Visually stunning? Yes. Epic? Yes. At least, wide in its scope. Original? Hardly.
James Cameron's visionary dream is creative and imaginative in its presentation, but it falls short in its story-telling. The world of Pandora is beautiful, full of wild creatures and exotic plants. It is inhabited by the Na'vi people, a race completely unified with Eywa, their deity, the energy that binds and surrounds them. They are threatened by the "Skypeople," humans who abandoned their "dying world" to extract a valuable substance ironically called unobtanium from Pandora's soil, in spite of the fact that the Omaticaya clan of Na'vis live on the richest deposit. To me, it was the cliched tale of greedy people taking what they want from anyone, damned be the consequences. Don't get me wrong - I love nature and am all for going green. I can recognize that we need to appreciate the abundance around us and care for our planet, as well as respect the cultural ways of other people who we may not understand, or with whom we may not agree. Yet the plot behind "Avatar" reminded me of "Fern Gully." Remember "Fern Gully"? Fairies living happily in the rainforest until evil man with his big ugly machines comes to tear it all down? Throw in a little Trail of Tears/indigenous relocation, a bicultural star-crossed romance, and a Matrix-like connection to another world, and you have hit the nail right on the head.
I'm not saying I did not enjoy the movie. Quite the contrary. This was the first non-documentary movie I've seen completely in 3-D (as opposed to IMAX nature films seen at the MN Zoo, and brief scenes in recent "Harry Potter" movies), and I really wish we had been able to see it 3-D in IMAX. Alas, "The Wolfman" chased "Avatar" out of the giant-screen theater in St. Michael, so we settled for 3-D on a regular movie screen. Which is fine. I was still able to appreciate the animation. It's extremely impressive that such a complete world (although did anyone else notice the Na'vi never ate anything?) could simply be pulled from the imagination in such detail and clarity, making dreams that much more tangible. Cameron pulled out all the stops, somehow creating a world by combining the beauty and mystery of both the rainforest and the depths of the oceans. From the heights of the floating mountains, through the vast and open skies, to the forest floors, Pandora is amazing. It did remind me a little of Dinotopia mixed with Naboo, but for a tiny moon, it's full of incredible flora and fauna.
Aside from aesthetics, the tiny cultural details were also quite thorough. Not only did the Na'vi have their own language, they had separate and distinctive clans as well. The creatures with whom the Na'vi interact are reminiscent of animals seen on Earth (at one time or another), but unique in their own ways. Something I particularly liked was the direct link between the Na'vi and the creatures. It solidified the concept of a planet (or moon) with an all-encompassing energy firing like neurons in the brain, connecting everything to everything else.
In addition to the creative details, the actor portrayal was impressive. The use of performance capture ensured that the actors' facial expressions were completely transferred to their computer-generated counterparts. Before seeing the film, I was slightly put off by the appearance of the tall, blue people, but while watching it, it is easy to see how the Na'vi actually look like the actors (especially Sigourney Weaver's...whose avatar TOO closely resembled the actress). Their movements were extremely natural, and it became easy to forget I was watching something designed on computers.
I thought Sam Worthington turned in a very good performance, although I have nothing to which I can compare; I had never seen him in any other movies prior to this. I thought his portrayal of paraplegic ex-Marine Jake Sully, the film's hero, was believable, and his emotional transition from former soldier to invested anthropologist and tribal hero was well done. Not only did his hair become longer and disheveled, but the video diaries of his experiences began awkwardly and became increasingly heartfelt. I also thought it was impressive making his legs appear shriveled and useless (unless they were real...in which case, he must have had one hell of a workout routine for his role as Perseus in "Clash of the Titans"), and his disuse of them seemed natural.
Sigourney Weaver also did a wonderful job in her portrayal of the driven, tough-on-the-outside scientist in charge of the avatar project. I really grew to like her, and she seemed to soften towards Jake as he got deeper into Na'vi culture than she ever had.
