Elegantly Random

Hollywood has TOTALLY killed the dream I dreamed.

I love musicals. I grew up with them. I literally cannot remember a time in my life when I didn't sing songs from musicals. My mom has a rich musical background as both a performer and a musician, so it was second nature to her. My parents started taking me to see plays, musicals and operas in college and community theaters as soon as I was old enough to sit through them. My mom used to record movies for me when they aired on television, so I could watch them over and over till the VHS tapes stopped working properly. We always had a vast library of musical soundtracks. Lots of these musicals I had never seen, so I had the fun of listening to the music and imagining what the staging would look like. I have a great memory from when I was about 7 years old, and the filmed stage production of Peter Pan starring Mary Martin was aired on television for the first time I was ever able to see, and our whole family gathered in the living room to watch it together. I was so DELIGHTED, because I'd been listening to the cast recording since I was a tiny tot. And those of you who know me know that I've done my fair share of stage performing myself. I LOVE MUSICALS.

Having grown up obsessed with musicals and having probably 50 or more of them utterly memorized, I've been really disappointed with their fall from grace in the film industry. Movie musicals have been out of fashion for a long time now, and there are lots of popular theories about why this is. It would have been so much fun to grow up in the days when musicals won Best Picture at the Oscars year after year, instead of being an rarity like when Chicago won the award in 2002. In the past 20 years of cinema, I can think of only a handful of musicals that have even come out, and so few of them that I actually thought were decent to good. Rent was okay - at least they brought back most of the original cast, but the adaptation was on the corny side. Moulin Rouge, Hairspray and Sweeney Todd, along with the aforementioned Chicago, are the only three that come to mind that were really good, in my humble little musician's opinion. It's sad. If you count animated films, then you could add several more to the list - but animated films have always celebrated music, and I really don't think they count in the same vein as a "musical."

You're probably thinking, "But there have been lots more musicals in the past several years in addition to the ones you named!" True. But I was listing the GOOD ones. Most of the musicals that have come out have been on the meh-to-terrible end of the spectrum. Dreamgirls. Mamma Mia! And worst of all, Phantom of the Opera. Hooo-boy. Talk about a wasted opportunity. It was beautiful to look at, but just. not. good. Phantom's a great example of the problem plaguing movie musicals today - star power triumphing over talent in terms of casting.

It's true that filmmakers have always considered star power and ticket sales when casting a film adaptation of a musical. After all, Audrey Hepburn famously won the starring role in My Fair Lady over Julie Andrews, a star of the stage who had played the role on Broadway for years to much acclaim, but who was unknown in the film industry. In order to make Audrey work for the film, a voice double had to be hired - the very famous Marni Nixon, who also sang for Natalie Wood in West Side Story and Deborah Kerr in The King and I. You could argue that the tactic worked - all three of those films were nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars, and the first two I mentioned won the award. Both Natalie Wood and Deborah Kerr picked up Best Actress nominations, but neither won, while Audrey Hepburn wasn't even nominated. The winner in her year? Julie Andrews...for Mary Poppins (which has to be my favorite Oscar story of all time).

So in terms of critical acclaim, sure - sometimes you can cast a more-famous actor and the movie still does well. It worked in Chicago. Bebe Neuworth wasn't cast in the film, though she won the Tony for her portrayal of Velma Kelly in the Broadway revival - and Catherine Zeta-Jones did an incredible job and rightly won herself an Oscar. But the reason that worked? All the stars of Chicago could sing. Every. Single. One. And not only could they sing - they were appropriately cast in their respective roles. Another recent favorite of mine was Sweeney Todd, which is an interesting example, but in that case, instead of trying to replicate the feel of the Broadway experience and the big voices who made the roles famous, director Tim Burton went an entirely different route and created his own look and feel for the movie and also for the singing - and it worked.

Which brings me back to The Phantom of the Opera. I would argue that the film is almost one hundred percent miscast. The only person who was able to hold his own with the music is Patrick Wilson, who played Raoul. But Patrick Wilson is also a stage veteran, so really, it makes sense. The rest of the cast is completely off. Emmy Rossum was lovely to look at, and her voice had a purity that was nice enough, but she simply lacked the chops to sing the role. Minnie Driver didn't even try - they had to dub her entire performance. And Gerard Butler, while intensely sexy and appealing, was just one thousand percent wrong for The Phantom. His rock-style vocals were absolutely second rate, a far cry from the now-legendary Michael Crawford performance. Clearly, the filmmakers spent scads of money on the film's look and feel, but it flopped critically and at the box office - and it shouldn't have. It's one of the most successful stage musicals in all of Broadway history. Had they been true to the score, I believe the movie would have succeeded. The star power shouldn't have been in the actors' names, it should have been the musical performances - and the filmmakers totally missed the mark.

And the next movie poised to aim big and fall short? The upcoming film adaption of Les Miserables, the cast of which is being filled as we speak with BIG NAMES. But CAN THEY SING? That is the question. And to be more specific, is their vocal talent on par with the score? I'm guessing director Tom Hooper isn't going to make an "edgy" Les Mis in the vein of Burton's Sweeney Todd - so riddle me why on Earth someone like Russell Crowe would be set to star as Javert, the police officer obsessed with capturing Jean Valjean. Who will be played, FYI, by Hugh Jackman, the only part of the cast that currently makes any sense. Hugh Jackman is a very talented stage actor and singer. Though he's 44, he somehow seems young for the role made famous by Colm Wilkinson. But I'd say he's more than likely capable of playing the role, all in all, if they can age him properly. But Russell Crowe? I'm pretty skeptical. And please, PLEASE don't get me started on the travesty that nearly was - Taylor Swift almost landing the role of Eponine. OMG. The HORROR OF IT. It makes me throw up in my mouth a little bit. Not much better? Amanda Seyfried as Cosette. I have seen Mamma Mia! and it wasn't good. It pains me to see one of the best musicals of the modern era about to be demolished on the silver screen, just like its sister The Phantom, all in the name of STAR POWER!

Nothing would delight me more than to be wrong about this, because I would dearly love a good Les Mis. But I've learned not to get my hopes up. If I'm wrong, I will throw a party and go see the movie three times, but I'm usually not wrong about these things, unfortunately. And all I have to say is, Amanda Seyfried is NO Audrey Hepburn. 

Talkin' tablets.

I love technology. But I'm not the kind of person to rush out and just buy things. Land sakes, no. I think about it, analyze it, do price comparisons, read reviews, the whole nine yards. My husband and I keep up with what's new in gizmo-land, but we don't replace our technology unless it doesn't work anymore or is truly, sorely out of date. Average life expectancy on a cell phone/smart phone in my hands? 2-3 years, depending. For a laptop? 3 years. A TV? 5 years. We replace things, but not after carefully researching and making sure it's needed or warranted.

Enter the oh-so-flashy iPad. 

