So this weekend was very big for the Oscar race because of the Guild awards (Producers, Directors, and Screen Actors). Here are the big stories.
Inside Job: Best Documentary?
Inside Job took the win in the Directors Guild Award, and because Waiting for Superman (which was inexplicably snubbed by the Oscars) took home the Producers Guild Award, Inside Job is the only film on the ballot with a Guild award. That does not necessarily make it the favorite (either Restrepo or Exit Through the Gift Shop could upset), but Inside Job has (dare I say it?) the inside track for the Oscar.
Is the Acting Race set?
Not exactly. Though the Acting races for the men have been fairly set (Colin Firth and Christian Bale are essentially locks), the Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress are less set in stone. Natalie Portman is clearly the favorite, but don't count out Annette Bening, who campaigned more than Portman. But Jennifer Lawrence is essentially out of the Race. Best Supporting Actress is looking a lot clearer with Melissa Leo on top. But Helena Bonham Carter, Amy Adams, or even Hailee Steinfeld could take over that spot.
Is David Fincher going to lose?
Probably not. He didn't win the Directors Guild award, but he took a lot of the critics' awards. Still he would probably have to look out for Tom Hooper, whose movie The King's Speech has more nominations in the Oscars and who took home the Directors Guild award.
The Social Network vs. The King's Speech
The Social Network looked like the surefire weekend before the nominations were announced. Then The King's Speech seemed to be closing the gap, but now, after this weekend, it's a lot harder to choose. Unlike recent years, there seems to be a tight race for Best Picture.
Updated Winners
Best Documentary: Inside Job
Best Animated Feature: Toy Story 3
Best Foreign Film: In A Better World
Best Adapted Screenplay: The Social Network
Best Original Screenplay: The King's Speech
Best Supporting Actress: Melissa Leo, The Fighter
Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale, The Fighter
Best Actress: Natalie Portman, Black Swan
Best Actor: Colin Firth, The King's Speech
Best Director: David Fincher, The Social Network
Best Picture: The King's Speech
Monday, January 31, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 23
Time to get a little sentimental...because today's theme is...
A MOVIE THAT REMINDS ME OF SOMEONE
This has to be She's The Man, less for what the movie is about and more for the history for me behind that movie. This is the movie my friends and I watched all the time. We knew almost all of the lines in the movie ("Gouda!"). This was always one of the first movies we would always consider watching. It actually annoyed people who weren't that close to us because we knew the movie so well. Then of course it reminds me of residential high school life and I knew what life was like there, except with the weird principal. It reminds me of my friends from my old middle school who I watched this movie with and the friends who I lived with in my residential high school. But of course, who could forget the awesome cat-fight between three (three!!) girls? Pretty awesome right?
A MOVIE THAT REMINDS ME OF SOMEONE
This has to be She's The Man, less for what the movie is about and more for the history for me behind that movie. This is the movie my friends and I watched all the time. We knew almost all of the lines in the movie ("Gouda!"). This was always one of the first movies we would always consider watching. It actually annoyed people who weren't that close to us because we knew the movie so well. Then of course it reminds me of residential high school life and I knew what life was like there, except with the weird principal. It reminds me of my friends from my old middle school who I watched this movie with and the friends who I lived with in my residential high school. But of course, who could forget the awesome cat-fight between three (three!!) girls? Pretty awesome right?
Sunday, January 30, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 22
Once again, I'm at a loss for words. And apparently my fish's name is gonna be D'Brickashaw. Today's theme is...
A MOVIE FROM MY FAVORITE DIRECTOR
My favorite director has to be Edgar Wright because he is another one of those people in Hollywood who has never let me down. I just started watching Spaced and it is hilarious. He works with Simon Pegg and Nick Frost (two of the funniest actors ever), and I just can't get enough of his movies. He is one of those guys who pays homage to the movies he spoofs. In Hot Fuzz, he created a legitimate buddy cop-action-comedy movie that lampoons the exact type of movie it is. The same goes for Shaun of the Dead, which is one of the best zombie movies in the world. And now he's finishing up his "trilogy" with Pegg and Frost with a new movie coming out soon. So exciting!
A MOVIE FROM MY FAVORITE DIRECTOR
My favorite director has to be Edgar Wright because he is another one of those people in Hollywood who has never let me down. I just started watching Spaced and it is hilarious. He works with Simon Pegg and Nick Frost (two of the funniest actors ever), and I just can't get enough of his movies. He is one of those guys who pays homage to the movies he spoofs. In Hot Fuzz, he created a legitimate buddy cop-action-comedy movie that lampoons the exact type of movie it is. The same goes for Shaun of the Dead, which is one of the best zombie movies in the world. And now he's finishing up his "trilogy" with Pegg and Frost with a new movie coming out soon. So exciting!
Saturday, January 29, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 21
Weekend for directing I guess. Today's theme is...
A MOVIE BY THE DIRECTOR I HATE THE MOST
I actually don't really hate any director. I think that one I'm supposed to hate is James Cameron, who is kinda a prick, but I like him in general. He is a great director and I respect what he has done in the sci-fi genre. I think I'm also supposed to hate Quintin Tarantino, but I really don't, even though he too can be somewhat of a prick. I really don't like actor-directors (even though Clint Eastwood and Robert Redford are really good at doing both). The worst is Mel Gibson, who I hate because of what he did with The Passion of the Christ. I can understand making a movie that is controversial (like Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ), but this is coming from a man with enough controversy on his plate. He may be a great director, but he is a horrible person. Same goes with Michael Moore, who is one of the most biased and sensationalist documentarians in the world (Capitalism: A Love Story is just vile). So much hate in the air, but that's gonna change soon...
A MOVIE BY THE DIRECTOR I HATE THE MOST
I actually don't really hate any director. I think that one I'm supposed to hate is James Cameron, who is kinda a prick, but I like him in general. He is a great director and I respect what he has done in the sci-fi genre. I think I'm also supposed to hate Quintin Tarantino, but I really don't, even though he too can be somewhat of a prick. I really don't like actor-directors (even though Clint Eastwood and Robert Redford are really good at doing both). The worst is Mel Gibson, who I hate because of what he did with The Passion of the Christ. I can understand making a movie that is controversial (like Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ), but this is coming from a man with enough controversy on his plate. He may be a great director, but he is a horrible person. Same goes with Michael Moore, who is one of the most biased and sensationalist documentarians in the world (Capitalism: A Love Story is just vile). So much hate in the air, but that's gonna change soon...
Friday, January 28, 2011
Presenting...
OUR NEW FISH!!!
I don't have a name for it yet. So we're gonna have a poll on the right side. Rob says that it should be named D'Brickashaw. But I'm a little less for that name. I think Quint would be a good name for the fish. Or maybe Paulie. I had a fish named Pauli and it lived for 2 years. So poll on fish name on the right hand side. Also if you have any other ideas that I don't put on the poll, post it in the comments!
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 20
Hate is a very strong word, but I think it fits in with today's theme, which is...
A GOOD MOVIE WITH AN ACTOR YOU REALLY HATE
Well, I would give this spot to Julia Roberts, but I really, really hate Julia Roberts, so there is no way I'm talking any more about her. Another actor I really hate is now Michael Cera. I will admit that he was hysterical in Arrested Development, but after that, I never really liked him, especially after his "turn" in Youth In Revolt. But I love Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World. There are many reasons why Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World is a great movie. There were so many good supporting roles in this film, especially by Kieran Culkin as Wallace Wells. The Seven Evil-Exes part was hilarious with my personal favorite was Mae Whitman (Katara from Avatar: The Last Airbender?!) as Roxy Richter. Mary Elizabeth Winstead was perfect as Ramona Flowers. Then of course, it was directed by Edgar Wright (Hot Fuzz, Shaun of the Dead), who has never steered me wrong. So maybe Michael Cera was his same old awkward self, but the movie was not taken down because of Cera's typical performance. So rent it, borrow it, (il)legally download it, whatever. But don't let Cera draw you away from a really great movie.
A GOOD MOVIE WITH AN ACTOR YOU REALLY HATE
Well, I would give this spot to Julia Roberts, but I really, really hate Julia Roberts, so there is no way I'm talking any more about her. Another actor I really hate is now Michael Cera. I will admit that he was hysterical in Arrested Development, but after that, I never really liked him, especially after his "turn" in Youth In Revolt. But I love Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World. There are many reasons why Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World is a great movie. There were so many good supporting roles in this film, especially by Kieran Culkin as Wallace Wells. The Seven Evil-Exes part was hilarious with my personal favorite was Mae Whitman (Katara from Avatar: The Last Airbender?!) as Roxy Richter. Mary Elizabeth Winstead was perfect as Ramona Flowers. Then of course, it was directed by Edgar Wright (Hot Fuzz, Shaun of the Dead), who has never steered me wrong. So maybe Michael Cera was his same old awkward self, but the movie was not taken down because of Cera's typical performance. So rent it, borrow it, (il)legally download it, whatever. But don't let Cera draw you away from a really great movie.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Thoughts on the NBA All-Star Starters
Congrats to all the starters of the NBA All-Star game. But just a few thoughts...
Eastern Conference All-Stars were absolutely and completely deserving
So the Eastern Conference All-Stars are Derrick Rose (CHI), Dwyane Wade (MIA), LeBron James (MIA), Amare Stoudemire (NYK), and Dwight Howard (ORL). No one is taking Dwight Howard's starting position for the next couple of years because there have been very few centers that have been as dynamic and as athletic as Dwight Howard. Stoudemire has been a revelation on the Knicks, embracing his star status and playing at the highest caliber of basketball he has ever played (though Kevin Garnett (BOS) could have also snuck in). LeBron James and Dwyane Wade have Miami playing their best basketball since their last superstar pairing (O'Neal and Wade). Derrick Rose's selection may seem odd because of Rajon Rondo's (BOS) impressive assist numbers, but Derrick Rose is a superstar, while Rondo isn't. So Rose deserves the starting nod. Also interesting that the top 5 scorers in the Eastern conference are the starters.
My Guess for the Eastern All-Star Reserves
Rajon Rondo and Kevin Garnett are going to the All-Star Game as both are defensive monsters and deserving players. After those two, the other starters are a little less set in stone. I'd guess that Danny Granger (IND) gets a nod because of his scoring abilities on a less than decent team. Chris Bosh (MIA) completes the trifecta of Heat players. Really this is just a crap-shoot. I'd go for Paul Pierce (BOS), Brook Lopez (NJN), John Wall (WAS), and Luol Deng (CHI), who is pretty much my favorite player.
Western Conference Starters...Not So Much
Kobe Bryant (LAL), Kevin Durant (OKC), and Chris Paul (NOH) all are veritable MVP candidates. Bryant is once again leading the Lakers to an impressive season. Durant is leading the league in scoring and is contributing like a real team player. And Chris Paul is probably the best point guard in the league (just a notch above Deron Williams (UTA)). But Yao Ming (HOU) is injured, and Carmelo Anthony (DEN) just isn't that great at anything other than scoring. The deserving starting center is Kevin Love (MIN) hands down. The best rebounder in the game is still not a starter? It just doesn't make sense. The starting power forward should be either Blake Griffin (LAC) or Dirk Nowitzki (DAL). Griffin is the highlight reel at power forward that hasn't existed since arguably Shawn Kemp. And he's averaging around 23 points and 13 rebounds. Dirk Nowitzki is just playing lights out. He was probably the best player until he got injured. That speaks a lot to his game.
My Guess for Western All-Star Reserves
This one is a lot easier. Monta Ellis (GSW) is one of the best scorers in the game. Deron Williams (UTA) is the second best point guard in the game and is having another fantastic season. Obviously you have Love, Griffin, and Nowitzki. But one of those players will be starting for the injured Ming. I would give Rudy Gay (MEM) a reserve spot just because he is the Most Interesting Man in the NBA . I would also lend LaMarcus Aldridge (POR) a spot because he has done a great job without Brandon Roy. Lastly, I would give Manu Ginobili (SAS) because you can't have an All-Star team without at least one member of the best team in the league, though Russell Westbrook (OKC) could sneak in.
All-Star Game is going to be on February 20. And with all of the other competitions (Skills Challenge is going to be chosen by the fans; Dunk Competition with Blake Griffin) it looks to be a great weekend from the Staples Center. It's gonna be a fun night!
Eastern Conference All-Stars were absolutely and completely deserving
So the Eastern Conference All-Stars are Derrick Rose (CHI), Dwyane Wade (MIA), LeBron James (MIA), Amare Stoudemire (NYK), and Dwight Howard (ORL). No one is taking Dwight Howard's starting position for the next couple of years because there have been very few centers that have been as dynamic and as athletic as Dwight Howard. Stoudemire has been a revelation on the Knicks, embracing his star status and playing at the highest caliber of basketball he has ever played (though Kevin Garnett (BOS) could have also snuck in). LeBron James and Dwyane Wade have Miami playing their best basketball since their last superstar pairing (O'Neal and Wade). Derrick Rose's selection may seem odd because of Rajon Rondo's (BOS) impressive assist numbers, but Derrick Rose is a superstar, while Rondo isn't. So Rose deserves the starting nod. Also interesting that the top 5 scorers in the Eastern conference are the starters.
My Guess for the Eastern All-Star Reserves
Rajon Rondo and Kevin Garnett are going to the All-Star Game as both are defensive monsters and deserving players. After those two, the other starters are a little less set in stone. I'd guess that Danny Granger (IND) gets a nod because of his scoring abilities on a less than decent team. Chris Bosh (MIA) completes the trifecta of Heat players. Really this is just a crap-shoot. I'd go for Paul Pierce (BOS), Brook Lopez (NJN), John Wall (WAS), and Luol Deng (CHI), who is pretty much my favorite player.
Western Conference Starters...Not So Much
Kobe Bryant (LAL), Kevin Durant (OKC), and Chris Paul (NOH) all are veritable MVP candidates. Bryant is once again leading the Lakers to an impressive season. Durant is leading the league in scoring and is contributing like a real team player. And Chris Paul is probably the best point guard in the league (just a notch above Deron Williams (UTA)). But Yao Ming (HOU) is injured, and Carmelo Anthony (DEN) just isn't that great at anything other than scoring. The deserving starting center is Kevin Love (MIN) hands down. The best rebounder in the game is still not a starter? It just doesn't make sense. The starting power forward should be either Blake Griffin (LAC) or Dirk Nowitzki (DAL). Griffin is the highlight reel at power forward that hasn't existed since arguably Shawn Kemp. And he's averaging around 23 points and 13 rebounds. Dirk Nowitzki is just playing lights out. He was probably the best player until he got injured. That speaks a lot to his game.
My Guess for Western All-Star Reserves
This one is a lot easier. Monta Ellis (GSW) is one of the best scorers in the game. Deron Williams (UTA) is the second best point guard in the game and is having another fantastic season. Obviously you have Love, Griffin, and Nowitzki. But one of those players will be starting for the injured Ming. I would give Rudy Gay (MEM) a reserve spot just because he is the Most Interesting Man in the NBA . I would also lend LaMarcus Aldridge (POR) a spot because he has done a great job without Brandon Roy. Lastly, I would give Manu Ginobili (SAS) because you can't have an All-Star team without at least one member of the best team in the league, though Russell Westbrook (OKC) could sneak in.
