Mysterious Magazine Subscriptions

Back in mid-December on one Saturday, I received a copy of Entertainment Weekly in the mail. I thought cool...somebody must have got me a subscription for Christmas. Narwold used to get it back on 127 and I've missed reading it since then. It's a fun magazine to read. Well, Christmas came...and was gone...and nobody fessed up to getting me the subscription. I was like...OK...that's fine.

Yesterday...I get a Wizard in the mail. For those not aware Wizard is a monthly comic book-driven magazine. I hadn't read one in awhile...I used to buy it all the time...but not anymore. Now it looks like I have another magazine subscription to a magazine that I like....which is cool. Again I have a mystery...Jenny didn't get it for me. My family didn't get it for me. I can't think of one reason why one of friends would randomly get me a magazine subscription (but if they did...Thank you).

So now I have two magazine subscriptions to magazines that I like but I don't know who purchased them for me.

I told Jenny I must have a secret admirer but she just laughed that off.

So I'm just going with the flow on this. If I learn the truth so be it...but if not I'll just enjoy my new bathroom reading material.

"Rambo" movie review

Sylvester Stallone's latest cinematic resurrection is Rambo ( R). In this fourth installment of the Rambo series, John Rambo leads a group of mercenaries into Burma to rescue a group of American missionaries who had been kidnapped by the Burmese army.

Andy: Rambo undoubtedly got the green light because of the surprising success of Sylvester Stallone's 2006 film Rocky Balboa. In that film, Stallone was able to put a nice coda on his most famous film and character. That movie seemed real without being campy and self-referential. With Rambo, I was expecting Stallone to play up the campiness of his second most famous character, and the trailer for the film made it seem like that was the direction it was going. Unfortunately, Stallone is taking everything a little too seriously in Rambo, and the movie falls flat on its face.

Ryan: I'll have to give Stallone a lot of credit. A few years ago he crafted a very enjoyable Rocky movie --when most people thought he was crazy for doing so. Here again, Stallone is attempting to revitalize another cinematic icon. Much like with what he did with Rocky, Stallone's latest Rambo movie is a thrilling success. The movie is exactly what one would expect a Rambo movie to be. It's light on story, dialog and character-development but heavy on action, violence and more action and violence.

Andy: Rambo does have its moments where it is somewhat entertaining, but even those end up feeling problematic. Many of the action sequences are full of over-the-top ultra-violence that moviegoers have come to expect from the Rambo franchise. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is left for the individual audience member to decide. For me, this type of violence works one of two ways. Either it is done in jest, almost as a parody of violence (Kill Bill), or it is done in earnest to illustrate some type of horror (Saving Private Ryan). Rambo falls somewhere in the middle, and that makes the violence mostly awkward and sometimes offensive.

Ryan: I will agree with Andy that Rambo is one of the most gruesomely violent movies that I've ever seen. This movie is not for everybody. But with that said, I think most moviegoers who want to watch this movie know what they are getting into so the level of violence should not be a surprise. If anything it was a change of pace to watch a straight-ahead, in-your-face, R-rated action movie. So many action flicks anymore are either overly stylized or drastically sanitized. Rambo is neither of those notions. It's ironic to think of a Rambo movie as being refreshing to the action picture genre.

Andy: This movie is at its best when there is no dialogue. Stallone must have realized this weakness in his script because he gives his title character very few lines. He mostly mugs at the camera and doesn't talk. This is a good plan, because when the characters were talking, it was frequently inadvertently funny. The most guilty party was female lead Julie Benz, who may have an early edge for Razzie nomination for worst performance by a female in a leading role.

Rambo might work for some moviegoers but it didn't work for me. Final grade: D+.

Ryan: There's no denying that Rambo was a high-octane theatre experience. At the same time the critic in me feels like I should point out that the movie is absurdly ridiculous when one stops and thinks about it. Most of the time, that revelation hinders how much I like or respect a movie. I'm not trying to give Rambo a free pass. For whatever reason, I'm willing to overlook the obvious flaws of the film and accept the movie for what it is—a mindless action spectacle. Final grade: B.

The Screen Actor's Guild

The SAG awards were handed out last night. Not many surprises. The Sopranos, 30 Rock and The Office dominated the TV portion of the awards and most of the front runners in the film categories took home the statues. With No County for Old Men winning for best ensemble I would say that film is now primed to win Best Picture at the Oscars. For a complete listing of the winners, click here.

No question... the most memorable moment from last night ceremonies was the acceptance speech by Daniel Day Lewis (who won Best Actor for There Will Be Blood). Not only is he a tremendous actor but he is also a very humble person. He dedicated his win to Heath Ledger and then went on to effortlessly break down two of Ledger's past performances.

Daniel Day Lewis just "gets it."

Do It South Carolina!

Good job...South Carolinians. Barack Obama scored a dominating win in the Democratic Primary on Saturday. Hopefully this momentum will lead to more wins come Super Tuesday (on Feb. 5).

I think this quote by Obama (in last night's victory speech) best sums up why I fiercely support his candidacy..."The choice in this election is not about regions or religions or genders. It's not about rich versus poor, young versus old and it's not about black versus white. It's about the past versus the future."

That last line is the key...the past versus the future. This country needs a new voice...a new direction...and new leadership. Obama is that man.

Further bolstering Obama's momentum is Caroline Kennedy's endorsement of him that appeared in today New York Times.

R.I.P. Heath Ledger

A couple of things about Heath Ledger's untimely death.

1. I know that Ledger's death shouldn't affect me more than say any other 28 year old dying unexpectedly but the reality is that it did. Some of that has to do with my fondness for films but most of it had to with Ledger playing the Joker in the forthcoming Batman movie. Since I'm all about everything Batman...Ledger playing the Joker (and from the looks of it...doing a damn good job) was a big deal in Ryan's world.

2. The news coverage of this event...especially on Tuesday...was just filled with endless speculation that ultimately just made me shut the TV off. The media seemed certain to cast Ledger's death as not a surprise...that somehow Ledger fit into their preconceived notion of an out of control Hollywood star. Now...that seems to be the furthest thing from the truth. Furthermore there was this notion that was put out there that somehow playing the Joker led to Ledger's demise. That idea really made me sick. Fortunately over the past couple of days, the coverage has matured.

