Friday, November 30, 2007
Bob Sanders had his cake, and he ate it too
More Bob Sanders facts can be found here...via Stampede Blue.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
"New Frontier" press release and images
BURBANK, CA, (November 27, 2007) - Warner Premiere, DC Comics and Warner Bros. Animation are set to release the all-new original movie Justice League: The New Frontier on February 26, 2008 on DVD, HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc, distributed by Warner Home Video. The original movie will also be available OnDemand and Pay-per-View as well as available for download on February 26, 2008.
Based on the graphic novel by Darwyn Cooke and produced by Michael Goguen and animation legend, Bruce Timm, Justice League: The New Frontier is the epic tale of the founding of the Justice League. The animated film, written by Stan Berkowitz, features an incredible celebrity-laden voice cast including David Boreanaz, Brooke Shields, Lucy Lawless, Neil Patrick Harris, Miguel Ferrer, Kyra Sedgwick, Jeremy Sisto and Kyle MacLachlan and will be available on DVD for $19.98 SRP. There will also be a 2 disc Special Edition DVD available for $24.98 SRP which contains additional bonus features including a documentary about the pathology of the super villain and three bonus episodes from the Justice League animated series selected by Bruce Timm. All the content from the 2-disc Special Edition DVD will be available on HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc.
The New Frontier takes viewers on an action-packed adventure, exploring the origins of the Justice League. DC Comics legends Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are all featured in the film as well as Green Lantern, Martian Manhunter and The Flash - as they band together to form the legendary super team. Strangers at first, these very different heroes must overcome fear and suspicion to forge an alliance against a monster so formidable, even the mighty Superman cannot stop it alone. If they fail, the entire planet will be "cleansed" of humanity.
Justice League: The New Frontier DVD will feature incredible extras including: "Super Heroes United!: The Complete Justice League History"- The documentary is a comprehensive forty seven year Justice League chronology from the inception in the comics to vivid animated renditions. The story is told with a myriad of interviews tracing back the early days of DC Super Hero team ups during the Golden Age, to the Silver Age rendition where the established heroes emerged and beyond. Interviews include Paul Levitz (President of DC Comics), Dan Didio (SVP Executive Editor at DC Comics), Michael Uslan (Historian), Gregory Noveck (SVP Creative Affairs DC Comics), Mark Waid (DC Comics Historian and Writer), Mike Friedrich (Writer JLU), Denny O'Neil (Writer and Editor at DC Comics), Mike Carlin (DC Comics Executive Editor), Stan Lee (Marvel Comics Co-Creator) and Marv Wolfman (Writer of Fantastic Four).
"Sneak Peak: Batman: Gotham Knight" - One part anime, one part Caped Crusader, the result is a glimpse at the world of Eastern anime sensibilities combined with a Western tradition of Batman. A detailed look at the world of Warner Bros Animation, and how they joined forces with the renowned Japanese animators to create the highly anticipated anime film of 2008.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Batman...not dead
Apparently DC Comics has come to their senses with regard to killing off Bruce Wayne and making him a New God...while one of the Robins would take over being Batman.
Via Comic Book Resources (by Rich Johnston)
That was another thing...why would you kill off Batman when The Dark Knight is getting released next summer. Bad Timing...simply...bad idea. Thank goodness it is not happing...not that I was losing any sleep over it...yet.
Via Comic Book Resources (by Rich Johnston)
Oh and Dead Batman/Todd Batman/God Bruce Wayne? So not happening. You can still expect a status-challenging new scenario, still expect Alex Ross covers and designs, still expect some intricately complex yet instantly entertaining Morrisonia, just, expect something else. Did Internet reaction affect this? Not one jot it seems. All decisions are taking place at a much higher level, and Warner Bros. have made their feelings known.
That was another thing...why would you kill off Batman when The Dark Knight is getting released next summer. Bad Timing...simply...bad idea. Thank goodness it is not happing...not that I was losing any sleep over it...yet.
Monday, November 26, 2007
"Bee Movie" movie review
We continue our look at films already in the cineplexes. This week it is the animated adventure, Bee Movie. Produced and co-written by Jerry Seinfeld, Bee Movie tells the tale of a young bee, named Barry, who dreams of life outside the hive. Getting his wish, Barry soon learns that humans are abusing bees to get their honey. So what does Barry do? He sues the human race. Lending their voices to the project are Seinfeld, Renee Zellweger, Matthew Broderick and John Goodman.
Andy: Bee Movie is a strange animated feature. It doesn't seem to be committed to targeting children or adults so it ends up reaching neither very well. It is a cartoon about talking bees and it is rated PG, so it seems like a kids movie. But most of the dialogue and plot seem pointed directly at the adults. The result is that the concept of the film, much like the plot, remains disjointed and unclear throughout the duration of the movie.
Ryan: For the most part, Bee Movie is a pretty entertaining animated feature. The movie is not a Pixar classic but it's better than a majority of animated films that get released. I agree with Andy's sentiment that Bee Movie is not a typical animated movie. A movie like Shrek is geared towards kids but contains many allusions that appeal to adults. Bee Movie has a large number of allusions that appeal to adults but unlike Shrek, Bee Movie's narrative is aimed at adults with a story filled with lawsuits and a trial. A great number of kids will like the movie because it looks great but they are not going to get what the movie is about even on the literal level.
Andy: Animated, anthropomorphized, animal, adventure movies often have an underlying message that allows the movie to be read as an allegory or at the very least an extended metaphor. Reading Bee Movie in this way leads to questionable conclusions. The bees discover that the dominant culture (humans) is taking their product (honey) with little or no compensation. After an attempt to rectify this injustice is made, the entire ecosystem begins to fall apart, and the bees realize that they were happier when they were making honey for the humans. So the lesson here is its okay for a dominant culture to exploit an entire class of workers because that is the natural order of things. In fact, that's what the workers want.
Ryan: The biggest problem with the film's conclusion is how unclear it is. Because of that one could make case for Andy's argument in terms of the film's message. I don't 100% agree with his argument but I do see how one could think that. One could read the film's resolution that has Barry (the bee) and Vanessa (the human florist) in business together as a harmonious balance between bee and human. Whether one thinks that or not, ultimately the loose ends of the plot are not clearly spelled out. Because of that, the movie ends on a choppy note.
Andy: Bee Movie was uneven, disjointed, and had a plot that was not particularly enjoyable to watch. However, there were several moments in the movie that were brilliant, laugh-out-loud funny on the scale of Seinfeld's best television shows. So in spite of its shortcomings elsewhere, Bee Movie is funny enough that it ends up being a pretty decent movie.
Ryan: With Seinfeld's involvement, it is no surprise that Bee Movie has quite a few funny moments. I found myself laughing quite a bit-- more so than with most animated features. The movie is quite heavy with it's dialogue and while I found that enjoyable I don't think many young kids will. Also enhancing the film is the voice work especially that of Zellweger's. In this case she seems to be really into the voice work and does a stupendous job with it.
Bee Movie is not the most consistent animated feature but it is a charming film for both kids and adults. Final grade: B-.
Andy: Bee Movie is a strange animated feature. It doesn't seem to be committed to targeting children or adults so it ends up reaching neither very well. It is a cartoon about talking bees and it is rated PG, so it seems like a kids movie. But most of the dialogue and plot seem pointed directly at the adults. The result is that the concept of the film, much like the plot, remains disjointed and unclear throughout the duration of the movie.
Ryan: For the most part, Bee Movie is a pretty entertaining animated feature. The movie is not a Pixar classic but it's better than a majority of animated films that get released. I agree with Andy's sentiment that Bee Movie is not a typical animated movie. A movie like Shrek is geared towards kids but contains many allusions that appeal to adults. Bee Movie has a large number of allusions that appeal to adults but unlike Shrek, Bee Movie's narrative is aimed at adults with a story filled with lawsuits and a trial. A great number of kids will like the movie because it looks great but they are not going to get what the movie is about even on the literal level.
Andy: Animated, anthropomorphized, animal, adventure movies often have an underlying message that allows the movie to be read as an allegory or at the very least an extended metaphor. Reading Bee Movie in this way leads to questionable conclusions. The bees discover that the dominant culture (humans) is taking their product (honey) with little or no compensation. After an attempt to rectify this injustice is made, the entire ecosystem begins to fall apart, and the bees realize that they were happier when they were making honey for the humans. So the lesson here is its okay for a dominant culture to exploit an entire class of workers because that is the natural order of things. In fact, that's what the workers want.
Ryan: The biggest problem with the film's conclusion is how unclear it is. Because of that one could make case for Andy's argument in terms of the film's message. I don't 100% agree with his argument but I do see how one could think that. One could read the film's resolution that has Barry (the bee) and Vanessa (the human florist) in business together as a harmonious balance between bee and human. Whether one thinks that or not, ultimately the loose ends of the plot are not clearly spelled out. Because of that, the movie ends on a choppy note.
