"Brevity is... wit."

A condition unlike any other

2009-04-06T22:50:00.000-07:00

Not a good time for my mental health: March Madness lends itself to Carolina blues. I suppose I should congratulate the Tar Heels, much as it pains me. None of their tournament opponents could put together 40 minutes of good play against them, and they all had bad nights when it came to outside shooting. That's more than a coincidence; that's good... defense? Apparently.

UNC didn't need to show greatness to win it all, which makes them a very frustrating kind of champion. But they were excellent in one facet: the ability to wear the other team down. (In this regard, they remind me of Wisconsin. Except Carolina uses a speedy pace and a variety of scoring options, while the Badgers suck the life out of the game with their awfulness. They're the Toby Flenderson of hoops.)

Sure, the Heels managed to avoid having to play Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Connecticut, and Louisville in the Year of the Big East, but their path still wasn't easy. Super athletic LSU? Gonzaga's pro-ready starters? Blake Griffin and Oklahoma? Villanova, faster, better at rebounding, and with a V for Vendetta? A rematch in Detroit against Michigan State, which was essentially a road game? They earned it.

After my prognostication skills peaked a year ago, I fell, and fell hard. For the 2009 Final Four, I predicted Michigan State correctly, but was off on Texas and UCLA, and was way off on champion Notre Dame (which made the NIT Final Four, but couldn't even win that). It's a somewhat pointless guessing game -- coaches may leave, recruits may go elsewhere, and you can't know for sure which players will declare for the draft, transfer, or get injured. But hey, it's my guessing game.

Even with Ed Davis saying he'll return, the Heels will leave the top tier and rebuild next year, which is good news for everyone else. Duke may top an even weaker ACC, but I still don't see them as Final Four caliber. So who will ascend to the NCAA's lame default city of Indianapolis in 2010? One year in advance, I'm calling it: Syracuse, Ohio State, Kansas, and Purdue.

Next year's champ is... the Syracuse Orange. The citrus industry rejoices. Jonny "Quest" Flynn makes headbands stylish again. Eric "Thug Life" Devendorf endears himself to a skeptical nation. And coach Jim "In the Zone" Boeheim proves he can win a title without Carmelo Anthony.

The All-NewsRadio team

2009-03-19T00:01:00.000-07:00

Welcome to the NCAA tournament! The year's best 2 days of sports are today and tomorrow. Enjoy it if/while you can.

To celebrate, I'm following up 2007's All-Simpsons Team and 2008's All-Hogwarts Team with a new pop culture tribute: The All-NewsRadio Team.

I thought of it a few months ago while watching a Marquette game. Too bad one of my co-captains later had a season-ending injury, but he still deserves this honor.

Granted, it's kind of a small team this year. Then again, the TV show had a small cast, and Beth didn't even have a last name!

CO-CAPTAINS
Jerel "Bill" McNeal, Marquette
Dominic "Jimmy" James, Marquette

REST OF TEAM
Calvin "Matthew" Brock, Illinois
Joe Krabbenhoft "Garrelli," Wisconsin
Austin "Johnny" Johnson, Oklahoma
Dwight "Max" Lewis, USC
Mike "Dave" Nelson, North Dakota State

COACH
Sean "Lisa" Miller, Xavier

And don't forget Catherine Duke. That's a whole team right there.

The NCAA double dip (2009)

2009-03-18T22:19:00.000-07:00

This is an annual post: see also 2006, 2007, 2008.

Which college is most likely to have both their men's and women's teams advance to the Final Four? There are 26 such candidates this year (compare to 20 in 2006, 23 in 2007, and 22 in 2008), but numbers don't quite tell the whole story. Of those 26, only two -- East Tennessee State and Virginia Commonwealth -- are mid-major programs. The rest are from BCS or BCS-adjacent conferences.

In my opinion, there is a tie for first place, because I picked two schools to make both Final Fours this year.

1. Louisville. Men are a #1 seed; women are a #3 seed. Both teams have been a bit overshadowed all season; I say it's their time. The men are certainly peaking when it counts the most, and their region's path is very navigable. The women may have to upset Baylor and Maryland if they want to match the feat.

1. Oklahoma. Men #2; women #1. Courtney Paris said she would forfeit her scholarship if the Sooners didn't win the title. Tall order, considering that Connecticut is undefeated and unchallenged. But anyone who supports the downfall of the Huskies is aces in my book. Speaking of...

3. Connecticut. Men #1; women #1. A pair of top seeds, and a prohibitive favorite on the women's side. But I'm not seeing the men winning the regional final against Memphis or Missouri. And I'm staying true to my year-in-advance pick of California, who would face the UConn women in the 3rd round.

4. Duke. Men #2; women #1. Put it this way: the women could face 8 seed Michigan State in East Lansing, and 2 seed Stanford in Berkeley. And maybe Tennessee in between. Hard to imagine, but the men may have the easier path. So why did I pick only the women to get there? Contrarian tendencies, I guess.

5. Pittsburgh. Men #1; women #4. In a season where the Big East reigned supreme in men's hoops, I wonder if the conference will make an equivalent dent in both tournaments when all is said and done. I don't know much about the women's team, but I'm expecting good things from the men.

The other 19 schools are Arizona State, California, Florida State, Gonzaga, LSU, Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota, Mississippi State, North Carolina, Ohio State, Purdue, Temple, Tennessee, Texas, Texas A&M, Utah, Villanova, and Xavier.

Still kind of a Baldwin

2009-03-16T22:42:00.000-07:00

I saw an advanced screening of I Love You, Man about a month ago. I probably should have written this review back then and saved it until now. But no, I gotta work off memory; the problem is that it's kind of cute, but forgettable. I remember thinking that its greatest strength is also its weakness: it coasts, perhaps too heavily, on the charm of actor Paul Rudd.

In the 1995 movie Clueless, his character was described as "kind of a Baldwin," back when the Baldwin acting brothers were still popular, thin, and attractive. Those days are gone, but in a way, Paul Rudd is a lot like the Alec Baldwin of today: a zany comic actor unafraid to make a buffoon of himself. Prime example: the recent Vanity Fair funnyman photo shoot, where he nails Tom Ford.

As for the movie, the premise is nice. Rudd plays a character who's recently engaged, and that creates an unusual problem: he needs a best man, and he has no male friends. For whatever reason, he's never made it a priority. So he follows the advice of his family and puts himself out there on the market for a hetero buddy. It's harder than he realizes, until he meets one guy (Jason Segel) for which the friendship forms organically. Complications arise as he ends up wanting to spend more time with his new guy friend than with his fiancée (Rashida Jones).

Rudd and Segel are asked to improvise a bit too much. At first, this is fine, but after a while it gets a little grating. For example, the guys bond in part over their love of the band Rush (a common symptom of men that age), having jam sessions that last all afternoon. When Rudd's character tries to explain it later, he says he was just "slapping the bass," referring to his guitar. He says it a few more times, gesturing like a goofy air musician, and you laugh a little. Then he repeats it in later scenes, maybe 60 times, and it becomes awkward, testy humor. How much more can we endure?

As the trailer suggests, the movie makes good use of Lou Ferrigno as himself, and has a stunning array of comedic supporting actors. You'll recognize almost everybody. And there are some interesting twists and turns. But you may come to the conclusion that it's a bit underwritten.

Sorry to burst your bubble

2009-03-15T14:05:00.000-07:00

One of the consequences of focusing on the top 16 teams is my lessened interest in the so-called bubble; that is, the fine line between schools that make the tournament and schools that don't.

Truth be told, it's hard for me to care. Every year the bubble conversation is the same: with no magic number of wins or steady criteria to separate the haves from the have-nots, it's all just speculation. And while there's one George Mason -- a questionable at-large team in 2006 that proves everyone wrong by making the Final Four -- there are a dozen invitees each year whose appearance and eventual performance are equally blah.

I'd like to think that the NCAA Selection Committee composes a top-secret formula that combines and appropriately weighs all distinguishing factors (schedule strength, opponent strength, conference rank, offensive efficiency, defensive efficiency, etc.) and ranks all 344 teams. Then they take a marker and cross out the 31 teams that get automatic bids for winning their conference tournaments. Then they highlight the top 34 teams left. There's your field. The rest of the time can be spent bickering over how those 65 teams should be seeded.

But I think the process is a lot more abstract, with conference lobbying in play. So really, the Selection Committee opens itself up for the painful criticism from angry commentators who can't understand why their favorite 76 teams didn't all make the tournament. This is a waste of time, and my least favorite part of Selection Sunday. That time should be spent on criticizing the Committee's lousy seeding choices instead.

You can see why I like the 1-4 seeds. How I see it, for the last time this season. Within the hour, the Selection Committee will see it differently (and incorrectly).

Midwest Regional (Indianapolis)
01. Louisville: The Pitt/UConn show has a surprise ending.
08. Michigan State: They did win the Big Ten by 4 games.
09. Kansas: 2008's champion reserves are the starters now.
16. Florida St: Will their ACC breakthrough translate nationally?

East Regional (Boston)
02. North Carolina: Had the best loss of the weekend, I guess.
07. Oklahoma: Gets the edge over Kansas and Missouri.
10. Villanova: Would love some karmic payback against UNC.
15. Arizona State: Coach Herb Sendek knows the Heels well.

South Regional (Memphis)
03. Pittsburgh: Swept UConn before quarterfinal loss to WVU.
06. Duke: Did what had to be done to show they belong.
11. Missouri: Only 3 seed here with a winning streak.
14. Gonzaga: The 3rd conference tourney champ in this subset.

West Regional (Glendale, AZ)
04. Memphis: They dominated with the schedule they were given.
05. Connecticut: 6OT? Okay, this was the best loss of the weekend.
12. Washington: Won Pac-10 outright, decent exit to Sun Devils.
13. Syracuse: Almost 5-0 in five days. Hope there's no letdown.

UPDATE! The NCAA Selection Committee's top 16 teams...

Midwest: Louisville, Michigan State, Kansas, Wake Forest
East: Pittsburgh, Duke, Villanova, Xavier
South: North Carolina, Oklahoma, Syracuse, Gonzaga
West: Connecticut, Memphis, Missouri, Washington

I predicted 14 of 16, including Arizona State and Florida State rather than Xavier and Wake Forest. Just for fun, I also looked at my first prediction from last November; I called 9 of 16. (Though I shouldn't brag: I had Davidson as a 4 seed and Notre Dame winning it all, and neither made the field.)

Sabotage!

2009-03-11T20:14:00.000-07:00

Some bad news: ABC is pulling the plug -- so to speak -- on its version of Life on Mars. It was a little too new to join my favorites of last year, but it's been a compelling bit of escapism these past few months. Pity that its central mystery will have to be wrapped up in the next, and last, three episodes.

Now I'll have to seek out the British version (and its sequel Ashes to Ashes) on BBC America, or maybe DVD. In the meantime, I can think of no better tribute to the show than...

For the record, that's not a Pic-Tac-Toe. Consider it a 9-panel salute to the awesome facial hair of actor Michael Imperioli. He's like the lost Beastie Boy.

Glorified G

2009-03-09T19:07:00.000-07:00

I was bringing in groceries for my sister sometime last weekend, which included a six-pack of Propel lemon-flavored water, from the makers of Gatorade. I decided to make light of the purchase.

"You know how Gatorade changed their name on their bottle labels to G?"
"No, I didn't know that. I've seen the commercials, though."
"It's a good thing you bought some Propel before they did the same thing."

Blue man's group

2009-03-04T03:00:00.000-08:00

What do I need to tell you to avoid seeing Watchmen?

Part of me wants you -- all 34 of you who read this -- to suffer as I have suffered, but there's a time when one has to sacrifice himself for the greater good. I can do this.

A few stats about this 163-minute movie.

1 hr 27 min: first black character appears.
1 hr 44 min: first heroic impulse sighted.
2 hr 04 min: first antagonist introduced.