3. I wouldn't say that Ledger was one of my favorite actors but he was a darn good actor. When I heard that he was playing the Joker...I wasn't worried in the least. I haven't seen every film in his catalog but he showed a lot of range. He had a star quality that worked in big budget works--The Patriot and A Knight's Tale...but he also had the acting chops to hold his own in smaller films as well--Monster's Ball and Candy. When those notions came together...Ledger could rise to the occasion. His performance in Brokeback Mountain was the pinnacle of his career. I know the movie is easily dismissed by some people...but he was simply outstanding in the movie. If it wasn't for Phillip Seymour Hoffman...he probably would have won the Oscar. (...not that there's anything wrong with Hoffman winning...). Ultimately in terms of being a quality actor, Ledger was the real deal.

4. I'm not overlooking Ledger's death...but there's not question that what happens with The Dark Knight is of (some) concern to me. Batman-on-film reported that Ledger was completely finished with the movie--in terms of filming in post-production work. With Ledger's Joker being the center of the current marketing campaign, there's no doubt that Warner Bros. is at a crossroads in how to proceed with the marketing. And there's no question now...that the movie is going to take on a whole new meaning...in being Ledger's last work.

But all that will be dealt with in time.

"Cloverfield" Movie Review

This week we watched the J.J. Abrams produced, Matt Reeves directed thriller Cloverfield (R). Seen entirely through a handheld video camera, Cloverfield documents a night when New York City is attacked by some sort of giant monster and all of the ensuing chaos.

Ryan: It is has been awhile since I’ve been so conflicted about a movie. Cloverfield, from the film to my expectations of it, is draped in contradictions. On the surface the movie seems fresh and original but ultimately has a story that is about as traditional as a Hollywood story gets. It’s a film that promised a big payoff (of some kind) but didn’t deliver. It's a film that looks like it was made on the cheap side but in fact has a strong production value. My biggest dilemma with the movie is that I respect what the filmmakers did but don’t feel the need to go out and tell people that they have to watch this movie right away.

Andy: First of all, I was very entertained by Cloverfield. The entire movie is a gimmick, and sometimes that can be disastrous for a movie, but this one held up pretty well the entire time. As Ryan was alluding to, the inventive nature of the movie is what makes it worth watching. It’s nothing that hasn’t really been done before (Blair Witch Project), but the idea of having a movie that is simply a “found” piece of video is intriguing enough that it can work in moderation. If a whole lot of movies like this start coming out it will be annoying, but it nice to see someone play with this (sub)genre every 8-10 years or so.

Ryan: It is only credible to address the movie in the framework of the internet-driven marketing campaign which--at least for me--did hype up my desire to see the movie. From the very beginning the movie was cloaked in secrecy. The speculation ran rampant that it might be Godzilla or even a Voltron movie. And while those notions now seem completely ridiculous, there is no doubt that in the back of my mind I was expecting some sort of mind-blowing revelation with regard to what was going on in the movie. Normally I have nobody but myself to blame when my expectations go out of whack but in this I case I feel somewhat deceived.

Andy: It is clear that the way the movie was advertised had a strong affect on many moviegoers perception of the movie. For me, it was clear that something big is attacking New York City, and we are seeing through the eyes of an ordinary person with a video camera. I would have actually preferred less of a payoff than the movie ends up giving. We end up getting more information and better views of the monster than I expected. With an ad campaign shrouded in mystery, I would have liked to see the events of the movie remain fairly clouded even at the end.

Ryan: In the You Tube world that we live in it shouldn't be to surprising that a movie would come along and raise the bar that the Blair Witch Project set some eight-plus years ago. The fact that Abrams and company were able to shoot a melodrama-driven monster movie on nothing but hand held cameras with a largely unknown cast is impressive. Although the movie made me borderline nauseous at times with the amateur-ish camera work, Cloverfield does succeed in being different from the majority of genre pictures that make it to the silver screen. Ultimately I'm still processing exactly what the difference truly means.

Andy: Ultimately, Cloverfield is a clever piece of work. At times it seems to be focusing too much on the story of the people involved instead of the madness happening in the city around them. The “video” that the audience is watching is taped over a video one of the characters made of a random day a few weeks earlier, and occasionally a few seconds of that video creep into the disaster video. The device is effective, as it allows us to see some of the characters humanized in brief snippets. Just like the movie as a whole, it doesn’t work perfectly, but it is both entertaining and interesting.

Cloverfield is not great, but it is different enough that it is worth watching. Final grade: B-.

Tony Dungy is the Man

By now most everyone knows that Tony Dungy will be back as coach of the Indianapolis Colts. This pleases me. Dungy is a great football coach (as well as a stand up guy). But mostly...he knows how to win football games.

Now I know...after the Chargers loss...that there was a feeling among some Colts fans that if Dungy left that it wasn't going to be that bad for the team. From their perspective they respect what Dungy brought to the organization and city but if he chose to leave they weren't going to be that upset mainly because Dungy does have his fair share of playoff disappointment. I'll concede that there has been some gut-wrenching playoff losses. The 2005 loss to the Steelers and this year's loss to the Charges are hard to swallow because in both instances the Colts had a first round bye and home field advantage. But one can't overlook the fact that Dungy and Colts did win a Super Bowl. More importantly with Dungy at the helm (and Manning under center) the Colts are always going to be in playoff contention. With Dungy's coaching ability and with the personal on the team the Colts are going to be in position to make a Super Bowl run year-after- year. I think that's really all one can ask for. You have to be in position (make the playoffs) to make a run. Because in a lot of ways...I see the NFL playoffs as almost like the MLB playoffs in that it's almost a crap shoot. The '05 Steelers came out of nowhere. The Colts came out of nowhere. Not many people gave this year's Giants much of chance to do anything in the playoffs.

But it seems not everyone is convinced that having Dungy back is the best idea. Indy Star sports columnist, Bob Kravitz, gives his usual (muck-raking) take that Dungy is being somewhat of a hypocrite by putting football above family (whereas he preaches to put family first). On the surface I see what he is saying... but he's completely off base. Kravtiz mentions that Dungy has the financial freedom to spend all his free time with his family and that he doesn't need football. That's true...but what kind of example is that. The fact is...that most...I would say 99% of men have to work to support their families. This to me seems pretty basic. For the most part the men that Dungy is inspiring are fellow football players who are away from their family a lot of times. So what Dungy is showing is that a man can work...be away from their family and still be a quality father. He is leading by example... by showing that it can be done...that one can be a quality father while having a time-consuming job. So what's so bad about that Kravitz.

For a more well-rounded take of Dungy's decision to stay, read Len Pasquarelli's column on espn.com.

Academy Award Nominations

The 80th Academy Award Nominations have been been announced.

Click here to see the entire list.

