Friday NIght at the Movies XI

I watched Peggy Sue Got Married Friday night. Lots of interesting things going on right there, and lots of sweet cars. It is 1960 after all.

I had never seen it before, but it was about the only thing on Netflix, so what the Hell? If it's junk I can turn it off.

Like I said; lots of interesting things going on in this movie. But the one that caught my attention was this; can you imagine trying to find your desk in home room 25 years later?

Or take an algebra test?

Certain things just make you stop and think.

Now: solve for y in the following equation:

Ah... who am I kidding? I could even write an algebraic equation, much less solve one!

Friday Night at the Movies X

For some reason yesterday I was in the mood for a James Bond movie. I wanted Thunderball, but Netflix didn't have it. So we watched The Man With The Golden Gun. You know one Bond movie is pretty much like any other. Good-lookin' half dressed women, car chases and stunts, and a super villain Bond needs to kill to make the world safe for humanity or democracy or some other noble goal.

 It is a good Friday Night Movie. It does do a little preaching about running out of oil, but it was filmed and released in 1974, right at the height of the OPEC oil embargo caused energy crisis, so I guess a little preaching isn't to bad, especially since the premise of the movie is for Bond to retrieve a stolen device that would allow the efficient harvesting of solar energy.

The car chase is great, including the scene where Bond flips a car 360 degrees laterally while jumping a river to get at the bad guy. The funny part was the Bad Guy was driving a 1974 AMC Matador, while Bond was driving an AMC Hornet, and the cops were driving AMC Sedans.

In Hong Kong no less. I never realized AMC was such a popular brand in the Far East.

And of course at some point Bond has to get captured by the evil doers, who, instead of a quick bullet to the head and dump the body in the ocean process, decide to have a school of martial artists kill Bond. I guess it was graduation test maybe? Anyway, as usual, Bond takes a few knocks and then manages to escape the evil clutches, it this case with the help of a couple of teenage martial artists, who just happen to be girls, who manage to defeat 30 or so members of the dojo. The evil doers apparently are having trouble finding good help.

The final showdown is not as thrilling as some, but still fun to watch as the bad guy gets his. and then of course Bond rescues the device and the girl and escapes on a just happens to be handy Chinese Junk.

Its not the best of the Bond films- in fact most reviews call it the worst of the series because of the comedy that had been inserted- but hey, a bad Bond film is till better than 90% of the other junk out there.

And I liked the comedy aspect. I've said many times I watch movies to be entertained, and The Man With The Golden Gun does just that. Fast paced, it never drags, and jumps from one piece of excitement to another without time to fetch a beer.

I also found a couple of other Bond films on Netflix, so I may have a few more James Bond nights at the movies. But I doubt I'll write reviews, unless I see one that lacks good-lookin' half dressed women, car chases and stunts, and a super villain Bond needs to kill to make the world safe for humanity or democracy or some other noble goal.

Friday Night at The Movies VIII

Last night it was time for an old family favorite again; It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World. 2 hours and 41 minutes of some of the best comics of the era doing there best gags; a virtual Who's Who of the greatest names in the business.

I remember seeing this movie on TV several times, usually on New Years Eve, from 9:00 to midnight, back in the day before the whole evening was about setting to watch The Ball drop on Times Square. It looks better in color on the wide screen.

It's hard to pick a favorite scene. The shares scene at the beginning of the movie? Sid Caesar tearing up the hardware store? Buddy Hackett trying to fly an airplane? Milton Berle and Terry-Thomas in a fist fight beside the road? There is a whole lot of good stuff packed into what seems like a short movie.

And the best part? The movie works. It's not just a series of gags, The plot is believable, the characters motivations are well laid and consistently followed, and as usual (for me anyway) a good story, convincingly told.

Briefly, Five men (Milton Berle, Sid Caesar, Jonathan Winters, Buddy Hackett and Mickey Rooney) all stop to help the victim of an automobile accident (Jimmy Durante). Durante tells the men about the money he stole 15 years earlier ($350,000.00) and where its buried. The rest of the movie is the race to Santa Rosita to retrieve the money.

Sounds simple, don't it? They tried to remake Mad Mad World in 2001 in a movie called Rat Race, which tanked pretty spectacularly. The formula may sound simple, but the correct execution is complex.

