Reviews and More

It’s not often that I veer away from my very long “To Be Read” book list in order to tackle a title solely based on the number of recommendations it has received from other people, but that’s precisely how I came to read The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, Mark Haddon’s award-winning 2003 novel.

I had no idea what the novel was about before I started reading it, so I was basically going into the whole thing without knowing what to expect. As it turns out, that was probably the best approach for me, since the premise — a 15-year-old autistic youth chronicles his attempts to find out who killed his neighbor’s dog — doesn’t sound all that appealing to me.

Fortunately, I never had the chance to form any pre-judgments, otherwise I would have missed one of the best modern books I’ve ever read!

Plot summary (with possible spoilers): Christopher Boone is a 15-year-old British boy who lives a couple hours outside of London, England. He suffers from Asperger Syndrome, which is a form of autism. As a result, Christopher has numerous personality quirks that the reader comes to know about over the course of the novel. For example, there are certain colors he doesn’t like, his food has to be served a certain way, he doesn’t like to be touched, and he has trouble communicating with people because he doesn’t understand the various nuances of conversation (such as sarcasm). He’s also very good at math, and is incapable of telling lies, two characteristics that play prominent roles in the story.

As the novel opens, Christopher is relating to the reader the story of how he discovered Mrs. Shears’ dog Wellington stabbed to death with a pitchfork. Christopher felt sorry for the dog, so he picked it up and hugged it — just in time for Mrs. Shears to come out and catch him. She of course thought Christopher was responsible for the horrible deed, and calls the police.

Christopher freaks out when the police arrive, punching one of the cops who tries to touch him. So they haul Christopher down to the station and call his father Ed to come pick him up. Although Ed believes Christopher when he says he didn’t kill Wellington, Christopher is worried about what the other neighbors must think, so he decides to investigate the incident for himself to find out who really did it.

Ed is not too keen on this idea, but Christopher receives encouragement from Siobhan, his counselor at the special-needs school that he attends. Siobhan is the one who tells Christopher it might be fun to write a book about his investigation, so that’s why he’s recording everything.

The rest of the relatively short novel goes on to deal not only with Christopher’s investigation, but also with various subplots that come up as a result of the investigation. Of particular interest is the turn the narrative takes when Christoper discovers that his mother, whom he thought had died of a heart attack, is actually alive and well in London.

My Reaction: I found Curious Incident to be a highly engaging read. I am usually not too fond of storytelling “gimmicks”, so I was a bit apprehensive as to how this novel would work out as told from Christopher’s perspective. Now that I’ve read it, I have to say that I can’t imagine the story being half as interesting if told from any other character’s point of view.

I thought Haddon did an excellent job of giving readers an idea of what it was like to be in Christopher’s shoes without making the boy’s condition the be all and end all of the novel. Yes, I was acutely aware of Christopher’s condition throughout, but that just served to heighten my appreciation of his narrative abilities.

In one review of this book, the reader praised Haddon’s skills at inserting nuances into the story despite the fact that Christopher himself couldn’t understand these nuances. Instead, Christopher resorted to a faithful retelling of everything that happened to him (remember, he cannot tell lies), and it was up to the reader to notice these nuances and make the connections that Christopher couldn’t.

I’m finding it quite difficult to express in words just why you ought to read The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time. It’s more than simply an exercise in reading, and the experience transcends the limits of the story itself. Needless to say, I highly recommend this title, and encourage you to check it out for yourself!

It’s a time-honored tradition in the movies that the villains possess astoundingly bad aim, and can’t shoot to kill no matter how long they’ve been engaging in their nefarious activities. Conversely, it’s an unwritten rule that the hero can hit nearly every target he aims at — even if he’s so unfamiliar with guns that he needs to read a manual to figure out how they work.

These and other cinematic head-scratchers (such as the ability of a mild-mannered executive to survive gunshots and body blows in hand-to-hand combat that would put ordinary people in their grave) are on full display in the 2007 movie Death Sentence, and are no less frustrating just because viewers have seen this kind of thing umpteen times before.

Plot summary (with possible spoilers): Kevin Bacon stars as Nick Hume, a senior risk analysis expert with an idyllic home life. Nick adores his wife Helen (played by Kelly Preston) and two sons Brendan (Stuart Lafferty) and Lucas (Jordan Garrett), and they all love him just as much.