My initial reaction...not too many surprises. American Gangster was virtually shot out of every major category but I don't find that too surprising. Tommy Lee Jones scoring a nod for In the Valley of Elah is kind of surprising mainly because that movie failed to register at all with audiences (Although...I've heard good things about it...It's on my Netflix list). The race is still wide open in what will win best picture. Of note I must toot my own horn (a little bit). About a month ago I predicted the best picture nominees and I missed it by one (darn you Charlie Wilson's War). Four out of five...not to shabby.

Wonder Woman...brining sexy back?

The picture to the right is from the latest issue (Feb. 2008) of Playboy Magazine. The cover depicts 2005 playmate of the year, Tiffany Fallon, as Wonder Woman...sans costume (except for the boots)...its body paint. The cover stirred up some controversy...especially among feminists...for depicting one of their cultural icons in such a sleazy fashion. (Of note...there is not a Wonder Woman pictorial in the magazine...Playboy is using her image to promote their "Sex in America" cover story.)

I for one was not overly offended mainly because it takes something quite seismic in nature to offend me. To be honest Wonder Woman is generally portrayed by contemporary artists in a sexy manner....exhibit 1 and exhibit 2....which shouldn't be too surprising considering the male dominance of the comic book world. But on the other hand I can perfectly see why some people were up in arms over the cover.

Wonder Woman is a strong feminist symbol. Her intention from the beginning (1940's) was to be a role model to girls. It shouldn't be too surprising that the 1970's Wonder Woman TV show coincided with the feminist movement. Thereby casting Wonder Woman as well as Lynda Carter as heroes to both little girls and woman alike.

Part of being an icon is having sensibilities that people relate to in different ways. While Wonder Woman is a feminist hero/role model to some people she is also a sex symbol (and possible even a fetish) to others. While those ideas seem to have a parallel projectory (thus leading to the reality of a Playboy cover)...the essence of Wonder Woman character is an intersection of those notions. She embodies both of those traits of being strong and sexy. She rises above the generic stereotypes of pop culture in that a female character is either pretty and dumb or smart and unattractive. The true strength of her character is that she is both powerful and beautiful and that those ideas do not have to be in conflict with one another.

Ultimately Playboy Magazine is not going to portray a balanced take on the Wonder Woman myth. Their desire and motivation is obvious. I just thought it was interesting to see how relevant Wonder Woman still is in that she can stir so much passion in the media (or blogosphere). Really...she is more than a feminist symbol...she is an American symbol. It is intriguing to see how that symbol gets played out from time to time. Also of note...DC Comics has just hired Gail Simone to be the regular writer of the Wonder Woman comic book...the first time that a woman will be an "on-going" writer in the series history.

A Second Look at "3:10 to Yuma"

The other weeknight I re-watched 3:10 to Yuma. As many as you know when Andy and I originally reviewed the movie last year we gave it a positive review...even giving it an A- (which for us is about as good as it gets).

There's no question now that I would say that 3:10 to Yuma (with apologies to some of the other 2007 releases that I haven't seen yet) is my top film of the year. With "top" being a combination of critical analysis and favoritism. I consider it to be one of the best films of the year as well as being my favorite movie of the year.

The movie is not only a stupendous western but a superb film. Without getting overly spoilerly for those that haven't seen the movie I just absolutely love how the movie ends both from an action standpoint and thematically. There's a famous line in the immortal John Ford western The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence that never stops being relevant in my eyes. . ."This is the west, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." To me that perfectly captures the myth versus reality of the American West. The climax of 3:10 to Yuma really plays with that idea of mythmaking and showcases how crucial it is to the characters involved. From a cinematic standpoint that notion is hardly new to the genre but it is always worth revisiting. Since the western is such a part of Americana...I think that as a genre picture there's nothing better than a good western and 3:10 to Yuma is definitely that.

Something Positive From the WGA Strike

I was pretty apprehensive about this live action Justice League of America movie. I guess I didn't quite understand the immediacy to rush out a JLA picture just for the sake of it. The whole project (from the director to the cast) didn't sit well with me. Due to the ongoing writer's strike the current JLA project is indefinitely on hold.

Via Variety magazine...

"Justice League" is no longer moving faster than a speeding bullet.

Warner Bros. let the options lapse on the young cast that director George Miller chose to play DC superhero staples. The studio, which had set Tuesday as its greenlight deadline for the pic, confirmed Wednesday the project is on indefinite hold.

Project now most likely won't get under way until late summer or fall at the earliest.

Cast members were informed late Tuesday their options would not be exercised, but they were also assured the studio is determined to make the film with them in it. But before that can happen, there are several problems to be resolved.

The studio's reasons included not getting the official response it needed on tax breaks from shooting in Australia. And while WB execs like the script they got from Kieran and Michele Mulroney, it would benefit from a little more work, something that isn't possible because of the writers' strike.

Some were surprised the studio didn't exercise cast options anyway. The deals gave WB the flexibility to exercise the deals immediately, or in July, and the actors will be making salaries in the low six-figure range. While Adam Brody, cast as the Flash, has a track record, most of the cast comprises such newcomers as Armie Hammer Jr., who plays Batman, and Megan Gale, who will play Wonder Woman.

The studio risks losing them to other film jobs. But it is likely most if not all the cast will make sure to be available starting late summer and fall, just in case. That's because of the starmaking potential of "Justice League."

Studio had set this week as the deadline to greenlight the superhero tentpole, which it was racing to get into production for 2009 release. That was always considered a dicey proposition, particularly when the writers went on strike, and because the film needs to be completed before the SAG deal expires in June.

With "Justice League" on indefinite hold, the studio has a superhero gap on its 2009 slate; status of the next "Superman" pic is also uncertain.

Newsflash...ESPN Loves The Patriots

ESPN continues to try to be in the business of creating stories than reporting (or commenting on) news. After the Chargers's victory over the Colts, Charger Igor Olshanky made the following ( I think tongue and cheek) comment about the Patriots.

Notice this wasn't a story on Monday...but come Tuesday it became the lead story with ESPN and it's given outlets. Why is this?

ESPN wants the Patriots to win the Super Bowl. This is obvious. Some of it has to be do with their east coast bias but mainly it has to do with ESPN's constant banging of the drums that anything present is the best ever. Nothing would suit their argument more than an undefeated Patriots team.

The Patriots get off on getting revenge on opposing players who talk trash leading up to the game. Just look what they did to Pittsburgh and Anthony Smith. They embarrassed them (and him). It's hard for me to see how some no name player can inspire the Patriots to play better but ultimately that seems to be the case...at least to a small degree.