Andy: Bee Movie was uneven, disjointed, and had a plot that was not particularly enjoyable to watch. However, there were several moments in the movie that were brilliant, laugh-out-loud funny on the scale of Seinfeld's best television shows. So in spite of its shortcomings elsewhere, Bee Movie is funny enough that it ends up being a pretty decent movie.
Ryan: With Seinfeld's involvement, it is no surprise that Bee Movie has quite a few funny moments. I found myself laughing quite a bit-- more so than with most animated features. The movie is quite heavy with it's dialogue and while I found that enjoyable I don't think many young kids will. Also enhancing the film is the voice work especially that of Zellweger's. In this case she seems to be really into the voice work and does a stupendous job with it.
Bee Movie is not the most consistent animated feature but it is a charming film for both kids and adults. Final grade: B-.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Friday, November 23, 2007
Top 25 Albums from the past 25 years.
For those not aware WTTS (92.3) out of Bloomington is a Independently owned radio station. In essence that should make them cool but unfortunately it doesn't (much of the time). I will admit that it is the best station in the Indianapolis area (Doesn't say much for the Indianapolis radio scene). WTTS frustrates a great number of people because the station could be on the cutting edge of the modern rock music scene but they seem to be content to be a mindless mainstream “wuss” rock station.
Several days ago they revealed their list of the top 25 albums from the past 25 years (based on 92.3 VIP listeners). Check out the list and come back for my take.
Commentary below...
1. Legitimately they have nine albums (“Yankee Hotel Foxtrot”, “OK Computer”, “Automatic for the People”, “Purple Rain”, “A Rush of Blood to the Head”, “Graceland”, “Born in the USA”, “Nevermind” and “The Joshua Tree”) on the list that definitely lend credibility to their objective. I haven't been “all about” some of those above mentioned albums but I do respect them or more importantly respect the musical tastes of those people (or critics) that are into them. I will have to say that having a third of the list being legitimate was a pleasant surprise.
2. This is Coug Country so I don't have a problem with him having Scarecrow on the list. I can buy that.
3. The following classic rock albums (Peter Gabriel's “So”, Dire Straits' “Brothers in Arms” and The Police's “Synchronicity”) wouldn't make my list but they aren't bad choices for this particular viewing audience. They could have been a lot worse (Tonic or Collective Soul)
4. “Eric Clapton Unplugged”...I'm sorry but Clapton is arguable the most overrated rock artist of all time. I know personal tragedy is a key theme on the album...and I don't mean to be a dick...but that in itself doesn't automatically make for a great piece of work. It doesn't belong on the list or any list of “best albums.” When rock icons (allegedly) go sappy...the results normally aren't that awesome.
5. Let me see...which artist (or band) have two albums on the list...Springsteen...No. U2...No. REM....No. Nirvana....No. Prince...No. Oh wait...John Mayer and Dave Matthews Band. WTF....let me repeat that WTF!. This is why WTTS stinks so much of the time. I have no idea what about these two artists that is so appealing. Seriously...I don't get it. I guess people are into Dave because his music is “different”...I don't know...I just find it uninspiring and boring to listen to (which is problematic for a song). There's a few John Mayer songs that I don't mind but most of his songs are so “soft-rock” that I just can't handle it.
6. I never know what to make of Pearl Jam. Sometimes I'm into them...and sometimes I'm not. Sometimes I think there place in rock and roll history is overrated...and sometimes I think it isn't. I was never into Pearl Jam when they broke so I have no personal history or connection with them. I will definitely say that I don't have a problem with “Ten” being on the list but there is no way that it should be number 2. I do know that.
7. More WTF...Counting Crows, “August and Everything After” at number 3. Wow. That has me at a loss of words.
8. Including such albums by David Gray, Norah Jones and Alanis Morisette isn't to surprising considering that they play these artists incessantly. I don't dislike these artists but they only reinforce the notion of the station being wussy or catering to an audience that likes wuss-rock.
Ultimately, the list isn't half bad. It is hard to argue with “The Joshua Tree” not being number 1. I can buy that. Like I said before about a third of list is quite legit. Of course there were several head-scratching...WTF selections. That is to be expected.
There is one big omission from the list but really the album doesn't fit into WTTS's format. But come on... any list of the best albums from the past 25 years has to include this album.
Several days ago they revealed their list of the top 25 albums from the past 25 years (based on 92.3 VIP listeners). Check out the list and come back for my take.
Commentary below...
1. Legitimately they have nine albums (“Yankee Hotel Foxtrot”, “OK Computer”, “Automatic for the People”, “Purple Rain”, “A Rush of Blood to the Head”, “Graceland”, “Born in the USA”, “Nevermind” and “The Joshua Tree”) on the list that definitely lend credibility to their objective. I haven't been “all about” some of those above mentioned albums but I do respect them or more importantly respect the musical tastes of those people (or critics) that are into them. I will have to say that having a third of the list being legitimate was a pleasant surprise.
2. This is Coug Country so I don't have a problem with him having Scarecrow on the list. I can buy that.
3. The following classic rock albums (Peter Gabriel's “So”, Dire Straits' “Brothers in Arms” and The Police's “Synchronicity”) wouldn't make my list but they aren't bad choices for this particular viewing audience. They could have been a lot worse (Tonic or Collective Soul)
4. “Eric Clapton Unplugged”...I'm sorry but Clapton is arguable the most overrated rock artist of all time. I know personal tragedy is a key theme on the album...and I don't mean to be a dick...but that in itself doesn't automatically make for a great piece of work. It doesn't belong on the list or any list of “best albums.” When rock icons (allegedly) go sappy...the results normally aren't that awesome.
5. Let me see...which artist (or band) have two albums on the list...Springsteen...No. U2...No. REM....No. Nirvana....No. Prince...No. Oh wait...John Mayer and Dave Matthews Band. WTF....let me repeat that WTF!. This is why WTTS stinks so much of the time. I have no idea what about these two artists that is so appealing. Seriously...I don't get it. I guess people are into Dave because his music is “different”...I don't know...I just find it uninspiring and boring to listen to (which is problematic for a song). There's a few John Mayer songs that I don't mind but most of his songs are so “soft-rock” that I just can't handle it.
6. I never know what to make of Pearl Jam. Sometimes I'm into them...and sometimes I'm not. Sometimes I think there place in rock and roll history is overrated...and sometimes I think it isn't. I was never into Pearl Jam when they broke so I have no personal history or connection with them. I will definitely say that I don't have a problem with “Ten” being on the list but there is no way that it should be number 2. I do know that.
7. More WTF...Counting Crows, “August and Everything After” at number 3. Wow. That has me at a loss of words.
8. Including such albums by David Gray, Norah Jones and Alanis Morisette isn't to surprising considering that they play these artists incessantly. I don't dislike these artists but they only reinforce the notion of the station being wussy or catering to an audience that likes wuss-rock.
Ultimately, the list isn't half bad. It is hard to argue with “The Joshua Tree” not being number 1. I can buy that. Like I said before about a third of list is quite legit. Of course there were several head-scratching...WTF selections. That is to be expected.
There is one big omission from the list but really the album doesn't fit into WTTS's format. But come on... any list of the best albums from the past 25 years has to include this album.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
"Walk Hard" red band Trailer
I'll admit when I saw a trailer for Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox story in the theatre a few weeks ago I wasn't overly optimistic that the movie was going to be any good. That was too bad because I really like (and who doesn't) John C. Reilly.
Here's the red band trailer for the movie and things are looking up. I'm still not convinced that it's going to be a comedic gem but there is definitely potential.
Here's the red band trailer for the movie and things are looking up. I'm still not convinced that it's going to be a comedic gem but there is definitely potential.
Moorehead out...Klecko back in!
Via the indystar.com
This is pretty good news. Not to be mean but Moorehead was borderline worthless on offense.
It is good to see Klecko back. He rocks.
Aaron Moorehead's season is over. The Indianapolis Colts placed their veteran wide receiver on the injured reserve list with a back injury.
Moorehead, who's been a backup receiver since signing as an undrafted rookie in 2003, has been bothered by an unspecified back ailment much of the season. That situation was exacerbated in Sunday's win over Kansas City when he was hit in the back while attempting to catch a high pass from quarterback Peyton Manning.
The team filled Moorehead's spot on the active roster by re-signing veteran defensive tackle Dan Klecko. Klecko was waived last week to make room on the active roster for offensive tackle Corey Hilliard.
This is pretty good news. Not to be mean but Moorehead was borderline worthless on offense.
