“I’m going on an adventure!!”…

.. Surely meant something else, right?

What do “they” say about traveling?

·         “We're on a road to nowhere / Come on inside”. David Byrne / Tina Weymouth / Jerry Harrison / Chris Franz (Talking Heads). 1985. “Road To Nowhere”. “Little Creatures”. Sire Records / Wb Music Corp., Index Music Inc., Wc Music Corp., Index Music, Inc.

·         “All roads lead to Rome”. An 1175 proverb originally written by French theologian Alain de Lille. “Mille viae ducunt homines per saecula Romam”, or loosely translated, “A thousand roads lead people through the centuries to Rome”. See footnote for an article.

·         “Two roads diverged in a wood and I - I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference”. Frost, Robert. 1915. “The Road Not Taken.”

·         “Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads”. Zemekis, Robert. 1985. Back To The Future. Universal Pictures.

What’s my point? I’m leading up to it.

Keep reading.

I needed to take a road from my house to the theater, in order to get myself in a seat and see a time traveling car go back to 1985 and then 1955. As it stands, there were references dating February 19, 2026 (current date and location). This non yellow brick road crazy was so I could see the Broadway production of “Back To The Future: The Musical”.

Am I making sense so far and are you with me?

Okay, moving on, let’s see where this takes us.

As mentioned, on February 19, 2026, I saw the Back To The Future musical at the local performance hall. It’s Broadway Series number three this year, for those keeping track. My mother and one of her friends had joined me on this venture and we were able to get some pretty decent seats, all the way in the back orchestra. I not only got to relive the sights and sounds of my early years, but my mom and her friend got to laugh and cry at what they remember from their early teen years.

The production wasn’t completely a full adaptation of the Robert Zemekis directed movie, but it was close enough. If I read some information correctly, Mr. Zemekis, Bob Gale and Alan Silvestri were the forces from the original move and they got together to create the musical.

The difference between this musical and the last one I saw (“& Juliet”), was that “Back To The Future” used slightly more dialogue between the characters, while the music helped push the scenes through. “& Juliet” relied heavily on conversational pop songs to help push the dialogue through in each scene. Meaning, there was enough liberty taken from the Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd movie, that the producers of the musical needed some filler. They didn’t rip the movie apart scene by scene, but you got the basic idea. They kept some pivotal points in the stage show, where they put a lot of trust in moving parts and the behind the scenes tech wizardry (like the ending - holy mother of all things AWESOME. #dead). However, the creative licensing and liberty took hold with some of the more elaborate science fiction (fictionalized) music numbers. There’s a scene where Doc is singing about being super excited for the twenty first century and this is done using things that shouldn’t have existed in any of the movie franchise timelines. I know there are conspiracies and conversations about the premise of each movie and how they linearly join together, but the musical doesn’t really adapt any of that. It’s like the musical took a snake from the three headed hydra and married it with one from Medusa’s head. There are too many story lines to follow, for sure, and at least at one point in the show that had a throwaway line about a possible fourth volume. This would align with the various theorems out there, for sure.

Okay, back on track (Hehe – “Back on track”). There are a lot of things happening here: technically, visually, and random. I think, forty years on, “we” (societal / general “we”) know enough about  the movie that it relies a lot on what could happen in the future for science and electronics, while whispering hints of things to come when being trapped in the past. Innovations in 1955 that no one had come up with, while things being too far out for what we’d think about in 1985. It’s The Jetsons in live forms under the assumption we might be on to something. Again, going back to the various fan fiction, there’s an entire spider’s web of brilliant minds working on connecting everything together. This musical does not touch upon the second and third movie, but again, somehow creates that in-world joke about a fourth event happening. Not that it ever would, but at least the crazy kids are being seen.

Enough with the spoilers; we must move on.

For as much as I’ve just written, those who haven’t seen the Broadway show yet, I want to make some advisement and let me be very clear: Due to the reliance of heavy audio, video and lighting mechanisms, this is not for the faint of heart. There are a lot of loud computer generated booming, video projection and strobe lights. The people who may have neurological problems (epilepsy, for example) may not benefit from seeing this show, as sorry as I am for saying that. It is seriously heavy handed on the white flashing LED and strobe lights. There are some flashing reds and blues utilized at different points in the show as well, even though it’s not at the same time. There are as many single deep blue flashes, as there are bright white and strobe flashes. If you’re familiar with the television show / movies “Star Trek” and “Star Wars”, you know that “deep space” “hyper speed” that the ships do? What’s referred to as “warp speed ahead”? This show also utilized that supersonic flying a couple times, to make a point in some of the scenes revolving Doc Brown and some epitome he has – this was during the twenty first century song excitement. Again, the show takes some creative liberties, including an aforementioned reference to “Star Wars”.

I don’t want to keep giving total spoilers, but I want to make it clear for readers who want to see this show and have any sort of photosensitivity, you may want to stay home for this one. Again, I’m sorry to tell you that, as I wish it were different. This is truly one of those shows that have so much of a sensory overload; it can be problematic for audience members who have specific challenges and needs.

Personally, I know I was having some issues in the beginning, as the show relies on the “deep blue lights”. Since I’ve been dealing with new contact lenses, getting my glasses fixed / adjusted as well as some other eyesight challenges, the blue light is affecting me differently. I’m perfectly fine, to an extent, with the white flash (not so much strobe) lights, but the blue is starting to do a number on me. I realized that during this past Christmas season with all the newer string lights. It’s not the best feeling, but it dissipates over time. This is why I feel I need to say something, a warning if you insist, that anyone who wants to see this show and has light problems, err on caution. Even my mother’s friend stated that some of the white strobe lights bothered her, and she usually has zero issues.

