h1

March Madness – Round 1 & 2 recap

March 23, 2009

While my bracket doesn’t look like complete shit after the first two rounds, I do feel like I made some unforgivable mistakes that someone with the basketball knowledge I’ve developed this year should have avoided (Boston College). How Barack Obama picked more Sweet 16 teams correctly than I did is beyond my comprehension. This year has been relatively straight forward as 13 of the top 16 teams on the last AP Poll have advanced to the Sweet 16 (with Florida State, Wake Forest, and Washington being the only victims). Purdue was ranked #17 and Xavier was ranked #20, so it’s not like those teams advancing are all that shocking, especially since Xavier (a 4 seed) was actually favored to do so. The only team that’s in the Sweet 16 that is surprising is Arizona, a team that almost everyone thought shouldn’t have made the tournament in the first place with their mediocre 19-13 record. Even so, Arizona has probably had the easiest path to the Sweet 16. Despite being a 12 seed facing a 5 seed in the first round, I don’t think the world was too startled to see a Pac-10 team with three legitimate stars topple Utah, a representative from a weaker conference with no household names. I wasn’t surprised at least, as I didn’t hesitate very long in predicting that upset in the first round. For the second round, Arizona faced the only Cinderella type team to advance (Cleveland State) and beat them rather easily. So, all in all, the representatives in the Sweet 16 are unsurprising and the only team I think is a clear top 16 team that is no longer in the tournament is Wake Forest, but they have been inconsistent all season.

1st Round: 23 of 32
2nd Round: 11 of 16
Elite 8 Teams Left: 7 of 8
Final 4 Teams Left: 4 of 4

This weekend is going to suck for me. I work Thursday, Friday, and Saturday and even though I might be able to get off early the first two days, I really can’t afford to. I need $$$$… so I’m likely going to miss 75% of the action this weekend after getting to see virtually all of the first two rounds. Fortunately, I scheduled myself off for all the Final Four games and the championship.

Performance Of The Tournament (so far): Cole Aldrich, 13 points, 20 rebounds, 10 blocks in 60-43 win over Dayton.

h1

March Madness Day 3

March 22, 2009

Uhm… yeah, so my blog is clearly going to be dominated by the basketball tournament while it’s going on… I want to say I’ll have some other updates (i.e. movies) during the week, but my internet browser is acting bizarrely at home… I have an online connection, but I can’t surf the web… so no promises. Anyways, today’s update:

1st round: 23 of 32
2nd round: 7 of 8 (today’s games only)
Sweet 16 deaths: 4
Elite 8 deaths: 1

I got every game right today except Washington vs Purdue, which every one in Washington probably missed as well. I can’t lie, it was a painful game to watch. Purdue absolutely dominated us in the first half. Their defense was stifling. The game was so out of control that I even fell asleep watching it…. TWICE. That’s how bad things were looking for us in the first half. We did manage to make a game of it in the second half and I gotta say it would’ve been great to win a game in which we had never lead on the last shot. Alas, Purdue just outplayed us today. Too bad for Jon Brockman, but I think UW will find their way back to the tournament next year with Q-Pon and IT returning, plus top 10 recruit Adbul Gaddy joining the mix.

I have more to say, but it’s late and I’m tired and I wanna be up for Arizona State-Syracuse in the morning. Peace.

h1

March Madness – Round One Wrap Up

March 21, 2009

After a solid first day of predictions, I had a miserable second day, missing six more games and losing an Elite 8 team.

First Round: 23 of 32 correct
Sweet 16 Deaths: 3 (Wake Forest, Boston College, Portland State)
Elite 8 Deaths: 1 (Boston College)

Honestly, I had a really hard time filling out the bracket this year. I’ve watched more college basketball this season than I probably have in the rest of my life combined and I’ve been tracking box scores, leaderboards, conference standings, and weekly rankings since day one. In 80% of these games, I could make a strong case for either team winning and it only gets harder as the rounds advance.