The movie holds up well. Almost 50 years old (released just a few days before JFK was shot in Dallas) the gags still are funny, and don't rely on knowing what was happening in 1963 to be funny. Without even knowing who most of these actors are, the movie is still funny. And most of the cast is dead by now.

So what makes it funny? Time-honored, universal humor. Milton Berle, traveling with his wife and his constantly badgering mother-in-law, Ethel Merman. Jonathan Winters, becoming enraged, and destroying a gas station. The chase through the abandoned building; all of these gags were probably first written is Latin, if not Ancient Greek or Sanskrit.

And how could I forget the star of the movie, Spencer Tracy? He is the cop who has been looking for the money Durante stole for 15 years. Driven to madness by his annoying wife and daughter, he is the joker in the deck that creates the madness in the last 30 minutes of the movie.

A few hours to kill, especially on a snowy Friday night; a few good beers and somebody to laugh with you. The perfect combination for a viewing of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World.

Friday Night at the Movies VII

Friday night was another video night. A few months ago I found Cool Hand Luke in the Wal-Mart 5 Buck Bin, and Friday night I finally broke the seal.

It has been a few years since I had seen Cool Hand Luke. Some scenes were familiar; others barely remembered.

Of course it was easy to remember Paul Newman in the title role. In the opening scenes of the movie, where his character Lucas Jackson is caught drunk, cutting the heads off of parking meters in the dark. At times it seems like the only light in the scene is coming from Newman's famous blue eyes.

When he is delivered to the prison camp the camp warden, played by Strother Martin, and known only as Captain, reads off his service record from the Korean War, including a Silver Star, a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts, and promotions to Sergeant, as well as demotions to Buck Private.

Our friend Luke seems to have a problem with authority, but not bravery.

The balance of the movie is Luke's battles with authority, both the official Prison system, and the more informal prisoner system.

The Prisoner system is easy. Luke has a fist fight with the prisoner's self appointed leader Dragline (George Kennedy in the role that won him an Oscar), that Luke refuses to lay down for. Dragline eventually walks away from the fight, leaving a battered and wobbling, but still standing Luke in the ring.

His battles against the official system doesn't end as well, or as easily. After numerous stays in The Box, a cramped, unheated, windowless structure, where the prisoner has a can of water and a bucket for a bathroom, Luke escapes. After he is caught and beaten, he is returned to the camp and kept in leg irons.

Luke's return the chain gang contains the most famous line from the movie: "What we have here is failure to communicate." Luke has not gotten the message about who is in command.

He escapes again, and is caught again, beaten again, and put in a second set of leg irons. Unlike the prisoner's control system, which appreciates a man's spirit, the official system does not. The Captain determines that he has to break Luke's spirit.

After several days and night of brutal treatment, Luke finally breaks. He has ended his brutal treatment at the hands of the guards, but lost the respect of his fellow inmates.

He becomes a toady for the Bosses, the guards who watch the prisoners work along the road; running errands and fetching water for the other prisoners. Everyone believes he has been broken. But he is just biding time, gaining the trust of the Bosses.

One day, out on the road gang, Luke steals the keys from all of the trucks while performing his toady jobs, and when told to go to a truck for an item, steals the truck instead. as he is driving off, Dragline jumps onto the running board, escaping with him.

Dragline and Luke split up, and Luke winds up hiding in an old. back-country Church. He sees the lights of the prison vehicles and the local police pull into the church yard just as Dragline steps through the back door into the church. Luke steps to a front window, overlooking the vehicles in the yard, and throws the Captain's words back at him: "What we have here is a failure to communicate".

At that point one of the Bosses shoots Luke square in the chest.

As Luke is being driven away to the prison hospital, he looks out the window of the patrol car and grins at Dragline.

Luke has spent the entire movie battling against authority. Did he win or lose? The movie doesn't let us know if he lived through being shot or not, but the impression is that he did not.The prisoners are seen in the final shots talking of Luke's exploits; including his final smile.

If you look at Luke himself you could say he won. He was no longer under the thumb of the prison system. He was dead, but he went out on his terms, defying their authority to the last. He was also a hero to the prisoners.

But you can also look at the larger picture. The prison system was free of Luke, and they had killed him. He was no longer around to challenge their authority. They had made him an example.

Or had they made him a martyr?

