My children are well past the age where they are content to watch the same show or movie over, and over, and over again. I remember those toddler and preschool fixations as if they were yesterday (weren’t they just yesterday??), and I remember wanting to lie down in the driveway and figure out how to run myself over with the car, rather than watch that same video again.

But I have a confession to make. If I have a sick child or two home from school, I will almost always suggest that we watch Toy Stoy 2. I don’t really know why. It just seems so comforting; a movie we can recite most of the lines from without a second thought, and a story that makes me laugh every single time. Oh, and I guess the kids like it, too.

If you have the same sort of soft spot in your heart that I have for Bullseye and Jessie and the rest of the Toy Story 2 gang, you can’t miss the two-part interview with Floyd Norman that’s running over at Jim Hill Media.

Part One recounts the author’s arrival at the (then barely-known) Pixar Studios, and the decision to make a sequel in the first place. There are some great sketches contained within that segment, too, including the one of Woody and Jessie on the turntable that appears at the top of this article.

Part Two is like a carnival of the movie’s fascinating trivia, complete with pictures. Did you know that the heroine of the movie was originally not Jessie, but one Senorita Cactus? She was… a cactus. Ouch.

Did you know that Toy Story 2 was originally slated to head direct-to-DVD, and therefore the famed Barbie sequence (my absolute favorite part of the movie, hands down) was cut out, only to return once the project was declared a full-fledged feature film?

There’s more—so much more—but I’ve probably spoled enough of it for you. Go read it for yourself. (And just try not to hear “Good-bye! Good-bye! Buh-bye! Good-bye! Are they gone? My cheeks hurt!” in your head while you’re reading.)

There’s a new kid in town; actually, there’s eight new kids in town. They can be found hanging out together on the new Lunchbox Funnies site, and they’re serious about offering something for everyone.

Newsarama’s Chris Arrant has the scoop:

Although some might classify “all ages” as kids only, it’s not: a successful “all ages” title is one that is understandable and enjoyable for people regardless of their age. If it’s something you wouldn’t mind giving to your youngest family member and your oldest, then that’s all ages. “I think there’s a misconception that the term “all-ages” refers only to entertainment aimed at children. All-ages means simply that,” said Butterfly creator Dean Trippe, whose comic is one of the eight series of the new collective.

“It seems like the idea of appealing to the largest possible audience has gone out of favor lately, as mature dramas on television get more and more adult, and simultaneously children’s programming has grown more and more juvenile,” said Trippe. “The cartoonists of Lunchbox Funnies hope to provide quality comics that anyone can enjoy—comics that parents, teachers, and older siblings can enjoy just as much as the children that look up to them. There’s just so little entertainment these days that crosses those boundaries.”

So if you’re in the market for comics you and the kids will enjoy, Lunchbox Funnies should have you covered.

So far, Cow and Buffalo is our favorite, but I feel myself falling for Butterfly based upon this description:

Butterfly stars the optimistic, young sidekick of a sidekick. Butterfly is the sidekick of Birdie, Birdie is the sidekick of Knight-Bat, and Knight-Bat works alone. The strip is a light-hearted parody of superheroes, but clearly done out of a love for the genre.

(Really, who could resist that?)

Silent Kimbly is chock-full of the kind of jokes my son loves best: Visual fun from the sort of misunderstanding a child might have about a figure of speech or other “sounds like” phrase/word, like this cute frame of a mermaid.

The Lunchbox Funnies site also hosts forums in case you have something to say about your favorite strip. And if this is your first experience with some of these animators, be sure to check out the bios to find out who’s who.

And then? Go read them all. With eight to choose from, everyone in your family will be able to find one (or more) that tickles the ol’ funny bone.

Here in the United States, today is the observation of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s life. It’s a wonderful opportunity to sit down with your kids and talk about how and why things have changed over the years, and the people who helped make that happen.

(Alternatively, you can just spend the day looking surprised to see them and exclaiming, “Why aren’t you kids at school?” But that’s less educational, and the joke gets old by the second or third time, anyway.)

Looking for some King resources to start you and the kids off? No problem.

Mary Tsao writes about some resources you might want to check out with your kids, including a pointer to thirteen ways to celebrate the holiday. (My favorite on that list: The pointer to 10 ways to nurture tolerance.)

Fun for your upper-elementary or older child: Fill in the blanks in the “I have a dream” speech.

There’s a whole bunch of stuff for MLK Day over at FamilyEducation.com, much of it marked by age/grade level.

The Seattle Times has put together a nice collection of information and activites, as well.

Enjoy the day off (if you’re off!) and don’t forget to use this as an oppotunity to lecture the kids about how good they’ve got it.

