What's going on at Pixar?

For a while, Pixar could do no wrong. They were cranking out hit after hit. Every single movie they released was not only a commerical success, but also liked by critics as well as parents that were dragged by their kids to the movies.

Recently, I heard some news that had me a little upset. Pixar recently announced that they would start production on "Toy Story 4," which would hit theaters in 2017. Why did this upset me? I will get to that in a minute. But this announcement had me looking at what Pixar has been doing over the last couple of years, and I am afraid they have lost their creative edge. One could even argue they have "sold out."

So why am I uneasy about "Toy Story 4?" First of all, I believe that the Toy Story films are some of the greatest movies ever made, animated or otherwise. The characters, visuals and writing were all nearly perfect in all three movies. Part 3, which had many of us choking up and holding back tears in the movie theater, provided what I thought was a perfect resolution for the main characters, and a wonderful ending to the story and the themes we have seen played out over the three movies.

My biggest fear is that Toy Story 4 will become the next "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull." The Indiana Jones trilogy, and, yes, I still consider these movies to be a trilogy, are all great movies (although some people have mixed feelings about "Temple of Doom"). The shot at the end of "Last Crusade" that had Indy, his father, Marcus and Sallah riding off into the sunset was a great way to end the story of Indiana Jones. Then, 15 years later, "Crystal Skull" hits theaters. This fourth movie was mediocre at best, with plot lines that are far-fetched, even for Indiana Jones (nuking the fridge?!), some of the worst directing of Steven Spielberg's career, and, of course, CGI monkeys.

Most fans don't even consider "Crystal Skull" part of the trilogy. Many people pretend it doesn't even exist. It has basically left a black mark on what is one of the greatest and most successful movie franchises.

I am afraid that, like "Crystal Skull," "Toy Story 4" is being made solely in the interest of the almighty dollar. John Lasseter, the movie's director and the chief creative advisor for Pixar and Disney Animation Studios, says he has a great story idea and he said "We only make sequels when we have a story that's as good as or better than the original."  He also revealed the plot will focus on a love story between Woody and Bo Peep, who wasn't in "Toy Story 3." Normally, I would believe Mr. Lasseter, but the other reason I am deeply concerned about this sequel is Pixar's recent track record.

Let's go back about 13 years or so. From 2001 to 2009, Pixar released a streak of 7 non-sequel, totally original movies that ranged from good (Ratatouille, Cars) to brilliant (Up, The Incredibles, Monsters, Inc., WALL-E). Every single one of these movies are written well, have stunning visuals, and hold up to repeat viewings. I know, because my kids watch them over and over again. "The Incredibles," like the Toy Story movies, is one of my top movies of all time.

Then we get to the current decade. After Toy Story 3 in 2010, things began to go downhill. 2011 saw the release of "Cars 2." This made a ton of money, and like its prequel, became a marketing bonanza. If you have boys, I am sure you have at least one piece Lightning McQueen or Cars swag, whether it's a blanket, toy car, or clothing item. However, despite its commercial success, this was the first Pixar movie ever to get pummeled by movie critics. The poor critical reviews were justified, because the movie was loud, light on story, and full of flaws. For example, there was too much of the Mater character. No offense to Larry the Cable Guy, but Mater works well as a supporting character, but, as a main character, he becomes grating. Many people like me were unpleasantly surprised by this movie, because of Pixar's track record up to this point. Many of us hold Pixar to a higher standard, so it was almost shocking to see such a mediocre film from the studio.

In 2012, "Brave" was released. This is the only Pixar film I haven't seen, because it didn't interest me. According to the critics, it was good, but not great.

Last year was "Monsters University," a prequel to "Monsters, Inc." which, again, was good, but not great.

As for the future, Pixar's next two movies are "Inside Out," in which four different characters portray the emotions of a young girl, and "The Good Dinosaur," which introduces a world where dinosaurs and humans coexist. This looks like another opportunity for some marketing megabucks.

After these two films, several sequels are on the way. Aside from "Toy Story 4,""Finding Dory," a sequel to "Finding Nemo," is in the works, along with "The Incredibles 2," which I am really looking forward to, and "Cars 3", which I am not looking forward to.

