Quick question to all five of you who read this thing: Where the hell did 2008 go? I mean, it's already August, and I'm already starting to consider various New Year's eve plans...
Is it just me, or has this year completely flown by?
Another random question: Why is Starbucks trying to enter the smoothie market with their supposedly healthy "Vivanno"?
C'mon, Starbucks! We're not waiting hours in your lines for refreshing, all-natural concoctions. We want coffee! Coffee-that-borders-on-crack-and-keeps-you-from-properly-sleeping-and-speaking-clearly-but-nevertheless-still-coffee...!
So many questions....
I saw “The Dark Knight” in IMAX last night – Wow! Great flick, in my opinion. Most of the reviews I’ve read about the new Batman movie describe a good, but not great film, with Heath Ledger as “The Joker” stealing the show. Well, these reviews are pretty dead-on.
Rather than bore you with another full review, I’ve bullet-ed some of the pros and cons to “The Dark Knight”…
Pros:
-Heath Ledger as “The Joker” is incredible; just give him
the Oscar right now;
-The film is beautifully shot (and this beauty is magnified
with the IMAX version);
-The soundtrack is great and truly enhances the film (never
really noticed how important a soundtrack is for a film until seeing “The Dark
Knight”);
-The action sequences are pretty cool, especially the beginning scene;
-Great acting performances by Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine,
Aaron Eckhart and Gary Oldman (Oldman, in particular, really shines as
Lt./Commisioner Gordon)… No, I didn’t accidentally
keep Christian Bale off this list.
Cons:
-The length; this movie is d*mn long – 2.5 hours; be sure to
visit the bathroom before grabbing your seat;
-Batman’s voice and dialogue; when you see the film, you’ll
know what I mean, but Batman just sounds ridiculous at times;
-Confusing plot; lot of moving parts in this film add to the
confusion, as well as to its unnecessary length;
-The “deeper meaning” that’s forcefully injected into the
film; this is rather hard to explain, and I won’t attempt to do so, but when absorbing
an action movie, there’s no need to get incredibly “deep” with the audience –
just blow up a lot of things and make sure the good guys win (a little skin doesn't hurt, as well...);
-A lot of the film’s heavy noise (mainly during the action
scenes) takes away from some of the better lines of dialogue.
My “cons” are more nit-picking than anything else. This is a
really fun film with the perfect amount of violence mixed in. "The Dark Knight" makes both Superman and Spiderman look like men in tights...
Anyone who's a sports fan has likely heard this story involving three collegiate softball players (two from Central Washington and one from Western Oregon), but here it is again (courtesy of YouTube). I'm not the most emotional person, but even this incredible act of sportsmanship makes me tear-up a bit (sort of...).
Amazing story... Check it out:
After penning this post about some of the current problems with San Francisco, a client/friend of mine encouraged me to attend a monthly neighborhood meeting where issues affecting ourselves and our neighborhood are discussed – and I did, last night. I attended a meeting of the Middle Polk Neighborhood Association, and despite the fact I was probably the youngest person there by about 25-30 years, it was pretty interesting and very informative.
The meeting was held at a local coffee shop, and there were around 30 local residents in attendance. The hour-long get-together consisted of updates on various street blocks in the region, news on construction sites that are being considered by developers, safety tips from experts and even a crime report by local police sergeants.
In addition to this general info, I also learned the following:
-The
(dirty, sketchy) Cala
Foods market by my apartment is closing down by 2010, with a new (hopefully
cleaner) market taking its place;
-A
prostitution/drug house a block and a half from my apartment was infiltrated by
SFPD and shut down last week, with 12 related arrests being made;
-Developers
are trying to move forward on turning a two-story church into a six-story
condominium complex (and future eyesore); and
-There’s a
new low-fat frozen yogurt shop opening soon (go Fro-Yo!).
The most significant thing I took from last night’s meeting was not the regional updates, but just seeing all these neighbors congregate in one place to discuss what’s going on in our ‘hood (and ways to keep it safe and attractive). Seeing everyone together, as a team, was quite uplifting.
(Plus, learning about the nearby prostitution/drug house was a bit alarming... All this time I thought those semi-clad, plastered women hangin' on the corner were members of the local 4-H club.)
When you migrate from the suburbs to the city, you tend to lose that sense of community that permeates suburban neighborhoods throughout the U.S., and you really feel on your own. This meeting proved to me that, even in a big city, people still care about their neighborhood, and more importantly, their neighbors.
If you have
a chance to attend a similar event in your own district, I highly encourage it.