Stephen Lang was villainous as Colonel Quaritch, your typical militant let's-blow-things-up bad guy. He had a wicked awesome scar on his head from his first experience on Pandora, and he was extremely determined to do whatever it took to get the Omaticaya away from the unobtanium deposit. He was wonderfully disconnected from the consequences, nonchalantly sipping coffee while watching the Omaticaya's home get destroyed on his orders.
Zoe Saldana, of whom I am not the biggest fan, did a decent job lending her voice and facial expressions to Neytiri, the female Na'vi protagonist, who happens to be the Omaticayan princess and Jake's love interest and cultural teacher. They had fairly good chemistry "on screen," but I felt her role in general was cliched.
Overall, I really enjoyed this movie, and it nearly exceeded my minimal expectations. I knew the story would be so-so and the animation superb, but the combined effect was surprisingly pleasing. It's generally predictable (and for me, that's saying something...I'm usually terrible with plot predictions), but very entertaining. I'm glad I saw it. (I could go into the ethical issue of creating a hybrid creature of human and Na'vi DNA to simply use as a shell to house someone else's mind...but I just don't have the energy.)
Friday, February 19, 2010
Friday, December 18, 2009
Review of "The Young Victoria" (4 out of 5 stars)
The movie “The Young Victoria” boasts a core cast of very well-known British actors, so my expectations were relatively high. Did it disappoint, you ask? The answer is, “Not really.”
Taken at face value, I really enjoyed the film. The cast was indeed very good, living up to about 93% of their potential, I’d say. Emily Blunt (“The Devil Wears Prada,” “Sunshine Cleaning,” and a really great episode of “The Simpsons,” in which Blunt’s character and Lisa Simpson become Grobanites and go to a magical land called “Equalia,” where Josh Groban music plays all the time), in the title role, was charming and feisty. Rupert Friend (“Pride and Prejudice”) as Prince Albert was warm and encouraging, befitting his friendly face - and name - much more than that dastardly Mr. Wickham...even if his accent did come and go. Paul Bettany (“A Knight’s Tale,” “The Da Vinci Code”...among others. I love him!), was definitely cool and calculating, yet gentlemanly, as the Whig PM and Victoria’s first advisor. Mark Strong (“Stardust,” “Sherlock Holmes”) was the typical brooding bad guy, but hey, it works for him. (Gotta love an actor that embraces the fact that he could probably never play a “good” guy...) Miranda Richardson (“Phantom of the Opera,” “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”) was the somewhat detached and manipulated mother of Victoria, but I feel her character could have had more depth. Perhaps her role wasn’t written that way. It almost works. Jim Broadbent (“Moulin Rouge,” “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe,” “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”) made me giggle in his role as the ailing (and slightly tipsy) King William IV, Victoria’s predecessor. He was kind and uncle-y, which is good, since William was Victoria’s uncle. Harriet Walter (“Sense and Sensibility,” “Atonement”), as Queen Adelaide, was the voice of reason and experience to counter Victoria’s youth and naïveté. I liked her character a lot, however scarce her screen time may have been.
Aside from the cast, the story itself was just a brief glimpse at the life and reign of Queen Victoria. From the beginning, I was intrigued by this woman of whom I knew very little (my area of “expertise” is somewhat farther in the past than her time). The political games people play with other people in order to advance their own purposes was quite clear throughout, but a lot of heart was put in it as well. Victoria and Albert were, above all things, young people in extraordinary circumstances. Victoria muses at the beginning of the film, “What girl does not want to grow up a princess?” But the strains of a restricted lifestyle and being used as a pawn can be frustrating and wearying. Albert puts it cleverly: “Then you had better master the rules of the game until you play it better than they can.”
(Insert tangent on well-written lines: Queen Adelaide says to Victoria, “He's a politician. And politicians, whatever their creed, always resent the monarchy. They pass through, you stay.” And one for the heartstrings: Albert to Victoria, “You're the only wife I've got or ever will have. You are my whole existence, and I will love you until my very last breath.” *End tangent.)
