Improvables: Seventeenth Annual Halloween Show

After trick-or-treating concluded on Halloween night, I took my TuPac-o costume over to Backstage Performing Arts for that evening's annual Improvables Halloween show. Because of course I was gonna be there after missing last year's performance.

Yes, I'm (or I was for one night) the whitest white guy rapper you know—even more so than the guys who recorded "Mormon Rap." Which is something I happily embraced on stage. I had a few chances to improvise rap songs, so in true white bread fashion, I included lyrics about growing up in the 'hood (Mr. Rogers's, that is), shooting people ... with Nerf guns, and being good, responsible citizens by calling your Congressman to voice your opinion on important social issues.

Anyhow, the rest of the show was a blast. Poor, exasperated Parker struggled in vain to describe the murder weapon in "Mumbling Movie Murder Mystery," which was something from the movie Hocus Pocus ... a movie I haven't seen in far too long.

In other words, I didn't guess that part correctly. But I did get the other two things correct.

We also played "Campfire Tale," "Nightmare," "Tombstone," and other Halloween favorites.

The cast was rounded out by new Improvable Chris as a UTA bus driver (which also happens to be his day job), Claire as a Middle Ages peasant who definitely did not have the plague, Ian as a character from the TV show "Peaky Blinders," Keenan as Dad Peter Parker from Across the Spider-Verse, and Parker as Noir Spider-Man from the same film.

Liz M., as Dipper from "Gravity Falls," was MC, while Kyra, who ran tech, portrayed ... someone whose name/description now eldue me. Incidentally, Kyra added to the decor by carving this phenomenal jack-o'-lantern featuring the troupe logo:

And so ended another unforgettable Improvables Halloween show. If you weren't there, then you were likely doing something else.

Return of "Return of the Jedi"

Nearly 40 years ago, early in the morning of May 25, 1983, my dad got then-seven-year-old me and my nine-year-old older brother out of school for the day—that act alone making him a hero to me forever—to line up on the streets of downtown Salt Lake City, at a theater that is no longer there, to be part of the first audience to see Return of the Jedi in Utah. And we made it in! (Back in my day, we didn't have the Internet and couldn't just buy the tickets online in advance.)

I remember being fascinated by every detail of that film: terrified by the creatures in Jabba's palace, almost covering my seven-year-old eyes at Princess Leia in her cast-iron bikini, my mind being blown by the Emperor's cruelty and by Luke's and Vader's final duel and Vader's redemption, and practically dancing in the aisles along with Han Solo and the Ewoks during the final celebration.

The next day at school, my classmates became somewhat jealous when they found out where I had really been.

Star Wars was a big part of my childhood and has remained a big part ever since then.

Everything old was new again this past Friday night when Return of the Jedi was re-released into theaters for a week for its 40th anniversary. (If you did the math, then yes, that means is that Paco is now old.) JB and I went to see it at the Megaplex along with my brother Ben and his two sons—ages 9 and 7. We had a blast reliving fun memories.

JB dressed up for the occasion:

The Force is strong in my family. My father has it, I have it, my brothers and sister have it, and now the next generation does, too.

Incidentally, Utah's last major flooding from winter snowpack also occurred 40 years ago this spring; we've seen an even-larger snowpack this past winter, leading to current flooding in various locations along the Wasatch Front. But that is a post for another day. (Stay safe out there, folks.)

Happy Star Wars Day, fellow nerds and nerdettes.

 

Groundhog Day 2023

For the first time in three years, our annual Groundhog Day party was held once again in person! (Thanks, COVID.) We gathered at Steve's and Summer's home in North Salt Lake for the occasion last weekend.

The year 2023 marks the 30th anniversary of one of our favorite movies. Yep, it's really been that long, and I'm officially "old" now. When the movie came out in 1993, I even reviewed it for the school newspaper. Since then, we've more or less held a Groundhog Day party every February, with few exceptions. During COVID, we've just told people to go ahead and watch it on your own at home.

Anyhow, the last time we met in person—which was three years ago—COVID wasn't even a word in our vocabularies, and nearly three-year-old Sadie (pictured here) hadn't even been born yet:

The treats last Saturday were plentiful and included goodies like Jenni's "Groundhog Dung" chocolate balls, which fortunately tasted nothing like actual dung (not that I'd know what that sounds like, just ... you know what I mean):

While the kids colored and played together, the grownups watched the movie. Well, sort of. We kind of did both things together and at the same time.

Seven-year-old Danny also proudly showed off the comic book he created and, I think he did a great job on it. I was not all that different from him at the same age, creating comic books of my own when I was a kid.

In Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, meanwhile, the real Punxsutawney Phil saw his shadow, which means six more weeks of winter. Or six more weeks until spring. I'm not sure which. Either way, we were glad to be gathered together with family and good friends for one of the year's best holidays.

Paco Reviews: "Fall"

Fall is nearly here, but before we get there, Fall is here, now playing in theaters. (See what I did there?)

The new thriller Fall—and I'm speaking in all sincerity here—may be just about the most frightening movie I've ever seen. But it's not a horror movie.

What's so scary about it? For me—keep in mind, I'm deathly afraid of heights—it's because the film spends the majority of its 107-minute running time with its two protagonists stranded at the top of a 2,000-foot-tall radio tower pole in the middle of nowhere (see the accompanying movie poster, which paints a pretty good picture of what their danger looks like). And they don't just "wait there" the whole time they are stuck.