In other words, I have seen a drop in the quality and creativity of Pixar's films, and I am also seeing what looks like a shift to more commercial films. Why is this happening? Here are a few theories.

1. They simply ran out of ideas. The crew at Pixar may have hit a creative impasse. Instead of coming up with new ideas, they are recycling old ones. This makes no sense, because they have hired outsiders like former Simpsons animator Brad Bird, who went on to direct "The Incredibles" and "Ratatouille" for Pixar. Maybe they need to hire younger writers with fresh ideas. That having been said, Pixar recruited outsiders Rashida Jones (from The Office and Parks and Recreation), and Will McCormack (from In Plain Sight) to write Toy Story 4.

2. Stiffer competiton from other studios has them making "safer," more commercial movies. For a while, Pixar was untouchable. You had occasional successes from other studios, like the "Shrek" movies from DreamWorks, but from an animation and storytelling perspective, no one could touch Pixar. This has changed. Other studios are putting out animated films that are successful on both a creative and commercial level. DreamWorks has put out "How to Train Your Dragon," which had dazzling animation, a great story and one of the greatest animated characters ever - Toothless the dragon. I haven't seen the sequel, but I am told that it is even better. Universal's Illumination Entertainment has established a successful animated franchise with the "Despicable Me" movies. I am sure everyone knows by now that "Minions" is coming out next summer.

Surprisingly, Pixar's stiffest competiton comes from within the Disney empire. Disney Animation Studios also has John Lasseter as its de facto leader, but they are a completely different group of animators. Their recent string of hits speaks for itself: "Tangled," "Wreck-It Ralph," the newly released "Big Hero 6," and let's not forget "Frozen." All of these are well-written and skillfully animated. Some critics are saying that Disney Animation Studios has taken Pixar's place as the top player in the animation game because of "Frozen." I know all of us, especially those of us with children, are fed up with this movie, but this is a valid argument. "Frozen" was, in a way, a throwback to the great Disney animated musicals, and was a well-written story about empowerment and the conflict between two siblings. Also, the movie looked beautiful, had some great songs (there is a cute little song buried in the middle of the movie called "Let It Go," which you might have missed) and was paced well for the kids. This more mainstream approach was a marked contrast to the more witty and artistic approach of many of Pixar's movies. This is not saying that "Frozen" was better, but it was able to appeal to a wider audience. This could explain why Pixar is bringing back its proven characters and franchises to the big screen rather than introducing more new ideas. This doesn't make sense either, because Pixar's non-sequels such as "Up" and "WALL-E" also made tons of money.

3. The Almighty Dollar. John Lasseter swears up and down that Toy Story 4 is being made because of passion and not profit, but after Pixar's most recent offerings and a look at their future slate, I am hard-pressed to believe it. The recent and future schedule contains all of Pixar's biggest hits and merchandise sellers. Compare this to the period during the first decade of the 2000s, during which Pixar released no sequels, just a bunch of great movies.

That having been said, when Toy Story 4 comes out in 2017, my boys will be 8 and 6, so guess who will be there with bells on the weekend it opens?

Update: I have seen "Inside Out," and it was great! It was well-received by critics, and I agree with most of them that it is the best movie I have seen from Pixar since "Up" in 2009. (although as of this writing, I still haven't seen "Brave.") It is not surprising that "Inside Out" comes from director Pete Docter and the same team that was responsible for "Up." It addresses my concern that Pixar has run out of original ideas, because this was a great concept that was executed very well with a great story and memorable characters. I also stand corrected, for the time being, on my criticism that Pixar is playing it safe. This was definitely an original idea, and it is rare these days for an original idea to be so successful. It had a $91 million opening weekend, and Disney/Pixar is bragging that it is the highest-grossing opening weekend for a movie that isn't a sequel or based on other material (like books, video games, theme park rides, etc.) In other words, "Inside Out" has restored some of my faith in Pixar. I am still a little wary about the batch of sequels that is on the way.