I’m going to post some pictures and a video of what the lighting looked like, at the beginning of the show and during intermission, since recording was strictly prohibited. Security was actively walking around to make sure no one had any type of device out during the entire 160 minutes.

Both the pictures and video has a projected image of the “Back To The Future: The Musical” logo, which then randomly flickers into computer glitching. The glitches then give an “error” code, listing how photography of any kind during the show is prohibited, but you can certainly take a photo of any image you currently see and tag the show before it starts. Once the show begins, phones must be off. Due to the use of the blue background on screen, plus the blue LEDs, it was hard to get my camera to focus on the “no phones allowed during show’ message. Try as I might, I had to raise the exposure really high in order to get a “clean” / “readable” photo.

From what I could tell, at this point and going forward, the crew was using a projector screen as their source of video manipulation, since I noticed an overhead projector a few rows in front of me. I did see in the back right hand corner, someone in a control booth. They had multiple screens up, and each screen had a different static image to shoot out onto the stage.

Everything is controlled by computers these days, no matter where you go and what you do, apparently. However, this is the first time in a while that I think the production company was using a fast fold screen for their visuals, rather than use a jumbotron. This was actually one of those musicals that needed the entire stage, so a television screen in the back would totally be in the way. It makes more sense to have a thin screen and throw an image on to it from an overhead projector.

I wish I had seen them put all of this together, so I would know for sure, but having been in the audio video field for a while and doing event setups, I’m sure that’s what was going on.

The video played, shows the glitching on the screen, which was more 1980s computer, DOS meets Word Perfect type of technology, that then meets the Matrix franchise bytes and bits downward spiral disjointedness. The beginning of the clip I took is what you actually heard while waiting: computer beeps and blips, electronic noises. The type of things old school techies associate with, while reminiscing about “the days of yore”. I would have left that original sound on for the duration of the video, but my mom and her friend were knee deep in conversation as well as the people around me having their own private discussions. I didn’t want to leave any of that in, considering it is tough enough to try to edit (blur) out faces. I didn’t even want to try that since my computer is old and I’m using an outdated version of Pinnacle. The software already has issues saving movies. Proof is in the end with that circled arrow. Lately, the program is having problems rendering the videos correctly so I’m stuck with that greyed out circle thing. It’s horrible and ugly, I know, but I also know I need to invest in better equipment. It’s no excuse, but eventually I’ll get an upgrade, I just don’t know when. The sound used for the rest of the video is the “Back To The Future Overture”.

Other than flashy lights and reliance on really solid video projecting, the music was brand new to the show, outside of the above instrumental “Back To The Future Overture” (I don’t know what else to call it besides the title track overture), Huey Lewis and the News anthems “Back In Time” and “Power Of Love”, The Penguins’ “Earth Angel (Will You Be Mine)” and Chuck Berry’s “Johnny B. Goode”. Those, of course, had to jump from the celluloid to the stage because they’re the songs we know and will know once we hear the opening seconds.

To be specific, “Power Of Love” was written for the movie, much like Cat Stevens wrote “If You Want To Sing Out, Sing Out” specifically for “Harold & Maude”. That movie uses all original songs from the man who would become Yusuf, but he did make it a point to add his own stuff to the film.

I do have to say, in regard to “we know the “Back To The Future Overture” like we know the “Imperial March” from “Empire Strikes Back”. Play the first couple seconds and it becomes “I can name that tune and its movie!”. We have gotten accustomed to the 1980s high energy Huey Lewis songs, and because “Back In Time” and “Power Of Love” were such big hits for the group, they were all over the radio. The latter still is; turn on any “classic rock” station and you’re bound to hear it. I think Chuck Berry’s song is so obscurely overused, you might not hear it as frequently now on the FM dial, so you’re better trying to listen for it on satellite stations. Same might be said for the Penguins, but maybe closer to a few late night AM stations, outside of specific theme “power hours” on the FM side, of course.

Quite honestly, I can picture that song being on a specific foreign station that I once picked up in my car and ended up listening to their nightly live stream for a while (online, of course). It was so random, as it was a glitch in the AM frequencies and it took me a full week to figure out it was a Canadian station. Turns out I caught what radio people call “the skip” and it took me about 9 years to utilize that term I learned in my freshman year radio class at college. See kids, pay attention to your learnings and you may end up surprising yourself!

If you’re still with me at this point and want to know more, like how the acting was, well, it was good. I feel that the only issues I would have, would be the way the writers turned Doc Brown into a slight weirdo. Not that he wasn’t a bit “off” in the movie, but that was all for science; this new version was a mad dash mix of science and sex. One of the first scenes / songs with Marty and Doc, there was a conversation between the two because Doc had his own little harem that came out to dance with him. It was questioned and he said he always seems to have the girls dance with him lately / when he breaks out in song. As the show moved on and taking more liberties, there was another point where the boys had a conversation and Doc says something sexual, but wasn’t outwardly commenting about it.

