Hannibal

Just a short update today to express my excitement at the imminent premiere of the second season of "Hannibal". It premieres tonight at 10:00 PM on NBC.

In my opinion this show is, by far, the best filmed depiction of the character. The acting, plotting, and character development are all top notch, but the show is also more than that. It has an incredible, dark tone. It has a visual element that is sublime, thanks to its brilliant cinematography and art direction. Its images are grotesque and beautiful at the same time. It is the best television show I have ever had the pleasure of watching during its initial run. Aside from "Twin Peaks", it is the only television show I have seen that I would qualify as "High Art".

Book Review: Doctor Sleep

I've reached my reading goal for February, after finishing Stephen King's "Dr. Sleep", a book I'd been meaning to read for a few months. I enjoyed the book. It is probably middle of the road as far as quality compared to his other books. He has written much better and he has written worse, but he is such a talented writer that even a book that is average by his standards is very good.

I can't analyze the book too closely in its role as a sequel to "The Shining"--it has been over a decade since I read it. I'm sure that some moments in "Dr. Sleep" would have had a bit more emotional resonance if I were more familiar with the original novel. This is not a significant problem, as "Dr. Sleep" works just fine as a standalone book. It tells its own story, and while it does feature callbacks to and locations from its predecessor, they are presented in a way that anyone coming to this book fresh will experience no confusion.

The book spans about ten years, most of them in the first half. King uses this time to establish his characters, something he is especially gifted at. He deftly gets inside the heads of his protagonists and antagonists alike. Things happen during these pages, but they mainly serve to let us get to know the characters and to get them to the places they need to be for the novel's second half. It's like King is setting up a game board, but he's skilled enough to keep us entertained while he does it.

The second half of the novel is when the plot really gets rolling and the various characters that we've been introduced to start to come into contact with one another. While the story has the potential to be big and epic (it is about a roving band of nomads who have lived for hundreds or thousands of years by killing children who possess 'the shining') it is presented in a much more intimate manner. It's not about the hundreds of kids these people have killed, but about a single girl they have set their sights on. The scope of the novel feels much smaller than it could be, but that is not a bad thing. King has proven in the past that he has the ability to tell epic and intimate stories with the same skill. In a world where many books and movies try to be as "big" as possible, it is refreshing to see a sequel that is not afraid to go small.

King is often an unpredictable writer, and I found that to be true here as well. There were some cases where I was pretty sure I knew where the story was going. It would start to go in that direction, but then suddenly changed course. I was sometimes taken off guard by how easy things seemed to go for the good guys. While it may have been better for the book to throw a few more challenges their way, it was also interesting to read something where the protagonists plans worked pretty much exactly as they hoped. It somewhat diminishes the drama, and I wouldn't like it if this happened in every book, but since it happens so rarely, it was fun to read just for the novelty.

I don't have any serious reservations about the book. The only complaint I could air is that, as I said earlier, King has done better in the past. Are the main characters well drawn? Is the story compelling? Are the villains memorable? Objectively, the answer to all of these questions is "Yes". In the context of all of King's other books, the answer is still "yes", but not quite as emphatic.

Oscar Marathon

This past weekend, I re-watched all of the Best Picture Oscar nominees at a series of screenings at a local theatre. I've already seen and commented on all of them, but after second (and in two cases, third) viewings, here are my current thoughts, in the order that the movies screened:

Gravity: Still a great technological accomplishment, but it wasn't nearly as impressive in a traditional, non-IMAX theatre. Again, I think that due to the complicated technical processes that went into making the film, its Best Picture nomination is not unwarranted. However, it seems to be considered one of the front-runners to actually win the prize, and that would not be justified. The film has a pretty fantastic one trick, but it's still a one trick pony.

The Wolf of Wall Street: This was the third time I had seen the movie. It's one minute shy of three hours long, and I have not been bored in the slightest for even a second of the almost nine hours I've spent watching the film. According to everything I've read, it doesn't stand a chance of winning Best Picture, but it probably should. It is an incredibly tight, fascinating film. I've seen movies half its runtime that have felt longer.

