...and tell us, Beck does, in this sublime mix of hip hop, alternative, country, jazz, rock and pop, with even a Beatle-ish Sgt. Pepper homage tacked to the very end.

Critics of Odelay accuse Beck of being overly indulgent and WAY-overly derivative, but isn't that the whole point of the CD? Beck has stolen the key to Fun Factory and is determined to play with every toy in the building before security throws him out.

Over 13 tracks, Beck (with a big assist from the Dust Brothers) treats us to a music mixer's wet dream, from the chronically hook-y ("Devils Haircut," "The New Pollution," "Where It's At") to the startlingly touching ("Jack-Ass," "Ramshackle") to the just plain silly ("Sissyneck").

Odelay holds its place as one of the essential CD's of the 90's. Years later it still continues to entertain and excite. This is a joyous celebration of music, period . . . and Beck's best album by far.

In this very fine greatest hits package, Lonesome George demonstrates exactly why his best songs became a staple of FM rock and karaoke bars everywhere. Turn the volume up to 11 on hits like "Bad to the Bone", "I Drink Alone", "One Bourbon, One Scotch, One Beer" and "Who Do You Love?" (the original, not the overslick, lifeless remix) and you'll blow the roof off of every gin joint in town.

The rest of the disc, however, may leave you wanting more unless your a hardcore GT fan. "Madison Blues", "If You Don't Start Drinkin'" and "Get a Haircut" are good fun, but Thorogood treats "Willie & the Hand Jive" like a throwaway and likewise goes through the motions on "You Talk to Much" and "American Made", the weakest song on the CD.

The back to back live tracks, "The Sky is Crying" and "Reelin & Rockin'" point out Thorogood's biggest weakness and best strength. His balls-to-the-wall approach, though heartfelt, hurts a song like "Sky" which requires more subtlety. "Reelin'" though, is the type of all out party song Thorogood excells at.

Devoted Thorogood fans will not be disappointed by this CD. Newbies to his music, however, may get lost once they get past his biggest hits.

We can debate the religious subtext of "The Da Vinci Code" ad nauseum (and I'll admit that's what got me interested in reading the book to begin with), but it doesn't change the fact that this book is simply not very good. The characters are thinly drawn and the events and coincidences that bring them together are ridiculously contrived. I could never accept that a man dying from a bullet wound would have the physical ability and presence of mind to set up an elaborate series of clues to reveal a centuries-old conspiracy. Dan Brown asks readers to take many plot-oriented leaps of faith in "The Da Vinci Code". I couldn't do it.

One other plot question: Since so many "experts" seemed to know the true nature of the Holy Grail, why was locating it such a big deal? How can there be a "conspiracy" to protect an ancient secret if everybody's already in on it?

I found "The Da Vinci Code" to be a literary "Blair Witch Project". The backstory was interesting enough, but the plot woven around it fell flat.

And so, "The Matrix Revolutions" brings the trilogy to a close (or does it? See the title above). For those who are passionate about the first movie--and there are many, judging from the reviews posted--"Reloaded" and "Revolutions" managed to align you in one of the following two camps:

1. You bought into the pop philosophy that is "The Matrix", reveled in the "more questions asked than answered" mentality of "Reloaded", and rejoiced in the religious allegory of "Revolutions".

--or--

2. "The Matrix" created this incredible alternative reality but, "huh?, what happened?".

Please allow me to set up my camp somewhere in between.

First, I was totally entertained by "Revolutions". Good pacing, incredible action, jaw-dropping CGI effects (although I am feeling "bullet-timed" to death lately). Did it, however, wrap everything up in a nice tidy bundle and explain what the hell actually happened?

Not really ... but I don't think that's a bad thing.

*****SPOILER ALERT (oh hell, you've all seen the movie--why do I bother?)*****

The Wachowskis finished the Matrix trilogy in the same manner they started it, by making us question our perceptions of reality (or, at least, the Matrix reality anyway). Did Neo die? Was he working for the machines or against them? Was the Oracle really his ally? Did he destroy Agent Smith, or did Smith self-destruct when there was nothing left to assimilate?

