I really hate it when a dictionary does definitions like this:

Gradasfaratory adj. 1. Produced or operating by Gradasfaratation.  2. Of or relating to Gradasfaratation.

So then you would look up Gradasfaratation…

Gradasfaratation n. The act of Gradasfaratating.

and then you would look up Gradasfaratate…

Gradasfaratate v. To Gradasfar.

I will agree with Brother Mike that the latest installment in the X-Men series isn’t nearly as good as the previous two, but I would disagree that it is as bad as Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith (Nothing can hold a stench next to that turd).

The original plan was for me to take Justin and Danielle to the 4:50 showing of X3 at the Galaxy Theater using two free passes Brenda had.  That would have worked, had the show not been sold out.  The theater gave me a third free pass, so the three of us had free tickets to the 7:35 showing.  We killed time by going to Faust park and playing on their new playground equipment (which is one of the best playgrounds I have seen).  The kids were nearly eaten by a ferocious mutant caterpillar (fitting since we were going to see a movie about mutants).

When we got back to the theater, it was surprisingly packed.  I didn’t think X-men would be popular this late into it’s run on a Thursday night.  Perhaps it is just run-off from the Superman Returns crowd.  The show started a little late, which normally wouldn’t be a problem, but it did mean that the kids were going to be up pretty late.  The previews for Pirates 2 and My Super ex-girlfriend looked pretty good.

Anyway, about the movie…

If you didn’t already have knowledge of who the new characters were based on, the movie was watchable, but the characters would seem very flat (almost no character development for any of the key mutants).  If you DID have prior knowledge to give the characters depth, you might be offended at how badly the characters were portrayed/used.  This brings me to my biggest complaint about the movie — length.  In the age of 3 hours movies, an hour and fourty-five minutes doesn’t cut it.  They could have/should have added twenty to thirty minutes of character development and plot twists.  Like Mike said, the movie is very predictable and linear.  The only surprises were the sheer number of major mutants they killed off.

If you are looking for mindless, action packed, entertainment, the movie would probably work for you.  The dialog was poor, but again, not nearly as bad as Star Wars III.  I asked the kids what they thought, and they rated the movie as okay, but not great, so either the story wasn’t to their liking, or they were looking forward to more than just special effects.  They liked the first two X-men movies better as well, so obviously this one was missing something.

Caution spoilers follow,

My biggest complaint is probably the story lines, and again this could go back to the movie length.  The two main story lines, a cure for mutants, and the return of Jean Grey could have been their own stories.  The problem is, the storiesdidn’t intertwine, and neither was developed enough.  The cure for mutants could have been a lot deeper topic - they barely touched the surface of why some mutants might want to give up their powers and why others would be offended.  They touched on the ethical points of forced cures, but not enough.  Basically they didn’t focus on the story enough to see where it would take them.

The return of Jean Grey as the Phoenix was a complete waste.  They barely touched on her power and she just sat back during the first major battle.  She could have and should have destroyed most of San Francisco in a fit of rage.  She was far to big a menace with far too much potential for the short cut solution they came up with. 

In summary,

The viewers were cheated out of two good stories.  The movie had potential that was never realized.  Hopefully they will do better for X4 (and yes, they probably will do an X4).

Just a little over a week since Allison was nearly eaten by giant concrete turtles, and my other two children are nearly eaten by a giant concrete caterpillar.  I told Justin and Danielle that it was dangerous to grab onto the caterpillar’s antenas, but being children, they of course ignored me.

That caterpillar snapped it’s head around and bit them both.

Danielle was nearly swallowed, but Justin put up a good fight.

Then Danielle was regurgitated while the caterpiller tried to swallow Justin.

Then we saw duckies…

Why is it that the plant’s you want are so much easier to kill than the plants you don’t want?

Can you believe it?  Two times in less than two weeks, the Bush administration did something right.  First the aquatic reserve, and now an executive order to correct the Kelo atrocity.

I was pretty ticked off about the Kelo decision that gave the government the right to take your property just because they thought they could get more tax money off it from someone else.  Bush’s executive order, at least in principle, will stop this.  It would be better if Congress got off its collective butt and legislated limits to the eminent domain laws, but an executive order is at least a step in the right direction.

Of course I again believe that Bush has ulterior motives, like improving his poll numbers, but again, I will take what I can get.  If he keeps up the good work, my opinion of him might go up to incompetent buffoon instead of malicious [expletives deleted].

Missouri has passed a booster seat law that goes into effect January 1, 2007

CHILD PASSENGER RESTRAINT LAW - This act modifies the law with respect how motorist must restrain children in motor vehicles.

