In case you're concerned...

I feel better.  Sunshine has maintained its presence.  My mom and I had my Gramma's car to run around in.  We got out around 7:30 and went to Starbucks and then Schnucks.
I guess I shouldn't say I "Realized" something as if I know more than I did, but it occurred to me that Israel's King David was far from perfect.  He was not very Jesus like, because Jesus had not set his mission in motion.  He was not Holy, but he did try, in his own way.  I don't know why descendants of God-haters are punished.  Especially those who barely know of  their God-hating ancestors.  But it's not for me to know, really, unless I'm just too thickheaded to figure it out...Also, God says to ask him for all kinds of things.  I keep thinking "Isn't that kind of weird?"  But the things people value in their life - independence, dignity, etc. - are often highly overrated.  If you want independence, you're not going to find it.  Even the man who owns his fiances and isn't employed by anybody and has no landlord still needs human companionship.  Often a pet can substitute that, but it's still not the same.  If everybody on the face of the Earth died, the last man on Earth would eventually find himself bored stupid, and that boredom would eventually eat his brain away to nothing.  A person can read the books his forefathers wrote to get his brain cells moving, but how far can that really sustain a person?  The fictional qualities of any given book are that much more fictitious when the characters all "coincidental"y resemble inanimate objects.  Corpses.  Electricity might still go on, if the last man standing knows how to operate, maybe even create, a generator.  In that case, all the songs ever written would just be dead dreams.  Songs of sadness w/o hope, songs of happy times never to return.  And every movie with a happy ending would just be cause for disdain.  The ones with a tragic ending would seem that much more tragic.
So, yes it is weird to ask God constantly as if you're a 5 year old running through a toy store draining Mom's bank account.  It's only weird though because everybody's too busy looking out for themselves to rely on God.
I really don't think the realities at hand warrant me getting a job.  The two options I have are to keep on SSI until it evaporates in late 2016, or risk being homeless.  I don't think God approves of welfare.  Does he consider me a thief for using it?  Well, I suppose...I am a thief, technically.  I take a piece of bread from a loaf that my Mom bought for herself, that constitutes theft.  And I've done that several times.  Usually when I ask for something, I don't get a concrete answer.  Does that still constitute as theft?  Maybe not intentionally, which is kinda the key matter; God doesn't mind if you accidentally sin, just so long as you acknowledge Him and the salvation he has granted.  So it is disconcerting when I stop and think about it, the idea that my lifestyle is a result of systematic theft.  But is it really theft?  I mean, yes, it's not pure capitalism, but pure capitalism did nobody any favors until gov't regulations were put in place in the 1930s.  I think it's considered theft more unjustly.  The injustice is not the welfare system.  The injustice is the American public letting politicians take away what's theirs.  If your gov't is so wrong, action needs to be taken.  The declaration of independence encourages its citizens to wage war with bad government.  Where's the war?  People would rather have convenience and comfort than a fair and just gov't.  That fact can't be pinned on me and the thousands of welfare recipients out there.  Since when do welfare recipients, or anyone else for that matter, who attempt social change by committing violence get anyone to join in?  Seriously, if I threw a brick into the window of Cape City Hall, it would be considered "some crazy guy commits vandalism in southeast Missouri".  It wouldn't do a damn bit of good on a local level, much less a federal one.
As for my withdrawn minimal company, I think this blog is pretty close to my best effort.  I may not be reaching anybody.  Maybe I am.  It's not up to me to save people.  It is up to me to declare the truth of Jesus Christ to the best of my ability.
So, really, the only things I need to work on are lust and anger/hate.  I really don't express love often enough.  I express a lot of other things, many negative, almost brutal, emotions.  Some of that is how I feel, my lack of connection to other people, victimization, maybe, but I need to handle it better.  Nobody's gonna make me feel better if I don't ask nicely.  Even if I do ask nicely, I still might not get any comfort from anybody.  But it's an absolute certainty if I keep venting at every little thing.