All-Star Game is going to be on February 20. And with all of the other competitions (Skills Challenge is going to be chosen by the fans; Dunk Competition with Blake Griffin) it looks to be a great weekend from the Staples Center. It's gonna be a fun night!
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 19
So we have an interesting topic today, which is...
A MOVIE THAT IS MY GUILTY PLEASURE
This movie has to be Win A Date with Tad Hamilton. It's okay to like some romantic comedies (aka rom-coms, aka chick flicks), but sometimes there are movies that just cross the line. I would argue that Win A Date With Tad Hamilton isn't one of them, but someone I know did say that she was ashamed that I liked this movie. My case for this movie is that the characters are just so lovely. Sure Topher Grace's character Peter isn't exactly the leading man you would expect, especially compared to Josh Duhamel's Tad Hamilton, but Topher Grace adds a different spin on the leading man. He's handsome, but not a heartthrob. He's the friend that was always passed up. He has been in love with the main girl for, like, forever. There are so many cliches that describe his character, but he makes those cliches essentially moot. He does small gestures to show that he cares. He had the beautiful (albeit set in a bathroom) scene where he describes everything that someone who truly knew and loved Rosalee Futch (the love interest played by the cute Kate Bosworth) would actually know. I loved the speech about her six smiles. Kate Bosworth was homely and cute as Rosalee and of course you had Josh Duhamel who broke hearts as the incredibly handsome Tad Hamilton. There were great supporting turns too from Nathan Lane and Sean Hayes as the agent and manager of Tad Hamilton and Ginnifer Goodwin (who is really, really good at romantic comedies) as Cathy, the quintessential best friend of Rosalee. The best supporting role has to go to Kathryn Hahn as the bartender Angelica, who taught us about love, big love, and great love (which changes a man). It is a beautiful and sweet movie (maybe a little too saccharine for some people's likings), and a pleasure I shouldn't be guilty for having.
A MOVIE THAT IS MY GUILTY PLEASURE
This movie has to be Win A Date with Tad Hamilton. It's okay to like some romantic comedies (aka rom-coms, aka chick flicks), but sometimes there are movies that just cross the line. I would argue that Win A Date With Tad Hamilton isn't one of them, but someone I know did say that she was ashamed that I liked this movie. My case for this movie is that the characters are just so lovely. Sure Topher Grace's character Peter isn't exactly the leading man you would expect, especially compared to Josh Duhamel's Tad Hamilton, but Topher Grace adds a different spin on the leading man. He's handsome, but not a heartthrob. He's the friend that was always passed up. He has been in love with the main girl for, like, forever. There are so many cliches that describe his character, but he makes those cliches essentially moot. He does small gestures to show that he cares. He had the beautiful (albeit set in a bathroom) scene where he describes everything that someone who truly knew and loved Rosalee Futch (the love interest played by the cute Kate Bosworth) would actually know. I loved the speech about her six smiles. Kate Bosworth was homely and cute as Rosalee and of course you had Josh Duhamel who broke hearts as the incredibly handsome Tad Hamilton. There were great supporting turns too from Nathan Lane and Sean Hayes as the agent and manager of Tad Hamilton and Ginnifer Goodwin (who is really, really good at romantic comedies) as Cathy, the quintessential best friend of Rosalee. The best supporting role has to go to Kathryn Hahn as the bartender Angelica, who taught us about love, big love, and great love (which changes a man). It is a beautiful and sweet movie (maybe a little too saccharine for some people's likings), and a pleasure I shouldn't be guilty for having.
Blog Post Contest Entry: Zombie Readiness Task Force at Your Service
Writer's Note: This blog entry is for a contest at the University of Chicago, where I'm a student. This post will be for the Uncommon Blog, which is a blog for prospective and admitted students. Winner gets their blog posted on the Uncommon Blog. I wrote about a club called the Zombie Readiness Task Force just for fun. Hope you guys like it!
I am proud to say that I am a member of the Zombie Readiness Task Force (ZRTF), an RSO based around anything zombie-related. Now I know what you’re thinking. Well, I probably don’t, but I’m sure many of you aren’t expecting zombies to take over the world by force. But we here at the ZRTF understand that the thought of a zombie apocalypse, though extremely cool to consider, is very unlikely to actually happen. But that really doesn’t matter, at least to us. Sure, we’re a club in its infancy, and maybe we don’t have as many members as say Model UN. We’re just a couple of people who just happen to know each other and share an interest in zombies, though the free pizza at every meeting is always a plus. We even found zombie-related activities that don’t involve killing the walking dead. Just recently, a group of members, including myself, attended a lecture from a former UChicago professor by the name of Daniel Drezner. He gave a talk on international policy and zombies, and it is a talk that was not the least bit trivialized because of the zombie involvement. It was actually enhanced. And of course, what kind of anti-zombie force do you think we would be without a little “Humans vs. Zombies” (hopefully)? For those who don’t know about HvZ, it is pretty much a massive, two-week long game where the humans try to survive under the pressure of attacking zombies. So, in about a month since its conception, members of the ZRTF have held a couple of meetings, attended a lecture on international policy and zombies, and proposed a campus-wide game of Humans vs. Zombies. Most importantly, we turned something that could have easily been disregarded somewhere else into a nearly full-fledged, funded, and fun RSO. And of course, if UChicago does happen to be overrun by zombies, at least we’ll be ready.
Update: I have PICTURES!
Update: I have PICTURES!
 |
| The Presentation |
 |
| Professor Daniel Drezner |
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 18
It's Wednesday (?)! I really have nothing else to say as of this point other than today's theme, which is...
A MOVIE NO ONE WOULD EXPECT ME TO LOVE
Well, a lot of people respect my taste in movies. I hate bad movies, love good movies, and give fair analysis to the movies in between. But there is one really bad movie that I really liked. I loved Speed Racer, which monumentally tanked at the box office. Exaggeration aside, it really wasn't a great movie, but I was in love with it. I wasn't the biggest fan of the acting (especially on Christina Ricci's part), but I looked at this like a sports movie, but in the future. The visual effects of the movie were cluttered, but beautiful. The racing was intense with some of the coolest looking sequences I've ever seen. It embraces its cheesy roots, but in my opinion, it should have embraced it even more. It is a movie based on an animated television show and it took itself too seriously, which led to the movie's downfall. But look past that and watch it with the enthusiasm of a child. Watch the immensely amazing race car driving and look at how each little thingamajig is used. That's how I watched it, and unexpectedly, fell in love with it. Mount up! Yea, I know it's from S.W.A.T., but it sounds really cool.
A MOVIE NO ONE WOULD EXPECT ME TO LOVE
Well, a lot of people respect my taste in movies. I hate bad movies, love good movies, and give fair analysis to the movies in between. But there is one really bad movie that I really liked. I loved Speed Racer, which monumentally tanked at the box office. Exaggeration aside, it really wasn't a great movie, but I was in love with it. I wasn't the biggest fan of the acting (especially on Christina Ricci's part), but I looked at this like a sports movie, but in the future. The visual effects of the movie were cluttered, but beautiful. The racing was intense with some of the coolest looking sequences I've ever seen. It embraces its cheesy roots, but in my opinion, it should have embraced it even more. It is a movie based on an animated television show and it took itself too seriously, which led to the movie's downfall. But look past that and watch it with the enthusiasm of a child. Watch the immensely amazing race car driving and look at how each little thingamajig is used. That's how I watched it, and unexpectedly, fell in love with it. Mount up! Yea, I know it's from S.W.A.T., but it sounds really cool.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Thoughts on the Oscar Nominations
Oscar nominations were announced earlier this morning, and most of it went as expected. But there are a couple of decisions that I think the Academy should not have made. But some were really good too, I suppose. So here are the important story-lines regarding the Oscars (aka no crap about animated shorts or nominations like that).
The King's Speech leads the nominations
No surprises here. The shocker was by how many it topped its competition, primarily The Social Network. The Social Network got important nominations, but it got fewer nominations in the technical categories. Though typically the movie nominated for the most accolades is not necessarily the winner of Best Picture, it does show that The King's Speech was at the front of the voters' minds. The Social Network went from nearly surefire winner to probable winner. It should win, based on what the critics have said, but if it loses to The King's Speech, don't call it an upset.
Javier Bardem for Biutiful over Robert Duvall in Get Low
The last spot of the Best Actor race was clearly up for grabs with Colin Firth, James Franco, Jesse Eisenberg, and Jeff Bridges essentially locked in. A lot of people expected Robert Duvall to sneak in with Get Low, but everyone should have been shocked when Javier Bardem heard his name called. It was a breathtaking performance by Bardem, but it also was a little-seen foreign language film. But his addition seems more of an appreciation/massive campaigning by one Julia Roberts (who actually may be the most overrated actress of all time) than anything. There seems to be no way Colin Firth (The King's Speech) gets upset for the Best Actor trophy.
Illusionist is in; Tangled, Despicable Me are out
So the Animated Feature race is always one of the least entertaining. The winner is typically Pixar's most recent film (5-2 since this award was given; winner of last 3 years), and that trend doesn't seem like it will change with Toy Story 3's Best Picture nomination. But a lot of people would have expected another kid friendly movie to join Toy Story 3 and How To Train Your Dragon, but lo and behold, the more mature Illusionist sneaks in to grab the last spot.
True Grit goes from zero to hero
True Grit goes from shut-out at the Golden Globes to second most nominations in the Oscars. Sure, I'm not typically the biggest fan of the Golden Globes, but that is a massive change. It probably won't win many of their nominations (or any at all from the looks of it), but it's still pretty amazing (kudos on Hailee Steinfeld, who at 14, is one of the youngest nominees of all time).
127 Hours and Winter's Bone in for Best Picture; no love for The Town
In what is less of a surprise, the Best Picture race is shaken up a little with the dismissal of The Town and the addition of 127 Hours. Winter's Bone and 127 Hours are probably the two weakest nominees (which means they are really strong movies in general), so it doesn't affect the race itself, but the lack of love for The Town (only one nominations for Jeremy Renner) is surprising. I think the Academy is still pretty pissed at Gigli and Daredevil.
Michelle Williams gets in with Blue Valentine
This isn't actually as big of a surprise as you would expect. The expected five were Natalie Portman, Annette Bening, Jennifer Lawrence, Nicole Kidman, and Hailee Steinfeld. So when Hailee Steinfeld was (not actually that) surprisingly put into the Supporting Actress category, it opened a spot for the next deserving nominee, which in this case was Michelle Williams. A deserving nominee for an underappreciated movie overall (with only one nomination)
The Biggest Snub of All Time (Kinda, Sorta, Not Really)
Okay, so maybe I'm a little overly dramatic on this topic, but this is the biggest snub of this year. Despite all of the love for his movie Inception, Christopher Nolan gets shut out of the Best Director category, and he is replaced by the Coen brothers (who already had 2 nominations and 1 win). This isn't the first time people have cried foul against Nolan, who was shafted for Memento and The Dark Knight (2 of his 3 Director's Guild nominations). He deserved to be nominated for one of the best movies of the year, but he wasn't. He'll be fine with his writing nomination for now, but I personally expected him to be the only person who could beat David Fincher (who probably would've won regardless). I guess I was pretty wrong with that guess.
So with those stories, here are my predictions for the Oscars.
Best Original Screenplay: David Seidler, The King's Speech
Best Adapted Screenplay: Aaron Sorkin, The Social Network
Best Animated Feature: Toy Story 3
Best Documentary Feature: Exit Through the Gift Shop
Best Foreign Language Film: In A Better World (Denmark)
Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale, The Fighter
Best Supporting Actress: Amy Adams, The Fighter
Best Actor: Colin Firth, The King's Speech
Best Actress: Annette Bening, The Kids Are All Right
Best Director: David Fincher, The Social Network
Best Picture: The Social Network
Oscars are in about a month (February 27, 2011), and from the looks of it, we won't have another Razzie and Oscar winner in the same year (congrats to Sandra Bullock for being the first!). Have fun, and see y'all later!
P.S. Good luck to Rob with his Fantasy Oscar game or what not!
The King's Speech leads the nominations
No surprises here. The shocker was by how many it topped its competition, primarily The Social Network. The Social Network got important nominations, but it got fewer nominations in the technical categories. Though typically the movie nominated for the most accolades is not necessarily the winner of Best Picture, it does show that The King's Speech was at the front of the voters' minds. The Social Network went from nearly surefire winner to probable winner. It should win, based on what the critics have said, but if it loses to The King's Speech, don't call it an upset.
Javier Bardem for Biutiful over Robert Duvall in Get Low
The last spot of the Best Actor race was clearly up for grabs with Colin Firth, James Franco, Jesse Eisenberg, and Jeff Bridges essentially locked in. A lot of people expected Robert Duvall to sneak in with Get Low, but everyone should have been shocked when Javier Bardem heard his name called. It was a breathtaking performance by Bardem, but it also was a little-seen foreign language film. But his addition seems more of an appreciation/massive campaigning by one Julia Roberts (who actually may be the most overrated actress of all time) than anything. There seems to be no way Colin Firth (The King's Speech) gets upset for the Best Actor trophy.
Illusionist is in; Tangled, Despicable Me are out
So the Animated Feature race is always one of the least entertaining. The winner is typically Pixar's most recent film (5-2 since this award was given; winner of last 3 years), and that trend doesn't seem like it will change with Toy Story 3's Best Picture nomination. But a lot of people would have expected another kid friendly movie to join Toy Story 3 and How To Train Your Dragon, but lo and behold, the more mature Illusionist sneaks in to grab the last spot.
True Grit goes from zero to hero
True Grit goes from shut-out at the Golden Globes to second most nominations in the Oscars. Sure, I'm not typically the biggest fan of the Golden Globes, but that is a massive change. It probably won't win many of their nominations (or any at all from the looks of it), but it's still pretty amazing (kudos on Hailee Steinfeld, who at 14, is one of the youngest nominees of all time).
127 Hours and Winter's Bone in for Best Picture; no love for The Town
In what is less of a surprise, the Best Picture race is shaken up a little with the dismissal of The Town and the addition of 127 Hours. Winter's Bone and 127 Hours are probably the two weakest nominees (which means they are really strong movies in general), so it doesn't affect the race itself, but the lack of love for The Town (only one nominations for Jeremy Renner) is surprising. I think the Academy is still pretty pissed at Gigli and Daredevil.
Michelle Williams gets in with Blue Valentine
This isn't actually as big of a surprise as you would expect. The expected five were Natalie Portman, Annette Bening, Jennifer Lawrence, Nicole Kidman, and Hailee Steinfeld. So when Hailee Steinfeld was (not actually that) surprisingly put into the Supporting Actress category, it opened a spot for the next deserving nominee, which in this case was Michelle Williams. A deserving nominee for an underappreciated movie overall (with only one nomination)
The Biggest Snub of All Time (Kinda, Sorta, Not Really)
Okay, so maybe I'm a little overly dramatic on this topic, but this is the biggest snub of this year. Despite all of the love for his movie Inception, Christopher Nolan gets shut out of the Best Director category, and he is replaced by the Coen brothers (who already had 2 nominations and 1 win). This isn't the first time people have cried foul against Nolan, who was shafted for Memento and The Dark Knight (2 of his 3 Director's Guild nominations). He deserved to be nominated for one of the best movies of the year, but he wasn't. He'll be fine with his writing nomination for now, but I personally expected him to be the only person who could beat David Fincher (who probably would've won regardless). I guess I was pretty wrong with that guess.
