THE OSCAR NOMINATIONS

Yes, I was shocked that Dreamgirls didn't get a Best Picture nomination. The Academy has shown it's not allergic to musicals with all the awards for Chicago a few years back. Now, admittedly, Dreamgirls is not Chicago -- the underlying material just isn't as powerful, and so it's no surprise that the movie wasn't as strong.

But still. I was surprised.

Why wasn't it nominated, when so many people seemed to consider it the front runner? We can all try to parse the intricacies of the Oscar balloting system (where nominations are weighted, so that a small group of people passionate about a film can outweigh a larger group of people who nominate, say, Dreamgirls, but who don't feel passionately enough about it to rank it highly).

But I think what it boils down to is, once again, the Academy making it known that their votes can't be bought or dictated.

Dreamgirls was lauded as the frontrunner for Best Picture before anyone had ever seen it. The Oscar campaign has been relentless. An Oscar was probable, a nomination was a given.

But the Academy made it clear last year that it doesn't like anyone telling it how to vote. As Brokeback Mountain racked up award after award, it was widely assumed that it, too, was the "frontrunner" for the Oscar. Some of the people connected with the film even made statements that implied they had the Oscar in the bag.

And clearly, as the surprise win of Crash shows, the Academy didn't like that. The Oscar is the only award that really matters, and they know that. (Otherwise, why would the producers of Brokeback have been so bitterly nasty after losing last year, given that their shelves were already sagging with awards?) Increasingly, the Academy will not vote for a movie just because they are told to do so, by critics, by box office, by other awards, by campaigns.

Does this mean campaigns don't work? No. It just means they have to be a bit more subtle, a bit more strategic. In a sense, Dreamgirls's campaign peaked before the film debuted. That's just bad timing.

One element of campaigning which clearly works (and which I don't believe Dreamgirls used) is the free screener -- the DVD delivered to the home of every Academy member, every Writers Guild member, every Directors Guild member, even the 100,000+ members of SAG. That's what Crash did last year. That's what Little Miss Sunshine did this year. And Little Miss Sunshine, with its unexpected PGA and SAG wins, could be sliding into frontrunner spot.

Dreamgirls will not go home awardless. I don't see how Jennifer Hudson can lose Best Supporting Actress. Eddie Murphy should win Best Supporting Actor, but all those ads out there for the huge embarrassment that is Norbit could really hurt him. We'll see.

Another lock is Martin Scorsese (finally!) for Best Director. Hard to see who could beat him. He has so nakedly wanted an Oscar for so long (every frame of The Aviator screamed "Did you like that shot? Was that good enough for an Oscar? Please?!!). If he loses this one, he should take it as a sign that he will never win.

Best Picture, though, is up in the air. One would think this would mean an exciting Oscar show and high ratings. However, given that next to no one in the country will have seen all 5 movies -- or even 3 movies -- or even 1 of them, I wouldn't count on it.

Will the Academy ever get back to nominating what we used to think of as "Oscar" movies -- the big epics with sweeping themes? Maybe. For now though, clearly the Academy is more interested in quirky than in epic, more interested in "art" than in popularity.

As long as you don't tell them how to vote.

APPLY TO ACT ONE!

Love movies and TV? Serious about your faith? Crazy about telling stories?

Program dates for the 2007 Act One Summer Writing Program have been announced and applications are now available online.

What’s It All About?

The Act One Summer Writing Program trains talented Christians for careers in mainstream film and television. The program takes place in Hollywood with 30 days of intensive classroom instruction from a world-class faculty that includes over 50 top-notch TV and movie writers, agents and producers, Hollywood pros like Dean Batali (That 70s Show, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Lee and Janet Batchler (Batman Forever, Scott Derrickson (The Exorcism of Emily Rose, Monica Macer (Lost, Prison Break, Bill Marsilii (Déjà Vu) and David McFadzean (Home Improvement, What Women Want.


“Act One helps the Christian writer overcome the temptation to ignore or oversimplify the arduous task of integrating faith and creativity. It provides not only a serious investigation into the art and craft of screenwriting, but also a challenge to think deeply about content.”
- Scott Derrickson, writer/director, The Exorcism of Emily Rose

Program Dates and Applications

The Act One Summer Writing Program will take place in Hollywood from July 6 through August 4, 2007. Applications must be received by March 31. For more information or to apply, visit us online at actoneprogram.com

What Our Alumni Are Saying About Us

“It's a fantastic program and an unbelievable deal for the money. I went through both UCLA's professional screenwriting program and Writers Bootcamp. They do not compare in terms of content and the comprehensiveness of Act One, not to mention the spiritual formation. It really is a must for any Christian writer in Hollywood.”
- 2006 Summer Writing Program

"One of the most fulfilling months of my life...both spiritually and artistically… It doesn't make writing easier. It makes it harder...and better...and thank God for that."
- Kevin Chesley, 2002 Summer Writing Program