It is good to see Klecko back. He rocks.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
"Lions for Lambs" movie review
This week we take a look at a big movie with quiet box office results so far: Lions For Lambs (PG-13). Robert Redford directs and costars as a college professor who taught two students now serving in Afghanistan. Another plot line shows Meryl Streep as a reporter interviewing a U.S. Senator (Tom Cruise) about the latest foreign policy attempt to win the war on terror.
Ryan: I was surprised at first with how Lions for Lambs has been under performing at the box-office. After all, the movie boasts a cast of legendary stars (Cruise, Streep and Redford). But after seeing the movie I can see why the film has not caught on with an audience. Make no mistake about it, Lions for Lambs is not a bad movie, in fact it is quite engaging at times, but overall the movie is one-sided (to the political left), slightly pretentious and overly preachy. Right away the movie is alienating a conservative audience. Most right-leaning moviegoers are probably going to dismiss the film as liberal propaganda, and while that is not completely accurate, there is some degree of truth to it.
Andy: Dismissing Lions for Lambs as lefty propaganda would be an easy thing to do, but I came away from the movie impressed on a variety of levels. It does seem a bit like its pandering at times (especially in the sequences featuring Redford), but it does not grossly oversimplify the issues as many movies do. It acknowledges the complexities the war on terror and attempts to look at it on three different levels (government, military, citizen). If there is an underlying message, it is that people should be more involved, or at the very least better informed, in the world politics our country is practicing, and it's hard to find fault with that claim.
Ryan: Not only is the movie not going to appeal to conservatives, I don't believe it's going to do much for liberals either. Regrettably the movie is a big let down because it doesn't bring anything new to the table. It adds nothing fresh to our foreign policy discourse. It asks the same old questions and provides no new answers. If this film came out three or four years ago, it would be relevant. But in 2007, it isn't. It's already dated. Considering the talent involved in the film, one would have expected more.
Andy: I wouldn't be so quick to call the film dated, as the number of movies that have come out on these issues using contemporary language and events is actually pretty small, especially from Hollywood. The root of what makes the movie compelling to me is the performance of Tom Cruise. For years Cruise has been playing slick, smooth talking, vaguely likable characters, so it's in some ways surprising that it took him this long to play a politician. His speeches to Meryl Streep about the war on terror are framed by the filmmaker in a way to make us be distrustful of them. But Cruise lays them out logically, passionately, and in a way that a reasonable person would have trouble finding serious fault with. In its failure to seriously answer the question of why we should distrust what he is saying, Lions for Lambs becomes less declarative than it wanted to be, but more complex.
Ryan: Like I said before, there are moments of intrigue in the movie. The film is interconnected with three separate stories and some work better than others. The scenes with Cruise and Streep are the most engrossing and both actors do a superb job with their respected performances. The scene with Redford, as a professor talking to a lackadaisical student, is interesting and provides the real weight of the movie that of getting involved to make a difference. The storyline with the two soldiers is not on the same level of the other two narratives mainly because it is not developed as well as the other two stories.
Overall,though, this is a movie that should have been better than it is. Final grade: C+.
Andy: I'll agree that the story of the two soldiers was in some ways wasted. They are interesting characters portrayed by relatively unknown actors who did a pretty good job (Michael Pena and Derek Luke), but they simply weren't developed enough to hold the weight the film needed them to. It was probably worth having this plot be a little light to avoid the movie pushing much more over two hours, though.
Generally Lions for Lambs only misfires a bit, and is an interesting and entertaining movie. Final grade: B+.
Ryan: I was surprised at first with how Lions for Lambs has been under performing at the box-office. After all, the movie boasts a cast of legendary stars (Cruise, Streep and Redford). But after seeing the movie I can see why the film has not caught on with an audience. Make no mistake about it, Lions for Lambs is not a bad movie, in fact it is quite engaging at times, but overall the movie is one-sided (to the political left), slightly pretentious and overly preachy. Right away the movie is alienating a conservative audience. Most right-leaning moviegoers are probably going to dismiss the film as liberal propaganda, and while that is not completely accurate, there is some degree of truth to it.
Andy: Dismissing Lions for Lambs as lefty propaganda would be an easy thing to do, but I came away from the movie impressed on a variety of levels. It does seem a bit like its pandering at times (especially in the sequences featuring Redford), but it does not grossly oversimplify the issues as many movies do. It acknowledges the complexities the war on terror and attempts to look at it on three different levels (government, military, citizen). If there is an underlying message, it is that people should be more involved, or at the very least better informed, in the world politics our country is practicing, and it's hard to find fault with that claim.
Ryan: Not only is the movie not going to appeal to conservatives, I don't believe it's going to do much for liberals either. Regrettably the movie is a big let down because it doesn't bring anything new to the table. It adds nothing fresh to our foreign policy discourse. It asks the same old questions and provides no new answers. If this film came out three or four years ago, it would be relevant. But in 2007, it isn't. It's already dated. Considering the talent involved in the film, one would have expected more.
Andy: I wouldn't be so quick to call the film dated, as the number of movies that have come out on these issues using contemporary language and events is actually pretty small, especially from Hollywood. The root of what makes the movie compelling to me is the performance of Tom Cruise. For years Cruise has been playing slick, smooth talking, vaguely likable characters, so it's in some ways surprising that it took him this long to play a politician. His speeches to Meryl Streep about the war on terror are framed by the filmmaker in a way to make us be distrustful of them. But Cruise lays them out logically, passionately, and in a way that a reasonable person would have trouble finding serious fault with. In its failure to seriously answer the question of why we should distrust what he is saying, Lions for Lambs becomes less declarative than it wanted to be, but more complex.
Ryan: Like I said before, there are moments of intrigue in the movie. The film is interconnected with three separate stories and some work better than others. The scenes with Cruise and Streep are the most engrossing and both actors do a superb job with their respected performances. The scene with Redford, as a professor talking to a lackadaisical student, is interesting and provides the real weight of the movie that of getting involved to make a difference. The storyline with the two soldiers is not on the same level of the other two narratives mainly because it is not developed as well as the other two stories.
Overall,though, this is a movie that should have been better than it is. Final grade: C+.
Andy: I'll agree that the story of the two soldiers was in some ways wasted. They are interesting characters portrayed by relatively unknown actors who did a pretty good job (Michael Pena and Derek Luke), but they simply weren't developed enough to hold the weight the film needed them to. It was probably worth having this plot be a little light to avoid the movie pushing much more over two hours, though.
Generally Lions for Lambs only misfires a bit, and is an interesting and entertaining movie. Final grade: B+.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Klecko Released by Colts
My wife is upset...the Colts released her favorite Colt, Dan Klecko, today.
Honestly...not much of a surprise (since he rarely plays--even with the rash of injuries)...but he will always be part of Colts history with his touchdown reception in the AFC Championship game last year.
We'll miss you, Klecko.
Honestly...not much of a surprise (since he rarely plays--even with the rash of injuries)...but he will always be part of Colts history with his touchdown reception in the AFC Championship game last year.
We'll miss you, Klecko.
The Death of Batman
That's correct...the internet is abuzz with rumors that next summer DC Comics plans on killing Batman/Bruce Wayne and that either Tim Drake (the current Robin) or Dick Grayson (Nightwing and former Robin) would don the mantle.
There's no question that DC is building towards a "Final Crisis" I haven't been reading a lot of those titles leading up to that event but know that it is happening. In the past couple of years we've had Identity Crisis and Infinite Crisis so another Crisis is imminent.
Of course DC Comics has traveled this road before in the mid '90 with the Death of Superman. That was definitely a stunt...but one that was thought out (by the Superman writers and artist) and one that had good storytelling (including the Funeral for a Friend storyline and Return of Superman storyline).
If DC Comics wants to do it...and they have a good story then I can buy it...solely on the condition that Bruce Wayne comes back. Yes this is the Comic Book world where characters come back to life more frequently than they do on daytime Soap Operas. Even the ones that you wouldn't expect to come back (Jason Todd, Oliver Queen and Hal Jordan)...they come back.
I was pretty mad when I read about this last night and declared (and it might not be true) that I might be done with comic books if Bruce Wayne never comes back. I realize that is a bold statement.
It would infuriate me if the original Batman was truly dead...and I would probably break something.
There's no question that DC is building towards a "Final Crisis" I haven't been reading a lot of those titles leading up to that event but know that it is happening. In the past couple of years we've had Identity Crisis and Infinite Crisis so another Crisis is imminent.
Of course DC Comics has traveled this road before in the mid '90 with the Death of Superman. That was definitely a stunt...but one that was thought out (by the Superman writers and artist) and one that had good storytelling (including the Funeral for a Friend storyline and Return of Superman storyline).