Let me go back to the beginning. In the opening scene of the film, poor Dan, rock climbing with his wife, Becky, and Becky's best friend, Hunter, tragically slips and falls several feet to his death.

A year later, Becky is a boozy, guilt-riddled, depressed mess. She can't forgive herself for what happened. Nevertheless, Hunter swoops by to convince her that she needs to start climbing again in order to get over what happened, and what better object to climb than the aforementioned radio tower?

(I deduct points from my IMDB ratings when the main characters show incredible stupidity, so it was at this point that this movie lost a few points.)

After a grueling climb, our protagonists finally reach the top, despite numerous ominous signs (and music) that what they are doing is both incredibly dumb and reckless. But then worse comes to worst, and they have to figure out how to survive.

Admittedly, I squirmed in my seat a great deal throughout this ordeal, or I just looked at a corner of the screen rather than looking at what was being shown—all because I chose to see a $6 movie that ended up making me very, very uncomfortable. A gentleman on the same row as me had to get up and leave twice because it was so nerve wracking to watch. (As the credits rolled, I turned to him and asked, "How's your blood pressure doing? Mine went way up just now." I didn't make a new friend by doing this.)

Paco's rating: 6 out of 10

The Good: If you're a thrill seeker, or something of a masochist, I'm sure you'll love it.

The Bad: The two girls end up becoming so annoying that you might end up rooting for gravity (or nature?) to win. I wouldn't recommend this film for those who are easily spooked or unsettled, and/or those who are prone to nightmares after watching something really scary. Also, Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Negan on "The Walking Dead") is pretty much wasted in a small supporting role.

The Ugly: Rated PG-13 for foul language, some vulgarity, peril, and violence. If you're acrophobic, you'd be much happier watching something else. See Top Gun 2 again, perhaps?

Paco Reviews: "DC League of Super Pets"

In a retcon (?) of the Superman origin story, baby Kal-El is placed onto an escape pod—along with the family dog, Krypto (voice of Dwayne Johnson)—just before the planet Krypton explodes. Fortunately, the future hero Superman doesn't have to make his interstellar journey to Earth alone.

Thus begins the story in DC League of Super Pets, which for the most part is a funny, mostly family-friendly story and one of the better DC Comics adaptations of the past few years. Fast forward a few years, and Superman (voice of John Krasinski) is getting ready to pop the question to Lois Lane (voice of Olivia Wilde). Krypto feels that his bond with Kal-El may be threatened and takes measures to keep the living situation as is.

Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (voice of Marc Maron) inevitably shows up to cause problems, but his cunning plan is hijacked by a power-hungry guinea pig, Lulu (voice of Kate McKinnon, hamming it up as the villain). Orange Kryptonite inevitably not only gives Lulu and her henchmen (henchpets?) special powers but also gives new abilities to a handful of pets at the local animal shelter. Among this motley crew are black Dane dog Ace (voice of Kevin Hart), Merton the turtle (voice of Natasha Lyonne), PB the pig (voice of Vanessa Bayer), and squirrel Chip (voice of Diego Luna).

The Justice League shows up, but all, including Superman, are captured. Can this new band of assorted super animals band together to save our superheroes and Metropolis, too?

Paco's rating: 7 out of 10

The Good: It's a fun little adventure, and kids of all ages will love it. Johnson (aka The Rock) and Kevin Hart once again make a good team, and there are many great vocal performances from the cast. In particular, Keanu Reeves is hilarious as Batman.

The Bad: Not much to nitpick here. Uhh, I guess I'll go with: Your pets might have to wait until DC League of Super Pets appears on a streaming platform to watch the film with them.

The Ugly: It's rated PG for minor vulgarity, which most likely will sail over kids' heads. Merton also has a bit of a potty mouth, but her swears are actually bleeped out. Do with that what you will.

Paco Reviews: "Where the Crawdads Sing"

Did I enjoy Where the Crawdads Sing? How shall I put this ... no, I may have kinda hated it. First film I've genuinely disliked this summer. It came highly recommended because of people I know who have read the book it's based on. But for me, it didn't deliver a positive experience.

First of all, I don't recall seeing a single crawdad (I had to Google what that is), let alone one singing. Blatantly false advertising.

Secondly, Kya, the protagonist, is likeable enough, but she has the habit of making very poor decisions when it comes to dating men. Beyond that, there's a lot of boating around the swamps of North Carolina and a lot of frowning. But hey, if that's your idea of a good time, more power to you.

Kya lives out on the bayou (?) with an abusive and neglectful family. One day, Mom has had enough of it and leaves. So does older brother. Eventually, Kya's abusive dad leaves, too (her family had the smarts to leave the derpy story before I did; I stayed until the credits finished rolling). This leaves Kya all by herself while she's still just a little kid. She survives by hunting mussels and selling them at the local grocery store.

She grows up and then meets Weenie Boyfriend #1. To his credit, he teaches her how to read. They hold hands and stare at each other a lot. And WB1 rounds the bases, if you know what I mean. Then, he completely disappears from Kya's life—no letters, no Crawdad Express telegram, nothing.

Weenie Boyfriend #2 comes around next, fresh from the laboratory where he was pretty much cloned from WB1. But alas, he's the angsty, ulterior-motived bad twin. After they also round the bases, he uses Kya pretty badly, and becomes abusive.