“For one intensive month I was thrust into a world of focused learning and creativity, with teachers at the top of their game who, in their generosity, shared their expertise. I can't recommend it highly enough! I cried the day after the program ended.”
- Staci Armao, 2002 Summer Writing Program

What We Teach

Our rigorous curriculum includes:

* 160 hours of classroom instruction, writing exercises, screenings and discussions, covering everything from script format, story selection, structure, genre, character and dialogue to understanding the business of Hollywood, pitching and working with an agent, plus:
* optional TV track, which recreates the atmosphere of a network television writing room
* ethics and spirituality for Christians in the industry
* challenging preprogram homework
* invaluable five-month mentorship with an industry professional
* a free critique from the Act One Script Consulting Service

“The amount of scholarship, the degree of professionalism and the wisdom of the Act One program is an unparalleled gift to script writers. I can hardly believe it exists.”
- David Hansen, 2002 Summer Writing Program

Alumni Successes

Here’s a sampling of recent alumni successes:

*Clare Sera (writer, Curious George
*Cheryl McKay (writer, The Ultimate Gift
*Stephen Chang (winner, ABC/Disney Writing Fellowship, Warner Bros. Comedy Writing Workshop)
*Amy Snow (winner, ABC/Disney Writing Fellowship)
*Kimberly Wilson-Lauziere (winner, Cosby Writing Fellowship, ABC/Disney Talent Development Program)
*Elizabeth Beachy (winner, Nashville Screenplay Showdown)

“Every great production starts with the writer. Writers who are interested in the craft of writing should start with Act One!”
- Ralph Winter, producer, X-Men, X2, Fantastic Four

For more information or to apply online, visit us at www.actoneprogram.com.

ARE YOU GONNA KEEP YOUR RESOLUTIONS?

I thought I'd get a 'no' on this, given how weak my resolution-keeping turned out last year, with all the major resolutions petering out over the summer. But this gives me hope! And so far, so good!

A good quiz to wrap up January!

You Will Keep Your New Year's Resolution

You planning on making a resolution that's smart, attainable, and perfect for where your life is.

Will You Keep Your New Year's Resolution?

HOUSE BEAUTIFUL

Just wanted to let you know that faithful blog reader Regina Doman has started a blog called House Art Journal. It's about how to let your house be your art.

I love this idea. No one who has seen my house in its normal state could accuse me of being artistic where my home is concerned. Maybe that's why I love the idea. And I look forward to be an invited voyeur as Regina and Andrew work on their home renovation.

Check it out!

NOTES FROM THE DIVINE CONSPIRACY

For the last several years, I have tried to start each year by re-reading The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering Our Hidden Life in God by Dallas Willard.

(I skipped last year because of my New Year's resolution to read C.S. Lewis. And I felt the lack of reading Divine Conspiracy.)

The Divine Conspiracy radically changed my understanding of God. I can't think of another non-fiction book that has had such a powerful role in my life. But I forget what I've learned, oh so easily. So that's why I re-read it.

I now read it in snippets, a few pages at a time, a little every day. And each day I find something to savor, something to ruminate on, something to treasure.

So from time to time over the next few months, I will post various random thoughts from TDC. (Needless to say, I highly recommend you get your own copy!)

To begin with...

We live in an often threatening world. A world with terrorists, weird weather, cold-hearted neighbors and co-workers, traffic accidents, unexpected pain. A world so threatening that a little girl in my daughter's Girl Scout troop once explained to me, quite seriously, that she was often very worried in the middle of the night because she didn't expect the world would still be around by the time she was a grown-up.

Here's how Willard writes about that same world. This passage (pg 66 of the hardcover) comes after half a chapter in which he discourses on the infinite goodness and love of God:

With this magnificent God positioned among us, Jesus brings the assurance that our universe is a perfectly safe place for us to be.

Well, that's a different point of view, isn't it? Willard follows with his own translation of the "don't worry" section of Matthew 6. The highlight:

So don't worry about things, saying, "What are we going to eat?" or "Will we have anything to drink?" or "What will we wear?" (People who don't know God at all do that!) For your Father -- the One in the heavens around you -- knows you need these things. Instead, make it your top priority to be part of what God is doing and to have the kind of goodness he has. Everything else you need will be provided.

Take a look back at that passage. Can you find how Willard translates what we normally think of as "Seek ye first the kingdom of God"?

That translation alone was, for me, worth the price of the book. And that's why I read The Divine Conspiracy every year.

More to come.....

IT'S GIRL SCOUT COOKIE TIME!

I hated selling Girl Scout Cookies... knocking on the doors of complete strangers. Needless to say, I didn't sell very many. Maybe 8 to 10 boxes a year.

