sports: I am so glad that I got a little lazy didn't write my NBA playoff post before they began. If I had my one big prediction would have totally blew up in my face before the end of the first game of the playoffs. I would have said that the Chicago Bulls would beat the Miami Heat and then go on to win the NBA Finals. This looks like it will not happen. Before the end of their first game, Bulls guard Derrick Rose tore his ACL and now is out for the entire duration of the playoffs. I still think the Bulls have a chance to make it to the Conference Finals. They should be able to handle the 76ers no matter what. They might even have a chance to beat the Celtics in the second round thanks to the large amount of regular season games Rose missed and the chemistry the rest of the team developed in his absence. But that is probably as far as they go. (Oh yeah, I just can't bring myself to fear the Atlanta Hawks. Sorry, I just can't).
Assuming Miami continues to dismantle the Knicks and then can beat whomever the play in the second round, most likely the Indiana Pacers, they could get the Rose-less Bulls in the Eastern Conference Finals. The Bulls played Miami tough this year even without Rose, but to think they can win a best of seven series against Lebron and Wade is just tough for me. That means that the Heat now have a relatively clear path to the Finals. If the Celtics beat the Bulls though, they might be able to challenge Miami with their experience; not to mention their hatred of the Heat. But even the Boston will have a hard time in a seven game series against the Heat. I'm saying to count out the Celtics. Paul Pierce hates them enough to pull it off and Avery Bradley's defense is for real. I just think Rose was any teams best chance to beat Miami in the Eastern Conference.
The Western Conference however is wide open. Oklahoma City and their scoring freaks, Durant and Russell Westbrook, could be enough to carry them past any team they play. The only problems with them is their lack of great defense and the fact that Durant settles for jumpers all the time. If he gets cold and can't get inside to help himself out they could lose. San Antonio will stop putting Manu Ginobli and Tim Duncan on the bench for being too old (It happened. Look it up.) and show their championship heart in the playoffs. As always though, they could go down in a heap because their so damn old though. And their young guys just aren't ready to win it all on their own. The Clippers are fun and exciting but are handicapped by having Vinny Del Negro as a coach. Sorry Vinny, I watched you in Chicago and have now bestowed on you the lowest confidence rating ever. Kobe can still drag the Lakers to the promiseland as long as Meta World (Peace wouldn't do James Harden like that. I think he should change it to Hate) and Andrew Bynum don't act like the children they seem to be. Then there's the Grizzlies. They look tough. They have youth. They have experience. They have Beasts for bigs. They are everyone's great pick this year. But I am sorry, The Grizzlies!!!! Seriously?
Ok, yes seriously, the Grizzlies maybe the best hope of anyone to beat the Heat with their punishing big men and perimeter players that can play defense, not to mention a healthy Rudy Gay, who they were missing during last years run to the Conference Finals. Unless the Mamba just goes off and decides that Lebron won't get one on his watch. But I think Rose just changed the site of the championship celebration from the Windy City to South Beach with his torn ACL.
If it wasn't painfully obvious already, this is a Bulls fan with his heart ripped out and looking for a way for the Heat to lose veiled as a playoff preview. There's always next year. Oh wait that's the Cubs. Screw it, I'm stealing their line.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Thursday, April 26, 2012
talking about glee again
tv: Last time I wrote about Glee, which wasn't too long ago, I spent a lot of time blasting the show for what it did with the character of Quinn following her accident. This post has nothing to do with that. In fact, I hope this is the last time I mention Quinn's accident in this post. This also doesn't have anything to do with the specifics of last weeks episode. It does, however, involve certain things that happened in the more recent episodes. I am more here to talk about what seems to be the plan of Glee for its end of the season and how I applaud it.
Ever since Glee came back from its Christmas break it seems like the plan has been to systematically say goodbye to all of the characters that will be graduating and thus, unlike in a lot of network teen shows, leaving the show. This has been a really interesting thing to watch. It has taken on a setting outside of the show (which I know is something I killed in my last Glee post). One can watch the episodes and see the creators conscious effort to deal with saying goodbye.
This, however, in this situation, is a good thing. If Glee is about to send off the majority of its cast, then allowing the viewers the chance to say goodbye to them is a good thing. People have spent the past three years getting to know these kids. People have spent the past three years falling in love with them. It may sound trite to talk about emotional attachments to characters, but spending years of your life with someone, even if they aren't real, does make you form a bond. Its why people cry at movies or books or anything else that tells a story that one can identify with. These characters are going to leave all of the viewers that have spent the past few years getting to know them. The viewers and characters deserve a chance to say goodbye before the cast is thrust into getting to know someone new (Artie, Tina, and Blaine, and maybe Sam, notwithstanding).
The most important thing about saying goodbye, though, is that it is the story the show has chosen to tell. This is a show about high school. The characters in the show (Rachel, Finn, Curt, Mercedes, Santana, Brittany, Quinn, Puck, and Mike for those who don't know their names) who will be graduating are going to scatter to the four winds after high school.
This is a remarkably realistic thing to have happen, given the often convoluted things that happen in Glee. Very few, if any, cliques from high schools would end up together in college whether or not they stayed in touch despite what Saved By The Bell would have you believe. Having been there, I can't imagine any part of the end of high school being more important. Sure there were extra-curriculars to finish out. Sure there were still finals to take. None of that mattered though. By half way through second semester everyone knows if or where they are going to college. The most important thing academically is to make sure your g.p.a doesn't slip. The most important thing is the end of that era in your life. The fact that your friends are going to leave you; maybe forever.
That is the story Glee has chosen to tell. It is the story, we who have all been through it know all too well, and those going through it are dealing with, and those yet to go through it refuse to believe they will have to deal with. That story is the story is that of saying goodbye. Not to anything deep or metaphorical, but saying goodbye to friends and an era. And for us viewers, saying goodbye to people we have gotten the opportunity to know.
This was supposed to about Glee and not about saying goodbye at time in one's life when it feels hardest. But alas, they are one in the same. I know I blasted the show for not being important enough with their story about Quinn (shit I mentioned it again), but this in the case of the larger picture, they seem to be getting it right. Its time to graduate. Time to move on. Time to say goodbye. Let me applaud Glee for giving us this opportunity. I will be saddened by having to say goodbye, but can't wait to watch my opportunity to do it. Its almost time to move on.
Ever since Glee came back from its Christmas break it seems like the plan has been to systematically say goodbye to all of the characters that will be graduating and thus, unlike in a lot of network teen shows, leaving the show. This has been a really interesting thing to watch. It has taken on a setting outside of the show (which I know is something I killed in my last Glee post). One can watch the episodes and see the creators conscious effort to deal with saying goodbye.
This, however, in this situation, is a good thing. If Glee is about to send off the majority of its cast, then allowing the viewers the chance to say goodbye to them is a good thing. People have spent the past three years getting to know these kids. People have spent the past three years falling in love with them. It may sound trite to talk about emotional attachments to characters, but spending years of your life with someone, even if they aren't real, does make you form a bond. Its why people cry at movies or books or anything else that tells a story that one can identify with. These characters are going to leave all of the viewers that have spent the past few years getting to know them. The viewers and characters deserve a chance to say goodbye before the cast is thrust into getting to know someone new (Artie, Tina, and Blaine, and maybe Sam, notwithstanding).
