"Let's go to the movies/ Let's go see the stars"

One of my favorite features of the amazing creation that is YouTube is being able to watch movie trailers. Come on, aren't the previews one of the best parts about going to see a movie? You know it is. So this is an easy way to see what is headed to theaters yet it prevents me from paying $8.50 (even for a matinee). Sweet deal. These are the ones that look interesting to me and I might even cough up the money for the insanely overpriced ticket to go and see them once they come out.

6. "Legion" In theaters: 1/22/10. Plot: After God loses faith in humanity, the archangel Michael (Paul Bettany) is the only one standing between mankind and the apocalypse. This time using angels as the act of Biblical judgment, God's wrath descends on Earth to exterminate the world's population. In a desperate, last-chance gambit, Michael leads a group of strangers to a small, New Mexico diner to protect a young waitress who may be pregnant with Christ in his second coming. (source: Wikipedia)

Okay. This one, I might not actually pay to see it. The true saving grace of the film (for me) is the fact that Kevin Durand is in it, playing the angel Gabriel. You might remember him as Keamy from Season 4 of LOST. He is Attractive. That's right, with a capital A. I mean the whole "God killing humanity" thing is sort of bizarre and I think there is going to be some sort of twist (but that might be giving the movie too much credit). Also Paul Bettany is in this and he's awesome. I think he has one of the best voices ever. So yeah, this film-- it's a maybe. That's also why it's number six on this list.

5. Moon. Plot: It is the near future. Astronaut Sam Bell is living on the far side of the moon, completing a three-year contract with Lunar Industries to mine Earths primary source of energy. He is set to return home in three weeks when strange things start to occur. (Source: YouTube)

This movie apparently has already had a limited release (and just to build some street cred, on IMDB.com it is #233 out of the top 250. Sort of impressive for a film with a limited release) and opened yesterday in one theater in Georgia (in Dublin. Might not be making it to this one). It stars Sam Rockwell, who usually impresses me, and Kevin Spacey is the voice of the robot. I don't know why but I am strangely fascinated by Spacey. Well, no, I know why: he's a brilliant actor. And during the trailer, I thought, "Wow. The robot has such a nice, calming voice". Little did I know it was my man, Kev! So that's reason enough for me. Oh and Clint Mansell did the music. He is fantastic so chalk up another point in column for reasons to see this film.

4. Couples Retreat. Release Date: 10/9/09. Plot: A comedy centered around four couples who settle into a tropical-island resort for a vacation. While one of the couples is there to work on the marriage, the others fail to realize that participation in the resort's therapy sessions is not optional.(Source: IMDB)

Vince Vaughn. Jon Favreau. Jason Bateman. Nothing more needs to be said. Moving on...

3. The Blind Side. 11/20/09. Plot: A poor, oversized and under-educated teenager is recruited by a major college football program where he is groomed into an athletically and academically successful NFL prospect. (Source: IMDB)

Sandra Bullock: Great actress. Tim McGraw: Good lookin. Adorable Boys who form an unlikely friendship: All about it. Football: Oh yeah. An uplifting tale based on a true story: YES. I think this may be the first trailer that I ever actually cried while watching. I had tears streaming down my face in the matter of 2 minutes and 32 seconds. I blame it on the use of the beautiful song "Pieces" by Red during the last half of the trailer. I will drag someone to go and see this one with me. Family members, I'm looking at you.

2. The Twilight Saga: New Moon. Coming to Theaters: 11/20/09. Plot: Bella Swan is devastated by the abrupt departure of her vampire love, Edward Cullen, but her spirit is rekindled by her growing friendship with the irresistible Jacob Black. Suddenly she finds herself drawn into the world of the werewolves, ancestral enemies of the vampires, and finds her loyalties tested. (Source: Youtube)

