Famous Dave's Review

It doesn't seem like very often that Springfield opens its arms to a new food chain, but recently it has to the well known BBQ chain Famous Dave's.  Located off South Campbell south of James River Freeway, Famous Dave’s offers a variety of meats such as ribs, brisket and chicken and also an assortment of barbeque sauces to go with your meal.  Famous Dave's also offers salads, sandwiches, hamburgers, seafood and a lot more

Accompanied by my beau, Lee, we decided to try out Famous Dave's after missing the chance to go to our original dining choice, WannaGetta Pizza (meaning the place closed at eight ... sheesh!).  The first things I noticed upon entering the car-lot-turned-restaurant were the decorations. Like most chain restaurants, the decorations fit the theme, for Famous Dave's that meant a lot of western paraphernalia with a southern twist.  Pig cutouts hung around exclaiming that we should eat more meat.

We weren't seated long before a young waiter with red hair named Eric arrived at our table to get Lee and my drink order. The experience was nearly ruined when the waiter denied me a Diet Coke with the dreaded phrase, "is Diet Pepsi okay?" No, it's never okay!  I was saved, however, when I was told that Diet Dr. Pepper was an option. Lee had a beer, his was easy.

After bringing us our drinks, the waiter brought us a small sample bowl of fries and proceeded to make a production to us about the several different types of BBQ at our table. He even described one as “kid friendly” which seemed to be right up my alley.  The Rich & Sassy, which is Dave's original recipe, is sweet and tangy.  The Georgia Mustard is made with vinegar, brown sugar and mustard.  Next, there is the Texas Pit which is a tangy tomato-based sauce with black pepper.  The Sweet & Zesty sauce offers a taste that is a balance of citric sweetness and spirited spice.  Lastly, he told us about the Devil's Spit sauce which is the spiciest one at the table.

Lee and I also decided to order a side of Chili-Roasted Corn Fritters for $5.99.  These little breaded balls were chili-roasted (obviously) with corn and jalapenos inside. The fritters came with honey for dipping sauce to make for, as the menu puts it, a "perfect sweet heat combination." The waiter warned me that some people think the corn-fritters are a bit spicy, I am not a fan of anything spicy, but these were really tasty and not really that spicy at all.

Num Num Num Corn Fritters

For our main entree we thought we would go big and try a little bit of everything. The “Feast for Two” serves two to three people and is priced at $34.99. This HUGE meal comes with a half a slab of St Louis-style spareribs, half of a country-roasted chicken, a fourth of a Texas beef brisket, creamy coleslaw, Famous Fries, Wilbur beans, two corn-on-the-cobs and two corn bread muffins. The corn bread muffins were amazing! They were easily my favorite part of the meal. All of the food was yummy, but I am a sucker for good bread.

Feast for Two

Needless to say, Lee and I did not finish our "Feast for Two" and ended up taking a large portion of it home for leftovers. We didn't order anything for dessert, there wasn't any room for that. We left feeling full and satisfied and smelling strongly of smoked BBQ.  Overall we were both very happy with how our meal turned out and very pleased with our service. With reasonable prices and a fun atmosphere, Famous Dave's is a great place to take the family or a group of friends.

Find out more about Famous Dave's by checking out their website (click here!).

Appitizer Prices:  $6-$9

Average Dinner Price:  $8-$15

Platters/Combos:  $16-$60

Dessert:  $6.00

Hours: Open Daily for Lunch and Dinner

Famous Dave's Address:

Springfield Location:

4406 S. Campbell Avenue

Springfield, MO 65810
Springfield Phone Number:  (417) 877-8646

Branson Landing Location:
1201 Branson Landing Boulevard
Branson, MO 65616

Branson Landing Phone Number:  (417) 334-4858

Facebook VS Google+

Google+ and Facebook share many things in common, but both allow users to do many different things as well.  These two social medias target an audience who want to consume and share information quickly with their friends and family, but which of these two websites should you choose though?

I am figuring that, out of the two social medias, people are choosing Facebook.  Why else would Google+ need to make a commercial marketing their website?  I am almost 100% positive that I have never seen a Facebook commercial, I even checked out YouTube just in case and came out empty handed.  The commercial above shows the basic concept behind Google+ and the use of 'circles' that you put your friends and family in.  The circles allow us as the users to separate our friends from people who aren't really our friends into circles (which you can name anything you want) and share specific information with the different groups.  The commercial for Google+ beautifully shows how easy it is to switch people from circle to circle, I'm happy to know that Kyle has a car and got to eventually move from the creeper circle to the keeper circle.