The story was well supported by exquisite sets, extravagant costumes (Emily Blunt’s insured for £10,000 EACH), and a magnificent score by Ilan Eshkeri (“Stardust”). The only outright problem I really had with the movie was the ending...to me, it seemed like production said, “The movie’s gone on for this long, let’s wrap it up,” and indeed they did...in like three minutes. I know the movie is “The YOUNG Victoria,” and I suppose it would have been difficult to choose a breaking-off point, but I would have liked a little more (runtime: 100 minutes). Yet hopes for a sequel (which would probably be ill-advised anyway) were dashed by the all-encompassing written-out summary of what happened for the rest of Victoria’s reign intermixed with brief glimpses of the characters. You know, the kind of summary that any movie based on historical facts is apt to have. Oh well. I enjoyed the film immensely.
I do have to say it’s more of a gripping romance/drama than an intense portrayal of a monarchy (ie: “Elizabeth” and “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”). This is perhaps because, as far as I can tell, there was not a whole lot of political turmoil at the time. Whereas Elizabeth had to deal with accused plots to overturn her sister, violent religious instability during the Inquisition, and wars with Spain (Armada, anyone?...Can you tell where my aforementioned “expertise” rests?), Victoria ruled during an era of economic growth, becoming Britain’s longest ruling monarch (63 years). By the Victoria’s time, however, the monarch was not the sole ruler of the realm anymore, as was the case with Elizabeth, but more akin to the figurehead and symbol of Britain with which we are familiar now. All of this could make for a dull movie, but “The Young Victoria” is gratifying enough, and serious enough (it’s kind of nice to see a movie about a monarch without any explicit sex or nudity) to be a real winner. Emily Blunt has already received a nomination for Best Actress in a Motion Picture - Drama for the Golden Globes...and for the British Independent Film Awards, the Broadcast Film Critics Association Awards, and the Satellite Awards. I hope the Price Waterhouse Coopers guys are paying attention.
**Shout out to Mrs. Heidi Thulin, for getting us those free tickets to the advance sceening!
Taken at face value, I really enjoyed the film. The cast was indeed very good, living up to about 93% of their potential, I’d say. Emily Blunt (“The Devil Wears Prada,” “Sunshine Cleaning,” and a really great episode of “The Simpsons,” in which Blunt’s character and Lisa Simpson become Grobanites and go to a magical land called “Equalia,” where Josh Groban music plays all the time), in the title role, was charming and feisty. Rupert Friend (“Pride and Prejudice”) as Prince Albert was warm and encouraging, befitting his friendly face - and name - much more than that dastardly Mr. Wickham...even if his accent did come and go. Paul Bettany (“A Knight’s Tale,” “The Da Vinci Code”...among others. I love him!), was definitely cool and calculating, yet gentlemanly, as the Whig PM and Victoria’s first advisor. Mark Strong (“Stardust,” “Sherlock Holmes”) was the typical brooding bad guy, but hey, it works for him. (Gotta love an actor that embraces the fact that he could probably never play a “good” guy...) Miranda Richardson (“Phantom of the Opera,” “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”) was the somewhat detached and manipulated mother of Victoria, but I feel her character could have had more depth. Perhaps her role wasn’t written that way. It almost works. Jim Broadbent (“Moulin Rouge,” “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe,” “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”) made me giggle in his role as the ailing (and slightly tipsy) King William IV, Victoria’s predecessor. He was kind and uncle-y, which is good, since William was Victoria’s uncle. Harriet Walter (“Sense and Sensibility,” “Atonement”), as Queen Adelaide, was the voice of reason and experience to counter Victoria’s youth and naïveté. I liked her character a lot, however scarce her screen time may have been.
Aside from the cast, the story itself was just a brief glimpse at the life and reign of Queen Victoria. From the beginning, I was intrigued by this woman of whom I knew very little (my area of “expertise” is somewhat farther in the past than her time). The political games people play with other people in order to advance their own purposes was quite clear throughout, but a lot of heart was put in it as well. Victoria and Albert were, above all things, young people in extraordinary circumstances. Victoria muses at the beginning of the film, “What girl does not want to grow up a princess?” But the strains of a restricted lifestyle and being used as a pawn can be frustrating and wearying. Albert puts it cleverly: “Then you had better master the rules of the game until you play it better than they can.”