At last...pt XVIII

the sun is here.  After 4 days of rain and uber-gloom AND COLD, the sun is out as if it hadn't missed a beat.  That weather was really trying.  I wanted to skip church on Sunday, but knew I'd regret if I did.  Still, I made no effort to get to church.  My grandmother usually picks me and my mom up for church on Sundays at 10:15 or so, but I was hoping she'd just skip our house and go straight to church.  I was not feeling well.  I was not "sick", really, I wasn't even really "depressed", but my spirits were not high at all.  I felt good once church service started.  It flew by in no time, I was really surprised when the time came for the pastor's sermon.  We didn't let out early, nothing was skipped, I don't think...it's possible the pastor may have spoken for an excess amount of time, but it didn't feel as if he did.  He's not the most economical with words, but I've grown accustomed to that and really don't mind anymore.  He didn't seem to drone on, which in some cases it really does seem...
Damnit.  Today's Tuesday.  As I started typing this I had the notion that today was Monday.  Yeah.  Today's Monday.  That's why I got mail yesterday.  duhr.
  I got most of my Christmas gift shopping done in one swoop since I never know what to give my small group of family members that I'm closely associated with.  I just get them a WalMart gift card, except for uncle Eddie, who actually makes pretty good money and can afford to enjoy shopping (does anybody who makes good money really enjoy shopping at that rat hole?)
  Anyway.  I was going to post something like yesterday, but I don't even remember what it was.
  I'm feeling better since the sun's return.  I feel like a demon is clawing its way through me and has chipped some sizable chunks off the wood.  I need to pray before day's end.  I need to really take time to do that.  I need to then quit avoiding God and giving into lust and hopefully that'll become routine enough for me to adapt w/.  This current scenario leads me to doubt the utility of my prayers and to feel self pity and then I end up doubting my own salvation and get scared when I realize that I can't even declare my own salvation as truth.  NOT GOOD.  Trust.  and.  obey.  I need to quit trying to wiggle out of that.

Mr. Left The Building has gone bye-bye (apprx 9 years ago)

Asked by someone(?) on Yahoo! Answers presumably 9 apprx years ago

"

Amendment I (1791) to the Constitution specifically states Freedom of Religion.
No where does it state the rights of Atheists or Agnostics.

Is this relevant?
Is this topic open for interpretation for the individual or since there was no specific wording for non-belief, does that mean it has no inalienable rights under the constitution?

Update: JT, clearly the interpretation for Atheism does not exist in the document.
What happened?
That must feel like a load off of the face.

"

 

I don't know who JT is, I didn't see any answers posted as being from "JT"...

 

This is "Left The Building"'s response to "someone(?) on Yahoo! Answers" 

 

Given the fact the 1st Amendment prohibits the government from establishing a religion and the constitution prohibits religious tests for office holders, it's fairly clear the US was founded as an atheist nation.

  
I rather childishly thought the same thing myself, mainly because I am pathetically ignorant of history and science.  I'm not even that good at grammar etc., although what grammar I do know I do respect its purpose and try to reflect that in my writings/typings and I get really annoyed when the tiny bit of grammar that I am aware of is entirely disregarded by people that are old enough to know how to phrase a sentence and aren't immigrating from some poverty stricken land where their government doesn't have the funds to teach its citizens how to speak English.  People that are from non-English speaking territories need to either learn English or not speak it at all.  I understand immigrants not feeling the need to learn English.  It's really not necessary.  Granted, it can be uncomfortable to wander into a city or town where nobody there knows what you're saying, but when all of the residents of x town/city can understand each other, what exactly is the problem?  If you're living in some gigantic city like NYC or Chicago and you can't speak English, it's not exactly logical to go to the white neighborhood(s) for the purpose of buying something at the Wal-Mart located there.
 However, if you're going to speak English, do it right or learn another language.  The purpose of grammar is to make communication more effective.  Which is why it irks me to no end that people in Alabama do not know the difference between Coke, soda and baking soda.  And why in fresh hell does the English dictionary need 9 different synonyms for daffodil?

