Play: Mary Poppins

I took a trip to New York City over the weekend. The goal was to take my daughter to see some Broadway plays. First up, Mary Poppins.

Most people are familiar with the movie version of the magical nanny. In the original book, the character was a bit more strict with the children and vain. Somewhere in between the two lies the stage version. Mary is definitely vain and fairly strict but she is also rather cheerful and more mysterious. Thankfully, she's not the only character that has been altered slightly. The children are slightly naughtier and the affection between Bert and Mary is more apparent. Story-wise, I found that these changes brought a breath of fresh air to the story so everyone, even those that have watched the movie a hundred times, could enjoy the musical.

It wasn't until today, while I was doing a bit of research for this review, that I realized how extraordinarily lucky we were to see this particular cast. Mary is played by Laura Michelle Kelly, who starred in the original London cast in 2004. Bert is played by Gavin Lee, also the original actor for Bert in the London cast. The two of them were absolutely amazing in their roles. (I was a bit partial to Bert though. He's hysterical.) If you get a chance to see these two perform, don't hesitate a single minute!

For the most part, Mary Poppins gets passed by for The Lion King. (I'll be talking about that one later!) In my opinion, this is a huge mistake. The show not only mixes both the book and movie very well but it also adds its own little flairs as well. One of these is the song "Practically Perfect" performed by Mary and the children. It showcases all of their talent while staying catchy at the same time. I really think that any fan of Mary would enjoy this show. I know I did!

National Museum of American History

The Smithsonian's National Museum of American History is, most likely, one of the most popular museums in Washington, DC. Not only does the museum address the political history of the United States, it also shows the cultural history. What other building would house both Abraham Lincoln's top hat and Kermit the Frog?

I was really looking forward to this part of our trip. This was my favorite museum as a child and I couldn't wait to share it with my daughter. Unfortunately, the museum has changed a great deal since my childhood. The pop culture exhibit has been reduced to an extraordinarily small room, which makes it difficult to see most of the pieces thanks to the tons of people that need to have their pictures taken with them. I appreciate the fact that people want something to help them remember Brian Boitano's skates but, seriously, there are thousands of people trying to get through this small room. MOVE.

Another problem area is the First Ladies' dresses. The room is large enough to handle a decent sized crowd, yet too many people insist on taking pictures. (NOTE: Flash + Glass = A picture of a bright light.) Thankfully, the inauguration dresses are kept in a separate exhibit, which is much larger and easier to navigate. This was my daughter's favorite exhibit.

While we were there, a large exhibit dedicated to Abraham Lincoln took up a lot of the space. This segued into a rather morbid display on presidential assasinations. Eventually, you end up in a collection of memorabilia from the presidents' children. My daughter liked that area as well.

Overall, I found the museum lacking. We all still had a decent time there but I think it would have been better with the larger pop culture exhibit and less about the deaths of past presidents. (I don't know that we really needed a funeral carriage in the center of the room by itself. Many more displays could have fit in there.) I suppose my biggest complaint is the bad use of the space. Exhibits that could be in a small area are put in huge rooms while popular pieces are stuck in small corners for people to try to wedge their way in to see. Still, this museum is a must see if you are in DC.

Newseum

The Newseum. Not only is it a weird word, it's a weird museum too. Located on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C., the Newseum is right down the street from the Capitol building. As a matter of fact, if you go up to the sixth floor, there is an amazing view of the Capitol from the balcony. (Beware though, tons of people stop to take pictures.) Unfortunately, this is pretty much the best part of the museum unless you are a media junkie.

Befitting its name, the Newseum is, well, a museum for news. On the bottom floor (where you first start out), there are some interesting exhibit. There are chunks of the Berlin Wall, as well as one of the watch towers. (Unfortunately, you can't go up it...though I imagine that would be a logistical nightmare since the inside is so small.) There is also a Sports Illustrated athletic photographic exhibit and a G-Men exhibit. I think I would have liked these better if I enjoyed sports and if we hadn't just finished with the Spy Museum earlier in the day.

