Now, I'm fairly certain I've never done this, so this is truly just a hypothetical question. I don't want anyone casting aspersions my way thinking I'm asking about something I've done. ;-)
First, the set up:
Let's say you have four chicken breasts that are on the far side of safe to prepare and need to be cooked now. Let's say you grill or broil them, but you don't use enough heat or time and the four breasts are undercooked. Since they were so late in the "use by" date, let's further say that two of the four are far enough gone and undercooked enough that you would get food poisoning eating them.
Second, the situation:
You finish cooking the four breasts, eat one of them for your dinner, and you luck out that you don't get sick (this breast is not spoiled, but it is undercooked). That gives you a false sense of security that you did a good enough job cooking the chicken that you wrap up the remainder and put it in the fridge. Since you didn't have problems from the first one, you have no idea the others are time-bombs waiting to go off.
Third, the question:
Next day you grab one of the undercooked and turned breasts and put it into the microwave to reheat. My question-- if you cook it long enough and get it hot enough on the reheat will that make the breast "safe" to eat? It is my understanding that the majority of food poisoning occurs because of bacteria and other things that can be killed in hot enough temperatures. Hence the reason why you are supposed to cook to minimum internal temperatures. So, wouldn't the microwave reach those temperatures, kill or destroy the bacteria and other issues, and bring the undercooked food up to a safe-to-eat level? Or is meat "bad" always once it goes "bad?"
Conclusion:
My feeling is that this circumstance would mitigate the situation and the meat would be okay. I am only basing this conclusion on my limited understand of how food poisoning works and what is required to destroy the organisms that cause food poisoning. However, maybe there is more to food poisoning than I am aware. Maybe the end result is somehow different than the starting factors, so the second cooking would not mitigate the effects of the spoiled food. Maybe the organisms work harder after being heated and the refrigerated meat gets so much worse over the next 24 hours or so that no amount of microwaving or other reheating can kill or impede the spoilage.
What is your informed opinion?
April 30, 2008
Life Changes
Last week was an experience, going from losing my job, to finding out that my cat has pretty bad diabetes, not receiving and having to ask after my severance, and then getting my confirmation and approval of permanent residence in Canada on Friday. Saturday was a nice day spent with my wife and mother in downtown Los Angeles for my birthday. Sunday my wife started her trek home, which was sad. But boy was it wonderful having her here for such a topsy-turvy and emotional week.
Thank you to everyone for their kind comments, words of encouragement, and prayers during this time.
I am still a little upset with how my company handled the severance issues and dissemination of information to those of us who were laid off. This is only our lives you hold in your hand, so of course delaying it not once, not twice, but thrice without telling us hardly anything is not okay. Get it straight and get it right. However, the severance is decent, so I cannot complain about that. It should be enough to tide me over until I can move and pay for a lot of the moving expenses.
Monday and Tuesday were interesting, as I worked partial days helping to get Renee up to speed with what I did, checking and writing procedures, cleaning up over 7 years of accumulated paperwork and stuff, and asking questions of HR as the severance information which was supposed to arrive last week continued to be delayed. First I was told it was shipping Monday for arrival at my home on Tuesday. On Tuesday I was assured it was finally going out for receipt on Wednesday-- the day we are being let go.
Today I was pretty much done. I did some last-minute tasks that my former boss requested and then headed down for my "exit interview" with HR at 10 am. Took all of about 2 minutes to complete, so I was done and gone. Nothing like getting to work at 9 am, working for an hour, and going home. And I was pleasantly surprised to find my FedEx package waiting for me when I arrived home. Finally!
Many of those leaving the company sent out group emails with their well-wishes and sadness about leaving, plus their contact info. I did not. Not that I don't like or respect those with whom I used to work, but rather because those whom I wish to stay in contact with already know how I feel, what my contact information is, and that I will contact them. I'll probably get flack for that, but that just isn't me.
I am actually very relaxed now. I had been thinking of leaving the company anyway, and only was stopped by the desire to work until I could move to Canada. Without that pressure, this comes at a good time and allows me to focus on getting to Canada as quickly as I can. And that is important, as the monthly rent, additional $1500 to break my lease, and daily expenses, on top of any moving expenses, will add up quickly. And, of course, in the back of everything are my health care needs.
I am playing today to finish out the day. I've played some CoH, watched some saved TV, and will likely watch a movie shortly. Tomorrow I will start the slow process of evaluating, deciding, and packing. My goal, I think, is to try to be ready to leave by the end of May or early in June.
Thank you to everyone for their kind comments, words of encouragement, and prayers during this time.
I am still a little upset with how my company handled the severance issues and dissemination of information to those of us who were laid off. This is only our lives you hold in your hand, so of course delaying it not once, not twice, but thrice without telling us hardly anything is not okay. Get it straight and get it right. However, the severance is decent, so I cannot complain about that. It should be enough to tide me over until I can move and pay for a lot of the moving expenses.
Monday and Tuesday were interesting, as I worked partial days helping to get Renee up to speed with what I did, checking and writing procedures, cleaning up over 7 years of accumulated paperwork and stuff, and asking questions of HR as the severance information which was supposed to arrive last week continued to be delayed. First I was told it was shipping Monday for arrival at my home on Tuesday. On Tuesday I was assured it was finally going out for receipt on Wednesday-- the day we are being let go.
Today I was pretty much done. I did some last-minute tasks that my former boss requested and then headed down for my "exit interview" with HR at 10 am. Took all of about 2 minutes to complete, so I was done and gone. Nothing like getting to work at 9 am, working for an hour, and going home. And I was pleasantly surprised to find my FedEx package waiting for me when I arrived home. Finally!
Many of those leaving the company sent out group emails with their well-wishes and sadness about leaving, plus their contact info. I did not. Not that I don't like or respect those with whom I used to work, but rather because those whom I wish to stay in contact with already know how I feel, what my contact information is, and that I will contact them. I'll probably get flack for that, but that just isn't me.
I am actually very relaxed now. I had been thinking of leaving the company anyway, and only was stopped by the desire to work until I could move to Canada. Without that pressure, this comes at a good time and allows me to focus on getting to Canada as quickly as I can. And that is important, as the monthly rent, additional $1500 to break my lease, and daily expenses, on top of any moving expenses, will add up quickly. And, of course, in the back of everything are my health care needs.
I am playing today to finish out the day. I've played some CoH, watched some saved TV, and will likely watch a movie shortly. Tomorrow I will start the slow process of evaluating, deciding, and packing. My goal, I think, is to try to be ready to leave by the end of May or early in June.
April 24, 2008
More Good News (Not!)
The week keeps getting better. Took Calypso into the vet yesterday because she was vomiting and had peed twice on the bed within a week-- which is very unusual behavior for her. Yes, I know I've written before about her peeing habits, but she has never peed on the bed during those indiscretions. She sleeps there as well as me, knows that it is wrong, and felt so ashamed that she ran and "hid" in her hidey-hole under the bookcase.
So this was something different, especially when you consider the vomiting. Add in the rampant drinking of water, the $300 test yesterday, and it turned out to be feline diabetes.
Caly is 10 years old this month. With my birthday (37), she has been with me for about 27% of my life to-date. That's a significant amount of time. She's been with me through some significant changes and events in my life, she's been my confidante and companion while others have come and gone, and she's been a sounding board through good times and bad.
However, she's just a cat, too. Her quality of life is already affected by this. She's an older cat at 10; considered a senior. How much more life does she have and what quality will that life be even with insulin. It may be that the best choice is to put her down.
Other things that are weighing on this news are:
So, I'm torn. I don't want to make a bad or wrong decision, or one that is too selfish toward my own desires. On the other hand, someone has to be an advocate for Caly and her quality of life. Is her listlessness, vomiting, and urinating problems at such a degree that she needs someone to consider her needs? Is she in pain?
I've got some hard thinking to do.
So this was something different, especially when you consider the vomiting. Add in the rampant drinking of water, the $300 test yesterday, and it turned out to be feline diabetes.
Caly is 10 years old this month. With my birthday (37), she has been with me for about 27% of my life to-date. That's a significant amount of time. She's been with me through some significant changes and events in my life, she's been my confidante and companion while others have come and gone, and she's been a sounding board through good times and bad.
However, she's just a cat, too. Her quality of life is already affected by this. She's an older cat at 10; considered a senior. How much more life does she have and what quality will that life be even with insulin. It may be that the best choice is to put her down.
Other things that are weighing on this news are:
- The move to Canada. Is it best for both the animal and the human beings to try to move a sick cat across the country? Will she need to be quarantined and, if so, how will she handle that with the diabetes?
- How quickly will her current problems accelerate without medications? Will she be "okay" for a few months before things turn bad? A few years? How much better will she be or will her quality of life be, at 10, even with the insulin?
- The expense of the remaining tests and the ongoing costs of the insulin on top of the previous tests, especially now that I'm out of work and expenses are likely to be tight going forward.
- The damage she's done to-date to the apartment.
So, I'm torn. I don't want to make a bad or wrong decision, or one that is too selfish toward my own desires. On the other hand, someone has to be an advocate for Caly and her quality of life. Is her listlessness, vomiting, and urinating problems at such a degree that she needs someone to consider her needs? Is she in pain?
I've got some hard thinking to do.
April 21, 2008
Glass Half Full or Empty?
Well, I got "the script" from Renee today. I knew something was up at work with the number of mid-level managers who were present much earlier than usual, and the fact that Tom (one of the higher managers of our business unit) was going from office to office with papers in his hand. I hoped he wouldn't stop at Renee's office, but when he did, I was expecting the inevitable call in and scripted "you're fired" message. The new company will not be extending an offer of employment to me upon the close of the purchase deal.
I'm a little sad, a very small touch bitter, but mostly just disappointed in this. I will get a severance package from the previous company and I am getting three days this week off on them (paid leave) to help me "adjust" to this decision. Then, by April 30, I need to transition my work to her, including training her on the more technical things I do, and then it is adios.
It was a good run. I was hired on January 8, 2001. I was something of a star in my department because I got through the training much faster than expected, was participating as a quality member well before they expected. However, in recent months, my private life has intruded on things more; I've used more sick days, I've been distracted by my (2nd) wedding and the immigration process, and the company has continually halted new work on two of the main product lines I worked on, so I couldn't shine by doing those document sets and prove my value.
The glass is half empty because my life is currently in a lot of turmoil personally and I didn't need professional turmoil on top of that. Added to that is the fact I may have to look for a job for an undisclosed period of time in that I have no idea when the Canadian government will give me (hopefully) approval to move to Canada. It will be hard to interview even for short-term contract work knowing that I may not be able to complete it if the companies don't allow me to work from "home."
The glass is half full because we are somewhat hopeful that the immigration may come through sometime very soon. If it does, I can transition from working to packing to moving to looking for a job in Canada fairly seamlessly. If need be, I can pack up everything and live low-cost with mom for a few months. I have my sister and father who can potentially be helpful. And, of course, my wife is here this week to discuss this issue with me and to help make plans and think through strategies. Maybe this will work out for the best in the long run.
As I've said before, I do not define myself by my job. It is, after all, just a job. However, it is still sad to be let go after giving over 7 years of good service. But, with the help of my friends and family, I will turn this into something positive and worthwhile in the long run. Just need to figure things out in the meantime.
I'm a little sad, a very small touch bitter, but mostly just disappointed in this. I will get a severance package from the previous company and I am getting three days this week off on them (paid leave) to help me "adjust" to this decision. Then, by April 30, I need to transition my work to her, including training her on the more technical things I do, and then it is adios.
It was a good run. I was hired on January 8, 2001. I was something of a star in my department because I got through the training much faster than expected, was participating as a quality member well before they expected. However, in recent months, my private life has intruded on things more; I've used more sick days, I've been distracted by my (2nd) wedding and the immigration process, and the company has continually halted new work on two of the main product lines I worked on, so I couldn't shine by doing those document sets and prove my value.
The glass is half empty because my life is currently in a lot of turmoil personally and I didn't need professional turmoil on top of that. Added to that is the fact I may have to look for a job for an undisclosed period of time in that I have no idea when the Canadian government will give me (hopefully) approval to move to Canada. It will be hard to interview even for short-term contract work knowing that I may not be able to complete it if the companies don't allow me to work from "home."
The glass is half full because we are somewhat hopeful that the immigration may come through sometime very soon. If it does, I can transition from working to packing to moving to looking for a job in Canada fairly seamlessly. If need be, I can pack up everything and live low-cost with mom for a few months. I have my sister and father who can potentially be helpful. And, of course, my wife is here this week to discuss this issue with me and to help make plans and think through strategies. Maybe this will work out for the best in the long run.
As I've said before, I do not define myself by my job. It is, after all, just a job. However, it is still sad to be let go after giving over 7 years of good service. But, with the help of my friends and family, I will turn this into something positive and worthwhile in the long run. Just need to figure things out in the meantime.
April 18, 2008
Strength In Unity
My wife flies in tomorrow afternoon for a week's stay in SoCal. While excited as always for her visit, it happens to come at a great time. As you know from previous posts, I find out no later than next Tuesday if I will be offered a position with the new company. If I am not, I look forward to working out the rest of the month for my current employer and then getting a severance package from them. If I do, then it is all-systems go for the new job.
Under this stressful time, it will be nice to have my wife her for support, encouragement, and to talk with about the various permutations. Also, I will have paperwork to fill out either way that I can bring home and discuss with her in person.
It will be, in many ways, one of the first times we'll be together for a "momentous" happening in our lives that we can discuss in person and make decisions about together. It gets frustrating sometimes to have nearly all of these conversations by phone, email, or IM. However, I cannot knock those means of communication as they have helped us to establish very open and honest lines of communication that we have every plan of continuing once we are together full-time.
I like to plan very small "adventures" for my birthday. Sometimes it is simply going to a restaurant I haven't been to before, or a walk on the beach, or a movie with friends. Sometimes it is out to mom's for a treat. A couple of years it has been going to visit the otters at the Long Beach Aquarium (I love otters). This year, with M here, I was looking for something fun to do with the family. It looks like we will be going to Los Angeles. The only question is whether we go on Friday (a day early) to just LA to see some sights or if we go on Saturday and attending the LA Times Festival of Books as well as see the sights. Either way we plan on having mom drive down here first and then head up to LA for some fun. Hopefully we can get to the Hollywood Walk of Fame, maybe the Tar Pits (which I keep meaning to go see, but haven't yet), or some of the downtown museums. It will be a fun day.
Under this stressful time, it will be nice to have my wife her for support, encouragement, and to talk with about the various permutations. Also, I will have paperwork to fill out either way that I can bring home and discuss with her in person.
It will be, in many ways, one of the first times we'll be together for a "momentous" happening in our lives that we can discuss in person and make decisions about together. It gets frustrating sometimes to have nearly all of these conversations by phone, email, or IM. However, I cannot knock those means of communication as they have helped us to establish very open and honest lines of communication that we have every plan of continuing once we are together full-time.
***
I like to plan very small "adventures" for my birthday. Sometimes it is simply going to a restaurant I haven't been to before, or a walk on the beach, or a movie with friends. Sometimes it is out to mom's for a treat. A couple of years it has been going to visit the otters at the Long Beach Aquarium (I love otters). This year, with M here, I was looking for something fun to do with the family. It looks like we will be going to Los Angeles. The only question is whether we go on Friday (a day early) to just LA to see some sights or if we go on Saturday and attending the LA Times Festival of Books as well as see the sights. Either way we plan on having mom drive down here first and then head up to LA for some fun. Hopefully we can get to the Hollywood Walk of Fame, maybe the Tar Pits (which I keep meaning to go see, but haven't yet), or some of the downtown museums. It will be a fun day.
April 17, 2008
I joined Facebook to be closer to my Canadian friends, who switched en masse from blogging to using that tool. I found the site initially very intimidating, as it is not set up in a way that makes sense to my mind, the features and especially the toggles and switches, were hard to find and not very well labeled. But I struggled through so I could be more connected.