Thus ESPN fuels the Patriot's fury by hyping (what should be) not event stories. The Olshansky's quotes led off PTI on Tuesday evening and was part of the opening montage for the 6:00 Sportscenter. I'm sure there was a segment about it but I didn't stick around to see it. It was also bantered about on ESPN 2's First Take and I would be willing to bet that it made the rounds on ESPN's radio shows as well. They did the same thing last week with Paul Spicer of Jacksonville Jaguars. He made a despairing (yet it was his opinion) comment around week 2 about the Patriots and spygate and lo and behold it was front page news with ESPN.

I realize that ESPN hyping a story to motivate a football team to win a game is not a guarantee that that team will win the game. I'm not that naive. But what bothers is the fact that ESPN is nonetheless trying. In their estimation they have nothing to lose. They're ESPN they can pretty much to whatever they want. They've been frustrating me a lot lately but it sure isn't stopping me from watching (or listening) to their programs.

Nonetheless...It's just ridiculous and unprofessional for ESPN...a journalistic institution...to manipulate their coverage in a way to help (maybe not the right word...) out another team to meet their own desires. Look at what Olshanky said...it was nothing...it was almost like he was just being sarcastic. But boy did ESPN run with the story.

I'm not kidding about this...but as I type this...Sportscenter just replayed Olshanky's quote....and now they are having Sean Salisbury and John Clayton discuss it.

Please.

I'm done.

"Sweeney Todd" movie review

This week we take a look at Hollywood's latest musical: Sweeny Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (R). Johnny Depp and Tim Burton team up for the screen adaptation of one of the darker mainstream musicals ever to grace Broadway. Depp plays the title character, who, in an attempt to avenge his slain wife, changes his identity and becomes a murdering barber. Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman, and Sasha Baron Cohen costar.

Ryan: If there was ever a musical suited for the taste of Tim Burton, it would be Sweeney Todd. The Gothic flair and macabre elements are perfect for the eccentric director. Granted this is nothing new for Burton, in terms of the film's morbid themes but for the most part his direction in the film is in tune with a lot of his past works. Sweeney Todd didn't impress me to the high degree that I thought it might but the fault lies elsewhere than with Burton's work.

Andy: I have to completely disagree. The problem with this film lies squarely at Burton's feet. First of all, this is a watered, down, recycled version of tricks Burton has been using for decades. It is almost like a lesser director was making a movie in the style of Tim Burton. Everything is darkly lit, several of the characters have Edward Scissorhands hair, and the visual macabre rarely holds the subtle humor that Burton's best work has.

Ryan: My biggest issue with the movie is the films music. Since this is a musical thats a significant concern. For instance, when I normally leave a film musical at least one song is dancing around in my head. With Sweeney Todd that wasn't the case. Now after a few days, the music completely escapes me. It just wasn't impressionable. I know Stephen Sondheim is well respected, perhaps even an icon in the musical world but, the music in film did not do it for me. Like I said earlier that is very problematic for a cinematic musical.

Andy: Sometimes Sondheim's music is a bit of a slow burn, and perhaps Sweeny Todd is no exception to that. A couple of the songs stuck with me when I left the theatre. However, it must be noted that Burton chose to cut one of the most beloved songs, “The Ballad of Sweeny Todd,” from the movie entirely. One also has to question some of the singing in the film. Helena Bonham Carter was questionable at times with her singing, and as great as Johnny Depp is, I would describe his vocal performance as adequate.

Ryan: Everybody knows that Johnny Depp is a fantastic actor. But even I was a little apprehensive with him being in a musical. I would say that hes not going to win any awards for his singing but he just scored a Golden Globe award for best performance in a musical or comedy. I'm not really sure how to take that (considering how dysfunctional the Golden Globes are this year) but I wouldn't categorize his performance as award worthy. It is definitely a noteworthy performance for his personal catalog but it certainly isn't the best work of his career either.

Andy: For all of the trash I've talked about this movie, I was very entertained. There is a stretch in the middle of the film where it is all falling into place and seems like a fantastic film. Unfortunately, it has a slow start and an ending that is inexplicably non-captivating considering the action that is going on. Ultimately, it does have a lot going for it, but it is a little disappointing to see great source material being put to screen by some of the most talented people in movies with results that are less than great.

Other than some questionable choices and music, Sweeney Todd is dark delight of a film. Final grade: B.

Blue Monday

I'm watcing PTI...I really didn't want to because I'm still recovering from the Colts game from yesterday.

But then...Tony Kornheiser, when talking about the game, uttered this..."Peyton Manning at some point becomes Greg Maddux. That he's one of the greatest regular season pitchers of all-time but you get to the postseason and the magic just isn't there."

As many as you can guess...I was literally screaming at the TV. It's bad enough that I have to relive the Colts loss but when Greg Maddux gets thrown into the discussion...well...I just couldn't let that pass.

I don't even know where to start. Manning can be blamed for some of the Colts pass playoffs disappointments but I don't think Sunday's game was entirely Manning's fault. The bottom line...is that the Colts defense played their worst game of the season. It was like the reverse of last year when the Colts defense went from zero to hero...seemingly over night. In this case it went from great to crappy. Granted the Manning led offense did have three gut-wrenching turnovers while in or around the red zone but only one of those could be attributed to a poor play by Manning. The bottom line is that the Colts made too many mistakes and that is why they and why deserve to lose...but to insinuate that the Colts loss was do to Manning' s poor play is simply untrue.

But let's get to the rest of what Kornheiser said...because really...if I had a beer bottle in my head it might have been launched at the TV.

There is the perception that in the playoffs Greg Maddux is not Greg Maddux. This is mainly due to the fact that his career postseason record is a lackluster 11-14. Admittingly that is zippy. But let's look at some other numbers. Maddux's postseason ERA is 3.34...slightly higher than his career ERA of 3.11. Let's see how that stacks up against Maddux's peers. Off the top of my head I've compared Maddux's postseason ERA to eight other contemporary pitchers (and their postseason ERA's) who have pitched multiple post season games. Here is how they rank:

1. Curt Schilling 2.23
2. John Smoltz 2.65
3. Greg Maddux 3.34
4. Pedro Martinez 3.40
5. Mike Mussina 3.42
Tom Glavine 3.42
7. Randy Johnson 3.50
8. Roger Clemens 3.75
9. Andy Petite 3.96

Not surprisingly...perceived big game pitchers, Schilling and Smoltz, lead the way. But wait...who's second...oh yeah...Mr. Choke Artist, Greg Maddux. Sometimes perception is right...like with Schilling and Smoltz...and sometimes it isn't.

But let's take it one step further. There's no bigger stage than the World Series. Let's see how ERA stacks up. I've only included those pitchers who have pitched in multiple World Series's (this eliminated Johnson and Martinez).