If DC Comics wants to do it...and they have a good story then I can buy it...solely on the condition that Bruce Wayne comes back. Yes this is the Comic Book world where characters come back to life more frequently than they do on daytime Soap Operas. Even the ones that you wouldn't expect to come back (Jason Todd, Oliver Queen and Hal Jordan)...they come back.
I was pretty mad when I read about this last night and declared (and it might not be true) that I might be done with comic books if Bruce Wayne never comes back. I realize that is a bold statement.
It would infuriate me if the original Batman was truly dead...and I would probably break something.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
"The Other Boleyn Girl" movie trailer
Click here to see trailer.
Let's see...who would one choose...Natalie Portman or Scarlett Johansson?
Damn that Eric Bana.
Let's see...who would one choose...Natalie Portman or Scarlett Johansson?
Damn that Eric Bana.
"Game of Shadows" update
Hot off the presses...Barry Bonds indicted on perjury and obstruction of justice charges.
Playing baseball is going to be the least of his concerns now.
Playing baseball is going to be the least of his concerns now.
"Maybe we ain't that young anymore..."
Well I turned 30 yesterday...and I can safely say it doesn't feel any different. Not that I was expecting it too...but one never knows. Although I was thinking that it is a big difference that there isn't a number "2" in front of your age. Even if you were in your late 20's...you were sill in your twenties, which is still a sign of being young. Once you turn 30 that's all over. Even the word "thirty" is just so much more harsh sounding than saying that you are twenty-something.
I will say that I don't feel old(er). In fact I pretty much feel and act the same way I've always acted. That might be kind of ridiculous to some people...but I would argue that it's being consistent. I've always thought that I've had a decent maturity-level.
Enough of that psyco-babble.
--Dwight Freeney's season is done...but the Colts season isn't. This team is tough and will still hold onto the number 2 seed in the AFC.
--Padres ace, Jake Peavy, won the NL Cy Young award today...not to surpring considering that he lead the NL in wins, strikeouts and ERA...although he didn't pitch to hot in the one game playoff with the Rockies.
--I'm almost officially done with Sportscenter. They should just rename the show "New England Patriots Hype Machine." They are seriously running a daily segment on the "pursuit of perfection." Please. I don't remember that segment when the Colts started the season 13-0. Total Crap.
I will say that I don't feel old(er). In fact I pretty much feel and act the same way I've always acted. That might be kind of ridiculous to some people...but I would argue that it's being consistent. I've always thought that I've had a decent maturity-level.
Enough of that psyco-babble.
--Dwight Freeney's season is done...but the Colts season isn't. This team is tough and will still hold onto the number 2 seed in the AFC.
--Padres ace, Jake Peavy, won the NL Cy Young award today...not to surpring considering that he lead the NL in wins, strikeouts and ERA...although he didn't pitch to hot in the one game playoff with the Rockies.
--I'm almost officially done with Sportscenter. They should just rename the show "New England Patriots Hype Machine." They are seriously running a daily segment on the "pursuit of perfection." Please. I don't remember that segment when the Colts started the season 13-0. Total Crap.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Game of Shadows
I just finished Game of Shadows (by Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams), the book that outlines the BALCO steroid story with regard to Barry Bonds and other athletes. One always here stuff referenced to it so I thought it was time to check it out for myself.
Newsflash...Barry Bonds is not only a surely guy...but he's a cheat. I'm by no means a Bonds-apologist but in some way I was in denial with how rampant his juicing was. I guess I was holding out some degree of hope that maybe he was only doping during the record breaking 2001 season. According to the book..and I buy a large portion of it...Bonds was juicing before that and after.
It seems that still to this day...that a number of people don't buy it (Bonds as a rampant juicer). They claim...well he's never been busted for a positive steroid test. Yes, that is true but...A) there wasn't steroid testing until a few years ago and B) MLB doesn't test for human growth hormone, which Bonds was using.
The most damaging evidence against Bonds is how well the doping cocktails worked (especially) for the track and field stars. This is a popular argument for people in denial about Bonds...they say...steroids don't help a player hit a baseball. With track and field--as opposed to baseball--results can be more definitive because A) it's an individual sport and B) there are way less outside factors that can effect the athletes given performance. It is definitely easier to measure and quantify the results from a race than a baseball game.
--Tim Montgomery went from not being able to qualify for the 2000 Summer Olympics to being (at least temporarily) the world record holder in the 100 meters.
--Michelle Collins went from being almost washed up to setting US (indoor) records in 200-meter fun with help from the The Cream and The Clear
--Look at Marion Jones...her career stalled when it became apparent she wasn't doping.
The bottom line is that the doping drugs from BALCO...the Cream, The clear, HGH, THG...significantly enhances an athletes ability to perform. So it is completely ridiculous to assume that a baseball player is not going to be enhanced from taking the drugs. Even in baseball with other factors influencing a hitter (the pitcher, his protection in the order, the weather) being on the illegal drugs makes one perform better. It's as simple as that.
I've always said that the tragedy of Bonds is that one never knows where the talent stops and the steroids start. Even though one can make a strong argument that Bonds's numbers are tainted...one can't just subtract X number of homeruns from his total to come up with some levelheaded total with regard to how many "genuine" homers he hit. We just have to deal with it.
It's a shame and tragedy (for the baseball records that Bonds has broke) because he was already a hall of fame caliber player.
Newsflash...Barry Bonds is not only a surely guy...but he's a cheat. I'm by no means a Bonds-apologist but in some way I was in denial with how rampant his juicing was. I guess I was holding out some degree of hope that maybe he was only doping during the record breaking 2001 season. According to the book..and I buy a large portion of it...Bonds was juicing before that and after.
It seems that still to this day...that a number of people don't buy it (Bonds as a rampant juicer). They claim...well he's never been busted for a positive steroid test. Yes, that is true but...A) there wasn't steroid testing until a few years ago and B) MLB doesn't test for human growth hormone, which Bonds was using.
The most damaging evidence against Bonds is how well the doping cocktails worked (especially) for the track and field stars. This is a popular argument for people in denial about Bonds...they say...steroids don't help a player hit a baseball. With track and field--as opposed to baseball--results can be more definitive because A) it's an individual sport and B) there are way less outside factors that can effect the athletes given performance. It is definitely easier to measure and quantify the results from a race than a baseball game.
--Tim Montgomery went from not being able to qualify for the 2000 Summer Olympics to being (at least temporarily) the world record holder in the 100 meters.
--Michelle Collins went from being almost washed up to setting US (indoor) records in 200-meter fun with help from the The Cream and The Clear
--Look at Marion Jones...her career stalled when it became apparent she wasn't doping.
The bottom line is that the doping drugs from BALCO...the Cream, The clear, HGH, THG...significantly enhances an athletes ability to perform. So it is completely ridiculous to assume that a baseball player is not going to be enhanced from taking the drugs. Even in baseball with other factors influencing a hitter (the pitcher, his protection in the order, the weather) being on the illegal drugs makes one perform better. It's as simple as that.
I've always said that the tragedy of Bonds is that one never knows where the talent stops and the steroids start. Even though one can make a strong argument that Bonds's numbers are tainted...one can't just subtract X number of homeruns from his total to come up with some levelheaded total with regard to how many "genuine" homers he hit. We just have to deal with it.
It's a shame and tragedy (for the baseball records that Bonds has broke) because he was already a hall of fame caliber player.
"The Darjeeling Limited" movie review
We switch gears this week by taking a look at the indie film, The Darjeeling Limited ( R). Wes Anderson directs this off-beat tale (of comedy and drama) of three estranged brothers trying to rekindle their relationship while on a train ride in India. The film stars Owen Wilson,Adrien Brodey and Jason Schwartzman.
Ryan: I want to preface this review by saying that Wes Anderson has never made a bad or even mediocre film. His films are all way-above average (with some being modern-day classics--Bottle Rocket and Rushmore). But there is a slightly disturbing trend with his films. When he makes a new film it's never quite as good as the previous one. It is not a drastic slope but it is slightly alarming because Anderson is such a talented filmmaker. Thankfully The Darjeeling Limited breaks that trend. It is not Anderson's best work but it is better than his last outing, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou.
Andy: I must fully disclose that I am a total sucker for Wes Anderson. I love pretty much all of his movies, so the chance of me going into this one and not liking it was pretty slim. Furthermore, I'd watched the--Part I Hotel Chevalier--on the internet and was blown away. It is able to pack months and months of a relationship's pain and baggage into just a few minutes of film, with almost no dialogue. In many ways, this is Anderson's greatest strength as a filmmaker. He is able to make a scene feel like there is a whole lot more going on than initial appearances indicate. You get the feeling that you know some of these characters' histories, even when it is not clearly presented.