The most important thing about saying goodbye, though, is that it is the story the show has chosen to tell. This is a show about high school. The characters in the show (Rachel, Finn, Curt, Mercedes, Santana, Brittany, Quinn, Puck, and Mike for those who don't know their names) who will be graduating are going to scatter to the four winds after high school.
This is a remarkably realistic thing to have happen, given the often convoluted things that happen in Glee. Very few, if any, cliques from high schools would end up together in college whether or not they stayed in touch despite what Saved By The Bell would have you believe. Having been there, I can't imagine any part of the end of high school being more important. Sure there were extra-curriculars to finish out. Sure there were still finals to take. None of that mattered though. By half way through second semester everyone knows if or where they are going to college. The most important thing academically is to make sure your g.p.a doesn't slip. The most important thing is the end of that era in your life. The fact that your friends are going to leave you; maybe forever.
That is the story Glee has chosen to tell. It is the story, we who have all been through it know all too well, and those going through it are dealing with, and those yet to go through it refuse to believe they will have to deal with. That story is the story is that of saying goodbye. Not to anything deep or metaphorical, but saying goodbye to friends and an era. And for us viewers, saying goodbye to people we have gotten the opportunity to know.
This was supposed to about Glee and not about saying goodbye at time in one's life when it feels hardest. But alas, they are one in the same. I know I blasted the show for not being important enough with their story about Quinn (shit I mentioned it again), but this in the case of the larger picture, they seem to be getting it right. Its time to graduate. Time to move on. Time to say goodbye. Let me applaud Glee for giving us this opportunity. I will be saddened by having to say goodbye, but can't wait to watch my opportunity to do it. Its almost time to move on.
Friday, April 20, 2012
cabin in the woods
movies: Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard have finally released their horror movie Cabin In The Woods. As a fan of Whedon's and therefore by extension Goddard's, who wrote on Buffy The Vampire Slayer, it was exactly what I expected. Whedon has become, through his success on tv with Buffy, Angel, and Firefly, along with his work in comics on the X-Men, and his internet musical Dr. Horrible, a fanboy icon. Goddard, who came to Buffy as a fan of Whedon's and ended up writing for the who, is more or less the same. Their use of the horror genre displayed all of the being of a fanboy that one would expect from them.
The movie was a horror film yes. But it was so much more than that. It was almost a love letter to the genre of horror. Two men who understand and love the genre doing everything they can to bring out what makes people love it. It had genuine moments that made you jump and possibly even be scared. It also had tons of humor in it, which depsite the fact that the genre is horror, creeps in to most of the genre's movies (pun definitely intended).
It is the story of a group of college kids who go to, yes its true, a cabin in the woods, for a fun party weekend filled with sex and drinking, and end up being beset by zombies and fighting for their lives in an all too typical horror archetype. Within this archetype you even have the expected group of friends, the jock and his hot blonde girlfriend, the virgin roommate and the dude her roommate is trying to set her up with (who is black, which matters in a typical horror story. Everyone knows you have to kill the black guy at some point. Watch Scream if you don't know the rules.), and the stoner dude who is there despite the fact that he you don't know why he is friends with any of them.
Added to this by Whedon and Goddard to twist the genre into their own vision is the agency running the cabin from an underground compound. This not only adds a kind of odd twist to the story, but is what allows for their commentary on the genre of horror. As the agents watch the scenario at the cabin play out, they make jokes and take bets and offer commentary on what is going on in the movie and thus on the entire genre of horror.
I am inclined to go into detail for the sake of fleshing out my writing, but i have no intention of ruining the jokes for anyone who hasn't seen it. Its just too damn funny. All you need to know to be prepared is that it is Cabin Fever with a twist and a joke. Keep in mind that despite the fact that I have spent a lot of this post talking about jokes and laughs and "what you'd expect" moments in the movie that this is not a spoof. It is simply a horror movie made by horror fans who want to have a ton of fun. And what's wrong with having fun. Throw in a couple of Whedon alum cameos and you have the makings of a fanboy dream. I feel like this is just one more reason to thank Whedon for his work. Buffy was awesome. Firefly was THE great joy of cancelled tv. Cabin In The Woods is the movie he was born to make. Thank god he found a fellow fanboy to make it with.
ps. For more of me geeking out on Joss Whedon, The Avengers comes out May 4th.
The movie was a horror film yes. But it was so much more than that. It was almost a love letter to the genre of horror. Two men who understand and love the genre doing everything they can to bring out what makes people love it. It had genuine moments that made you jump and possibly even be scared. It also had tons of humor in it, which depsite the fact that the genre is horror, creeps in to most of the genre's movies (pun definitely intended).
It is the story of a group of college kids who go to, yes its true, a cabin in the woods, for a fun party weekend filled with sex and drinking, and end up being beset by zombies and fighting for their lives in an all too typical horror archetype. Within this archetype you even have the expected group of friends, the jock and his hot blonde girlfriend, the virgin roommate and the dude her roommate is trying to set her up with (who is black, which matters in a typical horror story. Everyone knows you have to kill the black guy at some point. Watch Scream if you don't know the rules.), and the stoner dude who is there despite the fact that he you don't know why he is friends with any of them.
Added to this by Whedon and Goddard to twist the genre into their own vision is the agency running the cabin from an underground compound. This not only adds a kind of odd twist to the story, but is what allows for their commentary on the genre of horror. As the agents watch the scenario at the cabin play out, they make jokes and take bets and offer commentary on what is going on in the movie and thus on the entire genre of horror.
I am inclined to go into detail for the sake of fleshing out my writing, but i have no intention of ruining the jokes for anyone who hasn't seen it. Its just too damn funny. All you need to know to be prepared is that it is Cabin Fever with a twist and a joke. Keep in mind that despite the fact that I have spent a lot of this post talking about jokes and laughs and "what you'd expect" moments in the movie that this is not a spoof. It is simply a horror movie made by horror fans who want to have a ton of fun. And what's wrong with having fun. Throw in a couple of Whedon alum cameos and you have the makings of a fanboy dream. I feel like this is just one more reason to thank Whedon for his work. Buffy was awesome. Firefly was THE great joy of cancelled tv. Cabin In The Woods is the movie he was born to make. Thank god he found a fellow fanboy to make it with.
ps. For more of me geeking out on Joss Whedon, The Avengers comes out May 4th.
Monday, April 16, 2012
new girls on the block
tv: HBO's new show girls has recently premiered and seems ready from the outset to strike a chord. It has behind it what seems to be one the "hardest working girls in showbiz", Lena Dunham, who has created the show, writes, directs and plays the lead, Hannah. It also has behind it comedy superman Judd Apatow, who makes his return to TV; his first show since doing the highly underrated Undeclared and the highly praised Freaks and Geeks(in my opinion the best teen show of all times). While Apatow's name carries a ton of weight, certainly enough to get this writer interested, it is Dunham's vision that seems to be the driving force behind the show.
This show has been characterized as a new version of Sex And The City but the only thing Girls has in relation to the former is that it stars a cast of women living in New York City. What it really seems to be is Dunham's vision of the world that she lives in, maybe even the world we all live in. The voice of the mid-twenties American. She says early in the episode, "I think I could be the voice of my generation, or at least the voice of a genreation." That seems to be exactly what she is. When I watch this show's pilot I don't see the Sex And The City comparisons. I see a generation. I see possibly even more important, an age bracket in any generation.