Yes, I am going to be a 14 year-old squealing girl about this one. They can credit the success of this franchise (apart from Stephanie Meyer creating and writing the series) solely to Robert Pattinson. I didn't even know what Twilight was until a few weeks before the last book came out about a year ago. There were all of these vampire, dazzling, Team Edward, and Team Jacob "bumper stickers" on facebook and I had no idea it was a fairly successful book series. Somehow I saw my friend NE had read it and asked to borrow it. Well, two or three chapters in and I was hooked. It's definitely gear toward a middle schooler but it's entertaining and interesting. Actually, I really can't stand the character of Bella. She is whiny and annoying. And the fact that Kristen Stewart was cast as Bella just confirms this fact. They are lucky Katherine Hardwicke didn't screw up this multimillion dollar franchise because of her poor casting choices due in large part to favoritism. Nikki Reed as the most beautiful person on the planet? I'm sorry but NO. Bella, the charmingly clumsy girl who falls for a vampire is played by Kristen Stewart? An actress who is so monotone, gloomy, and plays the same role no matter the film's content or mood? Yeah, I'm not buying it. So that's why the film studio can thank their lucky stars they got R-Patz who sent thousands of girls' hearts fluttering when they saw him as Cedric Diggory in the Harry Potter series. And the likely success of this upcoming film can be also attributed to Taylor Lautner. Boy put on some muscle and became even more attractive (good move on the shirtless scenes in this trailer, editor) and I think many teenage girls are now pondering their loyalty to "Team Edward". Anyway, hopefully with the increased budget and new director this film will be a bit more exciting and visually pleasing than the last one. That doesn't mean I didn't enjoy the last one, I certainly did. And that's why I will definitely see this one. You can bet your last dollar on it.

1. The Lovely Bones. Will be released: 12/11/09. Directed by Peter Jackson. Starring Mark Whalberg, Rachel Weisz, Susan Sarandon, Stanley Tucci, and Saoirse Ronan. Plot: A young girl who has been murdered watches over her family--and her killer--from heaven. She must weigh her desire for vengeance against her desire for her family to heal. (Source: IMDB)

This has been one of my favorite books ever since I read it in high school. When I found out it was being made into a movie and Peter Jackson was at the helm, well I was nothing short of being absolutely giddy. The trailer is a cinematic masterpiece, how can the complete film be anything less? I smell (several) Academy Awards for this one. It looks visually stunning, the casting is surprisingly well-done (I hesitated about Whalberg playing the father. But after seeing The Departed, he is most certainly hardcore and up to the task), and I have already watched the trailer about ten times. I. Cannot. Wait.

Now, if you don't mind, I've got a stack of books I need to re-read before these films hit theaters in a couple of months.

"And these days/ I wish I was six again/ Make me a red cape/ I wanna be superman"

Two funny niece quotes from this week:

My sister-in-law's Facebook status about her 5 year old daughter, M.E.:

"We were talking about her day at school and M.E. asked me if there were witches in our part of the country. What? Why do you ask that? She said, "Well, you know that part in the Pledge of Allegiance where it says "...to the Republic where witches stand..." Hilarious.

Yesterday, I went to lunch with my mom, sister MR, and niece MG. Niece MG is always excited about what is going to happen next: "Can we watch a video when we get home?" "What are we doing on Saturday?" etc. So towards the end of lunch, she asked her mom/my sister if she could watch a video when they got home. My sister, being a fun and involved mother, replied, "How about a Special Moment with Mom?" causing my niece to become very excited as she exclaimed she wanted to play with play-dough upon their arrival home. I said, "Aw. It will be a special MOMent" because I'm a dork and enjoy a play on words (which some claim is the lowest form of humor. This maybe be confirmed in the following sentence). My five year old niece then cracked up saying "Hey! You took moment and put 'mom' in it because it's the same". Oh boy. While my niece is extremely smart for figuring this out since she is only in kindergarten, I'm not sure how I should feel since she is five and I am twenty-two and we came to the same conclusion. I'm chalking it up to she's brilliant and going to be quick with the wit when she's older. Like maybe next year when she's six.

"Can't you see that I'm the one who understands you/ Been here all along/ So why can't you see/ You belong with me"

I'll be the first one to admit it: I get a little too invested in television shows at times. Season finale cliffhangers absolutely kill me. Even episodes of LOST kill me since each one ends with a mini cliffhanger. I need to know! I become attached to characters, sure, but who doesn't? How else does a t.v. show build up an audience? Now, it's not like I think the characters are actual people or anything (Sidenote: It's the reality shows that really make you seem crazy. One night my friend HW and I were in a restaurant discussing the marital woes of Jon and Kate. I'm sure people around us thought we were insane since we were talking like we actually knew them.) Just sometimes, you see your own traits in characters and that makes you want to see them succeed. That being said, the one story-line on shows that drives me completely insane is the love triangle. Now I realize half of the time this is what makes the viewers tune in-- to see if the characters do end up together. But apparently rule #1 is: you can't have them together in the first season. Noooo. Gotta wait until at least the third season (e.g. Friends, The Office). I know on some shows, once the characters got together people lost interest, but seriously writers/producers... can't we get a happy ending before the series finale?