So with those stories, here are my predictions for the Oscars.
Best Original Screenplay: David Seidler, The King's Speech
Best Adapted Screenplay: Aaron Sorkin, The Social Network
Best Animated Feature: Toy Story 3
Best Documentary Feature: Exit Through the Gift Shop
Best Foreign Language Film: In A Better World (Denmark)
Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale, The Fighter
Best Supporting Actress: Amy Adams, The Fighter
Best Actor: Colin Firth, The King's Speech
Best Actress: Annette Bening, The Kids Are All Right
Best Director: David Fincher, The Social Network
Best Picture: The Social Network
Oscars are in about a month (February 27, 2011), and from the looks of it, we won't have another Razzie and Oscar winner in the same year (congrats to Sandra Bullock for being the first!). Have fun, and see y'all later!
P.S. Good luck to Rob with his Fantasy Oscar game or what not!
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 17
Oscars nominations are out! Today's theme is...
A MOVIE THAT DESCRIBES ME
Well this is an overly difficult concept because the way I describe me is different than the way you would. I see myself as a smart, hopeless romantic kind of person. Not really entirely a nice guy, not really entirely a jerk. But generally a good guy. So this is the type of movie that I think would describe me. That movie is Owl and the Sparrow. The story follows three Vietnamese people in a urban area. One is a flight attendant currently in an affair with another pilot. One is a zookeeper struggling to keep the zoo he cherished so much. One is a runaway, leaving behind her verbally abusive uncle. It shows how their three lives intertwine and eventually how they become a family. It describes me because I believe in the ideals that are portrayed in the movie. There is a type of serendipity that I believe I look for everyday, that any moment is the right one. I also believe that nothing is better than following your heart. Yea, as a college student, I'm probably gonna get a lot of crap for saying that, but it's true. I've never personally been to Vietnam or have had an experience as profound as those that the characters had, but I have had similar serendipitous experiences and chance encounters with my emotions, which I believe are embodied by Owl and the Sparrow. If you haven't seen it, you should definitely watch it. It has a great big heart, and while campy and cheesy at times, it is truly romantic, not mushy. Well, I'm going to gocry hold back my tears now. See ya!
A MOVIE THAT DESCRIBES ME
Well this is an overly difficult concept because the way I describe me is different than the way you would. I see myself as a smart, hopeless romantic kind of person. Not really entirely a nice guy, not really entirely a jerk. But generally a good guy. So this is the type of movie that I think would describe me. That movie is Owl and the Sparrow. The story follows three Vietnamese people in a urban area. One is a flight attendant currently in an affair with another pilot. One is a zookeeper struggling to keep the zoo he cherished so much. One is a runaway, leaving behind her verbally abusive uncle. It shows how their three lives intertwine and eventually how they become a family. It describes me because I believe in the ideals that are portrayed in the movie. There is a type of serendipity that I believe I look for everyday, that any moment is the right one. I also believe that nothing is better than following your heart. Yea, as a college student, I'm probably gonna get a lot of crap for saying that, but it's true. I've never personally been to Vietnam or have had an experience as profound as those that the characters had, but I have had similar serendipitous experiences and chance encounters with my emotions, which I believe are embodied by Owl and the Sparrow. If you haven't seen it, you should definitely watch it. It has a great big heart, and while campy and cheesy at times, it is truly romantic, not mushy. Well, I'm going to go
Monday, January 24, 2011
My Prediction of the Australian Open
Congratulations to the Australian Open Quarterfinalists (as if they read this blog). But we've got ourselves a couple of surprises. Some big ones: no Americans or Australians in the quarterfinals. Australia is shut out of the singles matches despite having Samantha Stosur seeded at No. 5. American Venus Williams left with an injury and Andy Roddick once again disappoints as his career seems to be coming to a decline. No. 4 Robin Soderling was ousted in the 4th round by some Ukrainian whose name is way too long to spell (Alexandr Dolgopolov). Andrea Petkovic takes advantage of the injury to Venus Williams and wins her next game against Maria Sharapova. So the quarterfinalists are set, and stories abound, but here are my picks for the winners on the men's and women's side.
Men's semifinalists: Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray, Rafael Nadal
Murray essentially was given a semifinal match by Soderling's loss (as long as Murray keeps his composure). Nadal gets to face off against David Ferrer, which has typically gone Nadal's way (just too good to be beaten by someone not named Djokovic or Federer). Djokovic beats Tomas Berdych, to no one's surprise other than Berdych's. Federer beats fellow Swiss player and doubles partner Stanislas Wawrinka. These four are just too mentally and physically good to be beaten at this stage (other than Murray, who is the weakest of the four).
Women's semifinalists: Caroline Wozniacki, Na Li, Kim Clijsters, Petra Kvitova
Wozniacki is looking for her first Grand Slam title and hopes to solidify her number 1 status in the world by beating a probably tired Francesca Schiavone (after her record-breaking longest match). Na Li returns to the semifinals of the Australian Open in consecutive years by beating Petkovic. Clijsters continues her unbelievable run by topping the very vulnerable Agnieszka Radwanska (hopefully with her racket intact). Petra Kvitova beats Vera Zvonareva after a horrific meltdown in the third set by the number 2 seeded Russian. The women tennis players are typically more prone to meltdowns and inconsistent play (as shown by the carousel of number 1 players), but other than Zvonareva, I'm expecting pretty much the expected.
Women's finalists: Wozniacki, Clijsters
You can't bet against these women right now because they are just too good. Wozniacki and Clijsters breeze through their semifinal matches and face each other in what would be a good, but not great, three set match. Wozniacki takes home her first ever Grand Slam title by beating Clijsters, who is still looking for a title in a Grand Slam tournament not in the United States.
Winner: Caroline Wozniacki (DEN)
Men's finalists: Nadal, Djokovic
Djokovic ekes a win out against Federer in a five-set match, while Nadal overpowers the mentally weaker Andy Murray, requiring only three sets to oust the Scotsman. Nadal then takes on the still-tired Djokovic, and though he has been battling illness and fatigue throughout the tournament, Nadal does something that no one has done since Rod Laver in the 1960s and takes control of all four Grand Slam tournaments at once. Nadal wins in four sets (giving him a 20-1 record in sets this tournament).
Winner: Rafael Nadal (ESP)
Agree, disagree? Call me at 1-800-COMMENT (or just comment without calling that probably already taken number).
Update: I was almost entirely right on the women's side. Zvonareva had the match under control for its entirety. So semifinals will be Zvonareva v. Clijsters and Wozniacki v. Li. I was also almost entirely right on the men's side, though my championship pick was downed in three sets. So semifinals will be Federer v. Djokovic and Murray v. Ferrer. Back to women's tennis where Na Li will be the first Chinese tennis player in a Grand Slam final and she will face Kim Clijsters. And in men's tennis, you have Djokovic v. Murray. Men's and women's winners are Novak Djokovic and Kim Clijsters.
Men's semifinalists: Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray, Rafael Nadal
Murray essentially was given a semifinal match by Soderling's loss (as long as Murray keeps his composure). Nadal gets to face off against David Ferrer, which has typically gone Nadal's way (just too good to be beaten by someone not named Djokovic or Federer). Djokovic beats Tomas Berdych, to no one's surprise other than Berdych's. Federer beats fellow Swiss player and doubles partner Stanislas Wawrinka. These four are just too mentally and physically good to be beaten at this stage (other than Murray, who is the weakest of the four).
Women's semifinalists: Caroline Wozniacki, Na Li, Kim Clijsters, Petra Kvitova
Wozniacki is looking for her first Grand Slam title and hopes to solidify her number 1 status in the world by beating a probably tired Francesca Schiavone (after her record-breaking longest match). Na Li returns to the semifinals of the Australian Open in consecutive years by beating Petkovic. Clijsters continues her unbelievable run by topping the very vulnerable Agnieszka Radwanska (hopefully with her racket intact). Petra Kvitova beats Vera Zvonareva after a horrific meltdown in the third set by the number 2 seeded Russian. The women tennis players are typically more prone to meltdowns and inconsistent play (as shown by the carousel of number 1 players), but other than Zvonareva, I'm expecting pretty much the expected.
Women's finalists: Wozniacki, Clijsters
You can't bet against these women right now because they are just too good. Wozniacki and Clijsters breeze through their semifinal matches and face each other in what would be a good, but not great, three set match. Wozniacki takes home her first ever Grand Slam title by beating Clijsters, who is still looking for a title in a Grand Slam tournament not in the United States.
Winner: Caroline Wozniacki (DEN)
Men's finalists: Nadal, Djokovic
Djokovic ekes a win out against Federer in a five-set match, while Nadal overpowers the mentally weaker Andy Murray, requiring only three sets to oust the Scotsman. Nadal then takes on the still-tired Djokovic, and though he has been battling illness and fatigue throughout the tournament, Nadal does something that no one has done since Rod Laver in the 1960s and takes control of all four Grand Slam tournaments at once. Nadal wins in four sets (giving him a 20-1 record in sets this tournament).
Winner: Rafael Nadal (ESP)
Update: I was almost entirely right on the women's side. Zvonareva had the match under control for its entirety. So semifinals will be Zvonareva v. Clijsters and Wozniacki v. Li. I was also almost entirely right on the men's side, though my championship pick was downed in three sets. So semifinals will be Federer v. Djokovic and Murray v. Ferrer. Back to women's tennis where Na Li will be the first Chinese tennis player in a Grand Slam final and she will face Kim Clijsters. And in men's tennis, you have Djokovic v. Murray. Men's and women's winners are Novak Djokovic and Kim Clijsters.
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 16
I made it over the hump and it's all downhill from here. Today's theme is...
A MOVIE I COULD WATCH OVER AND OVER AGAIN
There are a lot of movies that I could watch over and over again, primarily my favorite movie, but we'll wait for that. The movie I could watch over and over again that isn't necessarily my favorite movie is The Princess Bride. Everyone has a part of this movie that they love, because there are very few people who don't like this movie. Maybe you love Billy Crystal as Miracle Max and Carol Kane as his wife ("Have fun storming the castle!"). Maybe you love Fezzik and his turn as a gentle giant (anybody want a peanut?). Maybe you love the fast talking Vizzini (inconceivable!). Maybe you love Inigo Montoya and his revenge against Count Rugen the six-finger man (who killed his father, and therefore had to prepare to die). Maybe you love the beautiful love story between Westley/Dread Pirate Roberts and Buttercup and three words that may be more beautiful than "I love you": "As you wish". Maybe you even love the relationship between the grandson and grandfather. There are so many facets of this movie that make it watchable over and over again. There are scenes which will make you laugh every single time, even if it's the first time you are watching it. I can watch this movie over and over again and still react like I've never seen it. It is one of the best fairy tales/stories/movies ever, and that makes it impossible not to watch a couple more times.
A MOVIE I COULD WATCH OVER AND OVER AGAIN
There are a lot of movies that I could watch over and over again, primarily my favorite movie, but we'll wait for that. The movie I could watch over and over again that isn't necessarily my favorite movie is The Princess Bride. Everyone has a part of this movie that they love, because there are very few people who don't like this movie. Maybe you love Billy Crystal as Miracle Max and Carol Kane as his wife ("Have fun storming the castle!"). Maybe you love Fezzik and his turn as a gentle giant (anybody want a peanut?). Maybe you love the fast talking Vizzini (inconceivable!). Maybe you love Inigo Montoya and his revenge against Count Rugen the six-finger man (who killed his father, and therefore had to prepare to die). Maybe you love the beautiful love story between Westley/Dread Pirate Roberts and Buttercup and three words that may be more beautiful than "I love you": "As you wish". Maybe you even love the relationship between the grandson and grandfather. There are so many facets of this movie that make it watchable over and over again. There are scenes which will make you laugh every single time, even if it's the first time you are watching it. I can watch this movie over and over again and still react like I've never seen it. It is one of the best fairy tales/stories/movies ever, and that makes it impossible not to watch a couple more times.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Jay Cutler: Was He Really Injured?
So, today was Championship Sunday, and though my hometown Bears lost, it was still a pretty great game. But I expected us to play Jay Cutler for all four quarters. I didn't expect Todd Collins (aka the worst second string quarterback ever) or Caleb Hanie to play. This was the NFC Championship, and I wanted to watch Jay Cutler at least try to mount a comeback. People may say that Hanie actually made the team better, but he really didn't. For the two touchdown drives he started, he also gave up what happened to be the game-winning touchdown. I'm not trying to say that Cutler doesn't make that throw (we have 26 reasons from last season of why he would have), but he is the more talented quarterback between the two. He can make those plays, but he couldn't. While watching the game, I couldn't help but notice that the only thing wrong with Cutler appeared to be his attitude. He was standing up and walking about. He didn't limp around and he really didn't seem to have anything wrong with him. So did he quit on his team?
There are so many reasons why it would seem that he quit on his team. First off, he's been labeled as an underachiever. For a quarterback so talented, he is very bad. He has the arm strength to be one of the best quarterbacks in the league, but he doesn't work on his mechanics like Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers does. He never really improves his form, something that has been criticized in the past. Secondly, he's also been labeled as a selfish player. As a Bears fan, I've never taken a liking to Cutler. He never seems like he's into the game. He complains too much and loses confidence too quickly. He completely ruined his relationships in Denver, and he may be starting to lose fans in Chicago after this "injury". He has been a "me" type of player, and that doesn't work in a team sport. Lastly, he's not a great leader. There are some great leaders in football. Ray Lewis, Manning, Tom Brady, Brian Urlacher, Rodgers, Drew Brees. Almost every single team has a true leader, but Cutler has never actually taken that role in football in general. Sure, Urlacher has been an emotional leader for the Bears, but he's also a team guy. He would be willing to share that leadership role with anybody. Cutler never stepped up.
But for all these reasons of why he may have quit, there is one reason we're forgetting for why he didn't. He didn't bench himself; the coaches had the final say. He went through stretches and talked with the medical staff before he was pulled. It could be argued that he exaggerated the extent of his injuries, but odds are that he was taken out for a reason. I highly doubt that Lovie Smith thought that Todd Collins would be better in this situation because of his abysmal performance against the then-winless Carolina Panthers. So Lovie had a reason to take out Cutler. Lovie is a smart coach and he is the type of guy who would stick with his starter unless there is unquestionable doubt that his starter can not play. He pushes a player to be his best, but Lovie never puts his players at risk. So Lovie benched him because he thought that his quarterback was injured, something that his teammates can attest to.