Rental review: Toyota Corolla LE

I figured I would review the rental Toyota Corolla I got to drive while the minivan was in the body shop again. I was rear ended for the second time this year. This time, Enterprise provided me with a Toyota Corolla instead of another minivan, so I figured I would share my overall impressions. Let me preface this review by saying that I view most Toyotas as “transportation appliances,” meaning they are perfectly competent cars that are lacking in soul or excitement. In other words, they are adequate, competent cars for people who don’t enjoy driving. I drove the LE model, which is the middle trim level.

Exterior styling: Not bad. The previous Corolla looked like the transportation appliance that it was. The 2014 Corolla, based on the Furia concept, is sleeker, and has some nice touches, like the LED headlights and upward character line on the sides of the car. S “Sport?” models get a blacked out grille. Overall, a huge improvement over its predecessor.

Interior styling: Again, not bad. There are lots of different shapes and materials that make up the interior, and it is evident that they tried to inject some style into the car. The result is a little busy, but is, once again, a major improvement. There are many soft-touch surfaces throughout the interior. However, the fake stitching on top of the dashboard moulding looks cheap. Gauges are clear and easy to read.

Performance: Meh. The 132 hp four carries over from the previous model. Acceleration is merely adequate, and this car is easily outrun by others in its class. This car has a “gearless” CVT (continuously valuable transmission), which is obviously designed for fuel economy and not performance. The base model comes with a conventional 4-speed auto, and a 6-speed manual is available on some trim levels. The S has paddle shifters on the steering wheel. Despite the sporty trim of the S model, the car still comes with the lowly base engine. The only optional engine is on the LE Eco model, which has 140 horsepower. There is some steering feel, and the car handles reasonably well, but will never be mistaken for a sports car. I am sure the handling on the S is better on 17-inch wheels. Finally, all models except the ones with 17-inch wheels have rear drum brakes. As far as I am concerned, drum brakes, which tend to fade (lose effectiveness) quickly due to friction and heat, are outdated technology which shouldn’t be on any car, and this was Toyota doing too much cost cutting. Finally, the car rides well, absorbs bumps in the road, and is quiet, smooth and refined.

Fuel economy: Thanks to a fuel-efficient engine and CVT, I averaged a very impressive 34.8 miles per gallon. It only cost me about $30 to fill the tank, and the 2-hour trip through beautiful Pennsylvania from the State College area to Lancaster only used about 1/4 of a tank. I don’t know how people justify buying a Prius, because the mileage on this car is almost as good, the Corolla costs thousands less, and looks like an actual car.

Safety: All models come standard with a full complement of airbags and stability control. The LE, which  I drove, had a backup camera. Models with the multimedia system come with a backup camera. The Corolla did well in most IIHS tests, but earned only a “marginal” rating in the front overlap crash test, which  puts it behind other cars in its class. Again, no car should have drum brakes.

Space/utility: The wheelbase was stretched for the 2014 model, so there is a lot of rear-seat room for its class. The 13 cubic feet of trunk space is competitive for its class, and held several bags and boxes I was transporting from Lancaster to State College.

Features: All Corollas come standard with power windows, power locks, and Bluetooth, which allows your phone to connect to the car wirelessly, allowing you to use the phone hands-free and listen to music through the phone. The LE, which I drove, had a 6-inch infotainment screen which displayed audio information and detailed fuel economy information. The system is very simple and intuitive, much more so than the infotainment system in my Dodge Grand Caravan. It connected to my iPhone and imported all of my contacts and call history in a matter of seconds. I was easily able to listen to Pandora through my phone. The hands-free phone system worked very well, and the audio system sounded good. The LE had automatic climate control, which was easy to use and worked well.

Value: Pricing starts at $16,900 for the base model. A/C, power windows, power locks and Bluetooth wireless are included. The LE that I drove adds nicer interior trim, the 6-inch multimedia display, backup camera and automatic climate control for about $18,500. Considering the amount of equipment offered, this is a good value for the money.