Pertinent information: I am a former Mac user who converted mainly to PC circa 2004 (largely because of my workplace) and have only purchased iPods since - until this year, when I purchased an iPhone and then was issued a MacBook Pro and a second iPhone for my new job. So I guess I'm a born-again Apple person. I'll save my thoughts about the Apple corporation for another day, because they are lengthy and highly polarizing, and for now I'll be brief: Apple is very cool; Apple is very expensive; Apple gets away with charging you a premium because their shit is cool.

Now, back to the iPad.

There were tablets long before the iPad, but no one bought them. And it wasn't because they didn't do nifty things like stream content and let you play games. It was because they're unnecessary. You don't NEED a tablet. Especially now that most people have smartphones. But through the genius of Apple, the world suddenly liked tablets. Because the iPad is cool. The iPad is also very, very expensive, so of course not everyone can afford one...so all the other techno peeps set about creating their tablets to compete. And the tablet craze was begun. The people cried out, "Our laptops and smartphones are not enough! We want tablets! We want to stream our Netflix without having to carry our laptops to the living room!" Oh, we privileged first-world citizens do love our techno gizmos, do we not?! Life is so hard! But this whole thing is actually good because now there are lots of options and price points and there's something for everyone - from the low-budget to the "sky's the limit" crowd. Yay! Toys for all!

At first I was supremely anti-tablet. But after 18 months of watching everyone and their mom buy a tablet, I started thinking, you know, this might actually be handy for me. I'm over the in-home laptop, certainly now that work provides me a laptop. And I travel a lot. It might be nice to have another option. So I started to research, for a long time determined NOT to buy an iPad because, well, the principle of the thing. But now that I have all this Apple shit, I eventually realized that it would be more efficient if I could use the same cloud, share all the same stuff, etc. So I did it. I bought myself a very first-worldy iPad 2. And a little part of me died inside.

Meanwhile...Amazon released the Kindle Fire.

And I bought one for my husband, because why not? We both love Amazon in the way many people love Apple, and it's only $200! As someone who still can't believe that a regular Kindle is so cheap, I thought if nothing else, you can read on this thing, so it can't be a total bust. And you know, they hype on the Fire was big, but when it came out I read a lot of articles saying "Meh, it's not an iPad." Well, folks, no. It's not an iPad. But after a few weeks of having both around the house, I have come to the conclusion that most tablet users would do just fine with a Fire.

POINT-BY-POINT IPAD/FIRE COMPARISON:

Streaming content
This is the main reason most people buy a tablet - to listen to music, read books, watch movies. The Fire and the iPad do this about equally well from what I can tell. Though you have the option of 3G on an iPad, road tests with both gizmos didn't show a significant difference in service despite 3G enabling on the iPad. The Fire seemed to work just about everywhere the iPad worked. What's more, the Fire actually downloaded movie rentals from the Amazon Prime store much faster than the iPad downloaded them from the iTunes store - and also faster than my home computer downloaded movies from iTunes. I think the details here are important. It took 5+ hours each time I downloaded a movie from iTunes, whether it was to my iPad OR my laptop. The Fire downloaded movies in 90 minutes. That's a BIG difference.

The Silk browser on the Fire works at about the same speed as the Safari browser for iPad, and you can download new browsers like Opera to either one. Very important: you do NOT have to use Amazon Prime to enjoy your Fire. You can access Netflix and Hulu and such from the Fire. The only site Jay has had trouble with is HBO Go. Hopefully that will work better if he tries another browser. The screen on the iPad is obviously bigger and better, but the Fire is really light and comfortable to hold, so hey, they're both pretty neat. Both devices can handle your email just fine.

Storage
The iPad offers more storage, but thanks to the cloud on either device, it really doesn't matter UNLESS you are someone who wants to physically store more than 3 or 4 movies on your device, which I would argue is not most people. I purchased the 16gig 3G iPad and I cannot imagine filling it. Why would I put my music on it? It's all on my iPhone, and when do I not have my phone with me? And you're not gonna take your iPad to the gym to listen to tunes, or on a run. So really...is space REALLY that important? Also, Amazon's had a cloud longer than Apple has, and both gizmos come with the same amount of cloud storage. 

iTunes vs. Amazon Store/Amazon Prime
You have to pay a membership fee for Prime after your trial period, but it's not that much money, and afterwards you get discounts. For instance, if you rent a movie through Prime, it costs 99 cents and you get 48 hours for viewing, whereas rentals at iTunes are more in the neighborhood of 4-5 bucks and you only have 24 hours to watch. I keep waiting for iTunes to give us a membership option, that would be so great! Hint, hint, Apple! And let's not forget about that whole download time thing. I don't know what's going on with iTunes, but Amazon Prime downloads are faster. Plus, if you buy music from Amazon, it doesn't come with usage restrictions. Remember that annoying iTunes rule about only putting the music on 5 devices? That is SO uncool. No worries with that on Amazon. Sorry, iTunes. Your store is prettier, but I usually browse for ideas there and then go shop on Amazon.

Reading
Both the Kindle Fire and the iPad suck for reading. Period. It's bad for your eyes to read on lit screens. That's what they are. Suck. Magazines look great, as do graphic novels, but if you want to read books for long periods of time, read a real book or get an e-reader like a regular Kindle or Nook or whatever. 

Camera/lack thereof
The Fire has no camera and that is a bummer if you are a person who uses Skype or other video chatting programs. It's pretty much the only major downside of the Fire as of right now. But some people don't use those programs OR they will be okay with using them on their laptops or smartphones, like my husband. He doesn't care that his Fire has no camera. I will be interested to see if Amazon releases a more expensive Fire with maybe 16g and a camera. Who knows. 

Extras and apps
So as we all know, Apple currently boasts the most robust selection of apps. So far, Jay has been able to find most of the apps he wants in the Android selection for the Fire, or a very close approximation. You can play Angry Birds on the Fire, which should be enough to sate your average American. But if you're really into apps, you will find more on the iPad for sure. Also, it's true that you can't do all the cool music and video editing on a Kindle Fire that you can do on an iPad - and this touches on the reviewers who talk about the Fire not qualifying as a tablet, or offering any of the cool stuff that the iPad offers. This is my thought: Most users don't use that stuff. How many people are actually editing video or music on their iPad? I mean, really? Some are, but not very many. This is the same argument I make about laptops/computers, actually - most people only use about 1/5 of the power of their device, so I would argue, why are you paying for that other 4/5?

In summary...
The iPad is really cool. It syncs up with my laptop and phone. It has all the exact same features as my phone...which is cool, but it also MAY make you wonder why you just ran out and paid $700 for a larger version of the phone in your pocket. Ask yourself which of the features on the iPad you are actually going to USE...and how much of your desire to have an iPad is because "it's cool." If you've got the cash and you don't care, then tenfore, good buddy. That was me. I knew I didn't NEED it, but I wanted it, and that's basically all. But you won't hear me talk about how I needed it, that's for sure.

If you aren't flush with cash to spring for the iPad or any other $600+ tablet (and by the way, even wifi-only, 16gb iPad is going to cost $600 by the time you pay tax and get a cover for it), seriously, the Kindle Fire is a very, very cool option. Or if, like us, you want two unnecessary tablets for your first-world home. Or if you have KIDS who want to watch movies and play Angry Birds. It's a cool mini-tablet, and I would bet you that they'll release several other versions of it in the coming months/years because Amazon is awesome. And they'll all be cheap, because Amazon is so savvy, they don't have to make cash on these things.

