I've been busy meeting with doctors, hearing incredibly wonderful news, feeling slightly surreal and celebrating the news with Dan.  (And with tons of emails and phone calls from Team Laura and beyond.)  So...no time for a blog the past few days.  I've been too busy doing the happy dance.

My apologies to readers who long for serious stuff: political commentary, saavy movie reviews, the odd poem or two.

That said, we did take in a movie this evening.  Public Enemies with Johnny Depp, Christian Bale and Marion Cotillard (who won an Oscar a few years back for her performance in La Vie En Rose).  I enjoyed the performances overall.  Depp has some great moments, Cotillard is wonderful.  Bale seemed a bit workmanlike in his role, but also had a few good scenes, especially when he was conflicted over methods used to "get" Dillinger.

Unfortunately, Billy Crudup was woefully miscast as J. Edgar Hoover.  And equally unfortunate is that the movie is more of a biopic than a story.  So few of the qualities that appeal most in movies are present.  There is no real story arc, no transformation of character, and really only one person with whom the viewer can readily identify--"Billie," Dillinger's onscreen girlfriend.

I also found it somewhat disturbing that in the end, I was rooting for Dillinger/Depp over Purvis/Bale.  I could have been influenced by the fact I find Depp more appealing as a person and actor...but I also believe that the movie pushes the audience to sympathize with Dillinger by romanticizing him through the vehicle of his love story with Billie.  The film also pushes the audience away from sympathizing with the FBI by emphasizing the brutality of law enforcement during the era.  I'd have to see the (longish) film again to be sure of why exactly I felt the violence done by Dillinger's gang was somehow less disturbing than the violence done by the FBI.  But I'm not sure I'll be up for that for a while.

Bottom line?  It's an interesting film with some good performances.  A good way to stay out of the summer heat, but not an Oscar contender, imho.  (Although they are going to have 10 nominees next time, so who knows?)

In the meantime, I'm taking my happy dance and going to bed.

In an article in today's LA Times, writer Claudia Eller posits that the reason several recent summer films have failed is that audiences are no longer drawn to A-list actors.  She cites the dismal box office performances of three films as part of her argument: The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3 (starring John Travolta and Denzel Washington), Land of the Lost (with Will Ferrell), and Year One (which boasted Jack Black and Dana Carvey).  She also mentions the earlier in the year drubbing of State of Play and Duplicity, films that starred Russell Crowe and Ben Affleck, Julia Roberts and Clive Owens, respectively.

Even without quibbling over Eller's definition of a star (C'mon, Jack Black?  An actor, yes.  A celebrity, perhaps.  But not a star in my book), I think she's got it wrong.  The reason movies like Up, The Hangover and Star Trek have hit it big this summer is twofold:

1.  Innovation.  Up is the latest movie from Pixar, the animation geniuses who turned the genre on its ear with Toy Story.  The Hangover takes a "should be predictable" premise and livens it up with mystery, unexpected twists and a genuine story of transformation in the middle of all its antics.  Star Trek took a classic series and reworked it in a way that drew Trekkies and their grandkids.  (Trekkies may not have liked it, but they had to see it.  Their kids and grandkids loved it.)

2. Audiences are tired of reruns.  Pelham is a remake.  Land of the Lost is another in a series of Will Ferrell films that seems increasingly desperate for an audience (think Steve Martin in the late 80's).  Year One is Dumb and Dumber set 2008 years ago.  Similarly, State of Play and Duplicity both had a "been there, done that" sort of feel to the trailers.  State of Play was too close to Michael Clayton and Duplicity seemed like a pared down version of any of the Oceans films (11, 12 or 13).

What Ellers did get right is that this movie going season, word of mouth moves a lot quicker than it used to.  Films are instantly reviewed by bloggers, like yours truly; via tweet and text.  I think that's a good thing.  The audience is showing, I believe, that its hungry for a story that either surprises or touches off emotions (laughter, tears, something).

Studio heads shouldn't eschew stars in an attempt to "fix" this issue.  They should eschew tired stories and poor writing.

Today is the first day I've worn shorts this summer.  It's also the first day this summer that the June gloom we have (and I enjoy so much) in Laguna Niguel burned off before 9:00 a.m.  Which means that it's been fairly warm so far...but not so warm I've turned on the air conditioning.  (Gotta save that for the really hot days with NO breeze.

We had a little celebration of my scan news.  Last night it was a bit of bubbly (just a bit...gotta preserve that liver) and dinner out at a favorite Italian restaurant.  Then this morning the celebration continued with the wild abandon only found in sticky buns.

We had previously been turned on to Trader Joe's sticky buns, but those have mysteriously vanished from the marketplace.  So we're now onto Williams Sonoma sticky buns (pricey, I know, but you get 12 in 3 packages of four).  Not quite as sticky as TJ's but amazingly flakey and so, so good.

By lunchtime, I'd recovered myself and had a macrobiotic lunch at the local vegan place.  We ventured really far from the normal post-chemo agenda (i.e., the couch) and went to see The Hangover.  I laughed harder at that movie than I have in quite some time.  It's like watching a slow motion series of pratfalls, all elegantly crafted, with unexpected twists when you're expecting veers.