Both Facebook and Google+ started out the same way by letting only certain people join the website.  Facebook only allowed people with an university e-mail address and Google+ only allowered people who had invites.  This puts the websites at a certain "demand" because not just anybody could join.  Now, both websites allow anybody to join, all you need is an Internet connection. 

The chart above shows the basic components of Facebook, Google+ and Twitter.  According to this chart, Facebook is the easiest of the three to use and to share all of your information. 

Both of these social medias offer us the same thing.  Now, Facebook offers you the ability to put your friends in groups and share specific information, Facebook also allows their users to video chat.  Now... what's so special about Google+?  The one thing that it has different is the 1+ feature that you're able to use to basically "like" a website.  Google+ will  then automatically share it for you combining your Internet surfing and social needs all at once. But what's the point of the simplicity if no one else is on Google+ to read it?

So, as far as I can see... Facebook is the winner of this challenge.  Google+ has a long road ahead of it to build the fan base that Facebook has so easily built and kept.  I also see that you should follow me on Twitter ... i'm lovelylace86!  That's what all of this social media is for anyawy... promoting yourself!

The Iron Lady

I was expecting greatness as I took my seat in an old rickety chair in the small, cold theater at the Moxie.  The Iron Lady, directed by Phyllida Lloyd and written by Abi Morgan, is a film portraying the first female Prime Minister of Great Britain, Margaret Thatcher, played by Academy Award winner, Meryl Streep.  The film seemingly follows her rise to political power and her inexorable commitment for her country, that is – if you’ve only watched the previews.

I was startled to find that the movie focused on the much older, dementia ridden (and retired), Margaret Thatcher.  We first see her buying milk in a convenience store.  She is surprised by the rise in milk prices and informs her husband, played by Jim Broadbent, over breakfast.  The two share a moment before they are interrupted by one of Margaret’s assistants.  The camera pans back to the couple at the table, but now there is only Margaret, her husband has been dead for several years.

The camera follows the ancient Thatcher as she waddles around her home having flashbacks of her political career.  Her memory starts back to when she was a young woman and the daughter of a grocer, getting accepted in to Oxford.  The movie continues on like this, going back and forth between past and present until the credits start rolling.

The movie was filmed nicely, but a few scenes might leave the watcher slightly puzzled.  At one point in the movie, Old Lady Thatcher begins to watch an old home movie on her high definition flat screen television that would be (inevitably) shot with an 8 millimeter camera.  The image that she watches on the screen is pristinely clear; nothing like what the image would actually appear to be, even after a conversion from film to DVD.  Then, in other parts of the film, old pieces of footage are added, some in which you can clearly see the real Margaret Thatcher, but don’t worry, it’s only the back of her head.

The movie might have flowed better if the story had not been so far removed by time.  The writer of the story would have been better to start with a young Thatcher and to carry on from there, possibly ending with a very old Thatcher mourning the loss of her supportive husband and her political career.  The movie might have even been better titled The Lady in Blue since that was the only color that she seemed to wear throughout the entire movie.

The acting, however, was superb.  I wouldn’t expect anything less from Meryl Streep, who brings a little piece of herself into every character she plays along with an impeccable acting style that brings credibility to any character that she is portraying.  Broadbent, who plays Thatcher’s husband, also brings a certain ‘light-heartedness’ to the film with his ghostly antics and fun-loving goofiness.

The writer of the screenplay, Abi Morgan, uses several different types of symbolism in her film.  When the young Margaret, played by Alexandra Roach, is proposed to by Dennis, played by Harry Lloyd, she is overwhelmed with happiness, but informs him that she will never be “that woman” who is silent on the arm of her husband, her life must mean something – she didn’t plan on dying washing a tea cup in the sink.  He simply answers, “That’s why I want to marry you, my dear,” – The very last scene of the movie is of Thatcher, old and slow moving, washing a tea cup in the sink listening to the birds outside, but obvious happiness on her face, she has no regrets, the symbolism very obvious.

Overall, the movie was informative and somewhat entertaining, but lacked the greatness that I had initially expected.  It evoked several emotions from me, like any well written piece of art will do, but the movie felt long and the flipping between times left me slightly confused.  Streep is what keeps this movie afloat with her impersonation of the Iron Lady and her unmatchable ability to play practically any part in any movie, but the constant flashes between scenes were tiring and sometimes hard to follow.  I would recommend this movie to anyone who is a history buff or a diehard Streep fan.


Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher



The real Margaret Thatcher

Impressive comparison, isn't it??

The Hunger Games

We’re nearly there!  On March 23, 2012 we’ll finally get to see Katniss and Peeta fight to the death in the film version of The Hunger Games.  The Hunger Games, published in 2008, is the first book of the trilogy by Suzanne Collins, the next two are called Catching Fire and Mockingjay.