The point of this diatribe is not to say the iPad sucks. Nope, it's very cool. I love my iPad. But the Kindle Fire is very, very cool too, and if money is tight or you just aren't that into the Apple thing, I think the Fire will serve as a great, inexepensive alternative for lots of people.

If anyone has tried the new Nook tablet, which is only $50 more than the Fire, I'd love to hear about it, as that looks to be another strong option for people in the under $300 price range.

The Grinch is back.

Y'all, I can't believe Thanksgiving is one week away. HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE? I feel like this year, more than any other year before, totally flew by at rocket speed. Thanksgiving? Gah! 

Thanksgiving has actually become my favorite holiday, trumping Christmas for sure. I love the laid-back feel, the home cookin', the Macy's parade followed by the dog show, the wine and conversation with friends and family. It's also ended up that Jay and I have never travelled for Thanksgiving since moving in together. That all changes this year, though, as we're headed to St. Louis and beyond to spend the holiday with my grandparents. Should be a lot of fun - plentiful food, cousins, aunts, uncles and babies to enjoy. And my parents and brother will be there, too - only thing missing will be my sister. Waah!

There's really only one thing squashing my Thanksgiving cheer, and that's CHRISTMAS. Good LORD, Christmas is stomping on Turkey Day! I know that it's been the case for a long time now, but every year I get crankier about it. Between the commercialism and consumerism and the in-store promos starting in October and the street decorations coming out the first week of November, I'm turning greener by the minute!

A few years ago, Jay and I started slowly scaling back the Christmas shopping in an effort to combat the consumer-related cranks we felt creeping over us. We started making more gifts, and each year have gotten more adept at thinking outside the box, coming up with nifty things to make OR, if it's storebought, choosing things that are really special, whether that means locally made or something the recipient REALLY wants. Don't get me wrong - I love to gift people. I just hate the pressure/stress/cost of doing it in a 4-week window every year, and I hate the way the gifts become so repetitive. As my friend Marianne says, what's the point of exchanging gift cards with someone? You could just take that $25 you spent on the gift card for Aunt Marge and use it to buy your own whatever at Amazon, and vice versa. Does my dad REALLY need another red tie? (He might say yes). Whatever. The point is, we've become a lot more jolly as we've eliminated a lot of the stress, repetition and overspending from the process, and that's been really great. But the Christmas season is still cranky-making for me, and I have been trying to tune out the Christmas songs I heard in Claire's today, and the snowflakes decorating the streets on Capitol Hill round about, oh, November 5th. 

This year, we decided to add a new twist to help us beat the grouchies. In the past, we've still purchased gifts for each other and exchanged them, even while scaling back. This year has been very productive and successful for us, and we're feeling pretty good about things. We were chatting and we sort of realized, there's really not much that we want or need in the way of gifts. And sure, we could go out and get each other some things - new knitting needles, a sweater, whatever - but meh. No need. SO - we decided to buy some household toys that we'll both use and enjoy in the coming year, rather than gifting each other. I'm pretty freaking excited about it, too. Sure, this means we're spending MORE money on each other than normal, but we'll both reap the benefits of the fun toys we picked (an iPad and an Xbox - boo-yah!) for much longer than that new sweater.

SO. Once again, I am combatting the Christmas Cranks - this time by rewarding myself with fancy toys for me, treating my friends and family to really special and well-thought out local and hand-made gifts they couldn't buy for themselves, and above all else, not celebrating Christmas or Hanukkah or ANYTHING but turkey until AFTER THE TURKEY IS CARVED.

How about you? What are your holiday annoyances?

5 years.

We just got back from a ten-day trip to Hawaii, during which we had a lot of fun and visited Oahu, Hawaii and Maui. It was magnificent. The excuse was our 5-year anniversary, though we definitely are big fans of travel and this had been on our list for a long time. I'm also on a big quest to finish seeing all 50 states by the time I turn 40, and this stop leaves me with just nine more to go. I am excited!

Those of you who know me personally know that I'm something of a control freak and a planner. I'm anal retentive. I'm organized. I get things done and I like them done just so. I make a lot of lists. I think things through carefully (and then think them through several more times) before doing them. It's what I do, and mostly it works for me - though it's not without its downfalls. Upsides to being super organized and anal and control-freaky: rarely have money problems, usually have a job, manage to avoid law-breaking and most major catastrophes due to good planning. Downsides: uber-stressful at times, can be a bummer when things don't go to plan.

Cue our trip to Hawaii.

I had built up this trip for months and months, and without delving into too much personal detail in a public forum (wait, wha? excersing restraint in the over-sharing department? who AM I?) I'll just say that I put several things on hold so that we could take this trip, and I really wanted it to go a certain way. I wanted it to be adventurous, high-energy and romantic. On top of that lofty list of goals and expectations, right before we took the trip, my new coworker said something that made me realize that Jay and I, despite doing a plethora of globe-trotting in the years we have been together, have almost never taken trips that were JUST the two of us. Because we live far from family and friends, most of our trips involve other people - which we love, but when I realized it...it really struck me. Wow. We haven't taken a trip that didn't involve work, family or friends, but was just about the two of us, in YEARS. And so that made me even more determined that our Hawaiian vacation would be perfect.

And then I woke up the morning of our departure feeling under the weather.

As a repeat bronchitis sufferer, I knew that was likely what was coming down the pike, and as we sat on the airplane for six hours on Friday night, I could feel it getting worse. Determined to have a great time and see all the planned sights, I woke up Saturday morning sure that I was better and decided to power on through, and we had a fabulous day of sight-seeing at Pearl Harbor and Waikiki. Hawaii was gorgeous and we were happy. But still, the lingering sickness was there and I knew deep down that it wasn't really out of me. Sunday morning I woke up and knew I was licked, and soon found myself in a doctor's office in Honolulu. We flew to Kona, and I felt worse. Arriving at our rental apartment, I broke down in tears, absolutely enraged and saddened to find myself on my long-awaited, much-anticipated trip...with bronchitis. I went to bed for several hours - cried myself to sleep, even. I was the picture of pathetic.

And then, something magical and very un-Sarie-like happened. I woke up, and I made a decision - not to let this ruin my vacation. Somehow, I said to myself, "Okay. I'm sick. It will take most of the week for me to get better. I will not be able to do all the things I had hoped to do this week. But maybe, if I'm careful and take good care of myself, I can still do some of the ones I wanted to do most, and surely I can still have fun. I'm in Hawaii. I can relax and enjoy the scenery. I can lounge under a palm tree just as easily as in my bed. I just have to avoid getting sunburned, get plenty of sleep and drink tons of water, and make sure to get enough rest."