No deep thoughts today about life, books or marketing. Just wanted to use this space to congratulate one of my best friends, Nick Kenig, on his recent engagement to the lovely K. Chenin Woodbury. Nick proposed to Chenin yesterday afternoon in a private moment at Stinson Beach in Marin County, and, in a shocker, Chenin said “yes” (just kidding, bud).
I’ve had friends and acquaintances engage and marry before, but this is the first one where I consider myself great friends with the engaged couple, so it’s especially meaningful for me. It’s also a telltale sign that I am getting older, and may need to start thinking about the idea of getting married myself, but, uh… I’ll save these thoughts for a future blog post (WAY in the future…).
Anyway, congrats Chenin and Nick (or, “Che-nick”, as my cousin and good friend Greg S. calls them lovingly). This is simply awesome.
-Mitchell
]]>I think I’ve finally made the big time here in San Francisco.
Nope – I have yet to grace the society pages in the S.F. Chronicle. I still have to wait my turn behind the velvet rope outside nightclubs. And telemarketers continue to ask for “Mich-elle Schro-eder” when phoning everyday (and I do mean, everyday…).
No, I’ve officially “made it” because earlier tonight, while dining at the Sushi Rock in Nob Hill, I didn’t have to say a single word, and my server knew exactly what I wanted. Before I even sat down, my waiter asked if I wanted “my usual,” and with a simple nod of my head, the server was off to fetch two California rolls and a side of chicken teriyaki.
Nevermind the fact I eat at that particular Sushi Rock 2-3 times a week, and order the same exact thing each time. (OK – that’s probably the only reason why the waiter knew what I wanted.) But for those fifteen seconds, when the server knew what I wanted and was quick to please, my last name may well have been Clooney, Pitt or Obama… At Sushi Rock, I had become the man.
In hindsight, if I really was the man, Sushi Rock wouldn’t have charged me $15 for my meal, or sat me arm’s length from the men’s room. I probably wouldn’t have been eating at Sushi Rock at all, as I likely would have been sampling the fare at upscale spots like Gary Danko or Fleur de Lys.
Regardless, it was still a great feeling to know that someone knew who I was, or at the very least, remembered what I’d like to eat. And if just this simple recollection by a waiter could bring this much joy to my life, imagine what others might feel when we ourselves recall their likes, dislikes, professions, hobbies, preferred cocktails… even their names. Is there anything more flattering? Doubt it.
Of course, this could also be a sign I should start eating my California rolls elsewhere, or, Heaven forbid, order something else.
]]>I had a nice dinner last night at this local Italian joint on Polk Street, just a few blocks from my apartment. This, in itself, isn’t a revelation; the fact that I ate alone and thoroughly enjoyed the (lack of) company – probably is.
I eat out by myself quite frequently, and this freaks some people out (particularly my officemates). It’s not that I’m anti-social or without friends… I just find that I like the independence of entering any restaurant, sitting down, and treating myself to a nice meal. I should also say, I live alone, which certainly facilitates my many solo dinners. (I also can’t cook a lick, which necessitates the “eating out” part.) But even if I lived with another, I would take great enjoyment in dining by myself.
Why do I prefer these meals on my own? For a few reasons:
First, it’s super easy to get in (and out) of restaurants when you’re flying solo. Finding a table or a seat at the bar isn’t hard, and you often get served right away. Plus, if you have an idea what you want to eat beforehand, you can easily order right when you’re being seated.
Second, the food tastes better, or to be more accurate, you actually taste the food. Last week I ate at my favorite steak place in The City, Brazen Head, and sat by myself. I always liked the food there, but never really appreciated how good it was until I ate my steak and sipped my wine by myself. When there is no one else there to distract you, you really concentrate on what you’re consuming, which is pretty eye-opening.
Third, you don’t over-consume when on your own. There’s no extra appetizer, no extra Ketel-on-the-rocks, no dessert afterwards when you’re already stuffed. You eat exactly what you want, and when you’ve had enough, you move on… plain and simple.
Okay, I know what you’re thinking – No, I don’t consider myself an outcast. And yes, I do enjoy dining with others (nothing beats a romantic meal with someone you love).
I’m just
saying in a world where we’re always trying to be connected to something – via the
internet, your cell phone, your BlackBerry, etc. – it’s satisfying to consume certain
layers of life on your own.
The taste is much, much sweeter…
]]>There are
two types of people in this world: those who like Paulo Coelho’s The Alchemist, and those who don’t. I
fall into the latter category, and I’m probably the only person I know who has
read the book who wasn’t completely blown away. (So, I guess this means the two types of people in this world are -- “everyone in the world” and “Mitch Schneider”.)