1. Schilling 2.06
2. Maddux 2.09
3. Clemens 2.37
4. Smotlz 2.47
5. Glavine 2.47
6. Mussina 3.00
7. Petitte 3.96

Mmmm...Maddux is only three-hundredth of a point behind Schilling, who is regarded as possibly the best big game pitcher of his generation. Whereas Schilling's record is 4-1 all time in the World Series...Maddux's is a mediocre 2-3. I'm not suggesting that Maddux has been better than Schilling or really anybody on the list. My point is the perception that Maddux does not carry his regular season success or "magic" to the postseason is complete bull crap. Here's a novel concept...other factors like not being able to hit the ball...not being able to field the ball...or not being able to hold a lead...influence the outcome of games. In my estimation Maddux has pitched pretty darn good in the postseason and certainly does not deserve the label of being a great regular season player who can't get it done in the post season.

I have another political post brewing in my head...but I thought I lighten the mood by posting a couple of humorous videos from funnyordie.com.


This first is one is suitable for all ages.




The second one is more of PG-13 rating. And also features a Zach Galifianakais sighting.

A Restless Night

My night started off on the right track with IU dominating Michigan in basketball. Of note DJ White had 22 rebounds along with 21 points. Eric Gordon pumped in 23 points. They are becoming quite an inside/outside threat.

But with the New Hampshire Primary, my night became one of endless frustration (I could only go to sleep after I had drank about half a bottle of Nyquil). By now everybody knows that Hillary Clinton pulled off an upset by narrowingly winning the New Hampshire Primary. Barack Obama finished a close second.

I was hoping for (and the polls were confirming this) a resounding Obama win thereby significantly damaging the Clinton machine. The idea was that Obama would move on to Nevada and South Carolina and post decisive wins thus just about clinching the nomination.

Looking back on that...I realize now that was wishful thinking. It looks like the primary season is actually going to emcompass many states--which ultimately might not be that bad of a notion and in fact will represent the opinions of many more Americans who normally don't get a chance to select the nominees (although I'm sure by May... Indiana's primary still won't matter with regard to choosing the nominee). Anyway...it's going to be a battle between Clinton and Obama. Obama's momentum has slowed but it looks like being the underdog might be the way to go in winning the delegates. It is going to be interesting to see how the candidates choose to campaign (or not) in Nevada and South Carolina with Super Tuesday looming on the horizon.

"Juno" movie review

Update: This is kind of hard to believe but nonetheless is very awesome (for residents of Greensburg) but Wolf Theatre will be showing Juno starting Friday, January 11th. Props to the Wolf for getting a high quality indie flick.

We continue our look at end-of-year films finally making their way to our area. Up this week is the indie film, Juno (PG-13). Ellen Page stars as the title character, who, while in high school, confronts her unplanned pregnancy. She decides on her own to give her baby up for adoption to a yuppie couple played by Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman. Micheal Cena also co-stars in the film. Jason Reitman directs.

Andy: Juno is a very easy movie to like. All of the characters are well crafted, well acted, and reasonable. The story deals with a difficult situation without being preachy or overly simplistic, plus it has a really cool soundtrack. There are really no obvious problems with this film, which makes it one of the year's best.

Ryan: No question about it, Juno is not only one of the year's best films, but it is also one of my favorite movies of the year. The movie is a cross between Napoleon Dynamite and Superbad. It has a quirky charm to it with a crass sincerity. Juno is an independent film but it isn't overly artsy. It has a mainstream movie feel but it's one of authenticity not superficiality. It's a fantastic film that might just sneak a Best Picture Nomination from the Academy, which would be all right with me.

Andy: At the heart of Juno is the performance of Ellen Page. High School movies frequently operate on a superficial level, so making a movie about high school pregnancy that attempts to be genuine completely hinges on the performance of the pregnant teenager. Page plays it with an authentic, defensive sarcasm that only sometimes masks the shock of her situation. Without Page's performance, Juno is a pretty questionable movie.

Ryan: The breakthrough performance of the year belongs to Ellen Page. She is simply outstanding as the unconventional pregnant high school student. If she doesn't get nominated for an Oscar it will be a cinematic tragedy. Not to be out done is the rest of the cast. Michael Cena seems to have perfected playing the geeky high school student (TV's Arrested Development and last summer's Superbad). Jason Bateman continues his string of solid supporting work and Jennifer Garner again showcases that she has the skill to deliver solid silver screen work.

Andy: Every performance in the movie is great. Jason Reitman, who got a string of really solid performance in his first movie, Thank You For Smoking, has securely established himself as one of the most exciting (and viable) young directors working. The only questionable element to Juno is the unnecessary final scene, which is pretty easy to overlook in retrospect.

Ryan: Even though I have nothing but the highest praise for Juno I feel that I've been a disservice to the movie. Andy and I saw the film a few weeks ago. Over that time I've been asked, “What's a good movie that's out there?” My reply is, “Juno.” Immediately I hear the same thing, “I haven't heard of that movie. What is it about?” I start by saying that, it's about a high school girl that gets pregnant. By that time I've lost them. I'm going to amend for my mistake and just say that Juno is a stupendous film that needs to be watched. Case closed.

Juno is certainly one of 2007's best films. Final grade: A-.

Goose gets the call

Goose Gossage was elected to the baseball hall of fame today. My other choice, Tim Raines, didn't come close (24.3% of the vote). . . although he does remain on the ballot.

Via espn.com

NEW YORK -- Rich "Goose" Gossage became only the fifth relief pitcher elected to the Hall of Fame, earning baseball's highest honor Tuesday on his ninth try on the ballot. Gossage was listed on 466 ballots, or 85.8 percent, to qualify for enshrinement in his ninth year on the ballot.

Former Boston Red Sox outfielder Jim Rice was on 72.2 percent of the ballots, just 16 votes shy of the 75 percent needed. He has one more year of eligibility left on the ballot. Last year, Gossage was on 71.2 percent of ballots and Rice appeared on 63.5 percent. Former Montreal Expos and Chicago Cubs outfielder Andre Dawson was third in this year's voting, appearing on 358 ballots, or 65 percent. Pitcher Bert Blyleven was on 336 ballots, or 61.9 percent. Dawson's teammate in Montreal, outfielder Tim Raines, was alone among 11 first-ballot candidates in qualifying to remain on the ballot, with 24.3 percent or 132 votes. Candidates must receive 5 percent to remain on the ballot for the next year. Rice will appear on the writers' ballot for the 15th and final time next year, when career steals leader Rickey Henderson will be among the newcomers. Mark McGwire, a casualty of the Steroids Era in some writers' minds, received just 128 votes _ the exact total he had last year. His percentage increased slightly to 23.6 percent, up from 23.5 percent last year when he was on the ballot for the first time.