Then one night, Nick’s entire world comes crashing down around him. While driving Brendan home from his hockey game in the city, Nick stops for gas at a service station in a bad part of town. It just so happens that a group of gangbangers have chosen that particular service station to enact part of the initiation rites for their newest member Joe (Matt O’Leary). To prove his devotion to the gang, Joe must kill an innocent person in cold blood. He takes out a machete and slices Brendan’s throat, while Nick watches helplessly from outside.

Nick recovers in time to charge towards the store, and manages to tackle Joe before he can escape with the rest of his crew. Nick rips Joe’s ski mask off his head and gets a good look at the murderer, but Joe is able to jump up and run away. However, he gets struck by a car while trying to flee, and is subsequently taken into custody. Brendan is taken to the hospital, but it’s too late for doctors to do anything about his injuries.

Nick picks Joe out of a police lineup and is prepared to serve as the prosecution’s only witness in court when he hears some bad news from the D.A. Because of the scant amount of hard evidence, it’s likely that Joe will only get 3-5 years of jail time. Nick doesn’t like this at all, of course, and decides that he has to do something about it.

He stands up in court and tells the judge that he was mistaken about Joe. That’s not the right guy after all. The judge lets Joe walk free, and Nick follows him home. Once Nick learns where Joe lives, he goes to his own home, selects a weapon from his tool shed, and returns to Joe’s place where he lies in wait for his opportunity. When Joe emerges from the building to take out the trash, Nick pounces and kills him.

When Joe’s brother Billy (Garrett Hedlund) discovers what happened, he pieces the puzzle together and decides that Nick is responsible. From that point forward, the rest of the movie deals with the gang’s attempts to get revenge on Nick and his family for killing Joe, while Nick does his best to defend Helen and Lucas against harm.

My Reaction: I know that movies like Death Sentence aren’t supposed to reflect reality, but a bit of plausibility along the way would be nice. There wasn’t much in this film that was even remotely believable, from Nick flashing his headlights at the gangbangers’ cars to set their initiation killing in motion (this urban legend was dispelled on Snopes.com years ago) to Nick singlehandedly taking out every member of the gang by the time the credits rolled, this film featured one “Yeah, right” scene after another.

Besides all of the unrealistic things that Nick does (which I really don’t have the energy to list here), I have to say that I just didn’t understand the point of Aisha Tyler’s character, Detective Wallis. She didn’t put any pressure on Nick or the gangbangers, nor did she conduct any kind of investigation at all. She was entirely superfluous, and the movie would have been exactly the same if this character wasn’t involved at all.

There were just so many problems with this film that I couldn’t enjoy it at all — even when I turned off my brain and simply tried to soak it in as a couple hours worth of entertainment. Because it was impossible for me to like Death Sentence on any level, I give it only 3.0 stars out of 10.

Reese Witherspoon and Christina Ricci are two of my favorite actresses, so when I heard that they teamed together for the upcoming feel-good comedy Penelope, I immediately put the movie down on my “To See at the Theater” list.

Penelope is being billed as a modern-day take on the fairy tale notion of true love. Ricci stars as the titular character, a wealthy heiress whose life is made unbearably lonely because of a family curse that gave her the nose of a pig. This curse, known as the Wilhern Spell, can only be broken if Penelope finds true, lasting love with “one of her own kind.”

The trouble is, most suitors, even those looking only to score a piece of the inheritance, take one look at Penelope and run for their lives — until Max (played by James McAvoy) enters the picture. Max and Penelope seem to have a real connection, but when Max suddenly disappears because of secrets of his own, Penelope must face another crushing rejection.

Penelope then decides that she’s had enough of her sheltered life hidden away on the family estate, so she ventures out in the world. There she meets her first friend Annie (Witherspoon), and embarks on an unforgettable journey to discover who she really is.

I think this sounds like a fantastic movie, so I’m already counting down the days until its nationwide release on February 29. Be sure to check back here after that date to read my full review of the film.

Penelope Trailer — Extended Version

Add to My Profile | More Videos

In the meantime, here’s the extended trailer from the official Penelope MySpace page so you can judge for yourself. Check out the website, and go see the movie on Feb.29!

Heath Ledger’s death remains a top story on celebrity and entertainment websites, despite the fact that no new information has been uncovered in the last few days. Instead, the focus seems to have shifted to Heath’s family, and how they’re trying to cope with their tragedy.