But anyway, getting back on the topic that I started to talk about and then completely got off topic from (sorry), I'm not educated, to put it simply.  I have a high school diploma, which I do not feel I earned since I was in special ed when I should have been expelled before entering 1st grade, except the law does not allow for children who are too dumb or crazy to learn much of anything to simply not attend school.  
But I can tell the difference between somebody who took the time to carefully examine their information and someone who'se just running their mouth for the hell of it.  People can make impassioned speeches and say very provocative things that stir up the heart in the name of a political or social agenda.  Some Christian leaders are like that.  When Pastor Jeremy Clayton speaks, I can tell he's doing so with love in his heart.  He does not preach in a self righteous manner.  He does not preach to build himself up nor to knock others down.  He does occasionally say some decisive things that some church goers and athiests would probably take offense to.  He once exclaimed that (paraphrasing) if telling someone that they are going to Hell because of their sin was an effective way to change someone's behavior, Jesus excruciating torture would have been utterly pointless.  I don't think anybody in the congregation was significantly offended.  I didn't notice anybody stomp out of the room.  But some church goers, as well as pastors, seem to want to demonize people from outside the church rather than focus on how to strengthen themselves as a body of Christ.  Stomping out of the room is something I would expect those types of "Christians" to do, perhaps too discreetly for me to notice.... 

Taken from Yahoo! Answers posted there roughly two days ago:
Q:

Do you agree with Stephen Hawking that science cannot know reality as it is, only models of reality?

Hawking accepts what he calls model-dependent realism: External reality itself is unknowable, only models of reality are knowable. Different models may make different predictions of observations, but none of them can be said to be "real" or "true". E.g. the Big Bang may explain more of our observations of the world than young Earth creationism, but neither the Big Bang nor YEC can be said to be "real" or "true".

 

 

"Randy The Atheist"'s answer from 2 days ago apprx:

 
"Objective Reality can be demonstrated independent of the human nervous system by taking a chemical photograph. The photo it creates exists on the plastic film strip embedded with silver halide and can be transferred to many mediums like paper, parchment, plastic, metal and wood without any involvement of human interpretation or inference.

By using this simple test, the brain is interpreting the image from two distinct and completely independent sources. One source is the photons reflecting off the object's surface to your eyes. The other source is the film that reacted to the photons from the object in reality. So we know that our eyes are reacting to an object in the same way that plastic and paper react to it which clearly demonstrates that reality as we perceive it is correctly identified and objective.

Another way is to use a laser scanner and 3D printer to duplicate the object in reality using only the formula for the speed of light and a Cartesian coordinate system.

The BB is actually an exception to this because of our incomplete understanding of gravity and so for that example, Hawking is right.

HOWEVER, we DO KNOW that something very similar to the BB must have occurred at some point in the distant past."

 

It's interesting that I agree with everything this dude says, unless "Randy" is actually a lady, and in that case...f'ever...

The following is my answer, which is more or less a preaching of sorts...thought I'd post it here since most people reading this question and it's answers will probably dismiss the entirety of the post BECAUSE I am not a college graduate.....but hopefully with the words above, it won't take as much to consider the validity of what it is I'm trying to get across.

 

 I don't know that much about science, but obviously the big band THEORY is not a fact. Ditto for evolution. It may be true, but how the heck can human beings know something that they were not there to witness? There is no written history of how the world was created, except in religious texts, which many scientists are understandably skeptical of, since it's impossible for all religions to be true since many of them have conflicting statements in their texts, but if you take all the religions, and you look at their corresponding texts, and cross reference them with science, most of them do not hold up. From a purely scientific perspective, not taking into consideration psychological matters like social harmony (or lack thereof), familial and financial stability, religion is not an important matter. But if you do take into account societal matters, history did make substantial progress because of Christianity. Jesus came to teach mankind that love is the key to solving every problem you could possibly face. From the apostle Paul and his apprentices, much of the world was radically changed through Christ's messages. The philanthropic atheist is a relatively new lifestyle.

Source(s): The Bible, unabridged

 

 

I posted the above, so if you still can't at least consider the possibility that my answer is true more or less, then you can at least research these topics yourself if you feel the need.  I wouldn't advise everyone all at once call up my pastor and start asking him questions.  But if you can keep it civil, and don't have time to wade through a bunch of historic documentation, maybe call him.  He might be on Facebook.  I can give his office # in the comments, although I doubt anybody will respond, so it may be a few days before I see you've requested anything.

