>>>>>>>>>>"Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter" is based on a book of the same name. Haven't had a chance to read it yet, but my husband enjoyed the book.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"Cowboys and Aliens" was actually a fun movie, assuming you went into it with no preconceptions.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>"Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter"? Maybe I should watch it first before commenting but this seems like a new low from Hollywood.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>When you say "new low", you ignore or dismiss the immense corpus of truly awful work Hollywood has already produced.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Mashups are a definite sign of loss of creativity, but not the worst. Pride & Prejudice & Zombies? Cowboys & Aliens, anyone? :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>There's a whole genre of this stuff. I've read "Queen Victoria, Demon Slayer" Some of it is kind of clever.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>My TBR stack is completely out of control. There are literally dozens of unread books that I bought fully intending to read, and still do. At least maybe I am confronting the problem. My purchase of more books has slowed almost to a trickle. Yesterday I got an email from Amazon recommending a new biography of Bruce Springsteen, which actually sounds pretty good, and resisted temptation. No no no....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Since I know you share my love of language, do you get as bemused as me at the serial misuse of the word "literally"? "He literally went through the roof." No, he did not literally go through the roof.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I do share your love of language, though I think I you may be more bemused than I about about the use of the objective case when the implication is "more bemused than I am" ( sorry, couldn't resist, I know we've had that conversation before with Tamar )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I find my TBR stack doesn't bother me as much if it is on my Kindle rather than my nightstand where there was some danger of it falling and killing me in my sleep.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>>OK, you got me. I do have grammatical blind spots. For instance, I couldn't define objective case to save my life, not without looking it up. It's misused words or phrases that get me. "I could care less" is another one. Not trying to defend my error. Same church, different pew. So I will take your gentle admonition, ahem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Do you have any feel for the reaction in Cleveland to LeBron and the Heat winning the championship? Any softening at all?
>>>>>
>>>>>Sports writers pretty much encouraging people to get over it. Saying stuff like this takes a burden off everyone. Personally, I am dazzled when anyone is that good at anything. Heard on the news that he is now among about 6 people in all NBA history to score over 700 in a playoff series. ( and the other names are all folks even know-nothings like me know of :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>Basketball is a pretty cool game but having never played at any competitive level I'm increasingly aware I don't know what is going on so while I can watch for a while and be dazzled by the athleticism I find I can't focus for a whole game ( especially toward the end when there is so much strategy about fouls and timeouts etc that really slow things down but aren't very meaningful to someone as ignorant as I ) ( albeit someone who is a wizard with objective case :-)
>>>>
>>>>You are not going to give me a break about that, are you? ;-)
>>>>
>>>>Lord knows why I care what you think about soccer but if you are not doing anything early tomorrow afternoon, or have a DVR by any chance, check out the England-Italy match. You are English on one side if I am not mistaken. It won't take much of your time, two hours or so, since they play continuously unlike some other sports ;-) Watch it right from the beginning, including the teams congregating in two adjacent lines in the tunnel and coming onto the field with their little sidekicks. The playing and singing of the national anthems. You can see the passion, especially when they are playing for their countries. (I was really hoping Greece could beat Germany yesterday, considering world affairs, but the talent differential was just too immense). (OTOH Angela Merkel showed me a different side of her, jumping up and down like a schoolgirl when Germany scored). Watch the intricate ball movement and interaction between teammates. As I said to you before, it's like jazz.
>>>>
>>>>Another angle that may appeal to you is the history between the countries. It is not on the surface, which is good, but when you put the words Germany, France, England, Poland, Russia, etc. into a pot there is something going on there. These countries have been "interacting" for centuries longer than the U.S. has been around.
>>>
>>>DVR is set for ESPN at 2:45pm
>>
>>I apologize profusely for talking you into watching that match. If it's still on the DVR unwatched, scrub it. Disconnect the DVR and soak it in battery acid overnight just to be sure. What crap soccer. It was painful to witness. Not because I was cheering for England and they lost but for the feebleness of their play.
>>
>>Oh well. As the announcers (both British if you didn't watch) pointed out, it really doesn't matter which of these sides goes on to face Germany because they won't have much hope. It was amusing as their comments became increasingly acerbic. "The question is which team has deteriorated more in the past two years." LOL
>>
>>On the bright side, there are three really good, exciting teams in the semis. (Plus Italy). Germany, Spain, and Portugal have all been a blast to watch in this tournament. But I am out of the soccer recommending business for the moment ;-)
>
>
>There you go again Mike with that very USA view of football. 0 - 0 can be a good game. Pundits here seem to think it was an interesting game.
>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18355305
>
> At odds with the press here I thought England where very poor in all areas. They really need to rebuild from the bottom up but I can't see that happening. If you look at the stats in the bbc report number of passes you can see how much Italy controlled the game. I'm not a slave to possession being the be all and end all but Englands inability to retain the ball and build an attack is a real problem.

The nil-nil was not where I was coming from. To me the generally low scoring is actually a strength of soccer because when someone does score, it means something. I just thought it was badly played on both sides. There have been some really good, exciting (and low scoring!) matches in this tournament. I just didn't think this was one of them.

This isn't just me. The announcers thought the same thing. (Like all the announcers on the American telecasts, they are English). I also agree with them that Germany will make mincemeat of Italy. The intriguing semi will be Spain vs. Portugal.

"At odds with the press here" -- what are they saying? Do they think England played well?