To me, the movie says a lot about challenging authority. Luke is working hard in the first scene, cutting heads off of parking meters. He's not stealing them; just cutting them down. To make a point. To challenge the city's authority to charge for parking. The challenge costs him 2 years in a prison work camp.

Once in the camp, he challenges the authority he finds there. The self imposed authority of the inmates he beats easily; Luke shows he will not be beaten down, and the authority accepts that he is an equal. The authority that Dragline has a leader is granted to him by the other prisoners, and when the sympathy for Luke from the prisoners threatens Dragline's position, he does the only thing he can do; he acquiesces to that sympathy and stops fighting.

But the state imposed authority is a little more hard nosed. Not only will it not accept his challenge, it refuses to accept being beaten. The guards do not have to answer to a higher authority, as Dragline does. Their job is to control all of the prisoners, up to and including the ability to kill a prisoner.

The question is, which type of authority have we created in our government; Dragline's, or the Bosses?

Friday Night At The Movies VI

Last night was another DVD night. After last week's post about Macho movies I did some thinking about the most Macho movie and added to the post that I thought John Wayne's last film, The Shootist, was about the most Macho movie around. So last night I watched it again.

Briefly, Wayne's character is an aging gunfighter who has just had a diagnosis of terminal cancer. After his doctor describes what his last days will be like, he plans a birthday party and invites the three best gunslingers in town. The shoot'em up is inevitable, and in the course of the battle, The Shootist is killed, dying the way he wanted to, not in a bed having strangers tend his every need.

Set in January of 1901, the movie sets up the death of one era, and the beginning of another. The age of the Gunfighter in the Old West is over. Civilization, Law and Order and Technology have arrived. Carson City Nevada has paved streets, indoor plumbing, electric lights and motor cars. The lawless West that created men like Wayne's character, J.B. Books, is disappearing, and soon so will the men themselves.

And you can't beat the cast: John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, Lauren Bacall, Richard Boone, Harry Morgan and Ron Howard. Made in 1976, it was Wayne's last movie, and one of his best. My basic criteria are met- a good story competently told- and as usual the film is beautifully photographed.

Why do I consider this the greatest Macho movie? First, J.B. Books, has a very natural reaction to his diagnosis, and his progression from the diagnosis to his final actions are logically made. A man who has faced down many enemies is given another battle. This one he knows he cannot win, so he redefines what winning will be. Even so, in the end, although his wish is to die in a gun fight, and he has set up a battle against 3 gunmen, his will to live causes him to defend himself. Almost too well.

Second, John Wayne had fought and beat cancer in the late 1960's, and was diagnosed with the cancer that killed him a couple of years later. He knew the fight his character was fighting was personal, and knew it personally. Just how much was real and how much was character is anybody's guess. You also have to read into the movie if Wayne knew this would be his last film or not.

I think he knew. He was almost 70 at the time, and the making of a movie is a long and arduous process. By that point he had made over 250 movies, starring in over 140, and I think he wanted to go out well, not as a has been. He wanted his last film to be the culmination of his career, not the last gasp of a wanna be has-been.

This film is that. From the opening sequences- clips from some of his older movies, starting with Red River- through his various talks with Ron Howard's character Gillom Rogers, J. B. Books becomes John Wayne, not the reverse. I forget who said it, but someone once said the greatest character John Wayne ever created was John Wayne. You knew what he stood for, and would defend that position to the best of his ability.

Third, this movie is about a man who has lived his life on his terms, always in control. He was now facing not death- death he was always prepared for- but facing a loss of being in control. So while he is in control he decides to control everything he can, including the end.

And it almost works. Books does die at the end of the final gunfight, but not from the bullets of competent men, but shot in the back by a shotgun-toting bartender.  The final scenes are integral to the movie, and to the message. J. B. Books lived his own way, and died his own way.

But it was his way. It was a way of life developed for a specific time, and that time had passed as well.

Macho has taken on a definition that includes crazy and ignorant actions. I'm not a fan of that definition, and I think it has been developed to emasculate men. You want a true definition of Macho? Watch The Shootist.

Friday Night At The Movies V

After some family discussion, it was determined we would break out an old family favorite last night for movie night.

Somehow the line: "Well, there was that one traveling salesman" came up in conversation, and we all recognized the movie, and we all realized it had to long since we had seen Second Hand Lions.

