I finally saw this movie. It was moderately enjoyable; there weren’t as many songs as I dreaded, which was a relief. Having the Muses as a gospel choir was pretty funny, and quite effective – and whether they knew it or not, following the tradition of the Greek chorus, too.

However.

Am I too much of a nit-picker? A pedant? Perhaps. I guess I understand about making Hera the mother – cheating on your wife is a bit hard to have in a Disney film, particularly if you want Zeus to come up smelling like roses – and we just won’t even mention the fact that he is Hercules with Zeus as a father, rather than Herakles… To be really nit-picky, I was a bit irked by their giving Pegasus to him (I could be wrong, always willing to be, but I hadn’t thought that was so – Pegasus was born when Perseus cut off Medusa’s head, was the child of Medusa and Poseidon, and was ridden by Belerephon… but hey). And then there was their putting the heroes out of order. I follow the school that there are essentially two ‘generations’ of Greek heroes, the wild and the polis-oriented. Herakles obviously is wild, as was Achilles and Jason, I think. Theseus is your ultimate political hero. And yet Philoctetes says he has taught all of them before Hercules… anyway. Very few are going to pick that up.

And I guess it was too much to expect that, in a Disney movie, Hercules would kill his wife. But there were no Labours!!

We went to see The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe on Boxing Day.

Sometimes, just by the way, it is very easy to forget what the title of the story actually says, because it is so recognisable.

It was a fantastic film. I believe there has been some sort of furore over its Christian content… well, duh. If you object to your children being exposed to that, then don’t let them see it. And if you didn’t know beforehand that it had Christian content… maybe you should have done your homework a little bit better.

Liam Neeson was perfect as Aslan. I have been meaning to look up what else Tilda Swinton has done – I thought she was glorious as Jadis. And Rupert Everett was the fox… I was very impressed with myself for picking it.

Apparently whoever made this one – Disney? – has the rights over the rest. I wouldn’t be surprised if they made Magician’s Nephew; despite its lack of fame, it is a fantastic story, and I think it would translate well to the screen. I think Prince Caspian, Voyage of the Dawn Treader, and The Silver Chair would all do likewise. I am not so convinced, though, about A Horse and his Boy or The Last Battle. The first is a bit too odd, and the last a bit too disturbing. Still… we will see.

I have always meant to read books by David Gemmel, but have never seemed to get around to it. I think in part his sheer volume daunted me somewhat, because I didn’t know where to start. Visiting J’s cousin, I noticed some of Gemmel’s books on the shelf, including one called Lion of Macedon. I thought it looked like an interesting way of getting into his writing.

It was a really good read. The characters were slightly larger than life, but still engaging… I do love a part of history re-told, with a supernatural element or some reworking, if it is done well, and here it was. It was entertaining to read of Philip of Macedon – I presume that at least part of what Gemmel says of his earl life is true. The supernatural/fantastic elements were not forced, which is always an achievement. I have the sequel waiting to be read, and I am looking forward to it.

I am told his other books are quite different from this – not historical, for a start. That’s ok; I think I trust him enough now that I can take the plunge.

The babies have not been seen since they took flight.

I’m sure that last time, even after they flew, theyr remained in the nest for a little while.

Perhaps I am wrong about that.

I got this book about 2 years ago from the bro in law; I have only just got around to reading it, basically because I was expecting it to be a moderately tough read. How wrong I was… Stuart McIntyre is a remarkable writer, making this a very readable read. I don’t think I ever ran into him at Melbourne Uni; I rather wish I had – he comes across as quite personable.

I would bet that some people (like those he has a bit of a go at in the book) have accused McIntyre of being partisan to the left… he certainly doesn’t pull any punches, as far as I can tell, and I think he probably does lean left. However, he acknowledges the good on both sides, and some of the things people on the left need to improve or that they have done not so well. And besides – at least according to the book – it is the right that has tried to be revisionist and take Australian history and even culture back to some idealised ’50s idea.

A recommended book for people looking to understand the controversy over the use of history in the public domain (politics, museums, the Bicentennary, schools). Also interesting for how it talks about how Howard has used history and how he has used it – or at least his understanding of it – to portray himself.