And then the applications started bombarding me. Every little quirky thing that someone sent me required the installation of a new application in order to see it, read it, or respond to it. Every one of these apps then had a page that involved sending the results to everyone on my Facebook account unless I could find the (often) small or well-hidden Cancel or Skip button. Even using that, I was finding that a bunch of my stuff still was sent to people in my Facebook list, which frustrated me.
The last straw for me was the recent addition of the "People you might know" feature. This feature looks at my Facebook list and those who are listed as my friends' lists, compares them, and suggests people off of their lists to me that I might know. This is all well and good, I guess, except that I have turned on all of the options I can that do not send my information out to just anyone. Now I find that my info is going out there, spreading farther than I intended or wanted. I didn't mind that those who wanted to could search for me, even with the options I had set, but I didn't want just anyone being able to get a hold of me willy-nilly-- I have "friends" in my past whom I would rather not be contacted by. If, however, those people are friends of people I am friends with, they get my info for free and there is nothing I can do about it.
I contacted Facebook Support on this directly and asked them to point me in the direction of the Off switch. Support responded with the following:
This comes after a recent incident wherein Facebook installed features that similarly sent a bunch of data out that members did not want and it got a bunch of protests over. And an incident wherein Facebook installed some features that allowed businesses to track members purchasing habits and posted them online. And another that gave out identities-- do you see a trend? Facebook has a habit and history of putting in place features and applications that give away its members' identities for free to anyone who wants to join Facebook. It isn't until or unless the members complain that it does something about it or adds a toggle or switch.
So, shortly after receiving that email from Facebook Support, I Deactivated my account. I replied to both the email and the request for a reason why I was deactivating with a succinct and specific reason why: until such time as Facebook amends its policies as a company and offers these features as optional and respects my desire for some amount of privacy within the confines of the application it is enabling, I cannot be a member. In my mind it is that simple.
And then the applications started bombarding me. Every little quirky thing that someone sent me required the installation of a new application in order to see it, read it, or respond to it. Every one of these apps then had a page that involved sending the results to everyone on my Facebook account unless I could find the (often) small or well-hidden Cancel or Skip button. Even using that, I was finding that a bunch of my stuff still was sent to people in my Facebook list, which frustrated me.
The last straw for me was the recent addition of the "People you might know" feature. This feature looks at my Facebook list and those who are listed as my friends' lists, compares them, and suggests people off of their lists to me that I might know. This is all well and good, I guess, except that I have turned on all of the options I can that do not send my information out to just anyone. Now I find that my info is going out there, spreading farther than I intended or wanted. I didn't mind that those who wanted to could search for me, even with the options I had set, but I didn't want just anyone being able to get a hold of me willy-nilly-- I have "friends" in my past whom I would rather not be contacted by. If, however, those people are friends of people I am friends with, they get my info for free and there is nothing I can do about it.
I contacted Facebook Support on this directly and asked them to point me in the direction of the Off switch. Support responded with the following:
This feature highlights new users who you are likely to know based on their network, work/education information, friends, etc. Since this feature is automatic, it occasionally identifies people that you do not know or do not want to be friends with. Unfortunately, you cannot turn off this feature at this time. I apologize for any inconvenience. Let me know if you have any further questions.
This comes after a recent incident wherein Facebook installed features that similarly sent a bunch of data out that members did not want and it got a bunch of protests over. And an incident wherein Facebook installed some features that allowed businesses to track members purchasing habits and posted them online. And another that gave out identities-- do you see a trend? Facebook has a habit and history of putting in place features and applications that give away its members' identities for free to anyone who wants to join Facebook. It isn't until or unless the members complain that it does something about it or adds a toggle or switch.
So, shortly after receiving that email from Facebook Support, I Deactivated my account. I replied to both the email and the request for a reason why I was deactivating with a succinct and specific reason why: until such time as Facebook amends its policies as a company and offers these features as optional and respects my desire for some amount of privacy within the confines of the application it is enabling, I cannot be a member. In my mind it is that simple.
April 15, 2008
What a Difference a Day Makes
When we had our all-hands meeting explaining the purchase of our division by a new company, one of our leaders apparently misspoke and said that the new company was very interested in all of the people in our division and we would all have jobs at the new company. A week or so later we got an email from the former company's head of HR wherein he made the statement that some people may not be offered positions with the new company. This immediately took the feeling of lightness and relief that had finally permeated the offices after weeks of not knowing what was going on and turned it on its ear.
Yesterday we had an all-hands with the leads of the new company. They gave a presentation, an overview of the company, and answered a lot of our HR questions. One person asked the inevitable question: "Will we all be offered positions?" The same lead of our division stood and said frankly that, while most would, some would not. They were working on a final roster during this week and everyone should know before the next meeting on Tuesday when people are offered jobs with the new company and must provide proof of job eligibility and fill out the new paperwork for W-2s, etc.
So, of course, today the mood is absolutely bleak at work. No one is talking, the cloud is back, and people are ducking around. People are talking more about the what-ifs and what-fors than work-related issues. People are, frankly, scared.
My boss and I have a slightly different perspective. We don't wrap ourselves up in our job as much as most people; we define ourselves by internal drives and external motivations that are not job-related. She has a huge bank of vacation time that the company would have to pay her if they let her go, the equivalent of a number of months worth of pay, plus has the severance package to look forward. I am not as set financially, but my plans are all about moving to Canada and a decision on that should be made soon, so being fired may give me the opportunity to head that way even sooner. We both like our jobs, and like the people we work with, but because it does not define us, we can look past the current issues and see positives from both remaining and being let go.
This week is going to be a real winner now. People are walking on egg shells and worrying over everything. Until the emails, phone calls, or HR visits start, people will not get much done. All the positives from the previous meeting have been undone for the vast majority of workers as they are all now afraid for their jobs. There is at least one person at work who is not sleeping hardly at all.
There has to be a better way to do these things.
Yesterday we had an all-hands with the leads of the new company. They gave a presentation, an overview of the company, and answered a lot of our HR questions. One person asked the inevitable question: "Will we all be offered positions?" The same lead of our division stood and said frankly that, while most would, some would not. They were working on a final roster during this week and everyone should know before the next meeting on Tuesday when people are offered jobs with the new company and must provide proof of job eligibility and fill out the new paperwork for W-2s, etc.
So, of course, today the mood is absolutely bleak at work. No one is talking, the cloud is back, and people are ducking around. People are talking more about the what-ifs and what-fors than work-related issues. People are, frankly, scared.
My boss and I have a slightly different perspective. We don't wrap ourselves up in our job as much as most people; we define ourselves by internal drives and external motivations that are not job-related. She has a huge bank of vacation time that the company would have to pay her if they let her go, the equivalent of a number of months worth of pay, plus has the severance package to look forward. I am not as set financially, but my plans are all about moving to Canada and a decision on that should be made soon, so being fired may give me the opportunity to head that way even sooner. We both like our jobs, and like the people we work with, but because it does not define us, we can look past the current issues and see positives from both remaining and being let go.
This week is going to be a real winner now. People are walking on egg shells and worrying over everything. Until the emails, phone calls, or HR visits start, people will not get much done. All the positives from the previous meeting have been undone for the vast majority of workers as they are all now afraid for their jobs. There is at least one person at work who is not sleeping hardly at all.
There has to be a better way to do these things.
April 11, 2008
News and Notes
Taxes
I managed to get my taxes done and I put them in the mail today. Decided to go for claiming an exemption for my wife, as the JK Lasser book and the nice guy on the IRS phone line both agreed that it totally applied in these circumstances. However, that means that I had to send my taxes to a different address in Texas to be processed for her ITIN first, and then they process the tax forms for the refund. Pretty significant difference in my refund, so worth a shot. When you add in the $600 bonus refund amount this year, will get a tidy sum back-- just in time, hopefully, to help with the costs of moving.
Immigration
My file has moved to the Los Angeles consulate from the one in Buffalo, NY. The letter stating this claimed it was for "final processing" and to determine and perform an interview, if required. I would guess that we are close to having approval on this puppy!
Work
Not only was my division sold to another company, but the company we are moving to has just announced a merger this week with a Chicago-based company that does the same thing. So in the space of a couple of weeks, Mitchell International has, in essence, eliminated two big competitors by merging/buying them, as well as greatly increasing the distribution and clients of the company as a whole. Looks like it has just jumped from a $250 million/year company to a $450 million/year company. Both my existing company and the new are now stating that they think everything will be finalized on May 1, so the clock is ticking. This new merger news shouldn't affect that time frame. We have our first official all-hands with reps from the new company on Monday and Tuesday, April 21-22, wherein we basically reapply for our existing jobs, fill out new W-2s, etc. in order to get into Mitchell's HR processes. Everything must be completed/turned in no later than April 24.
Health
Had a bit of a health scare before going to Canada the last time, as my liver numbers were through the roof. However, my most recent test results were back within the normal range, so we (my doctor and I) are happy and proceeding cautiously forward right now. However, I have stopped taking my Enbrel for the time being until I can visit with my RA doctor. The last three times I've taken the Enbrel it solved my pain/swelling issues, but I was very sick for at least a week and upward of two weeks afterward. It is not worth it; the point of the Enbrel is supposed to make me more active and able to do more, but if I'm sick in bed instead, I'm not really gaining anything except pain relief. So I'm sore as heck right now and cracking like nobody's business, but I'm feeling healthier. Sucks to choose between health and pain, but what can you do?
Clothes
I can't figure it out, but I seem to be missing about 10 pair of underwear. I can't find them anywhere in my apartment, so far. It's the damnedest thing. Will do a more thorough look-see tomorrow and finish the last of the laundry to see if I can't find them.
Weight
I've managed to get myself down to an average of 172 lbs and seem to be staying there for the last two weeks or so. I'm going to push for 168 if I can hold around 172 for the next week or so. Not saying I'm any healthier, just lighter. ;-)
Visit
M is visiting the week of April 19 through 27. Very much looking forward to that, even though that will be a bit of a stressful week with the Mitchell meetings happening then.
I managed to get my taxes done and I put them in the mail today. Decided to go for claiming an exemption for my wife, as the JK Lasser book and the nice guy on the IRS phone line both agreed that it totally applied in these circumstances. However, that means that I had to send my taxes to a different address in Texas to be processed for her ITIN first, and then they process the tax forms for the refund. Pretty significant difference in my refund, so worth a shot. When you add in the $600 bonus refund amount this year, will get a tidy sum back-- just in time, hopefully, to help with the costs of moving.
Immigration
My file has moved to the Los Angeles consulate from the one in Buffalo, NY. The letter stating this claimed it was for "final processing" and to determine and perform an interview, if required. I would guess that we are close to having approval on this puppy!
Work
Not only was my division sold to another company, but the company we are moving to has just announced a merger this week with a Chicago-based company that does the same thing. So in the space of a couple of weeks, Mitchell International has, in essence, eliminated two big competitors by merging/buying them, as well as greatly increasing the distribution and clients of the company as a whole. Looks like it has just jumped from a $250 million/year company to a $450 million/year company. Both my existing company and the new are now stating that they think everything will be finalized on May 1, so the clock is ticking. This new merger news shouldn't affect that time frame. We have our first official all-hands with reps from the new company on Monday and Tuesday, April 21-22, wherein we basically reapply for our existing jobs, fill out new W-2s, etc. in order to get into Mitchell's HR processes. Everything must be completed/turned in no later than April 24.
Health
Had a bit of a health scare before going to Canada the last time, as my liver numbers were through the roof. However, my most recent test results were back within the normal range, so we (my doctor and I) are happy and proceeding cautiously forward right now. However, I have stopped taking my Enbrel for the time being until I can visit with my RA doctor. The last three times I've taken the Enbrel it solved my pain/swelling issues, but I was very sick for at least a week and upward of two weeks afterward. It is not worth it; the point of the Enbrel is supposed to make me more active and able to do more, but if I'm sick in bed instead, I'm not really gaining anything except pain relief. So I'm sore as heck right now and cracking like nobody's business, but I'm feeling healthier. Sucks to choose between health and pain, but what can you do?
Clothes
I can't figure it out, but I seem to be missing about 10 pair of underwear. I can't find them anywhere in my apartment, so far. It's the damnedest thing. Will do a more thorough look-see tomorrow and finish the last of the laundry to see if I can't find them.
Weight
I've managed to get myself down to an average of 172 lbs and seem to be staying there for the last two weeks or so. I'm going to push for 168 if I can hold around 172 for the next week or so. Not saying I'm any healthier, just lighter. ;-)
Visit
M is visiting the week of April 19 through 27. Very much looking forward to that, even though that will be a bit of a stressful week with the Mitchell meetings happening then.
April 3, 2008
The Death of the Movie Theater
I was reading this article about theater attendance declining. I was amused by it, as people have been prognosticating the death of the movie theater since the first Betamax and VHS machines were released in the 70s, and again when the internet finally took off in the 90s. And, while attendance has declined nearly every year, millions of people still flock to theaters every weekend to see films shown "as they were meant to be seen."
Here is my reaction to this article, and others like it:
Here is my reaction to this article, and others like it:
One thing that home-viewing cannot replace is the audience experience. While more and more it seems there are rude people, children there not paying attention, etc., few thing are as exciting as that shared experience of everyone gasping together at the villain's actions, everyone laughing at the same joke, everyone cheering for the hero at the same time. Those times are priceless. And, I think, that is primarily what people go to the theaters for these days-- the shared movie watching experience.Where I am in Southern California, ticket prices for matinees are around $8.50 and for the other times around $10 (some small .50 variations depending on where you go, but all in this area are around those costs). I can go to opening day on most of the big movies and have no issue getting in, because people are not willing to pay those costs, plus concessions, for the theater experience anymore. However, a $1 theater opened up a few miles away, and that theater has lines around the block for nearly every show! People still want the group-movie going/watching experience, it seems, they just aren't willing to pay $10 a person for it.For example, my wife and I went to see Michael Clayton a week before the Oscars. The first day we showed up about 20 minutes before the film and the line was from the ticket counter to the end of the building. The next day we showed up for a late morning/early afternoon show, got there almost 40 minutes early, and got in... but there was literally not one empty seat in the place.This is a converted old-style theater that had been run-down and unused for years. It has no stadium seating, the seats are small, uncomfortable, and have no head rests. The arms don't raise and there are no cup holders. The theaters are small. And yet they consistently pack the place for every weekend show!This proves to me that people want the theater experience, but we have simply hit a price-point where it is not cost-effective to go to your average over-priced theater any more.
April 1, 2008
The More Things Stay the Same, the More Things Change
I'm still employed. The company for which I work decided to restructure and divest itself of components that did not fit with its new direction. My division was the main one divested. It decided to eliminate approximately 200 jobs and $100 million a year today. By divesting itself of this division, the company is saving approximately $65 million a year in costs and gets a little more than half-way to its goal of 200 people. They are restructuring out the other people, gaining about $30 million, and then are closing some facilities and doing some odds and ends clean up to achieve the remaining $10 million per year.
The (now) former company was a decent one, but we never quite fit into its needs. We've been actively on the block for at least 18 months now. The company that is purchasing this division is privately owned, directly in the same industry as we are, and has wanted to acquire us for a long time because we are one of their direct competitors and, frankly, do what they want to do better than they do. It appears that they find we run lean (maybe even too-lean) and they have no plans for any layoffs from our division. Matter of fact, one of the reason they bought us is because they are actively seeking to grow and this was a quick way to add a viable, successful program, take out a rival in the industry, and increase their head count and intellectual property. While many other companies are letting people go, this company has over 50 current job openings and may allow us finally to hire some staff that we desperately need.
For the next month or so we will remain as part of, and employees of, the former company while the powers that be resolve and sign everything. After that, we will be employees of the new company.
It seems from what we have been told and what I have read about the new company that this will be a much better fit for our talents. The fact that we are joining a private company is also extremely advantageous, too. Public companies are not run by their management-- they are at the whim of the stockholders whose only goal is return on investment. That forces management to constantly make decisions that may not be in the best interest of their product or people or even their industry in order to maximize profits on the stocks. A private company, on the other hand, can take time to see how the industry is moving, keep lower-profit or unprofitable divisions around as it makes changes to facilitate the division's long-term success, and are not at the whim of "the Street" when making decisions for the company.