What the hell was it doing until then? I wish I knew. The plot meanders, setting up a backstory for what needs to be the greatest story ever told in order to make it worthwhile. It isn't. Spanning generations, multiple perspectives, and alternate histories, we learn that there are costumed fighters (many obscured by masks) who control the course of the American way, for better or for worse. From what I can tell, it's mostly about the main characters standing around and looking iconic, rather than heroic. We don't know how or why they form, what each individual brings to the table, or what they have in common. More importantly, we're not really told why they aren't so active anymore.

It seems that director Zack Snyder can't decide whether he's being deep or dark, but mostly I got a strong vibe of pretentiousness. Artfully done, emotionally empty. Maybe this is by design, but you have to try to get the audience to care, even if the characters don't. We were silent, and not necessarily rapt with attention. "Repulsed with attention" might be a better description, considering all the senseless violence, some of it against women. This is a movie that separates the fanboys from everyone else; you'd have an uphill battle convincing me that there's much of anything here that's of general interest.

Eventually, I gathered the semblance of a point, but I was too defeated by then to think much of it. As the film was winding down, I didn't really care how it ended, just as long as it ended.

(Author's Note: there's so many embarrassingly bad things about this movie that I chose to leave out of my review, in an attempt to keep it short. I can elaborate in the comments section, should anyone have questions.)

March has arrived

2009-03-01T22:09:00.000-08:00

Selection Sunday is two weeks away, and while the bubble has become more defined, the picture at the top looks no clearer.

East Regional (Boston)
01. Connecticut: Pitt goes for the sweep March 7.
08. Kansas: On a hot streak, and I can't ignore them anymore.
09. Washington: One win away from outright Pac-10 title.
16. Brigham Young: Don't count out the Mountain West.

Midwest Regional (Indianapolis)
02. Pittsburgh: They look uncomfortable with a #1 ranking.
07. Michigan State: Big Ten title all but locked up.
10. Duke: Saved face with that 4-game winning streak.
15. LSU: I guess an SEC team might break through after all.

South Regional (Memphis)
03. Oklahoma: A win at Missouri should cement top seed.
06. Louisville: Might tie UConn for regular season title.
11. Gonzaga: Remember them? They're winning again.
14. Marquette: Loss of Dominic James could cost them 4 seed.

West Regional (Glendale, AZ)
04. North Carolina: Go west, and avoid the Big East's best.
05. Memphis: Like last year, a freshman stud at the point.
12. Villanova: Clear separation behind Big East's top three.
13. Missouri: In the mix, despite that 25-point loss to Kansas.

Also considered: Wake Forest, Utah, Butler, UCLA.

Oscar's most likely (2009)

2009-02-19T21:10:00.000-08:00

For the third straight year I'm aiming my wildly erratic predicting power at the Academy Awards, which are announced Sunday. As I did in 2007 and 2008, I rank the frontrunners in all categories by likelihood of winning. (Well, all feature-length categories; I'm ignoring the short films.) All frontrunners determined by Dave Karger (former classmate namecheck!) of Entertainment Weekly.

I would have seen all 5 Best Picture contenders had The Reader not been nominated. I've had a month to convince myself to go, but the story of a mostly naked, teen-humping, illiterate Nazi concentration camp guard just doesn't interest me, even if she's being played by Kate Winslet.

Update: with the ceremony over, how did the frontrunners do?

1. Best Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight
WINNER!

Seems like more of a sure thing than Javier Bardem was in this category last year. I was tempted not to place it atop on the list because the Academy hasn't voted for a dead actor in a really long time. Then again, I wonder if his chances would be that much worse were he still alive; the competition is noteworthy but not exactly Earth-shattering. There will be karmic retribution against fellow nominee Philip Seymour Hoffman, who beat Ledger as Best Actor 3 years ago.

2. Best Documentary Feature: Man on Wire
WINNER!

In a way, this category pits the two greatest American tragedies of the decade against one another: 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina. But while Trouble the Water deals directly with the immediate fallout and aftermath in New Orleans, Man on Wire is set at the World Trade Center... in 1974. Recalling better days would seem to be a winning approach.

3. Best Editing: Slumdog Millionaire
WINNER!

Ticked that The Dark Knight wasn't nominated for Best Picture, but The Reader was? Pay close attention to this lineup instead; it's the one you wanted. Many of the year's big films relied heavily on flashbacks, but few worked as seamlessly as Slumdog did. Kudos to the incredible mix of fictional and real footage that went into Milk, and the anatomy of a leg injury sequence of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

4. Best Makeup: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
WINNER!

Up against The Dark Knight and Hellboy II: The Golden Army, this is the only nominee also in the running for Best Picture. Which gives it a huge advantage. I don't know the techniques involved in transforming Benjamin and Daisy: how much is latex, and how much is CGI? I hope the voters know the difference.

5. Best Costume Design: The Duchess
WINNER!

This category is usually not so predictable, but The Duchess is the only nominee with a corset advantage. Its competition (Australia, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Milk, Revolutionary Road) is surprisingly modern and not out of place in a fashion catalog today. In the event that voters tire of 18th century winners, look for Revolutionary Road to upset.

6. Best Animated Film: WALL-E
WINNER!

I was prepared to rank this frontrunner as high as #1 on this list, but then Kung Fu Panda conquered the Annie Awards last month. That film has a lot of fans who are thrilled with its old-fashioned qualities: hand-drawn animation, movie star voices, lots of dialogue and action. WALL-E rebels against many animation conventions in that regard, but it's also very much a breakthrough for Pixar. It won't go home empty handed.

7. Best Director: Danny Boyle, Slumdog Millionaire
WINNER!

I have a feeling that many people, including Academy voters, have no idea what a director does, or know how best to judge direction. I equate directors with general managers in baseball: they don't necessarily instruct the players, or handle the budget, or micromanage every decision. Instead a director controls everything from a distance, letting the cast and crew make many of their own decisions, and making their output adhere to a general vision of how things should go. In that regard, you can guess why Danny Boyle has been winning most of the precursor awards, bringing order to what must have been a chaotic filming process, which crossed barriers of economics, culture, and language.

8. Best Supporting Actress: Penélope Cruz, Vicky Cristina Barcelona
WINNER!

This seemed like much more of a gimme a few months ago. Watching the film, you're convinced that one of Woody Allen's motivations was to showcase Cruz's role. She doesn't have a whole lot of screen time, but she dominates all of her scenes, and is the main subject of conversation among the other characters before she even appears. So her presence is felt throughout. Cruz has since been overshadowed by a bunch of December nominees, but is still the likely winner. According to others, Viola Davis of Doubt has an outside shot.

9. Best Original Screenplay: Dustin Lance Black, Milk
WINNER!

Two forces are at work here. Milk is very much a triumph of acting, editing, and directing. Not so much writing. But Black is becoming that rarest of birds, a screenwriter celebrity, for being a young, talented, and good-looking winner in the awards circuit. He, not Gus Van Sant or Sean Penn, has become the person most associated with this movie, a public face on a political hot button issue that remains relevant, especially in California. And Milk is the only Best Picture nominee in this category. (Despite all that, In Bruges would make a better winner.)

10. Best Picture: Slumdog Millionaire
WINNER!

Bottom line: it doesn't lead the field in nominations. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button did, and Milk has a better balance/ratio of nominees in the major and technical categories. So it's a favorite, but a very beatable one. Fox Searchlight's non-campaign for this movie (it's been using the same commercial since the film's release in November) is an unusual strategy, but I suppose all the previous awards the film has garnered speak loudly enough. If it does win, it's not without precedent: orphans (Oliver!), Indians (Gandhi), American-free casts (The Last Emperor), and very British productions (Chariots of Fire) could be considered the film's Best Picture spiritual forefathers.

A note about The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. I really believe this film was about 75 percent of the way toward being one of the greatest films ever made. But ultimately it fails from a sense of cinematic excess and director David Fincher's unwise choice to indulge screenwriter Eric Roth's preference for magical realism. So many brilliant moments gone to eventual waste. Had they tightened up the film, dropped the hummingbird, not added the Hurricane Katrina element, and focused more on Benjamin than Daisy at critical moments...

11. Best Visual Effects: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
WINNER!

Despite its problems, the film remains a remarkable visual achievement. You can understand why it took decades to get the basic concept properly made. In the grand intermixing of effects and makeup (see Best Makeup above), Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett are depicted as flawlessly young and believably old. I would have liked to see the title character's reverse aging take more advantage of the actor's earlier career. We see a little bit that reminds us of Seven Years in Tibet -- why not go all the way and depict him in his Seven, Legends of the Fall, and Thelma & Louise periods? A missed opportunity.

12. Best Sound Editing: The Dark Knight
WINNER!

See next category.

13. Best Sound Mixing: The Dark Knight
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... Slumdog Millionaire.

See previous category. (Kidding. I'll never know the difference.) Some movie experts are paying close attention to these categories to see if Slumdog Millionaire will lose any awards. Others wonder if WALL-E (particularly Ben Burtt, sound technician and voice actor) can make some noise against the year's biggest movie.

14. Best Adapted Screenplay: Simon Beaufoy, Slumdog Millionaire
WINNER!

As I mentioned in my review, this is a remarkable adaptation in that it improves upon its source material in every possible way. Compare to nominees Peter Morgan (Frost/Nixon) and John Patrick Shanley (Doubt), who adapted their own stage plays. Beaufoy is a previous nominee (original screenplay for The Full Monty) but has never won. He'll face some competition from the previously mentioned Eric Roth, but the darkhorse is probably David Hare for The Reader.

15. Best Actress: Kate Winslet, The Reader
WINNER!

Speaking of The Reader, I have mixed feelings about one of my favorite actresses finally winning an Oscar for a movie that I have no interest in seeing. If you pay attention to the angry world of movie award prognosticating, this role exemplifies the worst things about the process: Holocaust bait, category fraud, last minute release, production problems, Harvey Weinstein. I plead ignorance in this category: I've seen none of the nominees, and am not seeking them out.

16. Best Score: A.R. Rahman, Slumdog Millionaire
WINNER!

If you've seen this movie, what do you remember? Probably not the acting or the dialogue. The visuals and the music come to mind. Rahman gives the film its pulse and energy, both in his songs (two of which are nominated) and his score. But this is a category with more traditional winners, and there are some other good choices. Look for a win by Alexandre Desplat (Benjamin Button) or Thomas Newman (WALL-E, which is even less reliant on dialogue).

17. Best Art Direction: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
WINNER!

It's like a sampler of great looks from different regions and periods. There's Paris, that train station, postwar New Orleans, that hotel, the sea. Possibly the most accomplished of the nominees. The Dark Knight also covers a number of sets, but they're not as memorable.

18. Best Cinematography: Slumdog Millionaire
WINNER!

Handheld camera work is a vital part of this movie, but I don't know if Academy members are in love with that type of filmmaking. The down and dirty approach gets nominations, not wins (see also Children of Men and City of God). The probable winner is Claudio Miranda for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, or possibly Wally Pfister for The Dark Knight.

19. Best Actor: Sean Penn, Milk
WINNER!

I've actually seen all 5 nominees. Richard Jenkins is solid in The Visitor, but its one Oscar bait scene in the detention center almost rings false. (The restaurant scene would make a much better Oscar clip.) Brad Pitt and Frank Langella are the oddball anchors, more concerned with holding their films together than standing out. This leaves the long-hyped two-man race between two wunderkind actors of the early 1980s, Sean Penn and Mickey Rourke. Penn has the more prestigious film, the biopic role, and current political relevance. Rourke has the comeback factor, no prior wins, and far more charm. Advantage goes to The Wrestler.

20. Best Song: "Jai Ho," Slumdog Millionaire
WINNER!

Some recent winners in this category suggest a trend against the biggest names in performing and songwriting. So this is a reasonable pick. If it does win, it will be the first winner in Hindi. Also, as a historical bookend to Three 6 Mafia's win a few years ago, the message is clear: songs with "Pimp" or "Ho" in the title win Oscars. But there is some in-film competition from "O Saya" (not in Hindi) and Peter Gabriel's "Down to Earth" from WALL-E, which I think will win.