Considering all of this, aren't there some characters that you absolutely hate because they are preventing "your couple" from getting together? This could be the reason why I'm a little extreme since when I see these actors in other roles, I'm automatically predisposed to hate them. It's not my fault. Especially if his/her role as "the obstacle" was the first time I ever saw them on a t.v. show, then I look at them and think, "Oh! That's her. She kept apart [boy] and [girl] for three seasons. I hate her!" Therefore I present to you, four actresses and one actor that I do not care for (read: despise) because of his/her role as "the obstacle".

5. Daphne (Jennifer Aspen) from Party of Five. Obstacle to: Charlie and Kirsten. Remember her? She was the stripper Charlie knocked up therefore ending the possibility of a relationship for at least another season. And Daphne just plain sucked. She was a stripper, abandoned her child, and caused so many problems, I hated her (as did my sisters). She stuck around until the end of the show since she was the baby mama to Diana. Thankfully, Charlie and Kirsten finally tied the knot in season six (would've been sooner if it hadn't of been for her). But seriously, I see this girl and all I think is "Daphne the stripper. I hate you".

4. Dennis (John Slattery) from Ed. Obstacle to: Ed and Carol. Doesn't this guy always play the same smarmy character? Some jerk politician always interfering and causing a love triangle (Sidenote: And I just realized he is on Mad Men and I have season one coming next in the mail from Netflix. I hope he doesn't ruin the show for me). Dennis and Carol almost got married but then Dennis thought she was looking around the church for Ed (which she was) and that effectively ended those nuptials. Yessss. And that also led to this awesome scene in the third season of Ed. Bravo Tom Cavanagh, bravo. (Sorry the synching is a little off. It's still fantastic.)

3. Juliet (Elizabeth Mitchell) from LOST. Obstacle to: Jack and Kate (and eventually Kate and Sawyer... but that one I don't care about as much. In fact Sawyer almost made the list since he was an obstacle to Jack and Kate). A) I see no chemistry between her and Jack. B) I cannot for the life of me figure out if she is good or bad. A 'lostie' or an 'other'? Is she playing both sides? What is going on here? The confusion isn't scoring you any points, missy. Although in the S5 finale, when she was getting dragged down into the abyss and she and Sawyer were crying and trying to hold on to each other, I won't lie, I got a little misty-eyed. Then she dismantled the bomb at the bottom (where there is hope that maybe everything cancelled each other out and she will still be alive in the final season... stop it Annie, this isn't a LOST dissection post. Moving on... ) even though she was severely injured... well this gave Juliet some credit. But not enough to make me not put her on the list. Sorry Jules.

2. Emily (Helen Baxendale) from Friends. Obstacle to: Ross and Rachel. Well, we all knew this one didn't stand a chance. No one could come between Ross and Rachel. And especially once Ross said Rachel's name at the altar (man, a lot of wedding mishaps on this list), you knew it was all downhill from there. To which, we the audience said: YAY! But seriously, she was British, catty, arrogant, annoying, and when she told Ross that he couldn't see Rachel anymore, I don't think there was a more hated character on television. But we all breathed a sigh of relief when Ross refused to do so, so it was hasta la vista, Emily. But really, any character standing in the way of R&R was doomed. I couldn't even get on board with the whole Rachel/Joey story line. Don't act like you didn't cry when Rachel got off the plane on the series finale and she and Ross were together again, finally!

