Showing posts from August, 2007


I am finally home after being on a honeymoon for a week. I had a great time, though the camera has vanished. I am positive it will turn up, however, because if I were to find a lost camera I would do everything I could to find the owner and return it to him or her.

Anyways, before I went away I put another video up on YouTube, but I didn't have time to post it here. It is a cover of "Jessie" by Joshua Kadison. Someone already watched it and rated it. It got two stars, which isn't too good.

Stardust part II

I saw Stardust. I am still unsure of what to think. I enjoyed the movie -- I can certainly say that. I hope that others go to see it because I think they will enjoy it too. It was silly at times. The humor was definately not typical comedy humor. It was more that it was so absurd and so random that it took you by suprise. There was also the subtle love story. It was by no means a dumb romatic comedy. The romance part of it was totally acceptable (there are plenty of movies that contain unacceptable amounts of romance -- these movies should be destroyed). There was also a whole lot of adventurous aspects to the story, which was pretty cool. Overall, it was a really good movie. Stephanie, who is not an over the top Neil Gaiman fan like me, loved the movie. I, of course, am more than familiar with the story of Stardust as I have read the book at least four times. Thus, the changes made for the movie version pre-occuppied me every once in a while. I tried to ignore it and just enjoy the m…


Tonight, I'm going to see Stardust! I'm pretty excited about it because the movie Stardust is created from the book Stardust, which was written by Neil Gaiman, who is my favorite author ever. I'm quite prepared for the movie to not reach the same expectations that the book did, so as not to be let down. Still, I think it will be a pretty great movie. Also, if the movie as a whole isn't just-like-the-book, some of it will be. Those parts will be exciting to watch, to say the least.

On another note, I'll be doing some cell phone shopping. I'm hoping to upgrade to something that has mp3 capabilities -- not because I'm a tech savvy cell phone geek, rather, I simply want to listen to music at random times and I don't want to carry around a cell phone and an mp3 player.

Finally, I need to get a pair of shorts for the cruise that I'll be leaving for next weekend. It's a honeymoon. Wow. I'm getting married in a week!

Open... who?

I attended Caffé Lena's open mic night on Thursday --

time out: is it mic? or mike? the debate rages on. You see, to spell it as m-i-c would be a slap in the face to the English language (which, if you ask me would be fair, as the English language constantly slaps its users in the face with ridiculous rules that make very little sense to anyone aside from those who study it and, thus, accept it). M-i-k-e should be the proper spelling, as is so eloquently described by Samuel Bayer, a warrior in what I can only say is the most pointless war since the Iraq one (Yeah, I said it). Many open mic goers prefer m-i-c because it looks right, being that "microphone" is first spelled m-i-c, not m-i-k, and "mic" is short for microphone after all. I tend to side with the m-i-c people, because as ridiculous as this debate is, I need something to blog about. Also, the first time I saw it spelled out, it was spelled m-i-c, not to mention the fact that "Mike" is a dude…