TMZ reports that the Ledgers held a private memorial service for a small group of family and friends in Los Angeles on Saturday night, and that Heath’s body is now en route to Australia, where he will presumably be interred near his native Perth.

Meanwhile, the Ledgers took a rare step as far as celebrity deaths are concerned, and publicized their grief by writing tributes to Heath in the West Australian newspaper. Here are a few of the heartbreaking entries:

From older sister Kate:

I can hardly breathe when I try to write this . . . we were the ultimate in soul mates. I feel both my heart and life have been torn apart. I loved our special talks, our daily chats from where ever you were in the world.

I especially loved all the precious time we spent together. We were so fortunate to have you as long as we did. You were so many things to so many people, but to me you were just my little brother.

There will never, ever be another “Heath” and I think that in itself is the greatest tragedy.

I will continue to talk with you everyday and love you just as if you were here. You will never leave my thoughts “Roast”, ever.

From father Kim:

“Heatho”, “Beef”, . . . my beautiful boy, so loving, so talented, so independent, so caring, so young . . . no more chess games mate . . . this is it, couldn’t beat you anyway!

My body aches for the sound of your voice, our chats, our laughs and our life and times together.

Your truly varied artistic skills, insatiable desire to improve and eclectic abilities set you apart from any other person on the planet . . . it had only just started for you … and for us to further enjoy. We were one, in soul and commitment. Just . . . Father and Son. I will love you forever, Dad.

From mom Sally:

Our darling boy, special in so many ways to all of us. You knew you were so loved. You lived life with courage and daring and we are so grateful for the wonderful times we shared. We will be there for Matilda. Your loving Mamma, Rog and Ash.

There are several more entries like this, which you can read on the Perth Now website.

That’s just very sad stuff, isn’t it?

I watch Entourage mostly because I love Jeremy Piven’s portrayal of Hollywood super-agent Ari Gold. Piven has won two Emmy Awards for his work on the HBO original series, which made me want to check out some of the other things he’s done in his career.

So a couple weeks ago, I rented Smokin’ Aces, a 2006 film in which Piven co-starred with Ray Liotta, Andy Garcia, Ben Affleck, and Jason Bateman, among others.

Well, I didn’t like that movie at all, and didn’t get very far in it before I just gave up and returned it to Blockbuster without finishing it. I made it to the part where Buddy (Piven’s character) is holed up in a Vegas hotel after jumping bail and running away from the mob hitmen on his trail.

At least, that’s what I think was going on. In all honesty, the storyline was so jumbled and confusing that I had a hard time following along (which is probably the main reason that I gave up on the film).

Anyway, it’s kind of strange that I haven’t liked any of the Jeremy Piven movies I’ve seen thus far. He’s just not as fun or interesting in these other roles, so I guess I’ll just stick to Entourage from now on!

There’s a new box office champ in town, as last weekend’s victor Cloverfield tumbled three places to No.4 in its second week in wide release. The new top movie in the U.S. is Meet the Spartans, a spoof flick starring Kevin Sorbo and Carmen Electra that took in a healthy $18.7 million.

Meet the Spartans barely edged out fellow newcomer Rambo for the No.1 spot. Sylvester Stallone’s fourth turn as the bulletproof mercenary grossed $18.2 million, and showed that there’s still a major audience for this type of mindless action romp.

Katherine Heigl’s romantic comedy 27 Dresses slipped from the second spot last week to No.3 this week, with receipts of $13.6 million. That brings its two-week total to $45.3 million, and is the second silver screen hit in a row for the Grey’s Anatomy star — which seems to beg the question of how long Heigl will be content to play Dr. Izzie Stevens on TV.

Here’s the rest of the top 10 for the weekend ending 1/27/08, along with their projected grosses:

1. Meet the Spartans, $18.7 million
2. Rambo, $18.2 million
3. 27 Dresses, $13.6 million
4. Cloverfield, $12.7 million
5. Untraceable, $11.2 million
6. Juno, $10.3 million
7. The Bucket List, $10.2 million
8. There Will Be Blood, $4.8 milliion
9. National Treasure: Book of Secrets, $4.6 million
10. Mad Money, $4.6 million

I just heard that an old college classmate of mine had a bit part in the 2000 film Mercy Streets. The movie wasn’t a major blockbuster or anything like that, but it did have some familiar names in it.