I find much value in my time spent in the former company, however. I got to work on many different products, learned a lot, and expanded my horizons. It was also personally gratifying that they allowed me some special favors like working from Canada two weeks out of every quarter and to work from home when not feeling as well as I could. I hope that some of these arrangements might continue with the new company, but expect they won't. With luck, I won't be with this new company too long before I see approval on the immigration paperwork and plan the big move to Canada. Then again, maybe this new company will have a different policy on employees working from Canada that I can take advantage of, too.
The (now) former company was a decent one, but we never quite fit into its needs. We've been actively on the block for at least 18 months now. The company that is purchasing this division is privately owned, directly in the same industry as we are, and has wanted to acquire us for a long time because we are one of their direct competitors and, frankly, do what they want to do better than they do. It appears that they find we run lean (maybe even too-lean) and they have no plans for any layoffs from our division. Matter of fact, one of the reason they bought us is because they are actively seeking to grow and this was a quick way to add a viable, successful program, take out a rival in the industry, and increase their head count and intellectual property. While many other companies are letting people go, this company has over 50 current job openings and may allow us finally to hire some staff that we desperately need.
For the next month or so we will remain as part of, and employees of, the former company while the powers that be resolve and sign everything. After that, we will be employees of the new company.
It seems from what we have been told and what I have read about the new company that this will be a much better fit for our talents. The fact that we are joining a private company is also extremely advantageous, too. Public companies are not run by their management-- they are at the whim of the stockholders whose only goal is return on investment. That forces management to constantly make decisions that may not be in the best interest of their product or people or even their industry in order to maximize profits on the stocks. A private company, on the other hand, can take time to see how the industry is moving, keep lower-profit or unprofitable divisions around as it makes changes to facilitate the division's long-term success, and are not at the whim of "the Street" when making decisions for the company.
I find much value in my time spent in the former company, however. I got to work on many different products, learned a lot, and expanded my horizons. It was also personally gratifying that they allowed me some special favors like working from Canada two weeks out of every quarter and to work from home when not feeling as well as I could. I hope that some of these arrangements might continue with the new company, but expect they won't. With luck, I won't be with this new company too long before I see approval on the immigration paperwork and plan the big move to Canada. Then again, maybe this new company will have a different policy on employees working from Canada that I can take advantage of, too.
March 30, 2008
I Am Legend
Note: Lots and Lots of Spoilers are involved with this post. Matter of fact, the entire post involves the end of the story and the end of the recent movie-- don't read if you don't want to know.
This ground-breaking novel is about the last survivor of a disease, Robert Neville, that wipes out humanity and replaces it with vampires. Those changed cannot survive in sunlight, sleep during the day, are allergic to garlic, and can be killed by fire, a stake through the heart, or decapitation. Neville spends his days hunting down those afflicted, getting resources for his survival, and repairing his fortress-like home for the night. Although he is just a man with no real scientific background, he attempts to figure out what caused the changes and find a cure. He copes with madness and loneliness during the three years he is alone and fighting for his life.
At night, the majority of the less intelligent vampires attack his house trying to get to him. He fends them off with bombs, guns, etc.
Neville runs into a woman who seems to be afflicted, but also has her facilities. He takes her in and he learns that some of the afflicted are changing; they are smart like human beings used to be, and can withstand some time in the sunlight, but they are also infected. This woman winds up betraying Neville and he is imprisoned. In his last few moments, he comes to realize that society has changed and, while he always thought of himself as the hero of his story, he comes to realize that he is the villain to this new society. As he stares out his prison windows, he sees the parents telling their children about the "monster in the day" and their "boogie man" who hunts them when they are sleeping and kills them without remorse.
It is a powerful story with a reveal that, especially when you consider the year it was published (1954), is so completely original and surprising that the story is considered one of the best ever in the horror genre.
I Am Legend, the 2007 film starring Will Smith, got a lot of things right. It shows Neville facing madness and loneliness over the three years he is alone. It shows his struggles with survival. The afflicted are changed to be more zombie-like than vampire-like, but it is small change for the story and does have a foundation in the original novel. In the movie he doesn't seem to be going out of his way to hunt down those afflicted, but the movie focused more on his attempts to find a cure. To this end, they made Neville a scientist who knows something about the disease and was actively working with it prior to the infection becoming pandemic.
However, the movie failed in the most pivot points of the story. Neville is rescued by a woman (Anna) and a child (Ethan), neither of whom are infected at all. She tells Neville that she was told by God to go to a camp of survivors. The zombies follow them to his home, which is sort of like the betrayal in the novel, except here it is unintentional. The zombies attack en masse, get into the house, and Neville has to fight them off and save the other two.
He gets everyone downstairs, into his laboratory, and they discover that the last infected he worked on is returning to normal. Neville takes some of the infected's blood, gives it to Anna and Ethan, helps them escape, and then leaps at the infected in his house and kills them, and himself, with a grenade. Cut to Anna and Ethan making it to the survivors camp and handing over the infected's blood for research. A voice over tells the audience that it works.
So, in essence, the writer (Akiva Goldsmith) and the producers and director completely and totally missed the point of the original story. But Will Smith got to be a hero with his sacrifice-- yay. I actually wonder if Smith playing the role "forced" the filmmakers to make Neville into a heroic figure?
I have many posts about movies. Frequently I write about the remakes or book/comic book to film conversions I see and whether they are successful in translating the original material to the film. I expect some differences when taking something from page to screen, but those films that are often the most successful (Jaws, Spider-Man, Forrest Gump, The Godfather, LotRs, Harry Potter, et al) keep as much of the original as possible and they never lose sight of the main points of the source material. Those that are less successful (Elektra, Catwoman, The Seeker: The Dark is Rising, Godzilla [1998], et al) either are not faithful or miss the main point(s) of the source material entirely.
There is another set of movies that are somewhat successful. These are mostly faithful, but vary on some key points. Something like The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe comes to mind for this-- the film was mostly faithful and did a good job bringing the world to life, but it left out, missed, or purposely avoided some of the parables that the source material that showed the four children learning powerful lessons for life while in Narnia (for example, in the book, after the final battle when Lucy uses her salve to heal Edmund, she tells Aslan to wait when he suggests there are others who need her help. He growls at her and she realizes that there are others beyond herself and her family who need her-- her lesson is learning to accept and be involved in the greater world).
I guess that I Am Legend will fall into this last category. The film is well-done, and half to two-thirds of it is very close to the source material (and very well-acted by Smith), but the end of it totally missed what made the original source material such a compelling and time-tested classic of the horror genre. By not showing Neville's realization that he is now the monster in a new society, he doesn't become the Legend of the title. With the way this movie ended, he becomes a hero, not a legend, and certainly not an ironic legend.
One other note: I think this movie would have done better business if they hadn't made all the zombies CGI. The CGI effects completely distracted from the film and looked cartoonish. This would have been much scarier and engaging had they just been real people. Of course, then it would have seemed and looked much more like 28 Days Later (which, in many ways, is closer to the intent of the book I Am Legend than many of the direct adaptations).
All-in-all, this is a watchable and fun movie. Will Smith does a very good job with carrying the movie without help for most of the film. However, the zombies are a bit of a disappointment and the ending, while exciting, missed the point of the original book.
----------
Richard Matheson's brilliant novel I Am Legend is considered the first "modern" vampire story. However, the story also is credited as the first modern pandemic apocalypse story as well as strongly influencing the zombie genre (George Romero is credited as saying that Night of the Living Dead was heavily influenced by I Am Legend).This ground-breaking novel is about the last survivor of a disease, Robert Neville, that wipes out humanity and replaces it with vampires. Those changed cannot survive in sunlight, sleep during the day, are allergic to garlic, and can be killed by fire, a stake through the heart, or decapitation. Neville spends his days hunting down those afflicted, getting resources for his survival, and repairing his fortress-like home for the night. Although he is just a man with no real scientific background, he attempts to figure out what caused the changes and find a cure. He copes with madness and loneliness during the three years he is alone and fighting for his life.
At night, the majority of the less intelligent vampires attack his house trying to get to him. He fends them off with bombs, guns, etc.
Neville runs into a woman who seems to be afflicted, but also has her facilities. He takes her in and he learns that some of the afflicted are changing; they are smart like human beings used to be, and can withstand some time in the sunlight, but they are also infected. This woman winds up betraying Neville and he is imprisoned. In his last few moments, he comes to realize that society has changed and, while he always thought of himself as the hero of his story, he comes to realize that he is the villain to this new society. As he stares out his prison windows, he sees the parents telling their children about the "monster in the day" and their "boogie man" who hunts them when they are sleeping and kills them without remorse.
It is a powerful story with a reveal that, especially when you consider the year it was published (1954), is so completely original and surprising that the story is considered one of the best ever in the horror genre.
*** --- ***
I Am Legend, the 2007 film starring Will Smith, got a lot of things right. It shows Neville facing madness and loneliness over the three years he is alone. It shows his struggles with survival. The afflicted are changed to be more zombie-like than vampire-like, but it is small change for the story and does have a foundation in the original novel. In the movie he doesn't seem to be going out of his way to hunt down those afflicted, but the movie focused more on his attempts to find a cure. To this end, they made Neville a scientist who knows something about the disease and was actively working with it prior to the infection becoming pandemic.
However, the movie failed in the most pivot points of the story. Neville is rescued by a woman (Anna) and a child (Ethan), neither of whom are infected at all. She tells Neville that she was told by God to go to a camp of survivors. The zombies follow them to his home, which is sort of like the betrayal in the novel, except here it is unintentional. The zombies attack en masse, get into the house, and Neville has to fight them off and save the other two.
He gets everyone downstairs, into his laboratory, and they discover that the last infected he worked on is returning to normal. Neville takes some of the infected's blood, gives it to Anna and Ethan, helps them escape, and then leaps at the infected in his house and kills them, and himself, with a grenade. Cut to Anna and Ethan making it to the survivors camp and handing over the infected's blood for research. A voice over tells the audience that it works.
So, in essence, the writer (Akiva Goldsmith) and the producers and director completely and totally missed the point of the original story. But Will Smith got to be a hero with his sacrifice-- yay. I actually wonder if Smith playing the role "forced" the filmmakers to make Neville into a heroic figure?
I have many posts about movies. Frequently I write about the remakes or book/comic book to film conversions I see and whether they are successful in translating the original material to the film. I expect some differences when taking something from page to screen, but those films that are often the most successful (Jaws, Spider-Man, Forrest Gump, The Godfather, LotRs, Harry Potter, et al) keep as much of the original as possible and they never lose sight of the main points of the source material. Those that are less successful (Elektra, Catwoman, The Seeker: The Dark is Rising, Godzilla [1998], et al) either are not faithful or miss the main point(s) of the source material entirely.
There is another set of movies that are somewhat successful. These are mostly faithful, but vary on some key points. Something like The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe comes to mind for this-- the film was mostly faithful and did a good job bringing the world to life, but it left out, missed, or purposely avoided some of the parables that the source material that showed the four children learning powerful lessons for life while in Narnia (for example, in the book, after the final battle when Lucy uses her salve to heal Edmund, she tells Aslan to wait when he suggests there are others who need her help. He growls at her and she realizes that there are others beyond herself and her family who need her-- her lesson is learning to accept and be involved in the greater world).
I guess that I Am Legend will fall into this last category. The film is well-done, and half to two-thirds of it is very close to the source material (and very well-acted by Smith), but the end of it totally missed what made the original source material such a compelling and time-tested classic of the horror genre. By not showing Neville's realization that he is now the monster in a new society, he doesn't become the Legend of the title. With the way this movie ended, he becomes a hero, not a legend, and certainly not an ironic legend.
One other note: I think this movie would have done better business if they hadn't made all the zombies CGI. The CGI effects completely distracted from the film and looked cartoonish. This would have been much scarier and engaging had they just been real people. Of course, then it would have seemed and looked much more like 28 Days Later (which, in many ways, is closer to the intent of the book I Am Legend than many of the direct adaptations).
All-in-all, this is a watchable and fun movie. Will Smith does a very good job with carrying the movie without help for most of the film. However, the zombies are a bit of a disappointment and the ending, while exciting, missed the point of the original book.
March 28, 2008
Taxing
My wife already detailed out her issues with the Canadian government and taxes. I also detailed some of my initial issues/concerns with American taxes. After returning from Canada, I have had some high-priority projects to work on, including getting some final answers on our tax needs. Luckily, we planned ahead and M got the required documentation together and notarized just in case I needed it.
Today I have been reviewing the documentation for the 1040. The instructions are very seemingly contradictory. In some places they say I cannot file Married filing Jointly because she is a nonresident alien. In another place it says we can file that way, if we both show in writing that we agree to. In another place it says that I have to claim her "world income" and will be taxed on it regardless of whether she was taxed on it in another country. In yet another area the rules state that we get a huge exception for her as long as we can prove she is a nonresident alien (how do you prove someone is NOT a resident?!). These rules led me to not one, not two, but three different other sets of rules that I should read. What I found in those rules seemed equally contradictory to me.
I said screw it and decided to call the IRS 800 number and speak with someone. The first person with whom I spoke could only help me by determining if my wife qualified for an ITIN (which I already knew she did and have all the forms). However, Nancy then transferred me to the more specialized Advanced Individual Tax Law area and I got Tony to aid me with the "how should I file due to these extenuating circumstance" question. I explained in detail what we did last year, and then explained I was sure, based on the very confusing rules I was reading in the various documents, what status I should use to file (Married Joint, Married Separate, Single) and, if Married Joint or Married Separate, how my wife's status as a nonresident alien affected what I should enter and how.
He went through the points of the Married Joint and it seemed like a poor choice for our situation. While we could do it, it would require a lot more paperwork (three additional forms on top of the 1040) and this status would then make her have to state that she is a resident of the US for the next three years, regardless of her residency status. That didn't seem good with me moving to Canada. The rules for Married Separate seemed much more amenable to our situation.
I then further explained that she does not have an SSN or an ITIN yet, but that I assumed she needed an ITIN and we had all the paperwork together to process that. Tony said, "Hold on a minute. Does she need one?" He then went through and explained in detail that she may not, in fact, need anything at all. He said that it is very common for spouses to turn in tax forms with their spouses name on it and no SSN or ITIN for a variety of reasons. That one of the benefits of filing Married Separate is that, excluding the two fields where her name and SSN/ITIN would go, the rest of the form is entirely devoted to my information as though I am a single person. He said that if I turn in my 1040 with no SSN or ITIN for her, they will process it without that with no problem. I also verified that the IRS doesn't "look for" a corresponding tax return from a Married Separate form to match up the two married people (as in my case they would never find one). He did say that, if I did have the paperwork for the ITIN, it shouldn't hurt anything to include that and send the tax return to the appropriate secondary address to get her one. However, he couldn't verify doing so wouldn't negatively affect filing in the future-- especially since I'm moving to Canada.
The only important caveat is that I cannot e-file my return if I do not have a tax identification number for her. I have to paper-file. No real problem, really. Just means it might take a bit longer to get my money back.
So, after some initial panic, this seems like the route to go. File as Married filing Separately status, do not include her tax ID number, and then do my taxes like a single person and send it in. I think this weekend I will spend much time doing just that.
Today I have been reviewing the documentation for the 1040. The instructions are very seemingly contradictory. In some places they say I cannot file Married filing Jointly because she is a nonresident alien. In another place it says we can file that way, if we both show in writing that we agree to. In another place it says that I have to claim her "world income" and will be taxed on it regardless of whether she was taxed on it in another country. In yet another area the rules state that we get a huge exception for her as long as we can prove she is a nonresident alien (how do you prove someone is NOT a resident?!). These rules led me to not one, not two, but three different other sets of rules that I should read. What I found in those rules seemed equally contradictory to me.