I’m trying not to create spoilers, but I need to in these instances, to get the point across. I’m sorry, but if you must know, you’ve got to be prepared. The innuendos weren’t bad, but it was weird how the character was rewritten. I don’t remember Christopher Lloyd taking it to the level of slight perv. Apologies again; this is totally the wrong form of language I’m trying to use. I remember the movies being more crazy scientist looking for alternative worlds, but I don’t remember there being a full “guy talk with gestures” conversation about the McFly parents needing to get together in order to keep Marty and his siblings from disappearing. I know there was a small discussion in the movie, but the musical elaborates more and does some gesturing. Doc Brown was explaining to Marty that in order to keep the 1985 timeline happening in 1955, Marty needs to get his parents to go on a date, get married and comingle. This was basic dialogue in the first film. In the stage version, they beefed it up a bit. They also had the actor over enunciate “gigawatts” so it became a grating version of the “1.21 gigawatts?!?!?!?!” scene.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not a prude or anything; I just thought it was odd how they changed the character slightly. This also rang true to other instances like Einstein the dog being missing and the Libyans not killing Doc in the parking lot of the mall. He dies another way, which I’ll save to myself, as I’m giving everything completely away.

However, if I were to make a comparison, there were some big scenes from the movie that could have been added to the stage version, like how they kept some of the big musical numbers, but they seemingly didn’t elaborate on it in the dialogue (again, not creating spoilers, but it was one of the big things in the movie for the 1955 timeline and when they brought it to the musical, they left out the suggestion of that thing going global).

The actors looked like their film counterparts, for sure, even down to the exact clothing styles. With my poor eyesight, I still saw the white Nike sneakers with red swoosh on Marty’s feet and the details on the backdrops were amazing (albeit they were projected images, but still; they were crisp from the back of the orchestra).

Would I see this again? I think so, for a couple reasons:

• One, we walked out at “the end” when the cast came out to bow. We missed an encore of sorts, which became the actual final number song. It was one of the songs that transferred from the movie into the play.
  
  
• Two, I really enjoyed the technical stuff. The visuals were really amazing, both in set design and computer design. I wish I could have seen the build, tear down and the in-betweens because it was truly amazing. I didn’t like the blue light flashes, but I enjoyed everything else.

 

Why wouldn’t I see this again?

• One: The blue lights bothered me, plain and simple.
  
  
• Two: the weirdness of Doc in some scenes.
  
  
• Three: There were a slim handful of songs that felt like they didn’t belong in the show, which led to a couple scenes that really felt out of place for the overall time of the show. The scenes didn’t make sense, if only at that moment, for that character. It was a big stretch in belief, and the timing could have been used differently.

Overall, it was a good day out and I’m happy I got to see the show. I would suggest seeing it if you can, but still advise caution for those with sensory issues.

Until the next post comes out, go out on some neon leg warmers over your tights and leotard and jam out to some heavy music, dude.

Rock on, man!

 

Cheers;

 

See Also:

* Article regarding Alain de Lille: https://italianstudies.nd.edu/news-events/news/all-roads-lead-to-rome-new-acquisitions-relating-to-the-eternal-city/

* "Back To The Future" (the movie) via Amazon

* "Back To The Future: Music From The Motion Picture Soundtrack "via Amazon

* "Back To The Future: The Musical (Original Cast Recording)" via Amazon

* "Star Wars- The Imperial March (Darth Vader's Theme)" via Amazon

* "Star Wars Trilogy" via Amazon. Choose your own adventure on this one; they're costly.

* Basic "Star Trek" search via Amazon.

* Just for kicks: "Harold and Maude" movie, book (easy read!!) and soundtrack on vinyl (because it's hard to find the CD version).

* I used an iPhone 17 to capture the photos and video from the show.

* I used Photoshop to edit the stills

* I used an old version of Pinnacle to edit the videos. 

* Talking Heads, "Road To Nowhere" via Amazon

* One of many editions printed of Robert Frost's "The Road Not Taken"

Book banning and library closures?

Over the last few years, there have been conversations of banning specific types of books. From “classic literature” (such as “1984” and “Fahrenheit 451”) to certain historical novels (such as “Maus”, “To Kill A Mockingbird” and “I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings”). Even political, religious and sexuality based stories are on the list. Someone always has to find something inappropriate about everything we do lately, as noticed in the recent Broadway musicals I’ve attended.

Which brings me to the subject of other things disappearing: I ran into an incident this week where I wanted to request a couple specific CDs, movies, and audiobooks-on-CD from the library. The information the service desk gave me was quite interesting.

A few months ago, I had gone in to the library to request standard DVDs of a few recently released movies. As the Blu-Ray discs were “on order” and I don’t have a Blu Ray player, requesting that format would be moot; I’ve no way to play them. The librarian told me that if I ever see Blu-Ray and not standard, it’s because the library can’t obtain a normal copy. Some movies are being produced specifically for Blu-Ray and 4K streaming, and in no other format. Standard discs are going by the wayside and it is hard to find them online or in store.

All right, fine; I guess I either need to purchase a Blu-Ray player or wait for the films to be on the streaming channels. Times, they are a-changing and they aren’t fun, nor are they free.

Quite honestly, I’ve seen the items available online through “big box retailers”, so I don’t know if the library wants to get away from physical media all together, or they really are having a tough time ordering them on the internet.

Moving on to this week, my list was short enough that I thought there would not be any problems. The things I was looking for are already being produced in their various forms. I was hoping the library could obtain a copy. Who knows; there may be other patrons who would be interested in that item.

I inquired first about the music discs. The librarian told me, in no uncertain terms, that they aren’t ordering many compact discs these days because there hasn’t been a great need for them. People aren’t requesting music so there’s no way or reason to order that type of audio disc.

Okay. I guess I understand. People have their phones or tablets and stream all the sounds they want.

