For the third year in a row I won the Oscar pool I entered!

WOOOOOO!

That’s right!

And here were my prizes: cash and a chocolate Oscar statue.

Seriously, I felt like the King of the World!

The party I was at had a buy-in poll and I kicked some serious a** thanks to my picks. Look at the food spread!! There were themed dishes like “9 Layer Dip” for District 9 and “Upcakes” (cupcakes) for Up. I’m now spoiled on how to throw a proper party :)

I just wanted to wrap up the Oscars by posting that :) So to make this more of a formal review: the party I attended was awesome!

How did you do on your Oscar picks?

Plus, I don’t want to brag but I have won the office Oscar pool the last two years. WOO! But this year, there isn’t a pool so I’m just posting my picks for everyone else for the first time ever.

Drumroll please!

Best Picture:

• Will win: The Hurt Locker
• Should win: Up in the Air/District 9
• Potential upset: The Blind Side

The Hurt Locker has a lot of momentum going into the weekend but I personally think District 9 and Up in the Air were two of the best movies this year. I got a lot of flack for picking The Blind Side for an upset but it’s the little engine that could and seriously, who thought they would even get a Best Picture nomination?

Best Director:

• Will win: Kathryn Bigelow
• Should win: Jason Reitman
• Potential upset: James Cameron

Bigelow has the Director’s Guild bump behind her. That is hardly ever wrong in picking the Best Director. And I liked Avatar but I cannot handle douchy James Cameron’s potential acceptance speech.

Best Actor:

• Will win: Jeff Bridges
• Should win: Colin Firth
• Potential upset: Jeremy Renner

Jeff Bridges really can not lose this. He has all the critical praise and awards behind him, this is the last piece. And for some reason, the Academy hasn’t figured out how/when they’ll award a great overall actor like Colin Firth, but this isn’t his year (again).

Best Actress:

• Will win: Sandra Bullock
• Should win: Meryl Streep
• Potential upset: Meryl Streep

Oh this is a tough one. I liked Meryl more than Sandra but Meryl will always be nominated again and it’s really been Sandra’s year. Now if only shirtless Ryan Reynolds would escort her.

Best Supporting Actor:

• Will win: Chrisoph Waltz
• Should win: Stanley Tucci
• Potential upset: Woody Harrelson

Again, Christoph Waltz is pretty much a shoe-in but Stanley Tucci was truly frightening in the Lovely Bones. But like Colin Firth, the Academy will recognize him down the road, not now.

Best Supporting Actress:

• Will win: Mo’nique
• Should win: Anna Kendrick
• Potential upset: None, I think it’s pretty clear Mo’nique has this in the bag

I don’t even have to think about this one. Mo’nique has it locked up but Anna Kendrick was really great in Up in the Air so I’d love to see her get some attention.

Best Animated Picture:

• Will win: Up
• Should win: Up
• Potential upset: If you saw Up and survived the flood of tears, this is an easy pick

Seriously, did you see Up? Pixar broke my cold, dead inside heart with this movie. It deserves a big sloppy hug.

Best Adapted Screenplay:

• Will win: Up in the Air
• Should win: District 9
• Potential upset: Entertainment Weekly said Up in the Air is the winner, and I feel good about it.

I’m a big fan of District 9. It was one of my favorites this year and was compelling and frightening at the same time. But the more “everyman” message of Up in the Air will sweep.

Best Original Screenplay:

• Will win: The Hurt Locker
• Should win: Inglourious Bastards
• Potential upset: I think it’s really between these two films. Both are solid choices

I was torn on this one. Inglourious Bastards was really well written but Hurt Locker can’t seem to do anything wrong. It’s a flip of the coin for me.

What about you? Who do you think will or should win? Or whose fashion are you hoping to see?

And in a January issue of my entertainment Bible, Entertainment Weekly, it listed “The 25 Movies You Need to See Before Oscar Night.”

I love a challenge and soon, I started carrying the list with me to the theater so I could check them off.

But two weeks of travel, a constantly changing movie schedule and me without car were big obstacles to over come, could I do it?

The answer: sort of.

Let’s take a look at the list. I starred the movies I haven’t seen yet and bolded my favorites.:

• Up in the Air
• Avatar
• The Hurt Locker
• Precious*
• Inglourious Bastards
• Invictus*
• An Education
• Up
• A Serious Man
• The Messenger*
• Julie & Julia
• A Single Man
• Crazy Heart*
• The Blind Side
• The Last Station*
• Nine
• Star Trek
• District 9
• Fantastic Mr. Fox*
• The Lovely Bones
• (500) Days of Summer
• It’s Complicated
• The Young Victoria
• Bright Star
• The Informant!