Last weekend, Lynne and I saw The Proposal.  More of a chick-flick, it was also funny but in a more dignified, and somewhat more predictable way.  There were times that the plot veered dangerously close to another favorite Sandra Bullock movie, While You Were Sleeping.  But leading man, Ryan Reynolds, and supporting actress, Betty White, both pulled the movie out of romantic comedy predictability with charming performances.

I ask you, what's better than a summer day, wearing shorts, hanging with your honey (or an amazing friend) and laughing out loud at a funny movie?

(I couldn't think of anything either.)

Still down with a sinus infection but the good news is that it appears to be breaking up...and I'm getting LOTS of reading and movie watching done.

We saw a predictable but enjoyable pop-corn romance today, Lucky You with Drew Barrymore and Eric Bana.  Nothing earth shattering but I've been playing a lot of video poker lately, so I enjoyed the plot about a professional poker player who "plays cards the way [he] should lead [his] life" and leads "[his] life like [he] should play cards."  There was one great line, having to do with the difference between competition and relationships that was worth the price of admission.  I can't find it in the movie quotes but it goes something like "Maybe there's more to forgiveness than winning and losing."

I also saw a fairly bad horror film, Silent Hill, which I wouldn't even recommend to horror fans.  Love the actors in it (Rahda Mitchell, Sean Bean).  Hated the film.

The best news here is that both films were free with my Cox cable On Demand/DVR.  One was on HBO (which we pay for and thus get free HBO movies on demand).  The other was on the mystery channel. 

Still, I'm looking forward to getting off the couch in the next few days.  Free mediocre movies are okay for sick time...but there's nothing like being healthy and paying to see mediocre movies in a theatre.

As promised, today’s fare is a little lighter than the heavy political discussion we’ve been having (many thanks to all the participants…I like the way the comments engender more thought, deeper response, better ideas).

Still, we all need a break now and then.  That’s what Dan and I had on Friday afternoon when we went to see 21, the new movie by director Robert Luketic, who previously brought us the comedies Legally Blonde and Monster-in-Law.

The plot surrounds a young, poor genius who must find a way to pay for Med School tuition.  He's recruited to a team of hipsters, fellow students all, who work for one of their college professors as card-counting players at Las Vegas casinos.  The game they're playing is, of course, 21.

There's an obligatory love story, lots of glitzy romanticization of Las Vegas, good guys, bad guys, betrayals of self and of others.  In other words, a fairly predictable plot acted by decent actors playing in a popcorn movie.

I always enjoy Kevin Spacey's performances (the professor) and he doesn't disappoint here, despite other reviews.  It's just that his part is thin, as is the whole movie.  That's a problem in a film that clocks in at 123 minutes (which feel more like 150).

As to the rest of the cast, Laurence Fishburne delivers a realistic performance as a casino security chief who is watching his craft fall to facial recognition programs.  Rounding out the cast are the lead character's two buddies (played by Josh Gad and Sam Golzari) who provide a welcome counterpoint to the beautiful people on the 21 squad both in acting ability and in delivering characters more of us can relate to.

Overall, I give the film a B-.  Good for a popcorn flick but it could have been (even should have been) more.

Dan came home early yesterday.  What a pleasant surprise!  We went to see "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" at our local movie theater.  I haven't read any reviews but it was a pretty light crowd for a summer afternoon.

The film was enjoyable for its special effects and, especially, for Imelda Staunton's delightfully cruel performance of Dolores Umbridge.  I'm not a professional movie reviewer like my brother-in-law, Ken Morefield (check out his website here), but I do know when I like a movie, when I LOVE a movie and when I hate a movie.

I'm in the "like" category with HP&TOOTP.  One of the issues with making films from complex books is the necessity of paring down the subplots.  JK Rowling, author of the Potter series, loves her subplots.  So we get only the breathiest, flimsiest version of Luna Lovegood here.  Ginny Weasely, Harry's future love interest, is reduced to looks and the occasional production of extremely impressive spells.  Hagrid comes in and out of the movie without much motivation.

I love the characters and very much enjoy the actors who portray them in the movie.  This time around, however, I felt like their performances were abbreviated sketches rather than fully realized characters.  And I don't really feel it was the acting that lacked luster (Radcliff, Watson and Grint are fine performers...especially Radcliff and Grint).  Instead, I have the general impression (rather than a fully fleshed opinion) that the writer was at fault.

The writer, Michael Goldenberg, has delivered some good screenplays in the past (Peter Pan-2003 and Contact-1997), but this time seemed to be content with stringing together major plot points rather than creating fully realized characters as he did in his adaptation of Peter Pan.

Most disappointing of all was the short shrift paid to Harry Uncle, Sirius Black.  One of the most devastating losses of the book was Sirius falling "through the veil."  In the movie, it's a loss but not the blow of the novel.  And Harry's struggle against killing one of the dark lord's minions is less impactful since we can't understand the depth of his loss, horror and rage...and what it costs him to hold it back.

Ah well...that's my two cents worth.  And it's more than colored by the fact that I am in process of listening to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.  The performer on the audio version, Jim Dale, does such a superb job of narration that it has been difficult for many of the movies to compete with his characterizations.

I'm about half-way through the book and already regretting the end of the series.  Does that stop me from listening?  No.  Quite a treat for when I'm on the elliptical.

Hey, a girl's gotta have something to motivate her!

p.s.  Check out Kenneth Turan's review for a cogent statement of what I merely was "feeling."