21. Best Foreign Language Film: The Class
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... Departures.

I wish I could be more informed about this race, but from what I can tell, any of three films can win: The Class (France), Waltz with Bashir (Israel), and Departures (Japan). If I had to guess, I'll go for the Israeli animated film. I'm enjoying this new trend of films that cross categories: documentary, animation, foreign language film. It's only a matter of time before the major categories become a true free-for-all.

Re-evaluation

2009-02-13T22:29:00.001-08:00

This feels like a good time to wipe the slate clean and re-evaluate the elite teams in college basketball. It's easy to fall into the bad habit of revising past rankings; poll voters do it every week, as they are lazy and useless.

With the exception of a select few, every team looks beatable at this point because they've in fact been beaten recently. In some cases, soundly.

South Regional (Memphis)
01. Oklahoma: 10-0 in a major conference? They stand alone.
08. Louisville: The victim of Notre Dame's one-game revival.
09. Clemson: Maybe they are a top-tier ACC contender.
16. Illinois: Lone home loss (to Clemson) not so bad.

East Regional (Boston)
02. Connecticut: Last 6 games include 2 clashes with Pitt.
07. Arizona State: Sweep of UCLA may reflect a shift out west.
10. Marquette: Should freefall in final phase of schedule.
15. Utah State: One-loss teams: Sooners, Huskies, and Aggies.

Midwest Regional (Indianapolis)
03. North Carolina: May not look battle-tested until ACC tourney.
06. Michigan State: Worrisome home losses to PSU and NU.
11. Villanova: Should improve in final phase of schedule.
14. Missouri: Steady rise capped by Texas, Kansas wins.

West Regional (Glendale, AZ)
04. Pittsburgh: Best candidate for the last top seed right now.
05. Memphis: Didn't think they'd bounce back so soon.
12. Washington: Tops in Pac-10, but being swept by Cal hurts.
13. Duke: Prognosis clear after UNC loss: severely limited.

Also considered: Florida State, Xavier, Wake Forest, Ohio State.

First ever poll!

2009-02-10T00:46:00.000-08:00

The most popular and divisive* issue of Sports Illustrated arrives in newsstands this week. Yep, the swimsuit issue. So I must ask:

* It's not really all that divisive, but for some reason there are people who write letters to SI complaining about the swimsuit issue and threatening to cancel their subscriptions. It's a long history of idiocy that's as old as, well, the swimsuit issue. It's annual; don't they know it's coming? I find it funny.

Peter Sellers was cremated.

2009-02-03T15:47:00.000-08:00

So if anyone complains that The Pink Panther 2 is the latest nail in the coffin of the original Inspector Clouseau, you can correct them.

I was not looking forward to screening this sequel. I remember very little of Steve Martin's first outing in this series, aside from the accent coach/"hamburger" scene -- which was horrible, then strangely funny and compulsively rewatchable. Then there's the title: films in the Pink Panther series have reached double digits, and many have interesting names. Are MGM and Columbia really so lazy as to slap a "2" on it? Color me disappointed.

But I'll admit that the new film delivers on some levels. The inspector still can't pronounce American food and is detested by his superiors, but the plot allows for some bloated (but welcome) casting. It's debatable whether Andy Garcia, Lily Tomlin, Jeremy Irons, Alfred Molina, and TMBWITW Aishwarya Rai Bachchan are actually slumming, considering the likely international box office.

A long-retired thief named The Tornado has resurfaced to steal priceless artifacts in multiple countries, and Clouseau is assigned to a crime-solving dream team. Mishaps ensue, Clouseau is discredited, Clouseau rebounds. The story is nothing special, but it does give Andy Garcia the opportunity to play a light role as Clouseau's professional and romantic rival. I also liked the development of Jean Reno's character, the fully capable officer who's still respectful and deferent to Clouseau.

I am less enthusiastic about Steve Martin, who was similarly uninspiring in last weekend's Saturday Night Live. As a comedy actor, he's not really trying anymore. Wanting to believe the best about him, I think his best work ahead is probably away from the camera, maybe in writing or music. This movie and any future installments are strictly about getting paid. Judging from the positive response of the parents and kids in the audience -- and the good money a PG-rated movie can bring in these days -- it's going to be a big paycheck.

Zebra pattern

2009-02-01T22:55:00.000-08:00

Homer Simpson: I’m not a bad guy. I work hard and I love my kids, So why should I spend half my Sunday hearing about how I’m going to hell?

God: Hmm, you’ve got a point there. You know, sometimes even I’d rather be watching football. Does St. Louis still have a team?

Homer Simpson: No, they moved to Phoenix.

Congratulations to the Arizona Cardinals for outperforming the Pittsburgh Steelers in Super Bowl XLIII -- for all but about two plays. At first I wasn't picking sides, but they kind of won me over by making gutsy plays in the second half, despite getting screwed repeatedly (almost comically) by the referees.

Whatever your bias, you have to admit that the zebras took over that game, holding the Tampa crowd and the national audience in suspense several times tonight. I was convinced that one of the men in black and white would win the MVP, at least until Santonio Holmes distinguished himself at the very end.

Time will tell if the Cards can build off their surprise success next season, or if their NFC championship was an anomaly. The Falcons and Panthers, for example, got there in the past and haven't really come close since. In the NFL, it's difficult to forge a new dynasty.

I don't dislike the Steelers. It's hard to root against Mike Tomlin. He's no elder statesman, like his mentor Tony Dungy -- he's reached the peak of his profession at age 36. A win like this could have some positive sociological consequences: if there's any chance he'll make life a little easier for African-American coaches at the college level, so much the better. If Hollywood ever makes a biopic, Omar Epps is ready to play the lead.

Finally: the Super Bowl commercials. I liked the premise of the Cars.com ad. A few others were cute, but forgettable. The rest of them were a waste of time and money. Are the advertising agencies even trying anymore? Did they lay off all the creative people? Where have you gone, Don Draper?

What happened to Notre Dame?

2009-01-30T18:35:00.000-08:00

As I've often mentioned, I picked Notre Dame to win the 2009 NCAA Tournament. I thought they had the experience and toughness to win the formidable Big East, receive a favorable seed, and then storm their way in and through the Final Four in Detroit.

The season is far from over, but with a record of 12-7 (3-5 in the Big East) and a 4-game skid, the Fighting Irish don't look like they have enough fight in them. If anything, they remind me of short-staffed Duke squads of past seasons, without the overachieving conference play. Their exceptional starters can only get them so far. I hold out hope that they can make a late-season run, but I've already prepared myself to be very, very wrong.

West Regional (Glendale, AZ)
01. Oklahoma: Stories of the season? Big East, ACC, them.
08. Xavier: Maybe they're 2 seed material after all.
09. Marquette: Flying high, but they'll level off soon.
16. Clemson: Probably won't crack ACC's top 3.

South Regional (Memphis)
02. Wake Forest: Now 2-0 along the Tobacco Road.
07. Pittsburgh: A little vulnerable after the Nova loss.
10. Texas: Admit it. You've forgotten about them too.
15. Purdue: Squeaking in on strength of last 5 games.

East Regional (Boston)
03. Connecticut: And now the hard part of their schedule.
06. North Carolina: Comeback vs. FSU both classic and annoying.
11. Villanova: More than just guards and a well-dressed coach.
14. Memphis: Again in the Conference USA driver's seat.

Midwest Regional (Indianapolis)
04. Louisville: Always athletic, now significantly more cohesive.
05. Duke: Even the legendary 1992 squad lost in Winston-Salem.
12. Michigan State: Suddenly the Big Ten looks competitive.
13. Butler: Newish coach and players, same outstanding result.

Also considered: Gonzaga, Providence, UCLA, West Virginia.

Failed pickup lines in Hogwarts

2009-01-26T07:00:00.000-08:00

Seven seems to be the magic number:

"I could introduce you to Dobby, if you're interested."
"Expelliarmus, baby. You can't resist Severus Snape."
"On the Marauder's Map, I have a really big... icon."
"Here, sample my stash of -- oh wait, that's gillyweed."
"Accio seduction music!"
"Ooh, the Head Girl of Hufflepuff. You must be good at [censored]."
"So tell me... is there a Mr. McGonagall?"

Variations and contributions are welcome. Try not to get too dirty.

The great Internet meltdown of '09

2009-01-22T16:08:00.000-08:00

I watched the Oscar nominations this morning on CNN's online video feed, without volume, and noticed something was awry when the picture of Kate Winslet was not from Revolutionary Road. Soon we discovered that The Reader took the place many felt belonged to The Dark Knight, and the Internet... broke. Popular prediction sites like Awards Daily and In Contention were overloaded. News sites (even CNN) weren't putting up a story. Most embarrassingly, the Academy's own site did not post a full list of nominees for nearly 45 minutes. For movie fans who treat this like their Christmas morning -- or, say, the people in technical categories who might like to know if they were nominated -- it was a shocking display of failure.

And I'm not even talking about Oscar's choices. (Yet.) I managed to avoid the swarm of Bat-fans who crashed message boards in useless venting or protest, likely shouting expletives at an awards body who refused to budge. Why so serious, indeed. I haven't seen The Reader, and may only do so if I submit to completist tendencies and try to see all five nominees. So I won't join the chorus of naysayers who criticize what they do not know. I'm an abstainer, not a complainer.

Conference calling

2009-01-16T15:57:00.000-08:00

People seem to forget this every season, but a team's in-conference play matters. North Carolina (and some overzealous pundits) got an early comeuppance from Boston College, and then another from Wake Forest. Another, less publicized example: Arkansas. They crashed the party a bit with home wins over Oklahoma and Texas, but opened SEC play with losses to Ole Miss and Mississippi State.

When I picked my year-in-advance Final Four, I had no idea they'd play each other in the regular season. Texas lost to Notre Dame and Michigan State, but beat UCLA. And the Fighting Irish will visit the Bruins next month.

This weekend's slate includes Wake Forest-Clemson, Pittsburgh-Louisville, Arizona State-UCLA, Illinois-Michigan State, Notre Dame-Syracuse, and Duke-Georgetown. Special weekend? Nope. Just college basketball.

East Regional (Boston)
01. Pittsburgh: So this is what they're like when healthy.
08. North Carolina: Great? Let's see .500 in ACC first.
09. Louisville: Will home advantage work against Pitt?
16. Texas: Missed 2 of every 3 shots against OU.

South Regional (Memphis)
02. Wake Forest: Team of next year may not have to wait.
07. Georgetown: Should win a title within next 5 years.
10. Michigan State: Beat Illini and create some distance.
15. Notre Dame: St. John's loss threatens top-tier status.

Midwest Regional (Indianapolis)
03. Clemson: Can make a huge statement at home vs. Wake.
06. Connecticut: Has a month to warm up for Pitt.
11. Xavier: Should hover around 3 seed all season.
14. Baylor: Wake loss is looking better and better.

West Regional (Glendale, AZ)
04. Oklahoma: Beat Texas. Blake Griffin > Sam Bradford.
05. Duke: Not entirely convinced. Waiting-and-seeing.
12. UCLA: Each Pac-10 loss should cost them a seed.
13. Minnesota: Winning at Wisconsin still means a lot.

Also considered: Syracuse, Arkansas, Butler, Marquette.

The tip of the iceberg

2009-01-15T23:22:00.000-08:00

I screened Revolutionary Road this week, somewhat reluctantly after being spoiled Monday by one of those vanity cards from TV showrunner Chuck Lorre. (He sums up 10 films currently in the mix as Oscar bait. If you want to go fresh-of-mind into this movie, Gran Torino, or Rachel Getting Married, then DON'T click here.)