So Cutler could have been injured or he could not have been. But what stings the most is that he did not look sad at his injury. He wasn't emotional about missing out on the chance to comeback for the win in a championship game. He was complacent. He was on the bench listening to music, watching the game. He didn't show a sadness for watching the championship game on the bench, rather than playing in it. He seemed to be just fine for missing out on what really is the biggest game of his career. Sure his teammates know that he is passionate about the game, but they're his teammates. You don't go around backstabbing your teammates or saying crap about them. Sure he was happy for Hanie when he led those two drives, but there are people who get benched who react crazily, even if it is because of an injury. They want to be on the field, especially in a playoff game. This is every football player's dream. So maybe we can't question whether or not he was injured, but as Deion Sanders tweeted, we can question Jay Cutler's heart and his passion. The question is no longer was he really injured because we can find that out. The question now is does Cutler even care anymore?
Update: Cutler cried after learning that his toughness was put into question. Now I'm not exactly the biggest Cutler supporter, but as a Bears fan, it is great to see our starting quarterback show some emotion. He really does care. Hope the injury you have isn't that bad Cutler!
There are so many reasons why it would seem that he quit on his team. First off, he's been labeled as an underachiever. For a quarterback so talented, he is very bad. He has the arm strength to be one of the best quarterbacks in the league, but he doesn't work on his mechanics like Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers does. He never really improves his form, something that has been criticized in the past. Secondly, he's also been labeled as a selfish player. As a Bears fan, I've never taken a liking to Cutler. He never seems like he's into the game. He complains too much and loses confidence too quickly. He completely ruined his relationships in Denver, and he may be starting to lose fans in Chicago after this "injury". He has been a "me" type of player, and that doesn't work in a team sport. Lastly, he's not a great leader. There are some great leaders in football. Ray Lewis, Manning, Tom Brady, Brian Urlacher, Rodgers, Drew Brees. Almost every single team has a true leader, but Cutler has never actually taken that role in football in general. Sure, Urlacher has been an emotional leader for the Bears, but he's also a team guy. He would be willing to share that leadership role with anybody. Cutler never stepped up.
But for all these reasons of why he may have quit, there is one reason we're forgetting for why he didn't. He didn't bench himself; the coaches had the final say. He went through stretches and talked with the medical staff before he was pulled. It could be argued that he exaggerated the extent of his injuries, but odds are that he was taken out for a reason. I highly doubt that Lovie Smith thought that Todd Collins would be better in this situation because of his abysmal performance against the then-winless Carolina Panthers. So Lovie had a reason to take out Cutler. Lovie is a smart coach and he is the type of guy who would stick with his starter unless there is unquestionable doubt that his starter can not play. He pushes a player to be his best, but Lovie never puts his players at risk. So Lovie benched him because he thought that his quarterback was injured, something that his teammates can attest to.
So Cutler could have been injured or he could not have been. But what stings the most is that he did not look sad at his injury. He wasn't emotional about missing out on the chance to comeback for the win in a championship game. He was complacent. He was on the bench listening to music, watching the game. He didn't show a sadness for watching the championship game on the bench, rather than playing in it. He seemed to be just fine for missing out on what really is the biggest game of his career. Sure his teammates know that he is passionate about the game, but they're his teammates. You don't go around backstabbing your teammates or saying crap about them. Sure he was happy for Hanie when he led those two drives, but there are people who get benched who react crazily, even if it is because of an injury. They want to be on the field, especially in a playoff game. This is every football player's dream. So maybe we can't question whether or not he was injured, but as Deion Sanders tweeted, we can question Jay Cutler's heart and his passion. The question is no longer was he really injured because we can find that out. The question now is does Cutler even care anymore?
Update: Cutler cried after learning that his toughness was put into question. Now I'm not exactly the biggest Cutler supporter, but as a Bears fan, it is great to see our starting quarterback show some emotion. He really does care. Hope the injury you have isn't that bad Cutler!
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 15
Good luck to the Bears! Today's theme is...
A MOVIE I WISH HAD A SEQUEL
I really wish that Taken had a sequel because Liam Neeson made a very classy action star. He does have a new movie Unknown coming out where he once again taps into his action role, but Bryan Mills was one BAMF. He took down baddies left and right with a uncanny ability to kill. We all know the best line. I will look for you. I will find you, and I will kill you. Who wouldn't want to see him again? But Neeson is smarter than that. Sequels are always (well at least typically) worse than their predecessors. But it's Liam Neeson and if there is anyone who could carry a good sequel (except for The Phantom Menace), it would be Neeson. Here's hoping for a Taken 2. Once again, GO BEARS!
A MOVIE I WISH HAD A SEQUEL
I really wish that Taken had a sequel because Liam Neeson made a very classy action star. He does have a new movie Unknown coming out where he once again taps into his action role, but Bryan Mills was one BAMF. He took down baddies left and right with a uncanny ability to kill. We all know the best line. I will look for you. I will find you, and I will kill you. Who wouldn't want to see him again? But Neeson is smarter than that. Sequels are always (well at least typically) worse than their predecessors. But it's Liam Neeson and if there is anyone who could carry a good sequel (except for The Phantom Menace), it would be Neeson. Here's hoping for a Taken 2. Once again, GO BEARS!
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Thoughts on Donald Glover
So I just saw Donald Glover tonight. And initial thought was that he was hilarious. Donald Glover is known primarily as Troy on Community, but I've seen some of his stand-up and this did not disappoint. So here are just a couple of paraphrases of some of the best jokes I heard.
Everything is "no homo" until you say "no homo".
Shaft has no powers and it would be awesome if Michael Cera was Shaft.
Shaft juice sounds a lot like semen.
People don't change. So if you're a woman who doesn't give BJs, be ready to have a lot of cats and Twilight books because you're going to die alone.
Charlie Sheen is the only person who can say the N-word without any problems because he hates so much that he becomes colorblind.
"Niglet" is the black version of "Piglet". And there is already a sign for "Niglet" in sign language.
Filipinos are the black people of Asia and Armenians are the black people of Caucasia.
Reggie Bush "stole" Donald Glover's glasses for $100, and was wearing them when he cheated on Kim Kardashian.
Donald Glover used that $100 to get a lap dance.
People should have expected Tiger Woods to cheat on his wife unless his wife's vagina was the Tiger Woods of all vagina.
Donald Glover got punched in the face by a homeless man.
Babies are like AIDS. You're stuck with them forever and you can pretty much only date other people who have them. The difference is you can't go to jail for dropping AIDS on its head.
Home Depot, not University of Chicago, is where fun comes to die.
"Muppet Babies" and "TMNT" are really screwed up.
Don't actually take a dump in a Home Depot toilet.
Also for you Community fans, I have news. Richard Ayoade is going to be directing an episode of Community and this episode will be an homage to a movie. In order to maintain innocence, I will speak cryptically now. This movie was directed by a "cutie". So
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 14
Donald Glover tonight! On a side note, today's theme is...
A MOVIE FEATURING YOUR FAVORITE ACTRESS
I went back to comedy on this one because a lot of the actresses I had considered my favorites either have let me down when I realized their limitations or they didn't. For example, Anne Hathaway in Love and Other Drugs. But this actress never lets me down. She is Jane Lynch. She is rarely featured in a movie, but that's okay because she plays supporting roles like no other. The closest she ever got to being featured was in Best in Show, where she played a dog trainer. And she was hilarious. She can be caustic and sarcastic without being obnoxious. She can switch from nice to mean with comedic ease. There just isn't enough you can say about her. She's even hilarious on television, something that isn't necessarily true for all comedic actors. Kudos to you Jane Lynch. Sound off!
P.S. If you would like to help out and post something on this blog, email me. I will typically post anything I can get and the writer will get full credit, and some (maybe) publicity. Sweet. Thanks!
A MOVIE FEATURING YOUR FAVORITE ACTRESS
I went back to comedy on this one because a lot of the actresses I had considered my favorites either have let me down when I realized their limitations or they didn't. For example, Anne Hathaway in Love and Other Drugs. But this actress never lets me down. She is Jane Lynch. She is rarely featured in a movie, but that's okay because she plays supporting roles like no other. The closest she ever got to being featured was in Best in Show, where she played a dog trainer. And she was hilarious. She can be caustic and sarcastic without being obnoxious. She can switch from nice to mean with comedic ease. There just isn't enough you can say about her. She's even hilarious on television, something that isn't necessarily true for all comedic actors. Kudos to you Jane Lynch. Sound off!
P.S. If you would like to help out and post something on this blog, email me. I will typically post anything I can get and the writer will get full credit, and some (maybe) publicity. Sweet. Thanks!
Friday, January 21, 2011
Achievement Unlocked 2 Or How I Stopped Working and Wasted 35 Minutes to Reach 250 Achievements
I literally just achieved every single last achievement on "Achievement Unlocked 2". It's a Friday, and what better way to waste it than with going onto Kongregate and playing meaningless flash games. I have nothing to do because I'm just looking forward to the weekend. So here's the story of how I unlocked each achievement for the second time.
I have been meaning to accomplish this task for about 2 days. I tried doing this exact thing yesterday, but fate did not have it. Fate asked me instead to complete the Sniper Assassin series, which is another great flash game (arguably the best shooter game online). After completing that, I got to fulfilling my next goal. I'm not exactly a great gamer, so it would be expected that I use a couple of walkthroughs. But I started, got my first couple of achievements pretty easily, but then it became a hassle. First mistake was not realizing that I only had to "paint", as it was called, 100 blocks instead of every single one. Second mistake was wasting too much time trying to do achievements that I have already achieved. But I took the meticulous route and tried to complete every achievement in every single part of the level starting with the home. It actually wasn't that bad. The first floor was the most tedious because of the difficulty involved of completing the first mistake. But I was able to finish this in 15 minutes. I also started by doing what I believe is the greatest Easter Egg ever in a flash game: the coffee mode. It was really a smart idea because it isn't something you would consider doing on a second's notice. Typically, you would not expect to open a second window in order to access another level. It was one of the most creative ideas in a flash game probably ever. And then you have the creativity of the achievements (personal favorite: BILLY MAYS, guess what you have to do?). The multiple floors were also a nice touch. I liked how each floor had a different perk. The first floor was nothing special other than the home and the marketplace. The second floor had a piano (try that Mozart!). The third floor had a slot machine, fourth floor had teleporters, and the fifth floor had a big orange button. Why the orange button? Even I don't know. Of course, then you have the cataclysm, or the real world. Speaking of the real world, you could also flood the building and "drown". The space bar "poops out" pastries, which the elephant eats. Why they use an elephant is also beyond me. Then you have the credits, which pretty much sum up to this. Thank you for wasting your time with us rather than doing something productive. So this is the thanks I would like to give them. Especially jmtb02, whoever you are. Thanks for the memories, as they would say in Dolphin Olympics 2. Now go achieve!
I have been meaning to accomplish this task for about 2 days. I tried doing this exact thing yesterday, but fate did not have it. Fate asked me instead to complete the Sniper Assassin series, which is another great flash game (arguably the best shooter game online). After completing that, I got to fulfilling my next goal. I'm not exactly a great gamer, so it would be expected that I use a couple of walkthroughs. But I started, got my first couple of achievements pretty easily, but then it became a hassle. First mistake was not realizing that I only had to "paint", as it was called, 100 blocks instead of every single one. Second mistake was wasting too much time trying to do achievements that I have already achieved. But I took the meticulous route and tried to complete every achievement in every single part of the level starting with the home. It actually wasn't that bad. The first floor was the most tedious because of the difficulty involved of completing the first mistake. But I was able to finish this in 15 minutes. I also started by doing what I believe is the greatest Easter Egg ever in a flash game: the coffee mode. It was really a smart idea because it isn't something you would consider doing on a second's notice. Typically, you would not expect to open a second window in order to access another level. It was one of the most creative ideas in a flash game probably ever. And then you have the creativity of the achievements (personal favorite: BILLY MAYS, guess what you have to do?). The multiple floors were also a nice touch. I liked how each floor had a different perk. The first floor was nothing special other than the home and the marketplace. The second floor had a piano (try that Mozart!). The third floor had a slot machine, fourth floor had teleporters, and the fifth floor had a big orange button. Why the orange button? Even I don't know. Of course, then you have the cataclysm, or the real world. Speaking of the real world, you could also flood the building and "drown". The space bar "poops out" pastries, which the elephant eats. Why they use an elephant is also beyond me. Then you have the credits, which pretty much sum up to this. Thank you for wasting your time with us rather than doing something productive. So this is the thanks I would like to give them. Especially jmtb02, whoever you are. Thanks for the memories, as they would say in Dolphin Olympics 2. Now go achieve!
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 13
Made it to lucky number 13! Today's very fortuitous theme is...
A MOVIE FEATURING YOUR FAVORITE ACTOR
I have a lot of favorite actors. Two of my favorites right now are Joseph Gordon-Levitt (who is as good an actor as the late, great Heath Ledger) and James Franco (who is a lock for his first Oscar nomination in 127 Hours). But the one actor who I will always trust to give me a good movie is Paul Rudd. Paul Rudd has the boyish charm necessary for a comedic actor, but his range goes beyond that. He made me laugh hysterically as the d-bag boyfriend in Wet Hot American Summer, and he was just as good in ensemble comedies like Knocked Up and Forgetting Sarah Marshall. He even played surly well in Role Models. But one of his best works is I Love You, Man where he played a guy who really couldn't find a male best friend. Pair him with Sarah Marshall star Jason Segel and you have yourself one great movie. He played immaturity differently than Adam Sandler because Rudd played it with a little bit of childishness rather than boorishness. He embodied a man looking for a friend with his sweet boyfriend-ly gestures and awkward naivete when confronted with typical friend situations. He delivered his lines perfectly (something he has always been able to do) and nothing felt forced. There were awkward times in the movie, but it fit so well with his character that I did not find myself cringing at his misfortunes, but embracing them. Paul Rudd is one of the best comedic actors, and I chose him because he rarely lets me down (unless he's paired with the heavily overrated Reese Witherspoon). So checking out (get it?! Like a DVD!), this is Petre.
P.S. Please give me some sort of great catchphrase to end my posts. It's getting really hard to think of something witty or insightful or even smart to end my posts with. So yeah...COMMENTS!
A MOVIE FEATURING YOUR FAVORITE ACTOR
I have a lot of favorite actors. Two of my favorites right now are Joseph Gordon-Levitt (who is as good an actor as the late, great Heath Ledger) and James Franco (who is a lock for his first Oscar nomination in 127 Hours). But the one actor who I will always trust to give me a good movie is Paul Rudd. Paul Rudd has the boyish charm necessary for a comedic actor, but his range goes beyond that. He made me laugh hysterically as the d-bag boyfriend in Wet Hot American Summer, and he was just as good in ensemble comedies like Knocked Up and Forgetting Sarah Marshall. He even played surly well in Role Models. But one of his best works is I Love You, Man where he played a guy who really couldn't find a male best friend. Pair him with Sarah Marshall star Jason Segel and you have yourself one great movie. He played immaturity differently than Adam Sandler because Rudd played it with a little bit of childishness rather than boorishness. He embodied a man looking for a friend with his sweet boyfriend-ly gestures and awkward naivete when confronted with typical friend situations. He delivered his lines perfectly (something he has always been able to do) and nothing felt forced. There were awkward times in the movie, but it fit so well with his character that I did not find myself cringing at his misfortunes, but embracing them. Paul Rudd is one of the best comedic actors, and I chose him because he rarely lets me down (unless he's paired with the heavily overrated Reese Witherspoon). So checking out (get it?! Like a DVD!), this is Petre.