I then asked about the audiobook-on-CD items. The librarian gave me a similar explanation, with the exception being there is only one publishing house they can purchase from; and that may be hard because not everything may be put on disc through this particular site. There’s a limit on what is widely available due to other big names having the media rights to the recorded file.

Uh, okay, sure; “I think some of the audio books on the shelf may be from the major companies?” I asked. The short answer was “yes but it really depends on the book, the availability and if we can get it”. Thanks; I’ll keep that in mind for future reference

When I asked about the movies, I was given the same answer as the months prior: not everything is being put to DVD. There is a big chance of things not coming out on regular disc and since Blu-Ray discs are more expensive, the library is limiting what they purchase in order to have patrons request certain shows and movies.

Overall, there is no guarantee with anything I asked for, simply because the physical forms of media aren’t as readily available as they once were. People are streaming more these days and unfortunately, are not going to their local library.

I am sure there will be a day when even the new books aren’t published on paper and won’t be on the library shelves. Look how box stores (and book stores) aren’t keeping an array of hardcovers and paperbacks around. The bookstores are having limited quantities of “new releases” and the markup is so grand that they have to have you be a paying member for any type of saving. Within the last decade, the more people are buying smart phones, the more those mobile devices are tending to come with their own books app. It doesn’t matter if that’s Apple Books, Google Books or something in between. Basic tablets come pre-loaded with the Kindle app, unless you’re specifically buying a Kindle e-reader. Barnes and Noble have their own e-reader, Nook, so that would be the straight competitor to Kindle; however, it’s such a proprietary software thing, that you can’t download Nook to any device except a computer. I mean, the last I checked, you could install the Nook reading app to your Windows based computer, but you couldn’t get it on your cell phone or tablet, unless you purchased the standalone Nook reader. This is not to be confused with Amazon, who allows you to install Kindle on any Android based tablet, along with any type of cell phone. It is regardless of whether or not you purchase that e-reader. I could be wrong and am willing to be proven wrong.

It’s a horrible feeling knowing that you want to support the arts and your community and let everyone have the opportunity to have a library card so they can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a compact disc. Knowing that these materials you’re looking for won’t completely be around in a few years is sad. It’s not like I’m asking for the world on a string. I am looking for a book on tape CD so I can listen to it in my car or watch a 2 and a half hour film in the comfort of my living room.

I did attempt to go online the other day and see if I can place a request for the CDs. I received an email from the library stating “Thank you for submitting a library purchase request. The library is unable to add this title to the collection, however, it is available on our free streaming music service Hoopla” for one request and “Thank you for submitting a library purchase request. This title is unavailable to purchase this music CD from our library vendors” for the other. Guess that’s the final answer. It is too bad because it would have been great to preview the discs, should I end up paying for them myself on a streaming platform. I’m sure if I attempted to request some movies, I’d get a similar response. I take that back; I actually did get a similar response when I requested “Omni Loop”, a Mary Louise Parker movie. I’ve yet to stream online, even though I’ve not actively searched since requesting it.

I’ve talked to my friend Shawn about this and he too feels like society has been busy gravitating away from all the stuff we grew up on. Renting movies from places like Blockbuster, Hollywood Video and Showtime Video (this last one was a one off when I was young; I don’t think this was a big chain in New England at that time) is a thing of the past. Spending time after school at the local library and immersing yourself in quiet time to work on the new fiction novel is going to possibly fade out soon. He and I both agreed that there’s nothing like holding someone’s written work in your hands and spending hours reading chapter upon chapter.

It’s a big responsibility to keep track of that book and what you’ve read; I remember having a list of titles I went through every summer and was so happy to have completed the stack of them. Now I’m lucky if I can get through one a month, let alone over a dozen in three. You learn so much by submerging yourself in a good book; you can learn so much about yourself and life by keeping yourself educated.

If libraries go away, what will happen to the easy access in furthering our knowledge? When Borders and Waldenbooks went dark, Barnes and Noble capitalized on being that sole in-store provider. Now they expect you to pay $25 a year for a premium membership, only to get ten per cent off specific items. It is usually something that they mark up every time a shipment comes in, so it’s not even worth it (I paid over five dollars more for a “discounted” memoir in store, than I could have purchased online on Amazon, with Prime free shipping). This is partly why libraries should, and need to, still exist: they can alleviate some of that cost because it allows people to have access in unlocking their imagination. I know, I know, libraries still need to purchase the book (or movie, or CD). However, “our” tax dollars go to keeping libraries open and funded, so essentially, we are all paying for the shelves to be stocked with things to read, watch and listen to. Should libraries close, what will be next? If our only choice is to buy online, I’m sure we’ll be paying more for mailing and subscription services, unless all you’ll be able to do, is stream. No more holding something in your hand and turning a page. No more putting a disc into a player and watching a movie on your TV. Headphones and music readers, be damned, because you won’t be able to do that either.

I sound like “a boomer”, screaming at kids to “get off my lawn”. I’m not at that point yet, I promise. I’m just reminiscing about my past and what is going to become of my future, if we continue to let technology take over and lose the things we used to enjoy. Please don’t let these things go away. Let’s keep finding a way to keep the arts and media relevant so our future doesn’t look so bleak.

Thanks for reading and listening to my gripe today.

Until it all gets sorted, go out and support your local library. Take out a book and learn something new. Listen to some music and watch some old television series on DVD. Let’s get a re-awakening of borrowing stuff!