This act modifies the law with respect to the use of child passenger safety restraint systems and booster seats. The act requires children of certain ages, weights and heights to be restrained by either a child passenger restraint system, booster seat or safety belt.

AGE/WEIGHT/HEIGHT CLASSIFICATION -

1. LESS THAN 4 YEARS OLD - This act requires children less than four years old, regardless of weight, to use an appropriate child passenger restraint system.

2. LESS THAN 40 POUNDS - The act requires children weighing less than 40 pounds, regardless of age, to be secured in a child passenger restraint system appropriate for the child.

3. LESS THAN 8 YEARS OLD/80 POUNDS OR UNDER 4′9″ - Children (ages 4-7) and who weigh at least 40 pounds but less than 80 pounds, and are less than 4′9″ tall must be secured in a child passenger restraint system or booster seat appropriate for that child.

4. GREATER THAN 80 POUNDS OR TALLER THAN 4′9″ - Children who are at least 80 pounds or children taller than 4′9″ shall be secured by a vehicle safety belt or booster seat appropriate for that child.

The act allows a child to be transported in the back seat without a booster seat if the child is secured with a lap belt if the vehicle is not equipped with combination lap and shoulder belt for booster seat installation.

The act also provides that when transporting children in the immediate family when there are more children than there are seating positions in the enclosed area of a motor vehicle, the children who are not able to be restrained by a child safety restraint device appropriate for the child shall sit in the area behind the front seat of the motor vehicle unless the motor vehicle is designed only for a front seat area. The driver transporting children under this scenario shall not be in violation of the child seat restriction law.

A violation of the child passenger restraint/booster provisions is an infraction and the fine is $50 plus court costs. The fine for violating the safety belt provision of the act is $10. Charges for violating the child passenger restraint and booster seat provisions shall be dismissed or withdrawn if the driver provides evidence that he or she acquired a child passenger restraint system or booster seat prior to or at his or her hearing. The act does not apply to public carriers for hire or to students four years of age or older who are passengers on a school bus designed for carrying eleven passengers or more and which is manufactured or equipped pursuant to Missouri Minimum Standards for School Buses (Sections 307.178 and 307.182).

The act provides that if there are more persons than there are seat belts in the enclosed area of a motor vehicle, then the passengers who are unable to wear seat belts shall sit in the area behind the front seat unless the vehicle is designed only for a front-seated area. This provision does not apply to passengers who are accompanying an intermediate driver’s license holder. Under current law, all passengers accompanying an intermediate driver’s license holder must be properly restrained. (Subsection 7 of Section 307.178). The act provides that the $10 fine for failing to wear a seat belt shall apply to “persons” rather than just “drivers” (section 307.178.5).

If you want to read the actual bill, you can go to:  

http://www.senate.mo.gov/06info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=24259 

Although booster seats a definately a good idea as your child transfers from a car seat to a regular seat, I’m wondering if the states micro-management is really necessary (or conspiracy theory would be that the carseat manufacturers lobbied for this law). 

Danielle and Allison (8 and 7) are under the 4′ 9″ requirement, but not by much.  They stopped using boosters about a year ago when the shoulder belts started fitting them comfortably (not by the head and neck).  Now it sounds like at least Allison will have to use one again for 4 months, unless she grows a little bit more in the next 6 months.  I may put both girls back in boosters for the next year, just to avoid arguments.

• Charles Darwin’s tortoise has passed away.  It was 176 years old.  To think you could have gone to the Australian zoo and seen a tortoise that was alive when Darwin published the Origin of Species.
• Here is a cool optical illusion of a castle.  I think it works because your brain tends to compensate for colors, so when you stare at something of one color then look away, you will see the opposite color.
• Sandra Day O’Conner was on NPR at lunch today (Real Audio / Windows Media Player) - I caught about 15 minutes of it as I was driving to Subway.  I would have like to call in and give my two cents on “Activist Judges.”  As far as I can tell an Activist Judge is a judge that rules in a way that the person calling them an Activist Judge does not like, even if they were following precident and the rule of Law.  The obvious case in point is the Dover trial where Judge Jones ruled according to the precident and the evidence presented, explained why he ruled the way he did, preemptively noted that he was not an activist judge on an activist court, and the losing side still went after him.  Ironically some of the people claiming he is an activist judge are complaining that he didn’t rule according to the politics of the people that put him on the bench — funny, sounds like if he had done that, he WOULD BE and activist judge.