Rating Hallmark Christmas Romance Movies

'Tis the season for some Christmas movies. This post will focus on Hallmark Romances. Next I might do Christmas Romances that are like Hallmark movies, but not by Hallmark. And then maybe I will focus on the Santa Christmas movies, specifically. While Santa does make a brief appearance (or a Santa look-a-like) in some of these to dispense some wisdom, the only one below where he seems to really play a role in the events is Snowed Inn Christmas. 

Finding Father Christmas: Cute and had a twist that I didn't expect, not overly dramatic and the couple was cute together. 8/10

• Has two sequels (Engaging Father Christmas and Marrying Father Christmas)

On the 12th Date of Christmas: A classic "optimistic, Christmas loving girl converts loner, Scrooge boy". It was cute, opportunity to make it overly dramatic and angsty, but did well at keeping it reasonable. 8/10

Christmas at Holly Lodge: Okay, a lot of different storylines to follow that didn't really seem to connect as well as they could. Classic happy ending for all, but people didn't really act rationally. Plus she spent 60% of the movie avoiding him. So, he had a grander than grand romantic gesture after knowing her for basically two days. 5/10

Christmas Cottage: Classic, "workaholic city girl returns home and falls in love with childhood sweetheart". Personally, it is always a knock against a movie if one or both is engaged to someone else. It just seems questionable to me to be declaring your love to someone less than 24 hours after ending a long-term relationship or engagement. She also bailed on work A LOT for someone who supposedly cared about her job. Plus, I feel like she made some selfish decisions that weren't necessary to get the happy ending. The couple did seem to have pretty good chemistry. 6/10

Snowed Inn Christmas: Really enjoyed this one. Opposites attract, cute chemistry. I think more could have been done to establish their relationship early on (i.e. kind of implies he might have been such a jerk to her for so long because he liked her but thought she didn't like him). Loses a point for ending long-term relationship and confessing to someone new within 24 hours. 8/10

Candy Cane Christmas: Too many misunderstandings and assumptions. They didn't just jump to conclusions, they flung themselves at them. Also they lived in the same small town and crossed paths like 6 times in two days, how had they never met before? Neither was new in town and they seemed to have mutual friends. He was instantly infatuated and spent probably $1000s of dollars on a grand gesture to make her happy in the end (not even something she needed, just on something she liked in the past). I think most people would be a little uncomfortable at someone going to such an extreme effort after just one date. 3/10

Our Last Love Song: Cute, but unrealistic. Classic Hallmark, "no one is really bad, even when they actually break the law", with a dab of "small town boy, city girl" and a sprinkle of "childhood sweethearts". 5/10

Lucky Christmas: My least favorite one yet. A guy and his brother commit arson and insurance fraud, then steal her car (which happens to have her winning lottery ticket in it). And the guy then inserts himself into her life, basically stalking her and using things he found in her car to get closer to her, because she is pretty. But also because he wants to decide if he should return the ticket or not. And then when she finds out what he did SHE STILL LETS HIM HANG OUT WITH HER SON. Like, I wouldn't let my son hang out with some stranger who I knew was both a criminal and a liar who stalked me and went through my things to insert himself into my life. She doesn't even turn him into the police. And he is like "I mailed the lottery ticket back to you". Like...okay, that doesn't change the fact that he was an accomplice to arson and theft. He also didn't send it back immediately. He dated her first and then when he decided he had feelings for her, he sent it back. So, like he only did the right thing because he was attracted to her. That's not really a win. And then she finds the lottery ticket and is like "he told the truth about sending it back!" And his brother says it was his idea to commit the crimes, which doesn't change the fact that he still was involved and he didn't have to be. So, she goes and confesses her love to him and they cash the ticket together. Like...why? He is clearly not someone you can trust and he will probably end up in jail. Oh, and the money you shared with him? Will be going to paying the legal fees when he gets sued by the insurance company. And they didn't even have chemistry to explain why she would be so eager to overlook his red flags. 0/10

Christmas in Montana: A little cliché, someone from the city going to the country to tell them how to run their business (be it a restaurant, hotel, inn, etc.) but then having that epiphany about how family and community are the most important things. I think this cliche annoys me, because it makes her look incompetent. It's almost always a woman coming into town and trying to change the small town business to the big city standard, but I've literally taken four business and marketing classes total and even I know that you look at the demographics and community of the surrounding area. And if she is really a VP or Executive, she would know that cookie cutter business strategies aren't going to work everywhere. Anyway, they had good chemistry and there were some twists that made it a little less cliché. 7/10

 

Christmas Under the Stars: Really cute, and while it had the "redemption for all" trope, it actually made sense without it just being a Christmas miracle. Lots of secondary characters that actually tied to the plot well. 8/10

Christmas in Homestead: Celebrity and non-celebrity romance, with a dab of "the grass isn't always greener on the other side". Cute overall with good chemistry, but the ending is a bit vague. The main issue separating them wasn't really resolved and it doesn't show any attempt or plan to resolve it. So, just by the power of love, I guess? 7/10

Heart of Christmas: Cute, liked that some of the early minor characters played a role in the end. Love when people doing good things early on has a ripple effect and the people they helped early on help them in return. Don't love the main female lead constantly yelling at a guy for doing his job. Not uncommon, but makes the female lead in this seem seem naïve at best, ignorant at worst. 7/10

Christmas Town: Loved this one. Was super cute, the pieces connected and it really did seem like fate without being too in your face about anything. Also, no one really had to give up anything. So often the female lead gives up her job in the city , but in this she actually still got her dream job, she just got it in the same town as her dream guy. 9/10

Miss Christmas: Really cute, liked the family. Certain scenes seemed unnecessary, but overall well done. The ending felt a little rushed and considering he was the one who yelled at her and accused her of basically being manipulative and faking romantic interest in him to get what she wanted, I was NOT happy that he basically never apologized. Like, he overhears her talking and leaps to conclusions, makes accusations, does something that he knows might risk her career and get her fired, while also making her look bad in front of basically the entire city, and then when he finds out he is wrong he feels bad about it but doesn't do anything. She is the one who makes the grand romantic gesture in the end, she gives up her apartment, AND quits the job she loves to return to him, before he even apologized. Like he thought some really horrible things about her based on two sentences out of context. If he loses trust in her that quickly, the relationship will not succeed. Other than the ending though, it wasn't bad. 5/10 

Snow Capped Christmas: It was cute. The characters got along fairly well. Relationship could have been fleshed out more, seems like a large part of it came from the fact that she got a long with his daughter. And while that's good for the relationship long-term, there needs to be more if they are going to last. Like, if she gets a long with her teachers and they are pretty, is he going to date them too? 7/10

Switched for Christmas: Twin drama as adults. Honestly, I wasn't a fan of the premise of this movie. One sister was a teacher and the other worked at some sort of property management firm. They had different jobs, different skill sets, different educations, etc. It doesn't make sense that they would swap jobs like that and then be surprised when things don't go smoothly. Also, it is technically against the law (identity fraud) and while they might not have gotten in trouble doing it as kids, as adults they might. 6/10

Dashing Through the Snow: They were trying too hard to make her seem nice and innocent. The whole premise is that she had her identity stolen and an incompetent FBI agent is convinced she is a criminal/terrorist. He has his team manipulate events (in a way that makes no logical sense) to get her in the car with an undercover agent who falls for her. But, she is so over the top with the positivity. I am a positive person and I'd find her annoying. And then the big climax happens and they basically gloss over her being arrested and proven innocent, only to cut to several days later with him (for some reason) in one of the towns they had stopped in, despite it not being where she was arrested, where she went after, or where he was based. Also, she basically knew nothing about him except that he was an undercover agent who lied to her and led to her getting arrested and several of her friends harassed and treated like terrorists. Also, the fact that their ending confession was basically "now you can believe in me like my dad" was a little awkwardly written and kind of screamed "daddy issues". The puppy though was very cute. Overall, think it had a good premise (and not a unique one, really) but could have been done better. 5/10

Christmas Everlasting: It was good and I liked some of the aspects a lot. I think that it could have been fleshed out more and some things were added to make it more dramatic, that weren't needed. They brought in a long lost relative, when I think more focus should have been on the main female lead overcoming the trauma and guilt she felt about her sister's accident. Like she clearly blamed herself for years and let the guilt she felt dictate the course of her life, but it really came up like once in a conversation and then it kind of implied through context that she didn't visit home because it was hard seeing her sister struggle. Like the pieces were mostly there but not well connected to give her that kind of moment of realization and closure, instead the focus was on the relative that doesn't even play a major part other than as a sort of twist. 6.5/10

Chateau Christmas: Cute, good chemistry between the leads. Not too much angst or drama. A little cliché with the reoccurring "she went to pursue her dreams and he stayed behind" thing. 7.5/10

Christmas Wishes and Mistletoe Kisses: Cute couple, some miscommunication issues that don't make much sense (i.e. why assume two people who aren't even dating will suddenly get engaged that very night?). She didn't need to have a kid. I feel like a lot of Christmas movies one of the two romantic leads will have a kid to kind of act as a bridge between the characters (i.e. guy with kid and girl bonds with kid first) or an obstacle (i.e. she doesn't want to date because her kid is her focus), but he didn't play much of a role at all. In fact, I had to start playing it again just to check if I remembered correctly that she even had a kid. 7.5/10

Christmas Bells are Ringing: She lost her inspiration and passion in the big city and finds it in her small hometown with her childhood sweetheart. They both give things up at the end, which seems a little unnecessary but its sweet and they seem happy about it. 7/10

