the TV show. Do you need to see the TV show to enjoy this movie? Does the movie ignore the TV show? No on both counts. I was very happy about this.
Books
And what of the books?
The book series is written by Cressida Cowell.
Wikipedia notes that: “The plot of the film is almost completely different from the first book in the series.” (!!!)
The Dreamworks iterations borrow the characters and settings from Cowell’s novels.
Cowell wrote of the first movie:
“This is a BIG movie, an epic re-telling of the Hiccup story, and it is different in some ways from the books. Personally, I’m very relaxed about this, because I feel that books and film are different media and sometimes stories change and adapt when they are translated into a new medium. What I really wanted was for Dreamworks to make a wonderful movie. So I was open to the idea of them making changes, particularly because the film keeps true to the spirit and message of the book, the relationship between Stoick and Hiccup, and the characters and the world I created.
Furthermore, I have written eight books in the series now, and I am extremely proud of them. If a movie puts forward a slightly different interpretation of things, it doesn't change the books themselves. There they still are, just the same as they always were. The books are my own complete personal vision of the world and that remains unaltered.”
I really loved this! While I completely understand authors who are unhappy or upset about movie makers who take their characters and change them, it’s refreshing to hear an author say that the books are still there and nothing will change that.
Of course, we will have to read the books next!
I recommend the movies, when I read the books, I'll let you know!
Related links:
Official website (Dreamworks)
http://www.howtotrainyourdragon.com.au
Cressida Cowell
http://www.cressidacowell.co.uk/index.asp
Hodder Children’s books
http://www.howtotrainyourdragonbooks.com
Cressida Cowell blog
Hiccup goes to Hollywood
Posted on: Monday, December 14, 2009
http://www.cressidacowell.co.uk/pages/blog_01/blog_item.asp?Blog_01ID=169
Cressida Cowell blog
How to Train Your Dragon 2, and Book of Dragons
Posted on: Friday, May 02, 2014
http://www.cressidacowell.co.uk/pages/blog_01/blog_item.asp?Blog_01ID=200
Review:
Debruge, Peter. (16 May 2014) Cannes Film Review: ‘How to Train Your Dragon 2’. Variety. http://variety.com/2014/film/reviews/cannes-film-review-how-to-train-your-dragon-2-1201181707/
Wikipedia links
How to train your dragon - book series
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Train_Your_Dragon
How to train your dragon - TV series
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragons:_Riders_of_Berk
How to train your dragon - Film
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Train_Your_Dragon_(film)
YouTube
How to train your dragon 2 - Official Trailer
http://youtu.be/1Y0erVF9cLI
How to train your dragon 2 - First five minutes
http://youtu.be/bqk6rbhuKd0
IMDB links
How to train your dragon (2010)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0892769/
How to train your dragon 2 (2014)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1646971/
How to train your dragon 3 (2016) [*Risk of spoilers for #2]
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2386490/
Dreamworks Dragons (aka Dragon Riders of Berk)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2325846/
#blogjune
 |
| Movie Poster |
I haven’t read the books (I know, what kind of librarian am I?!?).
I did not see the first How to train your dragon movie on its theatrical release. In fact, we only watched the DVD this year.
The reason we bought the DVD is because we had been watching Dragons: Riders of Berk on ABC TV (ABC 3). We originally started watching because it looked interesting… and further episodes confirmed that it was! Wikipedia and the IMDB tell me that it is an award-winning animated series.
So, that brings us to today… **text is spoiler free!**
I really enjoyed this movie. I laughed, I cried. I was fully engaged and engrossed - and that’s not always something you can say about an animated film. I should note here that I was an animated film fan before I was a parent, but perhaps my film choices were more selective then than they are now!
I think the tale was pitched a touch too ‘old’ for our Miss 7, though she still loved it. The main characters are now in their early 20s and they face serious issues.
I love the film review by Peter Debruge in Variety where he writes:
“… this time around, [Director] DeBlois commits to the idea that dangerous acts have serious consequences: Major characters will be asked to make huge sacrifices to protect the ones they love. In that sense, “Dragon” aspires to join the ranks of epic poetry, resulting in scenes that make “Bambi” and “The Lion King” look like mere cartoons..”
The scene Debruge refers to here is the most challenge of the film. Bring your tissues. I recommend Debruge’s review - there is plot exposition (of course), but no spoilers for the plot twists.
I wonder, though, if you need to live in a cave to not know the plot twists in this (and any other) movie. Between trailers and the media are there surprises to be found in film anymore?
Do you read reviews before you see a film? Do you rely on movie trailers? Our Miss has picked up that trailers do not always accurately reveal what a movie is about.
This trailer is pretty good, but it gives away a major character development… that’s obviously a conscious choice by the film makers. How much is a ‘spoiler’ and how much is “I’ve gotta see this movie because X happens in it - did you see the trailer?”. I wonder…
Sequels
The challenge of the sequel for me is: does it honour the original, but build on it? Does it stand alone? I don’t believe you should have to see all the films in a franchise for a franchise movie to work. This is one of the slight irritations of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The films don’t really stand alone. But this movie does.
In addition, as I mentioned, I came to this movie via the TV show. Do you need to see the TV show to enjoy this movie? Does the movie ignore the TV show? No on both counts. I was very happy about this.
Books
And what of the books?
The book series is written by Cressida Cowell.
Wikipedia notes that: “The plot of the film is almost completely different from the first book in the series.” (!!!)
The Dreamworks iterations borrow the characters and settings from Cowell’s novels.