1. Karen (Rashida Jones) from the Office. Obstacle to: Jim and Pam. Now, I love all of the previously mentioned couples on this list, but Jim and Pam are, by far, my favorite. This could be in large part because I absolutely love Jim Halpert (as well as John Krasinski) and there is a very good chance he is, indeed, the perfect man. You would think this would make me hate Pam but she's his ideal counterpart (aside from myself, of course). Oh I definitely cried when they got engaged this past season. And thank God that happened because this little lady certainly proved to be difficult. I did not like Karen. a) I don't think she is attractive. b) Why was she a good match for Jim? c) She sucks. d) She isn't funny. I know they tried to make her seem good with the whole "Helping Pam throw a Christmas Party" deal but that wasn't enough for me. e) She should have known she would never hold a candle to Pam. I am so glad she is gone, P.B.&J are together (and expecting a baby!), and hopefully she won't have another guest appearance when her new show, Parks and Recreation, inevitably goes south. Also, there is a bit more hatred towards her since she did date John Krasinski in real life. Now I realize I don't know her personally; she could be great and hilarious. But until I meet her and she proves me wrong (like that's ever gonna happen), she will continue to be my most hated obstacle character. So how about a clip where she is finally edged out and it's the beautiful beginning of Jim and Pam:

Honorable Mentions:

1. Jess (Milo Ventimiglia) from Gilmore Girls. Obstacle to: Dean and Rory.

2. Annie (Paige Turco) from Party of Five. Obstacle to: Bailey and Sarah.

3. Christopher (David Sutcliffe) on Gilmore Girls. Obstacle to: Lorelai and Luke.

But seriously, kudos to the writers and actors on these shows for making characters we come to love and creating chemistry that has us rooting and pining for fictional characters to finally, finally end up together, even if it is only in t.v. land.

"When I grow up/ I wanna be famous/ I wanna be a star ... Fresh and clean/ Number one chick when I step out on the scene"

Okay so the subject title isn't exactly dead on for me. I'm not saying I want to be a famous movie star or singer or anything (I was just trying to think of a song about growing up and sadly, The Pussycat Dolls popped into my head first). But I will admit that I've always wanted to write a book (hence why I started this blog. To practice, have my writing somewhat out there in the public, and it makes me work on my editing skills). But honestly, don't a lot of people think they could write a book? Just within my own family: my dad, sister AE, sister LA, and myself all think we could write a book (and I'm not saying any of us couldn't by any means but thats 40% of a family thinking they could. Sort of a large percentage for a rather difficult feat). And then you look at some of the fools getting books published these days: Kathy Griffin, Tracy Morgan, Tori Spelling, Lauren Conrad (Sidenote: I won't lie. I want to read LC's book. Wellllll... when I was waiting on my mom to finish shopping in Target one day, I may have picked it up and read the first two chapters and been intrigued. Do I think she wrote it without any assistance or heavy editing by another person? I'm pretty skeptical. All I know is, I want to finish reading it but new books are not a luxury in the life of a recent college graduate aka the unemployed). But seriously, they are getting books published? That makes it seem like anyone can, right? Well if you know the right people and have a ton of money to burn.

I've been kicking around a couple ideas for a few years but there is one in particular I have harped on the most. I came up with it in the tenth grade but as I've experienced more things in life (you know, like being able to drive, going to college, and graduating), the idea has matured as well. And no, I will not share it with you (while I like you, I'm not sure I trust you. To repeat, most people think they can write a book and I'm not giving you a head start with my idea). I'm not saying writing a book is easy. It obviously takes a lot of work. But do you know what I think the hardest part of a book is? The ending. I read a lot (more contemporary stuff like Jodi Picoult, Nicholas Sparks, Kristin Hannah, Emily Giffin, etc) and I've come to the conclusion that there are three basic endings:

1. The happy ending. I think deep down, we all want a happy ending especially when we are reading about characters we are now attached to and have become familiar with. But at the same time, the happy ending (HE) is cliched, not entirely realistic, and overdone. At least I myself have a love/hate relationship with the HE. And I'd say the number one HE is the girl gets the guy or vice versa. And while you've become attached to this character and you've been rooting for them for 300+ pages, it does get a little old and not to mention predictable. But I mean there is a reason the most famous ending line is, "and they lived happily ever after". We want to believe that even if we aren't experiencing our HE at this very moment, it can still be around the corner, waiting for us to stumble across it. And we read these HEs to vicariously experience ones that inspire us on the way to our very own happy ending. At least that's what I like to think, but what do I know?

2. The Independent ending. Ugh. These sort of annoy me because I am a romantic deep down (a cynical romantic actually). But you know these endings, it's when the main character realizes she doesn't need a man in her life to be happy, even though she has pined over him for the last 350 pages, but then she decides she is just fine on her own. I'm not saying this isn't possible but I mean come on, author. Don't build up these feelings and a conflict and the confusion just to completely abandon it in the last chapter. These are the authors who are anti-HE, I think they try to appeal to those who don't believe that 'all's well that ends well', but I get more frustrated with these endings than the HEs.