One Royal Holiday: This was really cute and I liked the accents, but even Hallmark knows that the secondary couple took the show (Hallmark uses the second couple in a lot of commercials for Hallmark movies). First of all, the secondary couple had such a cute meeting. They had such a good story line that should be the premise of another Hallmark movie (royalty/celebrity ends up stranded in small town, head of security/head bodyguard works with town's mayor to ensure discretion and security). And I  LOVED her attitude. The main female lead was like "don't pursue this, it isn't real. He's going to leave. It will never work." And the she was just like "they said I wouldn't be mayor, but look at me now." And "it might be hard to do long distance, but I think it is worth trying". Loved them. They should have been in it more or the main couple. The main couple was still okay. Suggests she might be going to live with him or just visiting. I don't know. Honestly, not sure they do either. But the secondary couple, they buy tickets for her to fly out to visit him for New Year's way before the main couple even comes to terms with how they feel. 7/10

Jingle Bell Bride: They were a cute couple, felt like there were some plot lines that never were fully pursued. But it did make it lighter on the drama. Like her coworker seemed to be trying to sabotage her, but that seemed like a plot thread that was just dropped. In fact, it was made to seem kind of sketchy about her going to the main female lead's client sort of behind her back, but like they worked at the same firm and the lead was stranded in a Alaska, it made sense that someone else would work with her client while she was away and nothing came of it. 6/10

Cheerful Christmas: She was too much. They needed to tone her character down a little bit. She was so overly enthusiastic and hyper, that a lot of the time their meetings seemed awkward and forced with her trying to shove Christmas cheer down his throat. Like she constantly disturbed his work, got in his way, or was overly pushy but everyone encouraged her to keep annoying him to "save his Christmas spirit". But, she gets better about halfway through when they become more of a duo and they live in the same area so there isn't too much drama in regards to how they will maintain a relationship. 6.5/10

Christmas on My Mind: She basically magically (I guess) forgets two years of her life. But then it doesn't really make any sense. Like, she gets bits and pieces back, but it doesn't all seem to come back to her by the end of the month. So, she makes some pretty big decisions about her future considering she is still missing so much of her past. The main couple are cute, but I am not really a fan of people being all "I'm going to hold them back". Because a) 90% of the time there is nothing stopping them from going with them or pursuing a long-distance relationship and b) it reminds me of something from another show that I wish I could remember exactly, but it was something like "you can't expect her to pick you, if she doesn't know you are an option". All she really remembers was him calling off their engagement two years prior so he wouldn't hold her back and he then he doesn't even really say he still loves her and wants her to stay. 6/10

Cranberry Christmas: This felt like it was meant to be a sequel to something, but I don't think it was. The couple is already married but are having some difficulties (mostly in communication). I liked that she called him out for basically doing a "maybe we shouldn't be together" in an attempt to not hold her back thing. I feel like I would have rooted for them more if I saw how they came together. So, if it isn't a sequel, then maybe we need a prequel. 6/10

Christmas Connection: I really liked this, but felt like we could have gone into her backstory more. Like, it seems to suggest she isn't big on Christmas because her parents died when she was young and she was raised by her grandparents, who have since passed away so she doesn't have family to spend it with. But, it doesn't really seem to talk about how her grandparents did Christmas. The kid was cute and I liked a lot of the story. 7/10

Merry & Bright: I'm going to start off by saying the framing device was weird and unnecessary. It starts with her being asked a question and goes into a flashback, but it is just not necessary and really kind of spoils the ending. The couple are cute, there were things introduced early on that came up later. Some things didn't make sense from a practical point, but overall very cute. 7/10

Post 184: Rating Amazon Prime Hallmark Movies (Stack Channel - updated May 7th)

When I was going to work, I would usually need to leave the house by about 7:15am to get to work at 9:00am (mostly to get a parking spot at the station). Then, I would leave work at 4:30pm and would usually get home around 5:45-6pm. So, I spent about +3hours in commute. And because I was out of the house all day, I could only do chores on the weekend (or usually only did them then). Even more low maintenance, but time consuming things like laundry were a Sunday activity. But now that I can't go any where and my commute is basically 50 steps, I have gained a lot of time. I'd like to say that I have been using all of it to be highly productive, but some of it has been spent watching mindless television.

As of late I have been a particular fan of Hallmark style movies, i.e. predictable, formulaic even. But always with a happy ending and good people getting good things and bad people being punished or reforming.

So, to keep it from being a total time waste, I figured I would use it as an opportunity to get some writing in. There are so many and it seems like there are three new ones that pop up every weekend, I will only write a little bit about each. But I will rank them all below.

They are all from Amazon Prime, particularly the Stack channel (free-trial ending at the start of next month). After this free trial ends, I will try Super Channel. It has some Hallmark movies, but it has a lot that fit the same style under "Heart and Home" category. I will update as new ones come up, as long as I have a free trial. I don't know that it is worth the extra $10 a month for some Hallmark movies, especially at an additional $7-10 per channel on top of the cost for Amazon Prime.

EDIT: I will not be continuing with Stack channel. I considered it, but now that I am nearing the end of my free trial I started a Super Channel trial. Super Channel has some of the same movies, more selection, and so far there have been no commercials while most Stack movies and TV shows still have commercials. They are generally shorter, but since other channels with more selection don't have commercials it doesn't feel worth it.

Love at Sunset Terrace--He is a widower who runs a B&B, she is a corporate interior designer looking for some time away from work. Review: really cute, adorable little girl, good chemistry, minimal angst. Minimal communication issues. 8/10

Just My Type--She is a writer for a magazine who is tasked with interviewing a popular writer that hasn't done interviews in years. Review: sweet, very cute dog, interesting premise, some things a little unclear. Medium communication issues, but minimal angst. 7/10

You're Bacon Me Crazy--They both run food trucks and end up as competitors in a food truck competition. Review: communication issues actually resolved through communication, medium angst in one scene, good looking food, side characters could have had more of a role. 6.5/10

Easter Under Wraps--Her family owns a large chocolate company, she goes undercover in one of the factories where he works. Review: Medium communication issues, minor characters did play a role but could have had more focus, okay chemistry but could have ended as friends just as easily. 6/10

Fashionably Yours--She moved to the city to follow her dreams, but when they didn't work she decided to move home and he is her mover. Review: A little bit of an odd premise, but he was sweet. They had good chemistry, there was good use of the side characters and they actually influenced the ending. Medium angst and communication issues. 6.5/10

Bottled with Love--She wrote a love letter to her ideal partner, put it in a bottle and threw it in the ocean which he found. They turn out to be coworkers with very different ideals. Review: Medium communication issues, but they are actually resolved. Medium angst. Kind of similar in nature to You've Got Mail. 6/10

Love at the Shore--stressed single mother (divorced) takes her two kids to the seaside for some peace and relaxation to focus on her next novel, he is her neighbor and a bit of a loud one at that. Review: really sweet, loved the kids, couple had good chemistry and had the "being the best version of themselves with each other" thing. Communication issues were minimal at the end, but played a role in the beginning that made sense. Minor angst. 7.5/10

In the Key of Love--Former singing partners and exes meet at their friend's wedding (her best friend, his sister) and get reacquainted. Review: Medium communication issues, relationship very quickly changed and was awkward at times, sweet ending. Minor characters played a large role in the plot, but in a way that made them kind of unlikable. 5.5/10

True Love Blooms--she runs a community garden and he is the real estate developer that is looking to build on the property. Review: I found her mostly unlikable. She is meant to come across as a very sweet, selfless character but comes across as the opposite. She keeps pushing him to move elsewhere or block his development, but he owns all the other properties nearby and his whole team is depending on the job. Meanwhile, no one at the garden actually NEEDS their little patch of dirt (which is like a 2by4 plot per person and there are maybe 6-8 in total). She dismisses two of the people when they are trying to talk to her and then acts like they are betraying her when they decide to move their garden elsewhere rather than risking having their garden just destroyed. She gets mad at the guy selling the land because he wants to retire to be with his family. And she spends the entire movie trying to block the male lead by going over his head or trying to guilt him into it, but never actually looks at other locations or proposes solutions. Medium angst, medium communication issues. 3/10

Season for Love--She works at her family BBQ restaurant and he is a local chef in town to host a BBQ competition. Review: really cute, loved their dynamic. Side characters found love as well and people improve. Medium angst, minimal communication issues. 6/10

How to Fall in Love--She was the most popular girl in school who danced with another guy after they went to a school dance together as friends...with a group, years later he still feels like the awkward dork from school and doesn't know how to talk to girls so hires her to teach him to date. Review: Kind of like Love Don't Cost a Thing, but with adults who should know better. Angst was too high. Twenty years later he still can't date because she invited him as a friend to a dance and then when he didn't talk to her most of the night she agreed to dance with someone else? Like the most popular girl in school invited him to the dance and there was no prank or cruelty involved. She actually asked just to be nice. And yet he was still scarred for life? That doesn't make much sense to me. If she had been mean at the time and then years later had learned her lesson that would be one thing, but there was too much of a push for her to have been nice all along (though apparently she forgot everything that happened, which seems weird unless she had some sort of head injury) that it didn't seem like it should have hurt him so much for so long, the movie even brings this up but doesn't address it. Basically he goes, "I've probably been upset about this for longer than people think I should, but...oh well". And there is no moment where he says he was bullied or insulted by anyone prior to or after that moment not even for his appearance. So, it seems to have only ever been in his own head. And her "teaching him to get to first base" while he was dating someone else was kind of cringey and manipulative. Sure, he liked her at that point, but she didn't know that and it was using his eagerness (and desperation) to do well as an excuse to get him to do what she wanted. Especially when she said he needed practice kissing as an excuse to make out with him more, like...that just doesn't sit right with me. 3.5/10 (Also on Super Channel and on Super Channel there are no commercials).

