Am I alone in thinking it really boring and weird with total charisma vacuums instead of actors?

No you're not. I've been finding all the Jane Austen adaptations so far very heavy and slow. Jane Austen for me, has always matched the romance with a lot of wit, and I really feel it's been missing here.

Also, I had just watched a couple of episodes of Secret Diary of a Call Girl, so I had a total mindbend to see Billie Piper go from high class whore to Fanny Price.

I'm pretty sure dumping words on a screen wouldn't have been that expensive (was it being done on contemporaneous news shows?)

According to Wikipedia, chyron's been around since 1966.

And in adorable news, I took some home videos this weekend.

Dead of the cute. He's such a talker, Jess!

Is it Legos birthday or something? I always miss the logos unless someone points them out because of iGoogle, too.

Is it Legos birthday or something? I always miss the logos unless someone points them out because of iGoogle, too.

Well, there you go. How cool.

H&M is celebrating their 65th anniversary, and they're giving Fossil watches with the H&M logo to all of their employees. (I'm one.) Which seems awfully nice to me. Less nice is the fact that apparently they're already available on eBay.

Did people watch the SAG awards? I seriously love award shows, but so sad this had no red carpet coverage (except horrible TV Guide channel) and then the awards - iugh - I think on the whole people looked bad - no ties, weird dresses, messy hair. Then there were old actors seeming confused and frail. And the Daniel Day Lewis paying homage to Heath Leadger in his acceptance speech which seemed odd. The whole thing was a mess.

Dinosaur cartoon (no, not that one) for kids: [link]

Explains how dinosaurs were originally good (and vegetarian) but because of Man's sin, dinosaurs became evil.

It came from here [link] which explains how 'Darwinism' is a religion and science really isn't scientific.

...though most people, including scientists, consider the biblical teaching of origins to be religious and consider evolutionary ideas scientific, we should challenge such a view. In the secular media, for instance, the debate is often described as “creationism vs. evolution,” as if the “ism” should not apply to “evolution.” This is not accurate, because believing in evolution, like believing in creation, requires acceptance of a certain presuppositional dogma and requires placing one’s faith in a story about the unrepeatable past. See Science or the Bible?

Also, the term “religion” must be defined clearly. While beliefs and worship practices, procedures, and conduct are involved in religion, any belief system that purports to be a total explanation of reality is more-or-less religion. Thus, insofar as it is an attempt to explain why the world is the way it is, held to with ardor and faith, Darwinian evolution can thus be considered religion.

Oh, my god, Monday. No. No, no, no.

Did anyone else watch Mansfield Park tonight? Am I alone in thinking it really boring and weird with total charisma vacuums instead of actors?

I haven't watched yet but that's too bad. I thought last week's Northanger Abbey was pretty fun. The actor who played Henry Tilney reminded me of Lee Pace kind of. With the crinkley eye smile. Nice!