Ryan: Never content in just being a standard director, Anderson elevates things a bit by showing a short film, Hotel Chevalier, before the feature film. The eight-minute short stars Jason Schwartzman and Natalie Portman (as estranged lovers) and ultimately provides an intriguing back-story to some of the events that take place in The Darjeeling Limited. The brilliance of the short film is that it can simultaneously stand on its own merit and also serve as an introduction to the narrative of the feature film. Hats off to Anderson for using a lost art to make the film-going experience more enriching.
Andy: Love him or hate him, Anderson has a definite style to his movies. That is surprisingly rare in American cinema today, so he gets some art-house points just for being unique. But most striking here is how he allows the actors to work their craft. Each of the leads has a striking visual appearance that hints at what the character is actually like. As the brothers banter and argue, themes start to emerge. Brodey is clearly the class of the group from an acting standpoint, but all three of them are able to portray characters that are very likable while being full of contradictions and shortcomings.
Ryan: I don't want to define Anderson's films as simply being quirky but they definitely have their own charm that might be an acquired taste for the casual moveigoer. The Darjeeling Limited showcases the attributes that makes Anderson's film so engaging. One has eccentric characters in unconventional situations. Depending on the strength of the interaction between the characters with regard to their environment is key in determining how successful an Anderson movie is. With The Darjeeling Limited, that storytelling theme is played out in entertaining and engrossing manner.
Andy: Another signature of a Wes Anderson film is the use of the soundtrack. He almost always has a very listenable set of songs that he masterfully incorporates in the movie, and this one is no exception. It's gotten to the point now where it's almost like there is a template he his using. There is frequently a scene of characters walking in slow motion while some British-invasion rock song is playing on the soundtrack. The thing is, that scene is usually one of the coolest in the movie, as it is here with The Kinks “Strangers.”
The Darjeeling Limited may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's visually stunning, well-acted, cohesive piece of work that is well worth taking the chance on watching. Final grade: B+.
Ryan: I want to preface this review by saying that Wes Anderson has never made a bad or even mediocre film. His films are all way-above average (with some being modern-day classics--Bottle Rocket and Rushmore). But there is a slightly disturbing trend with his films. When he makes a new film it's never quite as good as the previous one. It is not a drastic slope but it is slightly alarming because Anderson is such a talented filmmaker. Thankfully The Darjeeling Limited breaks that trend. It is not Anderson's best work but it is better than his last outing, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou.
Andy: I must fully disclose that I am a total sucker for Wes Anderson. I love pretty much all of his movies, so the chance of me going into this one and not liking it was pretty slim. Furthermore, I'd watched the--Part I Hotel Chevalier--on the internet and was blown away. It is able to pack months and months of a relationship's pain and baggage into just a few minutes of film, with almost no dialogue. In many ways, this is Anderson's greatest strength as a filmmaker. He is able to make a scene feel like there is a whole lot more going on than initial appearances indicate. You get the feeling that you know some of these characters' histories, even when it is not clearly presented.
Ryan: Never content in just being a standard director, Anderson elevates things a bit by showing a short film, Hotel Chevalier, before the feature film. The eight-minute short stars Jason Schwartzman and Natalie Portman (as estranged lovers) and ultimately provides an intriguing back-story to some of the events that take place in The Darjeeling Limited. The brilliance of the short film is that it can simultaneously stand on its own merit and also serve as an introduction to the narrative of the feature film. Hats off to Anderson for using a lost art to make the film-going experience more enriching.
Andy: Love him or hate him, Anderson has a definite style to his movies. That is surprisingly rare in American cinema today, so he gets some art-house points just for being unique. But most striking here is how he allows the actors to work their craft. Each of the leads has a striking visual appearance that hints at what the character is actually like. As the brothers banter and argue, themes start to emerge. Brodey is clearly the class of the group from an acting standpoint, but all three of them are able to portray characters that are very likable while being full of contradictions and shortcomings.
Ryan: I don't want to define Anderson's films as simply being quirky but they definitely have their own charm that might be an acquired taste for the casual moveigoer. The Darjeeling Limited showcases the attributes that makes Anderson's film so engaging. One has eccentric characters in unconventional situations. Depending on the strength of the interaction between the characters with regard to their environment is key in determining how successful an Anderson movie is. With The Darjeeling Limited, that storytelling theme is played out in entertaining and engrossing manner.
Andy: Another signature of a Wes Anderson film is the use of the soundtrack. He almost always has a very listenable set of songs that he masterfully incorporates in the movie, and this one is no exception. It's gotten to the point now where it's almost like there is a template he his using. There is frequently a scene of characters walking in slow motion while some British-invasion rock song is playing on the soundtrack. The thing is, that scene is usually one of the coolest in the movie, as it is here with The Kinks “Strangers.”
The Darjeeling Limited may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's visually stunning, well-acted, cohesive piece of work that is well worth taking the chance on watching. Final grade: B+.
Monday, November 12, 2007
The Monday Blues
I've been stewing about last night's game all day...here's my take.
1. The Earth is still rotating...meaning the season is not lost...talking to some people today...one would have thought that the Colts are no better than the Miami Dolphins. This is still a good team...even with the injuries...this team battles and never quits. They played one of the worst games a team can play and still could (and should have) won.
2. Manning had a horrendous day...no question about that...he was not on his A-game...but dammit he battled and put his team in position to win. The Colts did not lose that game because Manning had 6 picks...no they lost because...
3. OUR SPECIAL TEAM PLAY IS HORRENDOUS. They gave up two touchdowns and Vinatieri missed two field goals. That's unacceptable. I don't know what is wrong with Adam...but he's been struggling all year...missing extra points...missing 29 yard filed goals...that's worse than Vanderjagt. As for the coverage...it's been a problem for a number of years...I don't know how to fix it...but maybe's its time to put Bob Sanders on the unit.
4. Our defense is still great. Even with all the injuries they played their asses off. I realize that San Diego's offense was pretty inept but the Colts D only gave up 10 points (with a lot of those possessions coming on short fields). The defensive scheme...this year...is working.
5. Aaron Moorehead stinks. Wow...this guy killed us. Seriously...LB's Gary Bracket and Clint Sessions have better hands then he does. We need Marvin.
6. Injuries. They continue to mount up...but that's not why we lost the game (see number #3). In fact...a lot of the substitutes (especially on the offensive and defensive line) played really well. At other positions...WR...we have nothing.
It was just so frustrating because...despite how bad we played...we were in position to win the game. It's gut-wrenching. On the other hand...they didn't give up...they played tough...they probably didn't deserve to win the game...but...I don't know. Ultimately I'm still confident in this team...they can be champions again.
1. The Earth is still rotating...meaning the season is not lost...talking to some people today...one would have thought that the Colts are no better than the Miami Dolphins. This is still a good team...even with the injuries...this team battles and never quits. They played one of the worst games a team can play and still could (and should have) won.
2. Manning had a horrendous day...no question about that...he was not on his A-game...but dammit he battled and put his team in position to win. The Colts did not lose that game because Manning had 6 picks...no they lost because...
3. OUR SPECIAL TEAM PLAY IS HORRENDOUS. They gave up two touchdowns and Vinatieri missed two field goals. That's unacceptable. I don't know what is wrong with Adam...but he's been struggling all year...missing extra points...missing 29 yard filed goals...that's worse than Vanderjagt. As for the coverage...it's been a problem for a number of years...I don't know how to fix it...but maybe's its time to put Bob Sanders on the unit.
4. Our defense is still great. Even with all the injuries they played their asses off. I realize that San Diego's offense was pretty inept but the Colts D only gave up 10 points (with a lot of those possessions coming on short fields). The defensive scheme...this year...is working.
5. Aaron Moorehead stinks. Wow...this guy killed us. Seriously...LB's Gary Bracket and Clint Sessions have better hands then he does. We need Marvin.
6. Injuries. They continue to mount up...but that's not why we lost the game (see number #3). In fact...a lot of the substitutes (especially on the offensive and defensive line) played really well. At other positions...WR...we have nothing.
It was just so frustrating because...despite how bad we played...we were in position to win the game. It's gut-wrenching. On the other hand...they didn't give up...they played tough...they probably didn't deserve to win the game...but...I don't know. Ultimately I'm still confident in this team...they can be champions again.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Sunday Morning Rumblings
For my birthday, which is actually on the 14th, Jenny took me to Superhero Museum in downtown Indy. For 5 bucks a person, it's pretty cool. It takes about a half hour to go through and they have some pretty cool stuff. It's really a Superman/Batman museum as about 65% of the exhibits are Superman related and the other 35% is Batman. The highlights of the museum would be the Bat-boat from the 1966 Batman movie and the Batmobile from the 1989 film. That stuff is pretty cool. He also has costumes from the Superman film/TV incarnations--all the way from the 1940's movie serials to Smallville. They even have an autographed Club Zero-esque Michael Rosenbaum shirt. The museum is just filled with a lot of toys, some old, and other collectibles showcasing Superman and Batman. I'll be frank...take away the Batman movie artifacts...I would have to put my personal Batman collection against that of the museum's. All in all it was cool...while we were downtown...Jenny did treat me to lunch at Rock Bottom...and some Circle City Light. (Petty, you would have been able to get in this time)
--For cable subscribers in Indy...still no Big Ten Network. This issue has completely pissed me off to the extent that it's just about fried my brain. I'm holding out hope that something gets done...but if not I might be at Links during some of the IU games that will be on the Big Ten Network. I guess I should just get satellite but in reality I'm very satisfied with my digital cable...so I don't know.