From there, you take a great glass elevator up to the sixth floor to experience the museum from the top down. This is where things begin to fall apart. After gazing at the Capitol, you are shuffled down a walkway filled with nothing but the day's front pages of newspapers from around not only the country but also the world. Some of them were vaguely interesting but newspapers, in this day and age, just aren't interesting any more. Luckily, a little bit farther down the museum (I forget which floor, they all kinda blended together after awhile), there are decades-old newspapers. These, to me, are way more interesting than what is currently going on in Backwoods, Iowa. On the bad side, there were tons of them so I didn't get a chance to read too many. This part of the exhibit stands in the center of the floor while video rooms line the walls. Various short films about the media were shown in these. For example, there was a 'Bias' film and a 'Sources' film nearby. Since I was walking around with my husband and my 8-year old daughter, we didn't check out any of these films. (They didn't look particularly appeasing from the outside.)

The next big exhibit was a 9/11 Memorial, which contained a piece of one of the towers. This also featured the front pages of newspapers from around the world. Though what I found most interesting was the tribute to William Biggart, a photojournalist who lost his life running toward the Towers to capture everything on film. His items, as well as the interview with his widow, were much more jarring than the piece of crumpled metal in the middle of the room.

I'd like to note here that the one exhibit that my daughter was looking forward to was the Presidential Dogs exhibit. Unfortunately, all it consisted of was a long line of photos of the presidents with their animals and a small description of them. It was along the lines of "This is 41st President George H. W. Bush with his dog, Millie." On the positive side, this did lead us to a small interactive exhibit on the Bill of Rights so I did get a chance to discuss that with her.

We ended our journey in the Interactive News Room. This gives people (mostly kids, I think) a chance to 'be a reporter.' There are various terminals with games where you question witnesses to get the story on a crime or matching the pairs of photographs of media personalities. However, the big draw is the "Be A Reporter" feature where you can actually pick up a microphone and step before the camera to report a story.

Overall, my husband, my daughter, and I found the museum to be rather boring. On the other hand, my mother, my sister, and my sister's boyfriend enjoyed it so much that they went back the next day to see all the stuff they missed. I guess it's a good thing that the tickets are good for two consecutive days, not just one. At least I don't have to go back again.

International Spy Museum

I spent last week in Washington, D.C. with my family. Over the next few days, I'll be talking about the various museums we visited. First up is the International Spy Museum.

I was a bit torn on this one. We didn't do any of the extra "spy operations" so my opinions are solely based on the regular trip though the museum. After a short elevator ride, you are told that you must memorize a new cover identity. You pick one of the identities written on the pillars in the middle of the room and try your best to remember all of the information. (Your new name, age, country of origin, etc.) Then you sit through a briefing video. Then the museum begins. Depending on how many other people are in your 'group' (it may not necessarily just be the people you came with), this part is either really fun or really annoying. There are a bunch of little games teaching you how to be a spy. From trying to figure out if someone is spying on you to learning how to read aerial maps, there is a lot to learn here. However, each area has two terminals. If there are a ton of people around, chances are you won't really get to use them. My husband and I walked all around the area and played a few of the games before we could get anywhere near the terminals for the secret identity game. (You get more clues that you are supposed to memorize to use later.) I think the museum either needs more terminals or to figure out a way to lower the number of people in each group.

From this point, the museum is pretty much like any other museum. There are a lot of exhibits featuring decades old spy memorabilia from the around the world. While some of it is interesting, a lot of it is a bit dull unless you are really into the whole spy thing. Also, the museum itself is badly laid out. Exhibits line the walkways, which make it difficult to walk though an area without bumping into the people reading the placards. My husband and I were stuck in one area because there was a man reading a placard on the left side of the walkway while a woman was translating a placard for a young boy on the right side. There was no room for us to squeeze in between them to get to the next section.

At the end, you were supposed to be able to use the clues you got from the secret identity terminals in the beginning to finish your mission. Either I (and my sister and her boyfriend) missed a terminal in the middle somewhere or the museum changed the information on one terminal without updating the second because the information that we had wasn't even available as an option on the second terminal. As a result, we failed our "missions." I was very disappointed since this game was one of the big things I was looking forward to.

In all, if you are a big spy nerd, you'll probably love this place. If you don't like crowds or are only vaguely interested in spy stuff, skip this altogether. There is much more interesting stuff in town.