Sabrina has no such issues. As she is quick to point out, her first year she sold 119 boxes, her second year she sold 204 boxes. Last year she aimed at 300 (even though I told her to just shoot for 250 -- oh me of little faith!), and she actually sold 309.

This year she wants to sell 400. Ha. I told her to be happy with 200. But it's day 5 of the sale, and we're at 209 already.

I still hate selling door-to-door. Lee does the parent thing for those sales. But Sabrina and I have developed an awesome e-mail selling tactic that works well. And she asked me to blog about her cookies as well. So here we are.

Here's the deal: If you live in the L.A. area (or if you're jonesing for some cookies and you're willing to pay postage), Sabrina would love to be your Girl Scout Cookie connection. You order now, we send the order to the Girl Scouts, the cookies get baked and boxed, and you pay when we deliver (in early March most likely).

There are eight kinds of cookies to choose from:
SAMOAS (caramel, coconut and chocolate)
THIN MINTS (chocolate and peppermint)
DO-SI-DOS (peanut butter/oatmeal sandwich cookies)
ALL ABOUTS (shortbread and fudge)
TREFOILS (the original Girl Scout shortbread cookie
TAGALONGS (peanut butter and chocolate)
CAFE COOKIES (crisp brown sugar/cinnamon snaps)
and our newest cookie:
LITTLE BROWNIES (sugar-free brownie bites)

(Let me say that we have tasted them all, and we do not recommend the Little Brownies. Sorry...)

HELP SUPPORT THE TROOPS! Once again, the Girl Scouts are supporting OPERATION COOKIE DROP. You let us know how many boxes you want to send to the troops, the Girl Scouts send the cookies to the U.S.O., the U.S.O. delivers them to our troops in Iraq. All you have to do is write the (tax-deductible) check! (And we do take Paypal!)

Okay, I've done my part for my budding entrepreneur. E-mail me if you really do want some cookies. Or at the very least, when you see some little girls in green standing outside a supermarket in March, buy a box and make them happy.

After all, who doesn't like Girl Scout Cookies?

We now return you to your regularly scheduled blogging.

TV THOUGHTS: GREASE: YOU'RE THE ONE THAT I WANT

Given that we're all American Idol fans in this household, given that we've watched Rock Star the last two summers, and given that Lee comes out of the musical theatre world, of course you knew we were going to watch Grease: You're the One That I Want.

Grease: YTOTIW is American Idol, of course. Same format: Open auditions, with the very best and the very worst singing in front of a trio of judges, with the Brit being the snarky judge. Then they'll narrow down the pool, do some exercises, then open it up to America to judge. Gee, where have we seen this before. Such originality.

But, hey, the format works.

Grease: YTOTIW is a novelty show, on and off in 9 weeks, and that should be about right. While the promos ranged from cheesy to sleazy, we're actually enjoying it. It's interesting to have a goal in mind in the competition: Casting the roles of Sandy and Danny for a Broadway production of Grease. And I like seeing the dancing bit of the audition, as all the singers-only suddenly realize, oops, this isn't American Idol, they have to be able to dance as well.

I also like the focus on Broadway. As a musical fan, I'm glad to have America reminded that musicals exist. And I'm always glad to have people see that it actually takes some work and some training (not to mention some actual talent) to be a performer -- one of the great public services performed by those sometimes painful AI audition shows.

I am surprised at how amateur most of the auditioners are. Okay, fine, it was understandable when they couldn't find good contestants in Chicago, which certainly isn't a musical town. But New York? All those unemployed stage actors? Were they keeping out people with Equity cards? (I don't think they were.) Surely the talent pool was deeper than what we saw onscreen.

I think the judges have also been much kinder than the AI judges are at the audition stage, and that's nice to watch. Many of the people who have been let through to the second round would have been crossed off the list before they opened their mouths just based on how they look. It's a good lesson to realize that, especially for an actor, what you look like truly makes a difference. (Of course, in real life it makes a difference every single day for each one of us -- but we'd all like to believe it doesn't.)

While I'm enjoying the show, my biggest bone to pick is with the choice of show they're casting. "Grease"??! This is the example of the great American musical they want to hold up as an icon? Sorry, but no. Grease is not a great show by any reckoning. And it's certainly not "the original High School Musical," as they've been advertising it.

No, Grease is quite the sleazy show, what with its assumption of teenage sex, its issues of teenage pregnancy, and its underlying message that a good girl has to set aside who she really is and become slutty to get the guy she wants. I know many moms who won't let their kids watch Grease because of these very messages.

Grease: YTOTIW is actually a spinoff of a British show (aren't they all?) called How Do You Solve A Problem Like Maria?, in which the lead for a new production of The Sound of Music was cast. Now that's a show worth following. Was Grease really the only revivable musical they could find to wrap a TV show around?

Nevertheless, it's fun to watch, certainly way better than the promos were. I think it's a valuable show for anyone who loves musical theatre, just for the (albeit warped) view into the behind-the-scenes thought process behind casting a show for Broadway.