Cheers;  

See also:

• Banned Books list on Amazon
• "1984" by George Orwell
• "Fahrenheit 451" by Ray Bradbury
• "Maus" by Art Speigelman
• "To Kill A Mockingbird" by Harper Lee
• "I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings" by Maya Angelou 
• Kindle app / e-reader on Amazon
• "Omni Loop" (film) on Amazon
• Amazon Prime information

Translation lost, new words found?

I picked up a "new" toilet bowl cleaner at a local Dollar Tree and didn't fully read it until a few days later.

The bottle is bright pink and white, has an angled neck exactly like big name brands, and almost smells like the grapefruit it says it should. The brand is called "Homebright" and the cleaner is "Power Clinging Toilet Bowl Cleaner Gel". I think it's supposed to be like "The Pink Stuff", but I haven't purchased any of those products, so I can't say whether or not they're similar. 

When I was finally ready to use the product, I had read the back in more detail. What had jumped out at me was the (very loosely) translated wording and how the more tough stains needed to be cleaned.

Taken from the back (with no corrections):

"A unique fresh, fruity perfume fills the whole toilet. Its foam cleaning action leaves your toilet sparking clean. The thick cleaning gel clings to the toilet bowl removes limescale when used regularly (3 times per week). Cleans above and below the water line.

DIRECTIONS FOR USE: Direct nozzle under the toilet rim and squeeze bottle to apply liquid. Flush away for a sparkling clean fresh finish. For built-up limescale leave overnight with the toilet seal in an upright position."

It does have a unique fresh and fruity perfume, but I didn't see any foaming action. With the directions stating you can just flush the mess away, it was weird because the gel sticks to the sides of the bowl. You actually need to scrub it a little bit to make sure things go down. What's the point of using a cleaner if it's not going to wash away the dirt? Plus, this is the first part of the translation gaff, or at the very least misinterpretation: "For built-up limescale leave overnight with the toilet seal in an upright position". What does that mean - "leave overnight with the toilet seal in an upright position"?? Maybe leave your toilet seat lid up so the fumes can disperse? 

The next bit of confusion on the label comes from the warning and caution:
"WARNING: Harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects. Keep out of reach of children. Read label before use. Wash contaminated skin thoroughly after handling. Avoid release to the environment. Dispose of contents/container in accordance with local regulations. 

CAUTIONS: Do not mix with other cleaning products. People with sensitive skin should wear gloves when using this product. 

STORAGE: Store upright in a cool dry place out of direct sunlight and do not expose to extreme temperatures."

Uhm, "Harmful to aquatic life with long lasting effects"??? What in the actual unprocessed hell is in this thing? This is a product that is meant to go down your drain. Depending on where your pipes lead, it'll wind up in other water systems where the "aquatic life" is around. It might not be immediate, but they'll have their opportunity to swim in it soon enough. Also, "contaminated skin"?? Like this is a biohazard product? Where is THAT on the label?

Moving forward, the rest of the bottle contains ingredients and information about the company (address and phone number):

"INGREDIENTS: WATER, CITRIC ACID, PROPYLENE GLYCOL, PEG-40 HYDROGENATED CASTOR OIL, DECYL GLUCOSIDE, XANTHAM GUN, FRAGRANCE, RED 33, METHYLCHLOROISOTHIAZOLINONE, METHYLISOTHIAZOLINONE.

Contains fragrance allergens.

For more ingredient information visit www.rejoice-us.com.

*Plant-based ingredients: Citric Acid, Propylene Glycol, Decyl Glucoside.

QUESTIONS/COMMENTS? 1-855-345-5575

MANUFACTURED FOR:

REJOICE INTERNATIONAL CORP.

21800 HAGGERTY RD.

NORTHVILLE, MI 48167, USA

MADE IN CHINA"

Okay, there are a lot of things I can't pronounce in the list, let alone wonder if it's the same kind of wording in all languages. Science is science, right? 

Castor Oil being one of the ingredients would probably explain why the gel sticks so good to the bowl and doesn't move, even when you try to brush it away. It seriously sticks to the sides and does take a couple flushes to fully disappear, as this stuff is pink when it comes out of the bottle and pink when it goes in your toilet. 

The rest of the ingredient list, well, good luck with it. I know there are some regulations with the "methyl" products listed, and it has some restrictive use.

I guess this will be the last time I purchase this product and will truly be reading the label better when I am in the store. I know there are cleaning agents out there that are better and some that are worse. Since this is a Dollar Tree product, it's not that widely available outside of that "less expensive" bubble. Which means, if you search for it online, it'll be a lot more money and come from third party vendors on auction sites (like eBay) or big name seller sites (Amazon did have it as a two pack and grossly over prices from some random seller). 

Honestly, it's my fault for not paying attention to things. I was looking for cleaning products while shopping at the Dollar Tree, and when I saw something that looked like another name brand, I thought I'd try it. Little to my knowledge, this would turn out to be something I'm turning into a big deal, without wanting to make it a big deal. 

I mean, it works to an extent. Once you squirt it in the bowl, it's not as easy as the directions state. You just can't flush it away because the gel is too thick and it stays on the sides. Therefore, you have to take a toilet bowl want and smush it around; do your usual cleaning. Then you flush it away, but the color stays for another flush or two. It's not staining my white bowl by any means, if that's what you're wondering. I think I had more of a problem with a slight stain with one of those blue cubes you drop in the tank and it cleans that way, then this get leaving "it's a girl!!" pink marks. The blue stain only happened once, but it's not getting clean, which is a bummer. Those cubes aren't the best and they're a bigger and better brand. I wasn't impressed, truth be told. 