I said screw it and decided to call the IRS 800 number and speak with someone. The first person with whom I spoke could only help me by determining if my wife qualified for an ITIN (which I already knew she did and have all the forms). However, Nancy then transferred me to the more specialized Advanced Individual Tax Law area and I got Tony to aid me with the "how should I file due to these extenuating circumstance" question. I explained in detail what we did last year, and then explained I was sure, based on the very confusing rules I was reading in the various documents, what status I should use to file (Married Joint, Married Separate, Single) and, if Married Joint or Married Separate, how my wife's status as a nonresident alien affected what I should enter and how.
He went through the points of the Married Joint and it seemed like a poor choice for our situation. While we could do it, it would require a lot more paperwork (three additional forms on top of the 1040) and this status would then make her have to state that she is a resident of the US for the next three years, regardless of her residency status. That didn't seem good with me moving to Canada. The rules for Married Separate seemed much more amenable to our situation.
I then further explained that she does not have an SSN or an ITIN yet, but that I assumed she needed an ITIN and we had all the paperwork together to process that. Tony said, "Hold on a minute. Does she need one?" He then went through and explained in detail that she may not, in fact, need anything at all. He said that it is very common for spouses to turn in tax forms with their spouses name on it and no SSN or ITIN for a variety of reasons. That one of the benefits of filing Married Separate is that, excluding the two fields where her name and SSN/ITIN would go, the rest of the form is entirely devoted to my information as though I am a single person. He said that if I turn in my 1040 with no SSN or ITIN for her, they will process it without that with no problem. I also verified that the IRS doesn't "look for" a corresponding tax return from a Married Separate form to match up the two married people (as in my case they would never find one). He did say that, if I did have the paperwork for the ITIN, it shouldn't hurt anything to include that and send the tax return to the appropriate secondary address to get her one. However, he couldn't verify doing so wouldn't negatively affect filing in the future-- especially since I'm moving to Canada.
The only important caveat is that I cannot e-file my return if I do not have a tax identification number for her. I have to paper-file. No real problem, really. Just means it might take a bit longer to get my money back.
So, after some initial panic, this seems like the route to go. File as Married filing Separately status, do not include her tax ID number, and then do my taxes like a single person and send it in. I think this weekend I will spend much time doing just that.
March 24, 2008
In the Valley of Elah
My wife and I managed to watch quite a few of the best picture, actor, etc. nominees this year, both before and after the Oscars. Overall, we felt that No Country... was superior to most of what we watched, even if the others were pretty good. Last night I watched my Unbox rental of Paul Haggis' In the Valley of Elah. While I wanted to see this film anyway, a post on this blog prompted me to step up my timetable for when I would watch it.
Wow.
Elah was a complex, realistic, engaging story about a father (Tommy Lee Jones) finding out his youngest son has gone AWOL from the Army after returning from a tour in Iraq. He determines to discover where his son has gone and soon learns of the son's death. He then rattles the cages of the local (Charlize Theron) and the military (Jason Patric) police to do more and to be more aggressive (and, frankly, better at their jobs) in finding out what happened to his son. Susan Sarandan has a small but powerful role as Jones' wife.
From beginning to end, this film was superior to most of the other films up for awards in the last Oscars. I simply do not understand why this film wasn't nominated in more categories than Best Actor for Jones. The script was sound and engaging, the cinematography was well-conceived and executed, the direction and editing were both tight and well-done. All of the performances, including a surprise from Wes Chatham as Cpl. Penning in a very naturalist performance, were spot-on and incredible.
My best guess is that, because the movie was labeled as an "Iraq-war movie" people shied away from seeing it. Yes, it has some themes from Iraq that play a part in the movie, and the war is discussed, but the movie is not primarily about the war. The war was used as a prop; Haggis could have chosen any military conflict for this prop. The war theme is used to state that there are people who go to war, who are trained in and experience circumstances that non-military people could never hope to fully understand, and who come back and cannot "turn off" those experiences or that training. The circumstance of war and conflict alter them and their perceptions fundamentally. I wonder if this film would have been better-received if Haggis had chosen a different conflict as the back story to this story.
In comparison, I found this story tighter and more complete/compelling than Michael Clayton. It is much more powerful and complex than Juno. It nearly rivals No Country for its thought-provoking story and direction. While I have not yet seen Atonement, from what I've read of that movie in reviews, it seems that Elah is more even and consistent in its direction and story telling (most reviewers have argued that Atonement loses focus when the story switches to the man going to war). I would argue that Sarandan's performance was close to the same quality of Tilda Swinton in Michael Clayton (who won the Best Supporting Oscar). Theron also gave a strong, natural performance.
This movie will not be for everyone. There are some violent images and some of the back story scenes of what went on in Iraq to cause the change in personality of the characters may prove disturbing to some. However, as a thoughtful, relevant, and involving story concerning the ongoing affects of war on those who fight, it is well worth a watch.
Wow.
Elah was a complex, realistic, engaging story about a father (Tommy Lee Jones) finding out his youngest son has gone AWOL from the Army after returning from a tour in Iraq. He determines to discover where his son has gone and soon learns of the son's death. He then rattles the cages of the local (Charlize Theron) and the military (Jason Patric) police to do more and to be more aggressive (and, frankly, better at their jobs) in finding out what happened to his son. Susan Sarandan has a small but powerful role as Jones' wife.
From beginning to end, this film was superior to most of the other films up for awards in the last Oscars. I simply do not understand why this film wasn't nominated in more categories than Best Actor for Jones. The script was sound and engaging, the cinematography was well-conceived and executed, the direction and editing were both tight and well-done. All of the performances, including a surprise from Wes Chatham as Cpl. Penning in a very naturalist performance, were spot-on and incredible.
My best guess is that, because the movie was labeled as an "Iraq-war movie" people shied away from seeing it. Yes, it has some themes from Iraq that play a part in the movie, and the war is discussed, but the movie is not primarily about the war. The war was used as a prop; Haggis could have chosen any military conflict for this prop. The war theme is used to state that there are people who go to war, who are trained in and experience circumstances that non-military people could never hope to fully understand, and who come back and cannot "turn off" those experiences or that training. The circumstance of war and conflict alter them and their perceptions fundamentally. I wonder if this film would have been better-received if Haggis had chosen a different conflict as the back story to this story.
In comparison, I found this story tighter and more complete/compelling than Michael Clayton. It is much more powerful and complex than Juno. It nearly rivals No Country for its thought-provoking story and direction. While I have not yet seen Atonement, from what I've read of that movie in reviews, it seems that Elah is more even and consistent in its direction and story telling (most reviewers have argued that Atonement loses focus when the story switches to the man going to war). I would argue that Sarandan's performance was close to the same quality of Tilda Swinton in Michael Clayton (who won the Best Supporting Oscar). Theron also gave a strong, natural performance.
This movie will not be for everyone. There are some violent images and some of the back story scenes of what went on in Iraq to cause the change in personality of the characters may prove disturbing to some. However, as a thoughtful, relevant, and involving story concerning the ongoing affects of war on those who fight, it is well worth a watch.
March 20, 2008
Safe Trip, but Exciting
While my overall trip was primarily on time and without incident, there was some excitement coming into Chicago and then again close to Orange County. In both instances, we hit really strong cross and head on winds, which cause some pretty extreme turbulence.
We actually landed with the plane not in line with the runway in Chicago. Only after all of the wheels were down did the pilot straighten the plane out and slow us down.
The flight to Orange County was also fun because the plane had a huge number of children under 10 on board. Some were screaming, some were playing games, some were excited by their first time or just being on a plane in general.
I got home pretty fast too. I got right on a Super Shuttle van and was the first person dropped off, for once. However, that still meant that I wasn't home until about a quarter to 9 PST-- and I was still running on AST, so it really felt like 1 am to me!
Immediately upon entering the apartment I had to start the clean up from my cat being alone for all that time. I also found my relatively new Drinkwell fountain not running and both water dishes bone dry. I think I may have to rethink my current arrangements for watching my cat. The bathroom where her litter is wasn't too bad, though; I have changed to a clumping pine dust mix that seems to work very well. I still have more cleaning to do from her, but it stuff that can wait a little.
Caly herself started meowing and didn't stop until after I fell asleep. She was sticking to me like glue and still is today (I'm working from home).
I then tried to stay up until 10:30-11pm and was successful.
I am looking at my things to do list now and realizing that I have a ton of stuff to dig into immediately, most especially my taxes (special circumstances due to being married to a Canadian without a US SSN or ITN (at the moment)), my health care needs, and laundry.
We actually landed with the plane not in line with the runway in Chicago. Only after all of the wheels were down did the pilot straighten the plane out and slow us down.
The flight to Orange County was also fun because the plane had a huge number of children under 10 on board. Some were screaming, some were playing games, some were excited by their first time or just being on a plane in general.
I got home pretty fast too. I got right on a Super Shuttle van and was the first person dropped off, for once. However, that still meant that I wasn't home until about a quarter to 9 PST-- and I was still running on AST, so it really felt like 1 am to me!
Immediately upon entering the apartment I had to start the clean up from my cat being alone for all that time. I also found my relatively new Drinkwell fountain not running and both water dishes bone dry. I think I may have to rethink my current arrangements for watching my cat. The bathroom where her litter is wasn't too bad, though; I have changed to a clumping pine dust mix that seems to work very well. I still have more cleaning to do from her, but it stuff that can wait a little.
Caly herself started meowing and didn't stop until after I fell asleep. She was sticking to me like glue and still is today (I'm working from home).
I then tried to stay up until 10:30-11pm and was successful.
I am looking at my things to do list now and realizing that I have a ton of stuff to dig into immediately, most especially my taxes (special circumstances due to being married to a Canadian without a US SSN or ITN (at the moment)), my health care needs, and laundry.
March 18, 2008
Ratings and TV
The following is from IMDB.com today:
I have been arguing this for a while now. Television is not the end-all, be-all medium anymore. And the television executives are not changing with the times. I see a few ways in which TV execs are not learning:
Fair but not outstanding ratings.
Execs would rather drop a show doing a fair amount (say, a 6.0 to 9.5) in the ratings and hope the replace does better than stick with a show that already has a solid foundation and may improve over time. However, the model over the last 5 years indicates this is no longer a safe bet. Matter of fact, the model shows just the opposite-- it is much more likely for 6.0-9.5 to be the average of "hit" shows. Gone seem to be the days when the top 20-25 shows all were doing better than 10.0 in the ratings. There is so much competition now that a show is going to start high and then level out to somewhere in the 6-9.5 range on a much more regular basis. Only the top 10, certain sports programs, and special presentations will regularly eclipse these numbers. As the internet and cable shows continue to eat into the networks quality and provide even more competition for viewers, this may go down even further.
How to compete?
Leave shows on longer. Let them find their audience and be content with smaller numbers. You are still receiving money from advertisers for that time. If you control costs on the shows without affecting the quality of the show, you can keep this going for a number of years. A recent example would be Studio 60. This show came out like gangbusters, then settled into a respectable but not overwhelming ratings number, and then started to pick up some cudos and awards toward the end of its run. The audience was starting to come around and, like many Sorkin shows, it likely would have picked up in the next season. However, the network wasn't willing to wait and replaced it... with something that made about the same splash and then sank to about the same rating lows. So they lost on two shows rather than giving one a chance to succeed.
Competing with other networks' best shows.
Execs think they can bully their way onto other networks' best days and steal some glory. Instead, they wind up diminishing the entire night's worth of ratings. The four main networks need to start working on ways to help each other maintain viewership rather than always undermining the other networks best shows or blocks of shows. This becomes especially true with the rise of cable networks quality and willingness to compete directly with the networks. Shows like Burn Notice, Damages, The Shield, The Closer, and others, are proving that the cable networks can pull in large audience for quality programming. This further thins the viewing public from the networks. Add in the large number of eyes that have shifted to internet-only programming, MMO games, and other forms of entertainment (to the tune of $3-4 Billion a year and more), and the networks simply do not have the rapt audience they used to have.
Another trick from the last year was scheduling shows to start early or overrun a competing network's show. They figured they would keep audience by holding them past the hour and the audience would switch. Instead, they got massive email, phone calls, and letters with customer complaints about that. They learned quickly that the audience wasn't going to stand for that kind of shenanigans and we slowly saw that tact done away with.
How to compete?
Program around another network's best shows. Let them have their piece of the pie and put your best shows on another day or another time. Give the audience a chance to watch both shows and keep both you and your rival afloat. And stop the gimmicks with time shifting your programs. Moving your shows around erodes your audience, as many will not move to the new day or time (they likely already have something for that day or time scheduled, whether it is online, on another network or cable channel, or unrelated). History bears this out-- shows that move their times and days lose audience and ratings. Every time.
They think we want unscripted shows and clones of everything else on TV.
The most recent errors the networks have been making are assuming the viewing audience will watch just anything they throw out there. When Who Wants to be a Millionaire first came out, it was a ratings juggernaut. However, they effectively killed it and drove it to cable and off-times by putting too much of it on the air. CSI and Law & Order drove down their own ratings by splintering into multiple versions of their own shows. Add to that the number of other, similar clones that rolled out on other networks, and the audience further erodes. Super-heroes were doing well at the box offices, so the WB put a couple of super-hero type shows on TV. They did well and built a loyal audience. Next thing you know, there are a bunch of super-hero type shows on TV and each one starts with a big audience and then erodes down to a core set of viewers. I'd be willing to bet it is the same core audience keeping most of them afloat. Supposedly unscripted shows are not doing the gang-buster ratings the networks have come to rely on because, well, the audience is bored. We all know they are not, in fact, unscripted. So we start going back to the original, most interesting and all the others slowly drop to oblivion.
The difference between the originator and the clones? Quality. The originator is usually the best, highest-quality, purest, and most original of the group. The clones are all variations on that same theme. So, once the audience figures that out after 2-4 shows, the audience goes away. Sometimes back to the originator, sometimes on to the next "big thing" hyped, and sometimes away for good.
Also, if you're going to rehash an old show or movie concept, make sure you make something new and different without ruining the feeling and opinions of those who saw and still watch the original. For example, Bionic Woman was too different from the original concept, tried to be too many things at once, and couldn't hold its audience (although it was averaging at the mid-6s... right in what I argue is the target range the networks should be striving for and trying to keep a hold of).
How to compete?
Go for the new and then stick with it and let it find its legs. If your rival network or cable channel comes out with something new and different, don't clone it. Look for your own new and unique shows instead. Don't franchise yourself to death. And simply don't put on the same show two or more times a week. NBC's response to the success of Lost on ABC was to bring out Heroes-- a similar feeling, but wholly different and high-quality show of its own. Both have been successful.
Take a long, hard look at the shows you are passing on. A lot of what is now on cable and stealing your ratings was offered to you first and you passed on it. Maybe it is time for new and different eyes in development?
New episodes of CBS's sitcom lineup returned to the air Monday following months of reruns due to the writers' strike, and ABC aired the season debut of its reality hit Dancing With the Stars, and although all of those shows received decent-to-good ratings, they were well off their comparable figures from a year ago. CBS declined 17 percent against last year's numbers for the comparable night. ABC was off 21 percent. For NBC and Fox, the plunge was far deeper, with NBC down 28 percent from last year and Fox, 32 percent. Reporting on the numbers, MediaWeek columnist Marc Berman asked, "Did the recent writers' strike cause permanent damage?" Berman pointed out that while ABC's Dancing With the Starspremiere averaged a solid 13.4 rating and a 21 share, a year ago it opened with a 15.1/22.
I have been arguing this for a while now. Television is not the end-all, be-all medium anymore. And the television executives are not changing with the times. I see a few ways in which TV execs are not learning:
Fair but not outstanding ratings.