 

 

 

 

Different names for the same thing

It never ceases to amaze me how many duplicate listings Amazon.com has of so many different CDs.  There's little to differentiate one from the other because the item details merely specify that they're imports.  The UPC isn't even provided for research/reference purposes.  There's like 15 versions of Phil Collins ...HITS album from 1998.  They all have the same product image/details and most of them are being offered used from sellers based in Japan, so one would assume most of these CD issueances are from Japan, but why?  Why in the span of less than 20 years have the Japanese (and possibly other unnamed countries) put this album on CD when it was already available on CD?
Then you look up MASTER OF REALITY by Black Sabbath or most any other CD and they have a two disc deluxe edition, at least one Japanese mini-LP edition, a MFSL Gold CD edition, and...well, I'm speaking hypothetically, I don't even know if that one was ever released by MFSL, but there's 12 editions of that album, many of which have customer reviews submitted for them and Amazon makes it increasingly difficult to figure out which review is for which item.  Unless the reviewer specifically says which item they're reviewing -- which for many years they didn't need to, so they didn't.  What's the point of reading a bunch of people saying "this is one of the greatest albums ever made"/"drop what you're doing and buy this!"/"I really like this album"...I mean, seriously, how does one EXPLAIN what it is they like about a song or album?  Unless you're a technically minded person, which most music listeners are not, thus explaining many progrockers contempt for pop music...
Anyway...
Haven't posted in a little while...Haven't been obsessing about this a lot or anything, just something I wanted to vent about.

I spent way TOO MUCH money this month.  I bought a bunch of CDs, etc....I wrote out my budget for December and I have enough to get Christmas presents for my small circle of family members, but that's it.  I meant to give $85 to God this month.  I'm only at $50, $10 of which is from re-selling osme of the more or less useless junk I had accumulated from online shopping et al...I need to quit this half assed Christianity I'm half assedly practicing.  UGH.
It looks like I will be moving from Southeast Missouri to suburban Atlanta, Georgia in January of 2016.  Another incredible journey.  It's been almost 20 years since I ventured from mid-state California to SEMO.

SPY (2015)

I saw SPY w/ Melissa McCarthy on Saturday (not a very fitting Halloween movie but oh well).  I was wondering if it was any good b/c it's got overall positive reviews according to Rotten Tomatoes' website.  A lot was riding on my opinion of this film.  If it had been a rotten tomato, I might have very well passed up seeing GHOSTBUSTERS in theaters this upcoming summer.  However, I was actually very pleased with it.  The directing was competent, the script was funny, it was just an overall job well done for writer/director Paul Feig.  I doubt the re-make of GHOSTBUSTERS will capture the visual majesty of the original, but either way, I'm sure it'll at least be entertaining, and not in a trainwrek-that-you-can't-look-away-from way...if it is...o dear God...aaaah!
Anyway.  I have a little more enthusiasm for the film.  That's a good thing.  I'm still skeptical.  Kate Diepold, who wrote THE HEAT starring McCarthy and Sandra Bullock, is also involved with the new GHOSTBUSTERS film, and that lends one to question weather the film will actually be any good, since THE HEAT was not funny in any way that I could perceive.  I guess that type of humor goes well with some people, but hopefully there's more in Diepold's arsenal than what I'm aware of presently...
Hmm...

Obscenity

I heard Rush Limbaugh talking on his radio program one day a few years ago about how the Great Depression is an example of how welfare isn't needed.  He either is extremely ignorant or he just doesn't care.  I'm going with the latter.  He was very vocal about the negative effect of "social conservatives" during the 2012 voting season.  Social conservatism is a good idea, IMO, but it should be something parents and neighbors act on.  Putting someone in jail because they defy social convention is just stupid.  The principles that the USA was built on were not socially accepted at that time.  However, if neighbors/friends/family have strong ideals that they wish to pass down to the upcoming generation(s), then they should work together to do so.  It is not congress' fault that the youth of the 1950s were drawn to Elvis Presley.  It is not congress' fault that TV stations felt compelled to air live recordings of Elvis Presley.  The fact of the matter is that congressman and religious organizations have been kicking and screaming about "American values" long after their voice became a joke in and of itself.  The sexual revolution started over 50 years ago.  Yet it's always "gay marriage" that becomes the subject of political squabbling.  Politicians and organizations defend it by saying "we don't care what they do in private, but subjecting children to it...", as if marriage had anything to do with children.  Yes, I realize a long long time ago, marriage was a means of having sex in a socially approved manner that would thus lead to parenthood.  But abortion is now legal and more or less safe (for the adult), and 30% of society doesn't even see the point of marriage.
This is indeed troubling information for those whose heart goes out to God.  And yes, if it were illegal for Elvis to be on TV it would have maybe kept the sexual revolution from happening and thus kept abortion from being legalized.  But how many souls are being saved by Kim Davies' actions?  Some guy on the news that supports her was asked by a reporter if he thought he was fighting a losing battle and he cited a passage in The Bible that talks of Christians being on the winning side.  That doesn't explain what verse in The Bible supports acting like a snooty holier than thou bigot.  Really, nothing in The Bible says to prevent marriage between gay people.  The Apostle Paul didn't force the fornicating church members to stop what they were doing.  He simply told them they would not enter Heaven if they kept it up.  It was their choice.  In Biblical terms, the issue IS gay sex, not gay marriage.  So if you're trying to conserve what's left of Christian influence in society, you either abandon the freedom of speech & religion clause and all the legislation that has been written surrounding it over the past 50+ years or you can love your neighbor the way God intended us to love each other and just hope your neighbors see and embrace the truth.  The battle against evil is not going to be won by man.  The antichrist WILL rise up and take over the entire planet.  It will be God's victory over evil that we will have the opportunity to witness and be astonished by.