Nebraska: I enjoyed this more than the first time I saw it. This is, in part, because the audience seemed to be having a lot of fun with it. It's a fine film, but not really Best Picture material. I would have liked to see "Before Midnight" nominated in its place.

Captain Phillips: My opinion hasn't changed. The first half is still pretty good, while the second half drags on for too long.

12 Years a Slave: This is another one of the front runners to win Best Picture. Out of the films that seem to actually have a chance, it's the one that should win. It has its issues, but it does have a compelling narrative that draws the viewer in.

Her: I still like the first two-thirds of the film, but again, the ending was weak. In fact, the movie runs out of steam a little before that. It gets to the point where it has thoroughly explored its concept and seems to be treading water, not moving in any real direction. It never fully recovers from this.

Philomena: The other film I was seeing for the third time, and the only film I might want to win Best Picture over "The Wolf of Wall Street". My heart says, "Philomena", because I really, really liked it, but my head says that "Wolf" is actually the better film by a nose. Unfortunately, this stands no chance of actually winning, either.

Dallas Buyers Club: I still found it hard to get into the movie. It wasn't just the frequent title cards, either, although they are a convenient scapegoat. It is primarily, as my Dad said, that the plot is disjointed. There's no real sense of progression.

American Hustle: Generally considered the third most likely film to win Best Picture if "Gravity" or "12 Years a Slave" doesn't. It's good, but not great. My opinion that Jennifer Lawrence is the best thing about the film was reaffirmed.

Reviews: Robocop and About Last Night

36. Robocop
I was very briefly exit polled after seeing "Robocop". The first question was to rate the movie as 'Excellent', 'Very Good', 'Good', 'Fair', or 'Poor'. I said "Good." The second question was: "Would you recommend it to a friend?" My answer: "Depends on the friend." Final question: "Did it meet your expectations?" The answer was "Yes." I think this last question was the most important. There was some complaint in the fan community that it was a mistake to make the movie PG-13, and that it was dumbing down what many people liked about the original. I'm not unsympathetic to these claims, but, bearing them in mind, I went into "Robocop" expecting a competent, likely forgettable action film. In this regard it met my expectations, so I was happy with it.

The film does have its issues. The final third of the film in particular felt a bit rushed. I've seen enough films with seemingly benevolent big corporations to know that the company behind Robocop would turn out to be evil to some degree, but the film itself did nothing to foreshadow this. They almost wait until the main plot appears to be finished before revealing the sinister natures of certain characters, making the development feel tacked on as an excuse to stage the film's climax. If the lead character had discovered this deception along with the audience, it would have been a plot twist, worthy of being hidden for so long. Instead, the reveal is done in a scene with the villains talking amongst themselves. If this is how the film wanted to stage the reveal, it could have gained some dramatic tension by placing the reveal much earlier in the film.

None of this gets in the way of some decent action scenes. While none of the film's major set pieces are especially groundbreaking, they get the job done and provide basic entertainment. The most entertaining moments, however, are when Samuel L. Jackson is on screen, portraying a political pundit with his own television show. Admittedly, Jackson doesn't bring anything new to this role; he shouts and swears like we've seen him do several time before, but his role is a comedic one and it didn't bother me that he was repeating himself. He may shout and swear in a lot of his movies, but there are few who can do it better.

37. About Last Night
I don't have that much to say about this film. It was marginally entertaining while I was watching it, but it's even more forgettable than most. There were some funny moments, but not as many as I would have liked. Many of the jokes depended on explicit language to make them funny. This can earn laughs in the moment, but when there is little true cleverness behind a joke, it also leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

The film follows the typical beats one finds in a romantic comedy, but oftentimes they feel obligatory (they always are, but the movie should be able to hide that). When the main couple breaks up, there seems to be little motivation for it. It just happens because that is what's supposed to happen at that point in the movie. The same is true of their predictable reconciliation at the end. As I mentioned in my review of "That Awkward Moment", movies like this are like comfort food. We don't expect or want them to reinvent the wheel. We just want them to throw a fresh coat of paint on the concept. "About Last Night" doesn't even do that.