Gossage, who fell short by 21 votes last year, joins Hoyt Wilhelm (1985), Rollie Fingers (1992), Dennis Eckersley (2004) and Bruce Sutter (2006) in Cooperstown's bullpen. Gossage was a nine-time All-Star who pitched for nine major league teams from 1972-94 and had 310 saves -- 52 of them in which he got seven outs or more.
He will be inducted July 27 in Cooperstown, joined by five men elected last month by the revamped Veterans Committee: former commissioner Bowie Kuhn, former Dodgers owner Walter O'Malley, managers Dick Williams and Billy Southworth and ex-Pirates owner Barney Dreyfuss.

Golden Globes cancelled

I know the Golden Globes don't have the prestige of the Oscars but it's always a fun show to watch because so many of the nominees are just there to have a good time and that comes across during the show.

With the Writers' strike still on-going, the show has been canceled as many of the acting nominees were going to boycott the show out of solidarity for their co-workers.

Via yahoo.com

The Hollywood Foreign Press Association said Monday that the traditional Golden Globe Awards ceremony has been canceled and will be replaced with a news conference format.

The move came after striking writers threatened to picket the event.

"We are all very disappointed that our traditional awards ceremony will not take place this year and that millions of viewers worldwide will be deprived of seeing many of their favorite stars celebrating 2007's outstanding achievements in motion pictures and television," said Jorge Camara, president of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association. "We take some comfort, however, in knowing that this year's Golden Globe Award recipients will be announced on the date originally scheduled."

The show had been set to air on Sunday.

Faced with a threat by actors to boycott the ceremony rather than cross picket lines, the association and NBC were forced to adopt another approach for the ceremony.

The association will forgo the typical network payment, reported to be $5 million, it receives for the broadcast, said a person close to the show who was not authorized to comment and requested anonymity.

But NBC will have exclusive electronic rights to the show will be able to sell advertising for it, the person said.

My Hall of Fame ballot

The MLB hall of fame announcement is tomorrow so I thought I would give my take...I know it's hard to believe but I actually don't have a vote.

This particular ballot is a tough decision. There are a number of players on the fence (which is a red flag). I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about baseball so when I have to think about whether a given player is a hall of famer or not than that's not a great initial sign for that given player. Most hall of famers are of the no-doubt-about-it variety.

I'd say that there is only one player on the ballot that I didn't even have to think about...that is Goose Gossage. For a ten year stretch ('75-”85) Gossage was one of (if not the best) reliever in baseball. He had four seasons of an ERA under 2.00 (including a ridiculous .77 in the strike shortened year of 1981). Minus the one year he had as a starter (don't understand that) his worst ERA season was 2.90. During that stretch he finished in the top ten in saves (in his league) every season while winning 3 save titles and finishing second two other times. He was simply dominant. He was also a 9-time All Star.

As for the other two pitchers who have gained some support (Bert Blyleven and Jack Morris)...I'm not sold on either of them. I know Blyleven has won 287 games but he never won a Cy Young award and he only made two All-Star games. If it wasn't for game 7 of the World Series...I'm not sure if Morris would even be in the discussion. He's kind of like his era's Curt Schilling only not as good. Like Blyleven, Morris never won a Cy Young and his career ERA of 3.90 would be the highest of any starting pitcher in the Hall of Fame.

This is where it get dicey...and I've spent way to much time looking at this. There are several OF's on the ballot (Rice, Dawson, Murhpy, Paker) that deserve a serious look. And I have even thought that Rice and Dawson should have already been in. I've looked really hard at the outfield position during the '70 and '80's and wondered what it was that was keeping these guys out. Furthermore the only new candidate to the ballot that deserves (some) consideration is Tim Raines and since he played out field as well I felt I should look into this phenomenon of players that I grew up with not making the cut of getting into the hall.

I've been reading Jayson Stark's latest book The Stark Truth: The Most Overrated and Underrated Players in Baseball History. (Rest assured that there will be future posts concerning this book). But in the book he uses the stat-geek stat of OPS+ to make several of his arguments. Regular OPS is simply on-base % plus slugging %. OPS+ is regular OPS but adjusted to the era that a player played in and to the ballpark that a player hit in. An OPS+ of 150 is generally accepted as being 50 percent better than the average player and constitutes what he calls a great season. An OPS+ of 125 is 25 percent better than the average player and constitutes a good season.

First I'm not saying that this stat is the “gospel” of whether a player is a hall of famer or not. It doesn't constitute defense. But overall it is a stat that I put a lot of weight in because it factors in the era that a given player played in.

Here's the candidates:

Dale Murphy...18 seasons played...2 good seasons...4 great seasons (although 2 of those were 149)

Jim Rice...16 seasons played...5 good seasons...2 great seasons.

Andre Dawson...21 seasons...6 good seasons...1 great season.

Tim Raines...23 seasons...6 good seasons...2 great seasons (one of those at 149).

Dave Parker...19 seasons...3 good seasons...3 great seasons (two of those at 149)

Let's compare those to some of their peers (outfields) who are already in the hall of fame or will be (Rickey Henderson)

Carl Yastrzemski...23 seasons...6 good seasons...4 great seasons.

Reggie Jackson...21 seasons...8 good seasons...7 great seasons.

Dave Winfield...22 seasons...7 good seasons...4 great seasons.

Tony Gwynn...20 seasons...8 good seasons...3 great seasons

Rickey Henderson...25 seasons...11 good seasons...4 great seasons.

My first reaction to all of this...is that during this era there were not a lot of hall of fame (or hall of fame worth) outfielders playing. It was a pitching dominated era with 6 (Carlton, Seaver, Ryan, Sutton, Niekro & Perry) pitches who pitched during this era that went on to win 300 games. There were only 3 players (Reggie, Mike Schmidt and Eddie Murray) during this time that hit over 500 homeruns. The game of baseball goes in cycles and this period was not overly friendly to the hitter.

My mantra for whether a player is a hall of famer or not is...that whether that given player was one of the best (if not the best) at his position for a number of years.

What I'm seeing (by looking at the OPS+...relative to other HOF's) is that Murphy, Rice, Dawson & Parker just simply didn't put together enough good to great years to qualify for the hall of fame. Murphy won back to back MVP awards but he only had 6 truly good to great years. Rice, who is earning more and more support, is a borderline candidate at best. And when you think that one his teammates (Dwight Evans) had the exact same number of good and great years that he did...than that shows how a “name” can propel a person more than what they actually did on the field (it also shows that Evans, who isn't even on the ballot anymore is pretty underrated). I was really surprised by Dawson's lack of productivity. I struggle with his candidacy more than any other's in this discussion (mainly because I actually watched him play when he was on the Cubs). He won one MVP award and finished second two other times. But other than those three years he was only a slightly above average ball player. And I just don't think that cuts it.