I’ve seen 19 of the 25 movies. So I didn’t fully make my goal but got pretty close. I’m planning on seeing Crazy Heart before Sunday and I might go bat sh*t crazy and try to squeeze in a few more but some I can’t see because they’re not on DVD yet.

I won’t lie, I’m a little disappointed I didn’t make my goal, but holy sh*t, seeing 19 of those movies is a pretty wicked accomplishment. And I have seen all of the Best Picture nominess (minus Precious) so that’s a win for me too!

I think I need to be inducted into the Academy so I can make sure to meet next year’s goal :)

What about you? How many movies on this list have you seen? What were our faves?

Let’s take a look!

Movie: A Single Man

Rating: R

Release date: December 17, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: B+

Summary: George (Colin Firth) has lost his long-time partner Jim (Matthew Goode) in a terrible accident and finds himself struggling with life after Jim’s death with the help of his boozy best friend (Julianne Moore).

My thoughts: First, I am a huge Mad Men fan, so seeing a movie set in the 60s when clothes were sexy, women weren’t so liberated and style was at the pinnacle of dapper and put together. Colin Firth is amazing in this movie. While I’ll always call him Mr. Darcy and love him most from Bridget Jones’ Diary, he was captivating to watch. Even with the salt and pepper hair, he was still attractive (even if he doesn’t play for my team). This is also former fashion designer Tom Ford’s directorial debut and I’m a little mixed on it. Visually, this movie is amazing, heightened use of color, letting sound play over over dialogue or scenes instead of natural noise and playing with different filters as metaphors for George’s change in personality from the present to flashbacks with his former partner.

I did have a few moments thinking I was watching American Beauty or a David Lynch movie, but Ford definitely has a good eye and way to convey emotion without words.

Julianne Moore wasn’t a huge part of this film but was effective, channeling part of Sharon Stones Casino character (minus the bat sh*t crazy side) and makes her British accent seem pretty believable.

But this movie is definitely intense so don’t expect a feel-good attitude when you leave. It is still worth seeing.

What about you? Do you always view Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy? Most women I know do :)

I’ve mentioned that I love mascara and after treating to Diorshow, I thought I would try another drug store brand. So I’ve learned that I want a lengthening and volumizing mascara. And the CoverGirl commercials for LashBlast totally reeled me in, so I picked some up and got to applying it right away.

Here are my thoughts:

CoverGirl Lash Blast mascara

How much it costs: $8.99

Where you can buy it: CVS, Walgreens, Target and other major drug store retailers

What I like about it: The wand. Seriously, that thing could be used as a weapon. The Maybelline mascara I previously reviewed has a similar one and it really does catch every single lash, which is great for me. It separates well (better than my Sephora brush) and adds length to the lashes right away. I can definitely tell a difference after I apply it and it goes on easily on lower lashes too.

What I don’t like about it: I wish it was a little thicker. I like full, long lashes and this definitely delivers the latter, but I wish that it would add more fullness too because to achieve that look, I have to put on a few layers of the mascara. Plus, the little prickly ends of the mascara can also poke you in the eyes a little bit so be careful.

But overall, I like this and would buy it again. I have a feeling though that my next mascara purchase will be a little bit of a splurge, between Bad Girl Lash or Lash Stiletto, both really intrigue me!

Do you usually mix up your mascara brands or do you pretty much buy from the same line?

But it’s not Christmas, it’s Valentine’s Day, and the movie with the same title is tempting me to be my Love Actually post-Christmas season movie so I sucked it up and went to see it (along with every other couple in Chicago) and here’s my review.

Movie: Valentine’s Day

Rating: PG-13

Release date: February 12, 2010

Everyday Adventures’ grade: B+

Summary: It’s Valentine’s Day in Los Angeles and we’re following around a group of separate yet intertwined people celebrating the day of candy, depression and flowers. I won’t even bother naming the cast because pretty much everyone famous is in it. Seriously, throw a name out and I’m sure he/she is in it. Try me.

My thoughts: I didn’t love it as much as Love Actually, but this wasn’t awful. The stories are funny and run the gamete of people “happily” in love, people getting engaged, people tested by long-term love and people just entering into a relationship and wondering how to celebrate Valentine’s Day when they aren’t even sure if they’re in a relationship. I loved Topher Grace in “That 70s Show” and it was great seeing him in a non-Stephen Soderbergh or Oceans movie, but he continues to play the same neurotic, jabbery guy he has in just about every movie or show I’ve seen him in.