Hearts of Spring--A mommy blogger meets a guy on her blog that has a different parenting style, they argue in the comments not knowing they are dating in real life. Review: I didn't love the concept. They are both claiming to be experts in parenting, but they are both such extreme opposites with no actual qualifications to be telling anyone what to do. And neither of them seem to be doing that great. One took a Emily Gilmore approach, the other a Lorelai Gilmore approach. As such you have a dictatorship parental situation and friends first, no leadership parental situation. He feels like he is losing control and she feels like she has none, but they're lecturing other people on what to do? Ridiculous. If she had a degree in childhood development (or really any experience beyond that her husband seemed to have left her enough money when he died that she could be a stay-at-home mom for her one daughter) that would be different. Multi-generational angst, medium communication issues. 4/10

Sailing into Love--A teacher takes her students on an annual trip to an island, he is the new captain sailing them there and together they have to save the island from developers. Review: could have been better, in the beginning something comes up that could have been a good way to resolve it, but then that is abandoned and it goes in a different direction. (spoiler: they are trying to save the island. Early on a bird is mentioned that hasn't been seen on the island for years, if they saw it they could have used that to lobby for the island to be a reserve to protect the bird, but the bird doesn't really ever come up again). Minimal communication issues, minimal angst. Cute couple, good chemistry. I like that despite thinking her ex is trying to get her back, that he actually fights for her (both in that even when he thinks he might not win her romantically, he still supports her rather than getting moody and leaving her to fight the battle on her own, but also that he lets her know that he thinks she can do better and he cares about her). 6.5/10

Love Once and Always--Former childhood sweethearts reconnect when they both inherit the same former historic home. Review: Confusing couple (i.e. it seems to suggest he broke up with her early on but still loved her and always got really excited when she came home to visit so he could see her again even from a distance but then it also seems to suggest that they broke up and hadn't been in the same place for years-but that means that they had been in a long distance relationship for years, so there was no reason they couldn't have stayed in one), but decent chemistry overall. Medium angst, major communication issues. 6/10

Love to the Rescue--At an adoption fair for animals, two households try to adopt the same dog and so the shelter has them take turns with the dog before deciding who keeps him. Review: I find the premise unlikely and found that their kids were basically mirrors of the other love interest weird (i.e. she has very practical and structured daughter who likes rules, just like he likes rules and structure. His son is creative and active, she is creative and active). Medium communication issues that are resolved too quickly. Minimal angst. 5.5/10

Rome in Love--She is an unknown actress playing a large role in a new movie, he is a journalist with an exclusive chance to interview her while they spend time sight-seeing in Rome. Review: Very cute, they were a really sweet couple. Good chemistry. Lots of chances to add communication issues and angst, but didn't go that way which was appreciated. Minor communication issue at the end. Minimal angst. 8/10

Love on the Menu--She works for a company that would like to improve their frozen food, he is a chef with a failing restaurant. She agrees to help him, if he agrees to help her company. Review: weird premise and didn't really make sense that someone as senior and talented as her in such a large company could spend so much time helping him with his restaurant and ignoring her actual job, but that aside it was very sweet and they were a cute couple. Ending was a little cringe. 6/10

Love Takes Flight--He is the new helicopter pilot at the hospital she runs. Review: Medium communication issues that don't make sense. In the end, she makes a decision and then justifies it, but the justification doesn't make sense (Spoilers: she says they shouldn't date because of the conflict of interest. There is a situation that arises where what makes sense for the patient is for him to land at their hospital despite the storm, but she tells him to fly to another hospital instead for a safer landing, knowing that the time to get the organ he is delivering will be increased likely to the point where it is no longer viable for transplant. Later, she says this was the right call, but that doesn't make sense. As the pilot, he knew the conditions and choose something more dangerous for him but better for the patient, while she wanted him to do something that was safer for him personally but would likely cause the patient's death and because of the importance of the surgery, be really bad for the hospital. It would have been better in the end if she admitted that she told him to take the option that was safer for him because she cared about him and then used that as a reason not to be together rather than what she actually did which was basically deny that what he did was in the patient's interest and she was in the wrong and fired him anyway). Medium angst. 4.5/10

October Kiss--She is a flake who ends up working as a nanny for a workaholic single dad. Review: How does she get all these jobs doing things with no experience? And she can't be getting good reviews it she never tries to learn anything new, quits immediately if she isn't good at something, and never stays longer than a week. How has she survived financially? How did she get a job teaching yoga when she didn't know what she was doing and her advice actually could have caused people harm? Didn't love her character, clearly. She basically has a "I wasn't instantly good at it, so therefore it isn't for me" attitude. She literally quits her first day of multiple jobs because she isn't instantly perfect. But aside from that it was okay. The kids were the real stars. 5/10 (Last I checked, also on Netflix commercial free)

Truly, Madly, Sweetly--She is a food truck owner who wants to be a baker, he was recently fired from an investment firm and together they inherit property. He inherits a bakery and she inherits the garage behind it. Review: Really sweet, like the ending. It could have added unnecessary conflict, being that he lost his job he could have been secretly trying to fix up the bakery just to sell it out from under her rather than letting her run it. Glad it didn't do that and kept it simple. Minimal angst and communication issues, don't think they (the actors) had the best chemistry. 6.5/10

All Things Valentine--She has an advise blog about love, advises his girlfriend to dump him, so he gets angry and starts insulting her through the blog. Not totally dissimilar in concept to The Accidental Husband. Meanwhile, he is also her vet. Review: Don't know how she has readers when she seems to flip flop on her ideas of love as a whole based on her mood and relationship status. I mean, I could see readers there for the drama, but who would take her advice?  Medium to high in angst. Medium communication issues. 5/10

Over the Moon--Former high school best friends meet years later and reconnect, but a client at her matchmaking business wants to be set up with him. Review: I found the premise annoying. The client came in and said she was tired of not finding love and she trusted the matchmaker to find her the right person via her process. Then ten seconds later she sees the matchmaker's former friend and declares that she is in love with him and that the matchmaker needs to make it happen. And the matchmaker instead of even just saying he isn't a client or he is married or coming up with a legitimate reason that she can't match them together (even just saying that she doesn't think they go together), she is a total pushover and basically tries to force him into dating her client (which if she was good at her job, she would know wouldn't work out and would be even worse than declining setting her client up with him).And he has basically been in love with her since high school so isn't a huge fan of that either. Overall, communication issues were high and angst was medium. 4/10

Love at Sea--A high strung event planner is helping with an event on board a cruise and must work with a free spirited cruise director. Review: Cute premise, liked most of it. Didn't like the ending, think that it was out of character and a little forced to come up with a happy ending. Minimal communication issues and angst. A couple of plot threads that were not fully utilized like they could have been. Several issues resolved for plot, but not in a way that would actually make sense in real life. 6/10

Midnight Kiss--Two siblings are taking over their parents' event planning business. The brother injures himself right before an incredibly important, short-notice event so the sister has to work with her brother's best friend to get it done. Review: Cute couple, worked well together. The right amount of opposites attract without them being too different to make sense. Minor communication issues, minor angst. 7.5/10

Love by Chance--A meddlesome mom tries to hook her daughter up with random guys she meets online. She meets a doctor and helps set up a meeting between him and her daughter. The daughter doesn't know that her mom brought them together. Review: Overall it was interesting, minor (considering how many people were lying to each other) communication issues. Minor angst. Some of the angst almost seemed forced at times though and a lot of private conversations happened in front of an audience. 6/10 (Last I checked, also on Netflix commercial free)

Feeling of Home--an entrepreneur gets pushed by her manager into hiding her upbringing just as she is on the verge of making a massive deal and has to return to her hometown where she meets her childhood sweetheart. Review: Seems like she could have easily corrected her manager if it actually mattered to her. The movie really tried to play it like she didn't want to do it, but didn't have a choice but she could have cleared the misunderstanding about her hometown up pretty easily. Like the guy says "oh you're from New England" and her manager is like "yes, she is!" and she says nothing. She could have easily gotten in touch and been like "my manager was a little confused, my mom was from New England but I am not". And that'd be it. Also, she was basically famous like she sells the product through her vlog. The manager had to be stupid to think that someone wouldn't have found out she wasn't from New England and then that would have hurt her reputation and the company's reputation. Overall though medium angst and medium communication issues. The biggest communication issue was really with her and her father, resolved a little quickly considering it seemed to be going on her whole life. 6/10

Dash of Love--She dreams of being a chef, but has never been to culinary school. He is a chef in a restaurant owned by former famous celebrity chef. They must work together after they are both fired. Review: She continuously applies for chef jobs despite having no experience or culinary training and seems disappointed and surprised when she doesn't get them. And her whole reasoning behind not going for training is because that culinary schools are too "by the book" and she can't be creative. But a certificate is like 6-months, a diploma is like a year. And even if it is "by the book", as soon as she graduates she would be able to actually get one of these jobs she keeps getting rejected by. And they aren't all "by the book". And if money is an issue she could get a student loan or part-time job. It made zero sense that she would rather work as someone's personal assistant in a restaurant and HOPE that the owner would suddenly make her a chef, instead of the sous chef (despite her job never needing her to cook) rather than actually put in the work to be a chef. Other than that, the antagonist was not the antagonistic until the last ten minutes and it was resolved way too quickly. Minimal communication issues, medium angst (but it also primarily occurred in the last ten minutes). 3/10