(Insert tangent on well-written lines: Queen Adelaide says to Victoria, “He's a politician. And politicians, whatever their creed, always resent the monarchy. They pass through, you stay.” And one for the heartstrings: Albert to Victoria, “You're the only wife I've got or ever will have. You are my whole existence, and I will love you until my very last breath.” *End tangent.)
The story was well supported by exquisite sets, extravagant costumes (Emily Blunt’s insured for £10,000 EACH), and a magnificent score by Ilan Eshkeri (“Stardust”). The only outright problem I really had with the movie was the ending...to me, it seemed like production said, “The movie’s gone on for this long, let’s wrap it up,” and indeed they did...in like three minutes. I know the movie is “The YOUNG Victoria,” and I suppose it would have been difficult to choose a breaking-off point, but I would have liked a little more (runtime: 100 minutes). Yet hopes for a sequel (which would probably be ill-advised anyway) were dashed by the all-encompassing written-out summary of what happened for the rest of Victoria’s reign intermixed with brief glimpses of the characters. You know, the kind of summary that any movie based on historical facts is apt to have. Oh well. I enjoyed the film immensely.
I do have to say it’s more of a gripping romance/drama than an intense portrayal of a monarchy (ie: “Elizabeth” and “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”). This is perhaps because, as far as I can tell, there was not a whole lot of political turmoil at the time. Whereas Elizabeth had to deal with accused plots to overturn her sister, violent religious instability during the Inquisition, and wars with Spain (Armada, anyone?...Can you tell where my aforementioned “expertise” rests?), Victoria ruled during an era of economic growth, becoming Britain’s longest ruling monarch (63 years). By the Victoria’s time, however, the monarch was not the sole ruler of the realm anymore, as was the case with Elizabeth, but more akin to the figurehead and symbol of Britain with which we are familiar now. All of this could make for a dull movie, but “The Young Victoria” is gratifying enough, and serious enough (it’s kind of nice to see a movie about a monarch without any explicit sex or nudity) to be a real winner. Emily Blunt has already received a nomination for Best Actress in a Motion Picture - Drama for the Golden Globes...and for the British Independent Film Awards, the Broadcast Film Critics Association Awards, and the Satellite Awards. I hope the Price Waterhouse Coopers guys are paying attention.
**Shout out to Mrs. Heidi Thulin, for getting us those free tickets to the advance sceening!
Friday, September 11, 2009
Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness...
I love fall. Absolutely love it. I love cloudy, breezy, crisp days. I love swirling leaves scattered across the sidewalk and making the grass more interesting. The sky somehow changes, too, and the blue is different than it was during the summer. It's fantastic.
I realized when I was walking my dog today that I feel more at leisure to enjoy the weather. While the end of summer/leaves changing colors in Maple Grove isn't nearly as pretty as up in Collegeville, I'm (sadly) much less busy, so things like dog walks are times in which I can sit back (minus the fact that I am walking) and enjoy the weather, instead of noting it as I quickly dash off to class or work or something. I still miss campus life quite a lot, but today was just a nice reminder that things aren't so bad on this side of the diploma.
Speaking of, I'm still looking for a job...I could apply for a 'Research Assistant' position at the MHS library, but it's super part time, kinda far away, and not exactly what I want. But, I would be there, at least, perhaps regularly seeing people who work in fields more directly related to what I want to do. It's hard, though...is it worth it? I'd be narrowing my availability at Byerly's (where I'm only getting scheduled 15 hours/week, in spite of being available during the entirety of store hours...so would it really make that big of a difference?), but I really don't want to let potential opportunities pass just to please my job since junior high. Yes, there's a sort of security there, but at the same time, it's nearly not sustaining me financially (since I only get those 15 hours, unless I pick up other shifts, which I have done quite a lot). I did apply for an 'Exhibit Props Specialist' position at the Minnesota Children's Museum, but I have not yet heard back from them. I will contact them next week. I think that might have been a part-time position as well, so...I guess it wouldn't hurt to apply for the library job...but it's just not quite the stepping stone I want it to be, you know? It's a lot to ponder. They need to give more time between announcing jobs and the application deadline!