Reviews: The Lego Movie and Vampire Academy

34. The Lego Movie
I can't give a real review, since I was very tired when I went to see this. I was fighting the urge to nod off for the first half hour, then finally I did doze off for around ten minutes or so. After that, I was fine and perfectly aware for the second half of the movie.

It was somewhat amusing in parts, but there was nothing that makes me want to go back and see the first half with a clearer head. I tend to think that the movie is not quite as clever as a lot of people seem to be giving it credit for, but since I missed a brief section, I won't say that with absolute certainty. Maybe I'll catch those few minutes on cable some day.

35. Vampire Academy
This movie did not get off to a good start, but it overcame that to become a watchable, although by no means exceptional, bit of entertainment.

I found it very difficult to get into the movie for the first twenty minutes. Much of this time was filled with a massive exposition dump done via voiceover. The nature of several different supernatural creatures and other information about the universe of the film is explained all at once, almost as if the audience were sitting in a lecture hall. Most first installments of fantasy-themed series feature a character being introduced to a new world, allowing the audience to discover that world along with the character. In "Vampire Academy", the protagonist is already a part of the supernatural world, leaving her to explain the intricacies of it to the audience. I wish the screenwriter could have found a more organic way to show this information rather than telling it in such an unartful manner.

Fortunately, the film does eventually get past this opening and becomes a pleasant enough diversion. It has some trouble juggling different genres. It tries at times to be somewhat serious, while at others makes attempts at satirizing typical high school movies. I like it when films successfully pull off multiple genres, but "Vampire Academy" often didn't seem to know quite what it was trying do with particular scenes. Many of the moments designed to poke fun at similar scenes in other high school movies are not fully fleshed out. They'll establish an event or setting, like a "cafeteria" where vampires suck blood from human volunteers, but the joke never goes beyond that initial comparison. If you're going to have a cafeteria scene, why not show what a food fight would look like? The film is more successful when telling its main storyline. The central mystery is nothing truly great, but it managed to keep me interested. I also always enjoy seeing performances from Gabriel Byrne, who I've been a big fan of since the first season of "In Treatment".

In short, "Vampire Academy" was not a particularly good movie, but, after the exposition dump at the beginning, I did manage to enjoy myself.

Once Upon a Mattress

I recently finished portraying the Jester in a production of "Once Upon a Mattress" with Live Arts Maryland. I have done several shows with this group in the past and, as always, I had a blast. We have a very short rehearsal process, just one to two weeks, before our performances. Unfortunately, due to snow, we only got to have one performance this time instead of the usual two.

Here are some photos from rehearsals:

My Big Musical Number

Conferring With The King

Getting My Jester's Hat Put On

The Cast

Reviews: Groundhog Day and The Monuments Men

32. Groundhog Day
Another film in the "classics" series at  the local theatre, "Groundhog Day" is a movie that I'd seen before, although not in a while. While the basic premise of reliving the same day over and over again was not introduced by this film, it is probably the best known example of the concept in action, largely due to how well that premise is executed.

The film hits all of the same beats as the typical romantic comedies that get churned out with regularity, but the way in which that story is told makes it stand out, and elevates the film above its genre. The basic premise is thoroughly explored. We see Bill Murray's character experience both the joys and frustrations one would expect someone in such a situation to experience. The film doesn't tell a new story; it tells an old story in a new way, and does so wonderfully.

33. The Monuments Men
I recently said that I would soon be discussing a movie that I would not be willing to go see again under any circumstances. "The Monuments Men" is that movie. It is a boring, uninspired mess of a film, without a single even remotely memorable character.

The film's problems start very early on. In most "team" movies, each member gets an introduction establishing who they are and maybe giving them a quirky character trait to make them easy to remember. In "The Magnificent Seven", the team is gathered one by one, each under different circumstances. In "The Monuments Men" the team is gathered during a musical montage with no dialogue whatsoever.

After introducing all of its characters without really introducing them, the film then breaks the team into groups, sending them off into unconnected storylines for much of the movie. These storylines are not edited together well. Instead of creating any type of continuity, the film just seems to randomly be cutting back and forth between unrelated scenes. This doesn't just kill the film's momentum--it prevents any momentum from being built in the first place. Instead of watching anything that could actually pull the viewer in, we are instead forced to listen to repeated lectures about how important art is. The film doesn't have a single scene of genuine tension in it, not even during its sad excuse for a "climax". It should never have been released.

Book Review: Divergent

Although I am eager to read Stephen King's "Dr. Sleep", I decided to read that as the second of my two books this month. I want to really be able to concentrate on and get into the book, which will be easier to do now that the show I'm in ends tonight and I won't be going to rehearsals every day.

Instead, I read "Divergent" as my first book of the month. It came recommended by my sister, who really enjoyed it and said that I should read it before the movie comes out. She gave it, among several other books, a brief write-up in her blog, here.

Unfortunately, she seems to have enjoyed the book a lot more than I did. I was not bored by the book and I did not dislike it, but I never found it truly compelling.

The biggest issue I have with the book is that it doesn't stand on its own. I knew going in that it was the first book in a trilogy, but I hoped that it would tell its own complete story as well as setting the stage for sequels. Instead, the whole book feels like a prologue. It starts off quickly enough, maybe even a bit too quickly--the main character's initial situation is barely established before it is changed. Then, however, the book moves into an extended section based on her training to be accepted into a new place. I was expecting this section to last maybe 100-150 pages, but instead it lasted almost the entire book.

Having a book solely about this training process would have been fine, but for the repeated hints about the "real story" being dropped. Knowing that something bigger was coming made me want the book to just get to it already, especially after having gone through several hundred pages. When the book finally gets there, it does so very suddenly and the last few chapters almost feel tacked on, as if they are only there to jump start the sequels.

The original "Star Wars" movie sets up its trilogy very well. It creates a new universe and establishes protagonists and antagonists that are still alive at the end of the film, ready to do battle again in future installments. It also tells its own complete story. We find out about the Death Star at the very beginning of the film, and the rising action throughout the story all leads up to the triumphant victory where it is destroyed at the end. The door is open for sequels, but the movie was clearly about its own events. "Divergent" creates its own universe and establishes some ongoing characters, but instead of being about its own story, it seems more concerned with setting up its sequels. I'm sure I'll get around to reading them eventually, and I hope they're good enough to warrant this protracted setup.

Reviews: Labor Day and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

30. Labor Day
I could count on one hand the number of movies I've seen with my pass that were so unenjoyable that I wouldn't see them again even if a friend wanted to. "Labor Day" does not make that list (another film, which I'll discuss in my next movie update does), but that doesn't mean it was anything resembling a good movie. In fact, the ludicrousness of some aspects of the film may have even helped to make it watchable, as my constant eye-rolling made me an active participant.

The biggest problem with the film is that its timeline robs it of all credibility. The main story takes place, as the title indicates, over Labor Day weekend. The evolution of the relationships between the characters is impossible over this short time frame. Kate Winslet's character goes from being held hostage by Josh Brolin in her own house, to falling in love with him, to planning to run away together to Canada. Over the course of a long weekend. There's such a thing as suspension of disbelief, but this is ridiculous. While watching the film, I often assumed that several days had passed, until "Saturday" was superimposed on the screen, reminding me that it had only been one.

