I picked up The Killer Angels while visiting Gettysburg, this fall. It is a fictionalization of the Battle of Gettysburg, and a good novel to read in conjunction with that visit. It is written well, and does a lot to make the battle more than a set of dry facts and numbers.

The novel focuses pretty narrowly on what happened during the battle, specifically, and only devotes a few pages to discussions about the cause of the war. I would have liked more attention to be given to that broader context. Other than that, no complaints.

I will add that I am somewhat leery of reading fictionalizations of historical events; without expertise, you don’t know which part is fiction and which is fact. There are some negative reviews at Amazon claiming that Shaara played fast and loose with historical facts; but I don’t see any such criticisms at wiki. On the plus side, wiki claims that the novel “has also been cited by Joss Whedon as the original inspiration for his science fiction/Western hybrid series Firefly.”

Watching Gilmore Girls makes me want a do over of my childhood. Even the arguments are charming. The premise is highly unrealistic – it’s very convenient that this single mom has a set of wealthy parents that she can approach (albeit reluctantly) for favors. And I’m not really very keen on the cast of quirky supporting characters. But overall, it is enjoyable escapist fare for those of us who had a less-than-marvelous childhood and a bumpy educational experience. The scripting and delivery are both excellent! This is one of my favorite TV series.

I rented The Protocols of Zion because I like a good conspiracy theory, and I wanted to see what this one was about. I thought this would be an interesting exposition and debunking of a conspiracy theory. In that sense, it disappointed.

The movie doesn’t go into the history of the The Protocols, although the DVD extras do fill in the cracks there. This is not a documentary about that text per se; rather, it uses that text as a launching point to study the recent rise in anti-Semitism.

It’s a distressing film, even if you are already aware of the existence of such ignorant and hate-filled people as are interviewed here. Why do some people hold to such confused and unreasoning beliefs? It almost seems like a form of mental illness.

Given that the movie is so emotionally exhausting, is it worth watching? It is educational for anyone who is unaware of what is going on in the world. But if you are aware of these things, it may simply make you feel discouraged, helpless, and hopeless about human nature. In the DVD extras, in a Q&A session with the director, someone suggests that the movie lacks a suggestion about how to deal with these offensive ideologies. The questioner points to organizations like the Anti-Defamation League. Perhaps a better answer is to improve education, in the US and around the world, so that more emphasis is placed on critical thinking skills.

The DVD extras are worth going through. There’s a timeline for the “Protocols” which you can flip through, starting in 1903 and ending in 2005. This gives you some of the facts about the history of that text, which were missing in the documentary itself. There is also a good set of interviews, including one with Will Eisner, whose work I love.

I got bored. Not my kind of action movie. But then, I’m not a Bond fan.

In the Shadow of Ragged Mountain is a study of the people who lived in the area now occupied by Shenandoah National Park, during the 19th and early 20th centuries.

Apparently, around the time of the Great Depression, the people of this area were publicized by certain parties as being extremely primitive, stuck in a different age. This may have been done to promote certain agendas that were not in the best interests of the residents. One of those agendas was the development of the area as a resort, with the use of eminent domain to remove the land from their owners, for creation of the park.

The book focuses a lot on refuting excessive claims of the primitiveness of the residents. I was unaware of this history and the conflict at the time, so the arguments and counterarguments seem a bit moot. It’s interesting to read about it, though, in the context of current events.

The book would have been a little more lively if actual writings by the residents had been presented. It is not clear if no writings could be found. One might expect that illiteracy was high amongst the residents, but given that at least some of them are reported to have been readers, one might expect to find some old letters about the development of Skyland Resort and the dispossession of the various properties from the point of view of the owners. Instead, we mainly get some “recollections” of the residents, mostly after they had been removed from the area, some of them collected as late as the 1970’s.

The book suffers from being rather academic, and a bit dry. On the plus side, it covers some interesting history and characters, and is filled with illustrative photos.

I read Into the Wild a while ago, in the nineties. It’s well worth reading the book, which goes into much more depth than the movie. The movie is well done, though, mostly sticking to the book, so far as I can remember.

I’m giving The Contract three stars entirely because I enjoy so much watching John Cusack and Morgan Freeman perform.

These two actors are typecast in my head. John Cusack is the hapless sweet romantic guy who wins over the girl. Morgan Freeman is the fatherly godlike figure who guides people to do the right thing. It’s not their fault; I want to see them in these roles because they do it so well.

So it takes a lot of work to shoehorn them out of these stereotypes… not enough work, in this movie. It’s impossible to believe that Cusack can put karate moves on anyone, even when you see it happening. And Freeman is just so nice and avuncular, I found it impossible to believe that he really meant to viciously throw that guy under a car – it was all a terrible misunderstanding.

If you enjoy seeing these two actors, no matter what, then I guess The Contract is worth the time. But this movie does have a lot of problems aside from ill-fitting roles – too many moments when it’s impossible to suspend disbelief. I don’t even consider this a good thriller/action movie. It is just done poorly.

Hilarious! My favorite quote so far is from Toby Flenderson on disc 2: “Costa Rica will still be there… when I’m 65.”

Sometimes, The Age of Turbulence wanders into the territory of pontification. Mostly, though, I found that Greenspan’s conservative and libertarian views do not cloud this fascinating presentation of his substantial knowledge of economics and unique perspective on the last few decades of history.

This book would make excellent fodder for a book discussion club (except that it must take at least a year to cover!). I plan on listening to it at least one more time, and may very well buy the book for more detailed examination.

Caveat: I’ve listened to the audiobook on my daily commute to work, and often found it a little hard to focus on the material. It requires some concentration to get the maximum understanding of the material.

I enjoyed Ghost Rider. To be clear, I was expecting to be disappointed so there wasn’t anywhere to go but up.

The movie has just enough tongue-in-cheekiness to make you crack up at the right points. If it took itself too seriously, I probably would have hated it. But Cage’s deadpan delivery of little wise cracks was great. How about the scene in the restaurant where Eva Mendes pulls a magic 8-ball out of her purse for a consultation! How about the scene where the Caretaker asks Johnny to sterilize the needle? Priceless! As a bonus, there’s a bit part played by Sam Elliott, who is one of the world’s coolest actors, and a very sexy man.

If you’re looking for dead serious vengeance go elsewhere. If you like a little whimsy with your bloodlust, Ghost Rider may work for you.