Would I buy it? I loved the car’s multimedia system. Still, if I needed to buy a car in this class, I would say no. I stand by what I say about Toyota. The Corolla is a perfectly competent, well-made car that is designed for people who want a car to get them from point A to point B. This is not the car for me, but I certainly would recommend this car to other people. I would pass on this car because I would like the utility of a hatchback, and the Corolla only comes as a sedan. Although the Corolla is by no means unpleasant to drive, I would prefer a car that is a little bit more fun, and I don’t like the rear drum brakes. In this class, I have driven the Ford Focus, which is more sporty and is offered as a hatchback. The Mazda3 is supposedly more of a driver’s car, and is also offered in a hatchback. Another car I would consider is the Volkswagen Golf, but the Golf can get very expensive very quickly as you add options. Finally, there is the Subaru Impreza, which offers all-wheel-drive, and I love my current car, the Legacy, even though my wife drives it most of the time. However, I would recommend this car to people because of its good value, outstanding fuel economy, refinement and reliability.

Overall:

What’s good:

Fuel economy

Multimedia system

Good value

Roomy for its class

What’s not good:

Needs more power

Rear drum brakes

Not a driver’s car

The 10 best and 5 worst roller coasters... That I have ridden... so far.

I have become a total roller coaster junkie.

Here is how it all started...

For those of you who knew me in high school and college, I was a big chicken when it came to roller coasters. I didn't like heights and the feeling of not being in control, so I didn't have any desire to ride them.

I would get on log flumes and some less intense wooden coasters (Hersheypark's Comet) which I didn't mind too much.

Then, in 2008, we took a family vacation to Busch Gardens Europe in Williamsburg. I figured that since I paid $60 to get in to this park, I might as well get my money's worth and try out the roller coasters.

The first ride we get to is the legendary Loch Ness Monster. I was a nervous wreck. The line was long, and they added a train right before I got on, prolonging the suspense. Finally, as the coaster went down the first hill, I was fine. The loops were the part of the coaster I feared the most, but they were the best part of the ride. During and after the ride, I learned why people like coasters so much. It is truly a rush, and there is really no other feeling like it . My wife says that she wishes I hadn't gone to Busch Gardens that day, because all I do during the summer is talk about roller coasters.

Since then, I have made it a point to visit as many parks as possible to ride coasters, and I have familiarized myself with coaster terminology, all of the types of coasters, all of the parks, all of the coaster records, and even which companies manufacture the coasters.

Sadly, while I am beginning to discover and enjoy roller coasters, the novelty has worn off on most people my age. I have had to ride a lot of coasters on my own. My best hope for riding buddies are my two boys when they are old enough.

After my trips to several amusement parks, I can come up with a list of the 10 best coasters I have ridden so far, and I have revised this list in 2015 with a visit to Kennywood. I have also revised the coasters I have already ridden with the additional knowledge and seat time that I have experienced on coasters.

Ladies and gentlemen, here they are!

1. Apollo's Chariot

Park: Busch Gardens Williamsburg

Type: Steel sit-down

Height: 170'

Drop: 210'

Top speed: 73 mph

Inversions: 0

Best part: Airtime, theming, layout

This is the closest I have been to experiencing coaster perfection. First of all, let's start with the hardware. The seat itself is comfortable, and there is only one clamshell-shaped harness that sits across your lap. The sides of the train are open and your feet do not touch the ground. This is designed so you take advantage of the coaster's great airtime.

The first drop is long, fast, and throws you out of your seat. The second drop provides more airtime, and the third drop is a dramatic banked, curved drop towards the water. After an upward helix where you pull 4.5 Gs, you hit the coaster's smaller hills, but there are still plenty of surprises in store, including a surprise final drop into a hidden ravine seems to come out of nowhere. I have ridden coasters that are newer, faster and higher than this, but this is still my top coaster, because the theming, the setup of the seating and trains, and overall design of the ride all work together perfectly.

