WHEEEEE! (OR SHOULD THAT BE, 'WIIIIIIIII'!)

Through a connection made via a friend of a friend, we got a Wii for Christmas.

If you're not a gamer (or you don't have kids), the Wii (pronounced "wee") is Nintendo's new gaming platform. And it is unlike any other game system out there.

It's different because it's three-dimensional. If you play the boxing game (part of a sports package that comes with it), you hold the wireless remote control in one hand and a second wireless control (called the nunchuk) in the other, and you box -- and your body's movements and arm movements cause your alter ego on screen to bob and weave and jab and punch just as you're doing at the same time in three-dimensional space.

The remotes are incredibly sensitive. When bowling, the least twist of the wrist can make a difference between a strike and only a few pins down.

We bought it for the kids because it was the number one item on both their wish lists. It was a huge hit. I have for years labeled Lee's Christmas gifts with hints (for instance, way back when I bought him the Beatles White album on CD, I labeled it "Wishing you a white Christmas"), and a couple of years ago the kids demanded that I start leaving hints for them on their gifts as well.

The kids were totally not expecting to get the Wii. Just a few days before Christmas, one of Cory's best friends told him, "You'll never get a Wii. They're all sold out everywhere." So they really didn't make the connection when they read the label that said, "What should you say when you open this present? "Yippee"? No, that's not quite right. "Whoo-hoo"? No, that's not it, either..."

They opened it, a bit puzzled. Then saw what was inside. Then started to yell "Yes!" "Yay!" "Thank you!" (they sounded like that old video clip of kids opening a Nintendo 64 that's been running on BMW commercials). Then suddenly they realized what the label had said -- and started yelling, "Wheeeeeeeeeee!"

We knew they'd love it. What we didn't realize was that we'd love it too.

The Wii is just incredibly fun. Who knew a video game system would give us family time? But we've spent hours so far bowling, golfing, playing baseball... It's just a kick. And the kids love it that mom and dad will play video games with them.

We realized we were (just a bit) hooked when Lee was disappointed last night that I was going to bed early. "Oh darn," he said. "I was thinking we could play some golf."

Try it! You'll like it!

MOVIE THOUGHTS: THE NATIVITY STORY

This late in The Nativity Story's run, rather than straight-out reviewing it, one has to ask why the movie tanked.

I think it tanked for two major reasons. The first, and most interesting, was actually proposed by Lauri Deason of Act One.

Lauri pointed out that her parents (and dad's a pastor) go to the movies every weekend of the year... except the first three weeks of December. That's because those weekends are packed with pre-Christmas stuff, much of it church-related. The programs. The pageants. The parties. The shopping.

And when did The Nativity Story open? Not Thanksgiving weekend, when people are turning their attention from one holiday to another, but don't yet feel the pre-Christmas pressure and might have time to go to a movie with their families. Not Christmas weekend, when all the 'stuff' is over and the family is together and gee, why don't we all go see that new Christmas movie.

No, it opened the first weekend of December.

So that's one reason it tanked: A foolish release date, based on a lack of understanding of the audience. (As a personal example, let me know that we didn't see the movie till Christmas weekend -- we simply didn't have time!)

The second reason it tanked: It was such a bland movie.

Now, I know some people have taken offense at various elements of the movie. I've read quite a bit from people who really really didn't like the Wise Men being comic relief. I have to say, that didn't bother me in the least. Very little bothered me about the movie. But very little was compelling. And even less was inspiring.

The things that worked for me: I liked the establishment of the world, seeing just how hard people had to work, how they were working all the time. I liked the look of the movie -- it felt very real to me...

And I liked a couple of the performances. Joseph was by far the most interesting character, and as I've never given all that much thought to Joseph, it was a fascinating point of view from which to see the story (though I don't think that's what the filmmakers intended). And I liked Herod. I found him chilling, hitting all the right notes. And cool curled beard.

And I liked the way the composer worked a few lines of Christmas carols into the score here and there. The "Carol of the Bells" echoes while they're looking for a place to stay in Bethlehem I thought worked particularly well.

But the rest of the movie was a snooze. And given the story they're telling, that's sort of criminal.

In particular, I thought Keisha Castle-Hughes's performance as Mary was a high school level performance. Not once did I feel any emotion from her, not once did she seem to have any sense of awe or wonder or fear about what was happening to her. She just seemed mildly peeved most of the time. And not once did I ever believe she was pregnant. I had to stifle an out-loud guffaw when, 9 months along, she popped up from sitting on the ground in a manner no pregnant woman could manage.