It was like someone else invaded my body, some other person who wasn't a crazed planner from Planet Spreadsheet. And I did it, guys! I stayed positive. Sure, I caved to frustration for a few hours that afternoon, but after that? No. I had a GREAT vacation. It's true I didn't get to sea kayak as I'd hoped, and I had to modify my hiking and swimming plans, downscaling to manageable activities, and I had to plan in naps and restful activities that involved driving or sitting instead of scaling things and running around on foot. But it was still fun. And by Thursday, I had gotten 9-10 hours of sleep a night, snorkeled with sea turtles and manta rays and hiked through a volcano...and was feeling better. WIN! This is a good lesson for me - as much as it's awesome to be a planner, and I do that well most of the time and as I get older I do it with less stress - I am also able to live in the moment and adjust my expectations on the fly. I was proud of myself. *pats self on back*

Another magical thing about our trip, in addition to me learning to chill the hell out...I spent uninterrupted time with my husband. This probably sounds really stupid, but you know what? When was the last time you spent 10 days with your husband, or your wife, or your boyfriend or girlfriend or best friend or mother or ANYONE during which time you didn't watch a single tv show or movie, didn't get online other than to upload a photo or check a map, didn't do work, kept emails to a minimum, didn't work on any crafts or hobbies or do ANYTHING but hang out - and actually had a good time? I am gonna say I haven't done this with Jay in several years, and it wasn't for 10 days whenever we did it. It was AMAZING. It's funny. Even though I was sick and the trip maybe wasn't so romantic in the traditional sense, what with me hacking and coughing up a lung the entire time, it was ultra romantic in that I remembered why I like him so much, why I wanted to get married. Jay and I get along like gangbusters! Jay is funny! and fun! SO fun, in fact, that I didn't even MISS my television shows or my knitting (it's true, I didn't knit more than 3 rows the entire time I was gone until we flew back) or ANY of the daily circus. And that's how I know this is gonna last a lifetime, that I was smart to marry this dude. Because anyone you can spend 10 days with, sans media and diversions and while sick, and honestly say, "Wow, that was totally great," is a rare find. 

The off-season.

Since moving to the Emerald City in 2010, I've become a huge supporter of the Seattle Sounders FC, our resident professional (MLS) soccer team. Last fall, I suggested to my husband that we purchase season tickets to the Sounders. Due to the Parade of Visitors (the 12 sets of people who came to see us between April and September), we were making an effort to stick around over the summer and not do a lot of big travel. We figured soccer tickets would help pass the time. 

This investment turned out to be awesome. Going into the season, which began back in March, I liked soccer and understood it reasonably well. My brother was a soccer player growing up, and I went to a lot of his games, as well as following the World Cup here and there. I appreciated the sport. Over the course of the season, though, I've come to love the sport. It's surprised me to some degree, how big a fan I am at this point. There are lots of things I love about it - number one, our team is really good (finishing the season #2 in the MLS, if all goes accordingly). Number two, Seattle has a lot of pride in the Sounders, and we have the biggest following in the MLS, with more tickets sold and higher attendance per game (by a LOT) than any other team. It's pretty cool to walk around town on game day and see tons and tons of people wearing green and blue, and know that our following is as big as basketball or football or any other pro sport in most cities. It's fun to feel part of that community of people who love their team and love Seattle. And number three, the players are ridiculously attractive. Let's not underestimate the power of number three.

Saturday night is our last regular season home game, and we'll be honoring our amazing goalkeeper, Kasey Keller, who is retiring after this season. I fully expect a little sports-crying, even though I'll get to watch him in both the CONCACAF and the MLS cup playoffs in the weeks to come. Kasey is a huge asset to our team, arguably our most valuable player, and he's going to be really hard to replace. But also, I'm sad that the season is coming to an end. I know, it's a long season, and my wait for the start of the next is pretty short - friendlies start in February. But still - it'll be a long, dark off-season.

I was thinking about all of this the other day as I made my commute to work, which involves a short bus ride and then a 15-20 minute walk. I realized that I kind of feel, in my personal life, like I've just come out of an "off-season" of my own. When I moved to Seattle, it was with great excitement. I supported my husband in his career move, I was honestly thrilled at the chance to move to the Pacific Northwest, a place I'd heard so many amazing things about and had already come to love after just a couple short trips. I was even ready to leave my old job behind, even though I really loved it and I still miss many of my coworkers eighteen months after the fact. I knew this would be a challenge, moving across country and being so far away from our friends and family, having to start over entirely - but I felt up for it.

When we got here, it took me a while to find a job - not a surprise, given the economy and the fact that I feel pretty strongly about working for non-profit organizations and preferably colleges or universities. But I thought, I'm not going to let being in the off-season stop me. I started a little business spinning yarn, which has been a lot of fun and a source of much-needed and appreciated side income. I eventually found a temporary job at the University of Washington, and though the job wasn't quite what I'd been looking for, I met some really lovely people, some of whom have now become real friends. I continued doing freelance graphic design work. I traveled a TON. It wasn't a bad time. In fact, it was pretty fun!

But I was antsy. I really felt like all the pieces were there - I was making friends, I was putting a toe in the pond of the professional community - but things just weren't quite coming together. I wrestled a bit with what I wanted to do professionally and personally, from jobs to raising a family to going back to school - you name it, I considered it and asked myself what the next step should be. As our old pal Dickens said, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times" - because even as I was questioning what was next for me, I fell head-over-heels in love with Seattle. I feel more at home here than I have ever felt in any place I've lived - and this is my 8th city of residence, so I feel like I have plenty of experiences to compare. It was like, in my off-season, everything I needed for bliss was right there in front of me, if only I could figure out how to put it all together.

This fall, I feel like that really happened. I found a new job that I'm enjoying. Like any job, I'm sure it'll have its ups and downs, but I'm busy and I feel useful. These are good things. And I'm surrounded by really, REALLY nice people here, both professionally and personally. Jay and I have made some great friends here already, and I'm encouraged by the number of people who want to visit us here too. It's sort of amazing. Some other questions have started to be answered, things that have been on my mind for ages - I don't want to say too much yet, but I feel whole again. It's like I can finally see a path for myself. It's not a set-in-stone path, it's more like a meandering country road, but still...there are some nifty things along that path, and I'm really excited to walk down it. 

I'm a big believer in the magic of seasons - that as much as we need times of revelry, we need times of quiet and solitude, times to consider, reflect, evaluate. Just like the world needs winter to sleep and rejuvenate, just like the Sounders need a couple months of downtime - so did I. So do we all. The cool thing is, when the season starts up again, it's so easy to put on that green and blue jersey again and dive in. 

 

The entitled consumer.

I'm back from haiatus, friends! And what better way to get my feet wet again than with a timely rant? I would like to talk for a little bit about something that's really been peeving me lately: the entitled consumer. Entitlement is quickly shooting to the top of my Most Awful Human Traits list, and nowhere is it more evident and prevalent than on the internet.

As many of you know, I work in communications, and I spend a lot of time on the internet. For the most part, I'm a big believer in social media and I tout the pros of online interaction with friends and strangers on a daily basis to earn my keep. Social media is awesome. The internet is awesome. But sometimes, it can also become a catch-all for some really unappealing human behavior - especially when it comes to entitlement and consumer griping.