Then one day, WB2 is found dead. Uh oh. You-know-who is accused of the crime. Then the story plays out, yada yada, the end.

Paco's rating: 3 out of 10

The Good: North Carolina seems like a pretty state. The lead actress, Daisy Edgar-Jones, does a good job with the limited material given her.

The Bad: The movie spends so much time in the swamp that you'll want a shower afterward. It goes on a bit long for my tastes; movies over two hours long generally need a light saber or dinosaur or superhman comic book person or hobbit to keep me interested.

The Ugly: Rated PG-13 for a surprising amount of sexual content in a movie that seems to be aimed at teens, and cursing. I found a pic of a crawdad; they are also ugly.

Paco Reviews: "Thor: Love and Thunder"

 Chris Hemsworth is back as Thor, and so is ... Jane Foster (Natalie Portman)?! It's Thor: Love and Thunder, the fourth stand alone film in the franchise.

The film picks up right where we last saw Thor in the MCU: going on various adventures with the Guardians of the Galaxy. He's back in shape, too. But then a distress call goes out, and it involves Gorr, the god butcher (Christian Bale)—and he's looking for Thor. To bait Thor into a confrontation, Gorr kidnaps several of the children of New Asgard.

Meanwhile, Jane has learned she's in stage 4 of a deadly cancer, and things are looking bleak. But then Thor's old hammer, Mjolnir—previously crushed to pieces by Hela in Ragnarok—calls out to her. When Jane finds it, it transforms her into Mighty Thor! She has all the powers of Thor, plus  she has a reconstructed Mjolnir, which looks like it was glued together by me when I was in the third grade. According to legend, the hammer has healing powers, and Jane is in dire need of them.

Before long, Thor and Jane join forces, and Valkyrie, now reigning as the "king" of New Asgard, and rock monster Korg come along for the journey. There is a whole planet of other "gods" where they go to enlist help, but unfortunately they find little. It leads to a confrontation with Zeus (Russell Crowe), hamming it up in a cameo role. Things escalate very quickly after that, including a rekindling of Thor's and Jane's romance.

Paco's rating: 7 out of 10

The Good: JB and I enjoyed the ride, and afterward we agreed this was our second-favorite Thor movie, after Ragnarok. That has a lot to do with director Taika Waititi, who made both films. Once again, he delivers a rollercoaster ride, and it includes a lot of humor (particularly from Thor's new pet goats) and Guns 'n' Roses songs on the soundtrack. He also once again voices Korg. Bale is great as the villain and seems to be channeling Voldemort in the process.

The Bad: The Guardians aren't in the movie long enough. Also, Jane's transformation into Mighty Thor doesn't ge explained well. Other than that, very few nits to pick here.

The Ugly: The movie is rated PG-13 for swearing, some vulgarity, violence, and Chris Hemsworth's bare bum in one scene. There is also a love story involving Korg and his gay rock monster love interest, so do with that what you will.

Paco Reviews: "Elvis"

Remember early on in the pandemic when Tom Hanks and his wife, Rita Wilson, both caught COVID-19, becoming basically the first celebrities not named Rudy Gobert with the virus? They were in Australia, where he was filming a movie at the time.

Well, fortunately, Tom and Rita both recovered, and that movie, Elvis, is now playing in theaters. Director Baz Luhrmann, whose previous films include Moulin Rouge!, the Leonardo diCaprio Great Gatsby, and William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet, never does anything that he doesn't put all the whistles and bells into—and that is certainly the case with this movie in all 159 minutes of its length.

In Elvis, we see many moments from the King of Rock 'n' Roll's life. Included are glimpses into his teen years, before he became famous; his rise to fame, both in music and movies, through the aid of his manager (and professional grifter) Col. Tom Parker (Hanks); his being drafted into the military; his marriage to Priscilla and birth of daughter Lisa Marie; his downward spiral with drug abuse; his comeback in the late '60s; how and why he carried a gun with him on stage and the destruction of several TV sets with said weapon; and many other events. A great deal of the story is told through the point-of-view of Col. Parker, who ends up becoming the antagonist of the film.

I knew nothing about Austin Butler, who plays the title role, before seeing this movie. He does a wonderful job playing Elvis. He even sings a few of the King's songs (or at least he is credited as doing so in the end credits). Hanks is almost unrecognizable in the makeup he wears as Col. Parker. He bears an eerie resemblance to Richard G. Scott while he's on screen. (I don't know how else to describe it. But that's what he looked like to me.) David Wenham (Faramir in The Lord of the Rings trilogy), Dacre Montgomery (Billy in "Stranger Things"), and Kelvin Harrison Jr. (as Elvis's friend B. B. King) are good in supporting roles.

Paco's rating: 5 out of 10

The Good: Whether or not you're an Elvis fan, you'll be a fan of Austin Butler's acting. As Elvis rises to fame, you'll be rooting for him, and there are a lot of classic Elvis tunes performed. Hanks, as always, is solid.

The Bad: It's a bit long, at nearly three hours. Your bum may start to get a bit sore at two hours in. Also, this film may be strictly for Elvis and/or Baz Luhrmann fans.

The Ugly: It's a warts-and-all approach to telling the King's story, so we see Elvis doing his at-the-time scandalous "Elvis the Pelvis" dancing, philandering and otherwise messing around behind his wife's back, as well as his spiraling into drinking, drugs, and other vices. There is some swearing and vulgarity, which earns the film its PG-13 rating.