Cowell wrote of the first movie:
“This is a BIG movie, an epic re-telling of the Hiccup story, and it is different in some ways from the books. Personally, I’m very relaxed about this, because I feel that books and film are different media and sometimes stories change and adapt when they are translated into a new medium. What I really wanted was for Dreamworks to make a wonderful movie. So I was open to the idea of them making changes, particularly because the film keeps true to the spirit and message of the book, the relationship between Stoick and Hiccup, and the characters and the world I created.
Furthermore, I have written eight books in the series now, and I am extremely proud of them. If a movie puts forward a slightly different interpretation of things, it doesn't change the books themselves. There they still are, just the same as they always were. The books are my own complete personal vision of the world and that remains unaltered.”
I really loved this! While I completely understand authors who are unhappy or upset about movie makers who take their characters and change them, it’s refreshing to hear an author say that the books are still there and nothing will change that.
Of course, we will have to read the books next!
I recommend the movies, when I read the books, I'll let you know!
Related links:
Official website (Dreamworks)
http://www.howtotrainyourdragon.com.au
Cressida Cowell
http://www.cressidacowell.co.uk/index.asp
Hodder Children’s books
http://www.howtotrainyourdragonbooks.com
Cressida Cowell blog
Hiccup goes to Hollywood
Posted on: Monday, December 14, 2009
http://www.cressidacowell.co.uk/pages/blog_01/blog_item.asp?Blog_01ID=169
Cressida Cowell blog
How to Train Your Dragon 2, and Book of Dragons
Posted on: Friday, May 02, 2014
http://www.cressidacowell.co.uk/pages/blog_01/blog_item.asp?Blog_01ID=200
Review:
Debruge, Peter. (16 May 2014) Cannes Film Review: ‘How to Train Your Dragon 2’. Variety. http://variety.com/2014/film/reviews/cannes-film-review-how-to-train-your-dragon-2-1201181707/
Wikipedia links
How to train your dragon - book series
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Train_Your_Dragon
How to train your dragon - TV series
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragons:_Riders_of_Berk
How to train your dragon - Film
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Train_Your_Dragon_(film)
YouTube
How to train your dragon 2 - Official Trailer
http://youtu.be/1Y0erVF9cLI
How to train your dragon 2 - First five minutes
http://youtu.be/bqk6rbhuKd0
IMDB links
How to train your dragon (2010)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0892769/
How to train your dragon 2 (2014)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1646971/
How to train your dragon 3 (2016) [*Risk of spoilers for #2]
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2386490/
Dreamworks Dragons (aka Dragon Riders of Berk)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2325846/
#blogjune
Saturday, June 07, 2014
Handmade Canberra...
I've had a thoroughly lovely day exploring the Handmade Markets today with my friend Cathy.
I love going to these markets and to the gorgeous Handmade Shopfront in the City.
The markets allow a broader range of designers and artisans to sell their wares and each market finds new vendors trying to temp you to buy.
Today I was quite restrained. However, there were cards from Twice Designs - I love their Thank You cards.
I bought a scarf from Material Pleasures. I first discovered Material Pleasures when I started working at the ANU in 1998. The ANU student market was one that Material Pleasures attended and I was thrilled to find something in my size. Today we were captivated by some gorgeous coats and a bright pink pair of Lacroix shoes! ("Lacroix sweetie!"). They were in my size, but I didn't dare try them on. (I would have had to buy them and honestly, what would I do with bright pink Lacroix shoes anyway?!?)
I discovered Big Sistah, Little Sistah at the last markets in March this year. They make lovely clothes and feature plus sizes. Among my purchases today, two tunics, including this one.
Look Mama is a company with a sense of humour. I was particularly looking for this card and I bought a few copies.
Another vendor I discovered at the last markets is Super Trooper Studio. I love their work, especially their super places collection. Work colleagues have received their magnetic bookmarks as gifts.
There were many other stalls visited. Another favourite is Two Alike (https://www.facebook.com/TwoAlikeDesigns). We love their toy penguins!
Some favourites weren't there today including Ink & Weave. I love Caroline's designs. We have this design in our house:
As well as viewing all the gorgeous wares, Cathy and I had a wonderful day of walking (must wear better shoes next time), chatting and food. It was perfect really. :)
Friday, June 06, 2014
Canberra Gourmet... #blogjune
I picked up a copy of Australian Gourmet Traveller today.
The current issue features Canberra on the cover (text) and so I was wondering what they had to say.
It's a very interesting article about the 'hipster' food scene in Canberra.
It's a very interesting article about the 'hipster' food scene in Canberra.
I have been to about 5% of the venues mentioned!
 |
| June 2014 issue Australian Gourmet Traveller |
The current article made mention of the Caramel Popcorn Sundaes recipe from restaurant "Eightysix" which had been featured in the magazine previously. See: http://www.gourmettraveller.com.au/recipes/recipe-search/video/2013/9/caramel-popcorn-sundaes/ (Although it has 'video' in the URL, the video is optional!)
Interestingly, the Caramel Popcorn Sundae is also mentioned in an article about Canberra in the New York Times! 36 Hours in Canberra, Australia by Emma Pearse.
I love that the Sydney Morning Herald has taken this and supplemented it with extra pictures: The New York Times champions the hipster underbelly of Canberra by Henry Belot. (Though I think Henry is a Canberra Times writer).
More venues to check out...
And my Googling has revealed I'm not the only one to blog about these two articles - check out HerCanberra: http://www.hercanberra.com.au/index.php/2014/06/06/canberra-is-officially-cool-the-new-york-times-says-so/
Beat me by 'that much'!
hehehe
#blogjune
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)