There are aspects of this show that typecast it as part of the 2010's young adults. Its references to social networking and communicating. Talk of the economy and tough job market. But what it is really about is that point in your life where you ask yourself , "Now what?" The show begins with Hannah(Dunham) being cutoff financially from her parents because they feel that the two years she's had since finishing college are enough to figure out how to find a job and earn a living. Her parents point of view is almost beside the point. What that moment, and what seems the rest of the show conveys is that the answers don't always come that simply. Young adults are looking for happiness as much as a job and Hannah can't find both in the same place.
We go to college. We earn degrees. We don't always know what we want, or if what we are learning will lead us there. And that is where the show picks up. It is that transition from child and pure academic to adult professional that defines that period of a lot of young adults lives and certainly this show.
Sure there are plot settings involving love and career and even conflicts between friends that will continue to drive the arc of the story. But what we are watching is really just a snapshot of what it is like when people feel like they are supposed to have the answers and don't. I don't know what this show holds for the future having only seen one episode, but it seems like it has importance over popularity written all over it. I eagerly look forward to Dunham's depiction of like in the adult transition.
Blogging at home by myself late at night, Girl or not, it seems like those questions really exist.
This show has been characterized as a new version of Sex And The City but the only thing Girls has in relation to the former is that it stars a cast of women living in New York City. What it really seems to be is Dunham's vision of the world that she lives in, maybe even the world we all live in. The voice of the mid-twenties American. She says early in the episode, "I think I could be the voice of my generation, or at least the voice of a genreation." That seems to be exactly what she is. When I watch this show's pilot I don't see the Sex And The City comparisons. I see a generation. I see possibly even more important, an age bracket in any generation.
There are aspects of this show that typecast it as part of the 2010's young adults. Its references to social networking and communicating. Talk of the economy and tough job market. But what it is really about is that point in your life where you ask yourself , "Now what?" The show begins with Hannah(Dunham) being cutoff financially from her parents because they feel that the two years she's had since finishing college are enough to figure out how to find a job and earn a living. Her parents point of view is almost beside the point. What that moment, and what seems the rest of the show conveys is that the answers don't always come that simply. Young adults are looking for happiness as much as a job and Hannah can't find both in the same place.
We go to college. We earn degrees. We don't always know what we want, or if what we are learning will lead us there. And that is where the show picks up. It is that transition from child and pure academic to adult professional that defines that period of a lot of young adults lives and certainly this show.
Sure there are plot settings involving love and career and even conflicts between friends that will continue to drive the arc of the story. But what we are watching is really just a snapshot of what it is like when people feel like they are supposed to have the answers and don't. I don't know what this show holds for the future having only seen one episode, but it seems like it has importance over popularity written all over it. I eagerly look forward to Dunham's depiction of like in the adult transition.
Blogging at home by myself late at night, Girl or not, it seems like those questions really exist.
Saturday, April 14, 2012
glee
tv: I have spent a long time thinking about this article. I really wanted to make it right. Glee returned after its annual American Idol hiatus and this return, maybe more than any they have ever done is deserving of thinking about. It is as much worth thinking about because of the episode that was just seen as because of the one that came before it. I can't help but say I am torn in my emotions and rationality as it applies to what has gone on.
In the previous episode, On My Way, we saw Dave Keroffsky attempt to take his life because he couldn't bare the thought of being outed as gay. We also saw a true cliffhanger in wondering weather or not Quinn would live or die from her car accident that came as a result of her texting Rachel to let her know that she was on her was to her and Finn's wedding, which otherwise would have been halted in totally insane ways by her dads. The question at the end of that episode, despite Keroffsky's near suicide, was weather Quinn lived or died, and what the blowback from that would be.
Quinn lived and was in a wheelchair. She was optimistic and aided by Artie. She was determined to walk again, not just in the future but "across the stage at graduation." I can't say that I don't admire her toughness. I do. I can't say I don't like Artie helping her. Kevin McHale has become one of the best parts of the show both with his voice and his acting. I can't even say that using her to talk about how bad texting and driving is is a bad thing. But I do have issue with this episode nonetheless.
We left the show on arguably its most emotional point ever. We didn't know if Quinn, a beloved character, would live or die. And in a season that has been mostly emotional, if not downright sad. and not Glee's typical funny, going for it would have been best. I will admit that I typically watch shows like Dexter, or Boardwalk Empire, or Game of Thrones, or The Sopranos, or Battlestar Gallactica, or even something like Buffy the Vampire Slayer. These shows will kill anyone and everyone at anytime to make a point. And I realize that killing characters in Glee is not the norm. But I can't help but wonder about the shows motives as it relates to Quinn's living or dying having seen their comeback episode. Quinn has become a spokesperson for texting while driving.
This does not relate to the show. It relates to the viewers. While I realize that relating to your audience is key to a shows success, it shouldn't be done in spite of its relevance to its characters. Instead of directly effecting the characters in the show as if their lives are what matters (because they are all that matters, their world exists to them and ours doesn't), the show seems to have tried to effect its viewership. That is not a good idea. The impact of art on an audience comes from its existence within its own context and how people relate to what is going on in that context, in this case the context of the show.
If you wanted to effect the characters in a way that would change them and impact their viewers in the strongest possible way the best move would have been to kill Quinn. That would have directly affected every single character in the show. It also would would have been the hardest hitting way to send the message about texting and driving.
Despite all of what I have said, I thoroughly enjoyed their episode back entitled Big Brother. It was a typically entertaining Glee episode. I also have no doubt that Ryan Murphy and company will make the end of this class at McKinley's run both entertaining and emotional.
I just can't help but wonder why, if you were willing to, go to that kind of raw emotional place would you not push yourself to that place harder. Why create a spokesperson when you can create a martyr. Why only go there half way. I know this is other shows in me talking(see above), but why not kill her. Is putting Quinn in a wheelchair and making her talk like an infomercial more impactful than making the kids deal with loss.
I know its not that kind of show but I can't say it enough. If you are not willing to go there all the way, then don't go at all.
There was not as much of an intention initially to harp on Quinn's life or death as came out. While I feel that her life or death was the crux of this episode, and it didn't go to the place I was hoping, there were good things that came out this episode. Finn wondering about his future was a good thing. Any time you can involve Artie in an episode seems to be a good thing. Also, Quinn's denial about her injuries veiled as optimism and determination to heal could lead to another big crash for her character. I have no doubt that Ryan Murphy and company will make the end of the season, and thus the send off for most of this group of the cast compelling. This episode even, was entertaining, despite the fact that I feel it didn't push as hard as it could have.
Maybe I wanted something from a different show. Maybe I just enjoy a little sadness. I just still want to know why Glee was willing to push the boundary so far just to pull back from it. I don't doubt at all they could have pulled off the proper level of darkness in a post-Quinn world.
Maybe that's not what viewers wanted. Maybe that's not creator wanted to do. But then don't go there at all.