Execs would rather drop a show doing a fair amount (say, a 6.0 to 9.5) in the ratings and hope the replace does better than stick with a show that already has a solid foundation and may improve over time. However, the model over the last 5 years indicates this is no longer a safe bet. Matter of fact, the model shows just the opposite-- it is much more likely for 6.0-9.5 to be the average of "hit" shows. Gone seem to be the days when the top 20-25 shows all were doing better than 10.0 in the ratings. There is so much competition now that a show is going to start high and then level out to somewhere in the 6-9.5 range on a much more regular basis. Only the top 10, certain sports programs, and special presentations will regularly eclipse these numbers. As the internet and cable shows continue to eat into the networks quality and provide even more competition for viewers, this may go down even further.
How to compete?
Leave shows on longer. Let them find their audience and be content with smaller numbers. You are still receiving money from advertisers for that time. If you control costs on the shows without affecting the quality of the show, you can keep this going for a number of years. A recent example would be Studio 60. This show came out like gangbusters, then settled into a respectable but not overwhelming ratings number, and then started to pick up some cudos and awards toward the end of its run. The audience was starting to come around and, like many Sorkin shows, it likely would have picked up in the next season. However, the network wasn't willing to wait and replaced it... with something that made about the same splash and then sank to about the same rating lows. So they lost on two shows rather than giving one a chance to succeed.
Competing with other networks' best shows.
Execs think they can bully their way onto other networks' best days and steal some glory. Instead, they wind up diminishing the entire night's worth of ratings. The four main networks need to start working on ways to help each other maintain viewership rather than always undermining the other networks best shows or blocks of shows. This becomes especially true with the rise of cable networks quality and willingness to compete directly with the networks. Shows like Burn Notice, Damages, The Shield, The Closer, and others, are proving that the cable networks can pull in large audience for quality programming. This further thins the viewing public from the networks. Add in the large number of eyes that have shifted to internet-only programming, MMO games, and other forms of entertainment (to the tune of $3-4 Billion a year and more), and the networks simply do not have the rapt audience they used to have.
Another trick from the last year was scheduling shows to start early or overrun a competing network's show. They figured they would keep audience by holding them past the hour and the audience would switch. Instead, they got massive email, phone calls, and letters with customer complaints about that. They learned quickly that the audience wasn't going to stand for that kind of shenanigans and we slowly saw that tact done away with.
How to compete?
Program around another network's best shows. Let them have their piece of the pie and put your best shows on another day or another time. Give the audience a chance to watch both shows and keep both you and your rival afloat. And stop the gimmicks with time shifting your programs. Moving your shows around erodes your audience, as many will not move to the new day or time (they likely already have something for that day or time scheduled, whether it is online, on another network or cable channel, or unrelated). History bears this out-- shows that move their times and days lose audience and ratings. Every time.
They think we want unscripted shows and clones of everything else on TV.
The most recent errors the networks have been making are assuming the viewing audience will watch just anything they throw out there. When Who Wants to be a Millionaire first came out, it was a ratings juggernaut. However, they effectively killed it and drove it to cable and off-times by putting too much of it on the air. CSI and Law & Order drove down their own ratings by splintering into multiple versions of their own shows. Add to that the number of other, similar clones that rolled out on other networks, and the audience further erodes. Super-heroes were doing well at the box offices, so the WB put a couple of super-hero type shows on TV. They did well and built a loyal audience. Next thing you know, there are a bunch of super-hero type shows on TV and each one starts with a big audience and then erodes down to a core set of viewers. I'd be willing to bet it is the same core audience keeping most of them afloat. Supposedly unscripted shows are not doing the gang-buster ratings the networks have come to rely on because, well, the audience is bored. We all know they are not, in fact, unscripted. So we start going back to the original, most interesting and all the others slowly drop to oblivion.
The difference between the originator and the clones? Quality. The originator is usually the best, highest-quality, purest, and most original of the group. The clones are all variations on that same theme. So, once the audience figures that out after 2-4 shows, the audience goes away. Sometimes back to the originator, sometimes on to the next "big thing" hyped, and sometimes away for good.
Also, if you're going to rehash an old show or movie concept, make sure you make something new and different without ruining the feeling and opinions of those who saw and still watch the original. For example, Bionic Woman was too different from the original concept, tried to be too many things at once, and couldn't hold its audience (although it was averaging at the mid-6s... right in what I argue is the target range the networks should be striving for and trying to keep a hold of).
How to compete?
Go for the new and then stick with it and let it find its legs. If your rival network or cable channel comes out with something new and different, don't clone it. Look for your own new and unique shows instead. Don't franchise yourself to death. And simply don't put on the same show two or more times a week. NBC's response to the success of Lost on ABC was to bring out Heroes-- a similar feeling, but wholly different and high-quality show of its own. Both have been successful.
Take a long, hard look at the shows you are passing on. A lot of what is now on cable and stealing your ratings was offered to you first and you passed on it. Maybe it is time for new and different eyes in development?
March 12, 2008
The Waiting Game
While it is great that the Immigration paperwork is in the hands of the Canadian government, it is also frustrating just... waiting.
I have a letter dated February 13, 2008, saying that the Buffalo, NY, Canadian Consulate has my paperwork and that mine is in a "priority queue." When I go to its online site, I see that 30% of the applications have a response in 3 months, 50% in 5 months, 70% within 7 months, and 80% in 9 months (all of those months numbers are the same or better than nearly all out-of-Canada response times).
However, knowing that I am very likely to have a response within 5 months from February still means that I am waiting for a response until July sometime, most likely. And that seems like forever to wait, especially with what is going on in my immediate SoCal area (with work, the housing crisis, etc.) and the nation in general (recession, etc.).
From my mother I get a need to do for myself and not give up a project or task unless absolutely necessary. While this is absolutely necessary, it is nerve-wracking to have it out of my hands and not be able to do anything to assist the application's speed review and approval.
So I will try my best not to go to the web site every single day and look up the application's state. I will try to wait patiently to hear from the Canadian government about my status. *sigh
I have a letter dated February 13, 2008, saying that the Buffalo, NY, Canadian Consulate has my paperwork and that mine is in a "priority queue." When I go to its online site, I see that 30% of the applications have a response in 3 months, 50% in 5 months, 70% within 7 months, and 80% in 9 months (all of those months numbers are the same or better than nearly all out-of-Canada response times).
However, knowing that I am very likely to have a response within 5 months from February still means that I am waiting for a response until July sometime, most likely. And that seems like forever to wait, especially with what is going on in my immediate SoCal area (with work, the housing crisis, etc.) and the nation in general (recession, etc.).
From my mother I get a need to do for myself and not give up a project or task unless absolutely necessary. While this is absolutely necessary, it is nerve-wracking to have it out of my hands and not be able to do anything to assist the application's speed review and approval.
So I will try my best not to go to the web site every single day and look up the application's state. I will try to wait patiently to hear from the Canadian government about my status. *sigh
March 10, 2008
The Week That Was
On the Thursday prior to leaving for Saint John, I commented to both my wife and my boss that I wasn't feeling particularly well and that I was afraid that flying was going to cause me increased difficulties because of that. On top of that, as you have likely already read in a previous post, the flight took much longer and was a poor day, which didn't help my beleaguered immune system. Lastly, Saint John is suffering from some pretty bad cold/flu problems at the moment (they have been ranked "High" or "Very High" since I got here).
Sure enough, I got sick. Very sick. Happily, it was a slightly uncommon illness for me in that my face really showed it, I was coughing a ton (and powerfully), and even sneezing and blowing my nose. My throat was raw both from the coughing and from the illness, some intestinal/stomach issues, and I had a severe headache. I say "luckily" because, oftentimes, I get very sick but it doesn't show up on my face and people around me don't completely believe I'm sick. Apparently, the key to making people believe you really are sick is to have a red nose from blowing too much or water, dry, drained, eyes. I simply don't usually have those symptoms.
I actually logged off early and or took a full sick day a couple of times last week, I felt that bad. This weekend it came to a head and I actually coughed so hard that I vomited! Ugh! I have been sucking on cough drops, Hall's Defense, and taking Advil Cold and Sinus all week and praying for health.
What has been wonderful is being with my wife. What a difference it makes to have someone who can take over the cooking needs, can keep the cupboards stocked, and rub you when you are having a hot or cold flash. Unlike when I am at my apartment and I have to eat whatever crap happens to be left over in my fridge or cupboards, which I'm sure doesn't help me get any better. My only hope is that she doesn't catch what I've had. *fingers crossed
I'm back at work today. Sneezing and blowing a bit, still having powerful and painful coughing, and still feeling liquid sloshing around in my chest. But I am definitely on the mend. Finally!
Now, today would normally be Enbrel day, but that lowers the hell out of my immune system and I'm not supposed to take it when I feel sick or feel like I am getting sick. So I think I had better hold off a day or two more before trying it. *sigh
Sure enough, I got sick. Very sick. Happily, it was a slightly uncommon illness for me in that my face really showed it, I was coughing a ton (and powerfully), and even sneezing and blowing my nose. My throat was raw both from the coughing and from the illness, some intestinal/stomach issues, and I had a severe headache. I say "luckily" because, oftentimes, I get very sick but it doesn't show up on my face and people around me don't completely believe I'm sick. Apparently, the key to making people believe you really are sick is to have a red nose from blowing too much or water, dry, drained, eyes. I simply don't usually have those symptoms.
I actually logged off early and or took a full sick day a couple of times last week, I felt that bad. This weekend it came to a head and I actually coughed so hard that I vomited! Ugh! I have been sucking on cough drops, Hall's Defense, and taking Advil Cold and Sinus all week and praying for health.
What has been wonderful is being with my wife. What a difference it makes to have someone who can take over the cooking needs, can keep the cupboards stocked, and rub you when you are having a hot or cold flash. Unlike when I am at my apartment and I have to eat whatever crap happens to be left over in my fridge or cupboards, which I'm sure doesn't help me get any better. My only hope is that she doesn't catch what I've had. *fingers crossed
I'm back at work today. Sneezing and blowing a bit, still having powerful and painful coughing, and still feeling liquid sloshing around in my chest. But I am definitely on the mend. Finally!
Now, today would normally be Enbrel day, but that lowers the hell out of my immune system and I'm not supposed to take it when I feel sick or feel like I am getting sick. So I think I had better hold off a day or two more before trying it. *sigh
March 3, 2008
Journey Here
For the most part, the trip here this time was okay and mostly uneventful. However, I have learned that having 3 or more hours of waiting to do at any one stop is like Hell. I will have to avoid flights with overly long layovers next time.
The last flight came after what was scheduled as a 4 hour layover. However, my flight from Chicago to Toronto was early and then a weather front in SJ caused my flight to be delayed from a takeoff of 9:55pm to 10:40pm. With the time change going to AST, I was already supposed to land at 12:45am, so this delay was pushing me back to nearly a 2 am arrival time. And then, when they finally announced what was going on (I had gone up and spoken with someone at the desk, which is why I knew about the delay and what was going on and found out the chances were "poor" they could get us to SJ), they said that they were thinking about taking off, seeing if the weather cleared as they traveled to SJ, and then landing at Quebec City if it was not clearing enough to land for refueling and "further consideration." Er, excuse me? You want to take off, hope that you have a place you can land, and then turn around and land in a much smaller city, with fewer hotels and other options for our continued travel? If the runway in SJ didn't clear, they even said they might then fly us back to Toronto from Quebec City later that night. Ugh!
I determined that if the chances of the runway didn't improve, then I would opt out of this marry-go-round and find the hotel that M had researched for me and just try again in the morning (Toronto had an 8 am flight that would get me to SJ by just shy of 11 am AST). However, the next announcement, over an hour and a half later and very nearly the time we should have been boarding the plane was that we were waiting a bit longer, and that they chances of getting through to SJ were "fair." I told M I was going to risk it and get on; I'd speak with her whenever/wherever I landed-- hopefully in SJ at 2 am.
This flight was uneventful and we did manage to land in SJ early in the morning. M had driven the borrowed Aztek, which has either all-wheel or four-wheel drive over the icy roads to come get me, nearly spinning out of control once along the way. We took a different path back, took it slowly, and she got me home safely.
Sunday we spent a lazy day at home adjusting to having me here. The snow outside is pretty thick-- I'd say close to a foot on the unshoveled and unplowed areas. We shoveled the driveway and back porch a bit so M could go to work on Monday.
The time shift struck me last night/this morning-- I had trouble falling asleep until after 2 am and am very tired this morning. It always takes me a little while to adjust either way. But we are hitting our routine and happy to be together.
The last flight came after what was scheduled as a 4 hour layover. However, my flight from Chicago to Toronto was early and then a weather front in SJ caused my flight to be delayed from a takeoff of 9:55pm to 10:40pm. With the time change going to AST, I was already supposed to land at 12:45am, so this delay was pushing me back to nearly a 2 am arrival time. And then, when they finally announced what was going on (I had gone up and spoken with someone at the desk, which is why I knew about the delay and what was going on and found out the chances were "poor" they could get us to SJ), they said that they were thinking about taking off, seeing if the weather cleared as they traveled to SJ, and then landing at Quebec City if it was not clearing enough to land for refueling and "further consideration." Er, excuse me? You want to take off, hope that you have a place you can land, and then turn around and land in a much smaller city, with fewer hotels and other options for our continued travel? If the runway in SJ didn't clear, they even said they might then fly us back to Toronto from Quebec City later that night. Ugh!
I determined that if the chances of the runway didn't improve, then I would opt out of this marry-go-round and find the hotel that M had researched for me and just try again in the morning (Toronto had an 8 am flight that would get me to SJ by just shy of 11 am AST). However, the next announcement, over an hour and a half later and very nearly the time we should have been boarding the plane was that we were waiting a bit longer, and that they chances of getting through to SJ were "fair." I told M I was going to risk it and get on; I'd speak with her whenever/wherever I landed-- hopefully in SJ at 2 am.
This flight was uneventful and we did manage to land in SJ early in the morning. M had driven the borrowed Aztek, which has either all-wheel or four-wheel drive over the icy roads to come get me, nearly spinning out of control once along the way. We took a different path back, took it slowly, and she got me home safely.
Sunday we spent a lazy day at home adjusting to having me here. The snow outside is pretty thick-- I'd say close to a foot on the unshoveled and unplowed areas. We shoveled the driveway and back porch a bit so M could go to work on Monday.
The time shift struck me last night/this morning-- I had trouble falling asleep until after 2 am and am very tired this morning. It always takes me a little while to adjust either way. But we are hitting our routine and happy to be together.
February 28, 2008
A Little Scare
I went to my AIH doctor while M was here and we spoke with him about my illness and my recent issues with being sick. It was nice having my wife along, so she could meet the doctor in whom I have so much built up trust and respect. For his part, he described in 5 minutes everything we've been doing about my AIH for the last 12 years and I think she got a lot of value out of that.
However, I wasn't able to get my blood work done prior to that visit. I got it done the following Friday (two days later) and then had to wait until yesterday to hear the results.
My ALT and AST, both prime liver-function indicators, were astronomically high. ALT has a typical range of 0-45 and AST is 0-40. My results were 182 and 145. I managed to get in contact with my doctor today and he is dumbfounded by these results. Especially since I have been doing so well for so long with my meds and my blood test results... I have occasionally come out high on one or both of my liver-function results, but just small blips (the occasion mid- to high-40s, even an occasional 50). These current numbers are similar to what I had when I was first diagnosed and started treatment (when I was first diagnosed, I was in the high 200s and low 300s, but they dropped quickly with treatment).
Complicating the issue is the fact I'm leaving for SJ on Saturday. We just don't have time to do much between now and then.
He provided three options:
1. Go on my steroids (prednisone) for three weeks until I return and can get another blood test done. This has a few disadvantages; I react well to prednisone, but higher doses can change my personality and has some other side effects. Usually I get happier with steroids, but sometimes I get meaner, morose, or lethargic. Also, if something else were to happen, the prednisone might mask the issue while I'm on it.
2. Up my Imuran take again. We have been slowly lowering my Imuran because it is hurting me to be on two powerful immune suppressants (Enbrel and Imuran) at the same time. However, Imuran takes a while to "kick in" so upping them won't see a change in the results for a few weeks most likely. Secondly, I'm flying shortly and going to a much colder and wetter climate, with viruses and flus to which I am not accustomed. Upping my Imuran means I am lowering my immune system at exactly the wrong time. I may get violently ill on my trip and be laid up far away from my doctors (while I'm sure M's mom can get me great care, they don't know my history like my current doctors do).