I'll watch all 9 weeks (not sure I'd make a much longer commitment, so they're smart to keep the show limited). But I doubt I'd ever go see the resulting Broadway show (which of course is the purpose for this show: 9 weeks of publicity and hopefully a built-in audience) -- simply because they chose the wrong show (IMHO) to highlight.

WINTER WONDERLAND

So our meeting in Santa Monica ran late on Wednesday, which meant we picked up our kids from school late, which meant we were right in the middle of rush hour, which meant the roads were clogged.

As we were driving near the freeway, we saw a helicopter hovering overhead. Never a good sign. Uh-oh, we thought. Major accident. Better get off the main roads and snake a way through residential neighborhoods toward home.

So we did. Down a back alley, through another alley, a right turn, twist around to a left turn that would take us toward Sunset Boulevard and our own turnoff--

And we drove right into a winter wonderland.

"What's wrong with the lawn at that house?" someone asked.

We all looked. The grass was white. Grass isn't supposed to be white. And why were there people out in front of the house taking pictures of it on their cell phones?

And the next house -- same thing. More white on the lawn. On the roof. More people taking pictures.

Suddenly we all gasped. "It's snow!"

We pulled over, astonished. Got out of the car. Started picking up handfuls of the white stuff. There were kids in the front yard with their mom, all wearing mittens as if they weren't used to wearing them.

The whole neighborhood was white with snow! In Los Angeles.

Okay, technically it wasn't snow. It was "small hail," we learned. But it was cold and white and you could make a snowball out of it (albeit an icy one).

We drove for blocks and blocks, marveling. Somehow our bad commute home had turned into something magic. And that helicopter we thought was filming some traffic fatality? Of course it was there to take pictures of the snow.

I have come to expect the bad phone call. The rude e-mail. The unexpected turn of bad news in the mail. To expect rejection and delay and disappointment.

But how lovely to realize that sometimes, just sometimes, you turn a corner and find something beautiful and wonderful that you would never have expected in a million years.

Here's to snow in L.A.!

MOVIE THOUGHTS: DREAMGIRLS

If you have any doubts that it's hard to put a live-action musical on film and make audiences buy into it, just take a look at recent box-office debacles such as Rent and The Producers, both of which came, one would have thought, with built-in audiences.

The awareness of the difficulties involved makes Dreamgirls even more an accomplishment. Smooth and compelling, Dreamgirls works well on every level.

The not-seen-in-a-long-time stage musical is, of course, a loose adaptation of the story of The Supremes (hence Jennifer Hudson's dedication of her Golden Globe to ousted Supreme Florence Ballard), and it's a story that, despite its period setting, resonates thematically today: The story of a highly talented young woman dumped because her looks aren't up to par, because she doesn't fit the right image. (A similar theme is echoed repeatedly today in everything from The Devil Wears Prada to Ugly Betty.)

Director Bill Condon, who also directed Chicago, clearly has the movie musical thing down. He has been quoted as saying that a movie musical hinges on its transitions, on the way you get in and out of the songs, and that's something he does beautifully.

He's also aware of how difficult it is for a modern audience to accept live people singing on screen (we're fine when animated people do it). To this end, he smoothly starts off with all musical numbers being onstage in one way or another. We're almost halfway through the movie before a character actually sings to another character. It's still a bit of a jolt (perhaps because we waited so long for it), but because of the emotionality involved, we make the jump into full musical, and there's no going back.

Beyonce Knowles plays the Diana Ross part with an underlying sweetness that makes one wonder if she idolized Diana as a child and doesn't want to make her mad. She does a fine job, if a bit bland and personality-less (but maybe that's the point), and she certainly looks breathtakingly gorgeous in all those stunning outfits.

Playing opposite Beyonce is Jamie Foxx, whose performance, for me, fell quite flat. Foxx plays the villain of the piece, but his performance is so constrained and inner-directed that someone not familiar with the play might not realize that until far too late in the movie. He said all the words and he hit all the notes (even though I always felt I could feeling him being all-too-aware of the fact that he was singing), but I never understood why he made the choices he made. And given that his choices direct the course of the story, that's a bit of a problem.

But the movie is anchored by a pair of other performances, those of Jennifer Hudson and Eddie Murphy. And these two just shine.

Much has been said about Hudson's rise from rejected American Idol contestant to Oscar contender. Let me just say she has earned every plaudit she gets this season. One would think, from her performance, that she has been acting professionally since she was 3. Not just the highly-touted "And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going," which she blasts out the back wall of the theatre with pure pain and defiance, but in every frame, Hudson rings true as Effie White. Effie is the role that must work for the show to work... and Hudson proves herself beautifully. She will win the Best Supporting Actress Oscar. And she will have earned it.