In the film adaptation of the book, Katniss Everdeen, played by Jennifer Lawrence - who also starred in the film Winter’s Bone that was set here in southern Missouri, makes a decision that changes her life forever.  Every year the twelve districts in the dystopian society of Panem, located in the ruins of North America, are forced to send two children, one boy and one girl, between the ages of twelve to eighteen to participate in the annual Hunger Games where they must fight to the death.  Katniss is faced with the life or death decision when she takes the place as Tribute for her twelve year old sister, Primrose. 

Katniss and the male Tribute from District Twelve, Peeta Mellark, played by Josh Hutcherson, are brought to the Capitol of Panem where they are groomed till deemed presentable and are paraded through the streets of the Capitol as if being chosen as Tribute is a privilege when it is in fact a death sentence.

The twenty-four total Tributes are trained and readied for the upcoming games (which everyone in all of the districts must watch).  The tributes are fed well and treated like royalty.  That is, until they are brought up in a tube that circles a cornucopia filled with weaponry, food and other supplies.  Then, the game is on and they must fight to the death.

Many big names will appear in this film, such as Woody Harrelson as Haymitch.  Also to appear in the film is; Elizabeth Banks as Effie, Stanley Tucci as Ceasar Flickerman (the Ryan Seacrest of the games…), Liam Hemsworth as Gale, Lenny Kravitz as Cinna and Donald Sutherland as President Snow.

Gale and Peeta

Although the movie is set to hit theaters in twenty-three days, a rating has yet to be chosen.  The film promises several violent scenes not suitable for those who are young.  Odds are the film will be rated PG-13 to satisfy all fans of the young adult fiction, but it leaves me to wonder, will they truly be able to catch the true nature of the book without a little blood and gore?  The book is tastefully written and leaves much of the violence to the imagination, but it will be interesting to see how director, Gary Ross, portrays the violence on screen.

The Hunger Games film will not only capture audiences both young and adult, but both male and female as well, which is a nice break from movies such as the Twilight series that caters to delusional girls and moms alike.  If the film does well in theaters, odds are they will continue on will the film adaptations of the trilogy – fingers crossed!!

May the odds be ever in your favor!

Chronicle - Boys Will Be Boys.

If you gained the ability to manipulate any object in your world, would you go ‘bad’?  Chronicle, released on Super Bowl weekend (02/03/2012) is a story about three high school guys who are brought together by a mysterious hole in the ground that has some alien like noise coming from it.

The main character, Andrew, played by Dane DeHaan, is raised in an abusive household.  His mother is bed-ridden with some disease that is never revealed to the audience and his father, a disabled fireman and drunk, beats on Andrew and blames him for the family’s short comings.  Naturally, Andrew has become an introvert.  Andrew purchases a large old video camera because he decides that his life is worth documenting, maybe because he is trying to stop his father from beating him or maybe to video his mothers last living moments. 

Andrew and the camera become inseparable, it is also the sole recording device for the movie.  He brings the camera to school and we see that he is a kid that gets picked on constantly.  His cousin, Matt, played by Alex Russell, is Andrew’s only friend – and that isn’t saying much seeing as Matt seems to steer clear of his odd cousin, Andrew.

Matt brings his cousin and the camera to a party at an old barn.  It isn't long before someone has picked on Andrew and his large video camera and we find ourselves looking at the grass on the ground and hear the party thumping in the background.  One of the most popular guys in the school makes his way out to were Andrew sits on the ground crying.  Steve, played by Michael B. Jordan, asks for Andrew to follow him through the woods to a secluded field behind the barn.  Matt is there waiting and the three boys go down in the hole to find a large rock-like thing that glows and makes a loud screeching noise.  The next time we see the boys, they have telekinesis and Andrew has a brand new camera which sticks with him till the very end.

Andrew's camera records the boys becoming closer friends as they get stronger and stronger, but Andrew is obviously the strongest of the three.  They do amazing things and even learn to fly using their powers.  Andrew's life becomes all together better - he has friends and he's popular, but his mom is still dying and his dad is still beating him.  All hell breaks loose when Andrew's father finds his video camera.  His father screams at him that he is useless and wasting money on the camera when his mom needs medication that they can't afford.  Andrew takes the yelling until his father starts beating him - then Andrew loses it completely. 

To try and help his mother, he puts on his father's old fireman gear and goes out to the city.  He starts using his powers menacingly.  After a robbery gone wrong at a gas station (the gas pumps blow up) he lands himself in a hospital bed.  His father comes to visit him, even though he is seemingly unconscious, the father proceeds to tell him that his mother is dead and that it is all Andrew's fault.  When the father goes to hit Andrew, Andrew grabs his arm and blows out the walls and window of the room.  This is when Andrew goes completely insane and goes about Seattle throwing cars around and blowing up windows.  In the end, Matt is the person to stop him.  Him and his cousin had become best friends, but the only way to stop Andrew, was to kill Andrew... and that's exactly what he did.