I also found the movie extremely shallow, with no understanding of what this story really means, of how it fits into the larger story of redemption. In fact, I found there to be very little sense of redemption at all. This was an event that happened to one couple 2000 years ago, and for some reasons having to do with fulfillment of prophecies that are never made clear (and which, we sense, only primitive people of a bygone era would even care about), a couple of other people find it important. But it certainly has no effect on us, other than as a piece of history or fable or legend.... One certainly got no sense that this story is true.

The movie was also visually lacking. I thought of this again on Christmas Eve. At the end of our church's Christmas Eve service, everyone in the sanctuary lightsand holds a candle, and they turn out all the lights, so that the sanctuary is lit only by candlelight -- it's very beautiful. But this year I noticed that one light was left on, very faintly: The spotlight illuminating the cross at the front of the church. So that even as we sing of Christ's birth, the shadow of the cross is already present. It was haunting.

Well, there was no such haunting moment in The Nativity Story. How easy it would have been to create 'the shadow of the cross' at the moment of His birth. But nothing like that seemed to occur to the filmmakers. Missed opportunities such as this abound through the movie.

One has to hope that the whole thing isn't a missed opportunity. The Nativity Story was ultimately a hurry-up-and-cash-in-on-the-"Passion"-audience effort by a studio (New Line) to make some bucks off the Christian audience. They didn't make all that many bucks (though they certainly didn't spend much in making the movie). So will they write off the audience?

Hard to say at this point... In the meantime, the movie is almost certainly out of the theatres already. But don't worry. You didn't miss much.

COMMENTS

With Squawkbox, the comment box system I've been using, going offline next week, I stand to lose three years worth of comments. (Yes, the upside is as I switch to the new Blogger templates, I should get comment boxes that work consistently.)

But I don't want to lose all your comments. So over the last couple of weeks, I've been going back through every post and cutting-and-pasting the comments over into a word processor, just to save them. (Will I get them back on to the blog? Maybe. No promises.)

When a blogger posts something and no one comments, it often feels as if we're writing into a void. Well, it's clear, and heart-warming, to realize that I have not been writing into a void of any sort!

I've been really touched at how many of you have commented, and what thoughtful and incisive (and often kind) comments you've made over the years. 2006 alone resulted in 134 pages of comments... and half of 2005 (as far as I've gotten) has netted 150 pages so far!

So let me pause to thank you for commenting on this blog -- one of my New Year's resolutions that actually has been more of a blessing to me than I ever expected. I will try to make it easier(!) for you to comment in the future. But for now, thanks. And Happy New Year!

HELP ME OUT?

I'm very excited to have What Will Harry Do? out and available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, etc. And it's been fun to see folks start to write reviews.

But a weird one cropped up yesterday.

A guy(?) calling himself "Kacey" posted a one-star review on Amazon. He clearly had not read the book. What he said was, in essence, "Why should anyone pay for spoilers?"

Okay. Fine. He's entitled to his opinion. Though one has to wonder why he's even clicking around to look at books like this online, if he's so desperate to avoid spoilers. It is, of course, tacky to write a review of something one hasn't read (or, as with a movie, seen).

So I clicked on his profile, thinking maybe I'd send him an e-mail asking why he was "reviewing" books he hadn't read... when I noticed something quite interesting.

"Kacey"'s Amazon profile links to very few people. But one of them is a person who caused immense trouble for Barbara Nicolosi on her blog, by posting all sorts of obscene, blatantly false, and probably libelous posts. She had to ban him from her blog -- and also had to ban him from another message board we're both on, because of his scurrilous behavior.

Is it just a coincidence that this guy's name shows up linked to the guy firebombing my reviews? (Could "Kacey" even be a pseudonym for the same guy? Possible, I suppose. I don't play those games, personally, but I know some do. To be honest, I wouldn't recognize the guy in a room. I've met him, and I know who he is. I've never had any personal interaction with him that I'm aware of.)

Sure, it could be a massive coincidence. But I am just suspicious enough to think it's not coincidental.

So here's my request. If you've read the book already (and especially if you've read it and liked it!), could you click over to the Amazon page (use the link through the book title ablve) and write a review to help counteract his utterly bogus review that's bringing my overall review score way down?

