Starring: Julia Roberts and Dennis Quaid

Rating: 3

Granted, this movie came out in 1995, so it's a bit older. So, maybe I can't really review this movie based on today - 15 years later.

Overall, I thought it was a good movie, I just thought it was a little bit on the slow side.

But, I've noticed that I've felt that way a lot lately. Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm moving faster than things around me and that's why movies feel really slow.

Either that, or it's that we watched this movie after watching Ironman. Nah. That's not it.

I just thought there could be less "down" time.

Grace (Roberts) manages her father's (Robert Duvall) stables, and her life seems perfect. Until she realizes that her husband (Quaid) is cheating on her. She leaves him. The movie tells the story of how they all get their lives back on track.

There is one scene that made the whole movie worth while watching. And that is when Grace is in the League meeting and starts asking everyone about the affairs of their spouses, and who is cheating on whom.

By: James Patterson

2008; 320 pages

Rating: 4

Sundays at Tiffany's is about a woman named Jane. When Jane was a young girl, she had an imaginary friend named Michael. While most children forget their imaginary friends, Jane never did.

One day, she runs into a man who looks just like Michael. She soon realizes that it IS Michael, her imaginary friend. But, how is this possible? The two fall in love, never knowing how long Michael is going to be around or when he's going to disappear again.

James Patterson is a pretty amazing writer. I haven't read much by him, because most of what I have read until now has been a bit violent for my taste (Women's Murder Club series).

I loved the idea for Sundays at Tiffany's. I also liked how easy it was to almost instantly bond with the characters.

The book is incredibly well written. I highly highly recommend that you pick it up. It makes me wish I could remember my imaginary friend.

I don't remember mine, but I do remember my sister's. She had about 20 of them. My favorite was named ABCD.

Starring: Tom Hanks, Marlin Waynes,

Rating: 3

Had I known that this was a Cohen brothers film before I started watching it, I never would have watched it.

The saving grace of this movie? Tom Hanks. He's an incredible actor. I thought it looked like he had a lot of fun playing his role.

But, overall, the movie dragged. And dragged. It had its funny moments, but they were few and far between.

The Ladykillers is about a group who tunnels underneath the town so they can rob a casino. The trouble is, the tunnel starts in the basement of an old woman's house. And she very much keeps her nose in their business.

Honestly, I think the movie could have been at least 30 minutes shorter, if not even an hour shorter. I know that there's obviously a market for the Cohen brothers...but it isn't me.

Starring: Noah Wyle and Bob Newhart

Rating: 1.5

I remember about a year back when my father in law was raving about this movie he saw on TV. It was called "The Librarian". It was part of a trilogy, and he just couldn't wait to see the rest of it.

The little he told me about it (knowing that I don't like to know the whole movie before I see it) sounded interesting.

That's why, when I ran across The Librarian in New Zealand, I wanted to check it out.

But, to be honest, it wasn't very good. It felt like Noah Wyle was trying to be an actor instead of being one.

The story was too far-fetched, and not far-fetched enough. It had a great idea and premise, but it fell short on delivery.

A man becomes the new Librarian, but his real job is to protect the "mythical" objects of lore. Of course, one of the most powerful objects falls into the wrong hands, and it's his job to get it back and save the world.

Sounds good right? Wrong. They should have either over played this, or underplayed it. Instead they went for the middle ground, and in this case that was the worst thing they could have done.

It tells the story of young Billy Elliot who wants to be a ballet dancer. His father and brother are miners and are currently on strike. His mum passed away.

It's a good story with a good message. But, it could have been told a little faster.

Overall, it's pretty good. But, now when I come to talk about it, there's not really all that much to say.

by: Noah Charney.

2008; 320 pages,

rating: 2.5

You know how you read those books that instantly remind you of some one who's trying too hard? Well, this is one of those.

I'm sure that you've read "The DaVinci Code" by Dan Brown. If you haven't, you've seen the movie. If you haven't read it, nor seen the movie, what are you doing here? Go read it.

I wasn't more than 10 pages into "The Art Thief" before I knew that this guy was trying to be Dan Brown.

And, I was only about 20 pages into the book when I guessed how the whole thing would turn out. And, you know what - I guessed right.

I don't really recommend that you read "The Art Thief". Unless, you're somehow related to the author. But, in that case, you've probably already read it.

It's about two stolen paintings and how those paintings inexplicably coincide with each other. One is a Michelangelo, the other a Malevich (modern art). And, there are 8 key characters, and Charney tries to weave their stories together in a way that keeps you interested.

Unfortunately, all that weaving does is make the book disjointed because there's so long between characters that you'd forgotten who they were and the last thing that happened to them.

by: Laurell K. Hamilton.

2006; 416 pages.

Rating: 3.5

In this, the fourth book of the Meredith Gentry series, the entire book takes place over one evening.

While it makes for an interesting technique, I can't help but wonder how long Hamilton is going to draw out the series.

Yes, it's a good series, but take it somewhere already. Please.

I'm already hooked, but if too many more books continue along this trend of dragging out every possible situation as much as Dickens, I won't keep reading too much longer.

AND, they raised the price for the books on Kindle. The physical print version of the book costs $7.99. The Kindle price used to cost $6.39. Now, it's $10.49. WHY? Why does an electronic version cost more than a physical book? It costs them so much less to produce the Kindle version, but they're selling it for more. Greedy bastards.