There is also some problematic overacting going on near the end of the film. Two of the characters are questioned in one scene by a suspicious police officer, and in another by suspicious bank employees. They respond to this with such over the top nervous behavior (stumbling over words, huge eyes, etc.) that in a movie with any realism they would be increasing suspicion instead of averting it.

31. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
I saw this back in November around the time it came out, and enjoyed it. I didn't feel an overwhelming urge to see it again, but it was still in theatres and my pass would let me, so I figured "why not".

My opinion of it stayed the same. It's a good movie, but didn't change my life in any way. I enjoyed it more than the first film, which had too many shaky cam shots for my taste. My viewings of this film also benefitted from being done long after having read the book. When I saw the first "Hunger Games" film, I had just finished the book. This made some alterations from the text, even when justified, distracting. I was able to enjoy this film without having the book excessively fresh in my mind.

I don't really have much else in the way of critique to say about this film. It does its job effectively, and is a solid, skillfully made movie. There's nothing major in it to criticize, but also nothing so incredible about it to warrant effusive praise.

I've gotten through the first of my two books for February, and I'll have a little to say about that in my next post.

Reviews: That Awkward Moment and Gravity

28. That Awkward Moment
This movie and others like it are the cinematic equivalent of going to a chain restaurant and ordering a cheeseburger. You go into it knowing what to expect and you leave satisfied, even if ultimately it is a forgettable movie/burger.

"That Awkward Moment" is consistently amusing and has a few good laughs, but there's nothing there to elevate it above its genre. It is incredibly formulaic. The general direction of the plot is evident from the word "go". There are also a few moments in the film that felt a bit contrived; they were only present to help the film move along its preordained track. In a movie with loftier aspirations, this would have bothered me more, but in this case I merely shrugged. Sure, some elements of the screenplay could have been handled with more subtlety, but this didn't have a huge negative impact on my viewing experience.

This probably isn't worth seeing in theatres for people who don't go very often, but it would make for a fine choice for an evening's entertainment once it's available for rental or on cable.

29. Gravity
I didn't use my Movie Pass to see "Gravity", as the pass doesn't work for IMAX or 3D screenings, and I'd heard that the film should be seen under those conditions. That turned out to be good advice.

The visuals in the film are amazing, and the use of 3-D feels merited. In some films I'll almost forget I'm seeing a movie in 3-D (in a bad way), but here I felt the effects of the extra dimension for the entire film. It was on these merits that the film held my attention. The story itself is effective, but nothing special or groundbreaking. It probably came across as better than it actually is due to how well the effects immerse the viewer in the world of the film.

Were the groundbreaking effects enough to justify the film's Best Picture nomination? I'm not sure, but they might be. It's certainly not at the bottom of my list now that I've seen all the nominees. And this movie highlighted better than anything else I've seen in a while one of the reasons to go to the movies. It's not always about seeing a complex story. Sometimes it's just about the spectacle of it all.

Next time: "Labor Day" and "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire".

Reviews: I, Frankenstein and Dallas Buyer's Club

26. I, Frankenstein
When my brother-in-law was visiting over the holidays, he saw a trailer for "I, Frankenstein" on TV and commented that the movie looked terrible. He wasn't far off. The film has an interesting premise, but fails to do anything with it. It never really comes together.

If the screenplay is any indication, this movie was doomed from the start. It is a series of scenes loosely connected into a "plot", and lazily written. At one point, Adam (the monster) sneaks into the bad guys' lair and walks around almost freely, getting hints as to what their Big Evil Plan is. The lack of security is ridiculous. The only reason he's able to walk around freely is because that's what needs to happen for the story to progress and the writer could not be bothered to make the situation any more believable.

It's also hard to care about what we're told is the imminent destruction of the human world, when the number of human characters could be counted on one hand. There aren't even any extras populating the world. When the characters do battle throughout the streets of the city, those streets are completely empty. One look at this empty city with its desaturated, bluish hues, and one wonders what human world they're trying to save.