P.S. Please give me some sort of great catchphrase to end my posts. It's getting really hard to think of something witty or insightful or even smart to end my posts with. So yeah...COMMENTS!
Thursday, January 20, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 12
Today's topic is truly evil, a work of a diabolical mastermind. It is...
A MOVIE FEATURING YOUR FAVORITE VILLAIN
Well my favorite villain has to be Hans Gruber from Die Hard. He was just such a great villain. First off, he was played by Alan Rickman, who does evil so very well. Gruber emitted a classiness you wouldn't expect from other villains. He read about Asian Dawn in Time. He was German, and though that really has nothing to do with it, it seems that European villains are the classiest. I mean, think about any villain that was American. They did things the American way by getting into people's faces and had that shoot-first-ask-later kind of attitude. Asian villains always seemed to be either North Korean or part of a gang. There are very few smart Asian villains. They also always knew some sort of martial arts, but were never good enough to beat the protagonist. What was so great about Hans Gruber is that he had a brilliant plan (SPOILERS!). He affiliated himself with a known extremist organization and masked the entire Nakatomi hostage situation as a terror attack, instead of one of the most beautifully planned heists. He never abused the power of the gun, killing only two people, and only because he had too. Sure he was going to explode the roof of the building, but it was all for the charade. Gruber suffered from a case of wrong-place-wrong-time when dealing with the coolest action hero of all, John McClane. Without McClane, this heist goes down perfectly (he even incorporates action from the FBI into the plot). He even planned it so that he would not be sought after. No one ever thinks about the aftermath of the plot, only the plot itself. He considered every single possibility. Hans Gruber was one of the smartest and most meticulous villain of all time. Too bad he died one of the worst deaths of all time. He was dropped about 40 or so stories and then splattered on the ground. His expression as he realized his demise though was perfect. That instant moment where you realize that everything was so perfect except for that one guy who just had to break up the party. If you have questions, comments, or concerns, pleasecall post them in the comments.
A MOVIE FEATURING YOUR FAVORITE VILLAIN
Well my favorite villain has to be Hans Gruber from Die Hard. He was just such a great villain. First off, he was played by Alan Rickman, who does evil so very well. Gruber emitted a classiness you wouldn't expect from other villains. He read about Asian Dawn in Time. He was German, and though that really has nothing to do with it, it seems that European villains are the classiest. I mean, think about any villain that was American. They did things the American way by getting into people's faces and had that shoot-first-ask-later kind of attitude. Asian villains always seemed to be either North Korean or part of a gang. There are very few smart Asian villains. They also always knew some sort of martial arts, but were never good enough to beat the protagonist. What was so great about Hans Gruber is that he had a brilliant plan (SPOILERS!). He affiliated himself with a known extremist organization and masked the entire Nakatomi hostage situation as a terror attack, instead of one of the most beautifully planned heists. He never abused the power of the gun, killing only two people, and only because he had too. Sure he was going to explode the roof of the building, but it was all for the charade. Gruber suffered from a case of wrong-place-wrong-time when dealing with the coolest action hero of all, John McClane. Without McClane, this heist goes down perfectly (he even incorporates action from the FBI into the plot). He even planned it so that he would not be sought after. No one ever thinks about the aftermath of the plot, only the plot itself. He considered every single possibility. Hans Gruber was one of the smartest and most meticulous villain of all time. Too bad he died one of the worst deaths of all time. He was dropped about 40 or so stories and then splattered on the ground. His expression as he realized his demise though was perfect. That instant moment where you realize that everything was so perfect except for that one guy who just had to break up the party. If you have questions, comments, or concerns, please
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Plato's Phaedrus: What's Love Gotta Do With It?
Plato's dialogue Phaedrus is famous for two reasons. One is the speech that Socrates gives about love in reference to Phaedrus and his love affair with Lysias, a Greek boy. Apparently, pedophilia was pretty much okay in Ancient Greece, so that's actually isn't as weird as it sounds, even though it is. I digress. But Socrates (though in a seeming un-Socratic manner) helps define the word and idea of love. This dialogue is also famous for its views on rhetoric. He explains how important rhetoric is in certain situations so perfectly. What is so interesting is that there doesn't seem to be a strong link between rhetoric and love. One regards a human emotion, while the other considers the art of speech.
There are theories that suggest that rhetoric is a form of love, which could very much so be argued even though it seems like one of those stretch theories. The other is that love inspires rhetoric, which could also be true, and actually may have some validation. But my opinion is actually one of the more obvious ones. Socrates and Phaedrus were having a conversation. That is why there are two seemingly different topics in one dialogue. Have you ever had a conversation where the idea flow or logic made sense? I have on some occasions, but usually it goes more like this.
"So did you watch that cool Youtube video?"
"Yea, it was hilarious! It reminds me of that time you threw up at the party."
"Yea, we should never drink that much. What did we have?"
"I don't remember, but it was good because it was in glass."
"Hey did you know that sand and glass are pretty much the same thing?"
The logic is there in the conversation. But if I told you that we had a conversation that started with a Youtube video and ended with the comment that "sand and glass are pretty much the same thing", would you comprehend what just happened? This is the problem with the analysis of Phaedrus. There probably is no link between love and rhetoric. They were simply talking about a speech, which digressed into a speech about love, which digressed even further to the idea of rhetoric. The link is coincidental. I can't know that for sure, but that is my interpretation of this. Socrates was compelled to talk about rhetoric because of the speech on love, not because of the subject of love.
There are theories that suggest that rhetoric is a form of love, which could very much so be argued even though it seems like one of those stretch theories. The other is that love inspires rhetoric, which could also be true, and actually may have some validation. But my opinion is actually one of the more obvious ones. Socrates and Phaedrus were having a conversation. That is why there are two seemingly different topics in one dialogue. Have you ever had a conversation where the idea flow or logic made sense? I have on some occasions, but usually it goes more like this.
"So did you watch that cool Youtube video?"
"Yea, it was hilarious! It reminds me of that time you threw up at the party."
"Yea, we should never drink that much. What did we have?"
"I don't remember, but it was good because it was in glass."
"Hey did you know that sand and glass are pretty much the same thing?"
The logic is there in the conversation. But if I told you that we had a conversation that started with a Youtube video and ended with the comment that "sand and glass are pretty much the same thing", would you comprehend what just happened? This is the problem with the analysis of Phaedrus. There probably is no link between love and rhetoric. They were simply talking about a speech, which digressed into a speech about love, which digressed even further to the idea of rhetoric. The link is coincidental. I can't know that for sure, but that is my interpretation of this. Socrates was compelled to talk about rhetoric because of the speech on love, not because of the subject of love.
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 11
I'd like to welcome Rob to Petre's Dish! And speaking about other people, today's theme is...
THE MOVIE IN WHICH I WISH I WAS THE MAIN CHARACTER
I wish I was Ferris Bueller from the eponymous Ferris Bueller's Day Off. I mean, who didn't want to be the main character in an 80's teen movie? Their lives rocked. I mean, Easy A even mentions that Olive, the main character in that movie, wanted her life to be an 80's teen movie. But Ferris had everything. He had the girl, he had the fun, and he had the support. If anyone else tried to cut school, we'd applaud them for their adventurous spirit I suppose, but would we give them the love and support that we give Ferris? Then to top it all, he started singing in a parade, in Chicago. He's not only awesome, but he's ballsy. He lived life without any worries, and he changed the way we look at truancy. It's not just time off from school, but it could be the time of your life. I guess I should end this in the best way possible. Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.
THE MOVIE IN WHICH I WISH I WAS THE MAIN CHARACTER
I wish I was Ferris Bueller from the eponymous Ferris Bueller's Day Off. I mean, who didn't want to be the main character in an 80's teen movie? Their lives rocked. I mean, Easy A even mentions that Olive, the main character in that movie, wanted her life to be an 80's teen movie. But Ferris had everything. He had the girl, he had the fun, and he had the support. If anyone else tried to cut school, we'd applaud them for their adventurous spirit I suppose, but would we give them the love and support that we give Ferris? Then to top it all, he started singing in a parade, in Chicago. He's not only awesome, but he's ballsy. He lived life without any worries, and he changed the way we look at truancy. It's not just time off from school, but it could be the time of your life. I guess I should end this in the best way possible. Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.
A Challenger Appears!
Good evening ladies and gentlemen,
I am here to help Petrie, everyone's favorite talking Pteranodon, get out of the Land Before Time and into the world of blogging. But because Peter is churning out blog posts like Boston sports teams churn out championships, I may not be able to keep up. I'll be sure to stop in once in a while, though.
I am Sir, your most humble and obedient servant,
R. K. S.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
NBA Midway Report Card: The Going Ons in the First Half of this Season
No, not everybody has played 41 games, but some people have a little extra, while some are a bit behind. But whatever, I don't really care because I'm going to do this before anyone else has the chance. So who expected a season like this? Carmelo Anthony trade rumors, insane stats, high-flyers, oh my! So here are my picks for the best and the worst of this season.
Most Valuable Player (East): Amar'e Stoudemire (NYK) and Derrick Rose (CHI)
I'm sure no one is expecting LeBron James to three-peat for the MVP, so I'm giving it to one of these guys. Even though I believe that Derrick Rose is putting in a superstar effort in only his third year in the league, I'm gonna push for Stoudemire. He completely transformed the New York Knicks, and while the Bulls are dominating in the Central, Stoudemire has the tougher division. Both are putting up amazing numbers, and either of them could win.
Also considered: Dwight Howard (ORL)
Most Valuable Player (West): Dirk Nowitzki (DAL)
I separated the two divisions because there are just so many great players to consider. But Nowitzki has undoubtedly been the most valuable player in the West, and probably the league. He had the Mavericks hot until his injury. He is scoring and rebounding extremely well. To put it bluntly, he is playing some of the best basketball in his career, including his 2006-07 MVP season. Hands down, the most important player on any team in the West, and if you question that, look at how they play without him.
Also considered: Deron Williams (UTA), Kobe Bryant (LAL)
Rookie of the Year (East): John Wall (WAS)
Electrifying young player. He's a great passer and a great scorer. But this is more due to the fact that there is no one else in the East who is putting in as great of a game as this kid. Evan Turner and Derrick Favors (No. 2 and 3 in the last draft) still are trying to get into a rhythm. If they separated the rookie of the year voting, this guy would take the East, no doubt because there really is no one else to consider (Landry Fields, maybe??).
Rookie of the Year (West): Blake Griffin (LAC)
Do you really doubt this? Here are some dunks to help quell your doubts. I mean, this guy is averaging about 21 points and 13 rebounds. He has 27 or so straight double-doubles. He is a monster and the most entertaining player in the league. Undoubtedly the rookie of the year in the league. He's just TOO good.
6th Man of the Year (NBA): Gary Neal (SAS) and George Hill (SAS)
This is more just taking the San Antonio Spurs bench. These two are the cornerstones of that bench, but Gregg Poppovich has turned that bench into a strong group. Could you think of a more dominant bench? They deserve 6th Man of the Year because any given player can just step up and win the game for them. It's incredible how well this team functions, even with their starters on the bench. Just truly impressive.
Most Improved Player (East): Nick Young (WAS)
There is no surefire candidate for this award, but Nick Young deserves a second look. He has played very well as a guard-forward, giving John Wall a very reliable scorer (47% from the field, 41% from outside). He has shown signs of greatness, but he is really starting to become a very complete shooter. As with most Wizards players, he could live to improve his defense, but he has been good so far.
Most Improved Player (West): Kevin Love (MIN)
He had 30+ boards in a game, and averages 15 rebounds a game. This guy is a double-double machine and though he has always had this potential, did anyone really see him as an All-Star? I sure didn't, but Love gives Minnesota a reason to be happy after trading away Al Jefferson. He's no Kevin Garnett, but Love is a great cornerstone for a team because he's an athletic big man who can swallow up boards like crazy. He's worked, and now he deserves to be an All-Star.
Best Defensive Player (NBA): Dwight Howard (ORL)
Very deserving of this award. He deserves it because he forces plays out of the paint. He is such a dynamic blocker that he forces a change in direction on any given drive. But he establishes a defensive presence in the paint, and that is his best quality.
Also considered: Thabo Sefolosha (OKC), JaVale McGee (WAS)
All NBA First Team
Derrick Rose (CHI)
Kobe Bryant (LAL)
LeBron James (MIA)
Dirk Nowitzki (DAL)
Dwight Howard (ORL)
Best Performance: Kevin Love's 30-30
Best Game: LA Clippers at New York Knicks (November 20, 2010)
Worst Game (tie): Miami Heat at Cleveland Cavaliers (December 2, 2010), Cleveland Cavaliers at LA Lakers (January 11, 2011)
Sound off! Actually that really doesn't work. Just say what you want to in the comments. Preferably about the topic I wrote about.
Most Valuable Player (East): Amar'e Stoudemire (NYK) and Derrick Rose (CHI)
I'm sure no one is expecting LeBron James to three-peat for the MVP, so I'm giving it to one of these guys. Even though I believe that Derrick Rose is putting in a superstar effort in only his third year in the league, I'm gonna push for Stoudemire. He completely transformed the New York Knicks, and while the Bulls are dominating in the Central, Stoudemire has the tougher division. Both are putting up amazing numbers, and either of them could win.
Also considered: Dwight Howard (ORL)
Most Valuable Player (West): Dirk Nowitzki (DAL)
I separated the two divisions because there are just so many great players to consider. But Nowitzki has undoubtedly been the most valuable player in the West, and probably the league. He had the Mavericks hot until his injury. He is scoring and rebounding extremely well. To put it bluntly, he is playing some of the best basketball in his career, including his 2006-07 MVP season. Hands down, the most important player on any team in the West, and if you question that, look at how they play without him.
Also considered: Deron Williams (UTA), Kobe Bryant (LAL)
Rookie of the Year (East): John Wall (WAS)
Electrifying young player. He's a great passer and a great scorer. But this is more due to the fact that there is no one else in the East who is putting in as great of a game as this kid. Evan Turner and Derrick Favors (No. 2 and 3 in the last draft) still are trying to get into a rhythm. If they separated the rookie of the year voting, this guy would take the East, no doubt because there really is no one else to consider (Landry Fields, maybe??).
Rookie of the Year (West): Blake Griffin (LAC)
Do you really doubt this? Here are some dunks to help quell your doubts. I mean, this guy is averaging about 21 points and 13 rebounds. He has 27 or so straight double-doubles. He is a monster and the most entertaining player in the league. Undoubtedly the rookie of the year in the league. He's just TOO good.
6th Man of the Year (NBA): Gary Neal (SAS) and George Hill (SAS)
This is more just taking the San Antonio Spurs bench. These two are the cornerstones of that bench, but Gregg Poppovich has turned that bench into a strong group. Could you think of a more dominant bench? They deserve 6th Man of the Year because any given player can just step up and win the game for them. It's incredible how well this team functions, even with their starters on the bench. Just truly impressive.
Most Improved Player (East): Nick Young (WAS)
There is no surefire candidate for this award, but Nick Young deserves a second look. He has played very well as a guard-forward, giving John Wall a very reliable scorer (47% from the field, 41% from outside). He has shown signs of greatness, but he is really starting to become a very complete shooter. As with most Wizards players, he could live to improve his defense, but he has been good so far.