Recently, I feel like half the things I read in people's Facebook streams are about how much they hate this or that business, organization, or website. And not just how much they loathe these businesses, but how these businesses are mistreating and abusing them. I understand that people like to share their experiences, good and bad, with their network of friends, and I do it too. It's just that lately it really feels like more than just complaining or "having a bad day"-type whining. It's this whole consumer attitude of, "How dare this company do X to me, personally, and wreck my first-world life?" And I have to say...I'm sick of it. 

For example, how about the whole Netflix/Qwikster debacle? First Netflix raised prices. While I agree that the way this change in pricing was announced was less than smooth, asking people to pay a few more bucks per month for an unbelievably underpriced service seemed fairly reasonable to me. But the people, how they moaned and groaned. Then, when the company announced it would split its DVD and streaming services into separate companies (Netflix and the unfortunately named Qwikster), it was anarchy. People swarmed the interwebs to let all their fans and followers know that THEY WEREN'T GONNA TAKE IT. They were ditching Netster, by god, for DARING to charge them more money and change their business model. I'm no fan of the name Qwikster, and I'm skeptical as to how long the company will stay afloat under this new business model, but for my money, I still can't watch movies any other way for a better deal...so I'm sticking around. And not complaining.

Then there was Bank of America, who announced that they will begin a monthly fee for debit cards. OH, HOW THE PEOPLE RAGED. "We're switching banks!" they hollered in anger. Now, let's stop for a second, kids. First of all, it's $5 a month. It's not like they're going to charge you per swipe (which really would be an issue). And banks are businesses, not free services for the people. So they're going to charge you money here and there. Paying $5 for the luxury of swiping a magical card doesn't seem so insane to me. - probably because I'm still amazed that I get to manage all my accounts and bills via BoA's fairly amazing online banking system. Also, people fail to see the value in time saved. It wasn't so long ago that people had to actually GO TO THE BANK to obtain cash with which to spend money...or, horror of horrors, WRITE A CHECK. Do you know how much TIME that takes? And guess what? You can run off to another bank, but I'd check the news first. Several other banks have mentioned that this fee may be in their futures as well. And let's not forget, changing banks is a GIANT PAIN IN THE ASS. I would say it's worth the $5 a month to not have to deal with the hassles involved in a bank change. Imagine if you went to all that trouble to avoid the $5 fee, and then your new bank started charging? Then you'd REALLY have something to yell about.

And last but not least, there's Facebook. People just love to bitch and moan about Facebook making tweaks and changes to their site that require users to spend all of 3-7 minutes learning something new in order to use the site, or even MORE dreadful, read the privacy settings and think for a minute about what they're posting. To all of the people of the world who are whining about Facebook, a reminder: Facebook is free. You don't have to use it. You can feel free to scoot on over to Google+ where things are simpler. Of course, you'll be very bored if you do.

If you don't like your bank, change it. If you don't want to order DVDs from Netflix, don't. And if you don't like Facebook's game-changing, innovative website, then by all means, LEAVE. But I am so tired of consumers going on and on and on about how this or that company has done them some sort of personal harm by changing their policies. This is America. These are FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS, and you have the power to fix them. You can CHOOSE your service provider. And, happily, if you can't seem to find a way to stop whining about how some company's updated business model ruined your life, I have the power to un-follow you. 

The war continues.

I've got a lot of thoughts on this, the morning after Barack Obama's big announcement that the U.S. military has found and killed Osama Bin Laden. I'm having a lot of trouble organizing them and processing them, but I have them.

When 9/11 happened, it was a huge blow to the American psyche. Never had we experienced such a devastating act of random terrorism on our soil. We were angry and confused and saddened, and looking for someone to blame. Fortunately, Al Qaeda had a mastermind, Osama Bin Laden, and he became the face of evil for most Americans. I think any American citizen who was alive and cognizant on 9/11 would agree that Osama was evil and needed to be stopped, though we may have disagreed about the best way to go about that. As such, I think every American citizen is thankful today that Osama Bin Laden is no longer in the picture, that that particular act of violence has been in some way avenged. 

But I'm conflicted, for so many reasons. Even in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, I remember watching news programs and listening to pundits and journalists and President Bush spit angrily into the cameras and swear that we would find and kill Osama Bin Laden and end this terrorism - we would fight a war against terror. And I thought, "How do you DO that? How do you fight a war against an intangible concept like terrorism?" I don't think, in the past ten years, a true and clear victory has been made in "the war against terrorism." Terror, by its very nature, is random and unpredictable. Therefore, you cannot fight it. You can avenge previous acts of terror. You can protect yourself as much as possible on your own soil. But you can't fight a war against it, because it's not a physical object you can blow up. There will always be evil people in the world who want to destroy one another, or us. To think anything else is naive, in my opinion.

So here we are in 2011 after searching for OBL for ten years - and President Obama, in the midst of a very rocky term and with the help of U.S. military and intelligence, was able to find and eliminate him. My first reaction was, "GO BARRY!" Because really, this is a good thing for him as president. All the people who've said "What has Barack Obama done in this term?" will have less ability to say that now. He stopped Osama Bin Laden. Kudos. I'd argue he's done quite a lot of other things in the past few years as well, though not as many as we may have liked - but I blame Congress and the Senate for that in many ways, and it's an entirely different post for a different rainy day. Today, no one can say Barack Obama is all talk and no action. And I'm thankful for that. And today, an evil man has been stopped. I'm thankful for that too. 

But do I think the war on terror has been won? No. No, I do not. Because just as I thought in 2001, I still don't think you can fight terror with guns. I don't think eliminating Osama Bin Laden makes us safer than we were two weeks or two months or two years ago. Right now, somewhere in the world, some other evil mastermind is hatching a plan to hurt us, along with probably hundreds of other evil masterminds hatching plots to hurt other people around the planet. I'm not trying to be depressing or cynical, it's just LIFE. Good and evil, yin and yang. It's out there. I also don't much like dwelling on that, or living my life in fear, so I don't. I haven't been afraid since 9/11 and I don't intend to start any time soon.

And the false patriotism on display last night outside the White House and today on the cover of countless newspapers and magazines? It upsets me. Though I am glad that OBL is gone, I never like to see people celebrating the death of another human being. It just feels funny. Shouldn't it be more reverent, somehow? Should we really be waving flags, singing the national anthem, setting off fireworks and partying in the streets because we killed a man? Should we be buying copies of magazines or checking out websites with photos of his corpse? Maybe we should...but something about it turns my stomach. I think back to 9/11, when we saw footage of people celebrating in the streets of Afghanistan and Iraq as our twin towers burned to the ground, and thousands of Americans were shocked and outraged that anyone could celebrate in that way. I wonder, today, how the people of Afghanistan and Iraq felt watching the coverage of us dancing in the streets last night, or at various points throughout the past ten years as we've celebrated our "victories" in Iraq and Afghanistan. It all seems so senseless, and I don't feel any safer today than I did ten years ago. It feels like nothing has changed, except I can't hang out with family at their gate before a flight anymore. I wish we could have brought Osama to justice through a fair trial, rather than just by killing him.