As for Raines...I mean...he started out his career like it was headed towards Cooperstown. In his first seven seasons he made the All-Star team every year and by far had the best seasons of his career. But after his stint in the National League...Raines just became an average ballplayer. But he does have the best stolen base success rate of all time. He's 51^st all time in “Runs Created” (tied with Tony Gwynn)...so that is in his favor...especially when you see that he is well ahead of Dawson and Rice. The more I type...the more I'm liking Raines as a hall of famer. When one considers that Raines is one of the best leadoff hitters of all time as well as one of the best base-stealers of all time than those two notions go along way in helping Raines's cause. One isn't just saying that he's one of the best (leadoff hitters or base-stealers) of his era. He's one of the best of all time of those two ideas. I'm sold for him. I would vote for him.

I have learned (or maybe re-learned) that not every era in baseball history has hall of fame caliber players at every position. Dawson was one of the better outfielders in the National League during the '80's but that doesn't necessarily mean that he is a hall of famer.

Ultimately I'm going to have to change my hall of fame mantra...that a player has to be one of the best (if not the best) at his position for a number of years...too...that a player has to be consistently one of the best (if not the best) at his postion for a number of years. My biggest issue with guys like Dawson, Rice and Murphy is that they were just not consistently good (to great) for most of their career.

Goose...Rock Raines...the both of them get my vote.

We'll see what happens. The hall of fame announcement will be Tuesday at 1:30 PM.

Bob Sanders...Defensive Player of the Year!

Via espn.com

NEW YORK -- Bob Sanders' impact on the vastly improved Indianapolis defense, not to mention his impact on opposing ball carriers, earned the Colts safety The Associated Press 2007 NFL Defensive Player of the Year award Monday.

Sanders makes highlight films with his smash-mouth style and knack for always being near the ball. His value as a leader -- the Peyton Manning of the Colts' defense, if you will -- was just as much a factor in Indianapolis having the third-ranked unit in the NFL and allowing just 262 points, a league low.

Yes, these Colts can play dominating defense, and Sanders is the main reason.

"One of the things we talked about when he first got here was how critical this position is in this defense," said coach Tony Dungy, who has nicknamed Sanders "The Eraser."

"Donnie Shell went to five Pro Bowls, and John Lynch went to I don't even know how many Pro Bowls. You get asked to do a lot of things in this defense, and it's rare to find someone who can do those things."

Sanders did enough to earn 31 votes from a nationwide panel of 50 media members who regularly cover the NFL. That was particularly impressive because it was a strong season for individual defensive performances.

Yet next closest in the balloting were Seattle end Patrick Kerney and Tennessee tackle Albert Haynesworth with four votes each.

Sanders was a huge factor in the Colts' surge to the Super Bowl title last year. He missed most of the regular season, got healthy for the playoffs, and suddenly teams couldn't run or pass effectively on Indy.

With Sanders in the lineup for 15 games this season, the Colts were superb defensively on their way to a 13-3 record and the AFC South crown.

Not that Sanders laid back in an attempt to stay healthy.

"Coming in, that was my No. 1 goal, staying healthy. Sometimes, though, you can't prevent injuries from happening," he said.

One key to the Colts' stinginess has been moving Sanders closer to the line of scrimmage.

"I've had to adjust and I think I've adjusted well," Sanders said. "I was definitely a run stopper in college [at Iowa], but playing cover-2 or man coverage or whatever makes me better. I've tried to adjust because I want to do it.

"I enjoy it definitely. The strength of my game is being down in the box and I've got a good grasp of seeing what's going on. It's been a lot of work to do that since my rookie season."

Also receiving votes were defensive back Antonio Cromartie of San Diego with three; linebackers Mike Vrabel of New England and DeMarcus Ware of Dallas (2); and cornerback Ronde Barber of Tampa Bay, linebacker James Harrison of Pittsburgh, rookie linebacker Patrick Willis of San Francisco, and end Mario Williams of Houston, each with one vote.

Last year's winner was Miami end Jason Taylor.

Sanders is the first Colts player to win the award.

"To me, that's probably the biggest statement because the national perception is that we're an offensive team," Dungy said. "I thought for someone to win it on this team, it would take a big, big impact just to be considered."

Sanders credits his success and his style to how he was taught way back when.

"I would have to say it goes back to little league, pee-wee football," he said. "Those are some of the first things they teach you and that's something you remember as you grow up: stay low, stay low. It helps me now being explosive in short areas, because it's a combination of power, speed and quickness. You've got to bring it all together, and then you can come from 10 or 15 yards deep to make the play."

Lots of them.

Congrats to Bob...this is a much deserved award. Bob Sanders simply rocks.

Just remember...70% of the earth is covered by water. The other 30% is covered by Bob Sanders

The election might already be over

I don't know how I missed writing about this...but on Thursday night during Mike Huckabee's speech (after winning Iowa) I erupted in laughter because Chuck Norris was standing right behind him. It was hilarious.

Come to find out Chuck Norris is a big Mike Huckabee supporter (as seen by this campaign ad--which is kind of funny).

If Huckabee has Norris in his corner than not only is the primary over but the election as well.

My advice to Barack Obama...get Bob Sanders in your corner.

Tim Kurkjian

I just finished reading Tim Kurkjian's ( I think his first book...no wait...second book) Is This a Great Game, or What?
It was a fast read (almost too fast) but very enjoyable. It's basically Kurkjian being Kurkjian...ie telling fascinating stories and detailing crazy (stat driven) tales about the game of baseball.

I was thinking that it would be awesome to have this book on audio with Kurkjian reading it. He has a geeky quality that I find enjoyable when I'm watching him on Baseball Tonight. I recommend this book to all baseball fans. It is just a very enjoyable read.

Decatur County's First 2008 Baby

Normally I wouldn't be writing about this subject but one of Jenny's best friends had Greensburg's first baby of 2008.

Click here and here for the full story.

Congrats to David and Erin and their family. I'm happy to report that both mother and son are doing fine.

Do it Obama!

CNN is projecting that Barack Obama has won the Iowa Caucus (although it was a close three way race).

This is fantastic news.

Now it's on to New Hampshire.

Boy...I'm excited. It feels like the Colts just won the Super Bowl or IU just made it to the final four....
well...maybe I'm not that excited.......OK I'm not that excited.