Not that I'm impressed by this Homebright product either. The citrus smell does hit you, but then it goes away after that second flush, which is a good thing. It's as thick in the aroma department as it is in the gel department. For a liquid, it surely clings! 

This is truly not something I would buy again, and although I've not read the label for other products, I am hoping the translations aren't as bad as this one. The descriptions threw me for a loop, so based on that, I wanted to do a post. Share something I've seen and tried, and hopefully let others know to be careful with what they're purchasing and using. Hopefully something will change, regardless of what that "something" is. It's one thing to buy a knock off or pick something up that is less expensive, but it's something different when the wording on the product is warning you of the materials being harmful for the fishies and instructs you to leave something in an upright position when it doesn't really state what that something should be. Read between the lines and choose your own adventure? 

Until I finish this product and don't purchase it again, stay clean, for the most part. Stay out of the radioactive beds of water as well. 

Cheers;

Relive some late 1990s and early 2000s youth!

On Sunday, February 8, 2026, I got to some reliving of my high school and college years in the form of pop music.

I know was Super Bowl Sunday, but I had the opportunity to go see the Broadway production, “& Juliet”. Quite honestly, this was a better experience than sitting at home and watching the New England Patriots get their ass handed to them. From what I understand, they lost really, really badly; I walked in well after the halftime show to see a very low score. It was the fourth quarter and the Seahawks were up 19 to 0. At some point the Pats scored a touchdown (I had walked away from the TV after checking when I walked in the door). Unfortunately, New England would not and could not finish on top, in order to beat Seattle at this late stage of the game. Oh well; when I saw the final 29-13 in the morning, I guess the Washington State fans were extremely happy at the results. Seattle kept a good lead for a solid chunk of the time.

“& Juliet” started relatively on time with a mini show of the cast setting the stage. They pretended to do their work along with waving and saying hi to the audience. There was a moment when the woman playing Juliet sat down at the edge of the stage and talked to the people in the Pit. As the actors moved around, they greeted each other with high fives and quick dancing, which was like the 1980s style pop and lock break dancing. They continued to move set pieces and dance with each other while some of bass heavy instrumental music played on. There were no major speaking roles during this action sequence since everyone was doing their own stagehand work and they needed the focus. I know it was all for show, but it seemed a little redundant at the same time.

All of a sudden, we hear “hello!” come from the stage. It wasn’t a microphoned “hello”, as the show wasn’t quite ready to start. One person was holding signs that were used to inform the audience of “no electronics” and other similar requests, followed by a “thank you”. Once they were totally ready, the show began.

The show was kicked off with an enthusiastic “welcome to the stage and first show of William Shakespeare’s “Romeo & Juliet””, as the cast started singing the first song, “Larger Than Life”.

Uh huh; this would be the first of many Backstreet Boys songs in the show. It was definitely going to be interesting, since I’m not a big BSB fan. Beggars can’t be choosers, but given my druthers, I think I’d still choose New Kids On The Block first (I’m biased), then *NSYNC, then Backstreet Boys. However, I am on the fence with 98°. I wasn’t a totally big fan, but I know some of their hits. Currently, I’ve yet to master the art of K-Pop, quite honestly, so I don’t know much about BTS or whatever their acronym is. On the flip side, I know what you’re thinking; yes, I can still see and attempt most of the dances to all those boy band songs. Don’t get me started because it’s awkward and humiliatingly bad.

Once finished with the opening number, the cast worked in a brief synopsis of the show we all think we know, character flaws and all. This was meant to be the very first show of “Romeo & Juliet”, so there would be a need for updating as the show progressed. From the point the description ended, it became a complete reimagining of what could have happened.

What this means is, the retelling of the original was in case you were not familiar with the story (current students) or needed a refresher (adults). Once they got that out of the way, it was the radio friendly, popular bubblegum music we smile and sing along with, that served to push the dialogue through the couple hours we sat there. It was something that was needed to guide Shakespeare and his wife along while they went toe to toe on why his version may or may not need some re-writes.

The music and dialogue together didn’t really seem strange or weird. It wasn’t like there was a lot of dialogue and all of a sudden they broke into song, or, they had songs that didn’t completely match the scene or dialogue. The show wasn’t meant to have all songs and little dialogue either – like some productions where they don’t match scenes and you have to struggle with following on. In the instance of this show, they used the songs as dialogue and kept it relevant so you knew what was happening. The songs chosen for this musical were already conversational pieces, so the actors were able to utilize that as part of their discussions.

 An example of this would be the song “I Want It That Way” by The Backstreet Boys.

Again, BSB was heavily used in this show (as well as a few Britney Spears). *NSYNC pops up wildly too. Like I stated earlier, this is a late 1990s and early 2000s pop heavy musical. There are some 2010s mixed in, but the show starts off in the 1998-2003 years.

During the scene for “I Want It That Way”, the characters of Shakespeare and his wife, Anne, are focusing on how to write and end “Romeo & Juliet”. Shakespeare is making the comments of it being his show, his writing, his style. This is his baby and he wants the performance to go his way. However, Anne sees it differently. She states how it could be changed just slightly: empower Juliet more and give her a greater voice. Don’t end it with the two lovebirds dying under false pretenses. What if Juliet woke up and restarted her life? What if she did something else? How can we explore her doing something different with her teenage and adult years? Shakespeare fought against those opinions by stating what he wanted even though his wife wanted her way.