I expected a slow and methodical deterioration of a marriage, but the actual pace is a bit more brisk. The opening scenes juxtapose an optimistic past with a pessimistic present (1955), where both Frank Wheeler (Leo!) and wife April (Kate!) have soured on the reality of their sedate surroundings. But that's about all they have in common. Even in their most blissful moments, one spouse is only buying into the argument or vision of the other, so they're never at harmony. Then, when disagreement sets in, things get ugly. And depressing.

As a straightforward depiction of marital strife in the Eisenhower era, the film does not work. It looks like it should, but it just doesn't. So I decided to view it instead as a two-character psychological drama, where everyone else is a figment of their imagination, and it started to make more sense to me. The couple have children who are rarely present. Frank's coworkers (including Dylan Baker and Jay O. Sanders) seem to be whispering in his ear, reinforcing his attachment to socioeconomic conventions. Their realtor (Kathy Bates) is a less a character than a silly reminder of suburban propriety. To the film's credit, it has just enough of these oddities to make me wonder if that approach is intended.

I should mention the most unusual element of Revolutionary Road: the once-institutionalized academic son of the realtor, who pops up in two scenes as pure id, a verbal force of nature. As played by Michael Shannon, it's easy to say that he steals the movie. He's free to speak his (frayed) mind, and does so with more bluntness than possibly any character in the recent history of cinema. His perspective is so far removed as to seem anachronistic. He serves as the centerpiece of a film that veers away from the strange and into the positively mental.

For your consideration?

2009-01-12T23:28:00.000-08:00

Given this time of year, with all the movie awards shows, I would expect to see a lot more TV, online, and print ads touting the various high-profile examples of Oscar bait. I've noticed less such marketing now than in previous years -- not a complaint -- and what I AM seeing is a lot different. For example...

1. Where is the war film? Short answer: there is none. Long answer: do you like war films told from a European perspective? Because then there's Valkyrie, The Reader, and Defiance. None are really breaking through right now. I find it interesting that the nearly 3-hour The Curious Case of Benjamin Button depicts maybe two war-oriented scenes, and both are used in the trailer. Ladies and gentlemen, here is your war film.

2. Where is the All-American film? Maybe Revolutionary Road will make some noise -- 1960s suburbia sounds pretty American -- but until then, what are our choices? Slumdog Millionaire is set abroad, with no stateside actors. Benjamin Button mostly takes place in New Orleans, but advertises more global themes. Frost/Nixon addresses the Presidency, but (as I understand it) from an antagonistic perspective. Over in Gotham, homegrown Harvey Dent is being overshadowed by a Brit as Batman and an Aussie as Joker. This leaves the red, white, and blue iconography of Milk, which seems to wave the Stars and Stripes alongside the rainbow flag. In the age of Obama, what could be more American than a tribute to another community organizer?

3. Where is The Dark Knight? Ever since its DVD release in December, the publicity has kind of halted. Part of the problem is that the face of the film (and most of its precursor awards) belongs to an actor who is no longer alive. But it's more than that. Aside from a brief glimpse of Gary Oldman in ads for the recently released The Unborn, you're not seeing much of the rest of the cast. Strange that Christian Bale, Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, Aaron Eckhart, and Maggie Gyllenhaal have nothing new to promote. Really, the only cast member getting any TV exposure these days is this guy from the Wendy's ads. (Pictured, left.)

I expect this all to change in a few weekends, after the Oscar nominations are announced, but for now it's an interesting lull.

In the MMIX

2009-01-01T00:01:00.000-08:00

Children of the popcorn

2008-12-31T18:10:00.000-08:00

With general scheduling/interest/economy issues, any free time was a little harder to come by in 2008, as you can tell from my movie viewing habits. (Compare to last year, when I saw 56 films ahead of time. This year I could create an equally sizable section for advanced screenings that I skipped or lacked time to see.)

Free advanced screenings (18): Welcome Home Roscoe Jenkins, The Other Boleyn Girl, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, 88 Minutes, Baby Mama, Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay, Deal, Iron Man, Young@Heart, Son of Rambow, Wanted, Space Chimps, Pineapple Express, Tropic Thunder, Zack and Miri Make a Porno, Valkyrie, Slumdog Millionaire, Revolutionary Road

Saw in theater upon release (15): 21, Sex and the City, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Wall-E, The X-Files: I Want to Believe, The Dark Knight, Vicky Cristina Barcelona, W., Get Smart, Australia, Quantum of Solace, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, The Wrestler, Frost/Nixon, Milk

Waited until DVD/Cable (32): 27 Dresses, Untraceable, Rambo, Jumper, My Blueberry Nights, Cassandra's Dream, Vantage Point, Fool's Gold, In Bruges, The Spiderwick Chronicles, Charlie Bartlett, Be Kind Rewind, Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day, Semi-Pro, The Bank Job, College Road Trip, Tyler Perry's Meet the Browns, Smart People, Leatherheads, Speed Racer, Mad Money, Hancock, Kung Fu Panda, First Sunday, Mamma Mia!, The Incredible Hulk, The Longshots, Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father, Burn After Reading, Righteous Kill, The Visitor, Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

I haven't yet succumbed to paying for Movies on Demand from my cable provider, but by December I could not ignore the ubiquity of Redbox. The local library system is still my (free) DVD source of choice, but those $1 nightly rentals filled in a few blanks.

And now my annual list of irreverent superlatives.

Best Example of My Alienation from Younger Audiences

I don't think I saw a violent, allegedly edgy film this year that was geared toward physical and mental teenagers. Must have been one of the screenings I skipped.* So I'll say Jumper, which was neither bloody nor nihilistic, but was nonetheless incredibly stupid. Those who were suspicious of Hayden Christensen from the Star Wars series may confirm their doubts confirmed here; he's very wooden and shows neither range nor appeal. There's an elaborate mythology and franchise potential -- both are ultimately squandered, but I wonder if a good film could have been made at all. Another poor paycheck choice by Samuel L. Jackson.

*Edited to add: Oh wait. Totally forgot about Wanted. Both violent and allegedly edgy. Maybe the first poor paycheck choice for Morgan Freeman.

Style Over Substance Award

The easy answer is Speed Racer. Despite its likely massive FX budget, the most interesting visual element was putting the four eyes of Christina Ricci and Susan Sarandon in the same movie. Wasn't all bad, though: it didn't pretend to be about anything, and has a select group of understanding fans.

Substance Over Style Award

I don't think I saw a film this year that was otherwise strong but felt underproduced, like it could have have benefited from a bigger budget. In Bruges, Young@Heart, and Son of Rambow look as they should in their respective charming ways. I do think that Be Kind Rewind tried a little too hard to look authentically cheap, so there you go.

Best Eye Candy, Female

Vicky Cristina Barcelona is all about the eye candy, with its cast and sumptuous setting; who knew Woody Allen had such an affinity for the pretty? Fans of Scarlett Johansson and Penélope Cruz won't be disappointed, but my preferences and fond memories of the film gravitate toward Rebecca Hall (previously mentioned here). She was stunning to watch, in both senses of that word, as the sensible girl who can't help but be drawn in to that tangled web of multiparty relationship drama.

Best Eye Candy, Male

I never understood the cult of Colin Farrell, but I'll mention him here because his work in Cassandra's Dream and In Bruges finally makes the hype worthwhile. He can be an appealing leading man when he plays troubled, vulnerable, and moral characters -- like a next-gen Mel Gibson, back when we liked Mel Gibson. I don't know if he'll find that in mainstream movies, but as long as he picks projects that stretch his acting muscles, I'll remain interested.

Strangest Credit

"Directed by Fred Durst." From The Longshots, which was fine.

Unfortunate Trend of the Year

Studios are crazier than ever about developing, expanding, or reviving film franchises. On its face, nothing is wrong with that, but a lamentable by-product has emerged: the unnecessary film. Familiar (if not beloved) characters get dusted off and returned to the marketplace with stories that never needed to be told. What's worse is that the approach has succeeded: The Incredible Hulk, Indiana Jones 4, and Sex and the City all did well in the box office, inviting talk of even more unnecessary continuations. Not faring as well were second installments of The X-Files and Harold & Kumar, and a fourth Rambo.

Not all these films are bad -- I enjoyed some elements of Hulk, and I think history will treat The X-Files more kindly -- but they did not exist out of any need to satisfy audience demand. You can even see something similar among Oscar contenders, where Frost/Nixon re-enacts a recorded time in history, Doubt tries to expand a good stage idea beyond the stage, and Milk gives dramatic treatment to a subject covered definitively in a documentary.

Love Story of the Year

WALL-E by a mile. Either watch it or take my word for it. The film is flawed in some other respects -- it's probably the 4th best Pixar creation, by my estimation -- but the central relationship is pitch perfect, requiring neither analysis nor further commentary.

Buddy Comedy of the Year

This one's also easy: Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day. (There's no rule stating a buddy comedy has to be about guys.) Strange that a period film has such a "you go, girl" attitude, but you buy into it quickly with such nimble comedic performances from Frances McDormand and Amy Adams. The latter seems to be channeling (mocking?) Nicole Kidman in her Moulin Rouge! days, and opposite Lee Pace's own variation of Ewan McGregor, the similarities are amusing. Strong supporting turns from Shirley Henderson and Ciarán Hinds and an effective prewar European backdrop make it quite an experience.

Honorary Brevity Award

A lot of press was devoted to comeback king Robert Downey, Jr. and his remarkable year of output: Iron Man, a cameo in The Incredible Hulk, Tropic Thunder, and delayed Oscar bait The Soloist. He's worthy, especially given his checkered past, but I find it odd that people leave out a movie that was released in February 2008: Charlie Bartlett. It's listed in the IMDb as a 2007 film -- another delay, I'd imagine -- but it deserves to be mentioned among the actor's recent accomplishments. Because it was among the more enjoyable films I saw this year, and it clocks in at a speedy 97 minutes, I'm giving it some much needed attention now.

Downey plays a supporting role here; he's the well-meaning but flawed principal of a high school that's been taken over by the title character (Anton Yelchin), a clique-defying intelligent rebel. I understand the Ferris Bueller comparisons in retrospect, but this movie is less of a broad comedy and more of an indie curiosity with some mild mainstream aspirations. It's offbeat, well written, and ultimately the kind of film you're glad wasn't all that popular.

I recommend it as a pleasant DVD discovery: if you have the means, watch it as a double feature with 1999's Mumford. Go in chronological order. Both tackle similar themes, and both feature the always welcome actress Hope Davis.

(For those curious, 88 Minutes was both an awful movie and a misnomer. It was 108 minutes.)

The "Angel" alumni association

2008-12-29T19:00:00.000-08:00

Over the years I've mostly ignored Joss Whedon TV shows: Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Firefly. Probably my fault more than his, and maybe I'll come around. As it happens, former cast members of Angel have infiltrated the current TV landscape, and I can't help but notice. Part of Whedon's grand design? My favorite shows of 2008 seem to support that conclusion. (Descriptions of Angel characters below are woefully inadequate, but hey, I never watched the show.)

1. Dexter (Showtime). We start with Julie Benz, who played some centuries-old vampiress named Darla. She graduated to something more conventional: the initially chaste, then emotionally available girlfriend of Michael C. Hall's differently-wired title character. While this choice seems like a bit of a cheat -- I saw all three seasons of the show this year -- the 3rd season alone puts this at the top of the list. Shocking and darkly hilarious.

2. Chuck (NBC). Adam Baldwin appeared at the very end of Angel. Then he did Firefly, a few episodes of which I've seen. He plays a similar form of hard-nosed soldier in Chuck, a show that's remained ever so nimble in its second season, even as the plots dig a little deeper beyond the quirky premise. It's the most consistently funny show on network TV.

3. Mad Men (AMC). Back then Vincent Kartheiser was Connor, son of Angel. Now he's Pete Campbell, slowly developing a soul as he eyes advancement in the advertising world. I've grown to accept him as a counterpoint to the almost-too-fascinating Don Draper (Jon Hamm). Critics say this second season has been all about the women, but I disagree. (The rapturous Christina Hendricks is a notable exception, anchoring tiny but heartbreaking subplots.)