Matching Hearts--A woman working as a matchmaker for a dating site is tasked with matching up a writer/business owner/pet adoption worker who believes you should remain single to be successful. Review: Considering his whole shtick was "stay single to be successful" he didn't seem super successful. And I was not really sure what his job was. He seemed to write articles that got published in magazines, but he also ran a pet adoption center. And it seemed like only one location, so not sure why he would get featured on the cover of a magazine either. They were okay as far as couples go. I have trouble with the main leads dating other people until the last five minutes, for a sudden "well actually I love someone else" moment. Especially when it will go from "I'm not sure I love you" to one guy to a marriage proposal to someone else. Like...come on. You knew you didn't love them, which means you were basically stringing them a long on the premise of you not wanting to hurt them when you were really just to chicken to try to make it work with someone else. 5/10

Love in Design--A reality TV interior designer works with her ex-boyfriend, an architect, on a project. Review: Honestly, I think he is relatively attractive and they had good chemistry so the ending where the network is like "thanks, now we're done with you" was unrealistic. And I think it would have been more interesting (especially since her ratings had dropped at the beginning) if the big drama at the end had been them saying "we will keep her show, but only if you join" and then he has to decide whether to drop what he is doing to help her keep her job and whether he even wants to tell her that she only is keeping her show because he agreed to join, and then they actually go off and work together, rather than just the usual "she was only in town for a short time and we are just reminding you that she was always supposed to leave after this project was done and has her successful life elsewhere waiting for her" which comes up in so many of these movies. And I always cringe a little inside when she is like "I love my job where I am hugely successful, but I love you so I will give it up to be with you". And they try to play it off like "love is the real happiness" but it really seems to come down to "his career/life is more important" (or just "country=good, city=bad") because 90% of the time there is nothing stopping him from going to her. Like he will be a handyman or small town doctor or he will work on his parents' farm or something and she will basically be like VP of some major company or partner at a major law firm. There was one where she even had kids and its like you are moving your kids away from their father, changing schools, selling your place, and giving up your job that you seemed to enjoy previously for a lower paying, less prestigious job all to be with a guy who runs an antique store in the country that never actually seems busy anyway. Why? Why couldn't he just come to the city? You make enough he wouldn't even have to work and we see more about how much her job means to her and get nothing really about what his job means to him. If anything its usually some, "I tried to make it work in the city and was successful but just didn't feel as happy or connected". Like...okay, but you won't be alone in the city and if love=happiness then why isn't she enough for you to go back to the city? 5/10

Harvest Moon--A rich heiress and her father find out that he is going bankrupt and the only thing they really have left is a country farm he bought her years prior. She goes to the farm to try to sell it and see if she can't help her father, the family that owned the farm and sold it to him still lives there and wants to buy it back as cheap as possible. Review: Major communication issues. He is planning to make her life hard while she is there so she rushes to sell and does so cheap. But, he never actually put in an offer and even if he did that doesn't guarantee she will sell to them if she did decide to sell (unless the lawyer she talked to was in on it, but it never actually said she was). Meanwhile, she is supposed to be there looking to sell but 90% of what she does is totally irrelevant and seems like she decided not to do that. How does her helping fix a few fences or planting some flowers actually help her find buyers or sell the farm? She's selling the land not the crops. And she isn't very good at it so she is getting in the way more than helping. If she had told them she was looking to sell and why, they could have made an offer and she would likely have taken it because she needed the money and when she was in town the lawyer said there were like no buyers. So, they would be the only people actually offering to buy it. It could have been resolved in ten minutes if either of them had said anything. And then he thinks she is interested in his brother, but the age gap between him and his brother makes that seem kind of weird. His brother seems to have just finished high school (or maybe still is in high school it was kind of unclear), meanwhile he has a daughter who is like 10 who he had with his wife. So, even assuming a young marriage and fast pregnancy he is still probably like 30 at the youngest. While his brother is probably like 18-20. So, how old is she that she could so easily have dated either? Also there is basically a knock off Footloose scene. Not bad movie, but communication issues both between characters and the audience. 5/10 (Last I checked, also on Netflix commercial free)

Love in Store--two shopping network hosts compete for the same promotion while working as co-hosts. Review: It was cute and I liked it for the most part. The biggest issue I had was he went from being very spontaneous and expressive in the beginning to being sort of quite and reserved in the ending. The way it went down just didn't feel like it was true to his character. Minor angst, medium communication issues due to his weird change in behavior more than anything else. 7.5/10

Post 183: QD: "What was a fantastic movie ruined by its ridiculous plot twist?"

There are two in particular that come to mind when I see this question. I don’t know if I would necessarily classify these as fantastic movies, but I did enjoy them up until the plot twist.

The first would be Signs. It was creepy and suspenseful. I was super sad that the dogs died. I mean, did it really add anything to have the dogs die? Did it add anything for the dogs to be in the movie, besides them barking at things outside which a motion detector alarm or light could have done? That’s a whole other tangent. The thing that got me was the stupid water glasses. Why would these aliens invade our planet, which is mostly made up of water, if they were like deadly allergic to water? Are you telling me these things invaded all around the same time and it didn’t happen to be raining anywhere? Anywhere at all? Not even Seattle or London?

Are islands safe? Would they even go to Hawaii when it is so close to the beach? Is it only fresh water that is an issue or is it all water? Is the tap water really that dangerous? Is it her spit that makes the water dangerous?

And what a perfect scenario that we get a dad who never does dishes, lets his daughter take one sip from a glass and then leaves it somewhere, and just buys more glasses when they end up with thirty different used glasses all around the house. There were dozens of glasses everywhere. Who even owns that many glasses? How long have they been accumulating? Why didn’t he ever do the dishes when basically every flat service in the house was covered in dirty water glasses? Why didn’t he just start getting paper/disposable cups knowing that she did this?

It would have made more sense if she had gone to the fair and played the goldfish game and just had like dozens of fishbowls everywhere than him just letting all those water glasses accumulate. Or even Diet Cokes. Cans of Diet coke that she only took one sip off, because then it is still messy but it isn’t literally like he has to go out and keep buying water glasses instead of just washing them. And then it could even be explained as the chemicals in the Coke being what is harmful, not just water. Which would make the aliens coming to a planet of water seem less ridiculous.

Why was there even an alien in the house? For creatures that seemed to figure out space travel, it seems pretty stupid for them to come to a planet with so much water and to just be hanging out in a house filled with water. You didn’t even really need the dad to attack the alien, all you needed was an earthquake to cause all the glasses to fall on him or a rain shower outside and that would have done the trick.

Why was there only one alien in and around the house when he came upstairs? Did he just get left behind? Were they trying to be sneaky and he was there to trick them that it was okay to come up? If the aliens did land on Earth, decide there was too much water, and plan to leave then why were they there so long? If it was a mission of exploration, why send so many ships at the same time rather than one or two at a time to investigate?

I mean, the ending scene seemed so forced and so drawn out that it just gave me time to go back and question everything that I had let slide for the sake of suspense. I would have rather it have a non-ending with it just going to a black screen as they sleep in the basement or, if a happy ending was required, them hearing noises/gun shots/etc. from upstairs and then they hear people shooting and it ends with like some sort of military rescue as they get rushed out of the house. Really there are so many things that would have been better than the plot convenience that took place.

The second movie is It. The original It. I remember watching it when I was like 12-13 and being terrified. When he came out of the book, that was so creepy. As was the general clown thing. But then when he took form and he was just a big spider. That was so much less terrifying I actually started laughing. For the entire movie it was this interdimensional killer clown thing that primarily targeted kids and that could get into anywhere from anywhere. I mean, sure you can lock your doors and windows but he might just pull a scene from The Ring and step out of your TV. No one was safe anywhere.

And then…big, fake looking spider thing that they kill with sticks. There are scarier things living in Australia than what this thing became. Fluffy from Harry Potter looked like more of a threat that it did. As did the scorpion from Honey, I Shrunk the Kids. And for a movie that had such terrifyingly drawn out scenes of horror, the “beat it with sticks” scene was relatively short. It was kind of underwhelming really.  

I haven’t read the book, but from what I have read online about it, I believe what the plot was that he was demon that could cross into different dimensions and when he was in our dimension that was his physical form, but his physical form changes in different dimensions. Or something like that. But he seemed to be pretty adept at killing without turning into big bug and if becoming big bug makes him more killable, it seems like a stupid move.

Though, to be fair, I think the main reason why this plot twist was such a flop for me was because of the special effects (or rather the lack of them). It looked like a cheap Halloween decoration and as they “fought” it, it didn’t really move at all. I mean, it really looked like a prop and it broke the immersion.

Post 182: Taming of the Shrew @ Bard on the Beach

Shakespeare is often a subject of literary debate. There are debates about his treatment of women, his politics, and there are even debates about whether Shakespeare actually wrote the plays himself. One play that is particularly debated for its treatment of women is Taming of the Shrew. If you have seen the movie ’10 Things I Hate About You’, that is a loose version of the plot. And I mean, the plot is basically the same except without the scene where Heath Ledger’s character would psychologically torture his love interest. 