3. Do nothing different, continue to take Imuran and present levels, and repeat the blood tests as soon as I get back. Aggressively treat it then if my results come back still out of range while my doctor has complete access to me.
We discussed the options for a bit and then I decided on option 3. Liver disease is, thankfully, a slowly debilitating disease. My numbers are really not so bad as compared with people who are in end-stage liver disease (their ALT and AST numbers are in 1000s typically-- I'm far from that). It took around 5 months for my numbers to go from in-range to where they are now, so there is plenty of time to treat aggressively and get everything back on track. I am flying to SJ shortly. Not knowing how I'm going to react to upping my meds (or anything possibly more aggressive that we might come up with), would possibly cause me to have to miss my trip or be susceptible to everything I come in contact with along the way and while I'm there. Lastly, we are both incredulous that these results are not somehow a fluke. Yes, they might be high and we need to treat it, but going from high 30s/low 40s to 4 times that amount in a few months? Possible, but possibly influenced by other sources. Possibly one of the cold medications I was on trying to beat the cold I had helped lower my liver function. Maybe it is an adverse reaction to one of my other medications, a food, or something else external.
One of the great things about my doctor is that he shows me his concern and he is quick to act... when it is necessary. He doesn't panic over one bad test, even if it is very bad, as this one was. He wants to see trends and consistency before he does anything that is going to affect me unduly. Too often doctors react to one bad test and over medicate or over diagnose without taking the entire history into account-- and the patient winds up worse than before. My doctor knows my history and knows that this is very unusual for me. Better to see if my meds will calm this down and get it back under control and repeat the blood tests in a couple of weeks than to panic now and possibly do something even more destructive in trying to solve the current issue.
I am comfortable and confident in this decision. I'll start panicking in 3 weeks if/when my blood tests don't change or get worse, and will ask my doctor to be aggressive in getting things back under control. This way I can still go on my trip to SJ, I don't have to worry more than usual about the illness and muck that I will be exposed to at the airport and on the airplanes, and I don't have to remember any new treatments. We'll wait and see what happens, and then treat as required.
However, I wasn't able to get my blood work done prior to that visit. I got it done the following Friday (two days later) and then had to wait until yesterday to hear the results.
My ALT and AST, both prime liver-function indicators, were astronomically high. ALT has a typical range of 0-45 and AST is 0-40. My results were 182 and 145. I managed to get in contact with my doctor today and he is dumbfounded by these results. Especially since I have been doing so well for so long with my meds and my blood test results... I have occasionally come out high on one or both of my liver-function results, but just small blips (the occasion mid- to high-40s, even an occasional 50). These current numbers are similar to what I had when I was first diagnosed and started treatment (when I was first diagnosed, I was in the high 200s and low 300s, but they dropped quickly with treatment).
Complicating the issue is the fact I'm leaving for SJ on Saturday. We just don't have time to do much between now and then.
He provided three options:
1. Go on my steroids (prednisone) for three weeks until I return and can get another blood test done. This has a few disadvantages; I react well to prednisone, but higher doses can change my personality and has some other side effects. Usually I get happier with steroids, but sometimes I get meaner, morose, or lethargic. Also, if something else were to happen, the prednisone might mask the issue while I'm on it.
2. Up my Imuran take again. We have been slowly lowering my Imuran because it is hurting me to be on two powerful immune suppressants (Enbrel and Imuran) at the same time. However, Imuran takes a while to "kick in" so upping them won't see a change in the results for a few weeks most likely. Secondly, I'm flying shortly and going to a much colder and wetter climate, with viruses and flus to which I am not accustomed. Upping my Imuran means I am lowering my immune system at exactly the wrong time. I may get violently ill on my trip and be laid up far away from my doctors (while I'm sure M's mom can get me great care, they don't know my history like my current doctors do).
3. Do nothing different, continue to take Imuran and present levels, and repeat the blood tests as soon as I get back. Aggressively treat it then if my results come back still out of range while my doctor has complete access to me.
We discussed the options for a bit and then I decided on option 3. Liver disease is, thankfully, a slowly debilitating disease. My numbers are really not so bad as compared with people who are in end-stage liver disease (their ALT and AST numbers are in 1000s typically-- I'm far from that). It took around 5 months for my numbers to go from in-range to where they are now, so there is plenty of time to treat aggressively and get everything back on track. I am flying to SJ shortly. Not knowing how I'm going to react to upping my meds (or anything possibly more aggressive that we might come up with), would possibly cause me to have to miss my trip or be susceptible to everything I come in contact with along the way and while I'm there. Lastly, we are both incredulous that these results are not somehow a fluke. Yes, they might be high and we need to treat it, but going from high 30s/low 40s to 4 times that amount in a few months? Possible, but possibly influenced by other sources. Possibly one of the cold medications I was on trying to beat the cold I had helped lower my liver function. Maybe it is an adverse reaction to one of my other medications, a food, or something else external.
One of the great things about my doctor is that he shows me his concern and he is quick to act... when it is necessary. He doesn't panic over one bad test, even if it is very bad, as this one was. He wants to see trends and consistency before he does anything that is going to affect me unduly. Too often doctors react to one bad test and over medicate or over diagnose without taking the entire history into account-- and the patient winds up worse than before. My doctor knows my history and knows that this is very unusual for me. Better to see if my meds will calm this down and get it back under control and repeat the blood tests in a couple of weeks than to panic now and possibly do something even more destructive in trying to solve the current issue.
I am comfortable and confident in this decision. I'll start panicking in 3 weeks if/when my blood tests don't change or get worse, and will ask my doctor to be aggressive in getting things back under control. This way I can still go on my trip to SJ, I don't have to worry more than usual about the illness and muck that I will be exposed to at the airport and on the airplanes, and I don't have to remember any new treatments. We'll wait and see what happens, and then treat as required.
February 25, 2008
Oscars, 2008
My general, quick-hit thoughts:
- Where was Brad Renfro in the In Memoriam list? He died within the Feb 1, 2007 to Jan 31, 2008 time frame (Jan 15, 2008). Did I just not see him on the list?
- Katherine Heigl looked awesome in her red dress. Stunning, really. The woman in green from Enchanted was also stunning.
- Why don't they ask the audience to wait to clap until the end of any/all of the presentations? It just sounds bad when the audience claps for some nominees or some of the In Memoriam people and not others. Wait until the end.
- John Stewart did a very nice job. Kept things going, had a few killer jokes, and had one of the better moments giving the woman from Once the chance to give her speech (which was one of the best speeches of the night, by the way).
- Tilda Swinton deserved the win for Supporting Actress. She was incredible. And she had one of the better speeches for the evening, referencing George Clooney's turn in Batman.
- I think that any one movie should be limited to one best song nomination. After hearing it, I'm happy that the song from Once won. I have the movie and look forward even more to watching it now.
- I'm happy No Country did so well.
- No one else stood a chance against Day-Lewis this year. No one.
- I'm happy that Bourne won some awards. One of the best all-time action series.
- I still don't completely get why certain people are chosen to present and why people other than the host presents some awards. It would speed things up to have Stewart just present some of them.
- Cream and very light pink dresses don't generally look good on TV on Caucasian women. Cameron Diaz was a prime example (although she didn't look so great herself, either).
- Tom Hanks looks like Tom Hanks again, yay!
- Overall, I thought this was a good Oscars.
- Where was Brad Renfro in the In Memoriam list? He died within the Feb 1, 2007 to Jan 31, 2008 time frame (Jan 15, 2008). Did I just not see him on the list?
- Katherine Heigl looked awesome in her red dress. Stunning, really. The woman in green from Enchanted was also stunning.
- Why don't they ask the audience to wait to clap until the end of any/all of the presentations? It just sounds bad when the audience claps for some nominees or some of the In Memoriam people and not others. Wait until the end.
- John Stewart did a very nice job. Kept things going, had a few killer jokes, and had one of the better moments giving the woman from Once the chance to give her speech (which was one of the best speeches of the night, by the way).
- Tilda Swinton deserved the win for Supporting Actress. She was incredible. And she had one of the better speeches for the evening, referencing George Clooney's turn in Batman.
- I think that any one movie should be limited to one best song nomination. After hearing it, I'm happy that the song from Once won. I have the movie and look forward even more to watching it now.
- I'm happy No Country did so well.
- No one else stood a chance against Day-Lewis this year. No one.
- I'm happy that Bourne won some awards. One of the best all-time action series.
- I still don't completely get why certain people are chosen to present and why people other than the host presents some awards. It would speed things up to have Stewart just present some of them.
- Cream and very light pink dresses don't generally look good on TV on Caucasian women. Cameron Diaz was a prime example (although she didn't look so great herself, either).
- Tom Hanks looks like Tom Hanks again, yay!
- Overall, I thought this was a good Oscars.
February 22, 2008
CoH, Not Just for Entertainment!
A father posted the following on one of the boards for my favorite game, City of Heroes.
I think it is wonderful that he has found something he can enjoy with his children. It is also great how much his children have grown and changed playing the game; learning the story of the game, becoming more creative, and learning the values of good team work. I have, on some rare occasions, found that I was playing with a very young player. Many of the times I was surprised. Sometimes I could tell the person was young. I usually try to be nice to everyone and helpfully suggest tactics and things to help the team be more effective, so don't really care what age the person playing is. I have had more than one father/mother thank me for my patience with their child.
This is yet more proof that it is the person, not the activity, that makes something a "waste of time" or something worthwhile and possibly educational. One more example I can use in my arguments against those who say that playing video games is bad, evil, or worthless.
Go get 'em, Sister Flame!
As I sit here to wait for the servers to come back up, it struck me that I could write a little post about Sister Flame.
Sister Flame is the online handle of my middle daughter, currently six years old. She's been playing City of Heroes since she was 4 and 1/2. It was only over the last year we began to team together with my two accounts and have a lot of fun. I thought I let you know what Sister Flame has learned from CoX.
(1) Flame Learned To Read
At the tender age of five, I let Flame play on my second account on my laptop beside me. For a while, I had to tell her what the train destiantions were, what the NPCs were saying and what the villains name were.
It was only mere months before Flame didn't need my help anymore. We were playing one summer evening and I noticed that she wasn't asking me to read things. I looked over at her screen and watched her for a bit. I was intrigued she knew where to go.
"Need any help reading, honey?" I asked.
"Nope. I can read nope. That says Atlas Park and that says Steel Canyon. Those are Clockworks, but I like calling them Clickey Clacks." she replied quite happilly.
Her teacher was quite surprised at the headstart she had on her reading skills. When I informed the teacher that Flame's headstart was the result of playing a superhero online game, I got the weirdest look. Oh well.
Now, at six, I can hear Flame reading slowly over the mission text and the NPC dialogue. She cannot type yet, but if we get on a team together, I usually do the talking for both of us.
(2) Attitude Matters; Not Age.
From time to time, I get a little impatient with my daughters. I do recall the one evening I was unwell, but Flame wanted to play CoH and wanted to get on a big team.
"I'm too sick to play, so you'll have to do it by yourself." I told her, thinking that she'd never figure it out or get booted quickly if she did get invited to a team.
I laid down on the bed and closed my eyes to rest. Twenty minutes later, I stretched and asked Flame how she was doing.
"Good. I am in a big team." she told me.
"Oh yeah?" I asked.
"Yep. People keep joinging, but I think they're playing soccer." she says.
"Why is that?"
"I keep seeing the word 'kick'."
I rolled off the bed and scrolled back through the chat. Apart from several comments about Flame's excellent control and attack with her Fire Blaster, I see several conversations/arguments with some idiots who joined the team and did something really stupid. Most of them wound up being kicked by the leader. I also notice that every so often, Flame has written 'ty'.
"What's the 'ty' for?" I asked.
"Thank you. You type it sometimes. Everytime I see 'Flame', I type it. They like it."
I watched Flame play for another twenty minutes. No one in the group had a clue to her age and she played her role as any good team member should: waiting for 'Go' or 'Ready' before attacking, saving her Rain of Fire for large groups and giving inspirations to thoes that needed it.
Finally, I had to type a message for Flame.
"Thank you all for the team. This is Flame's dad. She has to get up for Grade 1 tomorrow and needs to go to bed. She says you were all great."
I still love typing that message and watching the responses. Most are 'lol' or 'what?!'. One time, a player typed 'Wow. I wonder if my poodle could play.'. All in good fun.
(3) Playing Coh Is Just Like Playing House a.k.a Imagination Is Power.
Flame has always had a decent imagination, but it has improved a lot since she has been playing Coh. She likes to spin stories about her toons and give them a backstory. This has translated well to her schoolwork when she has been asked to do creative writing assignments. She has also developed a healthy curiousity into some of the groups in CoH. Some of the things she has asked me are:
"Why do Skulls hang out in Perez Park?"
"How come the Clockworks don't attack cars or make nasty cars to attack people?"
"Why are Trolls green?"
"Where do the Outcasts get their power?"
Now, she makes up toons with funny names (to us anyways), but good backgrounds. Among some of her mains are Takes Care Of Pets (A MM with two mercenaries: Cat, Dog), Takes Care Of Bats (A PB with Bat Wings) and of course, Sister Flame (a Fire Blaster with her partner, Brother Frost [me]).
So, if you ever run across a Fire Blaster named Sister Flame on Freedom, chances are its my daughter havign fun, but learning many things at the same time. Feel free to team with her, but don't be a "poopyhead" (her words, not mind).
Ciao!
P.S. She is working on her typing skills, so if you see her say "Go", "Go", "Go" about twenty times, don't worry. It's only 1 of about 100 words she can spell.
I think it is wonderful that he has found something he can enjoy with his children. It is also great how much his children have grown and changed playing the game; learning the story of the game, becoming more creative, and learning the values of good team work. I have, on some rare occasions, found that I was playing with a very young player. Many of the times I was surprised. Sometimes I could tell the person was young. I usually try to be nice to everyone and helpfully suggest tactics and things to help the team be more effective, so don't really care what age the person playing is. I have had more than one father/mother thank me for my patience with their child.
This is yet more proof that it is the person, not the activity, that makes something a "waste of time" or something worthwhile and possibly educational. One more example I can use in my arguments against those who say that playing video games is bad, evil, or worthless.
Go get 'em, Sister Flame!
February 20, 2008
Broiler
So, frankly, for the longest time I thought the drawer under the stove was simply for pan storage. That was all my mother ever used it for-- I can't remember her doing anything with that drawer except place pots and pans.
I recently had cause to eat some dishes that were broiled. Each of them were quite tasty and surprisingly moist. So it caused me to wonder about this strange, alien cooking technique called "broiling." I spent some time today, in between doing actual work for my company, looking up broiling, and determining what might be the best course of action. It was during this time that I discovered that broiling, in addition to be something you can do in the main stove region of a conventional oven, can be accomplished in that little "storage drawer" at the bottom of a gas (and some electric) stove. You can imagine my surprise. I further learned that the drawer's front actually can rotate down to ease access for cooking using the broiler. And that funny pan with the slots that is always in that storage drawer? It has a purpose in broiling!! Aha!
Deciding to use it, I thawed some steaks over the day and they were ready when I was done with work. I used Mrs. Dash on both sides of each, seared them on the stove while the broiler warmed up, and then I followed the instructions I read online and put the thick steaks into the broiler for 12 minutes on the first side and 10 on the second side.
While not as good as grilled, I am very pleasantly surprised at how good they turned out. I was afraid that the steaks I was using were freezer-burned a little around the edges, but the broiling seems to have helped ease the damage done by that. The meat is still a little tough, but certainly not as tough as if I had fried them up or grilled them, so bonus. The internal meat is nicely pink and the outside is blackened but not overly burned. I'm sure I'll get better at that as I use this new-found technique.
Color me surprised.
I have expanded my cooking repertoire another notch and look forward to figuring better ways of using this feature of my stove.