I have been whining about the dearth of good animated films lately for a while now. I want to take my kids to a movie, and I want to like what we see. Lately, I’ve been skipping the cinema trip because I just couldn’t see anything being worth it.

Now Arthur and the Invisibles is opening and I have that familiar sinking feeling. (Go watch the trailer if you’ve been living under a rock and haven’t seen a million commercials for it on TV, already.)

At last glance, the Tomatometer for Arthur was limping along in the 25% range, which means that overall, critics are not impressed. The few who did grant it a thumbs-up seem pretty clear that their opinions go against the tide:

It’s a pretty good picture, albeit a strange one.
—Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune

Admirably blends animation and live-action and has a lot on offer for kids, though adults will probably yawn more than once at the predictable twists and turns of the plot.
—Boyd van Hoeij, europeanfilms.net

Ultimately, Besson has made an interesting, if shaky in places, homage to childhood.
—Monica A. Reyhani, Premiere Magazine

The criticisms of the movie are varied, but I’ve read more than one reviewer complaining that the switches between live-action and animation are disruptive and clunky. This leads us to another bit of new about Arthur that you may find interesting: Cartoon Brew reports that the movie has been disqualified from Oscar consideration. Why? Well, a movie has to be at least 75% animation to qualify in the running for Best Animated Feature, and Arthur fell short on that score.

I wasn’t sure why (or, honestly, if) I should care about this, but Arthur was previewing before the end of the year specifically so that it could be considered amongst the 2006 nominees. Cartoon Brew explains why the news is problematic on a larger scale:

The film’s disqualification will now alter the amount of films that can be nominated. We had 16 eligible features. Now it’s 15. Which means we just lost two nominees. (The rules state that if there are 16 or more eligible movies, there are 5 nominee slots. Less than 16, it’s three).

From the reviews, it didn’t sound as though Arthur had a real shot at an Oscar or even a nomination. But given the rules outlined above and the nominee slots being cut by two-thirds, there’s now also less chance for a fabulous but slightly less-popular feature to garner a nomination, which is a shame.

In the meantime: Do I take the kids to Arthur and the Invisibles even though I know it’s not going to be great? Decisions, decisions….

If you have a child in public school anywhere in the United States, chances are that every few weeks your kid comes home with the latest Scholastic brochure and order form. And there is a (large) part of me that actively detests it when our children are used as pawns by our consumerist society to convince parents to buy! Buy! BUY! stuff. But there is another part of me which is a complete sucker for a good book.

(And with Scholastic, when you buy their books through the school this way, the teachers get credit towards books for the classroom, so it’s just one big educational warm-n-fuzzy win/win situation, and so guess how often I am able to resist buying more books?)

Anyway, it turns out that Scholastic has a really neat section of their web site called Family Matters, which I found by accident a few days ago when I was looking for something to do with my sick kids other than pickling and eating them. I don’t mind telling you that I was instantly and completely smitten. This site is a treasure trove of parental resources.

My original search brought me to 8 Great Sick Day Activities, which may have saved my kids from certain doom. (Honestly, I love them dearly. I do. But by the 4th day of a fever not high enough to make them sleep and not low enough to leave them well, we were all climbing the walls.) From there I went to the entrance for the Have a Wonderful Winter section and soon found myself poking through the Cabin Fever Cures. Later, I became engrossed in the informative calendar. (Did you know that the Newbery Awards will be announced this year on January 22nd? Well, now you do!)

My kids are going back to school tomorrow (praise be). But Family Matters is staying in my bookmarks.

I can’t decide how I feel about this; on the one hand, I love the animation style of the cartoon Avatar, and would love to see feature-length animated movies. On the other, how awesome might the live-action version be? If it’s done properly, one might argue it could be Very Awesome Indeed.

(Full disclaimer: I say this as a woman who read and loved the Harry Potter books, and fully intended to hate the movies. I don’t hate them. They’re different than the books, sure, but quite marvelous in their own right.)

And—most importantly, because I am nothing if not self-serving—I suspect live-action films may have a larger draw than animated ones, which means the goodness that is Avatar can just spread further. And that would be a Very Good Thing Indeed.

Regardless, the first of three planned movies is in the works, and with an impressive director at the helm:

M. Night Shyamalan is making a rare foray into family films with a feature based on a popular animated series on the Nickelodeon kids cable channel.

“Avatar: The Last Airbender,” a series influenced by Asian art, mythology and fighting styles, has attracted an audience beyond Nickelodeon’s usual 6-11 demographic.