In the previous episode, On My Way, we saw Dave Keroffsky attempt to take his life because he couldn't bare the thought of being outed as gay. We also saw a true cliffhanger in wondering weather or not Quinn would live or die from her car accident that came as a result of her texting Rachel to let her know that she was on her was to her and Finn's wedding, which otherwise would have been halted in totally insane ways by her dads. The question at the end of that episode, despite Keroffsky's near suicide, was weather Quinn lived or died, and what the blowback from that would be.
Quinn lived and was in a wheelchair. She was optimistic and aided by Artie. She was determined to walk again, not just in the future but "across the stage at graduation." I can't say that I don't admire her toughness. I do. I can't say I don't like Artie helping her. Kevin McHale has become one of the best parts of the show both with his voice and his acting. I can't even say that using her to talk about how bad texting and driving is is a bad thing. But I do have issue with this episode nonetheless.
We left the show on arguably its most emotional point ever. We didn't know if Quinn, a beloved character, would live or die. And in a season that has been mostly emotional, if not downright sad. and not Glee's typical funny, going for it would have been best. I will admit that I typically watch shows like Dexter, or Boardwalk Empire, or Game of Thrones, or The Sopranos, or Battlestar Gallactica, or even something like Buffy the Vampire Slayer. These shows will kill anyone and everyone at anytime to make a point. And I realize that killing characters in Glee is not the norm. But I can't help but wonder about the shows motives as it relates to Quinn's living or dying having seen their comeback episode. Quinn has become a spokesperson for texting while driving.
This does not relate to the show. It relates to the viewers. While I realize that relating to your audience is key to a shows success, it shouldn't be done in spite of its relevance to its characters. Instead of directly effecting the characters in the show as if their lives are what matters (because they are all that matters, their world exists to them and ours doesn't), the show seems to have tried to effect its viewership. That is not a good idea. The impact of art on an audience comes from its existence within its own context and how people relate to what is going on in that context, in this case the context of the show.
If you wanted to effect the characters in a way that would change them and impact their viewers in the strongest possible way the best move would have been to kill Quinn. That would have directly affected every single character in the show. It also would would have been the hardest hitting way to send the message about texting and driving.
Despite all of what I have said, I thoroughly enjoyed their episode back entitled Big Brother. It was a typically entertaining Glee episode. I also have no doubt that Ryan Murphy and company will make the end of this class at McKinley's run both entertaining and emotional.
I just can't help but wonder why, if you were willing to, go to that kind of raw emotional place would you not push yourself to that place harder. Why create a spokesperson when you can create a martyr. Why only go there half way. I know this is other shows in me talking(see above), but why not kill her. Is putting Quinn in a wheelchair and making her talk like an infomercial more impactful than making the kids deal with loss.
I know its not that kind of show but I can't say it enough. If you are not willing to go there all the way, then don't go at all.
There was not as much of an intention initially to harp on Quinn's life or death as came out. While I feel that her life or death was the crux of this episode, and it didn't go to the place I was hoping, there were good things that came out this episode. Finn wondering about his future was a good thing. Any time you can involve Artie in an episode seems to be a good thing. Also, Quinn's denial about her injuries veiled as optimism and determination to heal could lead to another big crash for her character. I have no doubt that Ryan Murphy and company will make the end of the season, and thus the send off for most of this group of the cast compelling. This episode even, was entertaining, despite the fact that I feel it didn't push as hard as it could have.
Maybe I wanted something from a different show. Maybe I just enjoy a little sadness. I just still want to know why Glee was willing to push the boundary so far just to pull back from it. I don't doubt at all they could have pulled off the proper level of darkness in a post-Quinn world.
Maybe that's not what viewers wanted. Maybe that's not creator wanted to do. But then don't go there at all.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
mlb 2012 preview
sports: Ok, so I know this is coming about 4 games late. The holiday forced me to delay this. But it is time for my Major League Baseball season preview and predictions. In this I will touch on the storylines to follow, or at least so it seems going into the season, and predictions as to whom will be the teams to watch come October.
First and foremost are the storylines. There were a few big and unexpected spenders in the off season who will have to be watched. Namely the Angels of Anaheim and the Marlins. The Angels spent a ton of money to acquire free agents Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson. The Marlins spent at least as much acquiring all star leadoff hitter Jose Reyes, closer Heath Bell, and former rock in the Chicago White Sox rotation Mark Buehrle. This new group along with new manager Ozzie Guillen are what the new look (in name and ballpark as well as players) Marlins are hoping will bread a new kind of success both financially and in wins. The Texas Rangers also replaced aforementioned C.J. Wilson with Japanese sensation Yu Darvish. The Tigers added Prince Fielder to an already explosive lineup. The Blue Jays added closer Sergio Santos. The Red Sox have a new manager in the fiery Bobby Valentine and a new closer in former Athletic Andrew Bailey. Jonathan Papplebon is now with the Phillies. And the Yankees.... The Yankees were surprisingly quiet.
There were of course hundreds of other deals for more roleplaying type players and minor leaguers. But those are the big ones. Now onto the predictions, which will in some cases cover more of these deals in depth, at least as so far as their impact is concerned. Let's Start with the one easy one that seems to be out there. The Detriot Tigers seem to be about the most sure thing in baseball this year. They have retained all of the players that helped them cruise to a division championship last year. Miguel Cabrera has been so consistently great throughout his career that there is no reason to believe that anything should change. Not to mention that adding Prince Fielder to that lineup will make them better and give both he and Cabrera protection in the lineup to help their creativity. As far as their pitching goes Detroit is solid both with starters and relief pitching. And of course you have Justin Verlander. Even if last years runaway Cy Young winner is only a fraction of himself, that fraction is still nothing short of stellar considering how truly great he was last year. Plus the entire rest of the division seems to be in rebuilding mode.
Now on to a few kind of tricky picks. The American League West seems to be a race between two teams. If the Texas Rangers can find replacements for Cliff Lee from two years ago and C.J. Wilson this year in Japanese stud Yu Darvish and former bullpen star Neftali Feliz, to compliment that totally killer offense they have a chance to continue their reign in the West. However, if these two pitchers, who have never started in the major leagues, don't live up to the superstars they are replacing, despite all of the offensive firepower they have in their lineup, the Rangers could have a long season, or at least disappointing. The Angels on their other hand used to be the powerhouse in the West and have tried to regain that with two major offseason acquisitions: Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson. I cannot deny that Pujols is the best hitter in the game today and Wilson seems to at least an ultra high quality pitcher who can be built around, if not a true ace. The question for the Angels is simply weather two players can make that kind of difference on what was last year a mediocre team. The third tricky pick is the National League Central. This division has the reigning World Champion Cardinals. The champs however have lost their best player (THE best player) in Pujols. They have also spent the last few seasons battling injury problems with their other best hitter, Matt Holiday, and their two aces, Chris Carpenter and Adam Wainright, who can't seem to be healthy enough to be in the rotation at the same time. Their competition from last year, the Milwaukee Brewers however have take a huge blow by losing their superstar, Prince Fielder, to Detroit in free agency. Compound that with a new manager with zero big league experience and they could have a tough year. Oh, and did I mention that Ryan Braun, who won the MVP last year for the Brewers, is believed to have used steroids and escaped suspension on a technicality. The Pirates are the Pirates and the Cubs are rebuilding under wunderkin Theo Epstein. I like the young and still talented Reds to emerge as the best team in the Central.