So I'm conflicted today. I am proud of our president, and I'm happy the world is rid of an evil man. I'm thankful for our military and all the men and women who fight every day to keep our country safe. But I'm not happy to see my fellow Americans celebrate in the way they're celebrating, or hear commentary about how we've emerged victorious in our war against terror or the Taliban. I'm interested in how this will play out politically, and what it means for our country going forward in our dealings with the Taliban and other terror organizations and in Pakistan. There's so much mess still to clean up, so much work to be done...I just don't know how much celebration I can muster.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this subject. 

Dirty girl?

Alright, friends. Here's a discussion I've been longing to have with the internet community for ages and just haven't gotten around to writing about: cleanliness, and specifically, public restroom practices.

Today I went in the restroom behind one other girl about my age. I needed to blow my nose, so while I was taking care of that, I watched as this girl stuck her head in all three stalls and rejected each of them one by one. "Dirty?" I asked her. "One has no TP, the other two are dirty. I'm going downstairs," she said.

Maybe I should preface the rest of this tale with a little background on me and my views about cleanliness. So here's the deal. I'm not a super-clean person. I almost hesitate to type that because I have a feeling that's going to make me sound like a dirty person, which I don't think is accurate. But if I'm being honest, I can't call myself super-clean. I feel like I deserve props at the onset for the having the guts to be honest about this.

I shower every day. Although I wash my hair daily, I don't always scrub my body with soap unless I've been doing something to become filthy, like I've had an especially nasty workout or I've gotten literally soiled in some way (fell in the mud, walked around in flip flops all day, etc). Using soap every day dries my skin and makes me cranky. So I use a washcloth and scalding hot water on most days. I brush my teeth in the shower, a holdover from my college days. It's handy! A second toothbrushing will occur before bed. Usually, I use the same towel for several days before grabbing a new one - I hang the towels up after each shower, because I am neat and this way they dry out quickly.  I work out every day, but rarely do I shower again post-workout, though I do spot-freshen and change clothes. I've been known to wear the same underwear two days in a row. (TMI? Is there such a thing with me, really?) I don't shave every day. I don't get waxed anywhere but my face. I don't wash my hands all the time. I'd say in a given day I wash my hands a couple of times. I wash before I cook food. I use deodorant and other sanitary products on a daily basis. I do keep a bottle of hand sanitizer on my desk.

Here's how I use a public restroom 9 times out of 10, the only exception being a truly filthy restroom. And I suspect my definition varies from some people's.

Step 1: Assessment
I approach the bathroom door and open it with my hands - none of that crazy elbow-Olympics for me. I open the stall door and assess for general cleanliness, number of free stalls, etc. 

Step 2a: Stall Prep (if needed)
If there is any leftover paper on the seat, I do not leave. I tear off a piece of TP and use that to push the paper into the bowl, flush, and then I will use the toilet. If liquid is on the seat, I attempt to determine if it's just water that splashed out from the bowl during the previous flush (because there's no reason to bail if that's the case), or if it's tinkle sprinkle. If it's the former, I will probably again grab some TP, wipe it, flush the TP and use the john. If it's sprinkle, I may walk away and wait for another stall, or I might still wipe it off and use. I figure the TP is protecting my hands from whatever, and that's fine. If there is pee in the toilet, I flush it and then use it. Anything else in there, and I'm going to walk away, because that's gross. That's my threshold, I suppose.

Step 2b: Using the Stall
Assuming all is clean and ready for usage, here's my approach. I never use seat covers unless there is something truly wrong with the seat and it is a dire emergency and I MUST use this toilet. Which is nearly never. And I don't hover. I sit right down, seat uncovered, and go. When I'm finished, I flush the toilet, with my hands and a protective piece of TP, or my elbow, not my foot. Incidentally, why do people flush with their feet? Don't they know that whatever is on their feet is 10,000 times worse than what might have been on their hands? OMG. Rage.

Step 3: Follow-up/Departure
I exit the stall, and - confession time - sometimes I wash my hands. I will wash my hands if a) I had to clean off the toilet to use it or b) I got my hands dirty while going to the bathroom. Most of the time, though, I just run them under super-hot water. And then I exit, using my hands to open the door like a filthy heathen.

Go ahead, say it. You're appalled.

Here's the deal. I realize there are germs out there. And I could lather my hands for 4 minutes after going to the bathroom, or refuse to use a toilet that's had paper on the seat. But then, four seconds later, when I push the elevator button or grab a Coke from the vending machine, it's all going to go to shit, friends. Because that button is germy. EVERYTHING is germy. I'm not a germophobe. While I generally at least rinse my hands off before leaving the bathroom, I don't soap up for 4 minutes. What am I, three? I almost never soil my hands while going to the bathroom. In fact, I'm more likely to soil my hands if I'm worrying about hovering over the seat or some other neurotic thing.

I am 1000% sure I'm in the minority here, but really, I feel like people are overly concerned with germs, and I also feel like it messes up your immune system to panic TOO much about these things. I just don't understand why people - usually women - put so much energy into making sure to never put their hands in contact with anything in a public restroom (which, by the way, is why I have to stand in line for 20 minutes to use a public bathroom and my husband is in and out in 2), but then 3 seconds after leaving the bathroom they touch any number of things coated with germs. The office coffeepot. The elevator buttons. The handles and metal posts on trains. Their coworker's desk. People only think about germs in the bathroom, because body waste is on the brain, but seriously, your kitchen sink is equally if not more filthy.

I don't wipe down my gym equipment before I use it (although I do the post-workout courtesy wipe). I have no plans to put my baby in a stroller with a plastic shield on it unless we happen to live in a place so thick with smog I can't see my hand in front of my face. I let my dog "kiss" my cheek. Maybe I'm gross...but I don't feel like I am. I have very clear, healthy skin and hair, and I almost never get zits. And I smell good. I also almost never get any kind of sickness that's not related to my weak bronchial tubes. So clearly, I'm doing something right.

Panicking about germs doesn't guarantee you aren't still covered in them, one, and two, prevents people from building up immunities. And I'm sure most of you have read all those studies that talk about how commonly used spots in your own home are filthier than public bathrooms. And if nothing else, my lack of germophobic bathroom regimen means I am literally the fastest woman in any public restroom, EVER. And my husband appreciates this.

So here's how that bathroom thing ended this morning. The chick left, and I looked in the stalls. The first one had a little water on the seat, which I kindly wiped off for the next person, and then flushed the TP. The second stall had a seat cover from the last user still stuck to it (really, rude, ladies). I used some TP to shove it in the bowl and flushed for the next user's pleasure. And then I grabbed one of the superfluous rolls of TP from one of the first two stalls and took it with me into the paperless third stall. And when I was finished, I brazenly left after a mere rinse of the hands. So far, no cholera or tuberculosis have set in.