Paco Reviews: "Minions: The Rise of Gru"

Can I just state for the record that the Minions are adorable? Well, I'm stating it. I've enjoyed them in the four previous Despical Me/Minions films in the series, and they do not disappoint in the new Minions: The Rise of Gru.

Yes, the Minions are back, with their pseudo-Italian babbling and all of their hijinks. The year is 1976, bell bottoms and disco music abound, and Gru is a 12-year-old kid who doesn't fit in with the others at school. In fact, he tells his classmates that his life's ambition is to grow up to become a supervillain. Naturally, he is laughed at and mocked.

Gru also has the Minions, and he's already wreaking havoc on local people and businesses. But a job interview to join the Vicious 6 goes badly, and when Gru steals a talisman that the V6 had previously stolen, it becomes a cross-country race for the Minions to rescue Gru and bring him home. (Yeah, I may have skipped a few things, but that's the best summary I can come up with.)

If you've enjoyed previous Minions movies, you'll enjoy this one as well.

Paco's rating: 8 out of 10

The Good: It's a relatively clean (except the occasional fart gun) family flick, and it's appropriate for kids of almost all ages. It's funny. Julie Andrews (yes, Mary Poppins herself!) is great in a brief supporting role, as are Michelle Yeoh (last time I saw her was in Shang-Chi) and Alan Arkin, who assumes a role as Gru's mentor. The V6 cast is rounded out by Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren (yes, really—the Universal Soldiers reunite), Danny Trejo, Lucy Lawless, and Taraji P. Henson.

The Bad: Not much to pick at here. Perhaps the only question for kids may be why the main characters are actually "bad guys" of sorts. Of course, we know from the later movies that Gru becomes a "good" bad guy when he grows up.

The Ugly: That Julia Roberts/George Clooney comedy shown in the previews looks painfully bad. Prove me wrong, kids.

Paco Reviews: "Top Gun: Maverick"

JB and I had tickets to see Top Gun: Maverick on Memorial Day. But then the Killer Martian Death Flu came along for us both, and we ended up spending our holiday weekend feeling awful.

But life goes on! Today, I present for you a review of Top Gun: Maverick, the long-awaited sequel to 1986's Top Gun, which we finally saw this week on $6 Tuesday. I was 10 years old when the first movie came out, and over the years, I've learned that women around me tend to salivate if you merely mention the words Top Gun and/or Tom Cruise. They looooove that movie. A lot.

Admittedly, the first movie had some cool parts. It was a bona fide slice of the '80s and of all of the burly masculinity associated with that decade, from Tom Cruise's and Val Kilmer's shirtless sand volleyball match to the derpy love song by the band Berlin (which somehow, someway actually won an Academy Award for Best Song ... I can't explain how), to Tom's soprano-ish voice warbling through "You've Lost That Loving Feeling" to Anthony Edwards actually having hair and a mustache before he went on to being a doctor on "ER" and lost all that hair in a tragic blow drying accident (I honestly don't know; I didn't watch the first couple of seasons).

Anyhow, this Top Gun sequel brings us back, 36 years after the original. Maverick is still a dangerous dude and keeps pulling his renegade tricks. When he's not soaring through the skies, he's still speeding around on the roads on his motorcycle, not wearing a helmet. He's still just a captain in the Navy because of his insubordinate attitude, but the guy can still fly planes. His girlfriend from the first movie went back to being Amish and is nowhere to be found in this one.

Maverick is now a teacher at Top Gun, instructing 12 of the country's best pilots on  preparing for a dangerous mission (you might even call it an "Impossible" Mission ... ba-dum-ching!) against a menacing foreign adversary developing long-range weapons.

With me so far? Only things (surprise!) don't go well at first. There are attitude and teamwork problems to be solved. Will they unite under Maverick's daring leadership to do what needs to be done?

It's worth the price of admission to find out. I give mad respect to Tom Cruise for performing many of his own stunts, which he does throughout this movie, too. Visually, it's wonderful to watch on the big screen. And in addition, I found the film to be refreshingly patriotic and uplifting—sadly, a rarity these days. There are no political points to be scored nor agendas; the plot revolves around Americans working together to do one of the things America does best, which is to make the world safe(r) for democracy.

Paco's rating: 6 out of 10 (I gave the original 4 out of 10.)

The Good: Tom Cruise has found Dick Clark's Fountain of Youth, because he basically never ages. Val Kilmer, who is currently going through some severe health challenges in real life, is great in a brief scene as the only other cast member to return for the sequel. Jennifer Connelly is also very good in a supporting appearance.

The Bad: Not too much, really. I can't think of any major flaws at the moment.

The Ugly: some profanity, including 1 F-bomb, and a sex scene. It's rated PG-13 for those reasons and for scenes of action/peril. Yes, I deduct points for tomfoolery between unmarried people; Paco's rating scale is one of both family-friendly content and quality. (Without the aforementioned scene, it would be an 8 or 9.)

Paco Reviews: "Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness"

This week's $6 film is Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness. Before you go, be sure to watch "WandaVision" on Disney+, if you have a subscription. Or if you borrow a password, I won't judge. It would also be helpful to have seen Spider-Man: No Way Home, the "What If ..." series, and also possibly the animated, non-MCU film Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse if you really want to study up before hand.