But for the first time in a long time I have a postive vibe about where this country is headed (and that is something to be excited about).

The "real" TDK trailer

Pretty good stuff.

"Charlie Wilson's War" movie review

This week we watched the political comedy Charlie Wilson's War (R). Tom Hanks plays the Texas congressman who, pressed by a wealthy campaign donor (Julia Roberts) begins to covertly aid rebels in Afghanistan in the late 80s. Philip Seymour Hoffman costars and Mike Nichols directs.

Andy: Charlie Wilson's War is an unconventional comedy. Its subject is both historical and political, which usual does not bode well for a comedy. Almost every comedy that comes out of Hollywood is built around a romantic relationship, culminating with a marriage or connection between the romantic leads. Not only is there no marriage, there is no romantic theme in the film at all. Remarkably, this works perfectly for this film. What Nichols has done is create a political thriller that is a comedy that does not take itself seriously. It seems like a simple idea, but it has rarely been attempted, much less pulled off this successfully.

Ryan: There’s no question that Charlie Wilson’s War is one of the most fascinating films of the year. Making it even more remarkable is the fact that the movie is based on a true story. This is definitely a case of real events being stranger than fiction. Watching the movie, it seems unbelievable that this really happened. But from what I can tell, much of the movie’s events are indeed accurate. Considering how absurd the events are in the movie, it was a smart decision making the film a comedy. A more serious movie involving the subject matter probably would have been laughable (but not in a good way).

Andy: In a film full of Oscar winners, it is the most recent member of the club that steals the show. Julia Roberts is largely wasted in the movie, and Hanks carries it in the leading role, but Philip Seymour Hoffman absolutely steals the show in every scene he is in. Be prepared, because his character is completely obnoxious, foul mouthed, and rude. But just like Hoffman himself, he's unconventionally good at his job and ridiculously fun to watch.

Ryan: Hoffman is simply outstanding in the movie. There is one scene in particular in the movie that perfectly captures the crassness of Hoffman’s character. It is hands-down one of the best scenes of the year. He’s already scored a Golden Globe nomination and I don’t think an Oscar nod would be out of the question. The other fine performance in the movie belongs to Hanks. This isn’t one of his defining performances but seeing Hanks utilize his comedic talents (which he doesn’t use all that often anymore) is quite a joy. Like Andy alluded to, Tom Hanks knows how to carry a film and he again does it here.

Andy: While Charlie Wilson's War is not a perfect film, it does not have any major flaws. Aaron Sorkin's screenplay is strong with both storytelling and dialogue and it would be hard to ask for much more out of any of the performers. It also walks the precarious line of being politically relevant without coming across as preachy. All of this leads one to believe that when awards start getting handed out, Charlie Wilson's War will be on the receiving end of some of them.

Ryan: Charlie Wilson’s War box-office numbers have under-performed but that isn’t too much of surprise considering the track record of other recent war-themed movies. As Andy mentioned—as opposed to most of those other recent movies—Charlie Wilson’s War’s politics do not get in the way of the storytelling. The movie is not overt in seeing how the events in the movie would go on to influence future political policy regarding the United States and The Middle East. Instead it makes poignant allusions to our present battle of The War on Terror.

Charlie Wilson's War is one of the most captivating movies of the year. The movie entertains as well as informs. Final grade: A-.

A sneak peak of film's of 2008

This should be my top 10 movies of 2007 but I haven't had the chance or (opportunity) to see all those end of the year flicks (like The Savages or There Will Be Blood...or even Atonement). Instead I'll look ahead and give my top ten anticipated-films of 2008.

10. Iron Man

The trailer for the film isn't to bad but seeing some of the other footage that was shown at the San Diego Comic Con was pretty impressive. Marvel's movies have been pretty bad here lately so maybe Iron Man will buck the trend. I'm not a Marvel guy but I've always liked Iron Man.

9. Tropic Thunder
The last time Ben Stiller directed one of his own comedies it was one of his bests--Zoolander. The premise of the movie is promising (Through a series of freak occurrences, a group of actors shooting a big-budget war movie are forced to become the soldiers they are portraying.) An eclectic cast consisting of Stiller, Robert Downey Jr., Jack Black, Nick Nolte, Matthew McConaughey should make that movie premise work.

8. Pineapple Express
Judd Apatow had a brilliant 2007 (Knocked Up and Superbad) so hopefully he can parlay that into 2008 with this comedy involving Seth Rogen and James Franco.

7. Cloverfield
The biggest cinematic mystery in a long time is going to be answered very shortly as Cloverfield opens in a few weeks. I must admit that I've been caught up (to a degree) with the buzz surrounding this film. I have a feeling that its going to be either a big hit or a big miss.

6. Wanted
A Russian director (Timur Berkmambetov)...a Mark Millar graphic novel...and Angelina Jolie. This could be recipe for a summer hit or a summer dud. I haven't had the chance to read Millar's mini-series (although I want to)...the trailer for this movie looked pretty cool. On a side note it has the James McAvoy factor so I would be watching it regardless if it was based on a comic book or not.

5. Valkyrie
A Bryan Singer project with Tom Cruise...a few years ago it would have been a no-brainer. Singer is still one of my favorite directors...although his stock is a little down with Superman Returns not being as big as it could (should have been). As for Cruise...well he's Tom Cruise and whether deserved or not his name just doesn't have the cinematic weight as it once did...although I still think he's a helluva of an actor. Here's the trailer.

4. The Incredible Hulk
I realize that I'm just about the only person who liked Ang Lee's The Hulk movie. But I completely understand that a reboot was needed. The fact that Edward Norton is playing Bruce Banner is simply unexpected but quite cool considering that he's one of the best actors of his generation. Again I'm not a Marvel man but like Iron Man I've always liked the Hulk.

3. Bond 22
The next installment of the Bond franchise is currently untitled but expected to come out sometime in November. Daniel Craig's first go around as 007 was just freakin' awesome. Casino Royale was one of the best Bond films so my excitement regarding Craig's second outing is pretty high.

2. Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
Really...what needs to be said about this. Indiana Jones is a cinematic icon. Spielberg, Ford...and even Shia...what is there not to be excited about?

1. The Dark Knight
This will probably be like the greatest movie of all time.
But seriously (and all bias aside)...Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale know what they are doing with the character of Batman. It looks like Heath Ledger knows what he is doing with the Joker. For proof...click here see the trailer.

Happy New Year!

I couldn't resist posting this hit that occurred Sunday night in the Colts/Titans game.

My question is...why was Bob Sanders wearing Darrel Reid's jersey on special teams.

Just kidding, Mr. Reid...that was the hit of the year.