The ending to "Revolutions" had me scratching my head. I expected a neat resolution to all the questions posed in "Reloaded". I didn't get it. But isn't that really what the Wachowskis intended? The Oracle never gave a straight answer. We shouldn't expect Larry and Andy to do the same.

The Matrix Trilogy and, especially "The Matrix Revolutions", is a high-tech pop-culture shoot-em-up sci-fi action-adventure that makes you think, whether you get it or not. For even attempting that, the movie deserves high praise.

And, for what it's worth . . . Keanu Reeves is as exciting as toast, Carrie-Anne Moss is my ultimate cyberpunk fantasy girl, Laurence Fishburne needs to do a few tummy crunches, and Hugo Weaving plays too good a villain to ever be killed off.

So there.

Dark, sinister, and mesmerizing, "The Ring" is the type of old fashioned supernatural thriller that doesn't go for gratuitous violence or gore, but instead opts for crawling inside your head and creeping you out. The story revolves around a newpaper reporter (Naomi Watts) investigating a mysterious videotape that supposedly causes its viewers to die within 7 days of viewing. Attention must be paid--some plot points are hard to follow--but it's well worth the effort. The images from the tape are deeply disturbing, especially when all is revealed by the equally chilling story behind it. I particularly enjoyed the ending, which will appeal to anyone who's ever been sucked in by an urban legend, or heeded the warning of a chain letter.

An unnecessarily graphic and grotesque follow up to "Silence of the Lambs". It jettisons most of the psychological byplay between Lecter and Starling that made "Silence" so good, in favor of "how-can-we-top-this?" graphic violence. By the time it reaches the final "dinner party" scene (I'll spare the details), it's not so much gross as it is ridiculous. Julianne Moore is very good given the thankless task of filling Jodie Foster's shoes as Clarice Starling, but Sir Anthony Hopkins becomes a parody of himself as the titular Hannibal Lecter. It's not his fault, mind you. Thomas Harris and Ridley Scott just forgot that what made Hannibal the Cannibal so menacing was not seeing what he did so much as imagining what he could do.

A movie that, considering it's ample star power, should've been so much better. Brad Pitt is charming enough, but Julia Roberts is at her most annoyingly strident. Only James Gandolfini makes the movie shine as the complex, deep-thinking hitman. When he wasn't on-screen, I found myself checking my watch.

After "The Limey", "Erin Brockovich", and now "Traffic", is there any question about Steven Soderbergh's place as one of cinema's top directors? Intelligent, complex, and stylish, "Traffic" weaves multiple storylines together about America's drug trade, where the good guys aren't always good, the bad guys aren't always bad, and every character does what he/she needs to do to survive. Benicio Del Toro, with his soulful eyes and world-weary demeanor, is a revelation as Javier Rodriguez, the Mexican cop teetering precariously between what is legal and what is right. Also strong are Don Cheadle as a bulldog-tenacious DEA agent, and Catherine Zeta-Jones as the drug kingpin's wife who'll do anything to protect her family and her lifestyle. My only minor quibble with "Traffic" concerns a subplot about "Drug Czar" Michael Douglas's drug addicted daughter that tap-dances dangerously close to "Lifetime" territory. Douglas redeems it at the end, though, with a final, heart-wrenching moral stand at a White House press conference. "Traffic", hands down, was the best film of 2000.

What a waste of time and money. "Meet the Parents" is a painfully UNfunny film only slightly redeemed by Robert DeNiro parodying his traditional "tough guy" role--who wouldn't be intimidated to have him as a father-in-law? Ben Stiller proves again, however, that he A) can't select good material to star in or B) is a terribly overrated talent. Pass.

A one-joke movie, but in the hands of Mel Gibson, a very enjoyable joke. Mel gets the power to read women's minds, and uses it to romantically pursue and professionally undermine the perky-as-usual Helen Hunt. Pure entertaining fluff.