--We officially have new neighbors at 127...haven't met them yet (a guy and girl couple) but to my surprise they have an outside pet dog.
--I hope the Colts rebound this weekend...but I'm weary just because the team is so banged up. Another loss is not going to wreck their season...but I want them to hold on to that number 2 seed in the AFC. Should be Addai time again.
--The Hoosiers kick off their season on Monday night and I think they are going to have a stellar year. They should compete if not win the Big Ten and a run at the Final Four is definitely not out of the question.
--For cable subscribers in Indy...still no Big Ten Network. This issue has completely pissed me off to the extent that it's just about fried my brain. I'm holding out hope that something gets done...but if not I might be at Links during some of the IU games that will be on the Big Ten Network. I guess I should just get satellite but in reality I'm very satisfied with my digital cable...so I don't know.
--We officially have new neighbors at 127...haven't met them yet (a guy and girl couple) but to my surprise they have an outside pet dog.
--I hope the Colts rebound this weekend...but I'm weary just because the team is so banged up. Another loss is not going to wreck their season...but I want them to hold on to that number 2 seed in the AFC. Should be Addai time again.
--The Hoosiers kick off their season on Monday night and I think they are going to have a stellar year. They should compete if not win the Big Ten and a run at the Final Four is definitely not out of the question.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Thursday, November 8, 2007
"Heroes" Season 2 Stuggles
Found this over at ew.com...Heroes creator Tim Kring is apologizing to fans for some of season 2's shortcomings. I have to agree with him on a lot of them...the show really struggled for the first few episodes but does seem to be getting back on track (it didn't help that Jenny and I were about 3 episodes behind...but we are currently caught up).
By Jeff Jensen
On the chilly Monday morning that Hollywood's writers went on strike, Heroes creator Tim Kring called from the streets outside the Hollywood studio where his NBC series is shot. ''Yes, I'm picketing my own show,'' says the 50-year-old writer-producer. ''So surreal.''
But Kring wasn't calling to discuss labor woes — he was calling to explain why Heroes, suffering a creative decline and a 15 percent ratings drop from the same period last year, went from Human Torch hot to Iceman cold. The good news? A turnaround appears to be under way. After weeks of sluggish storytelling, the Nov. 5 episode recaptured some of last season's fanciful energy. We've also seen the next two episodes — and we like them, too. The cliff-hangers are back. Narrative purpose has been discovered. Old favorites like Peter (Milo Ventimiglia) and Horn-Rimmed Glasses (Jack Coleman) take center stage. Even more encouraging: Kring himself is keenly aware that Heroes is broken. Here's his candid critique:
THE PACE IS TOO SLOW ''We assumed the audience wanted season 1 — a buildup of intrigue about these characters and the discovery of their powers. We taught [them] to expect a certain kind of storytelling. They wanted adrenaline. We made a mistake.''
THE WORLD-SAVING STAKES SHOULD HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED SOONER The premonition of nuclear apocalypse created a larger context that unified every story line last season. Kring now sees that Volume 2 (the first 11 episodes of season 2) would have been better served if Peter's vision of viral Armageddon had appeared in the season premiere rather than episode 7. ''We took too long to get to the big-picture story,'' he says.
THE ROOKIES DIDN'T GREET THEMSELVES PROPERLY New Heroes Monica (Dana Davis), Maya (Dania Ramirez), and Alejandro (Shalim Ortiz) ''shouldn't have been introduced in separate story lines that felt unattached to the show. The way we introduced Elle (Kristen Bell) — by weaving her in via Peter's story line — is a more logical way to bring new characters into the show.'' (That said, Kring says a few newbies won't make it beyond this second volume, which wraps Dec. 3.)
HIRO WAS IN JAPAN WAY TOO LONG Hiro's (Masi Oka) time-bending adventure in 17th-century Japan — where he mentored samurai hero Takezo Kensei (David Anders) — finally came to an end on Nov. 5. But Kring says it ''should have [lasted] three episodes. We didn't give the audience enough story to justify the time we allotted it.''
YOUNG LOVE STINKS Kring regrets sticking Claire (Hayden Panettiere) with a super-dud boyfriend and forcing Hiro to moon over a cutesy princess. ''I've seen more convincing romances on TV,'' he admits. ''In retrospect, I don't think romance is a natural fit for us.''
Yet while Heroes has finally found some dramatic traction, this second volume is pretty much a wash. The Dec. 3 episode has been retooled to function as a potential season finale — a move inspired by the writers' strike and a desire to give the show ''a clean slate'' when it goes back into production for Volume 3. At that point, Kring wants to craft a rebooted Heroes that can attract new fans and win back those who've tuned out: ''The message is that we've heard the complaints — and we're doing something about it.''
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Greg Maddux, greatest defensive player ever
Well probably not...but he is now the all-time leader with 17 Gold Gloves. He breaks the mark of 16...held by Jim Kaat (Pitcher) and Brooks Robinson (3B).
Here's the story via Yahoo Sports
Here's the story via Yahoo Sports
Padres pitcher Greg Maddux won his record 17th Gold Glove while Boston first baseman Kevin Youkilis earned his first award Tuesday for fielding excellence.
Detroit catcher Ivan Rodriguez won for the 13th time and outfielders Andruw Jones, Ichiro Suzuki and Torii Hunter added to their totals. The Colorado Rockies, who set a major league record for fielding percentage, did not have a winner.
Maddux broke a tie with Baltimore third baseman Brooks Robinson and pitcher Jim Kaat for the most Gold Gloves.
Known for his quick reflexes on the mound even at age 41, Maddux won his first Gold Glove in 1990 with the Chicago Cubs. Since then, the 347-game winner has taken home the honor every year except 2003, when Mike Hampton broke his streak.
"It's cool to win again," Maddux said in a release. "I'm fortunate to still be pitching at this level and honored to be recognized with this prestigious award."
Earlier this week, Maddux and San Diego agreed to a one-year contract for next year.
The Gold Gloves were first awarded in 1957. Managers and coaches vote on players in their own leagues.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Greensburg's Mayor's Race
The Frank Manus(D) administration is over.
Gary Herbert (R) defeated Manus by a vote of 1679 to 1000.
Gary Herbert (R) defeated Manus by a vote of 1679 to 1000.
"American Gangster" movie review
This week we'll be taking a look at the current #1 movie at the box office, American Gangster. Ridley Scott directs this detective (Russell Crowe) vs. gangster (Denzel Washington) drama, set mostly in New York City during the end of the Vietnam War.
Ryan: It is not everyday that two Hollywood megastars co-star in a major motion picture. The pairing of Washington and Crowe is what makes American Gangster such a must see film. Make no mistake about it: American Gangster is a very good film. It is not a movie that's an instant classic (or even best picture material like last year's The Departed) but it is a film that is tremendously well put together that showcases the talents of two of the best actors of their generation.
Andy: It's true that Crowe and Washington are both big stars, but make no mistake about it. Denzel Washington's presence here is what filled theatres. In spite of his obvious talent as an actor, Russell Crowe has never connected with his audience as a major draw to a movie. Washington, on the other hand, almost always seems to have a strong opening weekend, at least. This movie offers an example of why this may be the case. Crowe and Washington both have outstanding, equally impressive performances. But Washington seems so much cooler doing it than Crowe does. I wish Washington did not so frequently play the tough-as-nails anti-hero, but he sure is good at it.
Ryan: This isn't Washington's or Crowe's best work but they do deliver strong performances. They don't share much screen time together and that might put off some moviegoers. But their respected performances are solid enough that they propel the dual narratives along until they intersect each other. When they do finally meet up on screen it makes for a really cool movie moment. The scene might not have the most dramatic effect that one might want from the pairing of two stars but overall the scene works within the framework of the film.
Andy: I actually would have liked to see Ridley Scott play up the meeting of Crowe and Washington's characters a little bit more. The whole movie is leading us toward their inevitable confrontation, and when it happens it's a little anticlimactic. It would have been fun to watch two actors of this caliber trading chops on screen, but instead we get a bit of a tidy, wrapped up ending. As Ryan said, it does fit the movie pretty well, but it's hard not to wonder what could have been between the two.