Most Improved Player (West): Kevin Love (MIN)
He had 30+ boards in a game, and averages 15 rebounds a game. This guy is a double-double machine and though he has always had this potential, did anyone really see him as an All-Star? I sure didn't, but Love gives Minnesota a reason to be happy after trading away Al Jefferson. He's no Kevin Garnett, but Love is a great cornerstone for a team because he's an athletic big man who can swallow up boards like crazy. He's worked, and now he deserves to be an All-Star.
Best Defensive Player (NBA): Dwight Howard (ORL)
Very deserving of this award. He deserves it because he forces plays out of the paint. He is such a dynamic blocker that he forces a change in direction on any given drive. But he establishes a defensive presence in the paint, and that is his best quality.
Also considered: Thabo Sefolosha (OKC), JaVale McGee (WAS)
All NBA First Team
Derrick Rose (CHI)
Kobe Bryant (LAL)
LeBron James (MIA)
Dirk Nowitzki (DAL)
Dwight Howard (ORL)
Best Performance: Kevin Love's 30-30
Best Game: LA Clippers at New York Knicks (November 20, 2010)
Worst Game (tie): Miami Heat at Cleveland Cavaliers (December 2, 2010), Cleveland Cavaliers at LA Lakers (January 11, 2011)
Sound off! Actually that really doesn't work. Just say what you want to in the comments. Preferably about the topic I wrote about.
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 10
A third of the way there! Today's theme...
THE MOVIE WITH YOUR FAVORITE DEATH SCENE
This is by no means the funniest death scene (which would go to this video), or the saddest (which would go to either Mufasa or Bambi's mom). This is my favorite, which isn't the funniest, saddest, most heartfelt, but a mixture of all of the feelings you feel around death. Death is a touchy subject and sometimes, you want to laugh at it, or cry at it. But some death scenes make you wonder what to do. The death scene that is my favorite would be John Coffey's (Michael Clarke Duncan) in The Green Mile. It was light in that he accepted his fate, even without his crime. It was poignant because he had affected so many people around him. But it was sad, because they had to kill an innocent man, but did they really? Their expressions were of pain and shock, but they all knew that John Coffey wanted to get out of all the evil in the world. He was a gentle giant who did not hurt a fly, but his seeming innocence also brought out a different problem. The world is flawed and evil, and he did not want to be a part of it. It was an act of faith that he would be somewhere better. Also, the demeanor of everyone in that scene is frightening, but peaceful. It leads to an ambiguity where you are left pondering the doings of this world and the effect that death has on others. It was beautiful. Please feel free to cry in the comments.
THE MOVIE WITH YOUR FAVORITE DEATH SCENE
This is by no means the funniest death scene (which would go to this video), or the saddest (which would go to either Mufasa or Bambi's mom). This is my favorite, which isn't the funniest, saddest, most heartfelt, but a mixture of all of the feelings you feel around death. Death is a touchy subject and sometimes, you want to laugh at it, or cry at it. But some death scenes make you wonder what to do. The death scene that is my favorite would be John Coffey's (Michael Clarke Duncan) in The Green Mile. It was light in that he accepted his fate, even without his crime. It was poignant because he had affected so many people around him. But it was sad, because they had to kill an innocent man, but did they really? Their expressions were of pain and shock, but they all knew that John Coffey wanted to get out of all the evil in the world. He was a gentle giant who did not hurt a fly, but his seeming innocence also brought out a different problem. The world is flawed and evil, and he did not want to be a part of it. It was an act of faith that he would be somewhere better. Also, the demeanor of everyone in that scene is frightening, but peaceful. It leads to an ambiguity where you are left pondering the doings of this world and the effect that death has on others. It was beautiful. Please feel free to cry in the comments.
Monday, January 17, 2011
New Song: "Black and White" by Jeremy Southgate
I am not a music expert, but I do like listening to it. Now the person who wrote this song is someone who lives in my dorm, so he's not necessarily a professional. But it's an interesting little song (link). Just fun to listen to, if you have the time. And it'll help him distribute the song a little bit. Have fun listening and disclose your opinions in the appropriate area!
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 9
It isn't Valentine's Day yet, but love is in the air with today's theme...
THE MOVIE WITH MY FAVORITE KISSING SCENE
There are a lot of great kissing scenes. Spiderman had the iconic backwards kiss. The Princess Bride had the self-proclaimed most romantic kiss of all time. The Godfather: Part II even brought us the kiss of death. There are different types of kissing scenes though. The funniest in my opinion is when Thomas Lennon kissed Paul Rudd in I Love You, Man because of the sheer reaction on Rudd's face afterward. There are purely erotic kisses like those between Neve Campbell and Denise Richards in Wild Things. There are platonic kisses and familial kisses, which are all powerful in their own right. But one of the most heartfelt and poignant kissing scenes of all time is between two robots. Wall-E has my favorite kissing scene because Pixar made us cry once again by showing that even robots have a chance to love. There will be more romantic kisses in movies, but this one stood out because of the daring approach to the story. A love story between robots seems preposterous, but the geniuses at Pixar summed up the relationship with one little kiss between the two lovers. It is as heartfelt a gesture as you can get.
THE MOVIE WITH MY FAVORITE KISSING SCENE
There are a lot of great kissing scenes. Spiderman had the iconic backwards kiss. The Princess Bride had the self-proclaimed most romantic kiss of all time. The Godfather: Part II even brought us the kiss of death. There are different types of kissing scenes though. The funniest in my opinion is when Thomas Lennon kissed Paul Rudd in I Love You, Man because of the sheer reaction on Rudd's face afterward. There are purely erotic kisses like those between Neve Campbell and Denise Richards in Wild Things. There are platonic kisses and familial kisses, which are all powerful in their own right. But one of the most heartfelt and poignant kissing scenes of all time is between two robots. Wall-E has my favorite kissing scene because Pixar made us cry once again by showing that even robots have a chance to love. There will be more romantic kisses in movies, but this one stood out because of the daring approach to the story. A love story between robots seems preposterous, but the geniuses at Pixar summed up the relationship with one little kiss between the two lovers. It is as heartfelt a gesture as you can get.
Thoughts on the 2011 Golden Globes
Okay, a bit of a disclaimer. I've always thought that the Golden Globes (and the Hollywood Foreign Press Association) wasn't really a great rewards show. I mean, they force films (like The Tourist) into the awards race, while neglecting more deserving films. Same goes with actors. They rely on star power rather than power in the performance (as noted by Johnny Depp's two nominations). But, they are reliable, at least when considering ramifications on the Oscars. So I guess that kinda balances it out. But tonight was a weird night. So here are some thoughts on the 2011 Golden Globes.
1) Wait...did they seriously just win?
Tonight was full of surprises. It got started early with Katey Sagal winning for her role in Sons of Anarchy. Two notes on Sagal: 1. She is really, really hot. She may be 55 (or so), but she is really beautiful. 2. She may have deserved to win, in all honesty. Sagal is one of those actors who gets overlooked a lot and she puts in great performances on Sons of Anarchy. Do I think that someone else in that category deserved to win? Maybe, but overall, the Best Actress-TV Drama category was pretty much stacked. Anyone who won in that category deserved it. Next surprise was Carlos beating out both The Pacific and Temple Grandin for Best TV Movie, Miniseries, etc. I don't really care about this category, but it's a great water cooler topic. But the biggest surprise is the love for Glee. Now I am a self-professed Gleek, but I will agree that this season has been rather weak all-around. And Chris Colfer and Jane Lynch, as talented as they both are, were not necessarily the most deserving. But this is more of a gleeful (sorry) shock than anything else. I am very happy for Colfer, Lynch, and Glee, but I was more surprised at their success.
2) Wait...did he just say that?
Ricky Gervais tiptoed the line between hilarious and insulting all night. He made jabs at Charlie Sheen's alcoholism, Robert Downey Jr.'s former criminal life, The Tourist, and Mel Gibson's anti-Semitic tendencies. He knew no bounds, even going as far as to insult the entire HFPA by questioning how The Tourist squeaked into the Best Movie-Comedy ("they also accept bribes"). And then we got a look at Johnny Depp's reaction. Priceless. And of course you have Robert De Niro. I love him to death, but he had one joke that just crossed the line. He talked about how the waiters were deported. Most awkward silence ever.
3) Best Dressed is...
I don't care. I'm a guy. Even though January Jones was absolutely, positively stunning in her dress. As was Mila Kunis and Natalie Portman. And Megan Fox looked very, very confused on stage. And that slit in her dress probably says a lot about her.
4) The big winner is...
The Social Network. Best Movie-Drama, Best Director (David Fincher), Best Screenplay (Aaron Sorkin), and Best Score. Not a bad take. Undoubtedly the favorite to win Best Picture at the Oscars.
Boardwalk Empire. Best TV Show-Drama, Best Actor-Drama (Steve Buscemi)
Glee. Best TV Show-Comedy, Best Supporting Actor (Chris Colfer), Best Supporting Actress (Jane Lynch)
These two shows weren't expected to do much. But they came in as dark horses and won the race (pardon the pun).
Well those are my thoughts. If you have your own, which I'm sure you do, sound off in the comments.
1) Wait...did they seriously just win?
Tonight was full of surprises. It got started early with Katey Sagal winning for her role in Sons of Anarchy. Two notes on Sagal: 1. She is really, really hot. She may be 55 (or so), but she is really beautiful. 2. She may have deserved to win, in all honesty. Sagal is one of those actors who gets overlooked a lot and she puts in great performances on Sons of Anarchy. Do I think that someone else in that category deserved to win? Maybe, but overall, the Best Actress-TV Drama category was pretty much stacked. Anyone who won in that category deserved it. Next surprise was Carlos beating out both The Pacific and Temple Grandin for Best TV Movie, Miniseries, etc. I don't really care about this category, but it's a great water cooler topic. But the biggest surprise is the love for Glee. Now I am a self-professed Gleek, but I will agree that this season has been rather weak all-around. And Chris Colfer and Jane Lynch, as talented as they both are, were not necessarily the most deserving. But this is more of a gleeful (sorry) shock than anything else. I am very happy for Colfer, Lynch, and Glee, but I was more surprised at their success.
2) Wait...did he just say that?
Ricky Gervais tiptoed the line between hilarious and insulting all night. He made jabs at Charlie Sheen's alcoholism, Robert Downey Jr.'s former criminal life, The Tourist, and Mel Gibson's anti-Semitic tendencies. He knew no bounds, even going as far as to insult the entire HFPA by questioning how The Tourist squeaked into the Best Movie-Comedy ("they also accept bribes"). And then we got a look at Johnny Depp's reaction. Priceless. And of course you have Robert De Niro. I love him to death, but he had one joke that just crossed the line. He talked about how the waiters were deported. Most awkward silence ever.
3) Best Dressed is...
I don't care. I'm a guy. Even though January Jones was absolutely, positively stunning in her dress. As was Mila Kunis and Natalie Portman. And Megan Fox looked very, very confused on stage. And that slit in her dress probably says a lot about her.
4) The big winner is...
The Social Network. Best Movie-Drama, Best Director (David Fincher), Best Screenplay (Aaron Sorkin), and Best Score. Not a bad take. Undoubtedly the favorite to win Best Picture at the Oscars.
Boardwalk Empire. Best TV Show-Drama, Best Actor-Drama (Steve Buscemi)
Glee. Best TV Show-Comedy, Best Supporting Actor (Chris Colfer), Best Supporting Actress (Jane Lynch)
These two shows weren't expected to do much. But they came in as dark horses and won the race (pardon the pun).
Well those are my thoughts. If you have your own, which I'm sure you do, sound off in the comments.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 8
First off, good luck Chicago Bears. Second off, the theme is....
THE FIRST MOVIE YOU REMEMBER BEING SCARED BY
The first movie I was ever scared by isn't actually that scary anymore. The scariest movie for me was The Grudge (for reasons I would like not to disclose at this point). I was pretty freaked by The Lost World and The Glass House. But the first one I remember is definitely Deep Blue Sea. I know that it was supposed to be a comedy and everything, but I was about 6 or 7 when I watched it and I actually thought sharks attacked those people because they were normal. I missed out on the entire "bigger brain" thing. I was super freaked out when the sharks jumped out of the tank to eat Samuel L. Jackson. So maybe they did their job and scared a 6 year old. Props to them.
P.S. Go BEARS!
THE FIRST MOVIE YOU REMEMBER BEING SCARED BY
The first movie I was ever scared by isn't actually that scary anymore. The scariest movie for me was The Grudge (for reasons I would like not to disclose at this point). I was pretty freaked by The Lost World and The Glass House. But the first one I remember is definitely Deep Blue Sea. I know that it was supposed to be a comedy and everything, but I was about 6 or 7 when I watched it and I actually thought sharks attacked those people because they were normal. I missed out on the entire "bigger brain" thing. I was super freaked out when the sharks jumped out of the tank to eat Samuel L. Jackson. So maybe they did their job and scared a 6 year old. Props to them.
P.S. Go BEARS!
Saturday, January 15, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 7
Arthur. Power Rangers. Goosebumps. Pokemon. What do all of these things have in common? If you guessed things from my childhood, you guessed right. So what could possibly be today's theme? My guess is...
A MOVIE FROM MY CHILDHOOD
I arguably lived during this best time for Disney films. We had our choice from movies like The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, The Lion King, Pocahontas, Tarzan, Hercules, Mulan, and my personal favorite Beauty and the Beast. This last movie is the movie from my childhood. Sure I dressed like Aladdin once for Halloween, but Beauty and the Beast was my favorite. The songs were more than memorable. There were exciting songs ("Be Our Guest"), romantic songs ("Beauty and the Beast"), and just plain funny songs (the Gaston song, as it will now be known as). The fight scene between the people and the magical things in the house was straight up hilarious. Gaston may be the most random choice of villain ever. He is apparently the most awesome person ever, but he wants Belle, so he goes completely crazy on the Beast. The origin story was truly amazing. A witch casts a spell on the Beast and his castle, isolating him from the rest of the world. This spell can only be broken when essentially, he falls in love, and the girl falls in love back and this must be done before the enchanted rose loses its last petal. But the most enchanting part that I remember is the love between Belle and Beast. I was (and still am) a hopeless romantic, and when Beast was stabbed, Belle fulfills the prophecy by telling Beast she loved him right before the last petal fell. It was an enchanting series of events that led to the metamorphosis, turning the Beast and the castle into a prince and a palace. One of the best movies from my time, and one of my favorite films from the peak Disney era (in my opinion of course). I need a tagline to end my posts. So I will start with this one. Sound off!