Update: I try to avoid making edits/changes to my posts after I write them but this one has gotten a lot of feedback. I feel compelled to assure my readers that I do not use my bare hand to flush the tainted toilet handle - I either grab some TP to protect me, or I flush with my elbow. If I do use my hands, then I WILL wash with soap after. Also, Julie made a great point that she thinks it's weird that I wash my hair every day and not my bod. I should clarify. The very act of showering means I am rinsing my body off daily. I don't like to soap up all the time because I've found that it gives me very dry skin, so I usually just use water and my hands/washcloth. And I smell purty, so it must be working! :) Oh, and yes, I do floss! :)

On Japan.

While I'm 100% sure there's nothing I can say here that will be more interesting or useful than anything the other 9 bazillion bloggers on the interwebs have already said about this, I want to talk for a brief moment about the earthquake slash tsunami slash nuclear disaster in Japan. 

Last week, last Thursday night, to be exact, Jay and I happened to put on the news for a bit around 10:30 p.m. (not a normal occurance in our abode, as we get most of our news online or from Comedy Central) and were shocked and horrified to learn about the then-labeled 8.9, now confirmed as a magnitude 9 Tōhoku earthquake in the waters off the shore of Japan. We became still more horrified as we watched early footage of the tsunami and the flooding. For the past week, my friends and I have watched in shock and disbelief as heart-wrenching videos have spilled all over the internet, depicting the devastating flooding and horrible destruction left behind from the tsunami. I don't even know what to say about the terrifying state of affairs surrounding the six nuclear power stations that are compromised and leaking radiation into the air.

The whole thing is horrific. It makes me think back to 2005 when, one year after I moved to North Carolina, Louisiana was ravaged by Hurricane Katrina. I remember how devastating it was, how terrible, how heartbreaking. It's unbelievable when you stop and think for just a minute how much worse this situation in Japan is. According to Wikipedia, at least 1,836 people died in Hurricane Katrina and in the subsequent floods, but there was another U.S. hurricane, the Okeechobee in the Bahamas, Puerto Rico and Florida in September 1928, that did even more damage.

Wikipedia also reports that the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami have collectively claimed 5,692 lives and left 2,409 injured and 9,522 missing across seventeen prefectures. The earthquake has been named one of the five most powerful in the world since modern record-keeping began in 1900.

I think everyone I know has been following this story pretty closely as it has unravelled, despite the fact that Japan seems pretty far away to most people in the United States. One thing I've noticed, though, is that if you live on the west coast, it doesn't seem quite so far away - for several reasons. One, we share an ocean, despite its vastness, so Japan feels like a neighbor now in a way it didn't before. Two, LOTS of people who live in the Seattle area are Japanese or have friends or family members in Japan. In my humble circle, I knew about 8 people this week who were waiting anxiously to hear if their loved ones in Japan were okay. One of those people was my boss, whose significant other was stuck in Tokyo for most of this time. Lastly, I live in a highly geologically sensitive area - I don't think I have to tell you how perfectly poised Seattle, Washington is for earthquakes and volcanic eruptions - so it doesn't seem so impossible that something like this could happen a little closer to home. Or AT home.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not suddenly afraid to live in Seattle because of the situation in Japan. But it's a lot harder to focus on other things while this is going on than maybe it might have been if I still lived in North Carolina. 

Like everyone else in the world, my heart goes out to the people of Japan, and I'll be watching with hope that people are found, homes are rebuilt and this nuclear situation is resolved quickly.

If you haven't seen this video yet, please take a few minutes to watch. It's pretty scary stuff, but also, pretty amazing. The power of our planet never ceases to terrify and astound me.

On a superfluous and deeply selfish note (cue the first-world problems), may I just say that with my last two moves, to North Carolina and to Washington, I've said, "Hey! Now I live close enough to visit New Orleans!" and "Hey! Now it'll be cheaper to finally fly to Tokyo!" And both times, natural disasters struck. I've been all over the country, but not to New Orleans, and I'm guessing Japan's not happening anytime soon, either. Maybe this is yet another sign I need to quit moving!

The year in film.

Many of you know that for years now, I've been something of a film freak. I'm a huge snob when it comes to the movies. If it ain't real, reaaaal good (and we're talking critically acclaimed, more often than not), I'm not going to see it in the theater. None of this 3-star nonsense for me, land's sakes, no! I'm a review-reader and critic myself, a snob of the highest order. And I have to say, as a huge snob, this was a tremendously good year in film. For the first time since probably 2003, I saw almost every single movie up for nominations, including all 10 of the best picture Oscar nominees. This wasn't my intent, but they were just all so good, I had to finish what I'd started. Hardest one to watch? 127 Hours. Holy, moly - I had to force myself to go, but I'm really glad I did.

So now that all the awards have been awarded and we're well into another year in film (the dry, painful part of the year in film), I'm here to give you what you've all been waiting for - my top ten list, in order. This was NOT easy to figure out this time around. When I say best, I mean best all-around, not best performance by a single person, or best directing. Best movie, plain and simple. Here we go.

10. The Fighter (Mark Wahlberg, Amy Adams, Christian Bale)

At first glance, this movie seems kind of simple, quiet, affable - the story of two brothers who are fighters and how the drug-addled former star helps his little brother take the title. It's easy to dismiss Mark Wahlberg's performance as a little too cool and calm, especially next to the tour de force that is Christian Bale in this movie. Believe the hype - this is the best performance you have ever seen Christian Bale give. It's total Methody madness, but it's awesome. As Dicky Eklund, he's heart-wrenching and funny and tragic all at once. You miss him when he's not on screen, you wonder at every turn what he's gonna do next. But Wahlberg's a rock, and it takes a lot to play the straight man. Obviously, Melissa Leo got the Oscar for her brassy performance as the mother and driving force behind the Eklund brothers' careers, but Amy Adams is such a surprise in this film. It's nice to see her break out of her sweet-girl standard role and get a little tough. This is a great movie in every respect.

9. The Kids are All Right (Julianne Moore, Annette Bening, Mark Ruffalo)

Yep, it's that LESBIAN MOVIE! But you know what's so great about this movie is that it addresses what it's like to be a lesbian couple raising kids at the very same time as it transcends lesbian vs. straight - it's just a movie about a family, trying to keep it together when the sperm donor suddenly re-enters the picture. Both Annette Bening and Julianne Moore give the best performances of their careers in this movie, and I do think Annette got robbed at the Oscars, though Julianne's scenes were equally amazing. Don't overlook Mark Ruffalo, though, who also shines as the guy who just found out he's a dad and doesn't quite know what family means. This is my favorite kind of movie - it's sad, it's funny, it's real.

8. Blue Valentine (Michelle Williams, Ryan Gosling)

There's no getting around it - this movie is sad. Very, very sad. It's the story of a couple who meet, fall in love and fall apart, and you see it all in painful detail. It's shot out of sequence, so the falling-in-love scenes are interspersed with the about-to-kill-each-other scenes, which makes it even more brutal to watch. The basic premise is that after a few years of a tough marriage, Michelle and Ryan shack up in a cheesy motel in an attempt to rekindle their romance that is at first strained and then utterly crushing. Michelle Williams received a Best Actress Oscar nomination, but Ryan Gosling was snubbed - horribly so, IMO, and deserved Jeff Bridges' nomination. This is a painful ride, but it's worth it for the honesty and bravery you'll witness.

