Roman Holiday

As Jenny and I were winding down with our Thanksgiving celebrations last night we decided to watch the screen classic, Roman Holiday (1953). The film stars Gregory Peck and introduced Aubrey Hepburn to the world. William Wyler (Ben-Hur) directed.

It's easy to see why the film is a classic. Hepburn (who won the Oscar) and Peck have a genuine chemistry with one another and the storyline of two people falling in love under slightly deceptive circumstance is a standard (and successful) Hollywood storyline. I won't give the ending away, but will say that it is a satisfying ending and one that probably wouldn't happen today.

But moreover it should be noted that Aubrey Hepburn is hands down...the cutest film star of all time. She's not the most beautiful (Grace Kelly) or the sexist (Rita Hayworth) screen icon of all time. But her screen presence...her acting ability...and her charming looks all add up to her being the cutest screen legend of all time.

"Rachel Getting Married" Movie Review

This week we’re taking a look at the indie drama, Rachel Getting Married (R). In the film Anne Hathaway stars as a recovering junkie who gets a weekend leave to attend her older sister’s (Rosemarie DeWitt) wedding at the homestead. Making the transition back to normalcy (even for a few days) proves to be difficult for both Hathaway and the rest of her family. Jonathon Demme directs.

Andy: Rachel Getting Married is a well made, realistic, and very difficult film to watch. The story is centered around Kym (Anne Hathaway) and her myriad issues with drug addiction, intra family relationships, and other demons from her past. Airing all of those issues against the backdrop of her sister’s wedding makes an uncomfortable situation a whole lot more uncomfortable, and at times downright excruciating. It is a testament to the performances and director Jonathan Demme that the audience feels that discomfort throughout.

Ryan: Rachel Getting Married has been getting its fair share of Oscar buzz mainly with Hathaway’s against-type performance. In actuality the film is more than Hathaway’s praise-worthy performance. It’s not quite Best Picture material but it’s still a solid piece of work. Granted there are scenes that drag and the non-structured linear story might frustrate some moviegoers but overall the film plays like a top notch indie picture.

Andy: The key to a movie like this working is that there must be top notch performances. There isn’t a bad one in Rachel Getting Married, but without question the group is led by Hathaway. She exudes selfishness, pain, and vulnerability, but manages to stay likeable for much of the film. It is no surprise that her complex performance is getting Oscar buzz, because performances like this don’t come around very often.

Ryan: Hathaway’s name has been getting tossed around for an Oscar and the acclaim is justified. The strength of her performance is that the audience still cares for her character even though she’s openly obnoxious in the film. A best actress nomination would not be out of the question and well deserved. Another potential nomination (for best supporting actress) might be for DeWitt. Her character is not developed the strongest but she more than holds her own in the heavy scenes with Hathaway.

Andy: For all of the good things about this movie, the story itself does lag a little at times. The marriage of Rachel that is in the title gets a reasonably large portion of the screen time, but you can’t help getting the sense that the wedding is not what this movie is about. So during long stretches of wedding activity, the movie drags a bit. The movie also lacks a truly satisfying conclusion, which bothers my sense of wanting a story to be completed, but probably is appropriate for the character it’s analyzing.

Ryan: Demme’s decision to shoot the film in a non-traditional manner also enhances the movie. The movie is almost exclusively shot with hand-held cameras and almost has a documentary type feel. Moreover the use of the hand-held cameras provides not only for an intimate look but arguable a voyeuristic feel as well. Consequently and by design this makes several scenes in the movie uncomfortable to watch--almost to the point where we, as the audience, feel that we shouldn’t be eavesdropping on the family drama unfolding.

Highlighted with some outstanding performances, with Hathaway leading the way, Rachel Getting Married is an authentic look at a family dealing with its past, present and future. Final grade: B+.

Chinese Democracy

The album, 13 years in the making, is finally available for purchase (even on itunes).

I'm not really expecting it to be good but what the heck...it is new Guns n' Roses (well sort of).