Even Ashton Kutcher, who I find interesting yet annoying, wasn’t awful. Sure, he grates on you after awhile and the hammiest lines appear in his scenes, but he was fun to watch. I actually like all of the characters in the movie, with minor exception to Taylor Swift (don’t quit your day job), Queen Latifah (wasn’t on screen enough for me to connect with her) and Eric Dane (hot but again, not a necessary character). I will say, there were a few big twists in the movie that surprised me, but I’m glad they were there because it kept the movie from being 100 percent predictable.

And there was a great scene with Taylor Swift that wistfully reminded me of young love and that silly, giggly, OMG-I-love-him emotion.

My only other complaint, Taylor Lautner was almost fully shirtless that entire movie. And he didn’t take his shirt off when asked to do so. WTF? I’m paying $11 to see this movie. TAKE THAT SHIRT OFF!

Did you go see Valentine’s Day this weekend? Did you like it or are you a Love Actually loyalist?

Sometimes, it’s good to know how you’ll react to a movie because then you’re prepared. Unlike I was for Up, where even with warning, I sobbed like a baby. Seriously, that movie broke me.

Anyhow, TC and I hit the movies again and this time it was my pick :) Let’s get to the review.

Movie: Dear John

Rating: PG-13

Release date: February 5, 2010

Everyday Adventures’ grade: B+

Summary: Nicholas Sparks is tries again to make you cry until you can’t breathe or your tear ducts beg for mercy. But this time, instead of “The Notebook,” it’s “Dear John,” a love story about John (Channing Tatum) and Savannah (Amanda Seyfried). John and Savannah meet and fall in love one summer, only to be torn apart by John’s Army deployment. To stay connected, they write letters to each other and over the years find that things don’t always stay the same.

My thoughts: I’ll just say it, yes, you will cry. And yes, there are several scenes of Channing Tatum shirtless and they are G-L-O-R-I-O-U-S. It’s the only time I’ve been in a movie where people are choking back tears and fawning over a bare chest at the same time.

In comparison to “The Notebook,” I liked “Dear John” a lot more. The timeliness of the story, a couple torn apart by one being in the military, really connects and the frustration and devotion between John and Savannah is very realistic. Sure, there are some hammy lines and lingering moments with unfinished sentences (like a bad Party of Five rerun) but the emotion in the letters between the main characters really makes you yearn for that connection we often lose by email.

Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried are great and the chemistry between them feels very real. And of course, he is VERY NICE to look at. Richard Jenkins (The Visitor/Stepbrothers) is also really effective as John’s dad. He is a great actor and the father/son dynamic made me cry at parts (even more than the main story) because it was so real. Even little Elliott from E.T. (Henry Thomas) has a small role and provides a rather surprising plot twist. There is a subplot about autism that never fully plays out and throws you off but it’s not a big distraction from the main story.

Here’s what I liked about the movie: the way it shows love growing and changing as time passes but distance remains. The ending was not what I expected but yet, it after some thought, I felt okay about it. It tackles the idea that a true love and connection never dies even as lives and relationships evolve, but doesn’t wrap everything up in a bow like, “oh my gosh we went through so much and still are the same people we were before.” That’s not real.

I wasn’t a huge fan of 500 Days of Summer’s realistic view on love but this is a good balance of reality and idealism and that I can live with.

On a tissue scale, this was a 2-3 tissue movie.

Did anyone else go see it this weekend? Or do you plan to see it?

YAY it’s almost Oscar time!

Movie: An Education

Rating: PG-13

Release date: October 8, 2009 (On DVD March 2010)

Everyday Adventures’ grade: A-

Summary: Jenny (Carey Milligen) is a London teen living a school-focused live in the 60s. She’s bored with her life and longs of a bohemian life in France, but her strict parents (Alfred Molina and Cara Seymour) keep her focused on school alone with the dream of attending Oxford. Then comes David (Peter Sarsgaard), a twice-her-age knight with good looks, charm and money. David gives Jenny an escape from her current life and  taste of a different one, with consequences.

My thoughts: Carey Milligen has been getting major buzz about her role as Jenny and I can see why. She’s cute, innocent and has an “aw shucks” persona. She is perfect for this role. And watching her with David, it made me remember being a teen in love for the first time. The shoulder shrugging, giggling and general “oh-my-god-this-guy-actually-likes-me” look was like looking at myself at 18, before I realized most guys I was dating were d*cks. And some still are.

Peter Sarsgaard needs to work on his British accent more (it was fading in and out) but he was definitely charming and I found myself being a little seduced by him. Rawr. And he would make an awesome sugar daddy, for real. Alfred Molina (aka Doc Ock) was annoying as the penny pinching, crazy enforcer dad but while he was driving me to drink, I did think he was really effective.

And because it’s the 60s, there’s lots of hand mixers, gorgeous dresses and smoking. That two of which I wanted to do when we left.

Go see it!