4. Leverage (TNT). I don't know where Christian Kane's role of Lindsey McDonald fit in the Whedonverse, but I find him mildly amusing -- long hair and all -- in this new revenge caper show that's more like The A-Team than Ocean's Eleven. Socially responsible, yet light and breezy. Timothy Hutton may be the biggest name of the bunch, but Beth Riesgraf is the breakout. Interesting that Jason Lee's baby mama chose a show with a similar karmic angle.

5. Bones (FOX). Finally we have Angel himself, David Boreanaz. For years I mocked him for trying to pass himself off as young, when he's older than dirt. But he's settled into a nice vibe on this show, as part of a cast that went from good to great when Dr. Sweets (John Francis Daley) became a regular. Last season was crackerjack fun, and this season has delivered more of the same.

The best of the rest: Supernatural finally gave each lead a purpose and a grand mythology; we'll see where it takes us, but this is the one TV show most ready for a big screen treatment. Psych remains the medium's best buddy comedy, and (unlike many other good shows) has great taste in women. The Big Bang Theory is a mediocre offering with one fantastic performance by Jim Parsons, who's more critical to his show than Hugh Laurie is to House. Speaking of which, House has bounced back nicely from its annual serious event, and the semi-regular PI is the best non-doctor character yet. Finally, Pushing Daisies kicked off season 2 by expanding Kristen Chenoweth's role, a risky but wise creative decision. If only people were watching.

Kings of Noel

2008-12-25T13:28:00.000-08:00

La Triviata

2008-12-17T16:50:00.000-08:00

I hadn't heard of Slumdog Millionaire until a few months ago, when it garnered attention in the Toronto Film Festival. A heavily hyped film set in India? About an unlikely game show contestant who can answer tough trivia questions because of the tougher experiences in his life? This sounded familiar.

About three years ago I came across a novel entitled Q & A on the new release shelf in the local library. As is the fate of so many impulse selections, I started reading it but didn't get very far. Great premise, bad execution. At the time I failed to notice this statement on the book jacket: Q & A "is being translated into eighteen languages and is due to be made into a film."

After seeing an advanced screening of the movie, I forced myself to try the book again. The results are clear: Slumdog Millionaire improves upon its source material in almost every possible way. Better and clearer protagonist (Dev Patel), a better interrogating character (Irrfan Khan), more meaningful stakes, and flashback vignettes that are much more plausible. Credit screenwriter Simon Beaufoy (The Full Monty) for preserving the premise but creating a stronger, more unifying vision -- and, though I hate to admit this, a much needed Western touch.

Not that native influences aren't present. For example, I liked how the game show host (Anil Kapoor) talked in the Hindi equivalent of Spanglish, a language hybrid where English sentences were infused with homegrown slang and suffixes. That's totally realistic. I may have been the only one in the audience who fully understood him, but no one else was complaining. I also appreciated the music, a mix of pulsing instrumentation and Bollywood pop; there's a train sequence that finally made me understand what M.I.A.'s "Paper Planes" was all about.

Director Danny Boyle also made Trainspotting, and I bring this up because he manages to top his worst-toilet-in-Scotland scene, with appalling but humorous results here. His film is uncompromising and at times not easy to watch. There's violence depicted, some of it against children, and other dark themes that only seem surprising when you're a safe distance away from the setting.

If you haven't heard too much about this movie, you must be wondering what the big deal is, and why reactions have been so divisive. I found it rewarding, and liked it tremendously, but I think you should be prepared. Yes, it's a crowd-pleaser, but it's not for every crowd.

The case of the narcoleptic monitor

2008-12-14T14:25:00.000-08:00

Apologies for the prolonged absence. Back in October I began to experience technical difficulties: after a few hours of non-use, my monitor would go into sleep mode and would refuse to awaken unless the computer was shut off and turned on again. A minor inconvenience, so I learned to live with it. Then in early November -- election night, as it so happens -- the monitor started going to sleep while the computer was still in use. I'm right in front of it, typing away, and then... nothing. "Monitor Going to Sleep," it said.

Going against my tendency to throw money at the problem -- the economy and all that -- I endured the painful procedure of following the slow steps in my computer's protection plan. (I did pay for this contingency, after all.) I shipped the monitor off to parts unknown, and tried another to use in the meantime. No dice. I decided the problem was the PC itself: maybe the video card, maybe the whole motherboard. Once reimbursed for the monitor, I purchased a new one and tested my theory. Still no picture. I had to wait a few more weeks for a contractually obligated service technician to order likely parts and stop by, sight unseen.

He came today. It was, indeed, a bad video card. The new one has the computer working, at least for now, but the TV tuner does not. I'll probably have to upgrade; recommendations are welcome.

Come back soon for the fruits of some much-needed online activity. Reviews of Slumdog Millionaire and Valkyrie. Developments in college basketball. And I may get around to some end-of-year summations. But I'm woefully out of practice.

Happy Thanksgiving!

2008-11-27T08:43:00.000-08:00

I'm creating my own, but funnier cards for all occasions are available here.

Slowly taking over

2008-11-24T18:32:00.000-08:00

I was watching the Maui Invitational game between Indiana and Notre Dame (your 2009 national champion) when something curious appeared on the ESPN ticker: in baseball, the Pittsburgh Pirates have signed a pair of Indian-born men, Rinku Singh and Dinesh Patel, to free agent contracts. They were the top finishers in an Indian reality TV show designed to find raw pitching talent.

Read about it here. Just another example of how Indian culture is slowly taking over the world. Why not baseball? I must admit I'm a little surprised that Pittsburgh took the leap, and not Cleveland.

But this story is exciting for so many other reasons. Consider...

1. They're learning English, in part, from watching Baseball Tonight. So when they hear the phrase "hot stove," they won't be thinking about kitchen safety. I think it's cool. I'd much rather hear my brethren adopt the speech cadences of Peter Gammons than, say, Dick Vitale.

2. My mind races with the cinematic possibilities. Will Lagaan be repurposed as a scouting video? Will Bollywood get wise and make their own versions of Field of Dreams or The Sandlot? Better yet, does this story give director Danny Boyle material for a new cultural trilogy?

3. Finally, there's a reality TV show that positively contributes to society. It's about time. Until now, only Rock of Love embraced that lofty standard of quality. And while I still have so much to learn from the great Bret Michaels, I know he can't be everywhere.

Hoops! I did it again.

2008-11-07T13:54:00.000-08:00

(What's great about that pun is that it's so timely.)

It's time to reveal the All-Mehta preseason standings in men's college basketball. I have no delusions here: my take on the sport will never be as revered as "All-Madden" in the NFL, but at the same time, I promise not to pitch antifungal foot cream.

At the end of last season I predicted the 2009 Final Four: Notre Dame, Texas, Michigan State, and UCLA. Since then, Texas lost D.J. Augustin to the NBA, and UCLA had an overhaul, but I'll stick with both for now.

East Regional (Boston)
01. North Carolina: Best? Can't tell. Most stacked? Definitely.
08. Pittsburgh: A team like this would give the Heels fits.
09. Gonzaga: Got a 2 seed 5 years ago. This squad's better.
16. Texas: FYI... A.J. to replace D.J. at PG.

South Regional (Memphis)
02. Louisville: Veterans + frosh + Pitino = early Big East fave.
07. Michigan State: Would love a Final Four close to home.
10. Duke: Maybe not quite exactly close to Top 5 material. Yet.
15. Arizona State: More poise to make Pac-10 noise than USC.

West Regional (Glendale, AZ)
03. UCLA: Most theoretical of the top seeds right now.
06. Connecticut: Not convinced they're the Beast of the Big East.
11. Oklahoma: In Big 12 South, basketball looks like football.
14. Tennessee: Best of a depleted and downward SEC.

Midwest Regional (Indianapolis)
04. Purdue: Returning stars give them the in-state edge.
05. Notre Dame: Positioned to make this their year. Watch.
12. Memphis: Comparatively loaded, easy-ish schedule.
13. Davidson: Strong belief that last year was no fluke.

Also considered: Wake Forest, USC, Xavier, Wisconsin.

Unfrozen caveman demographic

2008-11-03T14:40:00.000-08:00

On the eve of this 2008 election, I am very curious to see one thing (aside from the results): the senior citizen turnout. I've been thinking about it a lot in the past few months. Historically, this age group, rapidly expanding in range and overall number, can be counted on to vote in high percentages. But what happens when their main choices advertise themselves as the Democratic Candidate for Change and the Republican Candidate for Change? Where does that leave the (large) portion of the electorate that is most resistant to change?

Last summer my father's Medicare provider switched to Humana, and we attended an introductory seminar. Despite the company's repeated assurances that nothing would change, at least for the rest of the year, you could tell from their continued line of questions that the audience members felt alarmed and betrayed by the company switch. (We kept quiet.) Just receiving an insurance card with a new company name on it made them extremely nervous. So they attended these meetings and had their questions addressed, but were still uneasy.

Now, these seniors may be as representative of their age group as I am of mine -- which is to say, not very much -- but they inspired me to think a little about how both major party candidates may very well scare the crap out of them. They don't want change. Not even a little bit. Change confuses and frightens them. They are the Unfrozen Caveman demographic, trapped in a mindset of an earlier time we can't revisit: definitely concerned, probably intelligent, not always well-informed. Most will vote according to established party affiliation, but they can't feel as included this time.

I suspect the big story this week -- other than the winners -- is the intertwined successes of the youth movement and the early voting period in many states. And maybe that deserves to be the big story, if it happens. But I think it's also important to see if the senior vote was not as reliable this year because they were taken for granted, and if the losing candidate will see that exclusion as a campaign misstep.

Happy Halloween!

2008-10-31T10:31:00.000-07:00

It's never sunny in Pittsburgh

2008-10-27T11:00:00.000-07:00

My schedule hasn't given me time to catch advanced screenings lately, so in the past couple of months I've missed the likes of Choke, Brideshead Revisited, Flash of Genius, The Duchess, and The Secret Life of Bees. Well, did I really MISS them? Only time (and DVD) will tell.

I hesitate to call Zack and Miri Make a Porno my triumphant return to reviewing, but I will say that it is NOT Kevin Smith's triumphant return to filmmaking. It worked for many in the audience, judging from their laughter, but I just wasn't buying it.

The platonic roommates in the title -- saying "titular" just sounds wrong in this context -- struggle to make ends meet, sharing a crappy car and a crappy life in a frozen Pittsburgh suburb. (To this Southwest-based viewer, their harsh winter lives felt completely foreign.) After an unusual encounter at their high school reunion -- the dreamy jock now lives in Los Angeles with an adult film actor -- Zack (Seth Rogen) decides that amateur movies are just the ticket that he and Miri (Elizabeth Banks) need to have a better life.

So they round up a cast and crew, and Miri gradually becomes impressed with Zack's previously unseen talent for leading and entertaining others. By the very nature of their endeavor, their relationship is forced into a less than platonic direction, and we're left to wonder what this will do to them. Put in the best possible terms, it's like a voyeuristic When Harry Met Sally...: can a man and a woman remain friends once on-camera sex gets in the way?

You can already draw some obvious parallels between Rogen's character and Kevin Smith, aside from the beards, heavyset builds, and the shared hockey love. After all, what is Clerks but an amateur movie that became a ticket to a better life? And what isn't appealing about a slacker who finds his calling as a humorous commentator on life? Semi-autobiographical situations are not new ground for the writer/director -- Chasing Amy was probably about fellow indie star Guinevere Turner -- so you'd think that in Rogen he's found a new ~~Mewes~~ muse for his continued moviemaking success.