Movie review: Cop Out

Cop Out is a comedy directed by Kevin Smith (of Clerks and Chasing Amy fame). Bruce Willis plays a cop who decides to sell his rare baseball card so he can pay for his daughter's expensive wedding after he gets suspended without pay. When his card is stolen, his jealousy-ridden partner (Tracy Morgan) helps him track down the thief.

I've watched almost all of the movies that Kevin Smith has directed and I've enjoyed them. I wasn't sure what to expect from Cop Out. Especially considering it's been awhile since Willis has done a comedy. Luckily, the stars have aligned themselves and the result is quite hysterical. Though, I have to admit, a good chunk of that credit is due to Morgan. His performance as Paul is comedic brilliance. It's been a rather long time since I laughed so hard. Definitely worth it!

Movie review: The Losers

Much like The A-Team, The Losers are a black ops team that has been betrayed. However, The Losers are a CIA black ops team and they are left for dead after an operation that would have required them to kill children. (Again, like The A-Team, they have a soft spot for the kiddies.) Now living in Bolivia, a strange woman brings the group back together with promises of revenge against Max, the mysterious voice that sent them to their doom, as well as a promise to give them back their lives.

Despite making tons of comparisons to The A-Team, I found myself enjoying the flick. Both my husband and I felt that Chris Evans as Jensen was the best of the bunch. There isn't a lot I can say about the movie without giving away spoilers so I'll leave it at this: If you are a fan of action movies like Die Hard, you'll definitely enjoy this one. While there are a lot of fight scenes, this isn't the movie to watch if you're just looking for explosions. The awesomeness comes from the mixture of comedy and action. Enjoy them both and you'll have a great time watching this.

TV review: The Fabulous Beekman Boys

How many of you knew that Discovery has a channel called Planet Green? I didn't. At least not until The Fabulous Beekman Boys appeared. (New episodes aired Wednesday nights at 9PM.) Yes, Discovery has dragged me back into reality television.

The show revolves around city boys, Josh Kilmer-Purcell and Brent Ridge, purchasing a farm in upstate New York called Beekman Farm. Their goal is to turn the farm into their main source of income. In order to do that, Brent (a doctor that previously worked for Martha Stewart) works and lives at the farm full-time while Josh (a former drag queen who is now an ad exec) works in New York City during the week then commutes up to the farm on weekends. Luckily, they have farmer John to help them tend the goat herd that gives them milk for their cheese and soap. Unfortunately, they don't have someone to help them through the strains of a long-distance relationship.

When I first saw the commercial for the show, I was delighted. It was touted to be a "City Boys Become Farmers" type show. (Yes, there are a lot of Green Acres comparisons.) The commercials claimed the boys knew nothing about being farmers and everything they knew, they learned from Google. In reality, the show is about the strains on their relationship. The pair have been together for 10 years and, for the first time, they aren't together all the time. Josh spends 5 days a week in New York City, which is 3 hours away by train, while Brent stays at the farm working on building the Beekman empire. A lot of the episodes revolve around Josh complaining that he never sees his boyfriend as Brent reminds him that they agreed to this "year of sacrifice" or Josh complaining that he's tired from working hard all week only to return to the farm so Brent can hand him a list of farm chores. Yet, underneath it all, you can see that Josh and Brent really do love each other and, if they can get the farm to a point where it can financially support them, things will be happy again.

So what is my opinion on the show? The 10-episode season ended last night. I purposely waited until the end to talk about it. The first few episodes were annoying. I wanted the "How do we milk a goat? Google it!" show and not the 'Gay guys whine/cry a lot' that we were given. However, by the end of the season, I was hooked. I really want to try their cheese and smell their soap. I want Josh to quit his city job and be a real farmer. I want Brent to relax a bit...though I know it won't happen. The show has been renewed for a second season. I'm hoping that there will be less whining this time around.

Movie review: Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief

Percy Jackson thinks he is a normal kid with normal deficiencies. Much to his surprise, he finds out that he is anything but normal. He is a demigod - the son of a god. To be specific, he is the son of Poseidon, god of the sea. He soon finds out that there are problems in Olympus. Zeus believes that Percy stole his lightning bolt, the source of his powers. If the bolt is not returned within 14 days, war will be declared among the gods.