What's happening in this one: That pesky multiverse, which Doctor Strange opened like a Panodra's box in his last big screen appearance in Spider-Man: No Way Home, is back! And it's madder than ever. Really mad. It sends out a giant eyeball to terrorize New York City, which the Doctor and Wong discover is actually hunting gifted teenager America Chavez for her special abilities—which mainly involve her being able to travel through the multiverse. The bad guy wants this ability for nefarious purposes.

Troubled by very vivid dreams, the good Doctor also learns that these visions are actually real, and they're glimpses into what transpires on other worlds with the other Doctor Stranges of the multiverse. He soon learns that Wanda/the Scarlet Witch is having the same kinds of dreams and is being tortured with the appearance of her  two children, which may or may not be real in this or another world. She also gets involved. Rachel McAdams reprises her role as Christine, and she appears in more than one universe.

Pretty soon, the Pandora's box bursts wide open, and all heck breaks loose. But it's a fun ride. Like other MCU movies, there are also some unexpected and rewarding cameo appearances.

Paco's rating: 8 out of 10

The Good: It's another great entry in the MCU series. Fans will be rewarded with a great story and fantastic special effects. Like the better ones in the series, it leaves you wanting more and looking forward to what will happen in the next installment(s). A couple of the cameos made me smile, and a couple of new characters are introduced, to boot. It's worth seeing on the big screen.

The Bad: This is possibly the first MCU film categorized at least partly as a horror film, so it may not be appropriate for young kids.

The Ugly: It's one of the more violent MCU films that I can recall. There is also some cursing.

Paco Reviews: "The Bad Guys"

Due to popular demand—view count on my last movie review doubled from the previous one, jumping from two to four—I am proceeding with more movie reviews! No need to thank me.

This week's $5 movie was The Bad Guys. It's a kids' movie, and apparently it's based on a book I've not read, so I'm just going with the plot and the film here.

The Bad Guys are anthropomorphic people in a world consisting mostly of humans (with a few other exceptions). They may be Bad Guys, indeed; they rob banks and make heists and then speed away from police in one car chase after another. But these Bad Guys also super cool—like George Clooney and friends in Ocean's Eleven cool. There's Wolf, Snake, Tarantula, Shark, and Piranha, which is a pretty good sampling of animals I'd want to avoid in real life.

When the Bad Guys are apprehended following a heist gone wrong, though, guinea pig Professor Marmalade has an idea: Give the Bad Guys a legitimate chance to reform and prove what Good Guys they can be, and then they can avoid prison and go on living their lives. You know, something that would happen in real life.

What follows is a series of comic adventures, with a lot of action and more than one character turning out to be someone very different from his/her façade.

Paco's rating: 6 out of 10

Is it worth seeing in the theater? If you've got kids who've read the books, it probably would be more appealing for them than it was for me. It's a good movie, not a great one.

The Good: Kids, I think, will like it more than I did, as I said. The voice cast is certainly appealing, featuring such talents as Sam Rockwell, Awkwafina, Craig Robinson (from "The Office"), Richard Ayoade (from "The I.T. Crowd"), and Anthony Ramos. In spite of the thievery and heisting throughout, a couple of morals of this story include (1) being good is better than being bad, and (2) part of being good is owning up to your mistakes and making amends for them.

The Bad: One of my pet peeve movie stereotypes—in which the local police are incompetent morons—comes up more than once. Sometimes, it's also a little "too" cute for its own good.

The Ugly: Rated PG for mild thematic elements, nothing really that offensive for a family film that I can recall.

Paco Reviews: "The Lost City"

Of all the movies I've seen this year, The Lost City is now one of them.

If you've ever talked with me about my taste in movies and/or chick flicks, you may already know that I'm not a big fan of Sandra Bullock's work. Yeah, but While You Were Sleeping is like the greatest movie ever! "These mashed potatoes are SO CREAMY! ROFL!!!" you might say. Or: I wet my pants laughing every time Sandra snorts in Miss Congeniality! What about The Proposal, huh? Blah blah Hope Floats? Blah blah Practical Magic, huh?! Are you a murderer of joy, Paco?!?

To which I respond: That's great. I'm happy for you. It's just not for me. I can't explain it. Maybe it began when I went to the drive-in a number of years ago, and the second movie on the double feature was Speed 2: Cruise Control, one of the worst pieces of hud I've ever witnessed.

Anyhow, this week's $5.95 movie was The Lost City. I promised JB I would go into it with an open mind and would give Sandra a fair chance.

The plot: Loretta (Sandra) is a very successful (Harlequin) romance novelist. She's so good at it that if a bookshelf containing all her works were to tip over and fall on a cat, that kitty would instantly use up all nine of its lives.

Sandra's character has become a bit bored with the routine of promoting a new book and dealing with fans. She basically gets dragged onto the stage for a Q and A, yet most of the women are there to ogle her cover model associate Dash, played by Channing Tatum; all of the questions are directed at him.

Shortly after this, Loretta is kidnapped by Abigail Fairfx (Daniel Radcliffe), who's the bad guy in this probably due to the horcrux on his forehead. Because Loretta also studied linguistics in college, Abigail needs her to help translate a map and clues to finding the titular lost city and its treasures, located somewhere on a miniscule island in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. Dash pursues them to rescue her, with comic relief provided by Brad Pitt in what basically amounts to a cameo. Oscar Nuñez (from "The Office") also shows up later to provide more comic relief.