Shyamalan will write, direct and produce the live-action adaptation for Paramount Pictures’ MTV Films and Nick Movies. They hope it will turn into a three-picture series with Shyamalan’s continuing involvement.

The project marks the first time that Shyamalan, who is known for crafting original screenplays, will direct material he didn’t create. His last children’s film was 1999’s “Stuart Little,” which he co-wrote.

Shyamalan co-wrote Stuart Little? How did I not know that? And here I was thinking he was the perfect choice because he’ll keep it dark and creepy, but apparently he can keep it dark and creepy and silly and kid-friendly, if needed. Bonus!

Is it wrong of me to hope that an Avatar movie brings us some additional Avatar merchandise? My son wants all manner of obscure items he’s seen on the TV show, most of which don’t actually exist as toys. (I don’t dare show him that Lego is now making Avatar sets….)

Sorry, I got off on my own little tangent there. Ahem. Anyway! The course of the true Avatar ne’er did run smooth, it appears:

Because James Cameron also is about to film a new project titled “Avatar,” the films could end up in a showdown over their titles. Cameron’s camp said he began his “Avatar” screenplay 12 years ago. Both camps say they have registered the title with the Motion Picture Assn. of America.

How does something like that get resolved, anyway? Is there some approved method of film association smackdown where the creative teams go head-to-head to determine who gets to own the title? What else could you call this movie, anyway? Aang: The Last Airbender could work, maybe, but rabid fans everywhere would complain, I’m sure. Me, I don’t care what they call it.

I just want to see what sort of effects they’ll use to make a realistic, live-action Appa. (And maybe a small part of me wants to see some bald kid tattooed with a glowing arrow on his head, too. Don’t judge me.)

… and I’m loving it.

As you can see from the illustration to the side (borrowed from his excellent blog), Dan Santat is a whimsical illustrator. I am all about the cartoon animators whose style is just plain fun, and Santat delivers on that score, absolutely. He’s also a writer/creator in his own right for both television and print.

I first came across his work when the Disney Channel debuted their new series The Replacements this past September. My kids assured me that Todd and Riley (the show’s featured siblings) were “so funny,” and I had to agree. If you haven’t seen the show yet (and why haven’t you?), here’s a brief synopsis:

The Replacements follows the adventures of two siblings named Todd and Riley. One day while cleaning up their orphanage (as it defines in the theme song), they find a comic book with an ad by a company named Fleemco. The ad states that for only $1.98 any person will get access to ‘the replacements,’ people that replace current adults in the life of whomever needs or wants it. Todd and Riley get new parents from Fleemco. Their father is Dick Daring, a world famous stuntman, and their mother is Agent K, a British super-spy.

Naturally, I was pleased to read yesterday that The Replacements has been approved for a second season, and the news prompted me to go visit Santat’s aforementioned blog and realize that this is a very busy man. How have I previously missed all of the neat stuff he’s working on? Where have I been? (Answer: Possibly raising my children and working, but that’s neither here nor there.)

In addition to writing and illustrating Guild of Genuises—a lauded title that I will be adding to our library as soon as possible—he’s been illustrating The Secret Life of Walter Kitty and the Otto Undercover series of books by Rhea Perlman. (Yeah. That Rhea Perlman.)

I’m just so delighted to have found his quirky style outside of the television, and suspect my kids and I will soon be Guild and Otto devotees.

Go on, check out Dan Santat. I dare you to watch or read his work and not feel cheerful.

It was only a matter of time, and now it’s fast becoming reality: Yesterday Verizon announced V Cast Mobile TV:

The service, which works off of QUALCOMM’s MediaFLO technology, works like a dedicated broadcast network, delivering a television signals only to devices equipped with a MediaFLO receiver. The picture is about normal broadcast quality, almost 30 frames per second. V Cast TV will not interfere with regular phone and data service.

[…]

Verizon said the service will debut sometime this quarter in major markets. Pricing hasn’t been set. But Verizon said it’s lined up content from CBS, Fox, NBC and MTV’s family of channels including Nickelodeon and Comedy Central.

The service will debut on two phones, one from Samsung and the VX 9400 from LG. Both will have dedicated television keys and will sport screens that can be viewed in landscape form.

Remember when Nokia announced plans to make Cartoon Network shows downloadable and I wasn’t sure how I felt about that? Well, I’m suddenly feeling a bit of deja vu, albeit on a grander scale, this time.

A bit of poking around revealed this additional bit:

Verizon also announced an upgrade to its FIOS digital television service that will let users use their cell phone to program their home digital video recorders, change parental controls and perform other functions.

There’s that feeling, again. Hmmm. I wonder why. I just can’t put my finger on it….