This was a magnificent movie – I saw it yesterday at Nova (oh yeh, cheapo Monday). I knew it was going to be black and white, but I didn’t really know what else to expect in terms of the film. It was almost like a doco in many ways; I loved the way they used the original footage in the film – it was incredibly well done (the Liberace interview was hilarious). They obviously studied Murrow’s originals very closely… otherwise it just wouldn’t have worked. Clooney was pretty good; David S… whatever… was marvellous as Murrow. The music was also great.

I was surprised at how short it was: maybe 90 minutes at the most. It felt longer, but in a good way. I was also surprised at just how short the period McCarthy was doing his witch-hunting actually lasted. I’m sure it felt like an eternity to the people involved, and it was a long time in politics I guess, but the interviews and investigations ‘only’ lasted about 2 years; I had always got the impression it lasted longer.

I cannot recommend this highly enough. You don’t have to be all that politically minded, either, which I think is a positive; it is fairly obvious, with the choices of speeches etc, just what was going on. Very clever, very good.

I just saw a baby bird take flight!

I presume it was her first flight because she was pretty unco, and a bit surprised-looking.

*Warning: anthropomorphism alert*

I went out this morning, and there was one of the babies standing on the edge of the nest. I thought I’d watch for a while… I was just about to come inside when she launched herself out. She tangled in the climbing rose for a little while, then pretty much fell onto the jade plant underneath. She sat there for a little while, then jumped down and ran around in the plants for a couple of minutes. Then she got adventurous and walked out the gate. By this time the mother bird was back, sitting in a tree (having fed the other baby), squawking a bit. The baby went out the gate and into next door’s place, and now I don’t know where it is. I do hope it makes it back to the nest…

The other baby had taken up position on the edge of the nest, but after a short time I decided it was time for breakfast so I left him to it.

Well, I guess there’s usually going to a dud in any bunch of cheapo books. I bought a pile of $1 scifi from a second hand bookshop a while ago, and Icerigger, by Alan Dean Foster, was one of them. I don’t think I’ll bother with any more by him.

The ideas themselves were really quite interesting, and some of his characters had a great deal of potential. However, he was trying to do too much. He tried to have some love interest thing going… and he would seem to forget about the female characters for pages on end, and there would be no explanation. This also happened with a couple of other characters. A few of the things that happen to the characters almost seemed a way of padding the book out to its just-over-300 pages, which I guess makes it look a bit more respectable. But for me, this was just a very disappointing book; did not deliver on all it could have.

It worries me that I know the words to “This is it”, covered by Dannii Minogue, and currently on Video Hits (and, let me hasten to add, I am only watching it because it is a covers edition). When, exactly, were painter’s overalls with no shirt underneath, but with a scarf on the head – for a dude – ever in?

And I had no idea No Doubt’s “It’s my Life” was a remake. There you go.

This edition is called “Covers and Remakes”, and I was pondering whether this was a tautology or not. My sister, though, came through with her differentiation: a cover (like, say The Wrights’ Evie) is basically the same version of the song. A remake is where they make substantial changes (like, say Scissor Sisters’ Comfortably Numb). I can live with that.

It always seems like a good idea to stay up late and finish a good book. (Although last night, there was a little voice suggesting that I might regret it in the morning… this either means I am getting old, or just conchy).

Anyway, I read all of The Rival Queens, by Fidelis Morgan, last night. It’s the second of the stories about Anastasia, Lady Ashby de la Zouche, Countess of… Baroness of…. It’s a great time to be writing about, because she gets to say nasty things about Pepys, and have him do silly things (based pretty closely on the sort of man he actually was, I think); it’s a time of rising morality about the theatre, and since this one is centred on the theatre, she has Cibber rewriting Shakespeare to make him better and the Countess herself calling him “an Elizabethan hack”. It’s also a time when medicine and technology are getting more recognisably modern, which I think helps to make it easier for a modern audience… although at the same time, it is still a superstitious (to modern eyes) time, which serves to shock the reader into realising just how foreign this time actually is (the ideas of Passions and Humours, for example).

It is a good story. The Countess and Alpiew are gloriously well described, and entertaining as ever – although I really do wonder when we will finally get Alpiew’s background completely described… possibly never I suspect. The twists and turns are subtle – in that they are acceptable, given the rest of the story, and not just an author’s out. I think Morgan must have done a lot of research on the geography of London at the time (late 17th? ), or else she is brazening out and, since I don’t know anything about, I’m just willing to go along with it. Which is fine. The story is great – which should be obvious from my 2am-er to finish it.