A MOVIE FROM MY CHILDHOOD
I arguably lived during this best time for Disney films. We had our choice from movies like The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, The Lion King, Pocahontas, Tarzan, Hercules, Mulan, and my personal favorite Beauty and the Beast. This last movie is the movie from my childhood. Sure I dressed like Aladdin once for Halloween, but Beauty and the Beast was my favorite. The songs were more than memorable. There were exciting songs ("Be Our Guest"), romantic songs ("Beauty and the Beast"), and just plain funny songs (the Gaston song, as it will now be known as). The fight scene between the people and the magical things in the house was straight up hilarious. Gaston may be the most random choice of villain ever. He is apparently the most awesome person ever, but he wants Belle, so he goes completely crazy on the Beast. The origin story was truly amazing. A witch casts a spell on the Beast and his castle, isolating him from the rest of the world. This spell can only be broken when essentially, he falls in love, and the girl falls in love back and this must be done before the enchanted rose loses its last petal. But the most enchanting part that I remember is the love between Belle and Beast. I was (and still am) a hopeless romantic, and when Beast was stabbed, Belle fulfills the prophecy by telling Beast she loved him right before the last petal fell. It was an enchanting series of events that led to the metamorphosis, turning the Beast and the castle into a prince and a palace. One of the best movies from my time, and one of my favorite films from the peak Disney era (in my opinion of course). I need a tagline to end my posts. So I will start with this one. Sound off!
Friday, January 14, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 6
It's Friday. Super stoked because of the three day weekend. So let's get this started (and hot) with today's edition. Today, I am to be asked about
A MOVIE THAT YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN BUT ALWAYS WANTED TO
There are a bunch of movies that fall into this category. City of God is a recent movie that comes to mind. But as a member of this generation, I have missed out on a lot of good, older movies. I haven't seen movies like Casablanca, Gone with the Wind, and a lot of Stanley Kubrick films. But, the movie I want to see most is definitely Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho. I haven't seen much Hitchcock to begin with, but if I had to choose one of his movies, it would be his most famous. This may actually be one of the most influential movies ever, behind Citizen Kane and The Birth of a Nation. But Psycho looks like the most entertaining, and we all know that Hitchcock is the master of suspense. Well, I guess all I have to do now is find it, watch it and get back on track with all of the other movies that I have yet to see.
A MOVIE THAT YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN BUT ALWAYS WANTED TO
There are a bunch of movies that fall into this category. City of God is a recent movie that comes to mind. But as a member of this generation, I have missed out on a lot of good, older movies. I haven't seen movies like Casablanca, Gone with the Wind, and a lot of Stanley Kubrick films. But, the movie I want to see most is definitely Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho. I haven't seen much Hitchcock to begin with, but if I had to choose one of his movies, it would be his most famous. This may actually be one of the most influential movies ever, behind Citizen Kane and The Birth of a Nation. But Psycho looks like the most entertaining, and we all know that Hitchcock is the master of suspense. Well, I guess all I have to do now is find it, watch it and get back on track with all of the other movies that I have yet to see.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 5
This may very well be the most difficult movie to choose, primarily because I will have no experience on this topic...
A MOVIE YOU CAN'T IMAGINE WATCHING SOBER
This would be easier if I had seen a movie when not sober. I have seen movies and I have been not sober, but never simultaneously. I would probably have to interpret this as a movie so horrifically bad that you would have to be wasted to even consider watching it. It could be a movie so confusing that it is essentially like watching it drunk, but I prefer the badness, because there are some horribly bad movies. But the one that I would choose is Sex And The City. I cannot even imagine watching this even if my life was on the line. First off, I really don't like Sarah Jessica Parker (read: Matthew Broderick, why would you marry her?). And secondly, SATC just looks painful. All of the characters (Charlotte, Samantha, Carrie, Miranda) seem so unappealing. The jokes are supposedly horrifically lame and "punny". I haven't actually seen this, but I would rather see Twilight over SATC. And that's saying something, because I had vowed off Twilight ever since two of my friends gushed on and on about Edward (who I assumed was gay from the conversation). Yeah, so this isn't that big of a deal because no experience of watching movies drunk, but SATC generally sucks.
A MOVIE YOU CAN'T IMAGINE WATCHING SOBER
This would be easier if I had seen a movie when not sober. I have seen movies and I have been not sober, but never simultaneously. I would probably have to interpret this as a movie so horrifically bad that you would have to be wasted to even consider watching it. It could be a movie so confusing that it is essentially like watching it drunk, but I prefer the badness, because there are some horribly bad movies. But the one that I would choose is Sex And The City. I cannot even imagine watching this even if my life was on the line. First off, I really don't like Sarah Jessica Parker (read: Matthew Broderick, why would you marry her?). And secondly, SATC just looks painful. All of the characters (Charlotte, Samantha, Carrie, Miranda) seem so unappealing. The jokes are supposedly horrifically lame and "punny". I haven't actually seen this, but I would rather see Twilight over SATC. And that's saying something, because I had vowed off Twilight ever since two of my friends gushed on and on about Edward (who I assumed was gay from the conversation). Yeah, so this isn't that big of a deal because no experience of watching movies drunk, but SATC generally sucks.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 4
So yada yada yada... And I'd like to welcome you to a new addition of the 30 Day Movie Challenge. So after 3 long grueling days of blogging, our writer (aka me) has finally made it to the ever-important day 4. Will he make it? Can he last all 30 Days? Well, we'll just start with today's topic which is...
A MOVIE THAT MAKES ME PUKE
Now I'm not really someone who likes to puke. I, much like Ted Mosby from How I Met Your Mother, am proud to be puke free since '93 (more like '03, but '93 has more of a ring to it). But I have seen some awfully disgusting movies over the past 5 years alone. I'm sure a lot of you viewers (or at least I would assume such a thing) would expect the Saw franchise or The Human Centipede as my puke-inducing movie. And I would agree that a gorno (aka a film with so much gratuitous gore it is essentially a gore porn) would be the most disgusting movie, but I felt that Saw was so over the top near the end of the franchise that I kinda stopped caring about the disgusting parts. And The Human Centipede is a movie I have not (and most likely will not) see because of the immense puke-inducing factor. So the movie that I will choose is Hostel. The one scene that sticks out doesn't actually have that much blood. It just is painful to think about, which thus induces the gag factor. One of the characters has his Achilles' heel sliced so that when he tries to walk they essentially cause him to fall like a tree. That is all the visual imagery that I will give, because this entire post is making me a tad nauseous. So that's it, and I will be heading to the nearest receptacle to release my somehow unvomited vomit.
A MOVIE THAT MAKES ME PUKE
Now I'm not really someone who likes to puke. I, much like Ted Mosby from How I Met Your Mother, am proud to be puke free since '93 (more like '03, but '93 has more of a ring to it). But I have seen some awfully disgusting movies over the past 5 years alone. I'm sure a lot of you viewers (or at least I would assume such a thing) would expect the Saw franchise or The Human Centipede as my puke-inducing movie. And I would agree that a gorno (aka a film with so much gratuitous gore it is essentially a gore porn) would be the most disgusting movie, but I felt that Saw was so over the top near the end of the franchise that I kinda stopped caring about the disgusting parts. And The Human Centipede is a movie I have not (and most likely will not) see because of the immense puke-inducing factor. So the movie that I will choose is Hostel. The one scene that sticks out doesn't actually have that much blood. It just is painful to think about, which thus induces the gag factor. One of the characters has his Achilles' heel sliced so that when he tries to walk they essentially cause him to fall like a tree. That is all the visual imagery that I will give, because this entire post is making me a tad nauseous. So that's it, and I will be heading to the nearest receptacle to release my somehow unvomited vomit.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 3
INSERT WITTY BANTER HERE. I'm really lazy today. I've got a bunch of crap to do. So let's just get on with this. For today's challenge, I am to name...
MY FAVORITE MOVIE TRILOGY OR FRANCHISE
Now there are a lot of choices just from this last decade (Twilight, Shrek), but I'm going to go with the franchise that didn't just churn out movies, but made each film a quality piece. Now there are many different franchises that have done this. I mean, The Godfather trilogy notched up 3 nominations and 2 wins for Best Picture alone (9 wins out of 29 nominations) and The Lord of the Rings trilogy got 3 nominations and 1 win for Best Picture (17 wins out of 30 nominations). The original Star Wars trilogy was one of the most influential trilogies ever in film, not to mention the ground it broke in the sci-fi genre. But my choice is more sentimental. The Toy Story trilogy from Pixar is my favorite movie franchise of all time. As a college student, this trilogy was a reflection of my general life because of the age similarities between me and Andy. But it was much more than that. Critically, save for a few nay-sayers, this trilogy was flawless (100% for Toy Story, 100% for Toy Story 2 and 99% for Toy Story 3 on Rotten Tomatoes). The sob factor was in play for every single film, whether it was the sad realization that you aren't who you thought you were, or the devastation of losing your best friend, or the lesson that you can never take care of someone forever. These movies were poignant, but not moronically so. They were funny to both children and adults. The voice cast was superb. Randy Newman's songs and score were executed perfectly to help lead the viewers on an emotional journey. The stories were original and fictional, but they felt real. I was never able to look at my toys the same way after this trilogy. These movies, pardon the cliche, tugged at our heart strings and made us feel for what we before thought of as plastic. If you don't mind the references, these films made us reach for the skies, to infinity and beyond.
MY FAVORITE MOVIE TRILOGY OR FRANCHISE
Now there are a lot of choices just from this last decade (Twilight, Shrek), but I'm going to go with the franchise that didn't just churn out movies, but made each film a quality piece. Now there are many different franchises that have done this. I mean, The Godfather trilogy notched up 3 nominations and 2 wins for Best Picture alone (9 wins out of 29 nominations) and The Lord of the Rings trilogy got 3 nominations and 1 win for Best Picture (17 wins out of 30 nominations). The original Star Wars trilogy was one of the most influential trilogies ever in film, not to mention the ground it broke in the sci-fi genre. But my choice is more sentimental. The Toy Story trilogy from Pixar is my favorite movie franchise of all time. As a college student, this trilogy was a reflection of my general life because of the age similarities between me and Andy. But it was much more than that. Critically, save for a few nay-sayers, this trilogy was flawless (100% for Toy Story, 100% for Toy Story 2 and 99% for Toy Story 3 on Rotten Tomatoes). The sob factor was in play for every single film, whether it was the sad realization that you aren't who you thought you were, or the devastation of losing your best friend, or the lesson that you can never take care of someone forever. These movies were poignant, but not moronically so. They were funny to both children and adults. The voice cast was superb. Randy Newman's songs and score were executed perfectly to help lead the viewers on an emotional journey. The stories were original and fictional, but they felt real. I was never able to look at my toys the same way after this trilogy. These movies, pardon the cliche, tugged at our heart strings and made us feel for what we before thought of as plastic. If you don't mind the references, these films made us reach for the skies, to infinity and beyond.
Monday, January 10, 2011
The Controversy of the Crosshairs and a Study in Semiotics
Writer's note: I would like to first point out that this in no way is advocating for either side of the issue. I prefer to maintain impartiality and be unbiased. I would also like to extend a prayer to the victims and their families affected by the Arizona shootings. You all are in our thoughts.
I am not an expert on semiotics. I merely understand them, with much help from my professor. Semiotics is in layman's terms, the study of signs. It is much deeper than that (and if you are interested, read Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce for a more in-depth approach to semiotics), but for all intents and purposes we will focus on this specific part of the theory. Peirce essentially separates signs into three groups: symbol, icon, and index. A symbol is an arbitrarily chose sign that has no relationship to the real world. Examples include the alphabet or a "Caution" sign. An icon resembles something physical, like a picture or a portrait. An index has a direct relationship with the physical world e.g. a footprint. This is where the inflammatory speaking or toxic rhetoric comes into play. We should now all know this image.
This is the now infamous image. What it represents is the districts in the United States where there are currently Democrats where the Palin political action committee would like to have Republicans. The controversy occurs because Gabrielle Giffords is part of this list. There are other implications with this image. Red is the same color as blood, and a red crosshair typically signifies that you have the target in sight (more on signs later). It looks kinda like a hit list. And these implications have counterpoints. The shooter acted independently from this agenda. No other listed representative has been threatened or injured. It was not designed as a hit list and it is the intent that counts. But where the real controversy should occur (at least the root of the controversy) is the use of the cross-hairs as a sign. There are two different interpretations of these signs.
1) The crosshairs are a symbol. They are essentially target signs and they were target signs from the beginning. Our interpretation is not based on guns or firearms but of aim. So it is not inflammatory but symbolic for the Republican agenda.
2) The crosshairs are an icon or an index. When you look through the scope of a gun, you will see crosshairs. So the natural reaction is to relate crosshairs with firearms. So it is inflammatory because of the relationship between the crosshairs and guns and violence.
So the debate is caused by different readings of the same sign. It is, academically, a debate rooted in semiotics. Sound off in the comments (read: do I actually have any viewers?).
Image from Palin Political Action Committee (sarahpac.com).
Update: Apparently inciting a violent act is illegal. So the debate is also a legal debate too because on one side, the map is okay, but on the other, the map is illegal.
I am not an expert on semiotics. I merely understand them, with much help from my professor. Semiotics is in layman's terms, the study of signs. It is much deeper than that (and if you are interested, read Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce for a more in-depth approach to semiotics), but for all intents and purposes we will focus on this specific part of the theory. Peirce essentially separates signs into three groups: symbol, icon, and index. A symbol is an arbitrarily chose sign that has no relationship to the real world. Examples include the alphabet or a "Caution" sign. An icon resembles something physical, like a picture or a portrait. An index has a direct relationship with the physical world e.g. a footprint. This is where the inflammatory speaking or toxic rhetoric comes into play. We should now all know this image.
1) The crosshairs are a symbol. They are essentially target signs and they were target signs from the beginning. Our interpretation is not based on guns or firearms but of aim. So it is not inflammatory but symbolic for the Republican agenda.
2) The crosshairs are an icon or an index. When you look through the scope of a gun, you will see crosshairs. So the natural reaction is to relate crosshairs with firearms. So it is inflammatory because of the relationship between the crosshairs and guns and violence.
So the debate is caused by different readings of the same sign. It is, academically, a debate rooted in semiotics. Sound off in the comments (read: do I actually have any viewers?).
Image from Palin Political Action Committee (sarahpac.com).
Update: Apparently inciting a violent act is illegal. So the debate is also a legal debate too because on one side, the map is okay, but on the other, the map is illegal.
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 2
Well, yesterday is history, and tomorrow is a mystery. But today is a gift. That's why the call it the present. Thank you Kung Fu Panda for one of the best quotes ever. But today isn't about Kung Fu Panda because the topic of today's challenge is...
THE MOVIE THAT WAS MY BIGGEST DISAPPOINTMENT
This is without any question The Last Airbender. I am a huge fan of Avatar: The Last Airbender on Nickelodeon and the show is actually one of the best made shows on television. It mixes great action sequences with witty dialogue and a spell-binding story. There are lovable characters, truly dastardly villains, and heart-breaking moments for the casual fan. But for more hardcore fans (kinda like myself), there are Easter eggs like the cabbage man. But the movie was atrocious. I have nothing against the casting of this film other than the fact that they all sucked. Seriously, M. Night Shyamalan? You considered Nicola Peltz (Katara) your most surefire casting decision since Haley Joel Osment? She was wooden and lost instead of strong-willed. Sokka wasn't the same sarcastic, meat-loving character, but an extra. He had no use in the film. Aang and Zukko, though both were exaggerated, were well acted. But overall, the casting sucked.