If you have never seen the movie, it is all about growing up, growing old and what exactly constitutes a family. And it has some great cars in the supporting cast.

And you can't beat the actors either. How Micheal Caine, as Great Uncle Garth, manages to pull off a Texas twang I'll never know. Robert Duvall, as Great Uncle Hub, does a great job, and Haley Joel Osment as their nephew Walter form a great trio. One review I read this morning:

(P)rais(ed) the performances of Caine, Duvall and Osment but said "Almost all the film's peripheral characters, from Walter's mother and her boyfriend to a family of grasping relatives, are clichéd in an overly broad, unfunny way that is unpleasant in itself and a marked contrast to the more nuanced performances of the trio of leads.

I think this reviewer missed the point entirely. The three main characters were real, and the rest of the world was a flat caricature compared to them, especially the two uncles. It's hard to say much, without giving away the film, but then, this isn't a crime drama who-dunnit.

Walter goes to live with his two great uncles when his dippy mother wants to go Las Vegas. No mention is made of his father, but vague references are made to Mae, Walter's mother, being a floozy, so we can leave his parentage to our own devices. Mae lies to Walter about where she will be, another in a series of lies, so Walter decides to make the best of his situation with the Uncles. The Uncles themselves are rather mysterious, having disappeared in Europe 40 years earlier at the height of World War I, and suddenly returning home with rumors of vast wealth floating around them.

It is their rumored wealth, and not themselves that has attracted not only Mae's interest, but that of the rest of Garth and Hub's extended family. Which I see as another key point of the movie. Walter enjoyed his great uncles as people; everybody else saw them as wealthy eccentrics, and they wanted at least a piece of the pie.

The movie centers around the stories of what Garth and Hub did for 40 years, as Garth tells these stories to Walter. As always with family lore, the veracity of these stories is called into question. Walter asks Hub at one point if the stories are true. Hub replies that their truth isn't the point; it's whether Walter believes them or not. Whether the stories are true or not is decided in the final scene of the movie.

As I said, the movie is about growing up, as Walter decides that he needs to take a position with regards to his mother, and makes her accept his will. He is only 14, but based on his life with his mother, he needs to become an adult so that their relationship has an adult in it, as his mother is emotionally a flighty child.

It is also about growing older, as Hub and Garth are aging, Garth because he believes he is supposed to, and Hub being dragged kicking and screaming into a land he has no interest in. Hub at one point talks about how for 40 years he had a use, and his biggest fear is being useless. Garth is more prosaic; taking up gardening, "because that's what retired people do".

But Garth does understand what aging is all about, as he says to Walter at one point:

Well, a man's body may grow old, but inside his spirit can still be as young and as restless as ever.

I think that line sums aging up very well. Us oldsters don't see ourselves as as old; we still see ourselves as 18, or 25, or maybe even 30; whatever age it was we felt on top of the world. We make concessions to our rapidly failing bodies, but unwillingly. We may look 52- or as in Hub's case, 72- on the outside, but inside we are still as young and capable as we were at 25.

Of course, Second Hand Lions fulfills my criteria for a good movie- good story, convincingly told. If you haven't seen it, you should. The critics hated it. In my opinion that alone is enough reason to take a couple of hours on a Friday night and slip into a world where fantasy may be truth, and reality exactly what you have made of it.

Friday Night at ther Movies II

I was surfing Netflixs early Friday evening and ran into a movie I hadn't seen in years. Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry. It was a little different. Okay, saying this film was a little different is like calling PEEPS a health food.

The camera work looks like it was shot with an iPhone, and the acting could be considered wooden at best. But the reason to watch the film is the car chases. They are very real, and not cinematic in the least. Cars do what cars physically do. They get damaged when they collide with both movable and immovable objects, and require repair after said collisions. They also overheat and burn up when pressed to hard. And helicopters need fuel to run.

I like this so much better that the car chases that seem to go on for a thousand miles with nobody ever stopping for gas, and multiple collisions with no damage to the car. If the goal is realism.

Face it; I love Smokey and the Bandit, from the opening credits when the big rig fires up in the early morning light, to final scene with Sheriff Justice ready for another chase with less that half the car he left Texas with. I have to take an afternoon one weekend about every 6 months of so to sit down and watch The Bandit run that Trams Am all over Georgia. But in a lot of respects, Smokey and the Bandit is a live-action cartoon. That is part of what makes it FUN.

Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry is, in some respects, not fun. You know my criteria for a movie, a good story, convincingly told. DM,CL fills that requirement. Parts are interesting, parts drag out way to long, and some parts you just think to your self; WHAT?

I also have to disagree with Wikipedia on at least one point; they call Peter Fonda's character 'likeable'. I never found him likeable. Had I played almost any other character in the movie I would have hit him hard in almost any scene. He was about as likeable a bad case of shingles. The opening seen he and his buddy steal $150,000 form a grocery store by kidnapping the manager's wife and daughter. Oh yeah; that's a likeable bunch.

But the cars... In my opinion the most likeable star was the 1969 Charger R/T. Maybe that was why I disliked Fonda's character so much. He was behind the wheel of this machine less than a minute when he used it to take the door off of a police cruiser. And then tore half of the front end off off later in the film when he t-boned a pickup truck at an intersection.

The movie ends rather abruptly. The helicopter runs out of gas; they escape from the cops and are home free.

Until they t-bone a train and die in a fiery crash. Ahhhh; the final comeuppance.

But it made money; over $28 million. it was released in 1974, and laid the blueprint for movies like Smokey, and TV shows like The Dukes of Hazzard.

All of the elements are there; the hot car; the hot girl, the inept police, the likeable outlaw who isn't really a crook, even though he has broken the law, maybe, depending on your point of view. And the chase.

Chase scenes are as old as the movies. Name a Western without a chase scene. Name a Comedy without one. Name a Romantic Comedy without one. The difference is, this movie started The Chase Movie. So at some point, if that is your genre of preference, you need to watch Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry at least once. Preferably at the Drive-In, in the front seat of a 1966 Oldsmobile, with a tinny speaker hung on your door and a large popcorn in your lap.

If none of these items are available, a beer, Netflixs and your recliner are okay. and the surround sound will improve your viewing experience. When they uncork that 440 Charger for the first time, you might just turn the image off and listen to nothing but the noise, like I almost did.

Is You Is, Or Is You Ain't...

I watched O Brother Where Art Thou? last weekend for probably the fiftieth time. Yeah, I know it's a George Clooney movie; I like it in spite of him. The music is just flat great; the other actors are superb and it fulfills my basic requirements for a movie; a good story, convincingly told.

But that's not what I'm writing about today. Today our focus is a little tighter.

In case you aren't aware of the movie, and its various plots, one of the plots concerns the gubernatorial election in the state of Mississippi, where Governor 'Pappy' O'Daniel is being challenged by a fellow by the name of Homer Stokes. Toward the end of the movie Stokes is having a campaign event where George Clooney and his fellow escapees show up and barge the stage and sing a couple of songs.

Just prior to this scene Clooney  and company had busted up a KKK lynching that was being led by Stokes.

When he sees Clooney and his crew up on the stage he grabs a microphone and proceeds to denounce the crew in some rather vague but specific racial terms. He finishes his speech with the line:

"Is you is, or is you ain't my constituency?" (video at the link)

What the Hell is the meaning of this post? If you watched the video- and remember this movie is from 2000- I can't help but see Obama as Homer Stokes.

He is out on the campaign trail almost daily, and although they have not physically pulled the plug on his microphone or run him out of town on a rail, it is happening metaphorically.

Look at Nancy Pelosi, recommending nobody go to the Democratic Convention for crying out loud.

I can just see Homer Obama standing in the middle of an empty hall, shouting "Is you is, or is you ain't my constituency?", while Pelosi bends down to unplug his mike.

Sometimes Life does imitate Art.

So, There I am, Minding My Own Business...

All it takes sometimes is a few minutes with nothing else to do.

So, just like in a Doctor's waiting room, you look for something to read.

So, it's off to do a few blogs.

And then you run into this.

Did you ever wish you could unsee something?

But that's not why I pulled this down from the Ethernet.

Read the comments, if you can. There is one comment that has to be read aloud for it to make any sense at all.

But, if you have a weird sense of humor, like mine, it will be worth it.

Got "CLUE"?

