Sunday, December 07, 2008

highly educational


yesterday was an amazing, highly educational day. the ROM with the kids was totally fun but also COMPLETELY EXHAUSTING. we spent about 2 1/2 hours there and the kids were beyond wiped near the end. little ze fell asleep on the subway on the way home which means i had to lug his dead weight in my arms and keep a hold of my niece on the walk home from the subway stop, when i myself was near the point of passing out (for some reason the ROM appears to have a soporific effect, as all parties had drooping eyelids by the time we were ready to go, and my nephew pretty much lay on the floor of one of the less traveled rooms in which we ended our day, face up and blinking at me and H sleepily). however, as soon as we walked in the door of my home and i had divested the kids of boots, socks, and extra layers, plopped them on the couch and given them blankets and pillows for some quiet time, my nephew suddenly became as alert and bright and buzzy as if it was the crack of dawn.


it was my first time seeing the new interior of the ROM since the something something chin crystal part had been slapped onto the building - it was spectacularly unimpressive. the interior looked much more stark now, and all the quirky angles and slopes on the outside translated to nothing more than miles of white drywall inside. it lacked a lot of personality and felt really sterile.

there was a surprising amount of stuff for kids to do - they could pet stuff and crawl through stuff, dress up in stuff, draw stuff, read stuff, and go on faux excavations (which were really fun for the "adults" because the kids have to wear really nerdy protective goggles):



my nephew was obsessively fixated on the dinosaurs and my niece kept wanting to see egypt stuff (a word she pronounced kind of like "ancient" - so it seemed like the two concepts were synonymous in her head) - but when we finally got the ancient egypt room, the paltriness of the the ROM's holdings left A LOT to be desired.

confession time: i did something totally shadesball yesterday. i had packed us some snacks and 3 whoopie pies. 1 for H, 1 for my niece, and 1 for my nephew because i knew that i was going to be eating mine later at the theatre. when we were resting for a bit before we went home, i pulled out the snacks and gave H hers, and unwrapped 1 for the two kids to share (but i took some bites out of it too). then, when the kids were at my house and watching tv on the couch, i walked into the kitchen, pulled the other whoopie pie out of my bag, and crouched down behind the counter and ate THE WHOLE THING to myself without alerting them that's pretty sick and twisted, right? probably a sign that i'm not ready the selflessness that's supposed to accompany parenthood. lol! i'm such a weas(el)!

then the goosetang clan with the addition of my friend D checked out smoke's. it was pretty decent. here's what we had:

clockwise from the top left we have: the montreal (smoked meat, dill pickle); curried chicken; the hogtown (weiners, sauteed onions and mushrooms and bacon); bacon; pulled pork, and the standard. overall the poutines were really good and generously proportioned (the standard one is $5.95 and the other ones range in price from $6.95-8.95). i'm not sure i need all the bells and whistles and we kind of felt like hell afterwards...there's nothing about any of the individual iterations that's spectacularly good or that seems necessary...i think i preferred the classic most of all. also, "smoke" the mascot is a total hipster douchebag. which is automatically irritating and he's totally made up (as i ascertained from my crack investigative journalism, consisting of firing rapid questions at the poor bewildered counter girl). i don't think the toppings approach anything as magical as the fries supreme combination at taco bell...like having bacon or curried chicken on fries is for sure a novelty...but from a taste standpoint - it doesn't become something more than the sum of its' parts. it's definitely worthwhile if you feel like going to town on your arteries and colon, but it's definitely more of a novelty thing for me and won't be a go-to destination.

then we saw "twilight" which was the WORST/the awesomest. seeing movies like that in the theatre with a bunch of funny people is always a sure-fire bet because you're all there to have a lark and it's guaranteed to be funny. when you have a movie as outstandingly ridiculous and AWFUL as "twilight" - the laughs are non-stop.

first of all, bella (the female protagonist, played by kristin stewart in a kind of somnabulating daze - all heavy of jaw, pouty of lip, and hooded eyes) is a total b***h, who's supposed to be kind of teenagery "awkward" and disaffected, i guess, which would make sense if SHE HAD A REASON TO BE, but she doesn't! the movie starts when she moves to a tiny town of 3000 people in washington (which, for a town of 3000 happens to be the most cosmopolitan small town you've ever seen, complete with more minorities than you'd find in columbus, ohio.) anyway, bella fits in IMMEDIATELY and meets tonnes of cute, nice, friendly kids (who aren't cliquish at all) who welcome her with open arms, but for some reason, she persists in acting like a total d**k and being totally inconsiderate and jerky to them, all in favor of mooning over edward, the clammy, creepy vamp love interest, who spends a good HALF of the movie staring at her in a totally strange and effed up way.

actually, most of the movie is people STARING at each other, in a way that's supposed to be intense and passion-filled but ends up being unintentionally hilarious because of how long the camera lingers on their "brooding" intensity. also, the vamp family who all attend high school are hinted at being incestuous (the "brothers" and "sisters" who aren't related by blood but have all been adopted by the coven's patriarch) go to school holding hands and being all lovey dovey with each other, which is totally gross and never really fully addressed. they also all look 35. AND all the vamps end up being totally waxen looking, because of the OBVIOUS and hackneyed makeup application. one of the only things that bella and edward share in common is their foundation and lipstick.

edward and bella's quick fall into unending, eternal love is completely implausible because it doesn't seem to be based on anything but the fact that edward is supposed to be kind of hot and entrancing (oh, and when he stands in the sun he's covered in diamond dust). and because the two leads declare it so. "so i guess we're in love" (actually, the line was, "so the lion fell in love with the lamb" - *insert vomitous gagging*) "yeah, i'd die for you!" also, vampires apparently don't laugh or appreciate contemporary culture but love playing baseball (!!!!!). there's one scene where bella, in edward's room says, "you have a lot of music...what are you listening to?" instead of the answer that makes sense given edward's overwrought emotionalism (ie. evanescence), OF COURSE he's listening to debussy! debussy!!!!! and the vamps don't joke or like, smile ever!!!!!!! anyway, we're OBVIOUSLY committed to seeing the sequels. special mention goes to the native kid jacob who seemed the most normal but whose tribe has obvious beef with the vamps.

for sunday breakkie i made us bacon and egg sarnies on my rosemary olive oil potato bread.


today i've got dodgeball and i'm going to work on my presentation and then come home and knit and watch wall*e.

for dinner tonight we're having dhal makhani (buttered dhal) with rice and samosas and sag from up the street.

fin.

No comments: