I would actually give this book about 4 1/4 stars. It read at a feverish pace, as Martin takes you along for the ride at breakneck speed. Court intrigue, pitched battles and family honor dominate this tale in a mythical world that feels like what we dream medieval England would have been like in an alternate universe.

What I enjoyed was the changing perspectives, as the book follows the thoughts and lives of a few characters and through them we get a lens into the overall action. The plot moves along effortlessly even as the perspective shifts. Although the book could drag at times in lengthy descriptions of past events, and an overwhelming number of names, on the whole it’s easy to breeze past it.

Richly drawn characters that you want to root for – even the nastier ones. I look forward to picking up book 2 when i can, and checking out the HBO series.

View all my reviews

To get a better understanding of how contemporary art is valued and sold, I encourage you to learn more about the subject.  The first half of Ulrich Boser’s The Gardner Heist provides some insight into how art is acquired by museums and private collectors.  You may also enjoy this podcast by NPR’s Planet Money, that looks at how pricing works in the art market.

But if you want to experience the unpredictable world of buying and selling paintings for yourself, then you need look no further than Reiner Knizia’s masterpiece of a game – Modern Art.  This is a game with broad appeal that puts you right in the middle of the wild and wonderful world of art auctions.  The game is published in the U.S. by Mayfair Games, and is not to be confused with Modern Art: the Card Game, which is a vastly inferior impostor.

In Modern Art, each player is involved both with buying and selling paintings by five fictional artists.  While this makes certain thematic sense (museums generally only sell art to purchase other art), I’ve found it easier to explain as players wearing two hats.  First, you’re an art dealer, anxious to unload a painting to the highest bidder.  Secondly, you’re a museum director, looking to acquire something by the Next Great Artist.  Think of the art dealer being in cahoots with the museum director – he may sell it to his best pal, who has a little insider information about what’s about to hit the market.

The game is played over a series of four rounds, and the winner is the player with the most cash at the end of the game.  At the start of the first three rounds, players are dealt a hand of cards, each of which has a painting by one of the five artists.  These cards represent the holdings of your art dealer side (paintings acquired by your museum will be played on the table in front of you).  Those cards also each have a symbol which represents the type of auction that must be used to sell the painting.

Moving around the table in turn order, players will offer up a painting for auction to everyone, including themselves.  The card symbol tells you how to conduct the auction – it may be traditional, each player may only get one bid, it may be a secret sealed auction, or the painting may be offered at a single fixed price.  There are also cards that require a double auction – two paintings by the same artist go on the block at once.  Then the bidding begins!  Players are trying to determine what they think the painting is going to be worth at the end of the round – because that’s when the art really pays off.

At the end of the round (which happens when the fifth painting by a single artist is played), everyone looks at the three top artists – those that had the most of their art sold.  Each painting by the #1 artist pays out at $30,000, the #2 artist’s work gets you $20,000 apiece, and #3 pays $10,000 each.  The other two artists just didn’t make it big this time around.  All cards on the table are discarded, and a new round begins (players keep unsold paintings in their hand to carry over).

The game really heats up in later rounds, because those payouts are cumulative!  So if, for example, Karl Gitter is the #1 artist in the first round, and in the third round he’s the #2 artist, his paintings are now selling for $50,000 each!  Which means the bidding goes higher and higher…  The challenge is that players are trying to do quick calculations in their head as the game goes on; “If he ends up being #2 this time, I could get $50K , so I think I’m willing to bid up to $40K to get it.”  You’re working with limited information based on what you see on the table, what you remember has been sold in the past, and what cards you hold in your hand.

This on the surface is a straight-forward game, but the right group of people can turn it into a party game.  I first learned Modern Art with a bunch of theater-folk, and we naturally found ourselves naming each art piece as it was played, adding back-story about the artists, and working hard to convince each other to BUY THIS PAINTING!  Believe me when I say this makes the game twice as much fun.  Sometime I’ll tell you the story of how my sister-in-law named a Yoko painting simply with a sound effect.

It’s really a fantastic game, and represents auction games in the purest form.  The agony of knowing that you need to spend your money to make money, and you also need that money to win is just delicious.  The game works for 3 – 5 players, but I strongly prefer it with 5, as you get the maximum excitement in the bidding process.  Modern Art is a contemporary classic that gives you a window into the wild and wonderful world of art acquisition – and it remains one of my top ten games of all time.  Check it out!

The first hefty graphic novel I’ve read in quite awhile. It’s definitely entertaining and you want to keep reading.

But it can also get really depressing. I’m not spoiling you by saying people die – a LOT of people die. More than in a Shakespearean tragedy.

So if you want to delve into this, I’ll pass on the same advice my friend Austin who loaned this to me said – “Don’t get too attached to any of the characters.” He’s not kidding.

View all my reviews

I hope you’ll pick this up when it comes out next year – it’s going to be a hit – mark my words!  (Or Jess’ words, really.)  You can even pre-order it on Amazon here.

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This book follows the lives of three different women and although they don’t serve as narrators in their respective chapters, they are written from their points of view. Skyla is a restless spirit looking for an anchor in her life when she realizes her husband and daughter aren’t enough. Roxanne is the gregarious mother of five that she befriends. And Audrey is Skyla’s mother-in-law, full of rigid ideas and seeking a place where she’s really needed.

In general this was an enjoyable read, but it lacked depth that I kept hoping was around the corner. The book ended too quickly, and the characters had profound changes happen faster than I think is believable. If you’re looking for some light summer reading, this will do nicely.

Part of the reason I was curious to try this is that Karen McQuestion originally self-published this for the Kindle, and I think it’s always worth checking out authors that haven’t found the right publisher yet.

View all my reviews

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This book reminded me a lot of Fannie Flagg’s writing with its easygoing dialogue between friends. But the subject matter here is far more serious as the life as a black person in 1960s Mississippi is one of constant danger.

On the whole I really enjoyed this book which blazed by in no time. Perhaps the ending was a little too pat (perfect for a Hollywood movie). I mostly appreciate Stockett’s ability to juggle three very different narrators, giving each her own voice.

I’m only sorry I didn’t pick this book up much sooner.

View all my reviews

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

First let’s be honest – this is a book meant for hard-core fans of Agatha Christie. But it might also be a curiosity for other authors that are interested in the creative process of the most widely published writer in history.

Curran unearthed a treasure-trove of Christie’s notebooks where she sketched out ideas for most of her work. It sometimes reveals fascinating insight into possible alternate endings, how she developed the names of characters, and how/when she decided on a detective for a given book.

So for the Christie fan, this is all quite interesting. It mainly just got me excited about going back to some of her novels to read them again. Even though this book is full of spoilers, it’s easy to forget them when you’re reading so many.

My two main criticisms…

First, the book is not ordered in the most logical way. Curran has chosen to group notes on books based on a few themes, such as book titles based on famous quotes, or books that take place in foreign locales. Perhaps it’s more interesting than a chronology, but sometimes the books grouped together are just too disparate.

Secondly, the author is extremely opinionated, and sometimes offers up his opinions as fact. He lavishes praise over novels like Crooked House and Endless Night, while pointing out perceived faults in others. And it appears that he has no love for the Tommy and Tuppence books, which are not examined in any detail. All this is not to say that Christie’s work varied in quality, but I just found it presumptuous that Curran expects we will agree with his opinions. Sometimes I did (yes, Hallowe’en Party was weak) but other times I strongly disagreed (Endless Night was an unsurprising retread in my eyes).

In summary, taken with a grain of salt, this book is invaluable to any true fan of Agatha Christie.

View all my reviews

It may not blow you away, but when you realize that this book was written over 90 years ago, it’s easy to understand how it’s been called the predecessor of dystopian fiction. Reading about a world ruled by cold logic where OneState rules over individuality immediately springs to mind Orwell’s 1984. I even caught glimpses of more contemporary work – isn’t I-330′s rebellion a forerunner to that of Katniss in The Hunger Games?

A quick and worthwhile read to gain insight into the roots of our current obsession with dystopian novels.

View all my reviews

I really enjoyed the first part of this book. There are vivid descriptions of the paintings themselves, an exciting recreation of the heist, and fascinating insight into how museums handle security. You also learn about the monetary value of art in modern society.

Unfortunately, the book then devolves into the author’s obsession with a variety of suspects, and takes us on a journey to meet what feels like every underworld gangster in Boston. That becomes frustrating, because you already know his leads won’t go anywhere, as the paintings remain missing today.

Glad I read it, but I could have stopped halfway through. Quick tip for e-book readers – the last 25% of the book is just annotations and an index, so it’s much shorter than you think.

View all my reviews

The Oscars are tonight!  After checking out a few last-minute movies, I can now give you my Oscar picks.  Sadly I missed the shorts again this year, but I’ll do my best with my predictions. Feel free to post your own here, and we’ll see who does well!

I’ve been doing my best to catch up on the nominees, but there are only 5 categories where I’ve seen everything (same as last year!) – Director, Supporting Actress (we’re watching Animal Kingdom on DVD this afternoon), Art Direction, Cinematography and Sound Mixing.  But you know I do my homework and I never do worse than half.  So listen up!

Best Picture

Ten nominees still seems ridiculous – but at least this year they are all strong and well-reviewed.  We managed to get to nine of them, which I’m rather proud of.  After careful consideration, I really think the Academy is going to play it old school and honor the very worthy The King’s Speech, but of course The Social Network is the potential spoiler if young Hollywood exerts its influence.  Honestly I think a decade from now we’ll look back and wonder why Inception wasn’t considered a strong contender.

Best Actor

Last year I was hoping Colin Firth would win, and this year he will get it.  The Academy loves a male character that is overcoming a disability of any kind, and Firth is going to be honored for two strong roles two years running.  I will also tip my hat to Jeff Bridges who was really strong in True Grit.

Best Actress

Just like last year, the hottest contest amongst the acting categories is here.  It’s a shame that Jennifer Lawrence isn’t a front-runner, as she made Winter’s Bone what it is.  It’s also a shame Julianne Moore wasn’t nominated, as she was stronger than Annette Benning, in my opinion.  The winner will be Natalie Portman, for her fierce portrayal of one (or is it two?) fierce woman, while dancing like a true ballerina.

Best Supporting Actor

Two years running, this category is a an easy pick – Christian Bale all the way.  I wouldn’t have believed it if I hadn’t seen it, but his crack-addicted boxer/trainer is his best work to-date.  I’ll still give props to Geoffrey Rush, who in another year could have walked away with the prize for his excellent, excellent performance.

Best Supporting Actress

This category could be the most interesting of any this year.  The conventional wisdom for some time was that Melissa Leo had it locked up.  But after an ill-advised self-promoting ad campaign, I think voters reconsidered.  And if they really watched The Fighter, perhaps they recognized what I saw – that Amy Adams was in fact stronger in the movie.  So I’m going out on a limb here and say that the two actresses will split the vote, and running up the aisle will be newcomer Hailee Steinfeld, who was charming, strong and quite funny in True Grit.

Best Director

It’s rare that the Academy splits the Director/Picture winners between two films, but it’s become increasingly common in recent years.  I see that trend continuing here, as David Fincher brought together many elements to make The Social Network so compelling.

Best Documentary Feature

I’ve only seen one of the nominees – it’s got buzz, and a director that will likely only show up to the ceremony in disguise – so it’s all about Exit Through the Gift Shop.  I have heard great things about Inside Job, but I suspect that Academy members are trying to forget the pain of the recession and move on.

Best Documentary Short Subject

This is a shot in the dark – I’ll go with Entertainment Weekly‘s prediction of Killing in the Name, which deals with the fallout from a suicide bomber in the Middle East, a very timely topic.

Best Animated Feature

Pixar is still the king – Toy Story 3 was another triumph.  Who didn’t cry watching it?

Best Foreign Language Film

The only one I’ve heard much about is Mexico’s Biutiful, but I’ll throw my hat in with the Golden Globe-winning Danish film In a Better World.

Best Cinematography

I would say three of the five nominees have a good shot at this one.  Generally I find the Academy likes to award a film that shows a lot of landscapes and imposing settings, so my gut says the winner is True Grit‘s visuals by Roger Deakins, a frequent nominee that has never won.

Best Original Screenplay

Really tough call.  Inception was so inventive, and The King’s Speech is certainly at the front of the pack.  I am most likely to be wrong in this category than any other, but I think there is going to be a consolation prize given to The Kids Are All Right, which was given a lot of praise when it first came out for presenting an original family.  That’s thanks to scribes Lisa Cholodenko and Stuart Blumberg.

Best Adapted Screenplay

Easy choice again this year – The Social Network was all about rapid-fire dialogue, written by the expert, Aaron Sorkin.

Best Visual Effects

If Inception doesn’t win, I’ll eat my new fedora.

Best Animated Short

This could go any direction – so why not an environmental piece – Let’s Pollute?

Best Live Action Short

Two of EW‘s writers said they think a strong contender is Na Wewe, which is set in Burundi.  Sounds great to me.

Best Art Direction

Several good options this year; I’m going to say it’s the striking colors and visuals of Alice in Wonderland.

Best Costume Design

Again, there were a lot of wild and fanciful costumes in Alice in Wonderland, so I think that will win (not much else to say about that movie, except it was pretty to look at).  Normally a period piece would win, but The King’s Speech is full of very subdued outfits, and the Academy will find True Grit‘s costumes to be too grungy (which is a shame, as I was impressed).

Best Film Editing

The true crime is that Inception wasn’t nominated here, even though it’s major sequence of overlapping dreamscapes was amazing.  That being said, the rapid shifts of time and place in The Social Network should win the prize.

Best Sound Mixing

Big explosions and lots of gunfire – Inception.

Best Sound Editing

See above – Inception.

Best Original Score

I’m actually hoping the Academy doesn’t award schmaltz, and instead gives a deserved award to Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, whose score was a major reason The Social Network was so impressive.

Best Original Song

I can’t handle Randy Newman winning for another of his trite tunes!  So let’s give this one to Dido’s song from 127 Hours – “If I Rise.”

Best Makeup

The nominees here are not ones anyone has seen, so let’s assume it goes to the creature feature – The Wolfman.

So how about you folks?  How do your picks stack up?  Will young co-hosts James Franco and Anne Hathaway knock it out of the park?