My biggest problem area was in the bottom half of the Midwest Region, where I had Boston College advancing to the Elite 8… a team I’ve never even considered a top 25 team all season long, even when they earned that ranking by beating a then #1 UNC earlier this year. So how on earth did they find their way into my top 8 teams? Well, for starters, I didn’t think USC was a tournament team this year. However, they did win the Pac-10 tournament, beating a few teams I think are clearly better than them. Secondly, if BC had beaten USC, they’d be matched up with Michigan State in the 2nd round and MSU has been the most overrated team in all of college basketball this season. I’ve been saying that all season long, so how could I not pick them to lose to BC? In the Sweet 16, I would’ve had a BC-Kansas match-up and I was really close to taking North Dakota State over Kansas in the first round… so could I really take to the Elite 8 after nearly giving them a first round exit? I think what it comes down to… is I don’t think there’s a team in the bottom half of the Midwest Region that is a top 8 team in the nation. MSU is overrated and plays in one of the weaker big 6 conferences and Kansas, while defending champs, are too young and inexperienced; that they even played their way to a 3 seed this year is remarkable to me.

I suppose I get minor kudos for picking two #12 teams correctly (Arizona and Western Kentucky). In most years, those would be considered big upsets… but I’m not surprised by either of them. Arizona has the longest active streak of consecutive tournament appearances, so despite the low ranking this year, they are about as seasoned a program as there is. Not only is the school storied in the tournament, but they got a solid nucleus of talent with Jordan Hill, Chase Budinger, and Nic Wise… those guys are good enough to contend with just about anyone when they are firing on all cylinders, and let’s face it, Utah isn’t exactly a powerhouse organization.

Western Kentucky beating Illinois wasn’t a big shocker either. Only a year ago, they went to Sweet 16 as a #12 seed, so it’s not like this is a news flash. Also, Illinois isn’t blowing anyone’s mind with their talent level. Which brings me to….

Biggest Upset Of Round One: Cleveland State over Wake Forest – This should be the biggest bracket buster across the nation. Wake Forest has been inconsistent enough this year for this to seem possible, but they also have the talent of a team that can win a national championship. In my eyes, this loss would be on par with any of the #2 seeds losing in the first round. I’ve seen Wake play a couple of times this year and when they are on, they look like a top 5 team. For all the problems I had in the bottom half of the Midwest bracket, I would’ve taken Wake Forest to the Elite 8 over any of those teams (Kansas, USC, MSU, BC, West Virginia, Dayton). I’m sad to see such a talented team ousted so early. With that said, Cleveland State deserves some credit…. while they have earned the Cinderella moniker for the tournament, they did beat a then undefeated Syracuse team earlier this year… a team that is now in the top 12 nationally. Cleveland State certainly has it in them to advance to the Sweet 16 as Arizona should be an easier fight than Wake Forest.

Game To Watch: Washington vs Purdue – I think even outside of Washington this has to be seen as the most interesting match-up tomorrow. I hate Big Ten basketball this year and I’d love to see the Huskies pound the Boilermakers, but it’s hard to call. Personally, I think UW is easily the better team.

Runner-Up: Maryland vs Memphis – While I didn’t predict this upset, I do think the Terps can give Memphis a run for its money tomorrow, especially with how tough a time the Tigers had with CSU Northridge on Thursday. Memphis is one of the harder teams to judge this year. It wouldn’t be outlandish to say they have mediocre results against good teams this year; they lost games to Georgetown, Syracuse, and Xavier. They only have one win over a solid team and that was a decisive win against Gonzaga. Watch out now….

h1

March Madness: Day 1 & 2

March 20, 2009

Ah yes, folks, it’s my favorite time of the year: the NCAA Men’s College Basketball Championship, a.k.a. March Madness. With 75% of the first round complete, my bracket still looks in good shape. I’ve missed a total of 5 games, which probably has me around the national average, but I still have all my Sweet 16 teams alive.

My misses so far:

West Virginia vs Dayton: I penciled in Dayton in my first draft and thought they were certainly capable of the upset. However, at the end of the day I had to admit that West Virginia is the better and more seasoned team and I went with them. I can’t say I’m shocked by this upset at all though.

BYU vs Texas A&M: This was a pretty even match. I went with BYU because Lee Cummard is a beast and they seemed like the stronger team. Missing an 8 seed vs. 9 seed game is a pretty minor mistake anyways.