Eddie Murphy is a revelation in this movie. He shines as Jimmy "Thunder" Early, in a role much deepened (as I recall) from the stage musical -- or maybe it's his performance that makes it feel deeper. He glides smoothly from pompous and sexy in the beginning to do-anything-to-be-a-star eager to his final fall as broken and lost, and we believe every second of it. Given the stupid roles Murphy has been taking lately (we had to sit through a trailer for the clearly painful Norbit), I feel pretty confident that he also will win an Oscar -- the Academy has to know it will never have another chance!

The flaws of Dreamgirls are by and large the ones the show inherited from the stage version. The music gets repetitive, with song after song often orchestrated so similarly that we can barely tell them apart. This is not a show where you're going to come out humming the songs (although, to be fair, I must note that my daughter has been begging me for the soundtrack). And on the story level, the growth of Curtis from small-time hustler to impresario mixed up with the mob (or something like that?) never drives the story as it should.

But overall, Dreamgirls is quite an achievement, and well worth seeing. I took my kids with no problem (and with a warning going in about bad language) and I'm glad I did. The brief scenes with mentions or innuendoes of drugs went over their heads -- but the movie was shocking to them in other ways. Sabrina simply didn't understand the hilarious scene in which the Dreamettes' first hit is covered by a white-bread white boy -- as I whispered to her the concept of 'white' radio and 'black' radio and segregation, she was purely shocked!

As the front runner for Best Picture, you'll regret it if you don't see the movie. Go see it.

TV THOUGHTS: THE GOLDEN GLOBES

The Golden Globes have somehow assumed this near-Oscar status as an award. My guess is this is almost purely because of the lavishness of the awards show, and because they've been around long enough to acquire some genuine lustre. But really, they should be considered as equal to any of the other critics' awards.

Nevertheless, the stars get dressed up, so we watch. (And in our house, we watch with Sabrina giving a definitive thumbs up or down on every dress that crosses the screen.)

The Globes have a couple of interesting things to recommend them. First, they split the best picture (and major acting) award into two: Drama vs. Comedy/Musical. That allows two front runners to emerge for the Oscars, and it allows comedy to be honored, when it's so often the ugly stepchild of awards season. Also, because it's a dinner with lavishly-flowing champagne (Moet this year, as some carefully random product placement shots made sure to inform us), actors get a bit tipsy. Which can be interesting. (Or not. Tim Allen was noticeably drunk onstage presenting this year, and all we got out of it was botched line readings and some slurring.)

Last night was not a particularly thrilling show. I was extremely happy that Meryl Streep won for The Devil Wears Prada, which, for my money, was the best picture of last year. Happy because Helen Mirren will justly win the Best Actress Oscar for The Queen, and at least Meryl's stunning performance got some props.

I was also happy to see Jennifer Hudson and Eddie Murphy win for Dreamgirls. (Yes, I have finally seen Dreamgirls. I will post my thoughts momentarily.) I think they're the odds on favorites for the Oscar as well. Let's face it, when else will the Academy ever have a chance to honor Eddie Murphy?!

I was happy to see The Queen win for screenplay -- though not happy with the writer's overly political speech. (Does he really think all those people took the streets and brought flowers when Princess Diana died just to get Queen Elizabeth to return to London? Please.)

And speaking of speeches... Sasha Cohen continues to prove himself a vulgar boor. His speech might have been funny if he'd stopped earlier. But he's just an embarrassment. One good thing: He won't win an acting Oscar (I'd be shocked if he was nominated). After all, the Golden Globes are the Hollywood Foreign Press, and they have shown a bit of America-bashing sentiment from time to time over the years, so Borat was a movie tailor-made for them. But the acting Oscars are voted on by real actors -- and they know better.

While on the subject of speeches... I would dearly love to know if Tom Hanks actually writes his own awards speeches (presenting and/or receiving). His speeches are always the best-written of any evening. If he is writing them, good job! If he's not writing them, good for him for hiring someone to make him sound so good.

When Babel was announced as best picture/drama, you could feel the entire table thinking, "We're this year's Crash!" Problem is, I don't know if the Academy needs a "Crash" this year. Dreamgirls would seem to be the front runner, and a worthy contender it is.

What else...? Ah yes, the dresses. We gave a total thumbs up to Emily Blount's skintight white mermaid dress as the best of the evening, with high marks also to Reese Witherspoon in her short bright yellow satin. Lots of "What was she thinking?!" including Meryl Streep looking frumpy (as she often does at awards shows -- why didn't she call her dresser from Prada?!), Geena Davis looking chunky, and Cameron Diaz just looking out-and-out weird.

So the Globes are over, and people all over town are trying to suss out what they mean for the Oscar nominations. Because despite the hoopla surrounding this award given out by about 85 critics, let's remember what happened last year, when Brokeback Mountain won just about every single award leading up to the Oscars... then the producers showed quite the sour grapes when they lost the Oscar, despite having had to build new shelves to hold all their other awards.