Then the hilarity ensues. I mean, hilarity probably began with the start of the movie for all I know, because my wavelength is different than that of Sandra's fans. But the hilarity is amped up to 11 once the action gets going.

It's a decent popcorn flick and might even be a date movie if that's your thing. I wouldn't say it's for kids. The scenes on the aforementioned island, from what I understand, were actually filmed in the Dominican Republic, and there are many gorgeous shots of that Caribbean isle. From my understanding, this flick is a tribute to Robert Zemeckis's Romancing the Stone.

Paco's rating: 5 out of 10

The Good: Sandra fans will be entertained, and I'm sure Channing fans will be, too. Both Pitt and Radcliffe ham it up in their respective roles and seem to be having a good time. Sandra's and Channing's 16-year age gap seems to be a sort of feminist answer to those many Hollywood movies over the years in which the male hero is decades older than his female love interest, or at least a blurb I read about the movie pointed this out. (Want to feel old? Sandra is just a couple years away from 60.)

The Bad: Sandra's purple sequin dress might cause some moviegoers to go into seizures, but I'm not a doctor. She wears it a lot. You get to see Channing's bare bum in one scene, while Sandra ogles the front side of him.

The Ugly: RatedPG-13 for swears and vulgarity, and also some spicy passages are read from Loretta's books.

Paco Reviews: "Morbius"

Every once in a while, a sibling or extended family member or co-worker or the guy taking my order at Apollo Burger will stop me and say, "Hey, Paco! Have you seen the latest movie? You go to the movies a lot; is this one worth seeing in the theater? on DVD? when it comes to Hulu? or ... never ever?"

I'm happy to oblige, because I love movies, and I have opinions about them. I love great movies, and I also like terrible movies, because they end up being unintentionally fun and offer a number of "Mystery Science Theater 3000"-worthy popcorn gallery comments. (I see the bad movies so you don't have to ... unless you want to.) The mediocre movies—those that are neither great nor terrible—don't do much for me.

Anyhow, I go to our nearby theater frequently. The seats are comfortable, the popcorn is always fresh, and the people who work there are nice, even when I spill my drink on the floors they've just swept and mopped. With my current work schedule, I actually have Tuesdays off, and all seats at the local Megaplex are just $5.95 on Tuesdays—be they luxury or 3D or even the motion sickness-inducing D-BOX ones (it was one-and-done for me with those). Depending on JB's work schedule, she'll sometimes go with me on Tuesday nights or over the weekend.

Being OCD like I am, I even keep track of the movies I've seen over the years. IMDB.com is not only a good source to look up trivia and other things about movies, but it also allows you to rate films you've seen, on a scale of 1 to 10 stars. Want to know what rating I gave Legally Blonde 2: Red, White and Blonde, which I saw in 2003 because my sister-in-law had free passes? (Answer: 2.) I have rated over 25,000 films and TV episodes; keep in mind that this is more than two decades' worth of viewing.

So anyway, this week's movie was Morbius, starring creepy dude Jared Leto as Dr. Michael Morbius. I remember Jared being the guy in Claire Danes's school that she had a mad crush on in 'My So-Called Life," which was a show I sometimes watched back in the '90s. These days ... not too sure about Jared being the hot guy. I saw him as a guest on Jimmy "Thank Goodness I Have Good Writers" Fallon's "Tonight Show" the other night when he stopped by to plug the movie, and he (Jared) kinda gave off the creepy vibe then, too. Maybe it's just me? The guy has won an Oscar, so take my opinion for whatever it may be worth.

Dr. Morbius is a gifted scientist. He even wins a Nobel Prize but, like a hipster, rejects it because hipster reasons. He also, unfortunately, has a terrible blood disorder that will severely limit his life span. His best buddy Milo, played by eleventh Doctor Who Matt Smith, also has this disease. Morbius finds something that apparently will work ... but it also turns him into a vampire Mr. Hyde, and then all heck breaks loose. Even more heck breaks loose when Milo injects himself unsupervised, and the two lifelong friends find each other on different ends of the good/bad spectrum. Morbius becomes a kind of Venom-like anti-hero and ultimately the only guy who can take down Milo.

If you're a Marvel fan, you may want to see Morbius to see where the story fits into the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), which is now like 30+ movies and 10+ TV shows big and will basically conquer the world in a few years. Well, there are a few subtle references, like a copy of The Daily Bugle newspaper, plus a cameo at the end by (SPOILER ALERT) Adrian Toomes (Michael Keaton), aka the Vulture from Spider-Man: Homecoming.

Paco's IMDB rating: 4 out of 10

The Good: Fresh popcorn is always good when watching a flick. Matt Smith dances shirtless, if this does anything for you, ladies. It only cost me $5.95.

The Bad: It's very dark, it's violent. It's not quite as dark as The Batman, but it's nowhere near a feel-good movie. Morbius isn't necessarily a guy I want to root for; I felt more empathy toward Milo.

The Ugly: Rated PG-13 for violence, language, and excessive vampirism

Improvables: Oscar Night

The annual Academy Awards were held last week, for which a lot of very well-dressed celebrities gave each other awards and then gave speeches about them.