2. Phoenix

Park: Knoebels

Type: Wooden

Height: 78'

Drop: 72'

Top Speed: 45 mph

Inversions: 0

Best part: Airtime

The Phoenix may not be the tallest or fastest coaster on this list, but it delivers something that can’t be measured using numbers: A great ride experience. This coaster dates back to 1947, when it was built in San Antonio, Texas. The ride was later dismantled and put back together at Knoebels in 1985, giving the coaster its mythical moniker. The Phoenix begins with a long, dark tunnel, then climbs the 78-foot lift hill. It then goes down, and goes out and back several times over hills of different sizes. As the ride goes on, it seems to get increasingly fast and out of control. What truly makes this ride legendary is the frequent negative gravity, or sensation of floating in your seat. Coaster fans call this airtime. Adding to the fun are the restraints that sit several inches above your lap, which allow for plenty of opportunities for riders to be flung out of their seats. You will experience the most airtime in the back seats of the coaster. Although the Phoenix is very forceful, it is never rough, due to good maintenance. The Knoebels crew spends many hours during the off-season replacing track and rehabilitating the coaster as needed.  It should also be noted that Knoebels is a great park. Admission is free, so you only pay on a per-ride basis. Parking is also free. The food is some of the best I've ever eaten at an amusement park (don't miss the chicken and waffles at the Alamo), and it is reasonably priced.

3. Skyrush

Park: Hersheypark

Type: Steel sit-down

Height: 212'

Drop: 200'

Top speed: 76 mph

Inversions: 0

Best part: Airtime, layout

Hersheypark’s first coaster to top the 200-foot mark didn’t open until 2012, but it was worth the wait. Riders have the option to sit in the middle with a floor below them, or can be daring, and sit on the “wing seats” at either end, where there is nothing but air underneath. First of all, the cable lift, similar to an elevator, takes riders to the 212-foot high summit in only 10 seconds. Then comes the crazy first drop, which occurs at an 85-degree angle, and accelerates the coaster to 75 mph. This is followed by an intense series of tight turns and five airtime hills that constantly has your body fighting the restraints. Needless to say, this ride is not for the faint of heart, and is the most intense coaster on this list.

First, a point I would like to make, then a tip.

Many people have criticized the restraint system on Skyrush, complaining that the restraints are too tight. Some people are even calling the ride "Thigh Crush." Yes, the restraints are tight, but they weren't painful, and did not detract from the ride. And I am not a small person. These restraints need to be tight because this coaster is good at throwing you in every possible direction.

Finally, as you enter the park and turn left just after the stroller rental booth, there is a path that leads directly to the ride's entrance. This is especially useful if you are making a beeline for the coaster when the park opens.

Update: According to Hersheypark sources, the trains on Skyrush now use a restraint system that uses inflatable cushions, and is now a better fit for riders of all sizes.

4. Phantom’s Revenge

Park: Kennywood

Type: Steel sit-down

Height: 160'

Drop: 228'

Top speed: 85 mph

Inversions: 0

Best part: The insane second drop

This is the Keystone State’s fastest coaster, and also has the longest drop. What is unusual about this coaster is that the long drop is the second drop on the coaster. The first drop is a curved, 160-foot drop. The coaster then ascends and hits the big drop, a staggering 228-foot plunge into a ravine. As you drop, you pass through the structure of the Thunderbolt, another of the park’s coasters, which provides riders with a “headchopper” effect. The coaster then goes through a series of tight turns and airtime hills. What sets this coaster apart is the way it uses the terrain to its advantage, as it sits on the edge of a ravine with the Monongahela River below. When this coaster first opened as the Steel Phantom in 1991, it had four inversions. However, the coaster was literally a pain in the neck as riders complained about their heads banging on the restraints. The ride was closed, the inversions were removed and the coaster reopened in its current form in 2001.