Why? Because the Oscars are the only ones that really matter.... 41 days to go.

I JUST KNEW IT...

Y'know, even while I was taking this quiz, I was saying in the back of my mind, "It's gonna come out 'curling,' I just know it."

Hm.

But secretly, the winter sport I would love to try is the luge. When one season of The Amazing Race had to do a luge run as a roadblock or detour, I was so jealous! I really want to luge.

And it's almost cold enough here (34 degrees last night! In Los Angeles!)... So let me dream...

You Are Curling

What you lack in athleticism, you make up for in concentration. And while curling isn't much more of a sport than bowling, you *can* win a gold medal for it!

What Winter Sport Are You?

BOOK THOUGHTS: THE LITTLE WHITE HORSE

What a lovely book!

I have had Little White Horse on my list to read since J.K. Rowling started mentioning it in interviews as one of her great influences. I got it as a Christmas gift and sat down to read... and was instantly captivated.

I have very little context in which to place Little White Horse, as I have never really read anything like it. It is a book which goodness radiates goodness, even in the descriptions of various rooms. A book which feels as if it were written 100 years before it actually was (set in 1842, the book was actually written in 1946).

The story is simple: Orphaned 13-year-old Maria Merryweather has to return to her ancestral estate, where she feels instantly at home. However, due to bad choices made by some of her ancestors (the sins of the fathers, as it were), everything is not perfect. Maria, being curious, digs around and effects changes and reconciliations until everything is perfect.

And in the process, we are led through scenes of beauty and joy and redemption... with virtually no evil. That's what made this book so odd for me to read.

Yes, people have sinned in this world. (And this is a book that uses the word "sin.") And there is evil lurking around the edges of the world. But, jaded screenwriter that I am, I kept waiting for an invasion of evil that never came... for bad things to happen to the characters I had grown to love...

And good things just kept happening. Things kept turning out right. And I loved it, even as I felt it so odd.

I wish I had read Little White Horse when I was a child. I know I would have internalized it, read it over and over and over, lived in that world. And it would have been a good thing to live in a world where people make good and true and brave choices, a world where good seems to conspire to thrive.

A few caveats: The prose is purply. It is a very girly book. Boys might love it in actuality, but they might not want to admit they'd read it. The goodness might feel too sweet for many. And if you're not a fantasy reader, you won't get through the first chapter.

But if you want to experience a story filled to overflowing with joy and redemption and goodness (think of it as the exact opposite of A Series of Unfortunate Events tonally), snuggle up with this one under a blanket and let yourself go to an odd, beautiful world.

MOVIE THOUGHTS: ROCKY BALBOA

When I heard Sylvester Stallone was dragging "Rocky" out again for one last flick, I did exactly what you probably did: I groaned inwardly.

Of course, you may have groaned outwardly. I heard some of those groans. "Who's he gonna fight next, a cyborg?" were among the comments out there when the movie was announced.

Well, no one's groaning now.

In Rocky Balboa, Stallone has done what seemed impossible. He has taken a character who had become a bit of a laughingstock, a character he couldn't possibly play at his age and stage, a character no one cared about anymore, ...

And he's turned him into a character no one would laugh at, a character he plays impeccably (including making the fighting scenes believable), a character we care about deeply...

Rocky Balboa could have been an unmitigated disater, but instead is a lovely, heart-warming surprise. I found myself smiling early on, and cheering by the end.

The basic story? Rocky, now out of the fight game, still in mourning for the 5-years-gone Adrian, is running a restaurant by rote. ESPN, in one of its "Then vs. Now" segments, pairs up the Rocky-in-his-prime against the current heavyweight-champ-with-a-bad-attitude and picks Rocky as the winner. Some fight promoters get a bright idea: Let's do it for real. And off we go.

No real surprises in the plot (you could probably beat it out yourself right now). The joy of Rocky Balboa comes in the movie's sheer authenticity. Because of his age, because of his drifting since Adrian died, Rocky is again a major underdog. We thus get to appreciate him all over again as he strives against great odds not to win, but just to go the distance.

The aging Rocky returns in this movie to his roots as a gentleman. He looks out for a too-tough teenager in a bar just like he looked out for little Marie in the original Rocky. He's considerate, he's kind, heck, he's downright charming. We love him again. And we want to see him beat the odds.

For someone who's been beaten to a pulp by Hollywood (as Stallone also has), the emotional parallels are powerful. The idea that what matters isn't whether you win, but whether you can drag yourself up again every time you're knocked down -- well, in my world, that's downright inspiring.

Stallone gets the emotional details right. And if you do that in a movie, the rest just goes along for the ride. Not that Stallone does a poor job with the rest -- on the contrary, Rocky Balboa is directed (and written) with a sure hand. The final fight sequence in particular is beautifully shot and edited, and downright suspenseful, even as we know how it must end.