This is why the songs were used as a tête-á-tête to match the speaking: as much as these earworms are mindlessly fun, they were used really great in the overall context to move the show forward. Each character stated their facts and reasons, ending with lines from “I want it that way”, including those specific sentences.

As the musical progressed, new characters were introduced and relationships created, per each Shakespeare spouse version. It wasn’t a mirroring of the original per se, but it was one person interjecting their version into the other. It was a flawless telling of a story without being too crazy and jarring - you knew what you were watching because it meshed into the other. They jumped in personally to say “cut the lights!” and the actors froze in place, shrouded in darkness. The Shakespeares were lit up and hashed the scene out together. They wanted it both their ways and one ended up walking off as the loser for that moment, only to say “cue the lights!” and the scene started up again.

There were quite a few moments where they made fun of William Shakespeare – not only as a person, but in his writing and style, as well as how he was one of the more famous people to push gender boundaries. This production did a fairly decent job of keeping things clean as possible, at least to an extent. There were some “bad words” used during the two and a half hours, including the use of Pink’s “Fuckin’ Perfect” song. However, it felt like the show was something you could still see today if you didn’t know it was based off of a 1597 tragedy. It was family friendly enough that it became both a tragedy and a comedy; but again, it added some profanity (it’s not that society isn’t used to hearing any of it, of course, it’s used sparingly enough) and some adult content. I think the music muddled down the main expletives and allowed some innuendos to go over the heads of any kid that was there, because let’s face it; a certain rodent production house has been doing similar things for decades. Honestly, the worst word was “douche” and it was in the context of calling one of the male characters that, as well as it being in relation to another character in the same instance. I don’t want to create major spoilers so that is all I will say for that particular word and scene.

There were some LGBTQ themes and I know that is a hot topic for some people. A side effect to this (and some slight opinion) is that there has to be some understanding that adults may find it inappropriate for little kids, or even themselves. Knowing that this is Shakespeare and Broadway (and in Florida), the two will eventually meet, mingle and create a show. We are in a strange reality where more productions seem to be using “the LGBTQ agenda” and a lot of people are against that, however it’s also become some sort of normal. Again, thinking back to “this being Shakespeare”, what did he do? Put men and women in drag and create shows; which was also touched upon in this production of “& Juliet”. There was at least a ten minute conversation between characters about this subject – how Shakespeare tried to push the boundary limits.

To elaborate a little more about the themes for this particular show, it seems that reviews have been well received, from what I’ve heard, but there have been some complaints because of the non-straight characters. People are finding it against their belief system and don’t find it acceptable for any form of human to see. Two of the reasons for the negative reviews are the fact people are in drag or the character is finding they like other people who are the same gender as themselves. It’s sad that there are people who have to find hate in everything, but things do happen. I would like to stay as neutral as possible on this subject, so please make sure you research the show (or shows) you are could or would like to see, in the event they are not to your liking. Please understand I’m not condoning the hatred because I don’t find it acceptable. I see these shows not because of an overall specific theme, but because it is entertainment and I’m not here to rip something apart based on some “agenda”. As I’ve said before, I’ll say it again: Do your research and if you see something you don’t like, as in this case, a show, you don’t have to see it. If something looks interesting, go for it – show and share the love.

Admittedly, again, I feel that the music kind of covered for any misgivings, to an extent. It is all bubblegum pop - “Roar” and “I Kissed A Girl” by Katy Perry, “It’s My Life” by Bon Jovi, “My Heart Will Go On” by Celine Dion, and quite the list from Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys and a line or two from *NSYNC. This includes a single from Justin Timberlake. They are earworms a lot of people grew up with or are growing up with. The audio was thumping to the point it was rock concert worthy. There were some seriously bass heavy sounds with powerfully strong vocals. I think if I didn’t put my Apple Watch on “Do Not Disturb” and “Theater Mode”, it would have been going off every few minutes for “Loud Environment: Audio is above 90db”. The flashy visuals included the use of the Jumbotron, GOBOs and pyrotechnics, so there was a definite match for the wild music. It got to the point where it was literally a stadium show with random chit chat by the singers. There’s nothing wrong with it by any means, especially if that is something in your wheelhouse. I’m sure a lot of the older people didn’t like the loud noise, but there was plenty of opportunity for the crowd to clap, cry and whoop their way through the show.

Which brings me to another point of negative reviews: Although there were points where the laughter and applause got so loud, the actors had to stop for a minute, just to soak it all in. As much as I hate to be political, there were a few parts that were definitely politically inspired, even for today’s standards. Not to create spoilers, mind you, but I don’t really include the aforementioned “LGBTQ agenda” as part of the heavily political crazy (even though I can see where it might turn into a problem). There was a good amount of people who were enjoying the show and its poking fun of the current society we are living in.

Overall, this was a fairly good show. I had gone with my mother and one of our neighbors, so I did hear them laugh at the scenes and sing along to the songs. At the end, my mother said she “really enjoyed this show” and that she found it to be “the next generation’s “RENT”. I can see that comparison and understand where she’s coming from. I’m glad she enjoyed the show and had something to compare it to, not that you can compare any other show to “RENT”, given its theme, but point taken.