5. Intimidator 305
Park: Kings Dominion
Type: Steel sit-down
Height: 305'
Drop: 300'
Top Speed: 90 mph
Inversions: 0
Best part: Speed, twisties

The numbers themselves show that this is one serious coaster. This Dale Earnhardt themed coaster is one of only four coasters in the U.S. to top the 300-foot mark, and it is among the fastest coasters in the world. Although this is one of the best coasters I have ridden so far, I expected it to be even better given its height and speed. Smaller coasters like Apollo's Chariot and Skyrush are more fun to ride and more intense. The first 300' drop is certainly overwhelming, but I thought the drop on Skyrush was scarier (in a good way) despite being 100' shorter. Also, all three of the coasters that are on the top of my list have more airtime than I-305, although I don't think this coaster's primary purpose is to be an airtime machine. What sets I-305 apart is its speed. It hits 90 mph at the bottom of the first hill, and never lets up. The twists and high speed turns make this a blast to ride, although the smaller hills don't provide all that much airtime. Nevertheless, this has become one of my favorite coasters, and is definitely worth the trip to Kings Dominion. By the way, the first turn at the bottom of the massive drop had to be re-profiled, because too many riders were "graying out" on the ride.

6. Fahrenheit

Park: Hersheypark

Type: Steel sit-down

Height/Drop: 123'

Top Speed: 58 mph

Inversions: 6

Best part: First drop

This coaster’s claim to fame is the 97-degree first drop. The 121-foot, beyond vertical drop is definitely memorable. The coaster then goes through a tightly packed layout featuring six inversions, and a couple of good airtime moments. The first inversion, called a Norwegian loop starts to turn in one direction, but fakes riders out by quickly going the other way. This coaster is well-designed, packing a lot of entertaining, well-paced elements into a small space. 

7. Storm Runner

Park: Hersheypark

Type: Steel launch

Height: 150'

Drop: 180'

Top speed: 75 mph

Inversions: 3

Best part: Launch, flying snake dive

Here is another coaster that is not for the faint of heart. After leaving the station, the train stops, and an announcement says, “Now get ready, here we go!” The moment you hear the word “go,” the coaster is launched to 72 mph in a quick 2 seconds. Before your body is able to process what just happened, you are going up, straight up, then straight down 180 feet. The coaster then goes into a series of wicked inversions, including a corkscrew roll 100 feet off the ground, giving riders get a great view of the ground 100 feet down. This is followed by the so-called “flying snake dive” which is difficult to describe in words — It must be experienced. The only drawback to this coaster is that it’s a short ride, lasting only about 45 seconds from the launch to the brake run at the end of the ride. 

8. Great Bear

Park: Hersheypark

Type: Steel inverted

Height: 90'

Drop: 124'

Top speed: 61 mph

Inversions: 4

Best part: Layout, Last zero-g roll

This is one of two inverted coasters in Pennsylvania, meaning that the track is above the cars, and riders’ feet dangle from the seat. This coaster is shoehorned between several other rides in the park, and makes good use of the space and the terrain. After the drop, riders go through a vertical loop and several other elements in quick succession. Like other great coasters on this list, the ride is forceful but very smooth. Its closeness to other rides like the SooperDooperLooper and Coal Cracker log flume create some good “headchopper” moments. The only reason this ride isn’t ranked higher is because the ride is kind of short, due to the lack of space in this area of the park.

9. Lightning Racer

Park: Hersheypark

Type: Wooden dueling coaster

Height/Drop: 90'

Top speed: 51 mph

Inversions: 0

Best part: Layout, Tunnel

This an ingeniously designed ride that puts a new twist on the racing coaster (in which two trains race to reach the finish line, by adding an element where the two coasters appear to be careening towards each other head-on. This is a fun, relatively smooth wooden coaster with lots of twists, turns and airtime. The ride makes good use of a short tunnel where riders get a surprise pop of airtime. This is also where the on-ride photo is taken. And, like any racing coaster, it is always fun to heckle the people in the opposing train.

10. Thunderbolt

Park: Kennywood

Type: Wooden

Height: 70'
Drop: 90'

Top speed: 55 mph

Inversions: 0

Best part: Unpredictable layout

This classic wooden coaster, which dates back to 1924, has a very unconventional layout, which makes for an interesting ride. First of all, as you leave the station, instead of going up a lift hill, you hit a drop, which takes many riders by surprise. The lift hill occurs in the middle of the ride, followed by a helix, which will pin you against the person sitting next to you (you are required to have a partner for this ride). The ride ends with some dramatic drops into a ravine, and they save the best for last — A 95-foot drop, the largest drop on the coaster, that gives you so much airtime you will almost be standing up.