David White stars as John, a small-time con fresh out of jail who hooks up with bad news buddy Rome (played by Eric Roberts, aka Julia’s brother) for another scam. But instead of going through with it, John decides to put their combined money into some kind of Florida land investment deal that he thinks is on the up and up. Of course, Rome isn’t just going to sit back and let John run off with the money, so there’s plenty of conflict along the way.

I’m not sure what role my classmate plays in this movie, but he does have a line or two of dialog, so I’ll definitely recognize him when I see him.

The problem is, I can’t find this movie at any of the video stores near my house. I don’t want to buy it just to see a 2-minute scene, so I guess I’ll have to start checking some of the rental shops that I haven’t been to in a while.

What would you do if you knew that you only had a few months to live? That’s a question that makes many people uncomfortable, but Carter Chambers and Edward Cole have no choice in the matter. They’re both afflicted with cancer, and when chemo doesn’t have the desired effect, they realize that they better start living.

That’s the basic scenario in Rob Reiner’s latest film The Bucket List. This movie was ripped apart by Roger Ebert, himself a cancer survivor, but I decided to give it a try anyway since it has a pretty high (7.9 stars out of 10) rating on IMDB.com at the time of this writing.

While I didn’t think it deserved Ebert’s harsh review, it certainly doesn’t deserve such a high IMDB rating either.

Plot summary (with possible spoilers): Carter (played by Morgan Freeman) and Edward (Jack Nicholson) meet in the cancer ward of the hospital that Edward happens to own. Despite being a rich man, Edward can’t get a private room because of the stringent cost-cutting policies he put into place himself. How would it look if he received special treatment?

At first the two men barely talk to each other. Edward’s going through chemo, so he’s not really up to socializing anyway, while Carter is content to watch Jeopardy!, read, and take visits from his loving wife Virginia (Beverly Todd) and their grown children. Edward has no visitors except for his personal assistant Thomas (Sean Hayes).

Eventually, Edward and Carter do start interacting more. They play cards, watch TV, and shoot the breeze while going through the usual battery of tests and diagnostic procedures — until they both get the bad news: the chemo isn’t working, and they likely have less than one year to live.

Carter immediately starts writing a “Bucket List” containing all the things he would like to do before he dies. Edward thinks that’s a great idea, so he starts adding his own ideas to the list, and soon the men realize that they simply must do these things together. So, over the Virginia’s vehement objections, Edward and Carter embark on their life-defining journey.

The rest of the film then shows Edward and Carter knocking items off the list one by one, starting with skydiving and race car driving, and progressing through various exotic travel destinations (which is where Edward’s unlimited financial resources really come in handy). Along the way, they talk about the meaning of life, love, and faith, and they both grow to appreciate each other and the loved ones they’ve left behind.

My Reaction: As I said, I didn’t think The Bucket List was a god-awful film; but then again, I’ve never been a cancer patient so I obviously can’t look at this the same way that Ebert did. Even so, the movie did have some very glaring flaws that prevent it from being as meaningful as the filmmakers would have liked.

For instance, I couldn’t understand why Carter would want to complete his Bucket List without Virginia by his side. He wanted to experience some amazing things and see some unforgettable places, but wanted to do so with a relative stranger rather than his wife of 30+ years? I don’t buy it.

I’ve only been married for seven years, and yet I can’t imagine jetting off to see, say, the Pyramids without my husband there with me. It just wouldn’t mean as much and I would feel like something was missing. How could Carter not have felt the same way? That seemed like such a selfish move for an otherwise upstanding guy.

I also didn’t like the fact that all of the items on the Bucket List were so… ordinary. I’d wager that most people would want to see the Pyramids or Paris (I won’t even get into how cheesy the special effects looked), and go skydiving. Couldn’t they have come up with some really cool, unique activities to showcase in this film?

Otherwise, I thought The Bucket List was a fairly decent movie. I enjoyed watching Edward and Carter’s friendship develop, and thought Edward’s character arc was pretty believable. Moreover, I did like the overall message here in spite of the way it was communicated at times. As such, I give this movie 6.0 stars out of 10.

I’ve had dogs my entire life, and can’t imagine a home without pets. I currently have a 10-year-old miniature Dachshund and a 6-year-old Beagle, both of whom keep things very lively and energetic around here. They’re great with my son too, which is obviously an extremely important point to consider. All in all, I couldn’t ask for better canine companions!