I really don't understand this kind of nastiness. I didn't understand it when it was happening to Barb, and I don't get it now. Why would people go out of their way to be so destructive?

I don't get it. But if you wouldn't mind clicking over, I'd sure appreciate it.

ONE LAST CHRISTMAS POST

We went to Christmas Eve service last night -- Always a mixture of beauty (the music, the message, the people) mixed with a little agony (the fact that we take Grandma with us, and she squirms and fusses and demands attention throughout, and one never knows if she'll hit the guy sitting in front of her with her cane for being too tall -- something she's done before).

This year Sabrina really threw herself into the singing. She sang so loud and clear that people a couple rows ahead were turning around to see what that was back there.

And she knew the words to the carols. Or almost all the words.

She made one little 'goof' that I absolutely loved. While singing "Joy to the World," Sabrina sang "Let every heart prepare His room."

And I loved it. Because when I think of the phrase "prepare Him room," I get a visual image of people shoving over in a pew or on a bleacher to make room for yet one more person to cram in. I know that's not the intention of the line, but that's the image I get.

But "prepare His room" is totally different. With that, I see someone making a special room ready for Jesus to come. Clean sheets on the bed. Flowers on the bedside table. Maybe a chocolate on the pillow. Everything perfect. Everything thought through with love and anticipation.

So Merry Christmas everyone (all 12 days of it!). And let every heart prepare His room!

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS

When the title for Book 7 was announced (I never got the hangman to work, by the way -- anyone else have that problem?), I sort of snickered at all the people clicking on dictionary.com and the like to find a definition of "hallows." "The OED is what we need for this," I murmured to myself, "not some fly-by-night cyberdictionary."

But I hadn't quite gotten around to hauling out my own humungo copy of the Oxford English Dictionary and tracking down where the kids might have put the magnifying glass. So I am very grateful that Felicity has done it for us! Click over for the very best analysis of "deathly hallows" I have yet seen. Good work, Felicity!

Travis has also added a fascinating link to a discussion of the Four Hallows of Arthurian Legend. Click here as well.

As for the speculation that the "Deathly Hallows" refers in some way to Godric's Hollow because the words sound alike... Well, as a former linguist, I can't go with that at all. The phonetic resemblance between "hallow" and "hollow" is a coincidence. And I trust that J.K. Rowling knows enough about the history of words (and the Arthurian legends, for that matter) that Felicity's and Travis's posts are far more on the money.

Now, could the "deathly hallows" (one meaning being the location of the relics of the saints, if you haven't clicked over to Felicity yet) actually be Godric's Hollow, because it's where Harry's personal 'saints' -- his mother and father -- died? Well, Harry must go to Godric's Hollow in Book 7. But because we already know that, it seems "deathly hallows" will refer to something more. When have we ever started a book knowing what the title referred to?

My own thoughts... I don't think we can do more than guess till the book comes out. I think we will see a new location, one we've never seen before. And I think the title is more interesting for thematic echoes than anything else. Book 7 will be about death. And it will be about (in some way) the holy -- or the unholy.

But didn't we already know that?

...Nine more months... At least. (Plenty of time to click over and buy my book, she said shamelessly!)

MOVIE THOUGHTS: THE GOOD GERMAN

So our kids wanted to see Eragon, and having read the reviews (and having not read the book -- yet), we sort of wanted to skip it. And the only movie in the multiplex whose playing times matched Eragon was The Good German. Hey, George Clooney and Steven Soderbergh. It's gotta be worth two hours, right?

Yawn.

Oh, sorry, I seem to have dozed off there for a minute, just thinking about the movie.

So George Clooney is sort of supposed to be Bogart in Casablanca, and a near-unrecognizable Cate Blanchette is supposed to be the Ingrid Bergman character (though she seems to be channeling Marlene Dietrich instead) and she's married to a character named Emil Brandt, whom everyone is trying to find for some unclear reason, and he's clearly the Victor Laszlo character. And Tobey Maguire plays the modern equivalent, best I can tell, to Ugatti.

The parallels to Casablanca continue in specific shots, especially in the final sequence. The reveal of the plane on the tarmac is so exactly the same shot that I heard people whisper "Casablanca!" through the theatre.

But you know, I've seen Casablanca. I've seen it some 15 times or more. And Good German is no Casablanca. Not by a long shot.