Now on to the though three divisions. The National League West is shaping up to be tight as always. But it looks like it will come down to the 2010 NL champs and the 2011 Divsion champs, the Giants and the Diamondbacks. The Giants look good, with their usual stellar starting pitching returning. Their lineup looks good with Pablo Sandoval (he of my favorite nickname in MLB, Kung Fu Panda) losing weight in the offseason, and Buster Posey returning after getting mauled in an at the plate collision that ended his season last year. The Diamondbacks are returning largely the same team they had last year that won the division, along with power hitter Michael Cuddyer. They look to be at least as good, if not better than last year. Then there is the National League East. The Phillies ran away with this division last year behind their all time great starting pitching and great lineup. This success will be hard to duplicate with Chase Utley continuing to decline in health and the uncertainty with Ryan Howard. Having an again Jimmy Rollins and Shane Victorino as the backbone of your offense could be scary. The Braves looked like the upstart team of last year and with the young talent in their rotation there is no reason to think they would decline. There is also the newly high spending Marlins looming though. With the additions of an all star closer in Heath Bell, Mark Buehrle, and Jose Reyes, as long as Hanley Ramirez stays happy at third base and Cy Young hopeful Josh Johnson stay healthy they could be as good as anyone. The Nationals, yes the Nationals, may have a say in this as well. Ryan Zimmerman is a rock for that team. They also have a young star pitching in Stephen Strasburg. And if Bryce Harper delivers on expectations they could be a team to worry about. And last but not least, we have the American League East. The Yankees still have their veteran leadership in Arod, Jeter, and Rivera. They still have Sabathia and Texeria. They still have untold amounts of money to spend at the trade deadline to make moves if need be. The Red Sox have a new manager and new young stud closer, Andrew Bailey, and the same killer lineup they had last year lead by Elsbury and Pedrioa. Plus the sting of their epic collapse last year that kept them out of the playoffs last year should make them as hungry as ever. The Rays, well what can I say, they bring back the same low budget team they had last year. Evan Longoria leads an underpaid and potent lineup and young stud Matt Moore is hoping to deliver on the promise he showed late last season. The Blue Jays are also looking to making things interesting, adding highly touted young prospect Matt Lowrie to a lineup that includes masher Jose Bautista. And Sergio Santos looks to anchor the what has perennially been a less than outstanding bullpen. Yup I said it. Two four team races.
So after that I guess its time for some picks. The Tigers seem all but obvious in the AL Central. I think the Angels will win the American League West. Texas won't get it done this year relying on two inexperienced pitchers. Plus: Pujols. The Giants will win the National League West. I just like what they have, even if it is goofy and sometimes irrational. Give me the young and hungry and coming off a year with expecations for the first time in forever learning how to get it done and failing at it and now knowing Cincinnati Reds in the NL Central (wow I think I could have hyphenated that whole sentence if I had wanted to.). I will take the Ozzies (Marlins) in the NL East, with my only if, if I can have one, if Josh Johnson stays healthy. And I like Boston and their redemption in the AL East. The two wild card teams in each league will be Tampa and New York in the AL. Sorry Texas. Three years is just too hard. In the National League it will be Arizona and the Phillies. God I want to pick Washington. But not yet. As far as past that I have no idea. We'll see how the play in games go and all that. After all it has seemed to be who gets hot. Happy pastime.
First and foremost are the storylines. There were a few big and unexpected spenders in the off season who will have to be watched. Namely the Angels of Anaheim and the Marlins. The Angels spent a ton of money to acquire free agents Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson. The Marlins spent at least as much acquiring all star leadoff hitter Jose Reyes, closer Heath Bell, and former rock in the Chicago White Sox rotation Mark Buehrle. This new group along with new manager Ozzie Guillen are what the new look (in name and ballpark as well as players) Marlins are hoping will bread a new kind of success both financially and in wins. The Texas Rangers also replaced aforementioned C.J. Wilson with Japanese sensation Yu Darvish. The Tigers added Prince Fielder to an already explosive lineup. The Blue Jays added closer Sergio Santos. The Red Sox have a new manager in the fiery Bobby Valentine and a new closer in former Athletic Andrew Bailey. Jonathan Papplebon is now with the Phillies. And the Yankees.... The Yankees were surprisingly quiet.
There were of course hundreds of other deals for more roleplaying type players and minor leaguers. But those are the big ones. Now onto the predictions, which will in some cases cover more of these deals in depth, at least as so far as their impact is concerned. Let's Start with the one easy one that seems to be out there. The Detriot Tigers seem to be about the most sure thing in baseball this year. They have retained all of the players that helped them cruise to a division championship last year. Miguel Cabrera has been so consistently great throughout his career that there is no reason to believe that anything should change. Not to mention that adding Prince Fielder to that lineup will make them better and give both he and Cabrera protection in the lineup to help their creativity. As far as their pitching goes Detroit is solid both with starters and relief pitching. And of course you have Justin Verlander. Even if last years runaway Cy Young winner is only a fraction of himself, that fraction is still nothing short of stellar considering how truly great he was last year. Plus the entire rest of the division seems to be in rebuilding mode.
Now on to a few kind of tricky picks. The American League West seems to be a race between two teams. If the Texas Rangers can find replacements for Cliff Lee from two years ago and C.J. Wilson this year in Japanese stud Yu Darvish and former bullpen star Neftali Feliz, to compliment that totally killer offense they have a chance to continue their reign in the West. However, if these two pitchers, who have never started in the major leagues, don't live up to the superstars they are replacing, despite all of the offensive firepower they have in their lineup, the Rangers could have a long season, or at least disappointing. The Angels on their other hand used to be the powerhouse in the West and have tried to regain that with two major offseason acquisitions: Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson. I cannot deny that Pujols is the best hitter in the game today and Wilson seems to at least an ultra high quality pitcher who can be built around, if not a true ace. The question for the Angels is simply weather two players can make that kind of difference on what was last year a mediocre team. The third tricky pick is the National League Central. This division has the reigning World Champion Cardinals. The champs however have lost their best player (THE best player) in Pujols. They have also spent the last few seasons battling injury problems with their other best hitter, Matt Holiday, and their two aces, Chris Carpenter and Adam Wainright, who can't seem to be healthy enough to be in the rotation at the same time. Their competition from last year, the Milwaukee Brewers however have take a huge blow by losing their superstar, Prince Fielder, to Detroit in free agency. Compound that with a new manager with zero big league experience and they could have a tough year. Oh, and did I mention that Ryan Braun, who won the MVP last year for the Brewers, is believed to have used steroids and escaped suspension on a technicality. The Pirates are the Pirates and the Cubs are rebuilding under wunderkin Theo Epstein. I like the young and still talented Reds to emerge as the best team in the Central.
