Everyone's got one and doing it..

... but are they really using it?

Over the past few months, I've noticed a lot of people in the pool wearing some sort of smart watch; whether that be Apple Watch, Google Pixel Watch or Fitbit. 

Most user I have run into, have an Apple Watch, truth be told, even though I know quite a few who love their Android phone (out in the real world). I think I have come across more Apple users in my community, then there are other device users (some of the hip young kids are into the "Nothing" Phone or whatever is up and coming). 

It's strange but it's probably generational that they are all accustomed to using the same type of device (they all hang out together and trade health problems). If they have a home computer, odds are, it is Windows based. 

Yes, they also have iPads because they want a tablet and since they already have an iPhone, they want to also be able to have a bigger screen to "FaceTime" their grandkids. The catch is, if they still have a home computer, it's Microsoft. So they can't have things move between all environments and want to know why their apps aren't on the computer. Because it's two different things and the operating systems won't play together. Although, the truth is, they don't feel they need an expensive MacBook because Windows is dead simple to use and all they know the programs. Even though the iPad, iPhone and Watch probably cost as much as the MacBook, combined, when all was first purchased.

Can't win and can't talk them into anything otherwise.

Plainly because I'm a contradiction myself.

Personally, I'm using what is now considered a "Legacy Device": an Apple Watch series 3, with its stock band for my swimming watch. I was given a cousin's old Apple Watch series 6 when they upgraded to something newer, which means the series 6 is now my every day watch, to the point I've purchased some nice Velcro sports bands to go with it. I just need to invest in some more bumpers because I dumbly kept putting them on my series 3 and the pool was ruining them due to my trying to take the bumper off to clean the watch face. I need to replace the bumper on the 6 because it's getting too cloudy and scratched. 

I have an iPhone, an Apple Watch, and I use a Hewlett Packard laptop. The laptop is 13 years old at this point, so it's a little worn (Windows 8.1). I grew up with Microsoft computers, whether that was an IBM machine running DOS or various other name brands running newer systems over the years. It's what I know, but I also am not afraid to admit I've had my hands on Apple computers before. I'm of the generation where we played Oregon Trail on both the Apple II and Commodore 64 in elementary school. I earned my fruit stripes by getting dysentery, thank you very much (The Commodore was rare; I think there was like 2 in the school and we always fought for it)! 

Squirrel brain activated! Got to get back to the topic at hand.

I was trying to bring this up (the use of the watch) because it's interesting how everyone is literally attached to said time keeper, but they're not using it for the exercise apps that may or may not be included within their device's environment. They all seem to be using it to be able to check the time, see if they got a random text, or because they want to have a watch tan line (likely story 😜). 

I can't speak for Android, but Apple has not only the Health app, but they have the Fitness app. Both talk to each other, so if you do some sort of workout in the Fitness app, it tells Health you've completed an activity. With the watch, you can open Fitness, scroll to the workout you want to do, and the timer starts and the app senses what you're doing. It can tell your heart rate, your movement, and will time you while you're involved in that particular exercise. The downfall is you only get credit for an exercise minute if your heart rate goes above a certain number (100 and something). 

The standard goals in Fitness app are:

• 300 active calories (Move)
• 30 minutes (Exercise)
• 12 hours (Stand)

I've actually set my move goal to 500 but have kept everything else because I tend to do several hours in the gym. I go between the treadmill and elliptical, so I know I could achieve the 300 within the first hour I'm working out, should I pay enough attention to what I'm doing. Same goes for when I'm swimming; if I'm not just floating around and working on a pool shoe tan. 

When I said there's a downfall for exercise credit, I meant that in the 30 minutes you're "exercising", if your heart rate falls below 100 and something, the app doesn't register that as exercising. You have to do a serious work out if you want to get full credit. 

Example is, when I'm on the stationary bike, if I'm not pushing myself hard on it, my watch won't register I'm really working out. I can set the app up to show I'm riding for 30 minutes, but if my heart rate stays at (let's say) 95, then I don't get credit. Even though the bike screen says I've pedaled close to 5 miles, there's a definite disconnect somewhere. I've got to pedal hard and fast and start some sweating in order for the watch to know I'm doing something. 