If you haven’t, basically there are two main female characters that are sisters. The older sister (Katerina) is deemed too much trouble and no one wants to marry her. Her younger sister (Bianca) has multiple suitors, but their father says that until the older sister is married, the young sister can’t marry. One of the suitor’s for Bianca hears his friend talking about wanting to settle down and pushes him to pursue Katerina while he and another suitor pretend to be tutors to flirt with Bianca. Petruchio (the friend sent to woo Katerina) pretends to find her charming and sweet, so she agrees to marry him (sort of, he basically forces her into it) thinking he is the only guy that will tolerate her. As soon as they are married he throws a drunken scene, hits a priest, and drags her back to his house against her will. He then basically tortures her. He denies her food, sleep, clothing, and makes her doubt her sanity by constantly telling her what she knows to be true is wrong until finally she basically says whatever he says goes, if he says the moon is the sun or a candle then she will just make herself believe it is. They then head back to Bianca’s wedding and he says his male friend is a woman, so she agrees. He then scolds her and says he is obviously a man, so she apologies to him. One of Bianca’s suitors has won her over and they get married, the other marries a rich widow. 

In the end the three husbands are talking in a bar and make a bet about who has the most obedient wife. Each sends for their wife to prove it, but only Katerina comes. Petruchio then sends Katerina to go get the other wives, which she does. And then she then lectures them about how they should be more subservient to their husbands, the way a servant is to a king and their temperament should be as weak and soft as their physical strength. Even offering her hand to him to step on. Then Petruchio says he is lucky that Katerina let herself be tamed and the other husbands are unlucky, because the women they married were two-faced pretending to be meek maids but now that they are married are really shrews. 

There are three main arguments about this ending and the final speech. The first is that Katerina means every word. That after everything that happened and what Petruchio did to manipulate her, she believes this. Even suggesting that she blames herself for what happened based on her early attitude. Another argument is that she doesn’t agree and that she is just saying what her husband wants to hear, likely to avoid further repercussions from her husband. The third theory is that Katerina was in on the bet and it was all a show for the other two husbands. This doesn’t make too much sense to me because if she was in on it, the whole part where he psychologically tortured her wouldn’t make sense. Unless that was like…a really disturbing prank to prove a point. 

Overall, none of the endings are really happy. It is why this is a play I usually avoid, but I’ve actually just got tickets to see it. Bard on the Beach is a group in Vancouver, BC that does Shakespeare plays. They take them and set them in different times, different locations, and different contexts and I am eager to see what they do to this. The last play I saw by them was also a little controversial in its treatment towards women. It’s called Two Gentlemen of Verona. Basically, there are two best friends. Friend A is in love, Friend B is skeptical about love and then travels away and falls in love with Girl B. Friend A promises his love for Girl A. Then Friend A travels to where Friend B is, he sees Girl B and falls in love. So both friends are in love with Girl B. Girl B, doesn’t really like either at first but does eventually warm to Friend B. Friend A tries to undermine Friend B and gets Friend B banished. Friend B goes into the woods and meets a group of thieves and joins them as their leader. Friend A pursues Girl B but she’s not having it. Girl A sees Friend A pursuing Girl B and wants him to be happy so tries to help, but is really upset. Girl B leaves with Friend A to try to find Friend B. Friend A then tries to rape Girl B. Friend B interrupts the rape with Girl A. Friend A and B briefly fight, then make up. Girl B’s father says she can get married. Friend B offers to give her (like a literal object) to Friend A in honor of their restored friendship, right in front of Girl B who was just assaulted. Girl A is revealed to be there. Friend A decides to marry Girl A, Friend B says he will marry Girl B, and the men go off to celebrate while the girls literally are given 0 say. That is basically where the play ends. 

But in the Bard on the Beach version, they show that the group of thieves are women in disguise when they are first introduced. When the men rush off to plan the weddings, despite not having actually proposed, the thieves basically reveal they are women to Girl A and B and invite them to join them. Girl A and Girl B don’t go after the men, but join the thieves. 

I like that ending better. They didn’t change the words of the play and almost none of the stage directions, in fact most of the ending was silent as the women leave the guys. But, it really was a better ending. I hope they do the same with Taming of the Shrew. I don’t know exactly what they could do. The psychological torture, in particular, seems like it would be hard to change without changing the words and it is really what keeps any ending from seeming like a happy one. But that is why I am excited to see it done. 

What I might do, if I was them, would be to have the part after the wedding be told in a letter. It would require an additional line or two to separate it as a letter. Or, have it be a dream/imagined circumstance. Petruchio might make a scene at the wedding, whisk her away and then write a letter about his methods to update his friends. Then it could all visually take place exactly as it does in the original play, as the letter is “read” but in the end, it could be revealed as a lie. Which would make the third theory of the original ending possible. He claims that he “broke” her to win the bet and get back at his friend for pushing him to marry her for selfish reasons, when in actuality they were both in on it all along and it was all an elaborate con that they were running together. 

I have now seen the play and they did what I would have, well in that they went for option #3 that she was in on it all along. They changed a lot. What they ended up doing was dropping some of the lines all together and really shortening the psychological torture or having him say it, but not do it. He says he is going to keep her from sleeping and makes the plan to do it, but when she actually goes to sleep it suggest he can’t bring himself to do it so he says nothing, puts a jacket over her and lets her sleep. They also swapped a lot of dialogue. And instead of him pointing to the moon and calling it the sun to torment her, it plays like an accident and then a fun argument where she is just like “fine whatever, it’s the sun then”. And then she is the one that calls the man a woman and suggests her husband go along with it, then she corrects him and he apologizes. It all stays really playful more than mean. 

It also seems to set up early on that his behavior of acting erratic (kind of like a lunatic) was intentional. That he specifically did it to make her look better compared to him. There is even a line where he is called the devil and everyone says basically says, “well we already knew she was the devil’s wife” and the guy was like “no, you don’t understand, compared to him she is a lamb!” He will basically be normal until people start to call her shrew or whatever and he will start acting out and yelling at her, so she looks like the agreeable one. (Like when a dressmaker and his wife come by, he doesn’t say anything about the dress until they call her a shrew, and then he jumps in and says the dress is the ugliest thing he has ever seen and it is horrible and to tear it to shreds, but she is like “the dress is pretty, I like it”, but he sends the couple away rudely. So, he looks like a jerk, compared to her.)

And then it really plays out that the final bet was her idea all along and it shows them setting up the plot where he makes the bet and calls for her. They even have her give the monologue, then pause for people to basically tip her in support (the men, at least). And then she basically shows that she didn’t change, that she tricked them all, and in the end it seems to suggest that they kind of go off as outlaws together and are actually in love. 

It also changed her sister a lot. Her sister in the play was the blandest character ever. She was just like the epitome of a boring, “good girl”. But in this version, they made her into a flirt and a bit of a lush. Which I liked because that is who she was before marriage too, actually. They showed her flirting with both tutors and both suitors, they just choose to take it as her just flirting with them or just being nice. It reminded me of Into the Woods, how the princes were constantly trying to save the Princess but once they were married they lost interest. They took Bianca’s behavior as kindness and sincerity when they couldn’t be with her, but once someone won her, they saw it as flirtation and disobedience. 

Bianca even left home despite being basically grounded to go flirt and her sister dragged her back home, but when Kat was scolding her sister for sneaking out and being a flirt her mother and guests come in. Her mother sees Bianca crying and tells Kat off. When asked what her sister did, Kat basically tells her the truth. They take what she says as her saying she doesn’t like that her sister is so innocent, but really it could mean that she doesn’t like that her sister plays innocent and acts like the victim and calls her out for fake crying all the time. But her mother sides with Bianca. 

It really sets up why Kat might be the way she is, at least to some extent. In 10 Things I Hate About You, it suggests that she was like Bianca but that she slept with a suitor who then lost interest in her, so she closed herself off. I could see why she is angry at her sister, who gets hailed as an innocent and precious thing by both suitors and her parents, while in reality, she sees that her sister is a fake and a flirt. Even in their studies, Bianca is hailed as the better of the two.

She just walks by or into a room and people start shouting “shrew” at her. They constantly harass, torment, and mock her. One of the men who is pursuing her sister is powerful. If 10 Things I Hate About You’s take that she was attached to one of her sister’s suitors (this suitor being the equivalent to the one in the movie), it is possible he proposed and she rejected him, leading to the “shrew” chanting and her becoming more and more bitter. 

Overall, I think there were a lot of interesting elements and it was very well done. It could not be helpful to see this version INSTEAD of the original, but it was a nice retelling of the original. 

Post 181: Sephora, I adore ya.

I like Sephora. Makeup to me is really as close as I can probably get to being an actual artist. Not to say that makeup artists aren’t artists. Just that I will never be a sculptor or painter, but I might one day master the perfect Smokey eye and winged mascara.Sometimes I think about quitting my job and going to work at Sephora. I love the idea of being a makeup artist and playing with shades, but I don’t think I would actually enjoy it. The reason I don’t think I would enjoy it is that I don’t think the picture of the job that I had in my head would match the reality of the experience. I have worked in retail before and I remember being scheduled basically up to about a half hour to an hour under fulltime. So, I worked as much as they could possible get me to work without paying benefits.

It also would likely pay minimum wage, if not a little higher. But it would still be a pay cut. And while I like the idea of being able to do people’s makeup, it sounds like you work there in just a general role and you might be able to get trained to do makeovers, but it will generally be a few select people with the most experience at Sephora doing them. According to some reviews on GlassDoors (they got a 3.9/5 rating) the selection of who the makeup artists will be on a given shift often falls down to favoritism more than anything else. One person said they were officially certified in being a makeup artist and they didn’t get to do makeovers, but if their attitude in the comment was reflective of their actual attitude it could also just be that they are not as customer service oriented (aka friendly) as the others. People who are managers favorites are often so because they work hard and are personable. If you have to spend over an hour with someone where you are basically staring at each other’s faces the whole time, I would rather have someone that is personable and hardworking, than just highly skilled.