27. Dallas Buyers Club
I was a little disappointed by this film. It was well made and featured some great performances, but it never really grabbed me, so I was not as invested in what happened to the characters as I could have been.

The film is oddly paced. It frequently skips time, jumping months or years into the future. Many films do this, but in "Dallas Buyers Club", the skips do not feel as natural because every time they take place, a title card pops up saying "Two Months Later". Such title cards can be used occasionally to good effect (there's an example in "The Wolf of Wall Street"), but when they show up all the time, they pull me out of the film. They create the feeling of distance between the viewer and the story, and when bad things happen to the characters, I find myself thinking "Gosh, that's a shame" instead of feeling the righteous indignation the filmmakers are probably aiming for. The film's ending is also strange. It has a climactic moment, yes, but not one that it feels like the whole movie has been building towards. Then, a final title card appears on screen and the movie is over. For me it was too sudden, but was also reflective of the film's failure to fully connect with me throughout.

None of this is to demean the performances however, some of which are likely to win awards on Oscar night.

Next time: "That Awkward Moment" and "Gravity".

Reviews: Captain Phillips and Gimme Shelter

24. Captain Phillips
If I hadn't gotten my Movie Pass, there is a good chance I would have never seen this film. I won't go into details, but from some things I've read, the filmmakers portray the lead character in a more flattering light than he probably deserves. This was enough for me to not want to spend money to see the film, but with my Movie Pass, I could see it for free. So why not? In spite of my reservations, I was able to judge the film on its own merits.

The first half of the film is very good. It gives an intense "you are there" feeling, especially during the brief time that some of the hijackers play a cat and mouse game with crew members still hiding on the boat. Unfortunately, this comes to an end much sooner than I'd expected. The second half of the film consists primarily of five people in a lifeboat. There are still intense moments in this half, especially near the end, but for much of the time the urgency is lost. I understand the need for the movie to take it's time here, even at the risk of getting a little dull. It needs to establish the frustrations faced by the characters who are cooped up in this small boat for days on end. It takes it a little too far, though. This section could have easily lost a good ten to fifteen minutes.

25. Gimme Shelter
This movie wasn't bad. I actually kind of liked it, but the story didn't have quite enough of a spark to justify the film's exhibition in a theatrical setting. Instead, it felt like a good TV movie. There are moments of drama. In fact, much of the film is quite dramatic, but these scenes are not arranged to create a palpable sense or "rising action" leading towards a conclusion. Perhaps television really would be the best medium to showcase "true stories" like this. When making any film, but especially one meant for the movie theatres, it is most important to make the material work as a film, even if that requires making changes to the true story or the source material.

Aside from lacking that crucial "spark", the film was well made. As a big fan of "High School Musical 3", it was fun for me to see Vanessa Hudgens deliver this kind of performance, where she changes her appearance, voice, etc. I wish the film had had a more solidly structured screenplay that gave her more to do with the character.

Next time: "I, Frankenstein" and "Dallas Buyers Club".

Reviews: Nebraska and 12 Years a Slave

As I've mentioned in my February Goals, now that I've seen almost everything in theatres, I'll be using my Movie Pass to see the new releases of each week, but won't be going to the theatre quite as much as I did in January. As a result, I'm going to start reviewing two films per movie post instead of three, as I have less to catch up on.

22. Nebraska
Sometimes a director will make a film so good that it is virtually impossible for him to ever top it. For Alexander Payne, that movie is "Sideways". I have never seen a movie more artfully walk the line between serious drama and laugh out loud comedy, both aspects of the film resulting from some brilliant performances.

It is clear while watching "Nebraska" that it is made by the same filmmaker. There are some sequences that would be right at home in a film like "Sideways". But this time I did not connect anywhere near as well with the characters, so these sequences did not have the same comedic or dramatic effect they would have had in the other film. They could still be amusing, but rarely rose above that. There were some isolated moments that truly had life and drew me in, but they were too few to elicit sustained interest. Also, I was not bothered by the film being in black and white, but do not see how this was as "essential" as Payne has claimed.