But, I do like Jude Law, sh*t being blown up and men shirtless, so Sherlock Holmes is a pretty good fit for me.

And after seeing Robert Downey Jr. win a Golden Globe for his role, the curiosity got to be too much for me.

So away we go!

Movie: Sherlock Holmes

Rating: PG-13

Release date: December 25, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: A-

Summary: The classic Sir Arthur Conan Doyle characters are reinvented by director Guy Ritchie. Set in 19th Century London, Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and Watson (Jude Law) are on a case involving the evil Lord Blackwood, which requires the help of Holmes’ love interest/enemy Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams).

My thoughts: The main reason I don’t like mysteries is because I never fully understand the plot until the end when everything falls into place. Of course, I love that reveal but it’s the waiting and trying to piece it together myself that can be frustrating. Fortunately, you are let in on the bigger mystery in pieces throughout the movie, which keeps me engaged and curious to learn what else I’m missing.

Ritchie’s directing style with a mix of frantic and slow motion camera movements is present throughout and rather than making you feel sick, it breaks up the long periods of dialogue and Robert Downey Jr. staring at the camera. His setting of 19th Century London looks a little Gangs Of New York-like, gritty, gray and unpleasant, but it’s effective with the overall tone of the movie.

Downey is intriguing as Holmes, dialing his Tony Stark impression down about four notches to still be entertaining but a little more damaged. Jude Law is a great Watson, trying to keep Holmes on the straight-and-narrow and withholding his desire for adventure. Rachel McAdams is good but not great. After meeting her character, she isn’t who I would have cast, but she’s effective.

And there is genuine suspense in the movie too. A few times I was grabbing my handrest and hiding behind my hands. I was also a little surprised this is rated PG-13 because a few scenes are a bit graphic and violent, but hey, what do I know?

I recommend this movie. I liked it much more than I thought I would but I don’t think Robert Downey Jr. should get used to winning awards for his role. He was good, but not “blow me away amazing.”

Did you see Sherlock Holmes? If so, what did you think?

So that’s my disclaimer to the below review :)

Movie: The Lovely Bones

Rating: PG-13

Release date: December 11, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: B-/C+

Summary: Based on the Alice Sebold book, The Lovely Bones is set in the early 70s, where Susie (Saoirse Ronan) is murdered by her brutal, deceptive neighbor (Stanley Tucci) and her family (Mark Wahlberg, Rachel Weisz) deals with her terrible loss and tries to solve her murder.

My thoughts: Yeah, this movie is kind of a downer. I wouldn’t go see this if you’re looking for something light and fluffy but if you read the book ahead of time, you probably already knew that :)

For not reading the book and judging this solely on the movie. It was…okay. Visually, it was amazing. After LOTR, everyone knows Peter Jackson has a great eye for CGI and creating alternate worlds, and he does that here, weaving between real life and this “inbetween” world. What I found to be a little lacking was the story, which I had a hard time following in parts.

The most poignant scenes were the ones Susie narrates about her close relationship with her dad. Their close relationship and how lost he feels after she’s gone and her death being unresolved was very difficult to watch without crying. TC and I were both reaching for the tissues. But I had a hard time following how she communicates with her family, what this “inbetween” world is, how all of it fits together, especially at the end. To me, it felt very…unresolved or unsatisfying in how it ended.

The best part of this movie is Stanley Tucci, who is great in every movie he’s in, especially The Devil Wears Prada and Julie & Juila. He’s great but in this is he TRULY scary and chilling from his clothing to his mannerisms to the cold look in his eye. He is absolutely mesmerizing in this and creates a level of terror and fear that truly makes you fear and wonder what he’ll do next. He’s nominated for a Golden Globe tonight (as of publish time his category was unannounced) and he definitely is a strong contender. It’s just too bad that he gets lost in a story that jumps around and then ultimately ends without feeling like you went full circle. If nothing else, his performance in this movie is enough to see it.

Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weisz are good as his parents, I honestly can’t imagine Ryan Gosling playing the dad, but again, I think story makes it difficult to really develop their characters. Although I didn’t read the book, I know a key part in how Susie dies is missing due to the graphic and unsettling subject matter, and I don’t know if that would have really brought the story to another level on film, but I think for how great of a director Peter Jackson is, he needs to tighten up the script a bit more next time to really make it a complete picture.

Oh and be sure to watch for Peter Jackson’s cameo.

What did you think of the movie? If you read the book, did you feel the movie was pretty accurate?

So when my love Jenn was in town this weekend, we planned to go see it together in 3D, because she loved it…and I trust her judgement.

Here’s the review:

Movie: Avatar

Rating: PG-13

Release date: December 18, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: A

Summary: Um, this is a tough one to really summarize but it involves a fight on planet Pandora between humans and the Na’vi race to preserve its trees and energy source that the humans desperately want. I think I’ll leave it at that.