"The Wrestler" trailer

This is certainly a different direction than Darren Aronofsky's last film, The Fountain.

Looks pretty solid...of course The Boss helps that out.

The Moose

Not really sure why baseball pitcher, Mike Mussina's nickname is The Moose...but so be it. But anyway, news broke yesterday that Mussina plans on retiring. So consequently, because I'm a baseball junkie--especially when it comes to a player's chances for the hall of fame--I got lost last night with the website, baseball-reference.com.

My initial reaction upon hearing his retirement was really just a hesitation, which is not a good sign. Normally one shouldn't have to think about whether a player is a hall of famer or not. A hesitation is never a good sign. After thinking on it...while watching PTI...I was leaning towards it being no. He never won a Cy-Young...only won 20 games once (last year)...never won a championship...didn't get to 300 wins. Now I realize some of those things are more important than the others but together they made the case against him.

But after taking a closer look...Mussina should be a hall of famer.

1. His win-loss record is phenomenal. He didn't get to 300 wins...but he finished up 270-153. Now what's impressive about that is his winning percentage of .638. That's tied for 38th best of all-time (with HOF'er, Jim Palmer). That's a better win-loss percentage than some of his contemporaries that are going to be hall of famers (Maddux and Glavine) or close to it (Smoltz and Schilling). Maybe he didn't win twenty games...but he did have several seasons of winning a lot of games...in fact he won over 18 games five times (not counting his 20 win season). I kind of think that the 20 game mark for a starter needs to put in a proper context...in that...with the advent of the 5-man rotation...it's just harder to win 20 games a season.

2. He never won a Cy-Young but he finished sixth or better nine times. He finished second once in '99. While he made not have been the best pitcher for a season he certainly was one of the better pitchers for a number of years. And one of my rule of thumbs for determining whether a player is a hall of famer is whether or not that players was the best, or one of the bests, at his position for a number of seasons. There's no question that Mussina was one of the best pitchers in the AL for many seasons.

3. He again never won an ERA title but he finished sixth or better ten times. His career ERA of 3.68 is solid as is his ERA+ of 123. Considering that he pitched in the AL and in the AL East for his whole career... than having an ERA that respectful is even more impressive.

Mussina certainly didn't have a flashy career but he had a consistently good career and, in my view, that gets him in.

"Quantum of Solace" Movie Review

This week we take a look at the latest in the long line of James Bond films, Quantum of Solace (PG-13). Daniel Craig returns for his second go round as 007, and Marc Forster takes his first shot at directing the franchise. Olga Kurylenko, Judy Dench, and Jeffrey Wright costar.

Ryan: Quantum of Solace, like this summer's The Dark Knight, is a sequel to a very successful rebooting of a franchise (Casino Royale and Batman Begins, respectively). But unlike The Dark Knight, Quantum of Solace fails to bring the franchise up to that next level. Don't get me wrong. Quantum of Solace is a very entertaining action flick but it's a step back from the high standard that was reset by Casino Royale. Yet, ultimately most Bond fans and other casual moviegoers will be satisfied by the film.

Andy: Casino Royale was a big surprise, partly because it was so much better than the previous Bond films. Quantum of Solace does not have that advantage. It still packs enough punch to be a very good movie action movie, and shouldn’t be faulted too much for not living up to the quality of its predecessor.

Ryan: One of the biggest strengths of Casino Royale is how it simultaneously revived the Bond franchise for a contemporary moviegoing audience while still respecting the formulaic elements of the forty year old series. But regrettably, Quantum of Solace doesn't feel like a Bond film. I'm conflicted in whether that is a good or bad thing. The box-office results (a weekend hall of over 70 million dollars) would indicate that it's a good thing in that they are pulling in new viewers. But for Bond fans the movie might prove to be frustrating at times in that it's almost completely devoid of the allurement of the previous incarnations.

Andy: There’s no question that Solace break with many of the Bond traditions. There are not any spy gadgets, save what you can see on CNN on a nightly basis. Outside of the opening sequence there aren’t really any cool cars. Even on the seduction front this Bond seems preoccupied with other things, just having a token love scene with a token character that wasn’t very necessary for the film in the first place. That said, the movie still works like spy film should. But unlike most Bond films, it doesn’t check all of the 007 boxes.