7. Winter's Bone (Jennifer Lawrence, John Hawkes)

Y'all, watch out for Jennifer Lawrence. This is one of the most incredible breakout performances I have EVER seen. Who the hell is this chick? I have no idea, but she was intense. If she'd taken home the statue last weekend, I would have had absolutely ZERO complaints, and that's usually not the case for me with young actors. This movie has unfortunately not been seen by many people. It's tough subject matter (I promise, not all my picks are sad!) but I highly recommend it. Story revolves around a young girl who is forced to care for her two small siblings - mom's not well, dad's off in the Ozarks cooking crystal meth. Circumstances bring her to the point where she's in danger of losing her home, and she sets off to find her dad, with no help from his family and friends. It's a brutal, stark depiction of a corner of America we don't see very often - those rural white folk who can barely read and have no real futures to speak of. Super pumped that the Academy recognized the supporting performance of John Hawkes (Deadwood, The Perfect Storm), a fine actor who has gone overlooked for ages. Check it out.

6. Inception (Leonardo DiCaprio, Ellen Page)

We are now officially at the point where Christopher Nolan is being totally and sorely overlooked as a director. His not getting a directing nomination at the Oscars was a real shame, because over and over again the man makes blockbusters for the thinking moviegoer, which are a real rarity. Seriously, I only saw two movies all summer long - Inception and Toy Story 3 - because most of the summer fare is so utterly stupid I can't be bothered. I like a good explosion as much as the next person, but I wouldn't mind being challenged at least a LITTLE bit along the way. Enter Inception - a mind-bender you have to see to believe. Awesome, awesome flick.

5. The Town (Ben Affleck, Jeremy Renner, Jon Hamm)

I have been telling absolutely everyone that this is one of the most underrated movies of the year. This movie should absolutely have been in the Oscars' top ten over True Grit (we'll get to that later on). Outstanding, awesome movie directed by Ben Affleck - ladies and gentlemen, Ben Affleck is back in full force. If you haven't seen his previous directorial effort, Gone Baby Gone, do - it's brutal and awesome. This movie is even better. Affleck plays a Boston bank robber who tries to break out of the scene after falling in love with a woman who was a victim in his last heist. Renner's his best friend, Don Draper - er, Jon Hamm - is the cop trying to catch them. This is a fast-paced action movie with a heart - in other words, the same rare breed as my #5 pick. I've rated this film very high because, like Inception, it's the kind of movie you're going to want to watch over and over. Also, I love to say this is an equal opportunity his-and-hers flick. Watch it with your sweetie!

4. 127 Hours (James Franco)

If there's one movie this year that stuck with me for days and made me think, it was this one. Damn you, Danny Boyle, for making such tough movies - you just can't look away from his films, no matter how painful they are. Everyone knows the true story - Aron Ralston went hiking in Utah, told no one where he was going, and then got stuck in a crevasse with his arm pinned to the canyon wall by a giant boulder. After five days and at the brink of starvation, Ralston cut his arm off in order to escape. This movie was TOUGH to watch - terrifying, brutal - but also really beautiful and uplifting in the end. I read a review that said "by the time you get to the point where he cuts off his arm, you'll be begging him to do it." This is so true. You really just want to see him walk out. James Franco IS this film. His performance is amazing, in a word - it's reminiscent of the way Tom Hanks carried Castaway, only this movie is a zillion times better than that one was. As much as I love Colin Firth (we'll get to him soon, too), if I were in the Academy, my best actor vote would have gone to Franco. Also - Danny Boyle uses some very nifty tricks to get you in Ralston's headspace and create a full movie experience that's broader than just a guy stuck in a hole in the ground. SEE IT. It's tough but you'll be glad you did.

3. Toy Story 3 (Tom Hanks, Tim Allen & co)

DAMN YOU, PIXAR! You've done it again! And you've gone and trumped my theory about sequels - this is the best Toy Story movie yet. The toys accidentally find themselves donated to a preschool and all hell breaks loose. Look for one very terrifying teddy bear, an awesome Michael Keaten Ken doll cameo, and a near-death experience (toys! incinerator!) that will have you on the edge of your seat with a lump the size of Dallas in your throat. Seriously, this movie was outstanding. Jay and I went to see it and I'm pretty sure even he was touched. Me? I sobbed like a baby as Pixar jerked the ever-loving shit out of my heartstrings. LOVE.

The last two picks were a REALLY tough call for me, but...

2. The King's Speech (Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush, Helena Bonham-Carter)

I knew I would love this movie as soon as I read about it, and I did. But I loved it even more than I thought I would. When you have three actors this good, and a script that's so sublime, there's really no way you can go wrong. But this is an out-of-the-ballpark kind of movie. All three of these actors are SO good, we're talking career-best for both the men. The story is about a king who stutters and learns to speak in public and therefore becomes a real leader - sounds simple, but Firth brings so much pain, frustration, fear and hope to the role, you just really can't help but smile and laugh when he finally gets it. Rush is amazing, possibly his best performance to date, and for me, the heart of the film. 

1. The Social Network (Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, Justin Timberlake)

Unlike The King's Speech, I didn't expect to love this movie. In fact, I rolled my eyes and thought, "Great. A movie about Facebook. How trendy." But the problem is, it's the best movie of the year. This is a pretty tough call, because The King's Speech is almost equally awesome. The two movies kind of have a lot in common, though. They're both thinking movies that rely on well-written scripts and perfectly executed performances as well as subtle directorial decisions - in a word, they're low on spectacle and heavy on dialogue. I could go on and on about The Social Network and how amazing all the actors were (they were) and how Aaron Sorkin's script is ridiculously great (it is) and how David Fincher got robbed at the Oscars for directing (he did)...but here's the bottom line. There were two unspeakably great movies this year, and I'm giving this one the edge because for once, for ONCE, the edgy and trendy movie is AS GOOD AS THE HYPE. You have two equally fabulous films, and one is your typical Oscar fare - pearls, furs, British accents, period garb - it's the safe choice. The other is about a bunch of Harvard nerds who make a social networking site that changes human communications forever. I'm not saying that The King's Speech wasn't good enough to win Best Picture...but wouldn't it have been cool if the Academy hadn't made the safe choice?

The Social Network - as good as the hype. And my #1.

Honorable Mentions:

Black Swan - creepy, moody and a much better movie than the previous year's The Wrestler. 

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1 - solid adaptation of the book, sets the tone for the dismal and dark final chapter, best acting yet from the kids.

Let Me In - a remake, but absolutely brilliant. If you like scary movies, this is a must-see. Child vampires are scary.

Most overrated film of the year: True Grit. Seriously, if it weren't the Coens, then no one would have cared.

Movies I haven't seen but plan to:

Another Year
Rabbit Hole
Animal Kingdom
Tangled
Biutiful
Ghost Writer (I have heard this is incredible)
The Illusionist
Waiting for Superman
Barney's Version 

So - what were your top picks? :)