Now on to the though three divisions. The National League West is shaping up to be tight as always. But it looks like it will come down to the 2010 NL champs and the 2011 Divsion champs, the Giants and the Diamondbacks. The Giants look good, with their usual stellar starting pitching returning. Their lineup looks good with Pablo Sandoval (he of my favorite nickname in MLB, Kung Fu Panda) losing weight in the offseason, and Buster Posey returning after getting mauled in an at the plate collision that ended his season last year. The Diamondbacks are returning largely the same team they had last year that won the division, along with power hitter Michael Cuddyer. They look to be at least as good, if not better than last year. Then there is the National League East. The Phillies ran away with this division last year behind their all time great starting pitching and great lineup. This success will be hard to duplicate with Chase Utley continuing to decline in health and the uncertainty with Ryan Howard. Having an again Jimmy Rollins and Shane Victorino as the backbone of your offense could be scary. The Braves looked like the upstart team of last year and with the young talent in their rotation there is no reason to think they would decline. There is also the newly high spending Marlins looming though. With the additions of an all star closer in Heath Bell, Mark Buehrle, and Jose Reyes, as long as Hanley Ramirez stays happy at third base and Cy Young hopeful Josh Johnson stay healthy they could be as good as anyone. The Nationals, yes the Nationals, may have a say in this as well. Ryan Zimmerman is a rock for that team. They also have a young star pitching in Stephen Strasburg. And if Bryce Harper delivers on expectations they could be a team to worry about. And last but not least, we have the American League East. The Yankees still have their veteran leadership in Arod, Jeter, and Rivera. They still have Sabathia and Texeria. They still have untold amounts of money to spend at the trade deadline to make moves if need be. The Red Sox have a new manager and new young stud closer, Andrew Bailey, and the same killer lineup they had last year lead by Elsbury and Pedrioa. Plus the sting of their epic collapse last year that kept them out of the playoffs last year should make them as hungry as ever. The Rays, well what can I say, they bring back the same low budget team they had last year. Evan Longoria leads an underpaid and potent lineup and young stud Matt Moore is hoping to deliver on the promise he showed late last season. The Blue Jays are also looking to making things interesting, adding highly touted young prospect Matt Lowrie to a lineup that includes masher Jose Bautista. And Sergio Santos looks to anchor the what has perennially been a less than outstanding bullpen. Yup I said it. Two four team races.
So after that I guess its time for some picks. The Tigers seem all but obvious in the AL Central. I think the Angels will win the American League West. Texas won't get it done this year relying on two inexperienced pitchers. Plus: Pujols. The Giants will win the National League West. I just like what they have, even if it is goofy and sometimes irrational. Give me the young and hungry and coming off a year with expecations for the first time in forever learning how to get it done and failing at it and now knowing Cincinnati Reds in the NL Central (wow I think I could have hyphenated that whole sentence if I had wanted to.). I will take the Ozzies (Marlins) in the NL East, with my only if, if I can have one, if Josh Johnson stays healthy. And I like Boston and their redemption in the AL East. The two wild card teams in each league will be Tampa and New York in the AL. Sorry Texas. Three years is just too hard. In the National League it will be Arizona and the Phillies. God I want to pick Washington. But not yet. As far as past that I have no idea. We'll see how the play in games go and all that. After all it has seemed to be who gets hot. Happy pastime.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Game Of Thrones
tv: I spent the first season of Game Of Thrones watching treachery at the top of the royal family of the seven kingdoms be uncovered as a push and pull between two families. The Lanisters, who were, and still are, currently part of the royal family in King's Landing, the capitol in the south, and the Starks, the nobles of the Winterfeld in the north at odds over not only the legitimacy of succession of the throne, but also as a result of the attempted murder of the youngest Stark, Bran, for witnessing the incest between the queen, Cersei Lanister and her brother Jamie that has bred, quite literally, the illegitimacy of succession. The plan of the series seemed all but certain. Starks, noble, vs. Lanisters, cunning and corrupt. As the second season begins, so does this post, with lots of characters playing roles larger than what would have originally indicated and a plot not quite what it seems. And also larger.
As the second season begins, Ned Stark, Hand (chief adviser) to the king is dead at the hand of newly anointed and totally psychotic King Joffery. Rob Stark, Ned's eldest son, and Catelyn, his widow, are waging civil war against the throne. Stannis Baratheon, eldest brother of the former king, is getting ready to invade the seven kingdoms from exile to claim the throne. Jamie Lanister is in captivity due to a miscue when battling the Starks. Tyrion Lanister, Jamie's and Cersei's midget and shunned brother is now the Hand of the King. And how could we forget Daenerys Targaryen, a descendant of a former king, looking to regain the throne behind her army of horsemen and newly born dragons.
Thanks to the end of the first season, which is Daenerys standing in the wasteland, faced by her followers, naked with her dragons on her shoulders, and the looming civil war, I couldn't even begin to think where this story is going given the fact that the main character, Ned Stark, has been beheaded. Civil war and the question of who is the rightful heir to the throne seems to be the question of the second season. Based on the first season, I doubt that this may be the stories larger pupose even.
All I know is that this show has put its viewers in a place where no one is safe. No story is too important or trivial. The battle for the throne is up for grabs and the who will win is anyone's guess. I don't even believe that dragons could guarantee a victory. The smartest man in the show is the Hand. The most intriguing is the young woman sold for an army now possessing dragons. The most dangerous, and psychotic, are those already in power, and the rightful king is in exile with a dark mistress with powers yet to be revealed. This is not to mention a dark power coming from beyond the wall in the north that threatens everyone involved based nothing but a myth of savagery.
Your guess is as good as mine as to what will happen or what this show is really about. All I know is that a show labelled as fantasy and best known for its blood and tits is shaping up to look more like the medieval Sopranos. I have not read the books so I cannot see the future of the second season. But given that the series in book form is unfinished, I wonder if fans of the books can see where this is going.
I know I just spat a ton of characters and random information about a fantasy series at anyone who reads this but that's what the show feels like. There are somewhere between fifteen and twenty main characters acting in as many as six or seven independent parts of the universe. All of whom could end up being part of the stories end game, or dead. To sum this story up with any amount of detail would literally take novels. All I know is that I can't wait to see what happens and that I couldn't even begin to venture a guess at what that happening is.
One thing I can say is that this is story, whether of the shows creators design, or of the books, is truly unpredictable and unique. I have never seen a show in which I didn't know what I was going to see in this way. Its not Lost, where it was all cliffhangers and questions, or 23 with pulse pounding action. It is more a question of big picture goals. What is this really about? Who are the people that really matter? In the second season no one can say they know the answers to these questions.
My opinion on this will in all likelihood change from week to week. In the spirit of the show I can only mask my desire for the greater answers and possibly greater questions by raising a glass to the best blood and tits on tv. No one will ever guess who lives or dies. No one will find a king with clear vision. If you play the game of thrones you either win or you die. Cheers!
p.s. As a fanboy that image of Daenerys at the end of season one has been permanently burned into my brain.
As the second season begins, Ned Stark, Hand (chief adviser) to the king is dead at the hand of newly anointed and totally psychotic King Joffery. Rob Stark, Ned's eldest son, and Catelyn, his widow, are waging civil war against the throne. Stannis Baratheon, eldest brother of the former king, is getting ready to invade the seven kingdoms from exile to claim the throne. Jamie Lanister is in captivity due to a miscue when battling the Starks. Tyrion Lanister, Jamie's and Cersei's midget and shunned brother is now the Hand of the King. And how could we forget Daenerys Targaryen, a descendant of a former king, looking to regain the throne behind her army of horsemen and newly born dragons.
Thanks to the end of the first season, which is Daenerys standing in the wasteland, faced by her followers, naked with her dragons on her shoulders, and the looming civil war, I couldn't even begin to think where this story is going given the fact that the main character, Ned Stark, has been beheaded. Civil war and the question of who is the rightful heir to the throne seems to be the question of the second season. Based on the first season, I doubt that this may be the stories larger pupose even.