Not to be outdone, the Improvables had our own Oscar Night on the stage at the Bountiful Davis Art Center the Friday night before. It was the first time we've held such a theme night (there are many firsts we've yet to try!), and it turned out to be a total blast.

We all dressed up to the nines for the occasion, which became a tribute to many of our favorite movies. It turns out that we clean up rather nicely.

Keenan, Ricky, and I played on the same team. Our games included "Musical Theme Song" (I was assigned a theme song for the Die Hard franchise), "Scenes Not Seen," "Dueling Plays," "Director," and other favorites. At the end of the performance, members of the audience voted on their favorite game, and we were chosen for "Mumbling Movie Murder Mystery":

I was also chosen for an individual award for "Best Moment" for an improvised Calvin Klein perfume ad in "Movie Pitch Meeting":

Ricky was voted favorite performer of the evening, while audience awards were also given out (Best Suggestion and Best Audience Member). Sure, they were recycled sports trophies purchased at the D.I., but it was still flattering to be selected.

We came, we saw, we laughed a lot. We look forward to our next Oscar Night in 2021.

Weekend at Bear Lake 2019, Part 2

Over the weekend, we ventured up to Bear Lake for the second time in five weeks for another family vacation, this time with my side of the family. Mom rented out the same spacious house we all shared together last year, and it was wonderful to be back again to create some new family memories.

The weekend included watching a lot of movies together for those gathered indoors. On Sunday, we saw Church-themed movies The Best Two Years and Once I Was a Beehive, The rest of the time, we watched a good number of Pixar/Disney movies. Some of the highlights were family favorites That Thing You Do! and The Dark Crystal, which still creeps me out, from start to finish, to this day.

As you can see, Tanner was transfixed much of the time.

The plethora of activities, beyond playing in the water and in the sand, included t-shirt tye dyeing, rock painting, making bracelets, and Nine Square, which I suppose stands to reason as an updated version of a childhood favorite of mine (Four Square) from elementary school days. This is what it looked like:

When you're spending time at Bear Lake, you have to stop at either LaBeau's and/or Zipz for delicious raspberry shakes. (It's in the contract, among the fine print.)

At our second annual family talent show, many sang or played instruments; Jackson taught us all that cashews come from a fruit; Kira demonstrated her cup-stacking skills; and Biz, Steve, and I played "Spit Take," an improv favorite (JB took a video of it; she'll have to post it somewhere, sometime).

We also posed for some family photos in our matching shirts, featuring Mom with 13 of her 14 grandkids (minus our Elder Plowman, of course, currently serving in New Hampshire):

... and Mom with her six kids:

It was another well-spent weekend at Bear Lake, and we're looking forward to continuing this new tradition and doing it again in 2020.

Rationalization and Other Made-Up Stuff

Recently, I watched an old favorite film, Back to the Future. I listened to the commentary this time through, learning in the process what is perhaps not really all-that-secret of a Hollywood secret: Filmmakers make up a lot of stuff.

One of the filmmakers said that when it comes to science fiction movie plots, there's always a bit of actual science thrown in with a lot of made-up stuff. The flux capacitor, for example, is (gasp!) made-up science.

It can go the same way with religion. Throwing in a bit of actual doctrine together with made-up stuff comes in the form of rationalization.

In one of my favorite talks of the latest general conference, Elder Neil L. Andersen spoke on this topic:

"In today's world, the question 'What is truth?' can be painfully complex to the secular mind. ...

"Caught in today's confusion, it is no wonder that so many consign themselves to the words spoken 2,500 years ago by Protagoras to the young Socrates: 'What is true for you,' he said, 'is true for you, and what is true for me, is true for me.'"

This reminds me of one of the phrase "I'm just living my truth," which you see a lot in social media and in the culture right now. The thing is, there is no such thing as "your" truth. There is the truth, which exists independent of your opinion, and then there is your opinion, and the two do not always meet.

John Adams said: "The truth is always the truth, in spite of our feelings."

Elder Andersen continues:

"In opposition to the truths of eternity, there always have been counterfeits to distract God's children from the truth. The arguments of the adversary are always the same. Listen to these, voiced 2,000 years ago:

"'[You] cannot know of things [you] do not see. ... [Whatever a person does is] no crime.'

"'[God is not blessing you, but] every [person] prosper[s] according to his [own] genius.' (Alma 30:15, 17)

"'It is not reasonable that such a being as ... Christ ... [would] be the Son of God.' (Helaman 16:18)

"'[What you believe is a foolish tradition and a] derangement of your [mind].'" (Alma 30:14, 23, 27)

I am troubled as I see a great deal of this type of rationalization among friends and acquaintances on social media. I've observed multiple friends, including returned missionaries and otherwise faithful Church members most of their lives, let doubts fester and faith decay to the point they leave the Church.

My heart hurts for them. Like Nephi, I am "grieved for the hardness of their hearts" (1 Nephi 7:8). I am saddened for the loss of covenants that would bless their lives and their families' lives in exchange for a road fueled by rationalization that leads only also to anger, bitterness, and cynicism.

