Photos: Ebay Goodies – Pro-Curler (1930s) by Nancy

New gadget, new gadget! Okay so not exactly new, but kind of new? As in new to me. It’s patent dates to 1936 which means it’s likely from the late 30s. In great working condition, the box is in such good condition that it’s in better shape than the box my latest lipstick came in (in my defense, I’m extremely lazy and untidy at times).

Got her for about 13 bucks on eBay and she arrived within days. I’ve tried her out twice, both times with good results but I’ve just cut my hair (too) short and it may take some growing out before I can do any photo taking with the curls in.

Anyone have good/bad experiences with Pro-Curler? Any tips?

Updates: The Whereabouts Of The Mysterious Miss Ramirez by Nancy

I tend to go on unannounced walkabouts, which is obvious by now if you’ve followed ReproGoddess at all. I blog quite a bit when I have down time, which is rare, but then I go byebye for several weeks. What is it that I’m doing? Where do I go? The answer will shock and amaze you! Because it is *so* boring.

Since my re-entry to the Vintage community this week I’ve had quite a few questions as to where my butt’s been, considering I’m a bit hard to track down I thought I’d answer the question because it gives me reason to gush shamelessly about the projects that I’m involved with right now.

Sugar Push Media: As well as a few other MC’s from the lovely world of vintage life radio across the airwaves, I’ve been brought on board to help bring about The Sugar Push. Both the magazine (The Sugar Push) and the radio show (Sugar Push Live) if it ever gets off the ground. Currently I’m involved in helping to book the interviews for the first issue of the magazine and trying to hunt down fun stories and products. It takes up loads of time, but it’s a swell time meeting great folks!

The Vintage Lifestyle Hour: The show is getting it’s own website, which I am currently working on and getting it put up on the web instead of rotting away on my hard drive.

The Walking Dead & Mad Men: This isn’t a project of mine, but these shows do explain my absence the rest of the time!

Photos: First Look at ‘Lawless’ aka The Wettest County in the World by Nancy

I’m not sure how many know about this film, but I’ve been on pins and needles for well over a year since the adaption was announced (then cancelled, then announced with new financial backing).

I’m a big fan of both Tom Hardy and Shia LaBeouf already, but the chance to see them both in a period drama about real life bootleggers is something I can’t pass up. I’m posting about it today because the film, which was just gifted the name ‘Lawless‘, has it’s first official photo released in this scan from Entertainment Weekly:

It was hailed at Cannes last year with both lead actors already being talked up as Oscar threats – I can’t wait to see it when it premieres in August!

Video: ‘On The Road’ by Jack Kerouac Film Trailer by Nancy

I love this book. I adore it. I’m a raving Kerouac fan – you could say that I shamble after Sal Paradise the way he always shambled after people who interested him. So, of course, I was and am dead set against this film being made this way.

Now, there are a lot of reasons – one, I think that most of the acting cast are wrong considering that the book’s cast of characters aren’t just based on Kerouac and his genius/idiot friends, the original scroll actually used their names, names you’re probably familiar with if you’re a fan of ‘beat’ literature: Jack Kerouac (Sal Paradise), Joan Vollmer (Jane), William S. Burroughs (Old Bull Lee), Neal Cassady (Dean Moriarty), Carolyn Cassady (Camille), Allen Ginsberg (Carlo Marx), Luanne Henderson (Marylou), Hal Chase (Chad King) and a dozen more.

Hal Chase, Jack Kerouac, Allen Ginsberg and William Burroughs in the 1940s

Because of this alone I think the casting should be re-thought and cast, instead, for the real person each character was meant to portray. It’s absolutely annoying that they’ve made the film this way, add that to the fact that the trailer, below, suggests that the 1940s escapades happened in the late 1950s – somehow.

But, strangely, I’m compelled to rethink my argument. While I already hate the film, because it looks stupid, pretentious and *wrong*, it’s still a film I haven’t seen. And, as any avid reader knows, if you grow up with a book that’s adapted for the screen you already have a clear picture in your mind of the characters and no casting will do it justice.

I’ll likely see it, because I think you need to give something a shot before dismissing it (though I was right about hating Twilight, Ringer, The Vampire Diaries, The Secret Circle and Jersey Shore – granted, that last one was a given) and try to go into it with an open mind. I guarantee I’ll be back to bitch my head off about it, though!