However, if I'm walking on the treadmill at a 3.0 pace and over the course of an hour, I bump it up to 4 so I can run, my watch senses I'm exerting myself a little more, so the effort ends up pushing both my move coal and exercise goal up higher. By the time I finish the hour, I've not only closed the exercise ring, I'm a few pushes away from closing the move ring. Which leads me to use the elliptical for an hour and I've now fully closed the move ring and gone more in the exercise ring. All because I've pushed myself on two machines. 

Swimming is harder because I had to concentrate enough and do my laps. I can't sit there and talk to the people who just want to be there to run their mouth and tip toe walk the pool. When there are so many people in the morning wanting to get their social butterfly on, trying to go up and down the length of the pool is a little tricky because there are no lanes; it's a free for all and you're fighting for space with other swimmers. 

I've squirreled again. Hope you're still with me.

My point in all of this is, the watch can see what you're doing if you're using it to count your exercising. I'm using my watch now, while I swim, and it's been trial and error for me because there are several swim options in the Fitness app. I was doing "open water" which I think is the ocean, and that drained the battery quickly, in the two hours I was in the water. There's the manual "swim" mode that you can trigger if you don't use the watch; you can manually put in what you've done. Then there's "pool swim", which is what I've been using lately. I set it for the stock 25 lap set, and it counts my arm movement as I go back and forth, so for so many yards or laps, I get some sort of credit.

I swear, this isn't an advertisement for Apple products or exercise equipment. But the above screen grabs are from my Fitness app today and what my month has looked like so far (aka the "sessions"). I'm trying to do as much as I can, to get into some sort of routine and be healthy, however sometimes, things don't want to go your way.

At any rate, I've seen people in the pool, just bopping along and doing their thing, and none of them seem to be using their watch to keep track of their exercising. No one taps their watch to start or stop the timer, turn the dial to unlock the water drop thing, or even compare strides as they walk their lap. 

People seem disinterested in using their device for its full features and only have it as a show piece. Something to check the time real quick or if they got a text from a friend. In all the days I've been at the pool and have seen dozens of humans in the chlorinated H2O, I think I'm the only one actively using my watch for what else it can do.

One of the swimmers did ask me about it one day, but it didn't end well. The person is nearing 80, somewhat active (they not only walk the community in the morning.. which ends up being over a mile), they swim for 45 minutes afterwards. They had asked me about my watch and what I do with it, because they saw me dry it off one day when I was done in the water. I explained that I use the Fitness app to track my swim and it goes into my Health app. They said they know somehow their morning walk is in their Health, but they don't know how to use their watch to do any of that, and they're afraid to use the watch in the pool. I had said that I know the feeling about getting it wet, but also know that it's kind of safe to do, since I'm not completely submerging my arm in an ocean and I take care of the thing when I'm done. I'm not in the water for more than 2 hours, which I know is a lot as it is, but I am mindful of keeping track of what my watch looks and feels like. 

As I said, certain things run the battery up quickly, so I am careful I don't abuse it. 

The swimmer was still confused and concerned because she'd love to keep track of her laps, but is afraid of ruining the watch. I did ask the age of it, and she said it's not new; she's had it long enough, but doesn't want to damage it and end up with nothing. I completely understand that concept; if I didn't have the 6, I might be in the same boat as this woman, but also, knowing how the 3 is aged out, I would be due for an upgrade anyway. So I'd probably use it in the pool a little more sparingly than I currently am.

I explained all the reasoning behind it - what she can do with it; how the data can help her when she goes to her doctor, she can tailor the watch and the phone to suit her needs. 

She was just too worried about breaking the watch to really concentrate on what I was saying. Again, I totally understand, and actually hoped someone else who regularly wears their watch everywhere, would have jumped in and said she's fine. There are people in the pool who abuse their watch - they wear it golfing, swimming, out shopping, sleeping... I think the only time it's not on their wrist, is when they're in the shower. 

Overall, my whole thought process and question / reasoning is... if you're wearing a smart watch to use it for everything else, why leave it on while in the pool? What's the method behind this madness? It isn't doing you any favors by staying on your wrist while in the water because you're not keeping track of how you're doing in this "workout", much like you're not doing yourself a favor by leaving it off and by your towel. I can't wrap my head around it.

I mean, I can; I wasn't using my watch in the water for the longest time. I would manually put in the exercise into my Health app when I got home, because I was like that swimmer and afraid to get the thing wet. Now that I've tried it, it works and I still baby it when I'm using it. That's why I know I'm contradicting myself here. 