In a January CES fireside address, Elder Dale G. Renlund of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles spoke on the snowballing of doubt:

"'Doubt, unless changed into inquiry from reliable, trustworthy sources, has no value or worth. The stagnant doubter, one content with himself, unwilling to make the appropriate effort, to pay the price of divine discovery, inevitably reaches unbelief and darkness. His doubts grow like poisonous mushrooms in the dim shadows of his mental and spiritual chambers. At last, blind like the mole in his burrow, he usually substitutes ridicule for reason, indolence for labor, and becomes a lazy scholar. Doubt is not wrong unless it becomes an end in and of itself. That doubt which feeds and grows upon itself, and breeds more doubt, is evil."

This is not to say that it is wrong to have questions or doubts about doctrine or events in Church history. Everyone does at some point. But if you feed the beast, as the old saying goes, it will come to you every time it's hungry.

Whenever I have a doubt or a question, I think of the many, many times I felt the Spirit burn and testify of the truth of the Restored Church, the Book of Mormon, and other important issues. That knowledge is crucial as I study out issues and work them out through study, prayer, and pondering.

In the same fireside, Sister Ruth Renlund said:

"The blogosphere cannot replace scripture study and reading the words of living prophets and apostles. Foster your faith by going to trustworthy sources to find answers to your questions."

Yes, I realize the irony of sharing that quote in a blog post.

Sister Becky Craven, second counselor in the Young Women general presidency, also spoke on rationalization at general conference:

"Because of our mortal nature, don't we sometimes rationalize our behavior, at time referring to our actions as being in the gray, or mixing good with something that's not so good? Anytime we say, 'however,' 'except,' or 'but' when it applies to following the counsel of our prophet leaders or living the gospel carefully, we are in fact saying, 'That counsel does not apply to me.' We can rationalize all we want, but the fact is, there is not a right way to do the wrong thing!"

In an April 2016 general conference talk, Elder Dallin H. Oaks said that a lot of the rationalization so prevalent in our day not only comes from those who have left but also from those still within the Church:

"The Church in its divine mission and we in our personal lives seem to face increasing opposition today. Perhaps as the Church grows in strength and we members grow in faith and obedience, Satan increases the strength of his opposition so we will continue to have 'opposition in all things.'

"Some of this opposition even comes from Church members. Some who use personal reasoning or wisdom to resist prophetic direction give themselves a label borrowed from elected bodies---'the loyal opposition.'

"[T]he Book of Mormon describes three methods the devil will use in the last days. First, he will 'rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good' (2 Nephi 28:20). Second, he will 'pacify, and lull [members] away into carnal security,' saying 'Zion prospereth, all is well' (verse 21). Third, he will tell us 'there is no hell; and ... I am no devil, for there is none' (verse 22), and therefore there is no right and wrong. Because of this opposition, we are warned not to be 'at ease in Zion!' (verse 24)."

It's a day in which the mobs "(teach) for doctrines the commandments of men" (Matthew 15:9). I'm grateful for the gospel and also for the living prophets, seers, and revelators, who help us to see "things as they really are, and ... things as they really will be" (Jacob 4:7).

Groundhog Day 2019

Groundhog Day fell on a Saturday this year, and so did our annual family Groundhog Day party. We gathered at Ben's and Adi's house to enjoy good food together with a few close friends and to watch the 1993 movie Groundhog Day, as is our tradition.

The real Punxsutawney Phil apparently did not see a shadow Saturday morning, so for whatever that's worth, there's still six more weeks of winter, or only six weeks until spring ... whichever comes first.

Weekend at Bear Lake 2018

For the second consecutive year, we went on a family vacation up to Bear Lake. Except this time, everyone (all 27 of us) from the whole Plowman clan went, and JB and I were among them for a four-day weekend of good times and good fun.

Day 1: On our way up to the lake, we stopped at Gossner's in Logan for some cheese curd and ice cream, because that is how we roll.

Following, we also stopped by the Smithfield City Cemetery, where Mom and the kids spent some quality time with Grandpa.

After that, we made our way up through Logan Canyon to the lake, where we spent our vacation at a very large house in Laketown, right on the lake, that Mom rented out to fit all of us.

Christian flexed his muscles on the beach:

. . . while Mike and Ike also enjoyed some time in the sand.

After everyone got settled in and we had some dinner, Kate and I joined a few others for a viewing of Disney's Frozen.

Day 2: Most of the gang went out on the water on a boat we rented for the day, while JB and I enjoyed the fresh air and got in a lot of reading. Like you do while on vacation.

In the afternoon, JB and I ventured out on our own to Zipz in Garden City to enjoy what else but a Dole whip and a raspberry shake, respectively.

That evening, we enjoyed a family "RiffTrax" while watching an '80s classic, The Neverending Story. To their great credit, the kids (Dallin and Jackson especially) are much better at riffing than I had initially supposed.

Day 3: Some of the boys buried Jackson in the sand, because TBH you just can't resist the urge to do that while you're around him.

Our final night at the lake included a talent show, during which those more musically inclined than myself performed a few numbers. Ben and Steve performed a couple of Bluegrass Thunder numbers, while Kylee and McKenna sang a duet together, with Kenna accompanying them on the ukelele (quite an impressive skill set I didn't know she had until then!).

Ben and Steve goaded me up into joining them for a karaoke rendition of that "Weird Al" Yankovic classic "One More Minute," with Steve playing the guitar for us:

Toward the end of the evening, we posed for this family photo, with all 27 members of the Plowman clan (including four Woods) present:

On Day 4, we were on our way home to Bountiful, wrapping up an enjoyable four-day family trip.

We look forward to hopefully doing the same thing in 2019.