My thoughts: I have to say, I really liked this movie. James Cameron made me care about blue people and even made me cry a little bit. D*mn you James Cameron. Kidding!

The reason I like James Cameron flicks is because he blows sh*t up and makes you care about the characters. And how he does that is creating a layered story of characters that you can relate to in part and really get to know inside and out. You don’t know much about their backstory but you’re along for an adventure with them and can’t help but feel the wealth of emotions they do as the story progresses.

And Avatar is successful at making me care. Sure the Na’vi race is a little offputting at first and you don’t know how to exactly connect with them. But when you do, you feel fear and panic they do in trying to protect what’s theirs. Sam Worthington is great at Jake, especially as he goes through his emotional transformation, and Sigourney Weaver turns in a good performance as Jake’s tough boss. Cameron isn’t known for great storytelling but this story was definitely compelling, layered and entertaining.

But the real star of the show is the movie’s visual element. The effects are amazing, especially the clarify and use of color through the animation and CGI. It’s even more amazing when both worlds mix, you mind is pretty baffled. I’m very anxious to see how this technology is used in moviemaking in the future as it is definitely something different.

At 2 hours and 40 minutes, the movie is long and you do get a bit fidgety. Definitely hit the bathroom before it starts and avoid too many liquids during the show. But despite the long running time, it was still a great movie and I would highly recommend people check it out.

Have you seen Avatar yet? If so, did you love it or were you surprised at how good it was? I have to say, the trailers initially didn’t really sell me on it but I’m glad I went.

Oh yeah and Meryl Streep, Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin are in it too. I should mention that. No lie, I was hoping Meryl would just bust out a “Bon Appetit” during the movie, but she didn’t.

Alrighty let’s jump into the nitty gritty and then I’ll start with my editorial comments, of which I have many.

Movie: It’s Complicated

Rating: R

Release date: December 25, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: B

Summary: Jane (Meryl Streep) and Jake (Alec Baldwin) are divorced and Jake has his trophy wife (Lake Bell) with whom things aren’t going so well. After a family trip to New York, Jane and Jake hook up just as she is getting to know Adam (Steve Martin). Should Jane give Jake another try? Should she be with Adam? Like sands through the hours glass, these are the Days of Our Lives.

My thoughts: I have to warn you all that you have seen many of the funny parts of this movie in the trailer. Beware! And I’m being a little generous when I gave this a B, primarily because, Nancy Meyer movies do not cater to my demographic. There is a reason why my parents love her films and I support her making rom com movies that do relate to an older audience because few do.

One big issue I have with her movies, like this and Somethings Gotta Give, is that all of her main characters are rich, well dressed and well put together, WASPy version of 50+ year old adults. Everyone has the perfect house, car, family, kids, clothes and of course accessories. Not one of those kids has real issues outside of planning their JFK/Jackie-inspired weddings or lives in an apartment smaller than 2,000 square feet. It’s irritating and not very representative, but movies are an escape so I will take a round trip ticket to “oh my gosh I wish they would just adopt me like Angelina and let me live in this perfect world” station.

As a child of divorce, there were parts of this, especially Jane and Jake’s relationship with their kids, that I could relate to and overall, it was spot on. But when things get really complicated between Jane/Jake/Adam, the kids are left wondering, will mom and dad get back together? They’ve been apart for 10 years and I’m still dealing with the divorce! Are you kidding me? This theme is not at all examined leading up to this point of the movie and having her 22-27 year old kids all snuggled in bed together in a very Von Trapp-like way bemoaning this, made me gag because there is no set up, just random tears. But it makes for a warm, fuzzy moment so that’s what we love.

Meryl Streep is great as a semi-confident, established, moderately happy woman who grabs dating and sex by the balls (no pun intended) and struggles with the good/bad pieces of her affair with Jake. Steve Martin was good in an understated, muted character that you couldn’t help but root for and Alec Baldwin is still great as a smart a**y, Jake Donaghy-like character.

With relative unknown actors playing Jake and Jane’s kids, the addition of John Krasinski seemed a bit of a stretch, as if to appeal to the kids going with their parents to see this and forcing him in a few scenes. But he’s goofy, smoking f*cking hot (RAWR!) and makes you laugh. I still want to procreate with him multiple times a day after seeing this.

The last thing I’ll say is this, there was a great scene with Meryl that I could relate to, about being comfortable in your body and showing that nakedness to another person, knowing they’re judging something so intimate. Really poignant.

Summary: So out of my long-winded diatribe, I think you’ll like It’s Complicated, especially if you still have a girl crush on Meryl post Julie/Julia but it’s more dramatic than comedy with some good parts mixed in.