But as I was saying, social conservatism is a fantasy.  It was once a reality 75 or so years ago but there's nothing to conserve anymore.  There was a time when "obscenity" was considered something akin to pornography.  It is no longer the case.  However, most lukewarm Christians and heathens alike can say that it takes a truly despicable soul to stand for children starving over malnutrition.  The obscenity laws of yore are no longer relevant, but if you want an obscenity law on the books, there's one to think over.  It's not a matter of forcing good will on others.  It's a matter of Hitler ending the holocaust voluntarily or facing a bullet in the head.  Obviously, the rich pay their taxes and welfare recipients get a tiny fraction of that, but if they don't, Rush Limbaugh and his ilk are indeed correct - Society will stand up and hunt you down.  You will go to jail or die in a police altercation.
I do however think Obama is being stupid making the investigation of welfare recipients a partisan issue.  His solution makes a little sense, but it doesn't solve the problem as far as I can tell.  The GOP proposal makes even more sense, and although it also wouldn't solve the problem, it would at least minimize it.

Is It really stripped?

I bought some Jones Stripped Green Apple soda (basically a near-diet naturally flavored not-drenched-in-sugar soda) a few+ hrs ago and though it'd been about 30+ minutes since eating any - ahem - chocolate (ggggggggggh), I couldn't help but be less than satisfied.  Jones Naturals is supposedly no longer being made, having been merged with the Jones Stripped product line.  My local Hastings still has some Jones Naturals, and between the Naturals and the Stripped, I bought 4 total.  The problem is I don't remember which one I bought first.  The first one I tried I loved.  It was great!!  The second one tasted very plain and I was not impressed at all.  Then I tried another and it was great.  I might have had another one in between then and now, but that's how confusing this whole thing is, right?  I don't know if i should contact the company and let them know and hope they can refund my money or something or what.  I know I had some Jones Naturals Orange Mango and that was freakin' fantastic!  I looooved it!  However, I can't buy it just any old day.  Hastings didn't have any today, nor were they carrying any Jones Stripped Orange Mango for me to make a comparison.  I don't know where else to buy it.  They sell it on their website for $26 a 12 pk, which is more expensive than Hastings and is a lot of money to plunk down out of my budget for something i don't even know if I like.
rrr.
My average calorie intake from today and 4 days prior is 2,050 apprx.  That's not quite worth bragging about, but it's close (!)

weight loss and nostaliga...