All I know is that this show has put its viewers in a place where no one is safe. No story is too important or trivial. The battle for the throne is up for grabs and the who will win is anyone's guess. I don't even believe that dragons could guarantee a victory. The smartest man in the show is the Hand. The most intriguing is the young woman sold for an army now possessing dragons. The most dangerous, and psychotic, are those already in power, and the rightful king is in exile with a dark mistress with powers yet to be revealed. This is not to mention a dark power coming from beyond the wall in the north that threatens everyone involved based nothing but a myth of savagery.
Your guess is as good as mine as to what will happen or what this show is really about. All I know is that a show labelled as fantasy and best known for its blood and tits is shaping up to look more like the medieval Sopranos. I have not read the books so I cannot see the future of the second season. But given that the series in book form is unfinished, I wonder if fans of the books can see where this is going.
I know I just spat a ton of characters and random information about a fantasy series at anyone who reads this but that's what the show feels like. There are somewhere between fifteen and twenty main characters acting in as many as six or seven independent parts of the universe. All of whom could end up being part of the stories end game, or dead. To sum this story up with any amount of detail would literally take novels. All I know is that I can't wait to see what happens and that I couldn't even begin to venture a guess at what that happening is.
One thing I can say is that this is story, whether of the shows creators design, or of the books, is truly unpredictable and unique. I have never seen a show in which I didn't know what I was going to see in this way. Its not Lost, where it was all cliffhangers and questions, or 23 with pulse pounding action. It is more a question of big picture goals. What is this really about? Who are the people that really matter? In the second season no one can say they know the answers to these questions.
My opinion on this will in all likelihood change from week to week. In the spirit of the show I can only mask my desire for the greater answers and possibly greater questions by raising a glass to the best blood and tits on tv. No one will ever guess who lives or dies. No one will find a king with clear vision. If you play the game of thrones you either win or you die. Cheers!
p.s. As a fanboy that image of Daenerys at the end of season one has been permanently burned into my brain.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
hunger games
movies: So I got around to seeing Hunger Games over the past weekend. I figure that if for no better reason than the total insanity surrounding the books and movie something should be said. There are of course, better reasons. Hunger Games, the movie and the trilogy of books, have turned into one of the most popular series in recent memory and may end up being on of the most popular ever. The books have sold millions and the first movie in the installment has certainly proven its worth by topping the box office numbers for its first two weeks in theaters.
It is the story of young woman, Katniss Everdeen, who comes from a poor mining district in the dystopian nation that covers North America called Panem. Every year a boy and girl (eighteen or under in age) are chosen to participate in The Hunger Games. An event in which each boy and girl from the twelve districts, totally twenty four contestants, fights in a Battle Royale(1) style fight to the death with only one survivor. This event is televised for all of the twelve districts to watch for both their entertainment and horror. Along the way the participants through their charisma during the event or the interviews they do before it can earn sponsors that can send them supplies during the Games. It is clearly a sensational and damning view of reality tv and the corporations that pay for commercials to keep these shows going. Katniss ends up a participant after offering herself to the games to keep her younger sister from the danger it presents.
Jennifer Lawrence plays the lead role of Katniss. I must say that having seen her in two previous movies, Winters Bone and X-Men First Class, I think she is a star that will continue to burn bright into the future based on those two performances. This movie did nothing to deter that belief. She was believable and interesting and in the action sequences out in the wilderness where she was fighting for her life compelling. Any flaw of hers could be credited to the writing. While I ended up rooting for Katniss because of the action and intensity, I wondered through most of the scenes leading up to the actual Hunger Games why she was the one I was rooting for. Not that I wanted to root for someone else. I just wasn't totally sure, besides making the sacrifice to save her sister, what made her so special, a point made by some of the other characters helping to prepare her for the Games. Despite this, Jennifer Lawrence did deliver another great performance. She just at times wasn't given much to work with.
The one thing I keep hearing, as someone who never read the books, was that the movie managed to include most of what was in the books. Having seen it, I certainly believe that with the two and half hour running time. I wonder if at times this didn't work to the movies detriment. I spent a significant portion of the first half of the movie unsure of the relationships being built. Mostly because they weren't. The character of Cinna, for instance, played by Lenny Kravitz, was very impressed by Katniss and wanted her to win. But based on the limited amount of interaction they have in the movie, it is hard to say why. I once heard it said that when you are writing with a limited amount of time that you have to focus on what matters the most. I think that in certain instances, particularly like the one cited above (and others mostly in the first third of the movie), that the movie was more concerned with covering as much of the book as possible rather than focusing its energy on what really mattered. Thus giving the viewer an emotional bond to the characters that isn't built until more than half way through the movie.
The movie itself was ultimately good but not great. Entertaining but not fully realized. The idea behind it was interesting, that of reality tv being used to captivate a nation to the detriment and death of its youth. This idea however was not hammered home in a way that it will have impacted its audience in any meaningful and lasing way. Lawrence's performance as Katniss was excellent as long as she was given enough to do. However, the action in the Games themselves was truly exciting and compelling. We officially now have a new movie star in Lawrence and an entertaining as hell movie in Hunger Games. I suppose that's enough. especially considering the audience its geared towards. I should not resent this movie essentially for being Aliens when it is not supposed to be Dark City or Gattica. It is what it is. And what that is is good. Aliens was still a great movie.
(1) Battle Royale is a Japanese book and movie about a group of school aged kids taken to an island to fight to the death in an exercise in blood and gore rarely seen.
It is the story of young woman, Katniss Everdeen, who comes from a poor mining district in the dystopian nation that covers North America called Panem. Every year a boy and girl (eighteen or under in age) are chosen to participate in The Hunger Games. An event in which each boy and girl from the twelve districts, totally twenty four contestants, fights in a Battle Royale(1) style fight to the death with only one survivor. This event is televised for all of the twelve districts to watch for both their entertainment and horror. Along the way the participants through their charisma during the event or the interviews they do before it can earn sponsors that can send them supplies during the Games. It is clearly a sensational and damning view of reality tv and the corporations that pay for commercials to keep these shows going. Katniss ends up a participant after offering herself to the games to keep her younger sister from the danger it presents.
Jennifer Lawrence plays the lead role of Katniss. I must say that having seen her in two previous movies, Winters Bone and X-Men First Class, I think she is a star that will continue to burn bright into the future based on those two performances. This movie did nothing to deter that belief. She was believable and interesting and in the action sequences out in the wilderness where she was fighting for her life compelling. Any flaw of hers could be credited to the writing. While I ended up rooting for Katniss because of the action and intensity, I wondered through most of the scenes leading up to the actual Hunger Games why she was the one I was rooting for. Not that I wanted to root for someone else. I just wasn't totally sure, besides making the sacrifice to save her sister, what made her so special, a point made by some of the other characters helping to prepare her for the Games. Despite this, Jennifer Lawrence did deliver another great performance. She just at times wasn't given much to work with.