Did you see it? If so, what did you think?

1. The ability to successfully break into song and dance (successfully) anywhere I want
2. That Daniel Day-Lewis (DDL) finally says “I know, I’m the sh*t” when people praise his acting skills

Both of those happening would make me really happy.

I’m a sucker for a good musical. Song and dance? Bring it on. I love singing about my feelings. So I capitalized on my stepmom’s secret DDL crush and dragged her and my dad out to see this movie last week. And as a big Rob Marshall fan, I was ready to be ridiculously jealous of the fashion, scenery and musical talent.

So let’s take a closer look.

Movie: Nine

Rating: PG-13

Release date: December 25, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: B-

Summary: Guido (DDL) is an Italian director with a lot of problems. He has a movie that’s about to start shooting with no script and he’s having trouble juggling all the women in his life, including his wife (Marian Cotillard), mistress (Penelope Cruz), costume designer (Judi Dench) and muse (Nicole Kidman).

My thoughts: Sweet lord I wanted to really love this movie and for the most part I did but I think I fell victim to some early reviews, which were mixed.

The high points: DDL amazing as always and Rob Marshall’s direction, use of space and light were visually stunning. I love the location scenes in Italy, which made me want a mini sports car and cigarette right away, and Marian Cotillard was really great. Her musical numbers were strong and she looked every bit as tortured as she meant to and should have been. Guido is a total cad. I even found myself saying out loud “good God he slept with her too???!”

And now the bad, I was just…underwhelmed. The musical numbers didn’t feel like a fit with the plot points in which they appeared nor did they feel natural. Kate Hudson was gorgeous but had such a minor role, she wasn’t really necessary in the film at all, same with Fergie, who had the strongest song and best choreography for , “Be Italian.” Fergie, Sophia Loren and Kate Hudson were not really relevant to the larger storyline and are each on screen for about…20 minutes. And usually when I see musicals, I can pick a few really catchy songs that will come out of it and outside of Fergies, none really wow’ed me.

As I heard in early reviews, the story is weak and it is. DDL does such a great job of playing this cad of a guy but the crowded cast and random musical numbers makes the story hard to really grasp on to before it implodes and you don’t know if the movie is actually done.

Still, the look is good, music is great and Penelope Cruz shows me again why she does “crazy” so well. I don’t think this will really win anything of importance at the Golden Globes or Oscars but if it had a pared down cast and stronger story, I think it would have been better.

Okay, time for me to go practice my jazz hands. What’s your favorite musical?

I eat that sh*t up. With a spoon. I swoon and almost throw myself on my back, scratching around because it’s so d*mn cute.

And while I hate Emily Blunt for being so gorgeous, talented and mostly for being engaged to the man of my dreams in real life, I was intrigued by the movie’s trailer. And fortunately, it came out in Milwaukee on Christmas Day so I could skip over for a showing and bask in the pageantry.

Movie: The Young Victoria

Rating: PG

Release date: December 18, 2009 (limited)

Everyday Adventures’ grade: A+

Summary: Victoria (Emily Blunt) is the future Queen of England who is kept “protected” by her mother (Miranda Richardson) and advisors. And Victoria is feeling like she’s trapped in a prison, just waiting for word about when she will become queen. And she is trapped. She has to be escorted down the stairs at all times and her food has to be “taste tested” first. Contemporary books and music are banned too. The movie generally follows the first few years of her reign and the romance she has with husband Prince Albert (Rupert Friend) from Germany. Fortunately, the movie doesn’t weigh as heavily on the political piece of this (unlike Cate Blanchett’s Elizabeth movies) but the romance between Albert and Victoria, which is entertaining enough on it’s own.

My thoughts: I absolutely f*cking love this movie. It was above and beyond my expectations and so far is one of my favorite movies of the latter half of the year. Despite my hate toward Emily Blunt for taking my man, she was amazing in this role with a great mix of vulnerability, insecurity and young love. Much like Carey Milligen in An Education, she just wears all of her emotions on her sleeve when it comes to Prince Albert and you suddenly wish you received passionate declarations of love via letter and now, I wish I had someone to just write a letter to! Rupert Friend is great as Albert and the chemistry between him and Emily is just spot-on. The costumes are amazing (hello couture!) and the scenes of Windsor castle and the then newly built Buckingham Palace are jaw dropping. Miranda Richardson does well as Victoria’s mother who meant well by her daughter but took bad advice along the way and Jim Broadbent, in a smaller role, is memorable too. I laughed, cried and just left with this warm and fuzzy feeling.

Seriously though, this movie belongs to Emily Blunt in just a really great performance. I would definitely see it again and encourage you to check it out as well.