In completely unrelatedness, I LOVE THE MINNESOTA RENAISSANCE FESTIVAL. If you didn't already know that, however, you really don't know me very well. I LIVE for weekends mid-August through the end of September (or beginning of October, as it happens to be this year). So far, I've gone twice and am planning on going again at least once more. If I do indeed go twice more, I will have been there every other weekend of its 2009 run. I like that. :) This year, I purchased a new bodice and a peasant top to go underneath. I also bought some jewelry and a pottery goblet. I also bought a leather purse/belt (kind of the medieval version of a fanny pack...only...way cooler?) so I'm not carrying a shoulder bag anymore (because it hurt my shoulder--I tend to pull down on the bag--and because it was not period enough for my ensemble). I wish I could live there. Except it's so dusty.
Anyway...I think I'll clean my room a little before heading to work at 4:30. Cheers!
I realized when I was walking my dog today that I feel more at leisure to enjoy the weather. While the end of summer/leaves changing colors in Maple Grove isn't nearly as pretty as up in Collegeville, I'm (sadly) much less busy, so things like dog walks are times in which I can sit back (minus the fact that I am walking) and enjoy the weather, instead of noting it as I quickly dash off to class or work or something. I still miss campus life quite a lot, but today was just a nice reminder that things aren't so bad on this side of the diploma.
Speaking of, I'm still looking for a job...I could apply for a 'Research Assistant' position at the MHS library, but it's super part time, kinda far away, and not exactly what I want. But, I would be there, at least, perhaps regularly seeing people who work in fields more directly related to what I want to do. It's hard, though...is it worth it? I'd be narrowing my availability at Byerly's (where I'm only getting scheduled 15 hours/week, in spite of being available during the entirety of store hours...so would it really make that big of a difference?), but I really don't want to let potential opportunities pass just to please my job since junior high. Yes, there's a sort of security there, but at the same time, it's nearly not sustaining me financially (since I only get those 15 hours, unless I pick up other shifts, which I have done quite a lot). I did apply for an 'Exhibit Props Specialist' position at the Minnesota Children's Museum, but I have not yet heard back from them. I will contact them next week. I think that might have been a part-time position as well, so...I guess it wouldn't hurt to apply for the library job...but it's just not quite the stepping stone I want it to be, you know? It's a lot to ponder. They need to give more time between announcing jobs and the application deadline!
In completely unrelatedness, I LOVE THE MINNESOTA RENAISSANCE FESTIVAL. If you didn't already know that, however, you really don't know me very well. I LIVE for weekends mid-August through the end of September (or beginning of October, as it happens to be this year). So far, I've gone twice and am planning on going again at least once more. If I do indeed go twice more, I will have been there every other weekend of its 2009 run. I like that. :) This year, I purchased a new bodice and a peasant top to go underneath. I also bought some jewelry and a pottery goblet. I also bought a leather purse/belt (kind of the medieval version of a fanny pack...only...way cooler?) so I'm not carrying a shoulder bag anymore (because it hurt my shoulder--I tend to pull down on the bag--and because it was not period enough for my ensemble). I wish I could live there. Except it's so dusty.
Anyway...I think I'll clean my room a little before heading to work at 4:30. Cheers!
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Starry-Eyed and Vaguely Discontented
Okay, this whole "back to school" thing is really getting to me! I see it everywhere--at stores, in magazines, on Facebook...people are heading back to school. I, alas, am not. My four years at CSB/SJU were absolutely amazing. They were difficult, fun, heartbreaking, and life-changing. I met the most wonderful people, many of whom I will never see again. I grew in ways I never would have foreseen (me?! Lead songs?! By myself?!). I learned so much, not just in classes, but about other people, about myself, and about the world. That's what college is for, yes? So, why does the experience have to stop after four years? (Because financial aid only lasts four years.) I'm truly jealous of the students who get to go back.