The one thing I keep hearing, as someone who never read the books, was that the movie managed to include most of what was in the books. Having seen it, I certainly believe that with the two and half hour running time. I wonder if at times this didn't work to the movies detriment. I spent a significant portion of the first half of the movie unsure of the relationships being built. Mostly because they weren't. The character of Cinna, for instance, played by Lenny Kravitz, was very impressed by Katniss and wanted her to win. But based on the limited amount of interaction they have in the movie, it is hard to say why. I once heard it said that when you are writing with a limited amount of time that you have to focus on what matters the most. I think that in certain instances, particularly like the one cited above (and others mostly in the first third of the movie), that the movie was more concerned with covering as much of the book as possible rather than focusing its energy on what really mattered. Thus giving the viewer an emotional bond to the characters that isn't built until more than half way through the movie.
The movie itself was ultimately good but not great. Entertaining but not fully realized. The idea behind it was interesting, that of reality tv being used to captivate a nation to the detriment and death of its youth. This idea however was not hammered home in a way that it will have impacted its audience in any meaningful and lasing way. Lawrence's performance as Katniss was excellent as long as she was given enough to do. However, the action in the Games themselves was truly exciting and compelling. We officially now have a new movie star in Lawrence and an entertaining as hell movie in Hunger Games. I suppose that's enough. especially considering the audience its geared towards. I should not resent this movie essentially for being Aliens when it is not supposed to be Dark City or Gattica. It is what it is. And what that is is good. Aliens was still a great movie.
(1) Battle Royale is a Japanese book and movie about a group of school aged kids taken to an island to fight to the death in an exercise in blood and gore rarely seen.
Monday, April 2, 2012
the tournament, a look back
basketball: The NCAA basketball tournament has now come and gone. The Kentucky Wildcats are the national champions, and have won in a pretty dominant and convincing fashion throughout the tournament. I would first and foremost like to congratulate the players on their achievements and on their future in the NBA being that most of the starters on this team (most of whom are freshmen) will enter the draft.
The first thing I feel I must do is take a look back at some of the things I said in my brief and somewhat inadequate welcome to the tournament article to see how that all worked out. One thing i definitely got right is that my bracket blew up. It was pretty embarrassing actually. I had Duke at least getting out of the round of 64. I had UNLV making it to the elite eight. I had FSU getting to the final four. I had Missouri winning the whole thing. I had New Mexico upsetting Michigan State; an opportunity they didn't even get because they got knocked out early. Needless to say it was a disaster in most respects. I did, however, get Kansas beating North Carolina and getting to the title game. So not a total loss. I also had them losing in the title game if that counts for anything (to Missouri, who got knocked out in the round of 64, not Kentucky).
Another claim I made came untrue. There really wasn't much of a breakout star of this tournament. Jae Crowder made an impact for Marquette who got knocked out a little too early for it to matter and Royce White from Iowa State, who had the best chance to breakout, got bounced from the tournament in the round of 32 by the eventual champs. The stars of the tournament were the stars of the season: Anthony Davis, Jared Sullinger, Thomas Robinson, Draymond Green, Peyton Siva. On this account I was wrong yet again. Sorry, no Stephen Curry this year.
On the other hand I was right about one thing. I planned to front run in my bracket. I just picked the wrong top teams. But how can anyone say that Louisville, Kentucky, Ohio State, and Kansas isn't a front running final four. And how can anyone say that those top players of the tournament I just listed aren't front runners as well. The cream really did rise to the top this time.
And that cream was truly John Calipari and the Kentucky Wildcats. They were the preseason number 1. They were number 1 at the end as well. Cal has learned how to use the one and done system to his advantage and to that of his kids, getting them not only a college title but national exposure that can only help their futures. Many of the players on this team, much like his other players of recent years, will surely be top picks in the NBA draft. There has been a growing debate over whether Kentucky winning the National Championship would be good for college basketball. Calipari has mastered (and I do mean MASTERED) the one and done system that the NBA has created, in which top high school players go to college for one year merely out obligation. The debate will surely continue for years to come, depending on the impact of this championship upon other programs. I am not here to talk about that because time will tell if there are flaws in the system.
All I want to say is that Kentucky deserves congratulations. They were the best team on the court tonight and all year long. Those young men are amazing basketball players, not just because of their skill sets, but their clear understanding of how to play within a team construct (the National Player Of The Year, Anthony Davis, made only one field goals in the title game and was the tournaments MVP). It was fun to watch the best group of young talent in the country play great. It was fun to watch Kansas spend the tournament fighting back at every turn. It was tough for me to watch some of the upsets. At least I got my storybook match-ups (Cal vs Self for the second time in 5 years, Pitino vs Kentucky, Roy Williams vs Kansas). What a mad march it was.
The first thing I feel I must do is take a look back at some of the things I said in my brief and somewhat inadequate welcome to the tournament article to see how that all worked out. One thing i definitely got right is that my bracket blew up. It was pretty embarrassing actually. I had Duke at least getting out of the round of 64. I had UNLV making it to the elite eight. I had FSU getting to the final four. I had Missouri winning the whole thing. I had New Mexico upsetting Michigan State; an opportunity they didn't even get because they got knocked out early. Needless to say it was a disaster in most respects. I did, however, get Kansas beating North Carolina and getting to the title game. So not a total loss. I also had them losing in the title game if that counts for anything (to Missouri, who got knocked out in the round of 64, not Kentucky).
Another claim I made came untrue. There really wasn't much of a breakout star of this tournament. Jae Crowder made an impact for Marquette who got knocked out a little too early for it to matter and Royce White from Iowa State, who had the best chance to breakout, got bounced from the tournament in the round of 32 by the eventual champs. The stars of the tournament were the stars of the season: Anthony Davis, Jared Sullinger, Thomas Robinson, Draymond Green, Peyton Siva. On this account I was wrong yet again. Sorry, no Stephen Curry this year.
On the other hand I was right about one thing. I planned to front run in my bracket. I just picked the wrong top teams. But how can anyone say that Louisville, Kentucky, Ohio State, and Kansas isn't a front running final four. And how can anyone say that those top players of the tournament I just listed aren't front runners as well. The cream really did rise to the top this time.
And that cream was truly John Calipari and the Kentucky Wildcats. They were the preseason number 1. They were number 1 at the end as well. Cal has learned how to use the one and done system to his advantage and to that of his kids, getting them not only a college title but national exposure that can only help their futures. Many of the players on this team, much like his other players of recent years, will surely be top picks in the NBA draft. There has been a growing debate over whether Kentucky winning the National Championship would be good for college basketball. Calipari has mastered (and I do mean MASTERED) the one and done system that the NBA has created, in which top high school players go to college for one year merely out obligation. The debate will surely continue for years to come, depending on the impact of this championship upon other programs. I am not here to talk about that because time will tell if there are flaws in the system.
All I want to say is that Kentucky deserves congratulations. They were the best team on the court tonight and all year long. Those young men are amazing basketball players, not just because of their skill sets, but their clear understanding of how to play within a team construct (the National Player Of The Year, Anthony Davis, made only one field goals in the title game and was the tournaments MVP). It was fun to watch the best group of young talent in the country play great. It was fun to watch Kansas spend the tournament fighting back at every turn. It was tough for me to watch some of the upsets. At least I got my storybook match-ups (Cal vs Self for the second time in 5 years, Pitino vs Kentucky, Roy Williams vs Kansas). What a mad march it was.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)