, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Even though I’m Blogging Without Obligation, there are times I get busy and don’t have a chance to write new posts, which makes me feel like I’m missing something. It’s not that I’m not thinking about blogging. I’ve got a backlog of ideas in my notebook just waiting for me to expound upon them. (Although, truth be told, there are periodic stretches of days where I don’t have a single idea and I’m perfectly fine with tossing out inconsequential thoughts on Twitter.)

As I’ve come through a few weeks of not much blogging, what have I been up to instead? Other than house cleaning and visiting with relatives, I’ve been reading and watching movies. I normally read books at a dribbling pace, a few pages a night, a few at lunchtime, until I finish. Lately, though, I’ve been reading for longer stretches of time, particularly on weekends. At this pace, I tend to burn through books, which is fun because I can keep better track of the storyline or topic. I read Geraldine Brooks’ “People of the Book” within a few days, after having done the same with Christopher Moore’s “Fluke.” I’m now reading “13 Things That Don’t Make Sense” by Michael Brooks.

We’ve done some movie nights in the past month in our household. Last night we watched Rent, and the night before we watched The Da Vinci Code.  “Rent” was Daughter’s choice because she has most of the tunes from the movie on her iPod. If you like musicals, you’ll like “Rent.” The singers all had fabulous voices. While the story was told pretty much one song to the next, it wasn’t difficult to figure out the plot.

“The Da Vinci Code” was disappointing in movie form. It dragged so much that Hubby kept falling asleep. The book, which I read long ago, was a couldn’t-put-it-down-page-turner.  I think I could see what the movie’s creators were attempting to do. They were trying to translate a lot of the explanatory stuff that was in the book into the movie – the stuff about the Masons, Opus Dei, Mary Magdalene as the Holy Grail, the Rose Line, etc. Unfortunately, this didn’t work because bringing a movie to a screeching halt to explain complicated things tends to make the scenes look forced, which they did. I also felt as though the main characters weren’t ever in any real danger. There wasn’t enough tension, although there was plenty in the book.

I’ve heard that “Angels & Demons,” the follow-up prequel to “The Da Vinci Code,” is a better movie than its predecessor. We’ll have to see.