Basically, Verizon is working on making sure that you can entertain yourself with your cell phone at any time, anywhere. Forget being able to call 911 in an emergency; what would you pay for the ability to catch the latest episode of your kids’ favorite show even if you’re stuck in traffic? What would you pay to be able to punch up a good show while the kids spin in circles during a particularly long wait at the doctor’s office, or the DMV?

For me, that’s actually what it comes down to. For all my inclination to start waving my hands and prefacing everything with “kids today have it too easy!” I really do think this is exciting technology. But I wonder what the cost will be. And I’m not even sure what I think would be reasonable. But if Verizon offered me unlimited viewing for an additional $5/month that would be very different than shows that are $5/apiece, you know?

I guess that time will tell. In the meantime, I think I’ll continue enjoying watching cartoons on a screen larger than 2.5″ square.

I hate it when a new movie is coming out and I see the commercials and get sort of excited about it and then the reviews are kind of lousy.

I hate it more when a new movie is coming out and I see the commercials and my kids get really excited about it and then the reviews are universally disgusted that this piece of tripe was ever allowed to make it to the theaters.

I’m a little grumpy right now.

Listen, Happily N’Ever After didn’t have to do much. It has a stellar cast, including one of my very favorite actors (Wallace Shawn, if you must know, who first won me over as Vizzini and then sealed the deal in Toy Story as Rex). I haven’t been out to the movies in a while. It’s January, and we’re in post-holiday letdown mode. Basically, all this movie has to do is be okay to win my approval, at this point.

But it’s not looking like that’s going to happen.

Listen, I have been consulting Rotten Tomatoes for movie reviews for a long time, and I have never, ever, seen a movie rate so low.

“How low is it, Toy Box Mommy?”

I’m so glad you asked. Currently, the aggregated reviews for Happily are hovering at… 7% favorable, 93% thumbs down. That’s… that’s… appalling. Hideous. Inconceivable, as Vizzini might say.

And the things reviewers are saying about it. I feel embarrassed that I was even thinking about going to check it out.

The press notes boast that the total production time was only 15 months, ‘unheard of for a first-class computer animated movie.’ Maybe there’s a reason why that’s unheard-of.
—Gregory Kirschling, Entertainment Weekly

In terms of lasting, satisfying flavor, Happily N’Ever After falls somewhere between cardboard and tofu.
—Matt Pais, Metromix.com

Compared to the best movies of its kind (Shrek), Happily N’Ever After is insipid. Compared to mediocre ones (Hoodwinked!), it’s not very good, either.
—Frank Swietek, One Guy’s Opinion

Sheesh. I guess I’ll just be firing up the DVD player and popping some popcorn here at home. Have a great weekend! (And remember, friends don’t let friends take their kids to really atrocious movies.)

I don’t know if it’s something in the water down there or what, but Australia seems to all of a sudden be churning out popular kids’ bands faster than any other country on the planet. First The Wiggles, then Hi-5 (although the group most of us enjoy today in the U.S. is not the Australian original, the inception took place Down Under), and now The Funkees.

What’s a Funkee, you ask? Behold:

They’re a little bit American Idol and a little bit Techno and a whole lot of kid-friendly with that elusive feels-like-the-big-kids’-music vibe that will make them irresistible to the ankle-biting set and their older siblings (and parents) alike.

The Funkees’ pet charity, the McGuiness McDermott Foundation (located in the band’s hometown of Adelaide), profiled them this way:

Imagination Entertainment CEO Shane Yeend has great faith in the foursome saying “The Funkees will just fit into today’s market better because they are edgier and kids like that. They are set to become a child’s first pop band, but will still cover all the learning and educational aspects”

The four band members are all from Adelaide – Lauren D’Costa (Poppi), Ricky Spears (Turbo), Aaron Collis (Disco D) and Sarah Lloyd (Roxee) and they have some very talented professional support including stylist and body painter Emma Hack and fashion designer Razak.

The official web site has all sorts of bright, shiny tidbits about the group (but it also talks to you when you mouse over things, which makes me twitch a little), and for the truly devoted fans, the Funkees Freebies page has desktop wallpaper, coloring pages, and even an online Memory-type card matching game for your little one to play.

And—of course—the only place in North America to get your Funkees’ CDs and DVDs is at the Ty’s Toy Box Funkees Store, so unless you’re planning to be in Adelaide, you might want to check it out.

(For now, my Vegemite-consumption-leads-to-children’s-music theory is still unproven, but new research may prove The Funkees and their predecessors are linked to yeasty sandwich spreads, yet.)