From the Wikipedia article on bonded leather:
“Bonded leather is not as durable as other leathers, and is recommended for use only if the product will be used infrequently. An example for the use of this type of bonded leather is in Bible covers.”
I really can’t say enough good things about this movie. I love the story, direction, music, animation, and acting. I went into this movie with no preconceived notions (I barely knew a thing about it, not even that it was based on a Roald Dahl book), and it was awesome. George Clooney is hilarious as Mr. Fox, and it also features Meryl Streep, Bill Murray, Willem Dafoe, and some other cool guys.
I really hate to even mention the plot for fear of spoiling it. However, if you insist on knowing a little something about it, here goes:
Mr. Fox is unhappy with his current middle-aged situation and decides to do something about it. There. Just go see it.
The world is a better place thanks to George Washington Carver, and not just for his brilliant invention of peanut butter. The following is excerpted from a thank-you he wrote to the members of his senior class at the Tuskegee Institute:
“…it is needless for me to keep saying, I hope, except for emphasis, that each one of my children will rise to the full height of your possibilities, which means the possession of these eight cardinal virtues which constitutes a lady or gentleman.
1st. Be clean both inside and out.
2nd. Neither look up to the rich or down on the poor.
3rd. Lose, if need be, without squealing.
4th. Win without bragging.
5th. Always be considerate of women, children, and older people.
6th. Be too brave to lie.
7th. Be too generous to cheat.
8th. Take your share of the world and let others take theirs.
May God help you carry out these eight cardinal virtues and peace and prosperity by yours through life.”
The letter is reprinted in an excellent book called The Art of Thank You by Connie Leas.
I saw this movie before I had read the book. In fact, I had barely even heard of the book. So I had no expectations going into it, either good or bad.
It wasn’t very good. The very first conversation in the movie already seems out of place–stating a situation that already seems to defy any explanation. The rest of the movie isn’t much better. The plot is pretty lame, and the surprise villain couldn’t have been more obvious if he had one of those Snidely Whiplash mustaches. The plot seems kind of cheezy.
None of the characters are interesting or likable, and I actually kind of disliked Percy. Also, none of the obstacles he faced were really that challenging for him; everything, including facing a Gorgon, is just mildly inconvenient.
——–
Since then I have read the book (I’m actually on the third of the five books). The book, unlike the movie, is well-written and interesting; I was hooked by the fourth page. Having read the book, you realize that the movie is not just ‘not very good,’ but actively terrible, and a really crummy interpretation of the book. For the sake of comparison, imagine if they had made a movie of The Hobbit that left out Smaug. And Gollum. And Gandalf. And the plot wasn’t about the dwarves going to reclaim their treasure. And Bilbo was already a seasoned fighter. The movie is that untrue to the book.
It’s a real shame, too. The book is tailor-made for a brilliant film franchise, but they would really have to reboot it already.
I recently read Dracula by Bram Stoker. It wasn’t my first attempt at reading this book, but it was the first time I succeeded. Overall, I liked it a lot, and it’s easy to see why it’s such an enduring classic.
The first third of the book is amazingly slow; it’s told from the journals of Jonathan and Mina Harker, Dr. Seward, and other characters. The book really starts taking off when Dr. Abraham Van shows up. Van Helsing is the obvious star of the show, being doctor of literature, medicine, theology, and other disciplines, like, say, vampire hunting. Van Helsing is so awesome that Stoker had to hobble him with a bad Old Country Dutch accent, which does occasionally make for some humorous literal translations of common English idioms (“Quincey’s head is parallel with the horizontal plane.”).
Renfield was written as amazingly brilliant (at least when he wasn’t eating bugs), which is really wild because Dr. Seward comes across as smart and Van Helsing comes across as really smart, and that means that the entire time Stoker was writing Van Helsing, he was holding back so that Renfield would shine.
Spoilers follow:
My only real gripe with the book was when Mina got bitten. Stoker drops a tiny hint with, “Mina looked pale.” In light of all the characters have gone through with Mina’s friend, Lucy, you know what he is hinting at, just with that small clue.
But he spends another several chapters drudging through the diaries of Van Helsing, Mina, and Jonathan Harker elaborating how Mina is so sick and so tired and so pale and no-one has the slightest clue what could be blah blah blah. This section of the book was amazingly frustrating to read, and then when Harker does his big reveal it goes down like this:
MINA: I’m so pale!
JONATHAN HARKER: Mina!
COUNT DRACULA: What’s up, homies?
VAN HELSING and JONATHAN HARKER: What are you doing here?
COUNT DRACULA: I totally bit Mina!
READERS: Duh.
JONATHAN AND VAN HELSING: NOOOOooooo!
COUNT DRACULA: Ha ha! PWNED!
Other than that section, I loved the book as a whole, and I think you should read it.