I recently had cause to eat some dishes that were broiled. Each of them were quite tasty and surprisingly moist. So it caused me to wonder about this strange, alien cooking technique called "broiling." I spent some time today, in between doing actual work for my company, looking up broiling, and determining what might be the best course of action. It was during this time that I discovered that broiling, in addition to be something you can do in the main stove region of a conventional oven, can be accomplished in that little "storage drawer" at the bottom of a gas (and some electric) stove. You can imagine my surprise. I further learned that the drawer's front actually can rotate down to ease access for cooking using the broiler. And that funny pan with the slots that is always in that storage drawer? It has a purpose in broiling!! Aha!
Deciding to use it, I thawed some steaks over the day and they were ready when I was done with work. I used Mrs. Dash on both sides of each, seared them on the stove while the broiler warmed up, and then I followed the instructions I read online and put the thick steaks into the broiler for 12 minutes on the first side and 10 on the second side.
While not as good as grilled, I am very pleasantly surprised at how good they turned out. I was afraid that the steaks I was using were freezer-burned a little around the edges, but the broiling seems to have helped ease the damage done by that. The meat is still a little tough, but certainly not as tough as if I had fried them up or grilled them, so bonus. The internal meat is nicely pink and the outside is blackened but not overly burned. I'm sure I'll get better at that as I use this new-found technique.
Color me surprised.
I have expanded my cooking repertoire another notch and look forward to figuring better ways of using this feature of my stove.
February 19, 2008
Tivo Woes
I don't realize how much I rely on my Tivo until something isn't working correctly. Yesterday I watched a downloaded Amazon Unbox movie and today-- some of my network-related features are not available at all. One of my Unbox items is just gone. Some of my home network features are simply not there.
I did the usual tests, restarted the Tivo, double-checked all the network controls, and then called Tivo Support. Within minutes I was on the phone with Shawna. She pinged my Tivo, did not see anything wrong with my services from her end, and then had to put me on hold while she spoke with her manager. Turns out that they have experienced a server outage with certain servers that only run the network functions, like the Swivel Search, Amazon Unbox, and certain transfer and related services. Their techs are working on it and hope to have those network services up and running in 24 hours. It was great to discover these services are not available on their end and that the fault is not on mine. I was worried that something had gone wrong in the OS or with my network.
M had a similar issue recently; her Tivo, my old single-tuner one, started acting really strangely. It rebooted, lost connections, didn't react to things correctly, and was making a lot of noise. Being a tech person herself, she was able to make some analysis which led her to believe the hard drive was failing. We went through my friends at Weaknees.com and she got a new hard drive and fan for the unit, installed it, and everything was okay. But for those 4-5 days while she performed her analysis and then waited for the parts to arrive, she was a bit lost-- she also hadn't realize how much she had come to rely on the Tivo and all of its wonderful tools and features. She was beside herself until she fixed it and everything turned out okay.
The Tivo makes things so easy. It is far superior to any VHS recorders and most PC DVR functions. Some of the newer DVRs from cable companies and the like have just as good systems, however, most of those are ripping of Tivo's services (and a few lawsuits have been used by Tivo to correct this). When comparing a DVR, the companies always compare theirs to Tivo-- the best general DVR system available. This ease of use and powerful scheduling service is exactly what makes it so hard to do without when/if something goes wrong.
Now I just have to wait until the systems come back online from their end and I should have all my functionality back. Just have to be patient and not get a huge urge to download from Unbox or Swivel Search a favorite actor.
I did the usual tests, restarted the Tivo, double-checked all the network controls, and then called Tivo Support. Within minutes I was on the phone with Shawna. She pinged my Tivo, did not see anything wrong with my services from her end, and then had to put me on hold while she spoke with her manager. Turns out that they have experienced a server outage with certain servers that only run the network functions, like the Swivel Search, Amazon Unbox, and certain transfer and related services. Their techs are working on it and hope to have those network services up and running in 24 hours. It was great to discover these services are not available on their end and that the fault is not on mine. I was worried that something had gone wrong in the OS or with my network.
M had a similar issue recently; her Tivo, my old single-tuner one, started acting really strangely. It rebooted, lost connections, didn't react to things correctly, and was making a lot of noise. Being a tech person herself, she was able to make some analysis which led her to believe the hard drive was failing. We went through my friends at Weaknees.com and she got a new hard drive and fan for the unit, installed it, and everything was okay. But for those 4-5 days while she performed her analysis and then waited for the parts to arrive, she was a bit lost-- she also hadn't realize how much she had come to rely on the Tivo and all of its wonderful tools and features. She was beside herself until she fixed it and everything turned out okay.
The Tivo makes things so easy. It is far superior to any VHS recorders and most PC DVR functions. Some of the newer DVRs from cable companies and the like have just as good systems, however, most of those are ripping of Tivo's services (and a few lawsuits have been used by Tivo to correct this). When comparing a DVR, the companies always compare theirs to Tivo-- the best general DVR system available. This ease of use and powerful scheduling service is exactly what makes it so hard to do without when/if something goes wrong.
Now I just have to wait until the systems come back online from their end and I should have all my functionality back. Just have to be patient and not get a huge urge to download from Unbox or Swivel Search a favorite actor.
February 17, 2008
Movie Night Follow Up
The theater is older, with a screen set high up enough that you have tilt your head back and no stadium seating. But for $3.00 total cost to get in and watch Michael Clayton, well worth it. Our theater probably held about 200 people and it was pretty full. All but the first three rows were mostly full.
Michael Clayton was interesting-- I am not sure I think it qualifies as a Best Picture movie, although it is quite well acted, directed, and photographed. No Country for Old Men was far superior in comparison, for example. And Juno was this movie's equal in most aspects. However, I thought Tom Wilkerson and Tilda Swinton were incredible in their roles. I am scratching my head over George Clooney being nominated for an Academy Award. He was good, don't get me wrong, but one of the of the five best of the year? Hmm. I use some possibly faulty reasoning when I am thinking about who should be nominated for a Best Actor award: did the person do a good job in and of itself? Yes. Clooney provided a nuanced and subtle performance. Could anyone else be placed in the role and do as well or better? Yes. I saw nothing special or unique in Clooney's performance that someone else could not equal. Can I imagine anyone else in the role and liking the movie even more? Well, yes. I think someone older, like Clint Eastwood, could have really nailed this role. Does the person make those around him/her better? No. If anything, Wilkenson and Swinton made Clooney's acting better and stronger, not the other way around.
Another problem I had was the fact that it starts by showing you a bit of the future, then goes back four days and you see how those images come about. This is, in my opinion, one of the absolute worst things you can ever do in a movie. It never works, it doesn't work here, and takes a lot of the emotional and physical jeopardy out of the scenes until the movie syncs back up with itself. There are two assassins in the movie, but I never worried for the main star because I knew he survived anything they did until we reached the sync-point. However, if they had just told the story from day one, scene one and gone forward, I would not have been sure of anyone's survival and it would have given even more emotional impact to the scenes of Tilda Swinton crying, shaking, and sweating through her suit that come later (just to name one).
Secondly, while I appreciate them not telling us everything about everyone and letting the audience figure things out, the story itself could have been made slightly more clear. All those rooms full of lawyers tend to blur together and it is easy to lose track of the story and who is on which side (M complained of this; I felt I followed it okay, but think it could have been clearer).
Thirdly, throughout the movie we are told about how great Clooney's character is at "fixing" for this law firm. However, in both his personal life and in the law firm, he absolutely sucks at it for most of the film. I found that incongruity a bit unsettling and it didn't make a lot of sense to me.
Lastly, the payoff at the end is well worth it. Swinton and Clooney play off each other and bring a quality and satisfying end to what could have been a movie without much point. However, I'm not certain all audiences will want to climb the proverbial mountain to get to that payoff.
I would rate the movie a solid B+ or maybe an A- on my scale. A very good movie, but with some flaws. I would rate the theater a solid C-- flawed theater and one that I wouldn't want to go to often, but with great prices and good enough sound and picture to make me go back.
Michael Clayton was interesting-- I am not sure I think it qualifies as a Best Picture movie, although it is quite well acted, directed, and photographed. No Country for Old Men was far superior in comparison, for example. And Juno was this movie's equal in most aspects. However, I thought Tom Wilkerson and Tilda Swinton were incredible in their roles. I am scratching my head over George Clooney being nominated for an Academy Award. He was good, don't get me wrong, but one of the of the five best of the year? Hmm. I use some possibly faulty reasoning when I am thinking about who should be nominated for a Best Actor award: did the person do a good job in and of itself? Yes. Clooney provided a nuanced and subtle performance. Could anyone else be placed in the role and do as well or better? Yes. I saw nothing special or unique in Clooney's performance that someone else could not equal. Can I imagine anyone else in the role and liking the movie even more? Well, yes. I think someone older, like Clint Eastwood, could have really nailed this role. Does the person make those around him/her better? No. If anything, Wilkenson and Swinton made Clooney's acting better and stronger, not the other way around.
Another problem I had was the fact that it starts by showing you a bit of the future, then goes back four days and you see how those images come about. This is, in my opinion, one of the absolute worst things you can ever do in a movie. It never works, it doesn't work here, and takes a lot of the emotional and physical jeopardy out of the scenes until the movie syncs back up with itself. There are two assassins in the movie, but I never worried for the main star because I knew he survived anything they did until we reached the sync-point. However, if they had just told the story from day one, scene one and gone forward, I would not have been sure of anyone's survival and it would have given even more emotional impact to the scenes of Tilda Swinton crying, shaking, and sweating through her suit that come later (just to name one).
Secondly, while I appreciate them not telling us everything about everyone and letting the audience figure things out, the story itself could have been made slightly more clear. All those rooms full of lawyers tend to blur together and it is easy to lose track of the story and who is on which side (M complained of this; I felt I followed it okay, but think it could have been clearer).
Thirdly, throughout the movie we are told about how great Clooney's character is at "fixing" for this law firm. However, in both his personal life and in the law firm, he absolutely sucks at it for most of the film. I found that incongruity a bit unsettling and it didn't make a lot of sense to me.
Lastly, the payoff at the end is well worth it. Swinton and Clooney play off each other and bring a quality and satisfying end to what could have been a movie without much point. However, I'm not certain all audiences will want to climb the proverbial mountain to get to that payoff.
I would rate the movie a solid B+ or maybe an A- on my scale. A very good movie, but with some flaws. I would rate the theater a solid C-- flawed theater and one that I wouldn't want to go to often, but with great prices and good enough sound and picture to make me go back.
Movie Night
It has been a long time since I have had to wait in any sort of significant line at a movie theater. We have so many theaters around, and so many of them have multiple screens (I have two with over 20 screens within 7 miles of here, and two more with 10 or more within 5), that it usually isn't necessary to wait in a line. You want to see the latest blockbuster? Go anywhere and you can find it playing without a line. Simple.
Tonight M and I were planning an impromptu date night. After church we were going to head over to the nearby, recently discovered dollar movie theater and watch Michael Clayton. The theater is in an older section of Irvine, behind a car wash, and is an older theater that was fairly recently repurposed as a dollar movie theater. Well, to be honest, a "dollar fifty" movie theater (nearly all shows are $1.50).
She joked that it might just be the thing to do in Irvine on a Saturday night. We laughed... and then found out she was right. As we drove into the parking lot I commented that I was shocked at the number of cars in the lot. I hadn't ever seen the parking lot so filled. As we turned down an aisle and started heading toward the theater, we both commented on the number of people. As we got closer, we saw that there were two lines stretching along the sidewalk in front of the theater just for tickets! Since the movie we wanted to see started in less than 15 minutes, and there was no parking in sight, and there were two lines that long, we decided to put our plans on hold. But we drove right by the ticket booth and the lines were long and getting longer by the moment. It really is the thing to do in Irvine on a Saturday! Good call, honey!
So, we headed home, watched episodes of How I Met Your Mother, ate some popcorn, and had a quiet night at home. We are planning to try to go see Michael Clayton at the noon showing on Sunday instead.
I think that other theaters could really learn something. This theater is likely turning people away from shows due to the price and the size of the theaters; while you can go see the latest blockbusters it is rare that the shows are sold out. This theater is making up for the price in the volume of customers, while the deluxe, super-modern, multiplexes are having to raise prices continually to make up for the falling attendance. You wonder how much better the stadium 10 across the street from me would do if they would just lower the tickets by $2 per show; I would bet that they would make up in attendance volume the money they would lose on the initial ticket price. If you have a 100 seat theater and can only half-fill it at $10 a ticket, by lowering the price to $8 you only have to have 12 additional people show up per show to make up the price difference-- I would hazard that is fair bet to make. And when word gets around that your theater is $2 cheaper than the others around for first-run movies-- you'll have more than 12 people per show showing up!
Tonight M and I were planning an impromptu date night. After church we were going to head over to the nearby, recently discovered dollar movie theater and watch Michael Clayton. The theater is in an older section of Irvine, behind a car wash, and is an older theater that was fairly recently repurposed as a dollar movie theater. Well, to be honest, a "dollar fifty" movie theater (nearly all shows are $1.50).
She joked that it might just be the thing to do in Irvine on a Saturday night. We laughed... and then found out she was right. As we drove into the parking lot I commented that I was shocked at the number of cars in the lot. I hadn't ever seen the parking lot so filled. As we turned down an aisle and started heading toward the theater, we both commented on the number of people. As we got closer, we saw that there were two lines stretching along the sidewalk in front of the theater just for tickets! Since the movie we wanted to see started in less than 15 minutes, and there was no parking in sight, and there were two lines that long, we decided to put our plans on hold. But we drove right by the ticket booth and the lines were long and getting longer by the moment. It really is the thing to do in Irvine on a Saturday! Good call, honey!
So, we headed home, watched episodes of How I Met Your Mother, ate some popcorn, and had a quiet night at home. We are planning to try to go see Michael Clayton at the noon showing on Sunday instead.
I think that other theaters could really learn something. This theater is likely turning people away from shows due to the price and the size of the theaters; while you can go see the latest blockbusters it is rare that the shows are sold out. This theater is making up for the price in the volume of customers, while the deluxe, super-modern, multiplexes are having to raise prices continually to make up for the falling attendance. You wonder how much better the stadium 10 across the street from me would do if they would just lower the tickets by $2 per show; I would bet that they would make up in attendance volume the money they would lose on the initial ticket price. If you have a 100 seat theater and can only half-fill it at $10 a ticket, by lowering the price to $8 you only have to have 12 additional people show up per show to make up the price difference-- I would hazard that is fair bet to make. And when word gets around that your theater is $2 cheaper than the others around for first-run movies-- you'll have more than 12 people per show showing up!
February 7, 2008
Heath Ledger
While I am still sad that Heath Ledger is dead, I am happy that it has been ruled an accidental overdose by the coroner. I hated the thought that another bright young star may have killed himself for reasons unknown. It also points out the ease with which a person can get and use prescribed drugs exactly as ordered but with unexpected and deadly consequences.
By all accounts, Ledger was suffering from insomnia and anxiety or depression. Some of it brought on by the roles he took, some by his personality, and some by the life he was leading at the time. His breakup from Michelle Williams, I'm sure, played some role. You can't have a long-term relationship and a child and break up without some effect on your life. Published reports said that he was having a hard time "letting go" of the Joker persona, who is, in this version, much darker, scarier, and amoral than in other portrayals on film and TV. And, frankly, a certain type of personality tends toward acting and those personality types also tend toward instability and somewhat reckless or egotistical behavior. I do not know if Ledger was one of these, but if he was, this could have played a part as well. I have read some reports that Ledger may have suffered migraines or nagging headaches as well, although I'm having trouble finding any supporting information for this.