When I graduated from high school, I was so ready to get out. I was way more mature than the sophomores who thought they were God's gifts to the world, I was psyched about going to St. Ben's. Now...the future's not bleak, but it feels that way sometimes. The trip to Europe was fantastic, and I miss it a lot. I've been trying to arrange my life right now in a way that makes me happy, but I am cursed to dwell on the past (history major). I remember late-night roommate chats. I remember being in the presence of truly gifted people, shaping and sharing their gifts. I remember feeling independent and confident. College was just this awesome bubble that challenged me without making me feel abandoned. Real life was kept at bay by things like papers and finals and honors theses. I know that many people look back on college as the best years of their lives, and I can understand from where they're coming. I don't want to always look back. I want to look forward. I want to look at right now and be happy with where I am, who I am, and what's happening. I know I'll get there eventually, but I thought maybe I would have gotten there by now. But right now my life is just a cycle of frantically trying to scrape up as many hours at Byerly's as possible and attempting to squeeze in fun to keep me sane. I'm trying to organize things at home so they have more of a sense of permanency, but I'm still looking for a way out.
One day at a time, I guess. Baby steps. But I still wish I were going back to campus.
When I graduated from high school, I was so ready to get out. I was way more mature than the sophomores who thought they were God's gifts to the world, I was psyched about going to St. Ben's. Now...the future's not bleak, but it feels that way sometimes. The trip to Europe was fantastic, and I miss it a lot. I've been trying to arrange my life right now in a way that makes me happy, but I am cursed to dwell on the past (history major). I remember late-night roommate chats. I remember being in the presence of truly gifted people, shaping and sharing their gifts. I remember feeling independent and confident. College was just this awesome bubble that challenged me without making me feel abandoned. Real life was kept at bay by things like papers and finals and honors theses. I know that many people look back on college as the best years of their lives, and I can understand from where they're coming. I don't want to always look back. I want to look forward. I want to look at right now and be happy with where I am, who I am, and what's happening. I know I'll get there eventually, but I thought maybe I would have gotten there by now. But right now my life is just a cycle of frantically trying to scrape up as many hours at Byerly's as possible and attempting to squeeze in fun to keep me sane. I'm trying to organize things at home so they have more of a sense of permanency, but I'm still looking for a way out.
One day at a time, I guess. Baby steps. But I still wish I were going back to campus.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Carbuncle of Gold
The title of this blog came to me last night upon my third viewing of "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince." They were the only words I could make out inscribed on the walls of the Potions classroom. My first thought was that Cap'n Jack Sparrow called Bootstrap Bill Turner a "carbuncle" in "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest." Then I thought a carbuncle of gold must be really odd...but then I realized there are different definitions to the word. Sparrow's meaning was a pus-filled sore (since Turner was covered in barnacles and such), but the Potter-esque carbuncle refers to the gemstone. This makes much more sense, since a "carbuncle of gold" kind of refers to alchemy, so it's fitting to find it in a Potions classroom, yes? I wish I could read the other words; maybe they're from some sort of alchemic text. That'd be neat.
This is what happens when I see movies multiple times. I'm still wondering what Mary Bennet is reading out loud in "Pride & Prejudice" (Keira Knightley version). I've Googled it without success. It goes as follows:
"...must be free from all insincerity. She only can address herself effectually to the feelings of others whose mind glows with the warmth of sensibility and whose arguments result from conviction. She must feel the influence of those passions and emotions which she wishes to inspire..."
To me, it sounds like some sort of instruction book for young ladies, but for a brief moment, upon hearing the word "sensibility," I thought it would be greatly amusing if she were reading aloud from Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility. But when I Google the lines, I get the movie's script. *Facepalm* Hahahaha.
Anyway, I really wish I could keep having days full of fun and spending money without having to work to earn the money I'm spending. But then again, if I didn't have to work, I think I'd get really bored, in addition to being poor. But sometimes I just want to veg, but I also want to get lots done, and I don't have the time to do both! Oh well.
Johns Hopkins Masters Program in Museum Studies online?
I really want to see "Funny People." And the tv show "Modern Family" looks really funny.
This is what happens when I see movies multiple times. I'm still wondering what Mary Bennet is reading out loud in "Pride & Prejudice" (Keira Knightley version). I've Googled it without success. It goes as follows:
"...must be free from all insincerity. She only can address herself effectually to the feelings of others whose mind glows with the warmth of sensibility and whose arguments result from conviction. She must feel the influence of those passions and emotions which she wishes to inspire..."