For some reason, this was one of the two "must-see" movies for the kids at my kids' school this Christmas break. (The other was Night at the Museum.) Why a bunch of kids wanted to see an old guy in a boxing match is beyond me -- clearly they saw something of the emotional heart in the ads that pulled them there. We went out of our way to watch the original Rocky a few days before seeing Rocky Balboa, and I think that enhanced our viewing all the more.

Rocky Balboa is like pulling out an old outfit from 30 years ago and finding that it still fits... and feels wonderful to boot. A thoroughly satisfying movie. Don't miss it.

SWITCHING TEAMS

I was raised to cheer for UCLA.

Growing up in southern California, you have to choose sides early on: UCLA or USC. And because my mom worked at UCLA when I was born (she was secretary to the French department), I was pretty much indoctrinated from an early age.

The whole California high school system is built around the UC entrance requirements, giving UCLA (and the other campuses) a looming presence no matter what. And I did in fact end up going to UCLA. While I wasn't a big "team spirit" kind of person, I hadn't realized how much I got used to seeing blue and gold everywhere.

However, I'm changing teams this week. I've been asked to teach a screenwriting class at the USC Film School; I start in a couple of days. I'm quite excited about it... I love teaching smart students, and let's face it, the USC film school is the best in the world. I'm expecting to find an already high level of craft and love for the craft. Nothing frustrates me more than trying to teach students who can't or won't learn -- I just don't want to waste my time. (Yes, I know that sounds snotty. But that's how it is. Pearls before swine, as it were.) Well, I don't expect a minute of this experience to be frustrating or wasted time.

There is a bit of culture shock involved though.

I realized it at Bel Air's Christmas Tea a few weeks ago. The tea happened to fall on the day of the SC/UCLA game -- the one with the shocking conclusion. To pacify the butlers (150 men who would have been quite upset to miss the game), somehow the church ran video feeds waaaay down to the tented parking lot where the tea was taking place. The game was on the whole time in the butlers' tent, and they announced the score periodically.

As you probably know, UCLA staged a totally unexpected victory. When it was announced at the tea, most of the 1200 women there broke into cheers. Purely out of reflex, I started to cheer, too.

Then I froze. I realized that, having accepted the USC job a few days before, I'd been traded! I had to cheer for the other side now.

It was an odd feeling. One I thought about for a while.

And I decided it's a good thing to have to trade sides once in a while. Think about professional athletes. They get traded, they immediately play for the new team with total loyalty and effort. Which doesn't mean they weren't loyal to their old team.

This says to me that there are different kinds of loyalty. Being loyal to my family and friends isn't the same thing as being loyal to, say, the Lakers.

As I look around the world, way too many people are emotionally tied up in allegiences that ultimately amount to little more than "Tastes light! Less filling!" Yes, of course we want to be loyal to our home town, our home school, our home church, our home country, our home clique, our home team. But those are all things that can change, and even, at times, loyalties than can prove misplaced.

So I'm happy to have been "traded." My loyalty as a teacher is always, first and foremost, to my students and to their stories anyway. So who cares what colors they're wearing? If I even owned a UCLA sweatshirt, I'd fold it up and stick it in a box. I'm sure I'll be buying a cute little USC sweatshirt or the like for Sabrina soon.

And we had absolutely no problems whatsoever cheering for SC at the Rose Bowl.... So on to the new adventure.

P.S. For those asking what I thought about Dreamgirls -- I'm seeing it this weekend with Sabrina and a couple of her girlfriends. But I've read the script and am v. much looking forward to it. Will report my thoughts next week...

MOVIE THOUGHTS: NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM

Given Christmas, vacation, and the problems with Blogger, I'm late weighing in on this movie. If you were planning to see it, you probably have already. But FWIW, here are a few thoughts...

I liked Night at the Museum. I wish I could have liked it more.

The concept is a great one. (I have a vague memory of wanting to go up for a rewrite job on this because the concept was so fun, and of our erstwhile agent basically not bothering to follow up.) At night, the exhibits in the New York Museum of Natural History come to life.

What a great arena to have fun with! And the movie does have some fun with it. The dioramas come to life, the T. Rex skeleton delightfully comes to life (and turns out to want to play fetch!), etc.

There are many many places one could go inside this arena. I just wish the filmmakers had chosen somewhat better ones.

Ben Stiller stars as a loser divorced dad who can't hold a regular job, whose son is embarrassed by him, need I say more, we've all seen it before ad infinitum. An employment agency sends him to be the night guard at the museum, where he is replacing three night guards (including the vastly underused Dick Van Dyke) who claim they're retiring but nothing they do backs that claim up.