Tennessee vs Oklahoma St.: Another really even 8 vs 9 match. Oklahoma St. has decent depth and a star in James Anderson, but Tennessee is certainly the more touted team. This was the last game I filled out in the first round, so I could’ve gone either way on it.

VCU vs UCLA: Every analyst in the nation was predicting this upset and I think for good reason. I wasn’t jumping on any bandwagons making this pick because there are solid reasons for taking VCU in this game. First off, Eric Maynor is a beast… better than anyone on UCLA, Darren Collison included. Secondly, VCU won a tournament game just a few years ago. Thirdly, UCLA is just not that good this year. They have a decent squad, yes, but I’ll be surprised if they don’t lose by 10+ to Villanova tomorrow.

Clemson vs Michigan: I’m not sure why I went Clemson on this one. I made a list of my favorite out-of-state teams for the 2008-2009 college basketball season and Michigan was on that list simply because I think very highly of Manny Harris. I prefer Michigan over Clemson and since neither team is all that dominating, I’m surprised I didn’t go w/ the team I like more. I guess I figured Trevor Booker’s presence in the middle would be the difference in this game. I guessed wrong.

It sucks being at work while all these games are on, but I did get to see Washington vs Mississippi State and Gonzaga vs Akron yesterday. Thankfully, today is the only day I’m missing the action because I took tomorrow off and I always have Sundays off. I’ll be in Seattle rooting for the Huskies.

I should have another update tonight after the rest of today’s games.

h1

Choke Lives Up To It’s Name

March 15, 2009

What’s wrong with this picture? A film based on a novel by Chuck Palahniuk, the author of Fight Club (arguably one of the 20 best films released in the past ten years), can’t even gross $3 million domestically? You’d think that just attaching “from the author of Fight Club” on the poster would be enough to put the uneducated asses in the seats. I use the word “uneducated” because I think anyone that is familiar with Palahniuk’s work is going to fall into one of two categories: biased fanatic or biased hater. I never read Fight Club, but I’ve read three of Palahniuk’s other novels (Choke included), and they’ve all left a sour taste in my mouth. His writing style has an air of pretension that’s hard to overlook, the stories are ridiculously absurd, and his characters are unlikeable and morally retarded. I realize that’s often what he’s going for, and sometimes that formula can be engaging, but Palahniuk’s stories often come across heartless, and sometimes we just need somebody to root for. Choke was the first of his books I read and it’s easy to trick yourself into thinking you’ve stumbled across someone with a unique and clever voice, but his novels are kind of like Fight Club: you’re getting punched in the face repeatedly, yet sometimes you act like you enjoy it.

With that said, this is a review of the film, not the author’s collection of works… but I think it’s important to understand how I feel about the source material, since I clearly didn’t like the story and I was expecting disaster as soon as I saw the trailer. The movie version is a pretty faithful adaptation of the book and some of the scenes and characters are so sexually indecent that I’m sure this had to be pushing an NC-17 rating and it’s hard R-rating had to factor in keeping it from playing in a lot of theaters. The story is about Victor Mancini (Sam Rockwell), a sex addict who chokes on food in restaurants during his spare time in the hopes that his rescuer will feel responsible for his life and send him loads of money over time. Victor also regularly visits his mother (Anjelica Huston) in the hospital and we get flashbacks in his upbringing that help explain why Victor became the adult he is today. Yawn.

At least the acting in the film is decent, as Rockwell and Huston are both capable thespians. They do what they can with their characters, but neither invoke sympathy in the viewer. It’s hard to fault the actors, however, when the characters are clearly written to be completely amoral. I’m already tired of bashing this movie, so I’ll end by saying that I kind of hated it even though it lived up to my expectations. I’m sure anyone that can admit they are a fan of the novel will probably like the film as well… but don’t go into this thing blind, expecting Fight Club caliber.