Ryan: Like I said before, American Gangster is a fine film but it doesn't have that “something extra” that really grabs you. It's a film that's good enough to end up on many critics' top ten lists but it won't be a film that makes the number one spot. It just lacks that pizzazz that would have made it a great film. It's based on a true story and at times it feels like the movie's pace is more along the lines of a Sixty Minute's news segment as opposed to a drug-trafficking crime thriller. The resolution to the movie is a bit clunky as well as the movie takes an unexpected turn with the two leads that might frustrate some moviegoers. Even with these shortcomings, American Gangster is a finely made entertaining film.
Andy: Good, not great is a fine way of summing this movie up. There aren't that many shortcomings of the film, but nothing jumps out as being particularly overwhelming, either. It may garner a couple of random Oscar nominations, but mostly it's just a good, escapist crime drama. If this is the sort of movie you are into, you won't be disappointed, but no new ground has been broken here.
American Gangster is solidly constructed and well acted. Final grade: B+.
Ryan: It is not everyday that two Hollywood megastars co-star in a major motion picture. The pairing of Washington and Crowe is what makes American Gangster such a must see film. Make no mistake about it: American Gangster is a very good film. It is not a movie that's an instant classic (or even best picture material like last year's The Departed) but it is a film that is tremendously well put together that showcases the talents of two of the best actors of their generation.
Andy: It's true that Crowe and Washington are both big stars, but make no mistake about it. Denzel Washington's presence here is what filled theatres. In spite of his obvious talent as an actor, Russell Crowe has never connected with his audience as a major draw to a movie. Washington, on the other hand, almost always seems to have a strong opening weekend, at least. This movie offers an example of why this may be the case. Crowe and Washington both have outstanding, equally impressive performances. But Washington seems so much cooler doing it than Crowe does. I wish Washington did not so frequently play the tough-as-nails anti-hero, but he sure is good at it.
Ryan: This isn't Washington's or Crowe's best work but they do deliver strong performances. They don't share much screen time together and that might put off some moviegoers. But their respected performances are solid enough that they propel the dual narratives along until they intersect each other. When they do finally meet up on screen it makes for a really cool movie moment. The scene might not have the most dramatic effect that one might want from the pairing of two stars but overall the scene works within the framework of the film.
Andy: I actually would have liked to see Ridley Scott play up the meeting of Crowe and Washington's characters a little bit more. The whole movie is leading us toward their inevitable confrontation, and when it happens it's a little anticlimactic. It would have been fun to watch two actors of this caliber trading chops on screen, but instead we get a bit of a tidy, wrapped up ending. As Ryan said, it does fit the movie pretty well, but it's hard not to wonder what could have been between the two.
Ryan: Like I said before, American Gangster is a fine film but it doesn't have that “something extra” that really grabs you. It's a film that's good enough to end up on many critics' top ten lists but it won't be a film that makes the number one spot. It just lacks that pizzazz that would have made it a great film. It's based on a true story and at times it feels like the movie's pace is more along the lines of a Sixty Minute's news segment as opposed to a drug-trafficking crime thriller. The resolution to the movie is a bit clunky as well as the movie takes an unexpected turn with the two leads that might frustrate some moviegoers. Even with these shortcomings, American Gangster is a finely made entertaining film.
Andy: Good, not great is a fine way of summing this movie up. There aren't that many shortcomings of the film, but nothing jumps out as being particularly overwhelming, either. It may garner a couple of random Oscar nominations, but mostly it's just a good, escapist crime drama. If this is the sort of movie you are into, you won't be disappointed, but no new ground has been broken here.
American Gangster is solidly constructed and well acted. Final grade: B+.
Colts fallout Part II
All right...yes I was pissed on Sunday night. It wasn't until the Shelbyville exit (we watched the game at Reiger's condo in downtown Indy) that I could muster some words together to talk to my wife. (Hats off to her for putting up with my surliness...but she knows the drill...It just takes me some time to process a demoralizing sports lost with one of my teams). Ultimately it was a helluva of a game. It was exciting...it was nailbiting...it lived up to the hype. I don't think the Colts necessarily blew it...maybe gave it away...the Patriots on both ends of the ball made the plays in the fourth quater...and the Colts didn't.
Here are my observations:
1. Not much of a surprise but the Colts and Patriots are the best two teams in the NFL. Most people are aware of that...but this game proved it. It also proved that they are still, I think, evenly matched. The Patriots got us on Sunday but by no means are they utterly superior to us. If we played 10 games we would win half of them.
2. Randy Moss is a stud. When the pass rush faltered in the fourth quarter, it was then that Brady had the time to make the big play...and Moss has got to be the best big player receiver in the NFL. If they play again...I'm not to sure how the Colts will try to stop him...although I don't think Tim Jennings is the answer.
3. The Colts defense is good...I mean Super Bowl good. For 50 minutes they pretty much shut down the best offense in the NFL. They were making plays and getting pressure on Brady (which is the key to slowing them down and also why I think down the road...that the NY Giants might have more than chance to beat them). Unfortunately, due to fatigue or the Patriots making adjustments, the defense just could not hold them for the whole game. That was dishearting because they played their asses off.
4. I'm not saying that the injuries to several of our starters cost us the game but come on...it would have made a big difference...easily a 4 point difference. For the first time, the Colts offense really missed Harrison. The passing game was pretty slow and it is safe to say that with Harrison on the filed...at the very least...it opens more things up for the rest of the guys. The offensive line really missed Tony Ugoh as well especially in the fourth quarter. The line really let down the rest of the offensive in the fourth with the penalties and the lack of protection. And not to call out Charlie Johnson, who did an admirable job, but Ugoh is a stud and he would have made a difference. Maybe the defense would not have stumbled in the fourth quarter if Freddy Keiaho and/or Tyjuan Hagler would have played. Those guys are playmakers and greatly would have added to the defense's depth. I just think if the team was at full strength the result would have been different.
5. I don't buy the notion that the Colts can't win a potential rematch in Foxborough (AFC Championship). With the defense that the Colts have and with the ability to pound the ball with the run, they can win a smash'em up cold weather game. I'm not saying they should win...but they can. Furthermore, a cold weather game might actually effect the Patriots offense more than the Colts. The Pats are basically running the same 3 WR-set offense that the Colts ran in 2004. In a cold weather game with a tough defense (that the Colts have) the Pats' offense is not going to be running at optimum levels. I rather the game be in Indy...no question about that...but it's not a lost cause in New England (after all we have beat them the last two times in Foxborough).
6. I sill hate the Patriots. Tom Brady is great quarterback but he's also a whiny bitch. I remember quite vividly two instances of him whining during the game. (I'm aware that Manning doesn't have the best body language either...but he's better with it now). Bill Belicheck, while being a great football coach, is far from being a classy guy. His post-game handshake with Dungy boarded on being completely ridiculous. As for Teddy Bruschi...I just hate that guy. I'm just not going to say anything more.
Bottom line...the Patriots are a great team but so are the Colts. I hope we get them in the playoffs because we can beat them no matter where the game is going be.
Our next game in San Diego is not going to be an easy game...but I think we will get back on track.
Go Horse!
Here are my observations:
1. Not much of a surprise but the Colts and Patriots are the best two teams in the NFL. Most people are aware of that...but this game proved it. It also proved that they are still, I think, evenly matched. The Patriots got us on Sunday but by no means are they utterly superior to us. If we played 10 games we would win half of them.
2. Randy Moss is a stud. When the pass rush faltered in the fourth quarter, it was then that Brady had the time to make the big play...and Moss has got to be the best big player receiver in the NFL. If they play again...I'm not to sure how the Colts will try to stop him...although I don't think Tim Jennings is the answer.
3. The Colts defense is good...I mean Super Bowl good. For 50 minutes they pretty much shut down the best offense in the NFL. They were making plays and getting pressure on Brady (which is the key to slowing them down and also why I think down the road...that the NY Giants might have more than chance to beat them). Unfortunately, due to fatigue or the Patriots making adjustments, the defense just could not hold them for the whole game. That was dishearting because they played their asses off.
4. I'm not saying that the injuries to several of our starters cost us the game but come on...it would have made a big difference...easily a 4 point difference. For the first time, the Colts offense really missed Harrison. The passing game was pretty slow and it is safe to say that with Harrison on the filed...at the very least...it opens more things up for the rest of the guys. The offensive line really missed Tony Ugoh as well especially in the fourth quarter. The line really let down the rest of the offensive in the fourth with the penalties and the lack of protection. And not to call out Charlie Johnson, who did an admirable job, but Ugoh is a stud and he would have made a difference. Maybe the defense would not have stumbled in the fourth quarter if Freddy Keiaho and/or Tyjuan Hagler would have played. Those guys are playmakers and greatly would have added to the defense's depth. I just think if the team was at full strength the result would have been different.