The museum comes to life, which both scares and flummoxes Ben. He meets, among other exhibits, Owen Wilson as a tiny cowboy and Robin Williams (again, underused) as a wax Teddy Roosevelt. Ben survives his first night at the museum. But instead of any actual plot getting started, he goes back for a second night at the museum, which is basically a repeat of the first night, only he makes different mistakes.

Why does he do this? My best guess is, because too many execs and/or producers gave notes on the script. This feels as over-developed a movie (with all the development notes up there on the screen) as I have seen in a long time. I can just hear the discussions in the meetings... "I think we need to see Ben have a second night at the museum so we can track his arc from loser dad to winner dad -- never mind that it has nothing to do with his kid."

Well, it turns out that those three "retiring" guards are actually pulling a scan on the museum, plotting to steal a priceless (and magical) artifact. We don't learn this till well over halfway through the movie, unfortunately. Which means the first half is all development-notes-character-arc stuff combined with eye candy serving no purpose other than spectacle. A sad waste, even though the eye candy is well-done and sometimes quite funny.

Ben thwarts the bad guys (surprise!) with the inexplicable help of his son (no idea what he's even doing there!), and ends up making his son proud at career day. Ho hum.

While the writing (specifically, the plotting) made the movie weaker than it should have been with such a killer premise, Ben Stiller was also a bit miscast. I never believed him as a dad for a second (never believed the kid either), and I could feel him "acting" in almost every scene. (The scene where he feels Attila the Hun's pain, his best and and the truly funniest in the movie, was reputedly improvised -- at last, a scene free from development notes!)

But ultimately the problem in this movie is the writing. Great premise, lazy execution.

Let me just say, to be fair, my kids (who have never taken development notes) absolutely loved it. So maybe you send your kids to see it, and hop to the next theatre over to see Dreamgirls.

Wish it could have been better.

BLOGGER @#$%^&

So I got my comment boxes cleaned up, and I'm working on updating the look of my blog (okay, really Regina is working on it; I'm going along for the ride).

And in the middle of all that, I switched over to "New Blogger." New year, new look, new comboxes, why not? And they swore it was out of beta, so one would think it would work, right?

Ha!

After most of a week trying to get a post to actually post, after numerous "Help me!" pleas on their help group, I still couldn't get a post to post.

How did I get this one up and running? Well, I had to treat the whole thing as if it was in Html (thus losing access to all the spiffy features that might make one want to switch to the "New Blogger" to begin with!).

Oy.

All this to say:

1) If you have a blog on Blogger and are tempted to switch to New Blogger -- DON'T! It's still in beta, they just won't admit it.

2) I will start posting here again momentarily.

Happy new year....

NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS 2007

Some of my New Year's resolutions have turned out pretty well. For instance, my 2004 resolution to start a blog -- at least I've been happy with how that's worked out.

Last year's, however, were not so hot. I resolved to focus on reading C.S. Lewis. That lasted a while -- I tried to alternate Lewis with all the other books on my to-read list. The result was that I didn't get through most of the books on my to-read list, and I still have Christmas present books from last year that I haven't opened yet.

It worked out well in an unexpected way, however, as our church's August Family Camp turned out to be centered around -- you guessed it -- C.S. Lewis. And I had just read virtually every book that was brought up. So that was cool. But my reading sort of petered out after that...

My other resolution was to keep track of every bite I ate, and I started a subsidiary blog to do so. But that also petered out by mid-year. It just wasn't having the effect I wanted it to have.

But the great thing about New Year's is that we give ourselves permission to start over now. I've blogged in previous years about the power of New Year's resolutions. So here we go again...

I posted recently about my feeling that I had no social life. Thinking it through, I've realized that I've been so organizationally-focused, volunteering in so many areas, I haven't spent the time I'd like with friends and people I'd like to know better. So that's resolution no. 1 this year: I will spend more time with people rather than groups. More lunches. More hanging out.

I got a head start on that this week -- a day at the Santa Monica Pier with one of my best friends and her kids. A day at the movies and playing with our new Wii with one of our best friends. Both were more refreshing than zillions of hours spent at board meetings or the like. So here's to more of that in 2007!

And to that end, I've decided to make monthly resolutions as well (having seen how hard it can be to carry out a resolution over a whole year. Each of these monthly resolutions will be in support of the spending-more-time-with-friends resolution. For January, I resolve to really listen to what people are saying to me (even when it's Cory going into interminable detail about some video game I could care less about).

I also resolve to do a better job of cooking 'real' food this year. I've fallen back way too much on heating up frozen stuff, or packaged stuff, or the like. Lee got me some new cookbooks for Christmas, and I will dive into them and have some fun. (Now if only someone else would resolve to do the dishes!)

I may add one or two more by the end of the month... My feeling is you should make your resolutions by the end of January, not necessarily by New Year's Day.

So all of the rest of you have a month to make your resolutions! Feel free to share them here. (I will have new comment boxes up any day now.)