Overall, the move was OK.  It started out very slow, but got very good towards the end when all of the action started happening and the trios powers grew stronger.  A part of me hurt to watch the character of Andrew and his life, there are tons of young people who are treated that way at both home and at school.  I would recommend this movie to anyone who is in to supernatural stuff, but there is really no other need to see the film.  I do NOT recommend it to people who easily get motion sickness, the "home-movie" sort of filming might upset your stomach! 

 Chronicle was directed by Josh Trank and written by Max Landis and is rated PG-13 and runs for 84 minutes.  Don't worry, you don't have to stay through the credits.  There's nothing but a blue screen at the very end, no surprise clips!

Three boys just having some fun with their mind powers.  (Pictured left to right - Andrew, Steve and Matt).

World Trade Center Reboot?

It's 2012 and another presidential election is just around the corner.  In hopes of gaining the attention of New Yorkers and other Americans across the United States, President Obama has looked into a tax cut that would not only boost transportation in the lower Manhattan area that surrounds ground zero, but will also start the rebuilding of the World Trade Center.

The tax cut is part of President Obama's budget plan that he proposed to congress on Monday.  The tax cut would be $200 million under this new budget plan.  The credit would be given to both New York City and New York State and would be given annually from 2013 to 2022 totaling up to a whopping $2 billion.

The "Liberty Zone" - the area in lower Manhattan where the World Trade Centers used to stand has already received a large sum of money, $21 billion in money and incentives, to revamp the terror stricken area.

The rebuilding of the World Trade Center has increased in speculated costs.  In 2008 it was estimated that the rebuilding would cost around $11 billion, but now it is estimated to be up to $14.8 billion.

Now to my thoughts - is this a good idea?  I've often wondered if they would rebuild the two large towers that once stood in lower Manhattan.  I have mixed feelings about the reconstruction.  It would show that we are strong as a country and not afraid to rebuild what others want to tear down.  The towers would be a symbol of hope and faith in our country.  On the other hand, I believe that the area should be kept as a monument and memorial for those who lost their lives that fateful September day (now roll - "Where were you when the World stopped turning that September day...").

I could see the families of the lost ones becoming upset at the thought of new towers being put in the same place where the old ones used to stand.  Did their loved ones die for nothing?  Now, when they want to visit the spot where their friends took their last breaths, they have to look at a skyscraper that (odds are) looks exactly the same as the two that were brought down so easily by the two renegade airplanes?

The thought of a duplication of the two towers slightly makes me cringe.  The area should be revamped, but perhaps they should put off the building of the towers and put something like a museum or a better memorial instead.  What do you think?

Check out the full article here.

Oh, The Vampires!

In light of the recent New Year I have decided to start being a little more active, like most of the people in the world, but I needed something to keep my brain busy while I worked out.  I decided on an audiobook to keep my brain entertained – an audiobook about Vampires (and no, I am NOT talking about Twilight). 

I’m sick of vampires just as much as the next person, but there is something about the mythical creature that draws us in.  What is it that makes them so enjoyable to read about?  I would guess it’s their otherworldly strength and super-human powers that probably reel the reader in.

We’ve all heard of the HBO series TrueBlood about a telepathic barmaid named, Sookie Stackhouse who falls in love with Vampire Bill.  The series holds many twists and turns and is very enjoyable to watch, but the books are even better. 

 

(Above is the cast of the TrueBlood HBO series)

There are several books in the Sookie Stackhouse Southern Mystery novels.  Many of the characters featured in the TV series either meet a different fate or are not even in the book series altogether – for example, in the books, Vampire Bill’s “child”, Jessica, does not exist.

I would recommend this series for anyone who enjoys to read fantasy books or if they are a lover of the HBO series as well.  The author of the series, Charlaine Harris, paints a perfect picture of Bon Temps, Louisiana and builds a strong and caring in our heroine, Sookie Stackhouse who, with her supernatural friends, takes you on magnificent adventures.

 

Above is author, Charlaine Harris (kind of hard to imagine this woman writing some of the scenes in her books…)

Above is the series (which does not include her ninth installment Dead Reckoning) the tenth installment of the Sookie Stackhouse series is due out in May and will be titled, Deadlocked.  The picture above is also missing other short stories written by Harris such as the novella, Sookie Stackhouse Companion. Harris plans to end the series after the thirteenth book is released.