To me, it sounds like some sort of instruction book for young ladies, but for a brief moment, upon hearing the word "sensibility," I thought it would be greatly amusing if she were reading aloud from Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility. But when I Google the lines, I get the movie's script. *Facepalm* Hahahaha.
Anyway, I really wish I could keep having days full of fun and spending money without having to work to earn the money I'm spending. But then again, if I didn't have to work, I think I'd get really bored, in addition to being poor. But sometimes I just want to veg, but I also want to get lots done, and I don't have the time to do both! Oh well.
Johns Hopkins Masters Program in Museum Studies online?
I really want to see "Funny People." And the tv show "Modern Family" looks really funny.
Monday, July 13, 2009
A sense of dissatisfaction and hope
Well, I have joined the blogging community...How I wish I had marvelous adventures upon which to report, like so many of my fellow CSBSJU '09 graduates...Alas, I am stuck in suburbia, wondering what to do next.
Don't get me wrong. It's nice to be home, it's semi-nice to be back at Byerly's...But I really want to do something different with my life. I mean, I'm looking forward to a bunch of small fun events that are in the near future (HP6 midnight show, Public Enemies, Ren Fest starts soon...), but I would love to start a new chapter in my life. As of now, that chapter is unseen.
Grad school? Someday. Where? No idea.
Job? Hopefully. Where? No idea. Grand Portage? For 6 months? By myself? Really? Can I do it? Do I want to? I'm just not as willing to uproot myself and let the wind take me through some open door of opportunity as I need to be, I guess. Dwight Pitcaithley would be disappointed. Don't tell him.
Europe seems like it was forever ago. I remember going, but I don't feel as if I actually went. Does that make sense? I loved it so much, but I was ready to come home, as well. Now, I'm wishing we were still there, in some capacity or another. I think it's because it was three weeks of not working and spending money like crazy, while traveling around to amazing places and seeing things in person that I had only ever heard about or read about or seen via some form of media. It was an amazing trip. I felt more changed right when we got back...Now I feel like the same old Leah.
I need something different to keep me going. I was singing at Church, but that might not be the case anymore...(Budget cuts mean no pianist...no pianist means no singer, apparently.) I want to do Cross Community Players, but they only have two productions a year. We'll see how that one goes.
Oh well. For now, I'm looking forward to those little things, since they are what's getting me through right now. Hopefully someday soon, something will fall into place and things will make more sense and give me a little bit of purpose.
Don't get me wrong. It's nice to be home, it's semi-nice to be back at Byerly's...But I really want to do something different with my life. I mean, I'm looking forward to a bunch of small fun events that are in the near future (HP6 midnight show, Public Enemies, Ren Fest starts soon...), but I would love to start a new chapter in my life. As of now, that chapter is unseen.
Grad school? Someday. Where? No idea.
Job? Hopefully. Where? No idea. Grand Portage? For 6 months? By myself? Really? Can I do it? Do I want to? I'm just not as willing to uproot myself and let the wind take me through some open door of opportunity as I need to be, I guess. Dwight Pitcaithley would be disappointed. Don't tell him.
Europe seems like it was forever ago. I remember going, but I don't feel as if I actually went. Does that make sense? I loved it so much, but I was ready to come home, as well. Now, I'm wishing we were still there, in some capacity or another. I think it's because it was three weeks of not working and spending money like crazy, while traveling around to amazing places and seeing things in person that I had only ever heard about or read about or seen via some form of media. It was an amazing trip. I felt more changed right when we got back...Now I feel like the same old Leah.
I need something different to keep me going. I was singing at Church, but that might not be the case anymore...(Budget cuts mean no pianist...no pianist means no singer, apparently.) I want to do Cross Community Players, but they only have two productions a year. We'll see how that one goes.
Oh well. For now, I'm looking forward to those little things, since they are what's getting me through right now. Hopefully someday soon, something will fall into place and things will make more sense and give me a little bit of purpose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)