Especially because they will be more likely to actually accept feedback and my opinion. Not that I often go in with a “I want exactly this” attitude. But still, if I did, I would like to think they would listen and help me with it, rather than dismiss it based on their training and view that they know better. Like, maybe a Smokey eye won’t look as good on me as a cut crease or maybe I have more of warm skin tone so should stay away from blues, but I still want to try a Smokey eye or blue anyway to see what it looks like. Maybe it won’t look as good, but it will still look good.

That was a little bit of a side rant. Anyway, my point is that I might not actually get assigned to do them. Also, if I did do them, there is always the fear that the customer won’t like it. I have always liked it, sometimes I’ve been a liiiiiittle picky because there will be certain things that look a little rough (like maybe a smudged eyeliner or not properly blended foundation), but it is easy enough for me to fix and the lighting isn’t always great in Sephora, so I’ve been super happy with it. But, I’m pretty chill. Not everyone is pretty chill, or even a little chill.

Especially if they are coming in before prom or some big occasion. They might have an exact look in mind and if I can’t do it or even just can’t do it to the standard of their vision of it, then they might be unhappy. I know a lot of hairstylists complain when people bring in pictures that they got off the internet of photo-shopped hair colors and want their hair to look exactly like the picture. Or will come in for a haircut and it won’t look as good on them as the model/actress they saw it on and assume the hairstylist did something wrong. And I know that certain YouTube makeup artists edit their photos/final looks, which makes it harder to do as well. And the promotional photos for the makeup brands are done by serious professionals and STILL edited to look better, so some looks aren’t easily achievable or possible without an editing software.  

I don’t want to be the reason some’s special occasion doesn’t go the way they would like it to go. Partially because I don’t like confrontation and don’t know what I would do if they got mad, but also I would just feel guilty about it. Maybe it is just a sign that I need to practice more with my own makeup.  

Post 180: Happy (Un)Birthday!

It has officially been one week since my birthday. But, I have now decided that I am not counting last Friday as my birthday. Today is now my birthday.

Because today was like…top notch. I slept in a little late, but my hair wasn’t doing anything particularly weird after I brushed it so I decided I could shower tonight. I left on time, got to the station a little early because I didn’t hit every light and, because of the three day weekend, half the parking spots were empty so I could pick where I wanted to park. I got a pretty good spot too.

One of my friends that usually takes the earlier train was running late (not good for her, but good for me), so we got to take the train in to together. And the train was mostly empty so we weren’t squished either. And no one was annoyed with us. (Last time we were on the train, I was reading and she came on and the lady I was sitting next to us got up and was like “I wanted a quiet ride”. Like…we weren’t even being that loud. I mean, I have no problem with her leaving. If she wants a quiet ride, then, by all means, it is best if she changes seats to find people who aren’t going to talk. But the fact that she said it and the way she said it was kind of rude. Why couldn’t she just say excuse me and change seats? She didn’t need to tell us why. But, whatever. It didn’t happen today.)

I got to work and free breakfast. Bacon, potatoes, and scones. There were eggs and vegetarian sausages but I took a hard pass on those. I almost tried a vegetarian sausage, but figured it would be better to leave it to actual vegetarians would be more likely to actually eat it after taking it.

Then, I got my eyebrows waxed, which 100% counts to why today was great. Last time I got them waxed it went HORRIBLY and I got two giant blisters under my eyebrows from chemical burns that faded into scars. Thankfully, the scars have since faded away entirely. But today’s waxing (which I was super nervous about) went really well. It was quick, she explained why she choose the shape she did and asked for a lot of feedback to make sure I was happy, and I had no reaction (physical)! Well…I mean, it was a little red, because my skin is super sensitive. But no blistering, scaring, peeling, or burning. So, I call that a big win.

Because I didn’t bring my lunch and took my lunch break but forgot to pick up lunch, I was just figuring I would skip lunch today and maybe get a snack on the way home, not a big deal. But then...more…free…food. An event that ran today had too much extra food, so everyone was told to go get some. And this wasn’t like sandwiches, salad, and cookies basic lunch, this was a steak, chicken, salads (plural!), farrow, potatoes, risotto balls, and macaroons fancy lunch. So, I had steak, salad, and potatoes for lunch and a lemon poppy seed macaroon for dessert. For free.

Then, on top of all that, I got out of work at 3:00pm. Then I went to Sephora and got a mini makeover, which was a lot of fun and killed time. Because the first train from downtown towards home doesn’t leave until 3:50 (only 3:45 now). I could have taken the sky train. But the sky train takes longer, is more crowded, involves switching trains, and is just kind of high stress in comparison to the commuter train. And even if I left right at 3:00pm and went right to the sky train, I would not have gotten back to the station where my car is until approximately 4:00pm. If I instead do what I did by spending 30-40 minutes enjoying downtown, the mall, or just reading on the 3:50pm train before it leaves, the train ride is short (23min from station to station) and relaxing (ocean views). It isn’t as overcrowded, loud, or busy. And I get back to the station at around 4:15pm. I arrive only 15 minutes later with a far more relaxing trip.

So, obviously, that is what I’m going to do. With traffic, you can’t even guarantee that there will be much of a difference in final arrival time.

And then after I get home and say “hi” to my dog, Mexican for dinner! And since (unlike on my birthday) there will be other people home, I won’t be the sole person responsible for cooking dinner and cleaning up dinner. I also don’t have to water the plants, feed the dog, walk the dog, and then put the dog to bed. Which is a process, because she won’t make up her mind about where she wants to be in the bed and then she really likes to be tucked in. I can eat dinner (then help clean up obviously), hang out with my family, and then go downstairs and play video games or read. Or really do whatever, because I don’t have to wake up early tomorrow morning to take the dog out and give her breakfast. I can sleep in! I probably won’t, but I have the option too.

So far, today has been great. My actually birthday…kind of lame. I worked at a different location that was closer, so I was able to sleep in a little bit. But mostly it was just like any other day with soup for lunch. Then a can of lima beans and a brownie for dinner. I was supposed to go to dinner with friends, but they had a bit of an emergency so we had to postpone to another day. The brownie was only okay. And then I was tired from work and the dog (and I also was getting over having bronchitis), so I went to bed at like…9:00pm. And then I was up early Saturday. Overall…kind of a sad birthday. I talked to my dad which was nice and he sang ‘Happy Birthday’ to me. But that was about as festive as the day was. Today, on the other hand, despite the lack of singing is far more festive and it leads into a three day weekend. So, I do declare today is unofficially my birthday. Or, perhaps, it is just a sign that it is time to start celebrating un-birthdays. 

Post 179: What is QD (Quora Digest)?

I have now had two posts relating to Quora Digest, so now might be a good time to better explain what it is for those who don’t know. In the second post, I believe I compared it to Yahoo! Answers. That is a fairly accurate comparison. It is a website where you can post questions and people can answer. When people answer they can provide “Credentials” to better bolster their answer with experience and authority. The answers are then voted on and while all are visible, the top voted answer is at the top. You can comment on all answers given, allowing for more discussion that Yahoo! Answers. Unlike Yahoo! Answers, questions can be submitted anonymously as can answers.

Questions on QD fall under five main categories: LMGTFY, Tell Me About It, Ask Abby, Fandoms, and That Depends.

The first LMGTFY (Let me Google that for you) questions are ones that they could easily Google for themselves. They have a right and wrong answer. These show up less often than the others. Examples of this are: “what professional basketball teams does Washington have?”, “what is a word that rhymes with doctor?”, “how many people live in New York?”.

The second kind, Tell Me About It, is less of a question where they are looking for an answer and more about “tell me a story when…”. They don’t really seem to serve as much a purpose as the other questions, beyond entertainment. They’re the kind of question you might ask on a first date when the conversation starts to go dry but you don’t want to resort to asking about the weather. Examples: “what was the saddest meal you ever ate?”, “what did the ‘weird’ kid at your school do to make them seem weird?”, “where was your first vacation?”, “what was the silliest reason you had to pick your kid up from school?”.

Ask Abby is basically the same kind of questions one would submit to an Ask Abby column, like “my son is doing this weird thing, how can I approach him about it?”.  Questions don’t have a right or wrong answer, as they tend to fall into grey areas, but it is asking an opinion rather than for a story. Other examples: “my boyfriend cheated on me, he wants to make it work and says I should cheat on him to make it even, but I don’t want to. What do I do?”

Fandoms are sort of a mix of all three of the previous categories. They are fandom specific questions that often involve a mix of stories, opinions, and facts. They ask about things related to specific fandoms. Like “why didn’t they use the Time Turner to kill Voldemort before people died” or “why didn’t Darth Vader know Luke and Leia didn’t die with their mom, couldn’t he have sensed them with the Force the way that Leia and Rey could sense when Luke died?” Some of them have definitive answers, others have answers that can be assumed from information provided, and some are totally a matter of opinion. These questions can also be things like “which character from this show is the best?” Which is asking people’s personal opinion, but relates just as much to storytelling as it does opinion because people tend to include stories about why they like that character.