Honorable mentions:
Talon, Dorney Park
Steel Force, Dorney Park

Volcano: The Blast Coaster, Kings Dominion
Twister, Knoebels
Impulse, Knoebels
Sky Rocket, Kennywood
Jack Rabbit, Kennywood
Loch Ness Monster, Busch Gardens Williamsburg
Big Bad Wolf, Busch Gardens Williamsburg (Dismantled, replaced by Verbolten)

Hydra: The Revenge, Dorney Park

Big Thunder Mountain Railroad, Walt Disney World Magic Kingdom
Spongebob Squarepants Rock Bottom Plunge, Nickelodeon Universe at Mall of America

Now, just for fun, here are 5 of the worst coasters I have ever ridden, in no particular order.

Wildcat
Park: Hersheypark
Type: Wooden
Height: 106'
Drop: 85'
Top speed: 50 mph
Inversions: 0
Worst part: Roughness

If you have back problems, don't even think about riding this. If you don't have back problems, you will by the end of the ride. Unbearable, especially the back of the train. Replacing the original trains with the Millennium Flyer trains used on the Lightning Racer didn't help. This could be a candidate for "RMC Conversion" to a hybrid wood/steel coaster like the New Texas Giant, but if Hersheypark doesn't want to put the time and effort into doing this, This should be turned into scrap wood.

Shockwave
Park: Kings Dominion
Type: Steel Stand Up
Height/Drop: 95'
Top speed: 50 mph
Inversions: 1
Worst part: Wait/loading time, blandness

This is the only stand up roller coaster I have been on so far, and I wasn't impressed. The wait is long, and it takes a while to load because the restraint system is similar to a medieval torture device. Ride ops have to individually adjust everyone before the ride leaves the station. The wait wasn't worth it for a 2-minute ride with a couple of drops, a loop and a some airtime "bunny" hills, which are pointless because it is difficult to catch air while standing up.

Update: This dud of a coaster was CLOSED in August 2015. I don't think it is moving to another park, so it will likely be headed for the junk pile. It is being replaced with a Mondial Revolution ride, which you won't see me on because vomiting is not my idea of fun.

Pepsi Orange Streak
Park: Nickelodeon Universe, Mall of America
Type: Steel sit-down
Height: 60'
Drop: 40'
Top speed: 30 mph
Inversions: 0
Worst part: Lack of thrills

Basically goes back and forth through the indoor amusement park inside the Mall of America. It is a good way to see the park and the mall, but there are no big drops, and it moves along at a blistering 30 mph. Basically a fast monorail. By the way, there are two good coasters in this small park, the Spongebob Squarepants Rock Bottom Plunge (an honorable mention) and the Fairly OddCoaster (decent).

Trailblazer
Park: Hersheypark
Type: Steel sit-down
Height/Drop: 50'
Top speed: 45 mph
Inversions: 0
Worst part: Lack of thrills, theming

This mine cart roller coaster offers no thrilling moments, and the ride has very little theming. Check out this video from Dollywood... this is what a mine cart coaster should look like. I realize this is supposed to be a family coaster that kids can enjoy, but there are better "kiddie" coasters out there like Kozmo's Kurves at Knoebels (say that five times fast) and even the caterpillar coaster that you see at a lot of smaller parks and carnivals. Hersheypark is out of room, and I don't think anyone will miss this if it's scrapped and replaced with something more fun.

Flight of Fear
Parks: Kings Island/Kings Dominion
Type: Indoor steel launch
Height/drop: 74'
Top speed: 54 mph
Inversions: 4
Worst part: Too intense

I think I have a very high threshold of fear when it comes to coasters. I rode the Intimidator 305, one of the tallest and fastest coasters in the world. It was a blast to ride, and I rode it three times in a row without thinking twice. I can say that Flight of Fear is the only coaster that scared me to the point where I thought the ride was unpleasant. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't crying or screaming to get off, but I was happy when the ride was over. The track was very closely intertwined like a spider web, and even though this was a dark ride, I could see the supports and track, and they seemed too close for comfort. Also, the ride was disorienting, and by the end, you couldn't tell which way was up and which way was down. Most people love this coaster, but I can't say I did.