One problem: whatever charm I saw in previous Smith films is not to be found here. Those movies folded cleverness and wit into positively filthy dialogue that had the potential to definitively alter the viewer. (For me, the number 37 has forever lost its innocence.) In contrast, this movie has him operating out of his comfort zone: the filth here is visual, not verbal. Yes, there is nudity: certainly not as much as you'd think, considering the subject matter, but enough for the writing to take a back seat.

I realize that raucous film comedy has changed a bit in the past few years, where the sight gag of the full frontal male is now the unfortunate norm. And maybe Smith is just trying to fit in. But he (and exec producers Bob and Harvey Weinstein) should have tried a little harder to remind us of their 1990s Miramax glory days.

An odd workday realization...

2008-10-23T15:32:00.000-07:00

I don't think these are my pants.

One month absence

2008-10-19T23:59:00.000-07:00

Sorry about that. Creativity levels have been down -- really for more than a month, if you've noticed recent posts. I'm going to have to force myself back into writing.

Early voting started in Nevada yesterday. I waited a day to avoid the long lines and am now civic duty-free. I could post one of those "I Voted" stickers, but instead I'll just ask you to click over to this 2006 entry and change the voting date in your minds.

The best thing about early voting? Now I can, in good conscience, pay NO attention to any campaign commercial, mailing, lawn sign, or phone call I may encounter in the next 16 days. (I was ignoring all of that before today as well, just not in good conscience.)

In other news, while only a casual baseball fan, I find myself pleased with a Phillies-Rays series.* As should you. If free agency has made you lose some interest in baseball, take a look at how well a pair of mostly homegrown teams can perform. Ryan Howard, Pat Burrell, Jimmy Rollins, Chase Utley, and NLCS MVP Cole Hamels have played their entire major league careers in Philadelphia. A similar list for Tampa Bay would be even longer; they have the second cheapest payroll in the majors. (The Phillies are 13th overall, but in their defense, they've paid to keep their stars.)

It's just nice to see that teams can succeed by developing the talent within the organization rather than spending top dollar on outside (read: mercenary) talent. The New York Yankees are of course guilty of this -- unless you grew up loving them, you cannot possibly root for them -- but the Boston Red Sox have become equally culpable. While I did not derive that much pleasure from seeing them lose tonight, I was still a bit relieved. To me, they may be eternally entitled to a chip on their collective shoulder, but they gave up any kind of lovable underdog status in 2006, when they spent over $100 million to acquire and sign Daisuke Matsuzaka.

*Sure, it would have been nice to see the Cubs in it, as 100 years is a nice round number, but no one can explain what happened there.

"Have you ever considered piracy?"

2008-09-19T18:17:00.000-07:00

Author's Note: This is not a post about the file sharing of movies and music. Be gone, online thieves!

So today is International Talk Like a Pirate Day. I'd like to take part, but I'm not very convincing at it -- I can't even get away with wearing ~~eyeliner~~ a good eye patch. I'm sporting a Blackbeard right now, but will shave it off soon.

Enjoy the day. It's another excuse to link to this image.

Where the streets... (take 4)

2008-09-18T12:34:00.000-07:00

Some seriously lousy turnaround time here at Brevity. It really does seem to take a few months before I remember to revisit this series. My apologies.

On occasion I like to scour the Las Vegas area (via Google Maps rather than car) to find neighborhoods where the streets are quirkily named. Past themes: Star Wars, confusion, baseball.

It's as good a time as any to introduce gambling. Click to enlarge:

There are many gaming-themed street names in town, but this section of town just east of Boulder Highway is the largest one I could find. It's kind of generic -- there's nothing specific to the history of Vegas, such as it is. Most of the roads describe some aspect of card playing, with a few dice and sports book exceptions. Still, not a slot machine reference in sight.

Big Red Court seems a little out of place -- was the developer a gum chewer or a cheerleading movie fan? But a quick search tells me that there used to be a Big Red's Casino.

(P.S. More fun with Bring It On here.)

LOLcatwoman

2008-09-03T16:37:00.000-07:00

We here at Brevity don't usually feel the need to comment on what everyone else is talking about. So no Michael Phelps, no Sarah Palin. (Nor any Michael Palin or Sarah Phelps.)

Another unmentioned subject here from the past few months: The Dark Knight. I have seen it (once), and it had already been out three weeks by then. There was really no point in finding a new take on such an exhaustively discussed movie. It has its strengths (the Keyser Soze opening; the pencil trick; Aaron Eckhart) and its weaknesses (the Cillian Murphy cameo; pretending to kill off one of the 3 characters you CAN'T kill off). Is it the greatest superhero movie of all time, or is that label too limiting? Will it break the box office of Titanic? Will it be nominated for Best Picture? I don't know, and don't yet care.

But one Batman-related item got me interested over a month ago: with the inevitable sequel talk, people were bringing up Catwoman a lot, and jumped right into casting the role. Names bandied about included Angelina Jolie, Marion Cotillard, and Emily Blunt. Their logic was simple: find a brunette you wouldn't mind seeing in skintight black leather. (Understandable. That's exactly how I approach my weekends.)

But I see two problems with introducing Catwoman. First, women don't really figure into director Christopher Nolan's vision of Batman. We know Bruce Wayne had a mother, but she isn't discussed at all; Batman Begins is mostly about Thomas Wayne's life and legacy to Gotham. And having two actresses play Rachel Dawes gives us separate insights into how irrelevant she is as an individual (though certainly of symbolic value to the men).

Second, this version of Batman seems the least interested in a work challenge like Catwoman because he's not married to his job. Christian Bale is sort of the anti-Adam West in that he's not a monk in a costume, but just a guy with exceptional means to get things done. He's like the DC Comics incarnation of John McClane: there because he's needed, not because he's volunteering. I don't see how any previous embodiment of Catwoman will attract his attention.

There is a way to do Catwoman right, however, and it has nothing to do with getting an ingenue to give us her best purr. Just as the Joker was re-interpreted to be more anarchist and less jokey, so should Catwoman lose the playfulness and just give off a scent of desperation and danger. So why not cast the actress who was once so desperate for the role: Sean Young?

Apparently, I'm no longer the only one who thinks so. (Dang blog procrastination.) Last month this fan placed Young at the top of his list of choices, going so far as brand her breed of cat a cougar. Also open to the Freudian approach: the studio, if you believe the rumors that we call movie news. Last week In Contention quoted an insider with an even more bizarre suggestion... Cher.

While she's not my first choice (or even second choice among the Witches of Eastwick), the very idea tells me that a darker, less conventional depiction of Catwoman is at least in the discussion. In this Gotham City, Catwoman shouldn't get by on just her allure. She needs to be the intelligent and resourceful one who, by virtue of her gender, messes with Bruce's mind in a way that a man can't.

"Ugh. This thing is like a marathon."

2008-08-17T17:19:00.000-07:00

(What I said as I caught a little of the 10,000-meter race.)

And so concludes Brevity's coverage of these Beijing games.

War is hell. Hollywood satires, more so.

2008-08-12T16:35:00.000-07:00

Last week it was Pineapple Express. This week it's Tropic Thunder. Hope this is a trend; Hollywood should have more movie titles that sound like flavors of juice smoothies.

Speaking of Hollywood, it's always risky business to make a satire that skewers the movie industry. Most prior attempts are pretty bad, and even some of the better ones (like The Player) are a mixed bag. Add to that a difficult genre (war movies) and a hit-or-miss director (Ben Stiller) and you get Tropic Thunder.

While not a complete disaster -- it is genuinely interesting and laugh-out-loud funny in places -- it fails to fire on all cylinders. The one part of the movie that works extremely well is the Kirk Lazarus character, played to near-perfection by Robert Downey, Jr. All of his lines are hysterical and/or insightful, like a mini-manifesto on the rules of Hollywood acting.

If only the rest of the movie were as well-written. The premise is fine: a grizzled veteran (Nick Nolte) tells the titular story of a daring Vietnam rescue, and Hollywood wants to adapt it into a movie. The newbie director (Steve Coogan) is unable to coax convincing performances out of his pampered cast, so the two conspire to stick the actors in an isolated jungle area and shoot the film guerilla style, with cameras in the trees. Soon the actors find themselves without resources or direction, and try to re-enact the story as they find themselves in real-life peril.

But the execution is problematic. A surprisingly muscular Ben Stiller plays the lead, an action hero with a recently spotty filmography. I suppose it was a bit of an in-joke for Stiller to play a Tom Cruise-like character and then cast the real deal against type as a bald, obnoxious Hollywood producer, but in the end I don't think either casting choice was that successful. I sort of wonder what might have happened if the two actors switched roles. Could be a lot better, could be a lot worse. I don't know.

But my quibbles there pale in comparison to the movie's biggest liability: Jack Black, who stretches to play a flatulent comedy actor trying something serious for a change. Usually I tolerate his manic shtick in other movies because there's a calming element (like Mos Def in Be Kind Rewind, or the students in School of Rock) that helps restore the equilibrium. But there's none of that here, so he's a major suck of time and patience. I sympathized with the actors (Brandon T. Jackson and Jay Baruchel) who share scenes with him, and hoped his character would just die.

One of the film's unintentional strengths was its ability to make me think a lot about what I would have done differently. Black has to go, obviously. Stiller might work in Black's place. I'm not sure the big-name actor who plays Stiller's agent (I won't spoil) should be in more than one scene, much less be the film's moral center. Maybe a better director needs to be at the helm. There are a lot of pieces to move around; it might make a nice industry parlor game.

If you do plan to go, pay attention as the real previews wind down, because the best stuff starts long before the opening credits.

Figure eights

2008-08-08T08:08:00.000-07:00

Brevity previously dealt with numerical trifectas here and here.

So, today is 08/08/08. NBC has been taking advantage of the figure eights to promote the Olympics for the past several months. But it doesn't really mean as much as the devilish 06/06/06 or the lucky 07/07/07, does it?

Maybe it does. You can learn about the number 8 if you like -- there are multiple cultural reasons why the Chinese consider it lucky -- but I thought I'd write about what happened the last time the calendar read 08/08/08.

Wikipedia tells us that the Wright Brothers had their first public demonstration of manned flight at a race course in Le Mans, France. Wilbur was at the controls.

His first flight lasted only one minute 45 seconds, but his ability to effortlessly make banking turns and fly a circle amazed and stunned onlookers, including several pioneer French aviators, among them
Louis Bleriot. In the following days Wilbur made a series of technically challenging flights including figure-eights, demonstrating his skills as a pilot and the capability of his flying machine, which far surpassed those of all other pilot pioneers.

See? Figure eights. Also, Arthur Goldberg was born, and Ty Cobb got married. So, banner day. Speaking of baseball, the Chicago Cubs played their 99th game of the season on August 8, 1908, and lost to the Giants (then of New York), 4-1. But don't feel too bad for them; they went on to win the World Series, repeating their 1907 feat. It was a talented roster -- note the famous infielders -- but little did they know their club would begin a title drought that has now tolled 99 years.

Something to keep in mind on August 8, 2008, a day in which the current MLB standings show the Chicago Cubs to have the second best record in baseball, with a 5-game lead in the NL Central.

You're the one for me, fatty

2008-08-05T16:20:00.000-07:00

Speaking generally, Pineapple Express is one of those movies that can't compare to its excellent trailer. Not that the rest of the movie is any sort of disappointment -- on the whole, it's pretty good -- but you've probably already seen the funniest parts.

But within the genre of stoner movies, I'm guessing (guessing!) it's one of the best. Select members of the audience laughed harder at certain points than the rest of us. Laughter from knowledge, maybe? Which made me think: could this movie be used as some sort of sting operation? Before the lights went down, I looked around for anybody who didn't quite fit and could have been a narc; I quickly discovered that the most likely candidate was me.

Aside from a 1939 opening sequence that explains America's domestic policy on marijuana, the film takes place over roughly a 48-hour period. A process server (Seth Rogen) and his dealer (James Franco, once discussed here) get caught in the middle of a turf war between two drug empires, going on the run and trying not to get killed in the process. The film is more violent than you'd expect -- there is a significant body count -- which reminded me a bit of last year's buddy action comedy Hot Fuzz, only with weed.