Score: 3 out of 10 (Painful)

h1

Hamlet 2 Review

March 14, 2009

Hamlet 2 is a film that almost every one skipped while it was playing in theaters, as evidenced by it’s whopping $4.8 million domestic gross during its theatrical run. I’ve been seeing trailers for this movie for a while now, however, and I’ve always thought it looked kind of funny and the plot sounded so ludicrous I couldn’t help myself. It’s important to realize that you’re watching a satire of a genre–down on luck teacher inspires tough crowd of students (think Dangerous Minds)–and keep in mind that this film is a parody that should not be taken seriously. It will help your overall enjoyment if you watch it with this mindset. I thought that would be a strong chance I’d start this film and never finish it, but I was sold as soon as Steve Coogan’s drama teacher is near tears after listening to yet another scathing review from his nemesis, the school critic, who happens to be a 12 year old boy that misuses vocabulary and often times doesn’t even make sense in his writing. It’s quite funny to see a grown man’s hopes and dreams legitimately affected by a critic that hasn’t even started growing armpit hair.

I’m going to keep this review short and end by stating that Hamlet 2 is a decent comedy in the parody genre. It succeeds in ways that films like Disaster Movie and Superhero Movie continually fail at (i.e. being funny). We’ve all seen this formula before, so the plot doesn’t offer much in the way of originality or surprises, but I found it to be an enjoyable film overall. If you decide to skip it, however, you’re not going to be missing out on a whole lot either.

5.5 out of 10 (Worth Watching/Recommended)

h1

Son Of Rambow – Sequel or Homage?

March 12, 2009

I first started hearing about Son Of Rambow when it was in theaters and I wasn’t really sure what it was all about. Was it a horrible idea for a sequel in the Rambo franchise? Was it an homage? Did it even have anything to do with the Sylvester Stallone films? I didn’t really know, but I kept the name of the movie in my head and when it started popping up on a number of “Best Movies of 2008” lists, I decided that it was time to give it a chance.

The film is definitely not an entry in the popular action franchise, although the original Rambo does play a roll in the plot of this film. The story centers on Will, a young London boy, whose family is so religious and restrictive he must find bizarre ways of entertaining himself, such as drinking from the water fountain on days he knows his class will watch a movie (he is forbidden to watch TV), holding the water in his mouth until he is sent outside the classroom, and then spitting it into a fish bowl, keeping track of his efforts on a monthly basis. He also spends a vast amount of his time drawing and creating his own stories. It’s during one of these “time outs” that he befriends Lee Carter, who wastes no time identifying himself as the school trouble-maker. This unlikely bond leads to the two boys creating their own film version of the Rambo franchise, an idea inspired within Will after Lee Carter leaves him alone with the bootlegged film playing in the background.

The story may sound somewhat silly, but to say it’s simply an homage to the Rambo films would be a cruel injustice. The story tackles several important themes focusing on the power of friendship, the battle between self-choice and family values, escapism, and abandonment issues. While the name “Rambo” might turn heads and give this film attention, it’s the friendship between Will and Lee Carter and their personal battles with their own families that are going to turn viewers into fans.

I was really surprised by the acting from the young kids in this film. Bill Milner, who reminds me a lot of Freddie Highmore, does a very good job playing the secluded Will. You feel his depression at his isolation and lack of experience, and share his joy when he’s able to break through his shell. Not only does Milner do a fine acting job, he looks like a future star. This film really belongs to Will Poulter, the kid that plays the troubled Lee Carter (and if you’re wondering why I keep using first and last name, it’s because that’s how he is referred to 100% of the time). Poulter does a great job of playing the school lawbreaker, a personality which ultimately is a projection of his own troubled relationship with his brother, whom he idolizes, but may or may not know that Lee Carter even exists. It’s no coincidence that Will Poulter was recently cast in The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, due out in 2010… the kid is enormously talented and I hope to see him take on even more challenging roles in the future.

As a whole, I really enjoyed Son Of Rambow. It’s a quirky and funny film, with good acting from its young cast, and a solid story that deals with several thematic issues. I’ve seen a number of people put it on their “Best of 2008” lists and I’m pretty sure I know why. It’s a good film, yes, but the ending is phenomenal. It will pull at your heart strings and tap your tear ducts. It’s such a good ending that I think a lot of people are finishing the film thinking it’s much better than it actually was. I don’t want to get out of line and dub this as one of the great films of 2008… it’s not quite that. However, it is a very good film and the ending will leave you thinking it was great.