The final type of question is That Depends. This generally works more as a subcategory of LMGTFY (where there is a definitive yes or no answer but they didn’t provide enough information to find it) or Ask Abby (where they are asking for opinions but didn’t give enough information). “Who gets custody?”: is one such question. Without more information, no one can really give a definitive answer. It would basically take an essay to guarantee they get the answer they are looking for because it doesn’t include information about the living situation or even what state/country they are in. Other times it is asking people’s opinion but only provides a little bit of information, so people are left guessing and saying things like “if X, then Y but if W, then Z. And if W and Z, then B”. So, almost every answer will have “it depends” in it somewhere. Other examples include, “is marijuana illegal?”, “my boyfriend says I cheated, but I don’t think I did, who is wrong?”, etc.

So far on my blog, I’ve answered a Tell Me About It (“What is the funniest reason you have been sent home from school?”, which I believe was actually “your kids have been sent home”) and an Ask Abby (“What do most people like, but won’t admit to liking?”). The post I have about Ross from Friends was also inspired by a question about whether or not he actually cheated on her, but I had been planning to post about it for a while. But I’ve answered more on QD, the ones I posted on here, I didn’t post on QD. Either because they were locked for answers or because I didn’t feel like sharing. Some people really just LOVE Ross. And I am already tired of arguing with strangers online about things that are more important (like women’s rights and common sense) than a fictional character.

Post 178: Can you get a man's haircut as a woman?

I have short hair. It isn’t exactly a bob, but it doesn’t reach my shoulders (when it gets close to them, it is my sign that I need a haircut). Meanwhile, one of my male colleagues has hair almost to his waist. He works very hard to maintain it. Now, I’m not writing this to say that there is anything wrong with him having long hair as a guy or my having short hair as a girl. What I feel is wrong is that despite him having more hair, I will still pay more than him at basically every hair salon.

I looked it up, just to confirm. And every hair salon had separate prices for men and women. Even hair salons that had different prices depending on the length of the women’s hair had nothing for the length of the men’s hair. And a haircut for women with short hair still cost more than any male haircut.

At the first salon I checked (Jeff and J Hair Salon), it is $32 for a Master Men’s Haircut. That is a flat rate. The woman’s haircut started at $50 ($50+)! That is an $18 difference regardless of the length of hair for the man or woman. Mint Salon had a $15 difference, with women paying $50 for a haircut and men paying $35. Shine has a similar price difference with women’s haircuts starting at $51, while men’s start at $35. Angelo’s is the closest in price for salons that don’t specify a different price by hair length, with a $4 difference (Women’s: $44, Men’s: $40). At Kast it is $47 for a women’s haircut and $32 for a man’s haircut.  At Refresh women will pay $40 and up, men will pay $30 and up.

The next salons (starting with LUXE) did specify hair length for women, but still not for men. A haircut for a woman with short hair at LUXE is $46. The same service for a man of any hair length is $40. Melika Salon also specifies by length for women and for a woman with short hair it costs $25, for a man it is $22. Which is the closest of any of the salon’s prices that I checked in difference by gender.

That means that women with short hair will be spend an average $11 more than men for a haircut. Which seems super weird to me. When I get my haircut it takes like 10-15 minutes. It is basically just a trim; a snip-snip here, snip-snip there and I’m done.  It is more common with men’s haircuts to need to also get out a razor to clean up the back of the neck and do that kind of shaping, which seems like it would be more work.

And if you are going to specify by length, why both by length AND gender? Why not just length? Or even by time it takes? Is it because salons assume women are  more willing to pay more and don’t have an alternative? Men have barbers which are cheaper, if they want to go that route instead.

I did some research to see if anyone else had these questions, or if anyone had the answers. I found someone who was also surprised by the cost difference (Alexandra Haddow – “Why do women have to pay so much more than men for their haircuts?”). She is located in England and did a price comparison as well. She compared five different places and found an average difference of £16.80 (like $28CAD) more for women than men, the highest point of difference was £40!

She spoke to various hairdressers and they seem to support my thoughts. There was an assumption that women will require more effort and products then men and there is an assumption men will have short hair and women won’t, things just haven’t been updated with the times. And that there is an idea that women are more likely to go for a haircut rather than go to a barber or do it themselves, so they because they are willing to pay and pay more for a good haircut, salons know they can charge them more. One brought up that there is now a “dry cut” where they spritz your hair rather than shampoo it, but when I looked at prices to compare I used the lowest comparable cut for a man and woman. One of those was a dry cut for a woman, for the men’s it did not specify dry or not and it was still cheaper for the men’s.

Her article was posted in 2017 and she suggested some salons were starting to change. If that is reflected in the difference between the $28 difference she found and the $11 difference I found, then maybe it is hopeful it will continue to improve. She also talked about changes in other facets where women were charged more than men, like how women’s razors are more expensive than men’s tend to be priced, and how companies are starting to bring the prices closer. Which, I suppose, is all well and good. But, why bring the price’s closer rather than just make them both gender neutral? Is a man’s skin and hair so different from a woman’s that they need to have separate products? I mean, really? What would happen if I just bought a man’s razor? Sure, it wouldn’t be pink but it would still work.

Actually, there was an event that gave out free men’s razors and it is probably one of the best razor’s I’ve ever used. It is The Gillette Fusion5. It has a mostly metal handle and it takes reusable blades. It costs approx. $13 for the handle and two blades. While most razors for men have a metal handle and made to be reusable, rather disposable, women’s tend to be plastic and disposable. So, it was hard to find a comparable razor. The Gillette Venus Swirl, is most comparable. It has an almost fully plastic handle with a metal ball to allow for more swiveling (the Fusion5 swivels just fine, as is so it seems unnecessary). They both have five blades as well. It does have a little like comb before the razor, to pull up hair better that the Fusion5 doesn’t have. But the Fusion5 has a precision trimmer on the back (which means it has an additional blade), which the Venus Swirl doesn’t have. The Venus Swirl and 2 blades costs $15. It looks cheaper and more breakable and it still costs more. Significantly more considering that I got my Fusion5 for free.

It just seems weird to me.  I wonder, if I asked for a man's haircut, would it be cheaper or would they just look at me like I'm crazy? 

Post 177: QD: "What do most people like, but won't admit to liking?"

I get daily email updates from Quora Digest. I don’t really know why. It isn’t all that different than Yahoo! Answers. There are a lot of people who ask questions they could easily look up themselves, but don’t. There are people asking dumb questions or giving stories about their life that sort of relate but don’t actually answer the question. But sometimes, you get some thought provoking questions or some educated answers. The question that I was thinking about today is: “what do you think most people secretly like, but won’t admit?”

The top answer was something about sex and how all people are perverts. But, that doesn’t seem like much of a secret. I don’t know anyone is like “I hate sex” or will deny liking it, if they are in a situation where they are asked and it is an appropriate situation to ask. I mean, if a stranger asked me if I liked strawberries, I might say no because I’m weirded out by the random question. I mean, it isn’t saying something that people like/enjoy but don’t tell strangers they like/enjoy. This is something they hide, something that probably even their friends wouldn’t necessarily know. Plus, it is talking on a wide scale. It is “most people” not some. I know people who have declared that they like the smell of their own farts or that they like cutting the dead skin off their feet. So compared to those kinds of things, that maybe they shouldn’t be telling others, sex just doesn’t seem like an answer that fits the question.

So, I thought about it and I think I got it. I think I have an answer that fits, but is actually really quite the opposite to the top answer. Kid’s stuff. I know a lot of people who like kid stuff but don’t want to admit it. There are adults that have closets full of stuffed animals, that like kid’s movies like Barbie, that like Build-A-Bear, etc.

Do you know the stigma around walking into a Build-A-Bear as an adult? I read this woman who wrote an article telling adults not to go into Build-A-Bear as an adult because it was a horrible experience for her, do you know why it was a horrible experience for her? Because they treated her like a customer. They were friendly, they encouraged her to do the things they ask kids to do when getting a bear, they asked her to name the bear. She was basically traumatized by the fact that they thought she wanted to buy a bear for herself. When I was 17, my friend and I both went in and she got a bear. I didn’t that day because it is expensive and I didn’t really have cash. She wouldn’t go by herself, despite wanting the bear, because she was scared of going alone. When we went, I think we both giggled as we tried to nonchalantly enter the store because we felt awkward and judged, despite the fact that no one probably cared that much. It was weird how awkward it was. We were still teenagers, we were not far off from being kids, but we still felt somehow too old to be in the store. It felt like we didn’t really belong, like being underage in a liquor store. But we were overage in a toy store.

“Aren’t you a little old to have stuffed animals?”

“Aren’t you a little old to be watching that?”

“Aren’t you a little old to be playing that?”

People roll their eyes at Barbie movies and won’t say out in the open that they like them, but if you find them on YouTube there is inevitably a comment saying they are an adult that still likes Barbie movies and they will have hundreds of likes. Through the anonymity of a screen name, they can admit that they still like “kid’s movies”.

Even with Disney, they have worked hard to market themselves as a “for all ages” kind of brand and yet a lot of people won’t watch the movies or admit to watching them after a certain age. And you certainly don’t see as many people dressed up as Dinsey characters after the age of 16. Those who do, are often in more sexualized versions of the costume to make it more “adult appropriate”.

I think this is something that is getting better as more people come to the attitude of “why should I stop doing what I enjoy, just because I am older?” And with the prevalence of the extreme cases of people doing this (i.e. Bronies, who are adult men obsessed with My Little Ponies sometimes to the extreme of sexualizing the animated ponies), being an adult that just enjoys watching cartoons isn’t quite as shocking.