The movie is silly enough to not take the plot seriously, but also a product of deliberate design. The dialogue is witty and intricate, multiple characters are developed, and the friendships are believable. (I especially liked the amorphous jealousy between the hitmen played by Craig Robinson and Kevin Corrigan.) The movie has a kind of timeless quality to it, with no technologies or cars that might make it look dated. I think the filmmakers knew that stoner movies tend to have longer shelf lives, and made Pineapple Express to look just as appealing 20 years from now.

Or, as the person next to me said, "That was sobering."

Another secret 'stache

2008-07-23T08:17:00.000-07:00

Hard to believe I'm revisiting this subject.

My sincere thanks to Jason Hare from Popdose, who steered me to this article from Billboard magazine entitled "Oates, Mustache Make Cartoon Crime-Fighting Team." That's right, as in John Oates:

Left: With mustache, pushing Daryl Hall out of the picture.
Right: Without mustache, but somehow less Oatey.

But this cartoon might change all that! It's not clear from the description as to whether the mustache itself acts on behalf of Oates, or if there's an alterna-Oates that wears the mustache and does all the crime fighting. I guess I'll have to wait and see.

In the meantime, I'd like your answer to this question: what other celebrity body parts merit stories of their own? (Or, in the alternative, whose mullet most deserves screen time?)

For example, I should think that an entire theatrical release could be devoted to Mick Jagger's lips. But the subsequent TV series adaptation would have to use Steven Tyler's lips, just because they're more affordable at that stage of production.

(Author's Note: I've been slow to add keywords to Brevity, but this post has prompted me to add facial hair. Now I'll go back and find every reference of facial hair I've ever made, especially "beards" of the fake marital variety.)

Flags of our founding fathers

2008-07-21T18:16:00.000-07:00

I don't have HBO -- if you don't care for Entourage, what's the point? -- so I finally got around to seeing the 7-part John Adams miniseries on DVD. I commend Tom Hanks and other, less famous producers for getting this remarkable story filmed and given the appropriate running time. Also appreciated: its accessibility to today's audiences.

Truth be told, though, the filmmakers could have gone the extra mile to make it even more modern. I waited in vain to hear actor Paul Giamatti say any of the following statements:

1. "Calm down, cousin Sam, and go back to your brewpub."

2. "Do not make me clench this pamphlet and smack some common sense unto YOU, Mr. Paine!"

3. "A late dinner will not be necessary, Abigail. I shall partake of the local Boston Market."

4. "Mr. Jefferson, the Declaration Committee would advise the removal of the words sacred and undeniable to describe these truths. Also of concern to us: your phrase always bet on black."

5. "I feel that I may suffer a cramp from signing my name in such a small space. No thanks to Mr. Hancock, that pompous, preening jackass."

6. "Fellow citizens, I regret that the First Lady and I shall be leaving Philadelphia for a new home in Washington City. Abigail praises your civility, and I have a great admiration for your cream cheese."

7. "Young John Quincy, you are the son of a President and have the makings of a President yourself. So remember this: do not go amongst the people and say 'Mission Accomplished' unless you truly mean it."

If you believe that other historically significant quotes were also left out of this miniseries, now is the time (and here is the place) to comment upon them.

What to see this weekend?

2008-07-18T07:09:00.000-07:00

In one corner: The Dark Knight. In the other: Mamma Mia!

Leave it to Persepolis to put things into perspective. Thank you, Marjane Satrapi; Batman it is.

Apes of the planet

2008-07-16T09:42:00.000-07:00

On occasion, we get advanced screening passes for a Saturday morning matinee. Usually the movie is rated G or a mild PG, and the kids are everywhere. Attendance is always less than full capacity, so there's no guilt about taking away the seat of some crying child. But if that were to happen... well, they should learn about disappointment at an early age.

So this weekend we saw Space Chimps, and it's pretty much what you'd expect for a film that doesn't enjoy the animation or production capabilities of Disney, Pixar, Fox, DreamWorks, or Warner Bros. It's from Starz Media, which is trying to branch out some into TV and film projects the way HBO and Showtime did. So consider this movie an early attempt to launch their creative endeavors out there; a test pilot, if you will.

The movie is about the slacker grandson of a real space chimp who's slumming as a cannonball stunt attraction in a circus. Then, when a space probe is lost in a wormhole, a financially struggling space agency (not NASA, apparently) needs non-human astronauts to see what's going on, and decides to hire him for the celebrity factor. We follow the chimps into alien territory, with its fluorescent CGI jungles and generic-looking lifeforms. (They're the type of characters you would have a hard time marketing, but then, Beanie Babies were successful.) All in all, it looks like a video game, which makes sense, because it is a video game.

The small ones really enjoyed it; this is a film they'll understand more than Kung Fu Panda or Wall-E. You know, for kids. As for me, I laughed exactly three times. It helps that the space agency included a trio of mildly amusing scientists, one of whom was Indian and another who looked like an egghead Diablo Cody.

The movie logline quiz (part 3)

2008-07-14T06:17:00.000-07:00

First, check out Part 1 and Part 2 of the quiz trilogy.

This is the final installment of loglines that creatively and intentionally do a lousy job of describing movies. Can you still identify the movie for each? Enter your guesses in the comments, or avoid the comments if you'd like to remain unspoiled and solve them all yourself.

21. A feisty but well-rounded competitor enters a contest that ends, quite literally, in a split decision.
Solved by: Julie

22. Despite the iron will of his coach and a teammate's sacrifice, a golden boy loses a tournament title to the unproven rookie who also stole his girlfriend.
Solved by: Scurry

23. A woman who is seen but never named is apprehensive about replacing her predecessor, a woman who was named but never seen.
Solved by: Julie

24. With his race locked in a battle against a mortal enemy and its resilient leader, a laconic representative undertakes an unusual mission to destroy the natural source behind that leader's very existence.
Solved by: Quinn the Brain

25. A military man begins to question his marital intentions to a wealthy woman when he starts to fancy the virginal babysitter.
Solved by: Julie

26. Before he can devote his attention to more charitable pursuits, a consummate professional must first unleash a secret weapon in the fight against his corrupt industry.
Solved by: Quinn the Brain

27. A hardcore executive reconsiders his priorities after he witnesses his brother cut himself and a neighboring girl attempt suicide.
Solved by: Ceresina

28. Suddenly aware of the meaningless life he leads, a young man starts to beat himself up over the choices he's made.
Solved by: Jeremy

29. A salesperson praises the abilities of an actor he had initially dismissed as "like a Streisand." (The performer who portrays the salesperson was labeled as "kind of a Baldwin" in a previous but unrelated movie.)
Solved by: Quinn the Brain

30. Secrets unfold among of group of people and the natural order of things is disrupted. A wealthy but temperamental man (who can look a lot like Dumbledore) gets his final comeuppance in mysterious fashion. The proceedings are overseen by an intelligent woman (who can look a lot like Queen Elizabeth II).
(Two movies)
Movie #1 solved by: Julie
Movie #2 solved by: Quinn the Brain

I originally published these loglines when I started this forum thread. Feel free to read through it and find some very excellent contributions made by other writers.

And so the quiz trilogy concludes. As with movie trilogies, I could be convinced to create an unnecessary fourth installment... if the money were right.

Va-va-voom!

2008-07-12T22:11:00.000-07:00

It's been a while since I've been singled out by another blog, but recently I received dual distinctions from Nathaniel Rogers, author of The Film Experience. A few weeks ago he awarded me a DVD Guide for The X-Files, in which various episodes are compiled to prepare the viewer for the upcoming movie sequel. But this week I've ascended to even more rarefied air when my reply to this post made it to the main page.

A mighty honor, given his readership. But more importantly, this kind of attention puts me in elite company with other admirers of the curvy female form: painter Peter Paul Rubens, director Russ Meyer, and rapper Sir Mix-A-Lot. Well, I guess there's Buffalo Bill from The Silence of the Lambs, but we try not to talk about him at our monthly meetings.

The extraterrestrial highway

2008-07-09T22:13:00.000-07:00

To sort of celebrate the Roswell UFO incident 61 years ago this week, I thought I would recount a drive along the Extraterrestrial Highway that I took earlier this year. It's been a while since a photographic travelogue has appeared in Brevity. (My apologies; these days, my only trips have been to weddings, and who wants to take pictures to remember those?)

Obviously, I don't live anywhere near Roswell, but the rough location of the alleged Area 51 is the next best thing. The truth is out there, and it starts about 2 hours north of Las Vegas.
(All photos taken personally. Copyright 2008.)

Even the GPS recognizes its uniqueness. No "Nevada State Highway 375" here!

Did anything strange happen? As a matter of fact, yes.

1. Within the first 5 miles, I suffered a nosebleed, NOT prompted by rubbing my face or sneezing or anything. Classic alien abductee material. While there is some health precedent for this, it was still very, very weird.

2. We came across an unusual natural phenomenon just off the road, on the eastern side. I remember saying, "Take a look at that smooth rock up ahead... no, that's sand, NO, that's WATER!" It was a small reservoir of perfectly milky, seemingly clean, tan-colored water.

3. Miles later, also on the eastern side, we saw a mini-sandstorm that looked like it would cover the sky, but as we got closer, it kept getting further away. Then, when we thought we had to be passing it, there was nothing there.

We eventually reached the town of Rachel, Nevada, the only (public) stop on the Extraterrestrial Highway. Not much to it -- some houses, no gas station -- but it does boast the Little A'Le'Inn. Total tourist trap, but I mean that in the nicest way possible.

We had no reservations about entering this fine establishment.

Though some species aren't as comfortable with exiting through the same door. (Note the American flag. Proof positive that the United States is now the most awesome country in the universe. Take note, Stephen Colbert!)

We took a bathroom break and scanned the souvenirs with amusement. While we took our leisurely time, we had to get back on the road. But I couldn't help but feel like we were leaving something -- or someone -- behind.

Semi-related note: last weekend I revisited The X-Files, specifically a two-parter airing on TNT. They were the Morris Fletcher episodes, in which a time/space rift causes Mulder to switch bodies with Michael McKean's character, an Area 51 government tool. The episode is set in Rachel, Nevada and showcases the Little A'Le'Inn, or a larger version of it.

I'd forgotten how funny it was. When it chose to be light in tone, The X-Files was the funniest show on TV. The closest thing we have to that now is Dexter, which is similar both in its haunting instrumental music and in its darkly comic approach.

The movie logline quiz (part 2)

2008-07-07T07:00:00.000-07:00

For an introduction to loglines, read Part 1 of this quiz trilogy.

Each logline below describes a movie in misleading, vague, or roundabout fashion. Identify the movie (or for the last one, the TWO movies) in the comments. Skip the comments if you want to remain unspoiled and solve them yourself.

11. A family enjoys the accommodations of a resort lodge during the off-peak, tourist-free months.
Solved by: Andy

12. While facing his recent misfortunes, a doctor continues to assign blame to a disabled stranger.
Solved by: Jeremy

13. An old man is forgiven the balance of his travel expenses when his intended destination is found completely destroyed.
Solved by: Jeremy

14. Lovers on opposite sides of the law scheme to acquire part of the recently released collection of one of the state's wealthiest men.
Solved by: Jeremy

15. A young, mild-mannered driver helps thwart a high-tech heist with the only weapon available: an automobile.
Solved by: Sue

16. On the one hand, he spreads the word of the good Lord. On the other hand, he’s come to realize that he has certain financial needs.
Solved by: Jeremy

17. After advising a young talent on the road to stardom, a veteran achieves a dubious honor with minimal fanfare.
Solved by: Mainline Mom

18. Determined by society to be a criminal, a man decides to commit his first felonious acts in the hopes of self-preservation and personal freedom.
Solved by: Mainline Mom

19. A mysterious stranger sells a jaded businessman on what’s really important in the world, and then eagerly awaits to hear the next great jingle.
Solved by: Jeremy

20. A knight plays a monumental game of chess with a greater power, and the stakes are high. The knight's acts prove sacrificial in nature, as the game allows another to emerge unscathed.
(Two movies)
Movie #1 solved by: Quinn the Brain
Movie #2 solved by: Jeremy

Look for the last installment of loglines when the trilogy concludes next week.