Score: 7 out of 10 (Must See)

h1

Updates Coming Soon

March 11, 2009

I haven’t had time to update the page recently, but I will be starting to do so again very soon. This week I finished reading the graphic novel Watchmen by Alan Moore and I’m planning to see the film tomorrow, so I’ll have my thoughts on that adaptation posted very soon. Also, I will have a review for Milk very soon and a bunch of other movies. I also heard the new Brother Ali EP this week and will post my thoughts on that very soon. Lastly, I’m long overdue on my Harry Potter vs. Twilight rant.

Peace.

h1

The Yankee Years by Joe Torre & Tom Verducci

March 1, 2009

Started: February 15th, 2009
Finished: March 1st, 2009

First off, let me state the fact that I’ve never reviewed a book in my life, but considering that I’m a writing major and have some professional writing experience under my belt, I don’t feel that I’m unqualified to express an educated opinion.

The Yankee Years first caught my attention because it was making headlines on ESPN due to stirring up some dirt in the Yankees organization. I don’t even remember what the headline was, but it probably had something to do with Alex Rodriguez, since that guy attracts controversy like he gets a bonus for it in his contract. I wasn’t particularly intrigued by the fact that Joe Torre had written a book about his time with the Yankees, but when I saw that Tom Verducci, a reputed baseball writer for Sports Illustrated, was the co-author I figured it was worth my time.

Make no mistake, this book is Verducci’s baby. Despite first billing and an authoring credit, Torre’s involvement is limited to extensive interviewing and vocal contributions, but has nothing to do with the writing as far as I was able to tell. Though this book wouldn’t have been possible without Torre’s involvement, I think his name on it is mostly a sales strategy. Verducci puts together a well-structured and chronological book with sharp prose that keeps the reader interested. Some of the writing does get repetitive at times and some of the quotes used don’t contribute much, but overall, I found the book to be a quick and interesting read.

I consider myself to be somewhat of a baseball fanatic, but The Yankee Years made me realize that I completely lose touch with the game come playoff time. I’m sure this is due to the fact that baseball, despite being a great sport, is kind of boring to watch and also because I don’t have a vested interest when the Mariners miss the playoffs or get knocked out. This has caused me to miss out on some incredible games. Think what you want to about the Yankees, but over the past 15 years or so, they’ve been involved in some of the best postseason series and games of all-time. If there weren’t box scores and footage to prove the results, you’d think that some of these accounts were fictitiously written for the movies. From Aaron Boone’s game-winning homerun in extra innings, to Curt Schilling’s bloody sock, to the Yankees coming back from a sub-.500 record as late as July to make the playoffs in 2007, there definitely was a story to be told here.

The thing that surprised me the most about the book is how it made me feel about the Yankees. Without a doubt, in my lifetime, the Yankees are my most hated team in any sport. I’ve always felt like they’ve been able to buy their way into the playoffs due to a ridiculous revenue stream and payroll flexibility, and with 12 straight postseason appearances, six league championships and four World Series Rings, that might be hard to argue. However, after reading this book, I feel like I may have been a bit ignorant. The most amazing thing happened as I was reading the first half of this book: I found myself liking the Yankees for the first time in my life. No, not the Yankees as we know them now, but the team that won four World Series titles in five years from 1996-2000. It’s easy to learn to hate a team that constantly wins, but I think a lot of my hatred was misguided. I’ve always despised the Yankees because of their huge payroll and ability to buy their roster rather than develop it, but those teams that won the championships were built of gritty, hard-nosed and reasonably priced veterans that had a will to win (Paul O’Neill, Tino Martinez, Scott Brosius, David Cone) and young, upcoming future superstars produced from the Yankees own farm system (Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera, Bernie Williams, Andy Pettitte). When Joe Torre was hired before the 1996 season, the Yankees had a modest (in comparison to now) payroll and their attendance was merely average compared to the rest of the league. It was due to this run of championships and success that the Yankees have become the colossal revenue-building monster that it is now. It wasn’t until the 2000s (after the Yankees last championship) that they seemingly started signing every big free agent that went on the market. Don’t get me wrong, I still hate the Yankees, but I think you have to respect what they accomplished in the late 90s. Those championships were earned, not bought, and they put together an incredible run that deserves all the accolades it receives.