I sort of like Spongebob Squarepants. Now, I’m not clamoring over myself to keep up with new episodes or buying the merchandise. Mostly I like it because it is mindless, but not annoyingly so. It is like Family Guy/American Dad for kids. Saying I like American Dad or Family Guy seems more normal than saying I like Spongebob. Both with American Dad/Family Guy and Spongebob, they are more like white noise. I put them on while doing something else because I enjoy it enough that it provides a nice sort of background thing, but doesn’t demand so much attention that it distracts from whatever else I’m doing. And yet, one seems more acceptable than the other.

There are a lot of shows, games, and other things that have come out for kids now that seem so cool. I mean, sometimes I’m jealous that I was born twenty years earlier than their release. I mean, they different kinds of Monopoly alone these days is crazy. Apples to Apples was a game I really enjoyed too, (it is basically like Cards Against Against Humanity for kids). And now it seems like a kid game.

There are so many people that talk about how they like babysitting because it is an excuse to have tea parties, watch Disney movies, etc. So, I think that in the end, more than sex, people secretly like but won’t admit that they like kid’s stuff.

Post 176: Why Ross Wouldn't be My Friend

I don't like Ross. When Rachel got off the plane to be with him. I was more than a little upset. She was giving up a major opportunity to be with a guy who clearly did not appreciate her work or support her dreams. I mean, she didn't say she was going to stay in France forever. And he considered moving to England to be with Emily, but decided not to because of Ben. But Ben is older now and Emma, his other child who is younger so less able to travel to visit him, would likely be going with Rachel. Really, if he cared about her, he would have encouraged her to go live her dreams. She was really excited about going and it was a great opportunity. If it continued, I would be willing to bet that she resented him for keeping her from that opportunity.  He showed little to no growth, he never stopped being possessive of her and clearly never learned how important her work is to her. None of the things that they fought about in the past are resolved, it is only a matter of time before they come up again except now she will have this major opportunity weighing against them.

Anyway, here are a few of the reasons I dislike Ross. Though, there are many more. 

Cheater:

The whole "we were on a break" thing for starters. Psychology Today defines a break as "not a breakup: It's a pause from the other person—a period to think without having to be around the other person during the thinking period." As Rachel said "we should take a break" the implication is that it is, in fact, a break not a break up. And, therefore, they were technically still together and Ross cheated. His constant insistence that "we were on a break" doesn't help this either, because even in that he says "we were on a break" not "we were broken up". 

Also, some people have said it was never even decided on. She said, "Look, maybe we should take a break....from us." And then he stormed out. So, it was technically left at "maybe".

Now, as it is a bit of a misunderstanding where he took it to mean broken up, not on a break. It could be argued that it wasn't really cheating. 

If we take out the "we were on a break" thing, Ross still doesn't have the best romantic track record in that regard. He said Rachel's name at his wedding with Elizabeth. He cheated on Julie with Rachel. He cheated on Bonnie with Rachel.  When on a date with another woman, he spent most of the night flirting with his ex-wife. He kissed Charlie despite her being with Joey. Despite dating Mona, he said he would marry Rachel when he found she was pregnant. 

Even if it is taken as a break up rather than a break, he waited less than three hours before sleeping with someone else. And it wasn't just someone else, it was someone that both his closest friends also liked. 

Hypocritical: 

Despite being a cheater himself, he is constantly controlling and overprotective of his girlfriends and love interests without taking into consideration how they feel. He follows Elizabeth, his college age girlfriend, on Spring Break. Because he doesn't trust her not to cheat on him. He embarrasses Rachel in front of a guy she is talking to and throws away phone messages for her from other guys when they are not even dating. When they are dating, he constantly embarrasses her at work and is incredibly paranoid about her even spending time with other guys, which leads to them needing to take a break to begin with. He even considers having one of her love interests departed even though she and Ross hadn't even gone on a date. 

Meanwhile, as he gets upset at Rachel for talking to a male coworker, he is going out to strip clubs. When Elizabeth is rightly worried about him spending time with his first love, ex-girlfriend (who I believe he has actually dated on and off like three times at this point), and closest female friend who also happens to be the person whose name he said at the their wedding, he says he won't do it. Actually, he says he will do it and that he won't spend as much time with her, but then does anyway. He practically asks Rachel to quit her job so she won't be around Mark, and she never even went on a date with him and last he knew Mark was seeing someone else. 

He is constantly talking about work. He does not leave it alone and is constantly trying to get his friends to come to his talks and other talks about his subject area. He practically has an emotional breakdown trying to get them ready to go to a work dinner. He interrupts his first date with Rachel to go to work and constantly puts work first. He expects her to understand that he takes his work seriously, but cannot be bothered to even fake interest in hers. He insists on going with Rachel to a fashion talk (just so she won't go with Mark) pretending he is interested, but then gets bored and basically acts like a child trying to get her attention for the first few minutes and then falls asleep. When she brings up the talk she went to with him and her lack of interest, he basically responds "well, that talk was interesting". He doesn't even concede that they like different things. 

When his child comes over with a Barbie, after picking it out himself, he spends the entire time that Ben is there with him trying to manipulate his son into picking a more "masculine" toy. Considering we learn that he actually used to dress up as a woman, that is even more hypocritical. Other than being against his son having a Barbie, he also ends firing his daughter's male nanny because it seemed weird to him. Despite the fact that the nanny was perfect otherwise and got along great with Emma. 

Insecurities and Overconfidence: 

Based on his insecurities and inability to trust that his girlfriend won't cheat him if given the choice, you'd really think he wouldn't be as overconfident as he is. Rachel makes it very clear that she thinks what he did was cheating, so when she calls to meet with him the fact that he just assumed that she had stopped being crazy and realized life without him sucks is presumptuous (exact quote is: "Well, maybe the crazy fog has lifted and she realizes that life without me.... a-sucks..." from The One With the Tiny T-Shirt). 

And then after they sleep together and she gets pregnant, she tells him she wants to talk to him. She wants to talk to him, because she is pregnant but he assumes it is because he is just too good a lover (I guess?) that women can't just sleep with him once (exact quote is: "I’m just not the type of guy women can have just one night with. Y’know, they-they always seem to want a little bit more." from The One Where Rachel Tells...). Despite the fact that they have slept with each other on more than one occasion while dating. 

This comes a lot with his relationship to his parents. They constantly brag about him and are far more supportive of him than of Monica. In only the second episode of the show their parents are over and basically tell Monica that she isn't made to do great things like Ross is and they go on for along time, with him right there. He literally says nothing. When they go home and it turns out that their father used Monica's boxes of memories to create a wall to protect his Porsche, he helps move his stuff into Monica's boxes (though, clearly doesn't remember their childhood well enough to know what she was actually like). He still makes it about himself wanting to hear his dad tell him about he is a medical marvel while they work. He then gets upset that Monica gets the Porsche instead of him because of it. 

He is incapable of admitting he made a mistake. He gets married to Rachel when they are drunk and instead of getting divorced, he lies to her and tells her he did it because he doesn't want to be "three divorce guy". After their break up, he had a chance to get back together with her if he admitted it was his fault. Which it was. He was the one whose insecurities, jealousy, and lack of respect for her work led to the their constant fighting and the break. On the break, while she contemplated getting back together with him, he slept with someone else. Even if he didn't think he cheated, she made it clear she thought he did and he never apologized for hurting her that way. Most of their fighting about it and running joke for the next season or so was him asserting that "we were on a break". Not, "I made assumptions that we were broken up and that was wrong". He would rather be "right" and deny any culpability, than be with her. Even after he showed up at her office for their anniversary, despite her saying she was too busy, he took over her whole desk and accidentally lit things on fire. He got in her way, he distracted her, he could have burned down the office and when she gets home exhausted after he expects her to apologize for asking him to leave and doesn't see how what he did was wrong or obtrusive in any way.



When she had dreams about the other guys in their friend  group he was jealous but then he practically jumped her while she was having a dream about him. As if the dream was consent to actually do something. She didn't want to sleep with Joey or Chandler after dreaming about them, so why would she want to sleep with him? Honestly, with this in mind rewatching the show makes more sense why he is possessive of her, she exists as his ideal. He always liked her because of her looks and so when it comes to her personality when they are actually together, they often clash (he expresses at multiple points that he thinks she isn't very bright, she is spoiled, and is often vain). He keeps other guys from getting her and doesn't want her with anyone else, even when he is with someone else for that reason. This I think comes up in the fact that he kept count of every time they had sex, which seems really weird and not normal.

Bad Father:

There were 236 episodes of Friends. Of those, Ross's son Ben only appears in 24 of them. Of those 24, one of them involves Ross entrusting the care of a then infant Ben to Joey and Chandler, who leave him on the bus. In another he leaves Ben with Rachel, who couldn't even look after his monkey for one night without losing him. Despite Ben only being in a few episodes, Ross uses his son to get out of things by claiming to watch him to get out of things. He says he can't move to England because of Ben, but he got married without Ben so it doesn't seem like Ben is that big a factor in his life. And then after he has Emma with Rachel, we essentially never see Ben again. 

Emma is also very rarely seen and even when she is seen, she is seen just as often with other friends in the group that Ross. In fact, Joey seems to have a closer relationship with her than Ross. And Ross seemed to have no issue with Emma going to Paris with Rachel. In fact, all of his concerns were around Rachel going. Not once did he bring up being separated from his daughter, or show any indication that he was going to spend any time with his daughter before she went to Paris with her mom or that he had any plans to visit her. 

I mean, Emma was staying with Rachel's mom while she got settled in Paris. Why wouldn't the child's father be the one watching her? Why couldn't he be the one to take her to Paris? Better yet, why isn't he the one taking her? He is her father, shouldn't he actually be acting like it?