I re-watched the movie "Clue" (WARNING: this site does give away the endings, if you haven't seen the movie, but would like to) last night. I was digging in the DVD cabinet for another movie I'd decided to watch and hit upon Clue first.

Apparently it didn't do well with the critics 25 years ago (who cares), but has developed a 'cult' following. I never realized I was part of a cult.

The movie has a great set, some great scenes and some great writing. If you are familiar with the board game all of the rooms are here, along with a few more. Even the secret passages are a part of the movie.

I can see why the critics didn't like it. There is no 'message'; no 'conflict' and no trashing of 'the establishment'. Although they do take a swipe at J. Edgar Hoover at one point.

The setup of the movie is just and excuse for some great comic exchanges. the whole movie moves quickly; setting up situations and blasting through them. This exchange takes place as teh Butler, Wadsworth, is explaining about th eblackmail that brought everyone together:

Professor Plum: What is your top-secret job, Colonel?
Wadsworth: I can tell you. He's working on the secret of the next fusion bomb.
Colonel Mustard: How did you know that?
Wadsworth: Can you keep a secret?
Colonel Mustard: Yes...
Wadsworth: So can I.

AND, while doing reasearch for this post I found out Hollywierd is up to it again. They are planning a remake of 'Clue', due out in 2011. But, no details yet as to teh cast or exactly when it will be released.

Maybe we got lucky and they changed their minds.

What a Sunday, Part Duex

After I managed to get a post up I realized that KET has Masterpiece Theater on.

Hercule Poirot and Murder on the Orient Express.

Double Score.

And just for the record, yes, I am still humming Buffet.

Best of The Decade List- a Year Early

I found this through Instapundit this morning.

I have not seen any of the movies this critic cites as the best of the decade.

Hell, I haven't even heard of most of them.

The best part is the comments. NOBODY thinks this guy knows what he's talking about. That made me feel a little better.

But, as always with lists like this, I tend to follow the money. I think it is easier to tell which movies are the greatest by seeing how well they did financially.

That's why I believe this list maybe a better indicator of the greatest films of the decade.

On a side note; the first film, Titanic is from 1997, so disregard it, but the next ten are from 1999 to 2009; that forms our decade.

On a second side note; the decade began in January 2001 and ends in December 2010 if you are following the strict calendar decade. But most folks will see a decade as from XX00 to XX09 or XX10 to XX19, so why not call that ten years a decade too? It makes more sense to me that 1980 is part of the '80s decade than it does to say that 1990 is part of the '80s decade.

On this list of ten I have seen 6, and heard of all ten. I haven't seen the Lord of the Rings trilogy; I have never been interested in the Batman movies and I haven't seen the latest Harry Potter yet (but I have high hopes for seeing it soon, right Santa?).

And these are the movies you will be watching in another ten years, and ten years after that. And they will develop new audiences in that 20 years, because they do what a movie should do (at least the ones I've seen); a good story, convincingly told.

I'm sorry, but in general life is depressing, especially now. If I want to schooled, shamed or scolded, I'll read the flippin' newspaper or watch the news. If I want to be entertained, I'll watch a movie. Why can't these idiots get that through their thick skulls?

About Last Night...

We were hunting for something to watch and found our old copy of Toy Story 2 last night. It is one of my favorite movies, as it does what I have many times said is all I need from a movie; a Good Story, Convincingly Told. If you have never seen the Toy Story series, do your self a favor; rent a couple of kids (you would be suprised at how cheaply some parents wll let them go for a couple of hours. Take the kid to a movie and feed it dinner; Mom and Dad consider that a good trade for a couple of hours of peace and quiet for some reason) and go see them both on the big screen in the next two weeks. Then you will be ready for Toy Story 3 when it comes out next June.

Shoot, just the outtakes during the credits at the end of Toy Story 2 are worth seeing the movie for. First the idea there are goofs in the acting of an animated movie is a gag, then some of the scenes are simply hilarious, like when Stinky Pete gets caught with 2 Barbie Dolls in his box.

I actually liked '2' better than '1'. One was good, but a little creepy. '2' is just FUN! The trailer doesn't say much about the new movie, but does put each character into character, so I am looking forward to seeing it. The trouble is I no longer have a kid who is young enough to qualify as a reason to go see a kid's cartoon. I guess I'll need to rent one. Maybe I can borrow the granddaughter...