Would I see this show again? I honestly don’t know. It was a great show, don’t get me wrong. I bought a hoodie and I told Emi about it because she’d dig the sound and vision (mostly the vision) aspect of it, since she’s doing full time work at the House of Mouse rival. She would love the way the stage was lit, the random pyrotechnics (even in the first row of the audience), even the confetti bomb at one point. I personally was trying to enjoy the show but still was having some challenges because I was looking for mistakes while secretly doing the band dance to each song. It’s a vicious cycle of crazy some days because I want to enjoy the production at a full 100% but knowing some “industry secrets” from decades ago, I can’t forget those, so I look for them. It was fun, don’t get me wrong, but it was also a great experience to see since now I have something more to talk about and understand why people are positively hyping it up.

Without creating more of a long, spoiler induced post, I am going to stop here and think of the next thing to write. I have another review of a cleaning product I need to work on, so until I can sort out those words, dance like no one is watching and clean the earworms out of your head.

Cheers;

Pictures included below were taken with an iPhone 17, showing where I was located, and just basic set pieces because we couldn't use electronics during the show. 

The beginning of the show when everyone was sitting down, I wish I got a better picture of the stage. I should have walked down and taken a photo, so I'm sorry the pictures aren't as super clear and colorful. The walls with the artwork are the GOBOs and during intermission changed to the purple coloring. That's just a light shone on the walls - the images are on a metal disk in a studio light. The purple was during intermission, which I walked down to talk to someone I know, who was sitting closer to the stage.

The stage during intermission was reset to something else, and this time I did a somewhat better focus, sort of. The "Romeo" was taken at my seat, but I was paying more attention on getting the zoom more clear, but it's still washed out in light.

My mother did marvel at the seating though, as she has seen shows where she sat closer. She made the comment on how "The stage looks bigger when you're more up front". She's used to being 7 or 8 rows back, not 24. She still enjoyed it, and would love to see something else. We'll see, time will tell.

For those interested, Amazon has the soundtrack available to download (as an MP3 album) or purchase (as a CD or on vinyl). If more information is needed, there's an official site where you can preview things and see the trailer. 

Not the sun, but the moon with no stars

I was leaving the gym the other night and the moon was at an interesting angle over some of the houses. It was bright enough, that I thought I could get some photos (on my phone) and be able to post them here. 

Sadly, they weren't what I was expecting, but still looked pretty interesting. 

However the phone takes night photos, it layers everything in a distinct manner, so lights are bright and you'd think it was the day time in some alternate universe. Seeing these "night mode" shots, makes me respect the old videos a little more, when scenes were filmed in the daylight hours and the editors would go back in post production to adjust the light to make it look like a night scene. Pre high definition and fancy computers, there were filters used on the cameras and some minor trickery to make viewers think it was the middle of the night, but in fact, it could have been 12:30 in the afternoon. You can tell the difference in some films, if you really look and know what / where to look. 

This is not the case with the photos I took - no trickery, no manipulation. It is just the phone having a setting that I took advantage of. I guess, in a way, it is manipulation because it's drawing out all the bright lights, making the sharp and clean, and allowing you to see everything in view, for having darkness around you. 

I know I need to work on my Canon a little more. I've been trying to use a bounce / swivel flash for a few things lately, and seriously need to figure it out. It's something extra I've wanted for my camera and now I've got to work out the specifics of it. Do I have to use manual mode all the time, or can I have a special setting on it (one of the "scenes")? What does each thing look like?

The things I've taken so far have been portrait shots, so they're not for my blog. I've been testing it because I wanted to try to renew my passport with a digital photo and bypass going to a retail store to get my picture taken. I was able to get it partially right, except with my glasses off, I wasn't facing the camera. I also need to tweak the lighting around me because I had some shading in places. It's not the best, but I'm getting there with it; a little more fine tuning, and maybe I can submit something. 

At least then, I know what settings to use for any parties I'm at and want to use the flash. It'll be awkwardly fun - all of a sudden a burst of light comes from my area and people are going to think a lamp fell on the floor. That's not what I need when I try to be stealth and unobtrusive with the photos. *Rolls eyes*.

I know this is a short weird post. I was up because I needed to do some early morning work and felt like putting together a quick check in. I'm trying to do some things lately and haven't had any thoughts to write down since my last update. 

It's been cold here - reaching as low as 34°; people have been bundled up in multiple layers. I even had to pull out a down jacket I haven't worn since I purchased it almost a decade ago (to use in Chicago, and it stayed in my suitcase; I didn't need it! Ugh. Fiasco!). What happened to "it doesn't get immensely cold in Florida"??? Some parts of the state, near Tampa and further north, potentially saw snow - it got down to the 20s in those places. All the plop plops iguanas must be wondering what in the ever loving hell is going on, as we've had too many days in a row where it's 40° by 7am and 41° by 8pm. Somewhere, usually around 3, it'll reach 70, but won't stay that way for long. Even one of the gym bros I talk to, told me the other day that he didn't move from the Boston area to have days on days of excessive cold. He's freezing and doesn't like it. I agreed, and said "we could be cold and shoveling", to which he replied he didn't want either. He likes it occasionally, but not every day like this. I understand his point. I know my friends in New England are dealing with snow chaos the last couple weeks and it's been in the single digits. It's rough; I have no right to complain. Forty degrees is warm for what they're dealing with. 

 Which is why I have my window open right now. The weather map says we're to expect rain within the hour and it's currently 57°. I probably should go check the rest of my house and see what's going on... it's not even seven in the morning, but I need some coffee.

Until something changes / I learn more of my camera / we get a blizzard ... the crazy train will keep on rolling. 

Stay warm.

Cheers;

See also

* iPhone 17 via Amazon

* Photoshop via Amazon

* Canon T7i via Amazon

* "Swivel bounce flash" via Amazon