In case you couldn't tell, I'm a bit of a Greek mythology freak. (For the record, Cassandra is a woman that Apollo fell in love with. He gave her the gift of prophecy. When she did not return his love, he placed a curse on her. No one would believe her predictions.) Needless to say, I was intrigued when I was the commercials for the movie. Unfortunately, I hadn't heard of the books so I wasn't able to read them ahead of time. I went in with an almost-clean slate.

I absolutely loved the movie. The graphics were awesome. My favorite was when Percy and his friends were fighting the hydra. The writers didn't mess with the gods to make them more politically correct or fashionable. For the first time in a long time, I've seen a movie that actually makes me want to read the original source material. Luckily, my local library has copies of the series. I haven't heard anything about the next book - The Sea of Monsters - being made into a movie, but I'll be crossing my fingers!

Movie review: The Fourth Kind

The Fourth Kind is a sci-fi thriller starring Milla Jovovich, The title refers to the four "kinds" of alien contact. The first kind is a UFO sighting, the second kind is observation of a physical result (like a crop circle or radiation), the third kind is contact, and the fourth kind is abduction. Jovovich plays a Hollywood version of "real life" psychologist Dr. Abby Tyler. The movie shows both "real" footage from wireless cctv cameras, as well as a "Hollywood" version with actors in the roles of the participants. According to Dr. Tyler, her husband was mysteriously murdered. As she takes over his life's work, she finds that the people of Nome, Alaska have been unknowingly abducted every night by 'non-human intelligence.' Through hypnosis and therapy, she tries to get to the bottom of what is going on in this small town.

I was skeptical about the validity of the "real life" portions of the movie. Hey, I remember when The Blair Witch Project pulled the wool over my eyes. I wasn't about to let it happen again. Needless to say, the movie is entirely fiction. There is no real life Dr. Abby Taylor and the movie wasn't even shot in Nome. (It was shot in Bulgaria because it's prettier than Nome.) Since the movie pretty much revolves around you believing that this stuff really happened to people (the movie starts off with Jovovich speaking to us out of character about how this is a dramatization of real life events and that real life video and audio recordings will be shown), it's difficult to get invested in the characters. I spent a good portion of the movie waiting for the big death scene. In case you didn't know, the movie is rated PG-13...there isn't a whole lot of really scary things that happen. It's mostly sudden screams and things like that. I think that the movie might have been better if they went for the R rating and added a bit more blood. Not necessarily exploding head type things, but maybe some severe nosebleeds or bleeding from the ears.

If you can suspend your belief for awhile, it's not really a terrible movie. There's some interesting side-by-side video comparing the "real" footage to the "Hollywood' footage. Granted, it would have been better if the grainy footage was actually real footage instead of video that was separately shot by different actors. Overall, I just found it bland and uninteresting.

Movie review: The A-Team

Over the weekend, my husband and I took in The A-Team. Both of us are children of the 80s and fondly remember the television show so we were intrigued to see how it would play out on the big screen. Needless to say, both of us enjoyed it immensely.

When the movie begins, our four favorite military men aren't together yet. Hannibal (Liam Neeson) is working with Face (Bradley Cooper), but they are separated and haven't met B.A. ('Rampage' Jackson) or Murdock (Sharlto Copley). The way the guys get together is a bit of a stretch...but try to look past that part. Once the Fab Four have been united, things take off.

Eight years later, the boys are in Iraq doing their thing. Hannibal gets them unofficially assigned to a mission retrieving a set of lost/stolen plates for a US Mint printing press. Of course, just as they were completing their mission, things go haywire. The plates are, once again, stolen and their commanding officer is killed. The team gets the blame and the four of them are carted off to four different prisons. If you've watched the TV series, you know that they have to break out of prison and try to clear their names.

While I know that the movie needs to set up the back story, it seems to take forever to do so. Luckily, you don't really realize how much time has passed setting everything up. It's not until the boys are tossed in jail that you go "Wow. We're only THIS far into the storyline?" The action is amazing and it keeps you going from scene to scene. The main downfall of the movie is Jessica Biel's characters. I understand that the writers felt they needed to add a female character in order to keep the movie "gender friendly." However, that's just not the basis of the series. It's OK to skip adding female characters JUST to have a chick in the group. She was completely unnecessary and I felt that she brought down the movie just a little. But not enough to skip seeing the movie entirely. If you get a chance to see this in theaters, jump at the chance. I think that the action deserves the big screen.