The 2014 Oscar recap

And another year of Hollywood types patting themselves on the back is finished.

Here are my opinions about the show. I won't get into who will win and who should win, because I didn't see any of the best picture nominees. (I hope to remedy this over the next couple of weeks). As you saw on my Facebook page, the only major winner I saw was "Frozen." (update: As of now, I have seen "Gravity" and "Nebraska," both great movies!) Ah, the joys of parenthood. I am here to give my opinions on the show itself.

The hostess with the mostest: Hosting the Oscars is one of the most thankless jobs on Earth. The only stuff you usually hear about the host the next day is what went wrong. Sometimes this criticism is justified, like the year Franco and Hathaway hosted. On the other hand, I agree with most other critics that Ellen DeGeneres did a very good job. She managed to walk the fine line of making fun of celebrities and the ceremony, but didn't come off as mean-spirited (except to Liza Minelli). I read that most of her bits such as the famous selfie and the pizza were not planned and off-the-cuff. It turns out that celebs like Ellen as much as the critics. The show's producer said that more celebrities agreed to be presenters because Ellen was hosting. It is a certainty that she will be back sooner or later on Oscar night.

The year of the song: Usually, the original song performances are when people get up to get a snack or use the bathroom. Not this year. There was some major star power performing these songs. Pharrell Williams performed "Happy," which was my personal favorite of the four songs. U2 did a decent job with a stripped down version of "Ordinary Love," and Karen O had a haunting quality to her voice during her performance of "The Moon Song" from "Her." That brings us to "Let It Go." What can I say about this performance? First, Travolta introduces Idina Menzel as "Adele Dazeem." After that, there was some sort of disconnect between the band and Menzel. The tempo was all over the place and so was the pitch. I am not sure who to blame here. Maybe Menzel was pissed because Travolta couldn't pronounce her name. It may have had something to do with the fact that the band was off site (bad idea). Also, this is technically a very difficult song to sing. At least they got through it (barely).

Who are you wearing?: I usually don't pay too much attention to the fashion unless someone is wearing something completely outrageous like Bjork's famous swan outfit. I didn't see anything egregious this year, but I can't say I liked Pharrell Williams' tux with shorts.

People who are no longer alive: This year's stiffs montage was very tasteful, and the great Phillip Seymour Hoffman received the coveted "anchor" spot. (I would have been happy with him or Ramis there). This was all ruined when Bette Midler walks out and sings one of the cheesiest songs ever written, adding a needless 4 minutes to the ceremony. Whose idea was this?

Best acceptance speech: First of all, I never thought I would live to see Matthew McConaughey win an Oscar for acting. I am told he deserved this, so kudos (Update: He deserved it!). I appreciated how poignant and "real" his speech was, although he seemed like he knew he was going to win and had this entire speech ready to go. Also, sadly, no one got played off the stage this year. I thought the use of the "Jaws" theme to play verbose winners off the stage last year was hilarious.

Best Picture analysis: Coming into the ceremony, it was supposedly a three-picture race between "Gravity," "American Hustle" and "12 Years a Slave." Not having seen any of the movies, I assumed "12 Years" would be a shoo-in. I am not criticizing or being sarcastic when I say that "12 Years" is culturally relevant and shows the triumph of the human spirit. Oscar voters eat this stuff up. Also, I am told this was a very good movie that doesn't pull any punches. However, there were few major upsets, and the awards were spread out among a few movies, which probably means a lot of quality films were released last year. (Update: "Gravity" and "Dallas Buyers Club" were both excellent.)

Wild and Crazy Guy: Steve Martin gets a lifetime achievement award? Isn't he a little young for this?

Best unscripted moment: Bill Murray gives a shout-out to the late Harold Ramis while presenting the award for cinematography.

Finally: God hates Leonardo DiCaprio.