It's just one of those things that I try to understand and can't. When the swimmers out of the pool and drying off, they're on their phones. So are the manually putting in what they did? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of turning on the Fitness app and having that do everything for you? Yes and no because they're not putting anything into the app. They're checking the email, their texts, the store circulars online. I don't think any effort is made into checking the Health app. 

I could be wrong and I would love to know what everyone else is doing. It's not me being nosy more so it's being inquisitive and asking the obviously wrong questions. 

Until I can figure out how to stop rambling about totally useless things and feel like I'm circling the drain with this, stay healthy and sane, y'all.

Cheers;

And thanks for sticking with me this long.

 

See also

• Apple Watch via Amazon
  
• Google Pixel Watch via Amazon
• Fitbit via Amazon
• Nothing products via Amazon
• 6 Pack Sport Nylon Loop Band Compatible with Apple Watch Band 38mm 40mm 41mm 42mm 44mm 45mm 46mm 49mm  via Amazon. 
• The title was longer, but this is what I'm using and has worked. I don't know how it fits all those sizes; I didn't ask. I know it fits the 40mm which is what the 6 is, but I haven't tried it on the series 3, which is a 38mm. I've too many other bands for that, and didn't want to waste it on it. 
• Apple Watch bumper via Amazon. 
• I've tried the hard plastic ones that just slip over the watch (snaps on), but found they get caught weirdly and end up slipping off my watch if I'm not careful. Since they just pop on, they usually end up popping off. Conversely, there are ones you've got to fiddle with to get it all around the watch (literally cocooning it), that seem to work better. But again, the more you try to take off the bumper and put it back on, the more flimsy the wrap is around where the watch band goes into the watch, so the more that the plastic will wear and snap off. It's a double edge sword, but honestly, I find it works better for my needs. 
• Example of bumpers:
• Hard case snap on bumper
• Soft flexible all around bumper
• You also need to make sure it has a screen protector because some don't and the whole point is to have the entire watch not get beat up. That's also my preference too.. make sure it stays good. I'm clumsy, so I'd rather pay for the whole protection than need to buy a new watch.
• 
  

“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

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. 

I found myself subconsciously and inadvertently singing along...

Here I am, listening to the "Rocky Horror Show (Original Roxy Cast Recording)" and taking a Pinecone survey, when all of a sudden I find myself singing along with the artists. Unfortunately, I can't even tell you the names of them. I can, with certainty, tell you the song titles, if you wish.

Sure, Tim Curry and Meatloaf are on the recording of this stage production, but since the film didn't exist yet, the Roxy Cast is potentially what kicked the hornet's nest of a cult phenomenon. I honestly would not know the rest of this crew, should they pop up in front of me and I needed to pick them out of a jail line up. 

Abigale Haness? No clue. Bill Miller? I don't know, except he does look "All American, Folk" in a way (for 1974). Boni Entin,  Bruce Scott, Graham Jarvis, Jamie Donnelly, and Kim Milford? Doesn't ring a bell. Sorry, this group is definitely before my time.

Although, from what I've researched, if Jamie Donnelly is the same one that was in the "Grease" movie, then she's the only face I recognize. I still wouldn't know her from a hole in the wall if I tried, however. 

I can't help; I'm stuck not knowing these random singers. *Shrug* 

It's so strange to listen to this soundtrack because it varies slightly from the movie version. It feels rushed but not rushed because it's supposed to be live and they've got stage acts (conversations) in between each song to get to. 

Much like all stage productions do. The chit chat is what drives the next song, right?

Right?

The movie version is a little more slow, drawn out, clear. For being a highly low budget film that everyone got rained on while in the skivvies. Except Susan Sarandon. She got pneumonia. *rolls eyes*

Conversely, the Roxy recording is not muddy (rough sounding) by any means, but it really gives you the Broadway feeling, for having Los Angeles West Hollywood theatrics. As I'm going through each track, I'm picturing the scene from the movie in my head and I'm watching Susan Sarandon, Barry Bostwick, Patricia Quinn and Nell Campbell run their lines with Richard O'Brien, Tim Curry and Meatloaf. Peter Hinwood doesn't really count on the vocal part, as that wasn't him singing. His gold lamé shorts and muscle body (with "blonde hair and a tan" to boot) were nice to look at, but he's a model; his normal job (at the time) was to get to be eye candy. Being the star attraction of a film wasn't on his bingo card as he wasn't part of the acting world to begin with. 