That's not my only beef. As a fan of the series, I was saddened that Shyamalan did not stick closer to the story. There are so many plot-holes that it would require an entire website to describe it. But the biggest one is the fact that fire-benders cannot create their own fire. That was the entire basis of the fire-benders. Their strength derived from their ability to create fire from within. Now they needed some sort of source. Sure this makes more sense when juxtaposed with water-benders who also have to use their surroundings, but water is everywhere, but fire has to be made. Where was Suki? Why did they narrate almost every single episode? These plot holes aren't just affecting fans of the show, but also viewers of the movie. These plot holes created a discontinuity in the film, making it feel chopped and stiff.
So this was my biggest disappointment because the series is such a great basis for a movie. The story is enthralling. A young kid frozen in an iceberg for 100 years all of sudden has to save the world from the Fire Nation with his rag tag team of fellow benders and warriors. A disgraced prince has to find this child in order to restore his honor, but he undergoes an even bigger journey during this quest. It's a love story between our adolescent heroes Aang and Katara, Sokka and Suki, Zuko and Mai. In the 17th episode of the 3rd season, this team watched a play that depicts their journey, but it was their review that really sticks.
Zuko: "That wasn't a good play."
Aang: "I'll say."
Katara: "No kidding."
Suki: "Horrible."
Toph: "You said it."
Sokka: "But the effects were decent."
It was a spectacle. It looked pretty, but unless you couldn't hear anything, this movie was horrendous. A disappointment because it should have been amazing, an iconic piece of work, the first part of this decade's next great trilogy. But now, we're limping into the expected second movie, hoping either Shyamalan steps up his game or Shyamalan steps out.
THE MOVIE THAT WAS MY BIGGEST DISAPPOINTMENT
This is without any question The Last Airbender. I am a huge fan of Avatar: The Last Airbender on Nickelodeon and the show is actually one of the best made shows on television. It mixes great action sequences with witty dialogue and a spell-binding story. There are lovable characters, truly dastardly villains, and heart-breaking moments for the casual fan. But for more hardcore fans (kinda like myself), there are Easter eggs like the cabbage man. But the movie was atrocious. I have nothing against the casting of this film other than the fact that they all sucked. Seriously, M. Night Shyamalan? You considered Nicola Peltz (Katara) your most surefire casting decision since Haley Joel Osment? She was wooden and lost instead of strong-willed. Sokka wasn't the same sarcastic, meat-loving character, but an extra. He had no use in the film. Aang and Zukko, though both were exaggerated, were well acted. But overall, the casting sucked.
That's not my only beef. As a fan of the series, I was saddened that Shyamalan did not stick closer to the story. There are so many plot-holes that it would require an entire website to describe it. But the biggest one is the fact that fire-benders cannot create their own fire. That was the entire basis of the fire-benders. Their strength derived from their ability to create fire from within. Now they needed some sort of source. Sure this makes more sense when juxtaposed with water-benders who also have to use their surroundings, but water is everywhere, but fire has to be made. Where was Suki? Why did they narrate almost every single episode? These plot holes aren't just affecting fans of the show, but also viewers of the movie. These plot holes created a discontinuity in the film, making it feel chopped and stiff.
So this was my biggest disappointment because the series is such a great basis for a movie. The story is enthralling. A young kid frozen in an iceberg for 100 years all of sudden has to save the world from the Fire Nation with his rag tag team of fellow benders and warriors. A disgraced prince has to find this child in order to restore his honor, but he undergoes an even bigger journey during this quest. It's a love story between our adolescent heroes Aang and Katara, Sokka and Suki, Zuko and Mai. In the 17th episode of the 3rd season, this team watched a play that depicts their journey, but it was their review that really sticks.
Zuko: "That wasn't a good play."
Aang: "I'll say."
Katara: "No kidding."
Suki: "Horrible."
Toph: "You said it."
Sokka: "But the effects were decent."
It was a spectacle. It looked pretty, but unless you couldn't hear anything, this movie was horrendous. A disappointment because it should have been amazing, an iconic piece of work, the first part of this decade's next great trilogy. But now, we're limping into the expected second movie, hoping either Shyamalan steps up his game or Shyamalan steps out.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Why I'm Not Worried about the Seattle Seahawks as a Chicago Bears fan
Okay this seems to be a really stupid question. But as a Chicago Bears fan, I'm getting crap from a bunch of other people (primarily Packers and Seahawks fans) that think that the Bears are gonna lose the next game against the 8-9 Seahawks. From a win-loss standpoint, the Bears have the edge. But everyone else argues that because the Seahawks beat the Bears in the regular season that the Bears will inevitably lose again in the playoffs. Well this is why that won't happen.
1. The Seahawks beat the Bears before their bye week.
Yes this sounds like a stupid point, but if you watched the Bears before and after their bye (especially those last four games going into the bye), there was a vast difference. I'm not gonna statistically analyze anything, but I'm pretty sure that their quarterback Jay Cutler was sacked much less after the bye. He threw more efficiently and the offense and defense were clicking (except for one minor hiccup against the New England Patriots). As John Madden would say, the quarterback's throwing it, the running back's running it, the defense is playing good defense. They are beatable, but ever since that bye, it seems like Mike Martz, their offensive coordinator, really got his offense going. And of course, the Bears have an exceptional defense.
2. The Seahawks beat the New Orlean Saints using deep passes and the running game.
The Bears play a cover-2 defense. For those of you who don't know what that is, it is pretty much the two safeties play really deep, essentially to stop the big play. It leaves the team vulnerable to short, fast throws, but the Bears mix a great pass rush with good down field coverage. Yes, Matt Hasselbeck, the Seahawks starting QB, is experienced and accurate, but he didn't tear apart the Saints by using a lot of short passes. He hit them up deep. Just look at the pass to Brandon Stokley for the touchdown. He simply beat every single guy, but in the cover-2, there will usually be a safety playing back and ready to tackle Stokley. Speaking about tackling, the Saints did a crappy job on that part. Marshawn Lynch broke 7 or 8 tackles en route to one of the most electrifying plays ever. But against the Bears, they would not allow that. The defensive corps stresses good tackling more than anything. Just imagine Brian Urlacher whiffing on a tackle like that. Inconceivable, no?
3. The Seahawks aren't that great on the road.
The Seahawks went 2-6 on the road. Sure one of those 2 wins was in Soldier Field, but that was Jay Cutler's first game back from an injury. But the Seahawks are atrocious away from home and the Bears, with a 5-3 record at home including wins against the Philadelphia Eagles, Green Bay Packers, and New York Jets, are more than formidable.
There are many other reasons why one team or another is going to come out on top. But these are three main reasons and they are big reasons. Many people slated the Bears to lose their first playoff game. But these same people expected the Seahawks to be gone by then too. All I know is that the last time the Bears played the Seahawks after earning the bye, the Bears ended up in the Super Bowl. Serendipitous or just coincidence? We'll find out Sunday January 16. My guess is the Bears win with a score of 24-7. I just can't imagine another great game by the Seahawks offense against a very strong Bears defense. So all that's left to say is GO BEARS!
1. The Seahawks beat the Bears before their bye week.
Yes this sounds like a stupid point, but if you watched the Bears before and after their bye (especially those last four games going into the bye), there was a vast difference. I'm not gonna statistically analyze anything, but I'm pretty sure that their quarterback Jay Cutler was sacked much less after the bye. He threw more efficiently and the offense and defense were clicking (except for one minor hiccup against the New England Patriots). As John Madden would say, the quarterback's throwing it, the running back's running it, the defense is playing good defense. They are beatable, but ever since that bye, it seems like Mike Martz, their offensive coordinator, really got his offense going. And of course, the Bears have an exceptional defense.
2. The Seahawks beat the New Orlean Saints using deep passes and the running game.
The Bears play a cover-2 defense. For those of you who don't know what that is, it is pretty much the two safeties play really deep, essentially to stop the big play. It leaves the team vulnerable to short, fast throws, but the Bears mix a great pass rush with good down field coverage. Yes, Matt Hasselbeck, the Seahawks starting QB, is experienced and accurate, but he didn't tear apart the Saints by using a lot of short passes. He hit them up deep. Just look at the pass to Brandon Stokley for the touchdown. He simply beat every single guy, but in the cover-2, there will usually be a safety playing back and ready to tackle Stokley. Speaking about tackling, the Saints did a crappy job on that part. Marshawn Lynch broke 7 or 8 tackles en route to one of the most electrifying plays ever. But against the Bears, they would not allow that. The defensive corps stresses good tackling more than anything. Just imagine Brian Urlacher whiffing on a tackle like that. Inconceivable, no?
3. The Seahawks aren't that great on the road.
The Seahawks went 2-6 on the road. Sure one of those 2 wins was in Soldier Field, but that was Jay Cutler's first game back from an injury. But the Seahawks are atrocious away from home and the Bears, with a 5-3 record at home including wins against the Philadelphia Eagles, Green Bay Packers, and New York Jets, are more than formidable.
There are many other reasons why one team or another is going to come out on top. But these are three main reasons and they are big reasons. Many people slated the Bears to lose their first playoff game. But these same people expected the Seahawks to be gone by then too. All I know is that the last time the Bears played the Seahawks after earning the bye, the Bears ended up in the Super Bowl. Serendipitous or just coincidence? We'll find out Sunday January 16. My guess is the Bears win with a score of 24-7. I just can't imagine another great game by the Seahawks offense against a very strong Bears defense. So all that's left to say is GO BEARS!
30 Day Movie Challenge: Day 1
So the 30 day movie challenge is supposed to be something for Facebook, but I really don't want to just put movies up as my status without any clarification as to why I chose a specific movie. So I decided to blog about it. So the first day is supposed to be my favorite movie, but I feel like going in reverse. So the topic of today's blog post is...
YOUR FAVORITE MOVIE ADAPTED FROM A BOOK
Now there are many ways to take this. I have a lot of movies that have been adapted from books, so I'm going to stick with a movie and book combination where I have both read the book and watched the movie. Because anyone can like Fight Club as a movie, but that doesn't mean that they like Chuck Palahniuk's book. With that said, I have a lot of options. The Harry Potter series was a very good breath of fresh air, but I can't single out one particular movie that really stood out. Same goes with the Lord of the Rings series. There are a bunch of books that I've read that I thought were great (The Kite Runner, About A Boy) but I haven't seen their film counterparts. And there are other movies like Die Hard and Slumdog Millionaire that I haven't read the book for. Then there are movies that only take the plot line of the book, so it's difficult as to how I am supposed to interpret that. So for this one I'm going to go with High Fidelity, which is a movie starring John Cusack and a book written by Nick Hornby. I chose this primarily because I loved the strong connection between the two works. The movie is so true to the book that when I read the book, I felt that whenever Rob Fleming (main character) said anything, it sounded like John Cusack's voice. The movie was perfectly cast. From Jack Black (who, as Barry, gave the best performance of his life until he made School of Rock) to Lisa Bonet, everyone followed the exact characteristics of the characters in the book. That is something you rarely see from an adaptation. I mean, whenever I read a book, I always try to cast certain people as each role. I could not have seen any better way to cast it. And even though the film took place in Chicago, while the book took place in London, it had the same feel. And of course, they broke the fourth wall (one of my favorite gimmicks ever). That is why High Fidelity is my favorite movie based on a book.
YOUR FAVORITE MOVIE ADAPTED FROM A BOOK
Now there are many ways to take this. I have a lot of movies that have been adapted from books, so I'm going to stick with a movie and book combination where I have both read the book and watched the movie. Because anyone can like Fight Club as a movie, but that doesn't mean that they like Chuck Palahniuk's book. With that said, I have a lot of options. The Harry Potter series was a very good breath of fresh air, but I can't single out one particular movie that really stood out. Same goes with the Lord of the Rings series. There are a bunch of books that I've read that I thought were great (The Kite Runner, About A Boy) but I haven't seen their film counterparts. And there are other movies like Die Hard and Slumdog Millionaire that I haven't read the book for. Then there are movies that only take the plot line of the book, so it's difficult as to how I am supposed to interpret that. So for this one I'm going to go with High Fidelity, which is a movie starring John Cusack and a book written by Nick Hornby. I chose this primarily because I loved the strong connection between the two works. The movie is so true to the book that when I read the book, I felt that whenever Rob Fleming (main character) said anything, it sounded like John Cusack's voice. The movie was perfectly cast. From Jack Black (who, as Barry, gave the best performance of his life until he made School of Rock) to Lisa Bonet, everyone followed the exact characteristics of the characters in the book. That is something you rarely see from an adaptation. I mean, whenever I read a book, I always try to cast certain people as each role. I could not have seen any better way to cast it. And even though the film took place in Chicago, while the book took place in London, it had the same feel. And of course, they broke the fourth wall (one of my favorite gimmicks ever). That is why High Fidelity is my favorite movie based on a book.
An Opinion on Jake Gyllenhaal
Jake Gyllenhaal is a conundrum. Women consider him a heartthrob and cult fans love him in Donnie Darko. But most guys really don't know how to relate to him. Sure he's an Oscar-nominated actor, but does that really matter that much anymore? Can you name the movie he was nominated for or for that matter, any Academy Award nomination for any arbitrarily named actor, say Johnny Depp? Most of us probably only know him either as Maggie Gyllenhaal's brother or as that one guy in The Day After Tomorrow. Just look at his imdb profile. Honestly, there are very few films of note, and those that do have some merit (like Brokeback Mountain and The Good Girl) aren't necessarily known for Gyllenhaal's involvement. His problem for most people is that he is always stuck in somebody's shadow. He looks almost exactly like Tobey Maguire (side note: interesting that Maguire and Gyllenhaal played brothers in Brothers), and unlike Gyllenhaal, Maguire has starred in the Spiderman trilogy. Though Maguire is not as great of an actor as Gyllenhaal, it only takes one giant role to jump into the public's eye. Then take Heath Ledger, his costar in Brokeback Mountain. How could Gyllenhaal ever compare to Ledger? Like Maguire, Ledger took a role in a superhero movie, but rather than turning in a decent performance, he gave a deserving award-winning performance as the Joker in The Dark Knight. And anyone who thinks that Ledger wouldn't have won if he had not died is an insult to arguably the best performance in a superhero film ever. Ever. But Gyllenhaal doesn't have the same recognition as Maguire and he certainly doesn't have the same track record that Ledger has. But Gyllenhaal can make a name for himself and he took a good step by making Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. Sure the movie kinda bombed, but he's trying to break out as a superstar actor. He buffed up and though that seemed to please more women than men, it certainly made him at least look like a bona fide action star. He's worked with directors like David Fincher and Ang Lee. He's taking the right steps to becoming a star actor and as long as he builds off the momentum he got from his most recent movie Love and Other Drugs he is on that path. But for now he will be Donnie Darko or Tobey Maguire's look-a-like or Heath Ledger's lover in Brokeback Mountain.
PS: I really wasn't that big of a fan of Donnie Darko. Sure everyone thinks it was the classic movie, but I just think that it was a fustercluck.
Image from zimbio.com
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Welcome!
Well, more of a welcome to myself. Pretty new to the blogging world as you may imagine. I'm not really gonna talk much about myself, but more about the stuff I love. Movies, sports, television, random thoughts. Stuff like that. So first post and here goes!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)