Reader note: This is my first movie review on my little blog so please let me know if you want me to continue or have any requests of other information to include. I’m still learning as I go with this.

And one reason I’ve stayed with MAC for so long is the MAC Gives Back program, which it started to reward long-term fans and help the environment. If you bring in six (6) MAC makeup containers to a MAC store or retailer, you get a free lipstick or lipgloss of your choice. Sure, the payback isn’t the same as the investment you put in when buying those six products, but it’s better than just tossing them out and it allows you to try something new and fun. After a LONG time, I finally took in my MAC products to give back and opted to go with a lip gloss (shock!)

Choosing lip glosses from MAC is sort of like finding a needle in a haystack because there are so many but here’s one I liked.

MAC Tinted Lipglass

How much it costs: $14

Where you can buy it: MACcosmetics.com and MAC counters and retailers (Macy’s, Nordstrom, Bloomingdale’s, etc.)

What I like about it: Again, MAC has a variety of colors to pick from, some more subtle and vibrant than others. I purchased the Pink Poodle color, which looks shockingly pink in the container but it is a lot tamer on the lips. The Pink Poodle color is described as “pink fuchsia with pinky-goldshimmer.” Yeah it’s pretty bright, but I like a bright pink lip over red because of my skin tone. The color spreads really well without looking or feeling greasy. Yes, it does leave a bright color outline behind on cups or mugs so you’ll have to re-apply often but it’s fun and nice to know that you can get the bolder colors without it being too much on the skin. It gives a great shine without being too much and you can wear it on its own or over lipstick which is nice to have it be versatile too.

What I don’t like about it: It does rub off easily and when the lips are dry, it can feel a little cakey on the lips but it’s fun to wear out and is small enough to fit in just about any purse.

So overall, I’ve been happy with it and it goes really well with my MAC Sun Tints too.

What color lipstick or lip gloss do you always buy? For me, it’s pink all the way :)

Neutrogena Healthy Skin Enhancer

How much it costs: $12 (price varies based on retailer)

Where you can buy it: Neutrogena.com and retailers (Walgreens, CVS, Target, etc.)

What I like about it: It really is a good alternate to foundation. It’s light on the skin and dries really fast so you can see the coverage right away. Plus, spreads really well on the skin and looks pretty natural out in the sun. You can still apply blush and powder over it but on a hot summer day (which we won’t be having for a while) it feels really nice and not heavy at all. Plus it has SPF 20 and is oil-free, two things I like a lot.

What I don’t like about it: So while it is light, the tint isn’t very strong which means if you need a lot of coverage it might not give you the results you want. I use this still over my Clinique Super City Block and it’s fine but it’s moreso for a day of errands around your neighborhood or running downtown for something quick, not red carpet. And, even with a cap, the first little pump of product is usually dry and crusty, which is kind of annoying and a little bit of a waste. Oh also, if you have under eye circles, this won’t be the best coverage either (I found), so feel free to add Smashbox’s Under Eye Brightener as a base or your regular foundation and you’ll be fine.

I used to use Smashbox’s Photo Finish Color Correcting Foundation Primer and while I liked it, I found out NARS also had a primer so I gave it a try and I haven’t gone back to Smashbox yet. And here’s why….

NARS Makeup Primer with SPF 20

How much it costs: $33

Where you can buy it: NARS retailers (Nordstrom, Macy’s, etc.)

What I like about it: First, it has SPF. I know, I layer SPF on my face from multiple products, but the fact that it has it in case I shake up my makeup routine one day, that is a little piece of mind. The SPF is also effective against UVA/UVB rays and is oil-free, which is super important to me and my sensitive skin. I also love that it is more of a cream too (compared to Smashbox) and it absorbs really well into the skin while reducing redness. Usually I’ll apply this to my cheeks (where I need the most makeup coverage) and then put on my eye makeup while this absorbs before moving to my foundation. Also, I know it’s a little pricey but honestly, this stuff LASTS. I’ve had a tube for more than a year because it spreads really well and you don’t need a lot of it. A thin layer over the skin is more than enough.

What I don’t like about it: The primer color is white (compared to Smashbox’s variety of colors based on skin type) so I really have to be careful not to accidentally put too much on otherwise it looks like I have white cheeks, but again because it absorbs so well, it’s not a huge deal. Also, it can feel a little greasy on the skin when you apply too much so that’s another thing to be aware of.

Overall though, after using Smashbox’s primer and NARS, I’ll stick with NARS. I prefer the moreso creamy base and have had better results with my foundation over this primer. Plus it’s similar in price to the Smashbox product so you break even that way too.