In short, I did not dislike this film, but did not particularly like it, either. "Sideways" was like capturing lightning in a bottle. Anything that follows is not likely to live up to it.

23. 12 Years a Slave
Before seeing this film, I had heard that it was good, but that it was a "homework" movie, something you felt you should watch, but wouldn't particularly enjoy. For me, the most important factor in a movie's "enjoyment" is whether or not it kept my attention. No matter how hard certain parts of a film are to watch, as long as I'm not bored, I consider the film to be enjoyable.

Based on that criteria, I enjoyed "12 Years a Slave" quite a bit. Yes, there were some acts of violence that were difficult to watch, but the film kept my attention for its entire run time. It is full of good actors, featuring many veteran performers in small roles (it was nice to see Paul Giamatti playing a nastier character than he usually does). Even knowing where the film was going (the title hints pretty overtly that the lead character's time as a slave has a shelf life), the strong performances kept me invested in what was happening to the characters in the present.

My only issue with the film is that some shots are held for a bit too long, especially some close-ups. The problem is that these shot lengths did not feel organic, and called attention to themselves. When I'm sitting in a theatre thinking "this shot has gone on for a long time", it pulls me out of the story a little.

Next up: "Captain Phillips" and "Gimme Shelter".

Goals for February

Here are the goals I've set for myself for February:

1. Watch at least 10 different movies in the theatre. This goal returns from January, where I exceeded it by quite a bit. It should still be a fairly easy goal to attain, but there's no way I'll be racking up the same numbers I did last month. One reason is that in January, every movie was an option. The Movie Pass only lets you see each movie once. Since I had never used it before January, I was able to see anything that was in theatres. Now, I've pretty much seen everything, so I'll just be using it to see the new releases of each week. Still a lot of movies, but not quite as many. Also, I'm performing in the musical "Once Upon a Mattress" with the Annapolis Chorale on the 14th and 15th of this month. We started rehearsals a few days ago, and will be rehearsing almost every day until the performances, so my schedule won't be quite as open to fitting in movie times.

2. Go to the gym every day. I'm making this goal to ensure that I stay on track. I've been going to the gym every day for a long time now, and wanted to ensure that I will keep it up even with the busy schedule I'll have during the first half of the month. Making it a goal seemed like a good way to make sure of that.

3. Read two books. Two summers ago I went on a reading binge, making my way through more than 10,000 pages in 3 months. I'm not going to do that again anytime soon (I was reading to the exclusion of almost everything else), but I haven't read anything in a while, so I figured this would be a good goal to make. I've been meaning to read "Dr. Sleep", the Stephen King book that came out last year, and this should be a good opportunity.

4. Do more screenplay prep work. Last, month I reached my goal for this, but I'm still, not 100% happy with what I have. My goal here is to just do a little more thinking/refining of my ideas so that I'll be ready to start actually writing in March.

In my next post, I'll be back to talking about the movies I've seen. This time I'll be discussing "Nebraska" and "12 Years a Slave".

January Goals Wrap-Up

Now that January is over, it's time to look at how I did with my goals for the first month.

1. Lose weight. I probably broke even on this, more or less. My jeans might feel a little looser, but I certainly didn't lose a whole lot of weight. I'll put it down as a marginal success for now.

2. Watch at least 10 different movies in the theatre. This goal, upgraded to 20 partway through the month, I blew out of the water. I ended up seeing 30 different movies in the theatre this month. I also saw a few movies a second time, making my total number of trips to the theatre 34. This is certainly the goal that I've had the most fun fulfilling.

3. "Index Card" a screenplay. I'm not entirely happy with what I've ended up with (it's a good start, but still needs some work), but I did complete this goal, and wound up with a rough blueprint of a screenplay.

In my next post, I'll talk about my goals for February.