I do have to say, right in the middle of my train wreck circling, I was wrong. 

My last post about "Rocky Horror", I stated I vaguely remember going to the Brattle Street Theater in Cambridge. Through a little more research, it was the  Loews Harvard Square Theatre, which was formerly located at 10 Church Street in Cambridge. That was the brick building I remember standing next to with my youth group. I still have no idea why I kept thinking it was the Brattle Street Theater. I honestly don't know what I may have done at The Brattle in order to be so sure I was there, at night, with a group of other 12 year olds, seeing a shadow cast performance of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. It's the weirdest thing because I didn't go out to Harvard Square a lot at that time, especially to see see any type of moving pictures. I know while at college, I was there frequently to cruise "The Garage" and hang in "The Pit" (which I learned today doesn't exist anymore; it got leveled).  But as a young teenager, I had no reason to be there. As a bored college student, I went to a lot of random places and saw a lot of random sights. I enjoyed my solo trips; I got to find random bookstores, music stores and coffee shops, among other one off establishments. You learn quickly, the places you find, that will have you gravitate back to and decades later read they've shuttered their doors completely. 

Anyway, enough reminiscing about a lost childhood event. 

The Roxy version of the soundtrack, for 1974, is rock and roll meets folk in a way. Like I said, it's theatrical, so there's a lot of pulling and pushing with it. Hippy happy feelings for the theme of the show. There are points where it sounds like it belongs a few years in the past because it's got a folksy vibe with some of the guitar work, but at the same time, the riffs sound like the start of a rock opera. It's so strange to listen to, knowing that my first introduction was the movie. 

I've heard the 2000 Broadway Cast "revival" version, and that truly sounds like the 2000s called. They want their 90s rock back and they aren't taking 'no' for an answer.

Essentially, every generation that puts out a major cast album to this show, really sounds like the time they're in. The decades that define us, also make us subjects to that era. Future proofing your sound can only go so far, as the Wall of Sound isn't made for everybody. 

This Rocky soundtrack laid the groundwork for future productions, yes, I give it that. The lyrics are slightly altered as well, so you know they were still working out the kinks (in more ways than one. 😜😉). As the Roxy cast was the American introduction, there was a London version prior, were Tim Curry really cut his teeth as "Dr. Frank N Furter". Every time he performed this character, he changed things slightly, to what we know of in the film. It's so minor, you don't realize it unless you're hearing it or have been told about it. 

Oh, and by the way, I've picked up a copy of "Vagabond". It's a hardcover and I intend on reading it after I finish the current book I'm reading. Most likely within the next couple weeks (I'm slow.. I have opportunity to speed read at one of my jobs, however). I'm bummed now - today, the book is three dollars less than what I paid 3 weeks ago, and I bought it on Amazon too. I don't want to return it just to rebuy it at the lower cost. Oh well; at least it's not the Elton incident...

Much like I had to keep an open mind for watching "Some Like It Hot" this year, the longer I'm listening to the Roxy Cast sing "Rocky Horror", I am kind of liking it. I can't explain it and I know I keep repeating myself, but it's truly giving me folk vibes. I like folk music, especially from the late 1960s and early 1970s, which this falls into, for sure. It's pushing the rock limit, but it's not fully there, as a cohesive unit. You can definitely tell they were trying things out with this, if you've not seen the production. 

It's like when comedians back in the day would sign up for troupes like The Groundlings, Second City and other venues to workshop their improv skills in order to find a jump off point and make it big. This Rocky Horror sounds like a workshop, oddly enough. 

It's growing on me and I dig it. I wish I could see a recording of the live performance so I have something visual to put the music to, but unfortunately, most videos don't exist for stage shows, even now. It's too expensive, especially for those pre 1990s productions, due to technology. The cameras were big and bulky; be glad we have good sound quality from the early shows to begin with. As it is, good bootlegs that show up for the fans are due to some people, some how, hooking into the audio booth. Or, at the very least, it's the audio engineer creating their own copy and distributing it. Otherwise, with these "cast albums", the performers are in studios, doing their thing, and that is what gets massed produced. One never knows.

I do know, however, this is one of those surprise sleeper albums I never thought to look into, but am glad I did because now I can say I've listened to it and although it's very different from the album I know of (the movie), it's another option to get to sing to and get lost in some wild science fiction.

Until the next head bopper comes out, stay safe out there. You never know what some other reality will do next...

Cheers;