3. The Ambiguous ending. I think authors pick this ending in order to please both the romantics and the realists in their readership. Choose the middle of the road and then everyone is happy. No no no no. I want to be told what happened. I don't want to infer about it myself. That's the point. You're the storyteller. Tell me what happens. Does the author just run out of steam? Does she not want the typical HE but doesn't want to go all feminist on her readers either? Ugh. I'll never forget the book I trudged through (Sidenote: It's very rare that I abandon a book even if I'm not enjoying it. If nothing else, maybe there will be a quote that I like or there will be a redeeming ending) and got to the final sentence that basically read "She stood beside her open car door, poised to get in and leave everything behind her but when she saw her one true love watching her from the porch, she knew what she had to do." WHAT does she have to do?!?! Does she turn back or does she get in and drive off into the sunset? I need to know! So if I am a romantic, I believe she went back to the guy and they lived happily ever after but if I am a realist, I think that she left and got on with her life? These are the most frustrating of all, which is ironic because I think the author thinks they are pleasing both sides. Maybe some people are happy with these endings but I am not.

But the bottom line is, you aren't going to please every reader with your ending. I realize that. It's impossible to please everyone. But it's just so hard to pick what you want to happen. Happy ending, realistic ending, or ambiguous? You have some authors like Picoult that can throw you a complete curve ball at you in the final sentence and that's what makes her a unique writer. But what about the rest? Are you a bad writer cause you choose to have a HE? Are you lame cause you are ambiguous at the end? Are you a realist if you have an independent ending? It's just so gosh darn hard to decide!

"The little things ... Driving me crazy"

Five little things that shouldn't bother me, but they do (and maybe you feel the same):

1. When people spell the word "definitely" wrong. Come on people, if you are in college (or worse- a college graduate) you should be able to spell this word. Spell check should catch it if nothing else. I can sometimes tolerate the confusion of your/you're and they're/there/their considering I can be a victim of that mistake myself (albeit rarely) since our brains don't exactly decipher between homophones when quickly typing out a facebook status or wall post.

2. Putting on pillow cases. I don't know why this bothers me so much considering making an entire bed is much harder but I literally dread the final step of putting on the pillow cases. I mean it's not like I hate it to the point that I won't do it. I always do, I just don't enjoy it. Maybe I should start doing it first? Nah, that won't help.

3. Here is a conversation I have all too frequently at Starbucks:

Me: Hi, can I get the grande vanilla iced coffee with room please?

Barista: No.

Me (playing along, slightly annoyed): Please?

Barista: Oh alright/ Sure/ I don't want you tell you 'no' after you said please twice/ Some other "cute" variation.

A) I don't know why they think this is creative, B) it's not funny, and C) it has gotten old (and quickly I might add). And its always so awkward. I have nothing to say after they say I can in fact have the drink I am about to purchase for $2.56. Let's just faze this one out restaurant workers of America. And do so before I start deducting from your tip.

4. When people pour their little hearts out on facebook statuses. Let's be honest with ourselves people: it's for attention. There is a girl from high school (who I honestly don't even remember and am quite sure I never had an actual conversation with) and she has the most inappropriate updates. They are always about guys from the night before (gross), how her family is dysfunctional (no need to make that public knowledge), or how she is going to get wasted this coming weekend (and these are almost always posted on Mondays). Also when people make it obvious they have just broken up with someone/been dumped. I mean do I need to know this? Nope. Am I going to feel sorry for you? Probably not cause you are trying to get sympathy from your 500+ friends, most of them you probably haven't even spoken to for three years. Or when people put how they are so sick of drama, other people starting drama, and everyone else needs to grow up. Awesome, why don't you follow your own advice and not post that? Good idea? I think so. Let's keep it funny, interesting, and informative people!

5. When your magazine subscription still hasn't shown up and its already on newsstands. Isn't getting it first one of the built-in rights of a subscription? I'm looking at you Marie Claire and People Magazine. And if someone is swiping the mail, reading it, and then putting it their mailbox to be delivered to its rightful owner, well then that's annoying too.

Mini rants over.