Do you use a primer? If so what one do you like and if not, why? Just curious :)

And this would be one of those cave-in situations. When I bought the Volcanic Ash exfoliator a few weeks ago, I heard the saleslady talking about a matching Thermal Mask that deep cleaned the skin, moisturized and removed oils and impurities from the skin. And it was already sold out of the MAC counter at Michigan Avenue. Deep cleanser + sold out? Sign me up. So I bought this off Nordstrom’s Web site and had it delivered.

And now, here is what I thought about this little add-on baby.

MAC Volcanic Ash Thermal Mask

How much it costs: $19.50

Where you can buy it: Nordstrom.com and other retailers’ MAC counters (while supplies last)

What I liked about it: First, it applies a lot easier than the exfoliator. This spreads very easily and well and feels very light on the face rather than hardening and being uncomfortable. The grainy feeling from the exfoliator also isn’t present so it isn’t too harsh on your skin. You only have to leave it on for five minutes too which is easy to brush your teeth or step away for a few minutes before you wash it off. With my sensitive skin, this felt nice on it and I didn’t see any irritation when I washed it off so that’s a big plus for me. Also, when you do wash it off, the minute water hits the skin, the mask warms up (but not too warm) and feels kind of refreshing.

What I didn’t like about it: Because it is so light on the skin, I’m not one hundred percent sure how effective it is in deep cleansing but I’m not willing to rule it out just yet. Also, when you wash it off, the black color lingers a little bit on your hands and towel but again, that’s not a make or break thing for me either, just be aware so you thoroughly wash your hands before touching other stuff.

So I’ll give this a few more tries before making a final decision and hopefully after a few more uses I’ll see more noticeable results but so far I’m happy.

And if you asked me to pick today between this and the exfoliator (if you could only purchase one), I’d say go with the exfoliator.

Do you use any other masks other than an exfoliator? I had no idea other ones really existed!

Anyhow, last week my friend Meg (who is also my makeup Yoda), told me about this product from MAC that was previously available in stores, discontinued and now being re-released in limited edition, causing loyalists to clamour for samples before it’s sold out. And the product is formulated with volcanic ash to deep cleanse the face.

Volcanic ash as a cleansing product? Limited edition? Sign me up, so I called Nordstrom and went in to pick one up. Apparently Nordstrom on Michigan Avenue is already sold out of one of the Volcanic Ash products and the sales person gushed how much I would love this. So let’s take a closer look.

MAC Volcanic Ash Exfoliator

How much it costs: $19.50

Where you can get it: MAC counters at department stores (Nordstrom, Macy’s,etc.)

What I like about it: It definitely cleanses the skin and seems to work on all skin types. I was worried that the product would be too rough on my sensitive skin but my rosacea and skin redness wasn’t affected it at all, although I did apply it lightly on the cheeks just to be safe. The exfoliator spread well on my skin and you don’t need a lot to get good coverage. Plus, you don’t have to sit with it long on your clean face, just a minute and then wash off with warm water. I’ve only used it a few times but I am shocked at how soft my face is after. It’s like a baby’s bottom, no joke. I could not stop caressing my own cheek (in a non-scary way). Oh and the black scrub color is awesome because when you apply it to your face, it’s like applying dirt to your face, but in a fun way!

What I don’t like about it: The product does have a little bit of an odd smell but it’s not gross or gag-worthy. Just caught me by surprise. Plus, the product feels a little rough when you apply it, kind of like dragging….well….ash across your face. But, again, I haven’t used exfoliator in a while so I’m sure the concentration of ash to cleanse just takes an adjustment from me.

So thank you Meg for suggesting this. I definitely plan to ration my supply of it and get back on a regular exfoliation schedule :) I’m really curious to keep using this and see if it continues to give me the results I’ve seen so far! Next up: the Thermal Scrub. Can’t wait.

Do you exfoliate? If so, what do you recommend using too? Would you try something like this?

So here’s the one I love and recommend!

Mario Badescu Kera Moisturizer

How much it costs: $20 (for a 2 oz. container)

Where you can get it: Nordstrom, Mario Badescu.com

What I like about it: Lots! The moisturizer spreads well on your face and you definitely don’t need a lot to do the job. I apply it after I wash my face at night and my skin feels soft and smooth (like a baby’s bottom!) all night. Even if I don’t wash my face right away the next day, it still feels great. And it’s not very heavy so my skin doesn’t feel greasy or leave a greasy film on clothes, pillows, etc. Also, the container is recyclable plastic too.

What I don’t like about it: Sadly, this doesn’t have SPF so I wouldn’t recommend it during the day, unless you have SPF in your foundation, etc. It is a little pricy too, but if you don’t use too much of it when applying, it does last.

Do you use a specific moisturizer for night? And if so, what kind do you like?