Ryan: There's no question that Daniel Craig fits the modern Bond (a steely detachment with a lot of rage) that the producers and filmmakers are striving for. And there's also no question that Craig delivers the goods with regard to his cool performance. The only thing that I think needs tinkering with in regards to his performance is that it needs to be less intense. Yes, Bond is an intense character but he's also a suave character. Craig demonstrated in Casino Royale that he could handle that duality. Unfortunately with Quantum of Solace there was no opportunity to showcase his charming side.

Quantum of Solace is an excellent action film, even if it does lack some of the identity of a traditional Bond film. Final grade: B.

A Hoosier talking about the Wildcats and Tar Heels...

In anticipation of tonight's UNC/Kentucky basketball matchup, espn.com had an interesting Sportsnation poll...which is the greater historical program...North Carolina or Kentucky? As of 5:30 the results were a lopsided 61% to 39% in favor of the Tar Heels.

It should be noted that the only thing that these programs have in common (in terms of my view) is that I extremely dislike both of these teams. (And I'm aware that I married somebody who likes the Wildcats). But anyway...I'm an Indiana fan (not much of a surprise there) so it's only naturally to dislike Kentucky. As for UNC...well...I've just never really cared for the ACC or teams like UNC or Duke for that matter.

But anyway...I was just intrigued by the disparity of the poll because I don't think one can argue that UNC is that much more historically significant than Kentucky--in terms of its basketball tradition.

In trying to put bias aside...here are some numbers to look at.

Final Four Appearances:

UCLA, 18

North Carolina, 17

Duke, 14

Kansas, Kentucky 13

Ohio State, 10

IU, Louisville, 8

--UNC definitely has the lead here 17 to 13 respectively.

NCAA Titles:

UCLA, 11

Kentucky, 7

Indiana, 5

North Carolina, 4

Kansas, 4

Duke, 3

Kansas, 3

--But here Kentucky has a sizable advantage 7 to 4.

Here's the all-time leaders in winning percentage

Kentucky .762

North Carolina .733

Kansas .709

Duke .694

Syracuse .685

--This time Kentucky still has the advantage but it's pretty close.

Ultimately my point is that it's pretty even when arguing the greater historical significance between the two programs, UNC and Kentucky. I never really intended to argue for Kentucky but I guess I kind of did. I was just put off with how off-balanced the Sportsnation poll results were. (Although it's pretty clear that Kentucky doesn't have much of a chance against UNC tonight).

But when it comes down to it...if I were ranking the top five programs of all time I would just feel inclined to go by number of titles won...because when it comes down to it...that's what counts. Plus that makes Indiana look good...and ahead of North Carolina.

But I'll tell you what I don't like...is being stuck on five titles. Indiana is over due for a title. Not going to happen this year...but Crean's got it in him to catch Kentucky.

What is a Neti Pot?

I'm glad you asked.



Check this out...

New Watchmen Trailer...

...for your weekend enjoyment.

"Role Models" Movie Review

After a brief hiatus, we're back this week with a new review of the comedic hit, Role Models (R). In the film two slackers of sort (Paul Rudd and Seann William Scott) are sentenced to 150 hours of community service involving being big-brother type role models to two kids (Christopher Mintz-Plasse and Bobb'e J. Thompson). Hilarity ensues.

Ryan: For whatever reason--maybe having no expectations to speak of--Role Models turned out to be a pleasant surprise. This film is very funny. It's even laugh-out-loud funny. Now don't let the fact that kids are in this movie lead one to believe that it's a family flick. Because it isn't. This is an adult-orientated comedy laced with strong language and adult content. But as a Rated-R comedy, it succeeds mightily as a highly entertaining movie.