It seems that Ledger managed to get a lethal cocktail of drugs from reputable doctors and pharmacies. He likely assumed, as many people do, that the doctors would know of any drug interactions between the medications and thought they were safe. Or, maybe, like many people, Ledger didn't think about drug interactions and failed to tell doctor X that he was on medication Y for problem Z. That sort of knowledge may have changed the drug of choice for the new doctor. He may also have assumed that the pharmacy information or talking to a pharmacist would be enough; pharmacists do their best to ensure the safety and health of the medications they prescribe, but there is only so much they can do. It also appears from reports that at least a couple of the medications were prescribed in England during his stay there filming The Dark Knight or his newest film with Terry Gilliam. This might mean Ledger didn't even think to mention the other medications he had to this new doctor-- he had a problem and this doctor tried to solve it.
Yes, I realize I am leaving out the fact that he may have purposely tried to get these medications for the sole purpose of getting high. From what I'm reading, this was not Heath Ledger's intent. By all accounts, he was past that phase of his life, was trying to be a good dad, and had a lot to live for and many plans for the future.
Reports indicate that the amounts of each medication were within the prescribed limits for each. However, the combination of the drugs caused an unsafe reaction in Ledger's body which ultimately caused him to pass out (rather than just sleep), his breathing slowly became more depressed until he ceased breathing, and his heart stopped. I see a scenario where Ledger may have had a headache, or some other pain, and he takes an Oxycontin for the pain. He then tries to go to bed and can't sleep, so takes a couple of his sleep medications. He still can't sleep and realizes he is having undue anxiety, so pops a couple of those pills to allay that problem. All perfectly reasonable and justifiable, but deadly nonetheless. Or some similar combination of very reasonable events causes an unsafe mixture of these medications to be taken.
While I mourn the loss of a talented actor, I hope his death will serve to show people that prescription drugs are not to be taken lightly and that full disclosure is needed when obtaining a new prescription. Taking too many medications, or taking an unsafe combination, can result in a trip to the emergency room or worse. This is especially true for children who get into mom and dad's medicine cabinet and "sample" a little of everything.
Be safe and be smart about prescription drugs.
By all accounts, Ledger was suffering from insomnia and anxiety or depression. Some of it brought on by the roles he took, some by his personality, and some by the life he was leading at the time. His breakup from Michelle Williams, I'm sure, played some role. You can't have a long-term relationship and a child and break up without some effect on your life. Published reports said that he was having a hard time "letting go" of the Joker persona, who is, in this version, much darker, scarier, and amoral than in other portrayals on film and TV. And, frankly, a certain type of personality tends toward acting and those personality types also tend toward instability and somewhat reckless or egotistical behavior. I do not know if Ledger was one of these, but if he was, this could have played a part as well. I have read some reports that Ledger may have suffered migraines or nagging headaches as well, although I'm having trouble finding any supporting information for this.
It seems that Ledger managed to get a lethal cocktail of drugs from reputable doctors and pharmacies. He likely assumed, as many people do, that the doctors would know of any drug interactions between the medications and thought they were safe. Or, maybe, like many people, Ledger didn't think about drug interactions and failed to tell doctor X that he was on medication Y for problem Z. That sort of knowledge may have changed the drug of choice for the new doctor. He may also have assumed that the pharmacy information or talking to a pharmacist would be enough; pharmacists do their best to ensure the safety and health of the medications they prescribe, but there is only so much they can do. It also appears from reports that at least a couple of the medications were prescribed in England during his stay there filming The Dark Knight or his newest film with Terry Gilliam. This might mean Ledger didn't even think to mention the other medications he had to this new doctor-- he had a problem and this doctor tried to solve it.
Yes, I realize I am leaving out the fact that he may have purposely tried to get these medications for the sole purpose of getting high. From what I'm reading, this was not Heath Ledger's intent. By all accounts, he was past that phase of his life, was trying to be a good dad, and had a lot to live for and many plans for the future.
Reports indicate that the amounts of each medication were within the prescribed limits for each. However, the combination of the drugs caused an unsafe reaction in Ledger's body which ultimately caused him to pass out (rather than just sleep), his breathing slowly became more depressed until he ceased breathing, and his heart stopped. I see a scenario where Ledger may have had a headache, or some other pain, and he takes an Oxycontin for the pain. He then tries to go to bed and can't sleep, so takes a couple of his sleep medications. He still can't sleep and realizes he is having undue anxiety, so pops a couple of those pills to allay that problem. All perfectly reasonable and justifiable, but deadly nonetheless. Or some similar combination of very reasonable events causes an unsafe mixture of these medications to be taken.
While I mourn the loss of a talented actor, I hope his death will serve to show people that prescription drugs are not to be taken lightly and that full disclosure is needed when obtaining a new prescription. Taking too many medications, or taking an unsafe combination, can result in a trip to the emergency room or worse. This is especially true for children who get into mom and dad's medicine cabinet and "sample" a little of everything.
Be safe and be smart about prescription drugs.
Paper or Plastic?
Many stores are moving toward asking you to purchase your own cloth bags and use them whenever you go to the store for groceries (or, frankly, other stores). While doing this, over the last few years, many stores have been producing smaller, thinner, lighter plastic bags.
The main reasons that I have gleaned for this change is that the plastic bags are environmentally unfriendly. They don't biodegrade worth a damn and are filling up our trash and landfills with needless plastic. In addition, all plastics are made from petroleum, so the costs of producing the bags has increased since the oil barrel costs have skyrocketed.
For many years the only choice a person had when going to the grocery store was to get paper bags. Paper bags are tough, hold more than the new sizes of the plastic, and are generally easier to place in your car due to the regular rectangle shaped bottom. In addition to all of these advantages, paper biodegrades fairly easily in landfills, as many insects and some plants like to "feast" on paper and, specifically, the cellulose that makes up a major component of paper. Now, granted, most paper sacks do not have handles, so are a little more awkward to carry. Lastly, while originally paper manufacturers used clear-cutting methods to make their products, that has pretty much gone away. Nearly all paper manufacturers now replant, manage their tree lots in environmental safe ways, and use a ton of recycled material in all their products.
In addition to its use as a grocery carrier, a paper sack can also be used as impromptu drawing paper for children, package wrapping, and cooling trays for cookies. I'm sure many other uses are out there, too, but those are some of what I have used them for.
At my local Albertsons, it turns out, they have the paper bags in a small cupboard in the bagging area of the checkout stand and you just have to ask for them.
Sometimes the old ways are as good, or even better than, the new ones. If you are concerned about the environment and don't want to buy your own bags, try asking for paper at our local grocery store. They may just have the bags handy and you may find them useful to keep after they have served their original purpose.
The main reasons that I have gleaned for this change is that the plastic bags are environmentally unfriendly. They don't biodegrade worth a damn and are filling up our trash and landfills with needless plastic. In addition, all plastics are made from petroleum, so the costs of producing the bags has increased since the oil barrel costs have skyrocketed.
For many years the only choice a person had when going to the grocery store was to get paper bags. Paper bags are tough, hold more than the new sizes of the plastic, and are generally easier to place in your car due to the regular rectangle shaped bottom. In addition to all of these advantages, paper biodegrades fairly easily in landfills, as many insects and some plants like to "feast" on paper and, specifically, the cellulose that makes up a major component of paper. Now, granted, most paper sacks do not have handles, so are a little more awkward to carry. Lastly, while originally paper manufacturers used clear-cutting methods to make their products, that has pretty much gone away. Nearly all paper manufacturers now replant, manage their tree lots in environmental safe ways, and use a ton of recycled material in all their products.
In addition to its use as a grocery carrier, a paper sack can also be used as impromptu drawing paper for children, package wrapping, and cooling trays for cookies. I'm sure many other uses are out there, too, but those are some of what I have used them for.
At my local Albertsons, it turns out, they have the paper bags in a small cupboard in the bagging area of the checkout stand and you just have to ask for them.
Sometimes the old ways are as good, or even better than, the new ones. If you are concerned about the environment and don't want to buy your own bags, try asking for paper at our local grocery store. They may just have the bags handy and you may find them useful to keep after they have served their original purpose.
February 6, 2008
No Country
This contains spoilers. Matter of fact, I ONLY discuss the very end of the movie No Country for Old Men, so if you haven't seen it, stop reading now.
----------
I didn't like the very end of No Country and have said so. Specifically, I didn't understand the writer/director choice of having the villain get hit by a car and the subsequent interaction with the two boys.
Four different people to whom I said "I didn't like the ending. I didn't understand the choice they made ..." have all given me some variation of their explanation for it and why I should like it (luckily, a fifth person who knows I didn't care for the ending, Lisa, did not say this-- I guess she understands that not everyone has the same perception of a movie).
Let me set the record straight (or, at least, straighter).
First, throughout the entire movie we are shown that the villain is "Lawful Evil" -- i.e., while he couldn't give a damn about people in general and has no problem killing rather indiscriminately, he has a code by which he lives and he doesn't sway from it. So, for example, he gives the gas station owner an out and stands by it. He gives the cowboy an option of handing back the money and his wife would live or running and his wife would die. We, the audience, understand that he actually means it. The cowboy, unfortunately, doesn't know this (not that I think it would make a difference to the cowboy). We see him kill his "boss" when the boss appears to betray him.
Secondly, we are also shown repeatedly that the villain is machine-like in that he just keeps going no matter how injured he is. He sutures up his own shot leg. He shoots the new bounty hunter who appears to be horning in on his bounty. Even when he gains a grudging respect for the cowboy, he still will not offer a deal that doesn't involve the cowboy's death. He simply will not be swayed and he will not be stopped.
So, I perfectly understand him going to the wife's house at the end and, presumably, killing her in a fairly nasty manner. What I don't agree with is the villain getting into an accident as he leaves her house. We already know that the guy is unstoppable, so having him so injured and walking away does nothing new or different. We already know that he has honor, so his interaction with the two boys doesn't teach us anything new. The entire movie was founded on the idea of the "real-life" struggle and how dangerous everyday life can be-- so we don't need to see him get in the accident in the first place.
Now, if he had been killed in the accident and that was how he came to "justice," I could get behind it. How many villains in real life have only come to justice by a fluke or odd coincidence? That's just life-- these people tend to be smart and self-sufficient and only get caught by a fluke or when their ego overcomes their common sense.
If we have him leaving the house and driving away (sans accident) and then cut to the disillusioned and having a hard time letting go cop, and then fade to black, I would be in agreement-- the cop is uneasy in his retirement and wondering about the "one(s) that got away" and whether he could still be doing it and making a difference to others. Okay, I'm behind this. I know some current and former cops-- this is real life again and would make for a great ending.
I'm a pretty smart guy and I watch a lot of movies. I understand the choices and nuances that most movie-makers make. I just don't understand the Coen brothers' choice in this particular instance and for this particular two minute (or so) scene. I think the rest of the movie is masterfully done. I simply disagree with this scene. You don't have to explain it to me or act like I'm an idiot for not liking or agreeing with it. Every reason for the scene anyone has explained to me I have provided an equally compelling reason as to why it wasn't needed; as I said up earlier, we know all of the information that is presented in this scene so it doesn't add anything new to the movie and is superfluous (to me).
----------
I didn't like the very end of No Country and have said so. Specifically, I didn't understand the writer/director choice of having the villain get hit by a car and the subsequent interaction with the two boys.
Four different people to whom I said "I didn't like the ending. I didn't understand the choice they made ..." have all given me some variation of their explanation for it and why I should like it (luckily, a fifth person who knows I didn't care for the ending, Lisa, did not say this-- I guess she understands that not everyone has the same perception of a movie).
Let me set the record straight (or, at least, straighter).
First, throughout the entire movie we are shown that the villain is "Lawful Evil" -- i.e., while he couldn't give a damn about people in general and has no problem killing rather indiscriminately, he has a code by which he lives and he doesn't sway from it. So, for example, he gives the gas station owner an out and stands by it. He gives the cowboy an option of handing back the money and his wife would live or running and his wife would die. We, the audience, understand that he actually means it. The cowboy, unfortunately, doesn't know this (not that I think it would make a difference to the cowboy). We see him kill his "boss" when the boss appears to betray him.
Secondly, we are also shown repeatedly that the villain is machine-like in that he just keeps going no matter how injured he is. He sutures up his own shot leg. He shoots the new bounty hunter who appears to be horning in on his bounty. Even when he gains a grudging respect for the cowboy, he still will not offer a deal that doesn't involve the cowboy's death. He simply will not be swayed and he will not be stopped.
So, I perfectly understand him going to the wife's house at the end and, presumably, killing her in a fairly nasty manner. What I don't agree with is the villain getting into an accident as he leaves her house. We already know that the guy is unstoppable, so having him so injured and walking away does nothing new or different. We already know that he has honor, so his interaction with the two boys doesn't teach us anything new. The entire movie was founded on the idea of the "real-life" struggle and how dangerous everyday life can be-- so we don't need to see him get in the accident in the first place.
Now, if he had been killed in the accident and that was how he came to "justice," I could get behind it. How many villains in real life have only come to justice by a fluke or odd coincidence? That's just life-- these people tend to be smart and self-sufficient and only get caught by a fluke or when their ego overcomes their common sense.
If we have him leaving the house and driving away (sans accident) and then cut to the disillusioned and having a hard time letting go cop, and then fade to black, I would be in agreement-- the cop is uneasy in his retirement and wondering about the "one(s) that got away" and whether he could still be doing it and making a difference to others. Okay, I'm behind this. I know some current and former cops-- this is real life again and would make for a great ending.
I'm a pretty smart guy and I watch a lot of movies. I understand the choices and nuances that most movie-makers make. I just don't understand the Coen brothers' choice in this particular instance and for this particular two minute (or so) scene. I think the rest of the movie is masterfully done. I simply disagree with this scene. You don't have to explain it to me or act like I'm an idiot for not liking or agreeing with it. Every reason for the scene anyone has explained to me I have provided an equally compelling reason as to why it wasn't needed; as I said up earlier, we know all of the information that is presented in this scene so it doesn't add anything new to the movie and is superfluous (to me).
February 4, 2008
The Sneaky Little Details
I decided to start my taxes this weekend. I like to get them done early, e-file, and get the money back (if any) deposited directly into my accounts. Fast, easy, efficient.
Ran into a stumbling block this year-- I got married and to someone who isn't American and does not have a Social Security Number (SSN). Turns out that either a) we need to get her one, if possible, or b) we need to get her an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN). From the looks of things, the ITIN will be the easier thing to get and I can turn in my taxes with the form that asks the IRS to procure her the number.
Now I require my wife to bend over backward to get me the necessary supporting documentation, get it back to me with the signed form, so I can do my taxes. And, of course, it is not like she's the least bit busy at work and at home these days. *sarcasm
I'm just glad I do my taxes early, otherwise we would be finding this information out at the last minute, I would have to file for an extension, and we would have to jump through even more hoops.
Our marriage and relationship is complicated enough as we struggle to be together and overcome those issues. We don't need other things like this cropping up. At least, from what she's said, her Canadian taxes are much simpler in this regard. For me, though, it is makes a huge monetary difference filing as Married as opposed to Single (and a big difference between Joint and Separate). So it is worth the hassle. Hopefully this time next year I will be in Canada, we will have all of this information, and filing will be simple. We'll see.
Ran into a stumbling block this year-- I got married and to someone who isn't American and does not have a Social Security Number (SSN). Turns out that either a) we need to get her one, if possible, or b) we need to get her an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN). From the looks of things, the ITIN will be the easier thing to get and I can turn in my taxes with the form that asks the IRS to procure her the number.
Now I require my wife to bend over backward to get me the necessary supporting documentation, get it back to me with the signed form, so I can do my taxes. And, of course, it is not like she's the least bit busy at work and at home these days. *sarcasm
I'm just glad I do my taxes early, otherwise we would be finding this information out at the last minute, I would have to file for an extension, and we would have to jump through even more hoops.
Our marriage and relationship is complicated enough as we struggle to be together and overcome those issues. We don't need other things like this cropping up. At least, from what she's said, her Canadian taxes are much simpler in this regard. For me, though, it is makes a huge monetary difference filing as Married as opposed to Single (and a big difference between Joint and Separate). So it is worth the hassle. Hopefully this time next year I will be in Canada, we will have all of this information, and filing will be simple. We'll see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)