With that said, the last half of the book made me hate the Yankees even more than I did before. Not only has revenue sharing and an increased ability by other teams to exploit inefficiencies cut into the Yankees advantage, but the Yankees front office hasn’t been able to make intelligent decisions (especially regarding starting pitching) and has wasted a staggering amount of money on the free agent market. The list of failures is vast: Carl Pavano, Javier Vasquez, Jaret Wright, Jeff Weaver and Randy Johnson are just the beginning. On top of that, it took the Yankees 11 years (from Andy Pettitte in 1996 to Joba Chamberlain in 2007) to develop a quality starting pitcher out of their own minor league system. The book describes all these misguided decisions in detail and explores how the Yankees bought a team of superstars that lacked the will to win that the late 90s Yankees possessed. Also, these superstars didn’t mesh as a team and there were often clashes of personality in the dugout and on the field.

After reading this book, I realized that the Yankee championships were legitimate and hard-earned, Joe Torre is a remarkable manager (he got them to 12 straight postseasons, including six years when the team was clearly in decline despite an increasing payroll), and that my current hatred of the team is valid. Alex Rodriguez is still a piece of shit and may arguably be the most unlikable player in all of sports. This book didn’t help his image any; his own manager thought of him as a self-centered, whiny, attention-whore.

Without a doubt, this is an absolute must read for any fan of baseball.

h1

Oscars 2009 Wrap Up

February 26, 2009

First off, I went 14 of 24 in my Oscar pool, which is decent. I mostly missed the random categories like Best Animated Short and Best Short Live Action. I did make one big blunder, however, picking Benjamin Button over The Duchess in the Best Costumes category. I’ve seen enough footage from The Duchess to realize that was a shoo-in.

Secondly, let’s address snubs: no film got snubbed worse than The Wrestler. As it stands now, The Wrestler is one of the three best films I saw all of last year. With that said, I’d clearly put it in the running for Best Picture. I certainly liked it more than Benjamin Button and while I’m yet to see The Reader or Milk those typically aren’t the kind of films I see usurping The Wrestler from my top 3. Darren Aronofsky probably deserved a Best Director nod and the documentary-like cinematography should have gotten a nom in that category; along with The Dark Knight and Slumdog Millionaire the camera work in this film stood out to me more than any others. Also, it’s weird that Bruce Springsteen’s “The Wrestler” not only got nominated for Best Song in all of the other award shows, but he also won, yet he was completely absent from the Oscar ballot. Go figure. Finally, the Best Original Screenplay category was one I wasn’t very familiar with (I haven’t seen three of the films), but the script for The Wrestler was better than In Bruges; that much I can say for sure.

As it happened, however, The Wrestler earned a total of two nominations (and it’s quite arguable that Marissa Tomei’s Best Supporting Actress nom was undeserved), but I think you can make a solid argument for seven nominations.

Other snubs:

The Dark KnightBest Picture
Chris Nolan – Best Director

Most Deserved Oscar – Heath Ledger as The Joker. I predicted a nomination for Heath after just hearing him talk over the teaser trailer. I could just sense that he was bringing something special to the table… plus my unwavering faith in Chris Nolan made me think that he picked the right guy for the job. I think ten years from now when people talk about the best performances of this decade, Heath Ledger’s Joker is going to be at the top of a lot of lists.

Most Underserved OscarBenjamin Button winning Best Visual Effects. Okay, we get it… the character ages backwards by computer effects and lots of good makeup. Yippee… How cool. Neat. Not quite the “wow factor” of seeing Tony Stark put on his Iron Man suit or seeing the BatPod in action, flipping an 18-wheeler on it’s back and then doing a 180 off a wall. This was the most bizarre win of the night IMO.

Biggest Shocker – Sean Penn taking down Best Actor. Again, I haven’t seen Milk, so I might be out of line… but all the hype was for Mickey Rourke and Frank Langella, and I have seen both of those performances and the hype is deserved. No one was really talking about Penn winning, so I’m sure I’m with the rest of the world in being surprised by this award.

Okay, that is all!