Andy: Fans of the long-extinct MTV show The State will recognize some familiar faces in here. Many of the people responsible for this movie are veterans of that show, including director David Wain. The subtle humor and attention to detail that made The State so charming are present here, and it makes for a movie that is surprisingly funny. There are several big, goofy moments intended to garner laughs, but there are also several little peripheral jokes that give the movie a feeling of substance.

Ryan: Much of the comedic success of the film comes from the two leads, Rudd and William Scott. In the film it looks as if the director, David Wain, just told his two leading men to just go out there and do their “thing.” Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't. With Role Models, it succeeds and it succeeds very well. Rudd and William Scott garner many laughs and have a good rapport with one another. Obviously acting is more complicated than really just playing yourselves, but whether or not Rudd and William Scott are doing any heavy lifting is ultimately inconsequential as they both deliver solid performances.

Andy: Sean William Scott has carved out a nice career since he emerged on the scene as Stifler in 1999’s American Pie. Remarkably, I don’t think he’s done anything except grow a little older in that time. He’s essentially playing the same character only not in high school. The fact that this still works when used properly is remarkable. A large part of that is how well he works as a foil to Paul Rudd’s likeable everyman. As Ryan mentioned, Rudd is also doing what he almost always does. Even though it is more versatile than Sean William Scott’s shtick, it’s still nothing new. It just happens to work really well in this movie.

Ryan: Another interesting aspect of Role Models is how it does have some degree of sincerity to it. While it isn't a Judd Apatow production, it does have that combination of crudeness with heart. The film does not quite have the resonance of a lot of Apatow's films but it is definitely an above- average comedy. In a year where a lot of comedies didn't live up to their billing, Role Models definitely stands out. Granted it probably doesn't have the makings of an instant comedic classic but it's undeniable one of the funnier films of the year.

Andy: Role Models, like many of the more successful comedies of the past few years, attempts to balance crass and realistic language with an underlying humanity for its absurd characters. The film culminates with a fake medieval battle in a park staged by a group of fantasy-fic fans. While the movie takes repeated cheap shots at these characters, it is able to make fun of them while still showing them as real and valuable people. The result is a movie that ends up feeling more authentic than I think it actually is.

Role Models is nothing new, but it strikes the balance between absurd humor and a touch of heart that has proven a successful comedic formula in recent years.

Final grade: B.

Monday Night Thoughts

I know...I know...it's been awhile since I've posted. I think in some way I have...not so much the post-election blues (...Obama did win...) but a difficulty in coming to terms that the election is over. At times it seemed that it consumed my free time. I just have to process that it's over and that it's time to move on and see how my President is going to govern.

--If anybody is interested in seeing specifically (by precinct) how Decatur County voted...click here. I'm pleased to say that Decatur County had a +11 point swing from 2004 to 2008 with regard to the Democratic Candidate (26% to 37%). Hard work (and a slumping economy...and a desire for change...and a reason to believe in government...and a better candidate--sorry Kerry) does pay off.

--Changing gears here...not a good day for Wonder Woman fans in terms of a (good) major motion picture being developed...click here and here.

--I hope everybody got to see the the Colts-Steelers game yesterday. It was one of the best games of the year...and the Colts did win. They seem to be getting on a roll...let's hope it continues.

--Speaking of football...be sure to check out next Sunday Night's Football game on NBC.

--It looks like Inauguration Day is going to rock more so than I thought.

Yes We Can!

History is made.

I'm happy, proud, excited, tired, drained and most important...optimistic.



History is made here too...and unfortunately an end of an era might be at hand as well.

I'll talk more on both these issues in the next few days. It's a lot to digest.

This is It

The Polls are open here in Indiana.

I was planning on giving a thorough breakdown of my election day prediction but I'm just going to simplify it at this point.

This is not the most logical or rationale argument but it's how I'm going to look at it. If Decatur County goes 40-60 for Obama (and remember that it went 30-70 for Kerry in '04) than I believe that's a sign that Obama will win Indiana and if he wins Indiana than I believe he's going to win the election.

But again Obama can lose Indiana and still win the election but that's the angle I'm looking at.

Let's do it.