Let me first acknowledge I understand the popularity of The Alchemist… According to Wikipedia, The Alchemist has sold over 65 million copies in 150 countries, and has been translated into nearly 60 languages. It’s won awards; it’s being made into a movie; it’s featured front and center in any bookstore you enter… I get it – The Alchemist is clearly a good book (and it’s certainly well-written and moves quickly).
But I didn’t like it, plain and simple. The story (which is about a young boy, Santiago, who believes in omens that carry him from one destination and environment to another) is just Über-sappy and parable-like. The Alchemist is meant to inspire the reader to go after his or her dreams, and to never settle... If I wanted this inspiration, I’d watch the movie, Rudy. I bet, if you read The Secret, and liked it, you would want to own multiple copies of The Alchemist for every room in your house.
I think my problem is I read this book well into my late twenties, when I’d like to think I’ve figured most things out (or have an idea which way to go). This book is probably best read by fresh-out-of-school college graduates, members of Greenpeace, or people on Zoloft.
I’m not going to comment any further because you’ve likely just reported this blog post to the Homeland Security Council. But in keeping with the tradition of my One Minute Book Reviews, I’m giving The Alchemist two “Mitch’s” out of five.
My next book: Three Cups of Tea, by Greg Mortenson
Past reviews:
-The Tender Bar (Rating: 3.5 out of 5)
-The Kite Runner (Rating: 4 out of 5)
-The Road (Rating: 4.5 out of 5)
]]>Just when you think the entire city of San Francisco is going to H-ll, a random act of kindness resets your thinking about the whole Armageddon concept.
After work yesterday, Nick and I went into the BART station (S.F.’s underground mass transit system) to purchase tickets to ride the train to the Mission district. As I was getting out money to pay the machine, I accidentally dropped a few bucks without noticing in the crowded station. A few seconds later, an older gentleman tapped me on the shoulder, said “you dropped this,” and handed me back the bills I had lost. I thanked him, hopped on BART to 16th and Mission, and then finished the night with an awesome dinner at Pizzeria Delfina (drop whatever you’re doing and secure an outside table at this place…).
I’m certainly not an optimist about life; I consider myself more a realist when it comes to our existence. But I do believe in Newton’s Law of Motion – for every action, there is an equal, but opposite reaction – and life certainly carries this out.
Thanks, San Francisco – didn’t mean to write you off so soon. (That being said, I properly just earned myself a parking ticket or two later this month…)
]]>I wrapped up Jon Krakauer’s 2003 book, Under the Banner of Heaven, earlier this year, and whole-heartedly recommend it. Krakauer’s read is incredibly interesting, well-written, and paces really well. It reminds me of those long, absorbing pieces in the Sunday New York Times; the ones you phone your mom halfway through to tell her to read it.
There are two interweaving plot lines in Under the Banner of Heaven: the first is the story of the Mormon-raised Lafferty brothers who end up murdering their younger brother’s wife and daughter (claiming that a revelation told them to carry out these killings); and the second is the history of Mormonism and how Joseph Smith cultivated and developed this religion from the 1830’s on.
Krakauer does an awesome job putting the reader in both the minds of the Lafferty brothers, as well as Joseph Smith and other influential Mormons. You really feel like you’re along for the ride in both the murder story, and the history of Mormonism, and you find yourself tearing through the chapters to uncover the next significant event.
I also enjoyed how Krakauer detailed the drive and determination by Joseph Smith to create a new religion in more modern times. Smith’s creation was a miracle in itself, and the fact that Mormonism is alive and thriving today is a real testament to Smith and the early believers of this religion.
While Krakauer does mention both positive and negative tenets to Mormonism, it’s pretty clear his slant is more negative. Though I sense some people may be upset by Krakauer’s imbalance (i.e., Mormons who may read this book), I kind of wished he would have taken an ever harder line to put down some of Mormonism's (alleged) practices of racism, polygamy and statutory rape -- especially in the wake of the recent raid on a West Texas Church of Latter Day Saints’ ranch, where over 400 children were seized by the authorities.
Regardless,
this is a page-turning, eye-opening read by Krakauer, and I give it four “Mitch’s”
out of five. I’m embarrassed to say I haven’t yet read Krakuer’s Into Thin Air or Into the Wild. But after reading Under the Banner of Heaven, I’ll certainly need to dive into these predecessors
sooner rather than later.
My next book: The Alchemist, by Paulo Coelho
Past reviews:-The Tender Bar (Rating: 3.5 out of 5)
-The Kite Runner (Rating: 4 out of 5)
]]>