The plot is far too complicated and sometimes even undecipherable (though it's possible I may have dozed off in the middle, which could explain that). The performances are okay (though by the third time Clooney got beat up, some of the audience was starting to snicker).

Much has been made of the way Soderbergh used authentic cameras from the period, authentic film stock, etc., in an effort to recreate 1940s black-and-white. And he certainly succeeded on that account. The film really does look as if it came from the period.

But no one would mistake it for a 1940s movie. Not for a second. Why? Because of the writing.

Two huge flaws in the writing.

1) The characters swear a blue streak, with Maguire's character in particular dropping the F-bomb every few seconds. Now maybe Paul Attanasio thought he was being edgy, or maybe he hasn't bothered to look at old movies with the sound turned up in a while, but they just didn't do that in the '40s. Maybe he thought he was making it more authentic (after all, soldiers do swear). But he actually made it less real -- the cinematography was so well-done, so made us believe we were watching an old movie, that the swearing was just jarring -- and not in a good way.

2) When you think of Casablanca, you think of great, enduring lines. "Round up the usual suspects." "Here's looking at you, kid." "I'm shocked -- shocked!..." "We'll always have Paris." And on and on.

But there are no good lines in Good German. Nothing quotable. Nothing fun. Nothing memorable. It's just a yawn from start to finish. I can't even figure out how they could manage to cut a trailer out of this movie, since there are no 'trailer moments' from start to finish.

It's actually a great object lesson, and an arrow pointing to the importance of the writer. You can't 'copy' or 'pay homage' to a great movie just by copying the look of the movie. If it ain't on the page, it ain't on the stage. (Of course, copying the look, as difficult as it was in this case, and as meticulously as it was done), is much easier than duplicating the level of writing in a script like Casablanca.)

Ultimately, The Good German is a film school exercise, nothing more. If you are fascinated by 1940s cameras, this is the film for you.

If not... well, maybe we should have seen Eragon after all...

WHAT KIND OF CHRISTMAS TREE ARE YOU?

We have an awesome Christmas tree this year. We traditionally go to a choose-and-cut tree lot. We pick out a tree, then while I stand in line to pay, Lee and the kids play 'Marco Polo' in and out of the trees. We go early, usually around Thanksgiving, to choose the tree, then come back a couple weeks later to have it cut and take it home.

Well, that's what we tried to do this year. But when we got to our tree's location... it was gone. Someone had cut down our tree by mistake.

Turns out the tree lot reserves a bunch of trees in every category in anticipation of just such mistakes. They apologized -- and upgraded us. Boy, did they upgrade us! The tree we drove home (with much trepidation on my part, as I watched the top of it bouncing up and down in the rear view mirror) was a good 3' taller than the one we bought, and absolutely magnificent. It belongs in a mall, not in a home.

But we're not fools. They offered, we said yes.

It took 3 days to decorate and a ladder to reach the higher branches. But the one thing we don't have on it, despite the quiz below, is cranberry and/or popcorn. In fact, I have never strung either in my life... Hmm. Maybe I'd better start.

You Are a Cranberry and Popcorn Strung Tree

Christmas is all about showcasing your creative talents. From cookies to nicely wrapped presents, your unique creations impress everyone.

What Christmas Tree Are You?

JUST (BARELY) IN TIME FOR CHRISTMAS!

What Will Harry Do? The Unofficial Guide to Payoffs and Possibilities in Book 7 is now available on the major online booksellers -- Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and the like.

Click here to get your copy at Amazon... or here to get it on Barnes & Noble.

Of course, you can still get it at a discount here. (Unless you're in a rush, don't accept the default shipping option -- there are cheaper options in the menu.)

And if you've already read it -- Well, click on over to any of these spots and post a review!

Merry Christmas, all!

THANKS FOR READING!

This is my favorite time of the year to get mail, as it probably is for most people. I actually love getting all the pre-printed newsletters (especially if they're well-written). I like seeing pictures of people's kids.

And this year I've started getting little notes from people from my past remarking, "I've been reading your blog."

And that just tickles me pink. What a kick it is to know I'm still connected to some of these people who've meant so much to me in the past, even if I don't know they're eavesdropping, as it were, on my life.

I know some people will just never leave comments on a blog. And I know my comment boxes have been all screwy for the last several months. (I'm going to switch over to the new beta version of Blogger over the holidays, which hopefully will solve the comment problem.)