5. I don't buy the notion that the Colts can't win a potential rematch in Foxborough (AFC Championship). With the defense that the Colts have and with the ability to pound the ball with the run, they can win a smash'em up cold weather game. I'm not saying they should win...but they can. Furthermore, a cold weather game might actually effect the Patriots offense more than the Colts. The Pats are basically running the same 3 WR-set offense that the Colts ran in 2004. In a cold weather game with a tough defense (that the Colts have) the Pats' offense is not going to be running at optimum levels. I rather the game be in Indy...no question about that...but it's not a lost cause in New England (after all we have beat them the last two times in Foxborough).
6. I sill hate the Patriots. Tom Brady is great quarterback but he's also a whiny bitch. I remember quite vividly two instances of him whining during the game. (I'm aware that Manning doesn't have the best body language either...but he's better with it now). Bill Belicheck, while being a great football coach, is far from being a classy guy. His post-game handshake with Dungy boarded on being completely ridiculous. As for Teddy Bruschi...I just hate that guy. I'm just not going to say anything more.
Bottom line...the Patriots are a great team but so are the Colts. I hope we get them in the playoffs because we can beat them no matter where the game is going be.
Our next game in San Diego is not going to be an easy game...but I think we will get back on track.
Go Horse!
Colts Fallout, Part I
When you win the game...you don't whine and complain...please remember this New England fans and media.
Shortly after the game, the New England brass started complaining about the Colts pumping noise into the Dome. (Not a new accusation--a few years ago the Pittsburgh Steelers accused the Colts of pumping artificial noise into the dome).
CBS, who broadcasted the game, quickly chimed in what really happened during the game.
Via indystar.com
This doesn't surprise me at all. CBS almost always has sound issues during the football broadcasts especially with their HD feeds. I know I'm a Colts apologist but I completely buy CBS's argument. Bottom line...the Colts aren't pumping noise into the dome to gain an unfair advantage...they aren't New England.
Shortly after the game, the New England brass started complaining about the Colts pumping noise into the Dome. (Not a new accusation--a few years ago the Pittsburgh Steelers accused the Colts of pumping artificial noise into the dome).
CBS, who broadcasted the game, quickly chimed in what really happened during the game.
Via indystar.com
Sorry, conspiracy fans, there's no "Noisegate."
An unusual sound on the telecast of Sunday's game between the Indianapolis Colts and New England Patriots was a CBS production issue and not evidence of the Colts breaking NFL rules by enhancing noise at the RCA Dome, a network spokesman said Monday.
"It was the result of tape feedback in the CBS production truck," the network's LeslieAnne Wade said. "In no way was it from the stadium."
Yahoo Sports reported that Patriots president Jonathan Kraft complained about the noise issue after the game to Milt Ahlerich, the NFL vice president of security.
There were at least three posts on YouTube.com from the CBS telecast pointing to the first play of the fourth quarter as possible evidence.
The play, in which Patriots quarterback Tom Brady completes a 14-yard slant to Randy Moss, has a vibrating sound amid the crowd noise that stops abruptly after the tackle. One post characterized the sound as being like a CD skipping or "stuck."
"That's the end of that story," said NFL spokesman Greg Aiello, who added that no other part of the game is under investigation for noise violations.
A statement from the Colts said: "We trust this will put an end to the ridiculous and unfounded accusations that the Colts artificially enhanced crowd noise at the RCA Dome in any way."
This doesn't surprise me at all. CBS almost always has sound issues during the football broadcasts especially with their HD feeds. I know I'm a Colts apologist but I completely buy CBS's argument. Bottom line...the Colts aren't pumping noise into the dome to gain an unfair advantage...they aren't New England.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Hot Stove Heating Up
I know baseball season is over and that IU is getting ready to tip the season off and the Colts are 7-1...so my focus shouldn't be on baseball. But...I found this pretty cool website dealing with hot stove rumors.
I need one more night's sleep and then I will be able to express my feeling on the Colts defeat on Sunday night. Of note...I didn't break anything.
I need one more night's sleep and then I will be able to express my feeling on the Colts defeat on Sunday night. Of note...I didn't break anything.
Maddux resigns with Padres
Via espn.com
Not much of a surprise here. I'm glad they got it done right away. With the pitching staff that the Padres have...they should at the very least contend for the NL Wild Card (if not the division).
The San Diego Padres and pitcher Greg Maddux have agreed to terms on a one-year, $10 million deal, according to sources.
Maddux, who could have been a free agent, held a player option for $8.75 million for 2008. The Padres held a team option for $11 million for 2008.
Maddux has pitched 22 seasons for four teams, most of that time with the Atlanta Braves. He has 347 career wins, good for ninth on the all-time list.
A four-time Cy Young winner, Maddux was 14-11 with a 4.14 ERA in 34 starts for the Padres last season. San Diego lost a one-game playoff with the Colorado Rockies for the National League wild card.
Buster Olney is a senior writer at ESPN The Magazine
Not much of a surprise here. I'm glad they got it done right away. With the pitching staff that the Padres have...they should at the very least contend for the NL Wild Card (if not the division).
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Saturday Morning Thoughts
I haven't written a lot lately...not sure why...but it seems that I've been overly tired after getting home from work. I think the change in weather has my allergies in a funk.
Regardless a couple of things...
--There's a football game going on tomorrow...maybe the GREATEST REGULAR SEASON NFL GAME EVER...as the coverage on ESPN has been non-stop. The only way it could be a bigger story if by some chance the Yankees or A-rod were involved. Anyway, it looks Marvin Harrison might not play again. Which stinks...there was even a report that his knee pain would not only effect him this season but for the rest of his career. Since then the Colts have countered that report of saying that it isn't true. Obviously I hope that is the case as Marvin is my favorite football player...and a key ingredient to the Colts continued success. I have a feeling that he might play tomorrow in a limited fashion.
--Also related to the Colts...I found this interesting post on si.com comparing the 2004 Colts (and Manning's 49 TD passes) to the 2007 Patriots and Brady's pursuit of the record. There is this perception among Colt-haters that the Colts and Manning not only ran the score up on their opponents but that Manning was also padding his numbers. This article puts that nonsense to rest.
--Well it looks like I'm going to have pay ETC a visit. IU tips off the regular season a week from Monday and we still don't have the Big Ten Network on Insight. I've been hesitant because I like Insight's service (ie. the dual DVR box that we have)...if ETC has that...we'll be making the move for sure...if they don't...I'm not sure what we are going to do. It's frustrating me...plus I have this suspicion that Insight might eventually get it done at the last minute. That is normally how those deals go down. Bottom line...it's pissing me off.
Have a great weekend...Go Colts!
Regardless a couple of things...
--There's a football game going on tomorrow...maybe the GREATEST REGULAR SEASON NFL GAME EVER...as the coverage on ESPN has been non-stop. The only way it could be a bigger story if by some chance the Yankees or A-rod were involved. Anyway, it looks Marvin Harrison might not play again. Which stinks...there was even a report that his knee pain would not only effect him this season but for the rest of his career. Since then the Colts have countered that report of saying that it isn't true. Obviously I hope that is the case as Marvin is my favorite football player...and a key ingredient to the Colts continued success. I have a feeling that he might play tomorrow in a limited fashion.
--Also related to the Colts...I found this interesting post on si.com comparing the 2004 Colts (and Manning's 49 TD passes) to the 2007 Patriots and Brady's pursuit of the record. There is this perception among Colt-haters that the Colts and Manning not only ran the score up on their opponents but that Manning was also padding his numbers. This article puts that nonsense to rest.
--Well it looks like I'm going to have pay ETC a visit. IU tips off the regular season a week from Monday and we still don't have the Big Ten Network on Insight. I've been hesitant because I like Insight's service (ie. the dual DVR box that we have)...if ETC has that...we'll be making the move for sure...if they don't...I'm not sure what we are going to do. It's frustrating me...plus I have this suspicion that Insight might eventually get it done at the last minute. That is normally how those deals go down. Bottom line...it's pissing me off.
Have a great weekend...Go Colts!
Friday, November 2, 2007
The Rock Does As He Pleases
Joblo.com is reporting that the Rock told MTV.com that he will play Black Adam in yet untitled Shazam movie. Although not confirmed by the filmmakers, director Peter Segal and writer John August...it looks like the Rock is ready to go.
That could work...he certainly has the look and build to pull off Black Adam.
I just want to know who is going to be playing Mr. Tawny now.
That could work...he certainly has the look and build to pull off Black Adam.
I just want to know who is going to be playing Mr. Tawny now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)