I'm finding myself running around Rhapsody's on-demand streaming service like a chicken with its head cut off.  So much of what I used to listen to is negative, even blasphemous.  And there wasn't a whole lot of "great" music back when I was a heathen anyway.  I've found Michael W. Smith's SOVEREIGN to be a good album, but it gets rather boring sitting there thinking about how awesome my God is.  It's a good worship CD, but not something I'd listen to for entertainment.
It does provide some comfort to know the wife of the guy who put together my congregation's small group study THE STORY (Mrs. Randy Frazee, not sure of her name) is often melancholy in her mood.
My pastor was marveling about the fact that God is the author of laughter.  I'm not sure he's correct.  Maybe I have a serious attitude problem, but most things I laugh at are negative.  Most sources of humor and most content of jokes stem from something negative.  Dan Aykroyd, co-writer (and one of the stars) of GHOSTBUSTERS, stated that it wasn't hard to find a balance between comedy and horror (considered a Satanic genre by many) because so much of what makes us laugh is the same things that scare us (severe paraphrasing, not an exact quote by a long shot).  Coming from a successful and respected professional, it somehow seems to carry more significance than coming from an unschooled, unenmployed crazy dude who says stuff on the internet.  I guess Dan Aykroyd may suffer the same or somewhat similar attitude problem(s) that I do.  It's not unthinkable, given Hollywood's tendency to bash Christianity.  Christians do exist in Hollywood, but just as in general society, they are not the norm.  Most voters, Christian and otherwise, say they would not vote for an Evangelical Christian as POTUS.  I try to find out why and nobody has any answers that make any sense.  Some guy on Yahoo! Answers said it's because "Evangelical Christians" have a distorted view of The Bible (or something to that effect) and I asked him what is distorted about it and he never responded.
Anyway...on the physical side of things, I've consumed in the span of 4 days (including today -- fingers crossed!!) 8,000 net calories apprx.  That is...1,600 x 2 (yesterday and the day before the day before then) + 3,000 (the day before yesterday) + 2100 (today)...8,300, actually...which comes to 2,050 per day on average, which is good...so far.  It needs work, but it's better than it's been.  If I consume 1,800 or less tomorrow, that average will go down(!)
I sometimes wonder though if losing weight will really cause anything good.  I want to be healthy overall.  I want to FEEL good.  I feel fat.  It's hard to explain.  I want to feel less clouded in the head.  I want less sweat.  I want my skin to not feel like a wad of plastic tangled up in itself.  I want to feel more awake.  I feel sick!
Anyway...

lifestyles of the unlawfully impatient...

Darn it.  I'll probably miss seeing THE INTERN in theaters.  Ditto with BRIDGE OF SPIES.  Oh, well.  At least I have enough to see them on video when they come out.
I think I could afford to see THE INTERN in Nov if it's still playing, but that would depend on if I can get a ride to and from.  BRIDGE OF SPIES I have less faith in.  It'll either be shriek out loud awesome or leave me pissed off wishing I could leave the theater midway.  Plus, it's a Spielberg movie, so it's bound to generate revenue even if the Rotten Tomatoes consensus is somehow incorrect.  Nancy Meyers is not well liked by the movie critics.  On THE INTERN's Wikipedia page, it mentions that someone writing for The Guardian believes the poor critics' reception is due to the female movie critics being severely outnumbered, which sounds plausible, I suppose.  Meyers' IT'S COMPLICATED had the same critical reception as THE INTERN, although I haven't seen IT'S COMPLICATED either.  I did rent it a couple weeks ago along with another movie, but I only watched the other movie, which I wrote about earlier titled CRAZY STUPID LOVE.
Don't really have much to talk about I guess.  This is a much shorter blog post than what should be, given the low-number of blog posts over the past month(?)...
 If anyone's dying for more of my dry insight...then...sorry...if not, then perhaps a thank you is in order?  No, don't thank me.  Thank boredom.  Here's to boredom!  Cheers!

CRAZY STUPID LOVE (2011)

I rented CSL from Family Video a week and two days ago, and watched it about 3 days ago.  It was great.  It was a relief to know that some people still know how to write well-paced, focused and entertaining screenplays and that they can be filmed in a competent manner w/o the assistance of Martin Scorsese or Steven Speilberg...I wouldn't say it was the greatest film I've seen, but it's still really good.  I liked it a lot.
I bought it at Hastings' website (gohastings) and saved almost $3 off the already low price.  I guess it's considered "an old movie" by Hollywood execs, or, idk, but for some reason it's in the budget DVD section at Hastings ($5.99) and by buying on their website I only paid $3.25 + tax, and no S&H due to the sweetness of in-store pickup (yay!!!).
My mom had watched in on cable a few+ months ago and I was in the room for part of it.  The little I did see of it stuck w/ me tho.
Anyway...another cool thing, I saw the film in ONE sitting.  I didn't even get interrupted by a bathroom urge.  I just watched it.  For me, this is a pretty big achievement.  Me?  No, the real achievement in in the film's success.  It's a tasteful, stylish, spirited, engrossing film.  I liked it a lot.  I wouldn't say "I love(d) it".  Love is a strong word, although people act like it isn't...I did very much like it tho.  I'm glad I finally got around to seeing it.