But even if people don't leave comments, it's cool to know we're still in touch.

So thanks for reading, all you folks who will soon be getting my Christmas newsletter with the pictures of my kids. I'm glad we're in touch more than once a year, even if I don't know about it at the time!

WHAT KIND OF ORNAMENT ARE YOU?

Well, given that we are about to put the angel treetop ornament on our tree, I suppose this is somewhat appropriate....

You Are an Angel

A truly giving soul, you understand the spirit of Christmas.

What Christmas Ornament Are You?

NEWS FLASH! CHRISTIANS HAVE AN EFFECT ON HOLLYWOOD!

For those of us on the front lines, or more realistically, a few rows back from the front lines, in Hollywood, we always have to wonder: Are we, as Christians, having an effect on (a) the people around us and (b) the corporate culture of Hollywood?

Well, I got a partial answer a few days ago.

I was speaking to someone (not a believer) who is making a movie for a company with substantial public ties to the Christian world (but making totally mainstream movies). I asked what it was like dealing with the company.

"Well," he responded, "they're totally dysfunctional."

But before I could jump in and comment, he hastened to add, "That's not fair. All of them are dysfunctional. These folks are actually a bit better to deal with. They're dysfunctional, yes, but at least they're not evil."

...Whoa.

So here we have a partial answer to the question: Are Christians having an effect on Hollywood? Yes. We are. And it's a positive effect.

Because we may be dysfunctional, but at least we're not evil!

And in this town, apparently that's saying a lot.

MOVIE THOUGHTS: HAPPY FEET

Happy Feet was one of our most anticipated movies of the fall/winter. We loved the trailers, even though we couldn't tell much about the movie. "It's about penguins that sing and dance," my kids informed me. Well, duh.

And when we saw it last week (it's taken me that long to marshall my thoughts, and they're still sort of confused), we saw exactly that movie. Lots of fun. Joy. Music and dancing.

But we saw another movie as well. One that wasn't advertised in the trailers at all. One that turned into a progagandistic near-rant on how humans are despoiling the earth. (Not a message that offends me... but I would have liked to have expected it.)

We saw (SPOILERS!) a movie about a penguin on the run for his life. About a penguin captured by humans and put in a zoo portrayed as an inhuman prison. About a penguin forced to wear a tracking device. A movie that scared or upset some kids in the theatre (drawn in by that alluring advertising that promised them a movie they would love).

I enjoyed the movie, for the most part. (Especially the motion capture and the singing, John and Edie!) But I found myself wishing I'd know what movie I was going to.

I feel pretty sure Happy Feet will win the animation Oscar this year (beating out the perennial favorite, Pixar, for this summer's Cars). And technically it deserves it for the seamless and breathtaking blending of live action backgrounds with animated footage, for the thousands of feathers on each penguin, etc.

I realize I'm not giving you my thoughts on the movie, but more my thoughts on the advertising. But for me, unfortunately, the deceptive advertising colored my whole experience of the movie, left me walking out of the theatre puzzled rather than joyous.

I commented on something similar a few months ago with NBC's hit Heroes. The summer marketing had my kids jumping up and down with glee. Who knew there would be (largely implied) soft porn and bodies shown hacked to bits. The audience sure didn't, based on the ads. (Now don't get me wrong -- I love the show. But my kids don't watch it. And they shouldn't have been tempted to.)

Is it that the lure of the family audience is so great at the moment that advertisers will do anything to get them in? Did George Miller of Happy Feet even know what the ad campaign was going to look like?

I liked the movie. But had I not been misled as to the genre of movie I was going to, I might have really loved it.

For my money, Over the Hedge and Hoodwinked are still the most fun animated movies of the year...

WHAT CHRISTMAS MOVIE ARE YOU?

Yes, I know it's not officially Advent until Sunday, but I sort of like it that we have this extra week between Thanksgiving and Christmas this year... lets me slide into the season rather than feeling slammed that I'm already behind.

As for the movie choice here... Well, White Christmas is actually the movie we always watch every year, but we're also huge fans of the George C. Scott version of A Christmas Carol. I don't know if it's on DVD, but we have an old laser disc of it, and we love it.

So I'll take this as sort of a cross between the two.

And God bless us, everyone!

Your Christmas is Most Like: The Muppet Christmas Carol

You tend to reflect on Christmas past, present, and future... And you also do a little singing.

What Movie Is Your Christmas Most Like?