I’m interested in connecting with other pet lovers out there, so I today I checked out a website called AnAmigo.com. It’s a social networking community that operates more or less like a MySpace for animal aficionados, meaning users can create profiles, upload pictures, post messages, and interact with like-minded people.

I signed up for an account today, and appreciated how easy the process was. I just had to provide basic information (name, address, birthday, pet details), wait for a confirmation email to arrive, and click a link to verify my registration. In less than 3 minutes, I became a full-fledged AnAmigo.com member, and was able to browse through other user profiles. I soon found other Beagle owners on the site, and discovered this picture of a dog named Jasper. Too cute!

After signing up, I spent a lot of time surfing through the site. I love all the useful resources on AnAmigo.com, such as the Service Directory that helps me find pet-friendly businesses and care providers in my area.

AnAmigo.com just recently launched, and to celebrate, they had an official Launch Party at the Sundance Film Festival in Utah. Celebrity pet lovers Nicky Hilton, Jack Black, Felicity Huffman, Simon Rex, and other stars were in attendance, so hopefully they’ll end up submitting profiles to the site!

I have a feeling AnAmigo.com is going to turn into one of the top pet-related websites on the Internet, so be sure to check it out for yourself!

As you probably know, I’ve been spending the last year and a half in trying to get through all of Agatha Christie’s novels in chronological order. While I like her works well enough, I do like to change things up every once in a while, so I decided I’d read something a bit different last week. Since I’ve been wanting to get into the Sherlock Holmes novels and stories a bit more, I decided this would be a good time to pick up the second title in the series, The Sign of Four by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

I wasn’t exactly impressed with Doyle’s first Holmes novel, A Study in Scarlet, but wasn’t going to let that stop me from proceeding with the series. As it turns out, I liked The Sign of Four a great deal better — despite several weak plot points that detracted from the work as a whole.

Plot summary (with possible spoilers): The novel opens with Sherlock Holmes enumerating the beneficial effects of his cocaine habit. Watson disapproves, but since there has been a decided lack of detective action lately, Holmes doesn’t really care.

However, a knock on the door soon changes their situation. The visitor is a young woman named Mary Morstan who has heard of the services Holmes provides. She has recently received a mysterious letter asking her to meet the sender at an appointed time that evening. She may bring two friends along for security if she likes, and that’s why she’s asking Holmes for help. After getting a bit more background information, Holmes and Watson readily agree to accompany Miss Morstan.

The mysterious stranger turns out to be a man named Thaddeus Sholto. His father and Miss Morstan’s father served in India together, and somehow came upon a vast treasure while they were over there. Thaddeus subsequently learned that Major Sholto didn’t give Captain Morstan his fair share of the loot when it came time to split it up. Now that both of the fathers are dead, Thaddeus wants to make things right by giving Miss Morstan a cut.

Thaddeus then takes Miss Morstan, Holmes, and Watson to a house in an out-of-the-way neighborhood. His twin brother Bartholomew is holding the treasure there, so all they have to do is pop in, hand out equal shares, and live happily ever after. Right, except for the fact that the group discovers that Bartholomew has been murdered and the treasure stolen.

From there, the mystery takes off in earnest. Holmes scours the crime scene, and even though he finds very little, it’s enough for him to have a general idea of what went down. The rest of the novel then deals with Holmes’s investigation, eventual capture of the criminal, and a fuller explanation of the origins of the treasure.

My Reaction: I thought The Sign of Four started out very well. The premise was intriguing, and any story that involves vast amounts of treasure, double-crossing partners, a villain with a wooden leg, and a Pygmy with a penchant for poison darts ought to have no problem generating reader interest.

But, as with A Study in Scarlet, I felt that this novel went downhill in the second half, beginning with Small’s narrative. That’s when Doyle introduces the most implausible events and actions he could think of, and asks the reader to accept them without question. Sorry, but I can’t do that.

For example, are we really to believe that four prisoners would simply tell a couple of random army officers where their treasure was hidden — and trust that those fellows would actually come back and share the loot?? Furthermore, would Small really confess to murdering two people when there was no evidence that he did so? I mean, this guy spilled the beans so freely that it felt like an episode of Cold Case or something!

So while I appreciated the basic story in The Sign of Four, I couldn’t say the same about the details. In my opinion, this book was far better than A Study in Scarlet, but still not something that I’d recommend to anyone.