My apologies to the ladies

2008-07-06T14:40:00.000-07:00

This morning and afternoon, as I watched the Wimbledon men's final and napped through the rain delays (shut up! I'm on Pacific time and this sucker started at 6am), I noticed that my last post may have unintentionally slighted women, specifically those on the WTA tour:

"My generation has never seen a clay court specialist that was as good on grass as Nadal, nor a grass phenomenon that's as good on clay as Federer."

Well, that's not exactly true, is it? All that McEnroe/NBC coverage of Bjorn Borg circa 1980, while deserving, is still misleading: Borg was NOT the last tennis player to win both the French Open and Wimbledon in the same year. The following players have done it since then:

1982, 1984: Martina Navratilova
1988, 1995, 1996: Steffi Graf
2002: Serena Williams

I'm not trying to compare the strengths of, say, Federer vs. Graf. There's no way to know anything about that. But it's folly to say that this "double" of winning on clay and grass within that 6-week time frame is so elusive just because a man had not won it for 28 years. I realize that men's and women's tennis has traditionally been treated differently, but come on. The surfaces are the same regardless of gender.

Congratulations to Rafael Nadal for being the first in 6 years to join the real list.

A nation under the influence

2008-07-04T18:58:00.000-07:00

... of The Worldwide Leader in Sports. Click to enlarge.

I captured this image because it tells me a lot about America's tastes during this Independence Day weekend. (Well, as much as statistics from small samples can tell you.)

1. Some areas vote out of regional interest. The Cubs-Cardinals series is a big deal in the Midwest, and sure enough, it claimed more than 50 percent of voters in that pocketful of purple states.

2. The Red Sox-Yankees rivalry is a larger draw to Massachusetts (where it grabbed 60 percent of the vote) than to New York (45 percent). That the latter team is a joyous mess right now may have something to do with the poorer showing.

3. However, ESPN's constant and ridiculous promotion of this rivalry, even during the offseason, has made the world take notice. Sure, they prefer the Wimbledon men's final. But it got 38 percent of the vote to 33 percent for the Red Sox-Yankees.

4. Conversely, ESPN's coverage of Wimbledon has a strong effect on the U.S. populace, with the men's final* going neck and neck in many states with Red Sox-Yankees. (Even 37 percent of New Yorkers, also known as Mets fans, voted for Federer-Nadal.) But these large swaths of green may be misleading: the South didn't have a Braves option, and the West didn't get to vote for the Dodgers-Giants.

5. That all Williams-sister final? Not registering. I guess I'm guilty here, too; I never bothered to pick a favorite back when it all started. I will say that I'm impressed to see each of them maintain their singles title focus when they're still playing together toward a doubles title. We'll see how that doubles final goes Saturday -- after one has already beaten the other individually.

6. NASCAR did even worse here, but to be fair, "Dale Earnhardt Jr. and Daytona" isn't a rivalry. I'm aware of the family history, but an individual and a place cannot be rivals.

7. West Virginia is neutral territory, just like in the Civil War.

*By the way, I agree with the multitudes that are looking forward to Federer-Nadal because (despite the ESPN hype) it actually IS a big deal. My generation has never seen a clay court specialist that was as good on grass as Nadal, nor a grass phenomenon that's as good on clay as Federer. That each would be so doubly dominant were it not for the other makes for some keen drama. I'll root for the Spaniard, and haircuts for both.

The movie logline quiz (part 1)

2008-06-29T20:28:00.000-07:00

To my knowledge, there are three times in the life cycle of any movie where someone is pressed to describe it in 1-2 sentences:

1. The pitch. In the beginning, the writer sells the idea of the movie to the producer or studio exec. Depending on the patience of the listener, the writer may have the liberty to provide a longer synopsis or even a storyboard, but in the end it comes down to the quick summary of the premise, which can often reference other movies. "It's Die Hard on a bus!" (Speed) might work. "It's Die Hard in an office building!" (Die Hard) probably won't.

2. The tagline. Once the movie is made and ready to market, this is the sentence that appears in the trailer and poster. Take Alien: "In space, no one can hear you scream." Bam! You already know the setting and the genre(s). In an interesting twist, it seems as though the most creative taglines go to popcorn movies, while the bland taglines are reserved for the otherwise literate film fare.

3. The logline. Long after the movie is made and has had its theatrical run, it will appear on television, and someone (usually the person who fills in the TV grids in newspapers or cable guides) has to write a sentence that sums up the movie. For example: "Two divorce mediators spend a wild weekend partying with a politician and his eccentric family." That's a fairly straightforward description of Wedding Crashers.

As you can tell from the title of this post, I want to have a little fun with the third item on this list, the logline. What if the logline were true but entirely misleading? What if it were completely vague, focused on the wrong character, or missing the tone or point of the movie it describes? Can you still identify the movie? I wish I could say I invented this concept, but I didn't. Here are a couple of famous examples.

"Transported to a surreal landscape, a young girl kills the first woman she meets, then teams up with three complete strangers to kill again."
-- The Wizard of Oz (from Richard Polito of the Marin Independent Journal, according to Wikipedia)

"A boy and his sled are separated. Problems ensue."
-- Citizen Kane (from Movieline's list of the 100 Best Movies Ever Made)

Clearly, this is a job for Brevity, and I've already written about 30 of these. Here is my first installment; identify the movie (or for the last one, the TWO movies) in the comments. Skip the comments if you want to remain unspoiled and solve them yourself.

1. With the help of two friends, a hypochondriac converts his sick day into a vacation and a growth experience.
Solved by: Catherine

2. An even-tempered man refuses to leave a room until he can get a gruff colleague to do away with his past biases.
Solved by: Catherine

3. With hospitals refusing to perform his elective surgery, a troubled man forces others into his template so that he may fashion himself a new appearance.
Solved by: Quinn the Brain

4. A killer proves a man of his word when a thief reneges on his end of a deal. There is collateral damage.
Solved by: Ceresina

5. Misbehaving teenagers fulfill the unreasonable demands of an educator using a fraction of the requested manpower.
Solved by: Quinn the Brain

6. An accomplished son finds the object of his father’s obsession but learns its value is confined to a small radius.
Solved by: Jeremy

7. An intra-family vehicle swap has disastrous consequences for each side.
Solved by: Jeremy

8. During the Great Depression, a single parent takes on an uphill legal battle, puts forth the best possible case, and loses.
Solved by: Catherine

9. A local law enforcement officer works fiercely and outside the lines to save a visiting world leader from being killed by an unknown assassin in broad daylight.
Solved by: Jeremy

10. In a card game, a man wins himself a form of transportation. He soon finds adventure, and love with a woman who is otherwise attached. The affair is soon dead in the water.
(Two movies)
Movie #1 solved by: Catherine
Movie #2 solved by: Jeremy

For more fun with loglines, try the Random Logline Generator. And look for future installments here. (They get weirder.)

Random bullets

2008-06-27T18:34:00.000-07:00

Thought I was going to give you little snippets of information that add up to a blog entry? Guess again.

After a lengthy respite -- from Brevity and from advanced movie screenings -- I saw Wanted Thursday night. I'm usually a good judge of movies, knowing ahead what I'm willing to see and willing to avoid, but I couldn't get a handle on this one. I knew it was going to be all kinds of stupid, but would it still be fun?

My answer is no. (Though much of the packed audience -- and many critics -- vote yes.) Generally, I keep an open mind, but this movie turned me off in the first 30 minutes: An Indian woman is the first to die. James McAvoy drops his appealing Scottish accent to play American. And the same song is used twice as background music. (Despite Martin Scorsese being guilty of that last one on two counts in The Departed and still winning Best Director, I say all of these examples are strikes against the filmmakers.)

There is a car chase that walks a fine line of being long but not too long, and an assassin training sequence that manages to be brutal yet interesting. But the rest is a loud, obnoxious mess. McAvoy's been on a roll lately as an actor, so this big-budget U.S. debut comes as a bit of a disappointment, even though it's not his fault. I will give him credit for bulking up and bringing more to the table, physique wise, than the rapidly disintegrating Angelina Jolie.

Speaking of Angelina, she does a remarkable job of phoning in her performance even when she's on-screen. She's like a CGI Jolie, inserted into scenes where appropriate. I'm not sure how else to describe it; she's just not there. Morgan Freeman can bring class and substance to anything, even this embarrassing movie. It's his duty to explain the film's ridiculous premise (which I won't go into) and its inevitable twist (that I felt was coming but couldn't quite justify given what I'd already seen). But I'll give Freeman a pass here; many lesser actors have done worse for a paycheck.

Where the streets... (take 3)

2008-05-29T19:50:00.000-07:00

Nine months ago I started a series called "Where the Streets Have Fun Names." Las Vegas is full of small housing developments, complete with their own creatively named courts and avenues, and I thought it would be fun to share screencaps of these quirky neighborhoods from Google Maps.

This is the third such post. At this rate, expect a new one in about 4.5 months.

Baseball season is in full [insert pun here], and I felt this area of town was appropriate. While the Las Vegas 51s are part of the Dodgers farm system, this set of streets makes a better tribute to the team from Brooklyn, now in its 50th year in Los Angeles. Here's the alphabetical breakdown.

Campanella Street: Catcher Roy Campanella played his entire major league career (1948-1957) in Brooklyn. Half-black, he was originally barred from playing major league baseball, but was part of the Dodgers' effort to break the color barrier. He and Don Newcombe (see below) helped make history within the Dodgers farm team in Nashua, New Hampshire; in 1946, it became the first pro baseball team of the 20th century to integrate its lineup. He was called up to the majors the season after Jackie Robinson.

Cominskey Street: I see two problems here. First, the guy's name was Charles Comiskey, with no N. Second, he is best known as owner of the Chicago White Sox (1901-1931) and namesake of its famous ballpark (1910-1990). Where's the Dodger connection?

Doggett Avenue: Jerry Doggett voiced radio broadcasts for Dodger games from 1956-1987, working alongside the legendary Vin Scully. Any relation to The X-Files characters Dana Scully and John Doggett is NOT coincidental; show creator Chris Carter is a Dodger fan. (And in case you're wondering, pitcher Mark Mulder has only played for Oakland and St. Louis.)

Dressen Avenue: Chuck Dressen managed the Dodgers from 1951-1953. He was on the losing end of the Shot Heard 'Round the World, by which the Giants miraculously won the National League pennant.

Erskine Avenue: Carl Erskine was another Dodgers lifer (1948-1959) who added to the annals of baseball literature in 2004 with his first-person account of the team's glory days.

Hodges Avenue: Gil Hodges, originally a catcher, was moved to first base to accommodate the superior play of Roy Campanella (above). He was a Dodger from 1947-1961. Wikipedia claims he had his best seasons when the Dodgers did not win the pennant, but was less solid when they did. This inverse relationship is described as one of the reasons he is not in the Hall of Fame.

Labine Street: Pitcher Clem Labine spelled relief for the Dodgers (1950-1960) and set a franchise record for career games pitched, with 425.

Newcombe Street: Don Newcombe pitched for the Dodgers starting in 1949, and still serves the organization at the administrative level. He joined Roy Campanella (above) and Jackie Robinson in breaking baseball's color barrier; they, along with Larry Doby of the Cleveland Indians, were the first black players named to the All-Star team.

Shea Street: Like Charles Comiskey (above), William Shea has a stadium named after him but is of no relation to the Dodgers. Though he did bring National League baseball back to NYC, 5 years after the Dodgers and Giants moved to California.

Yeager Avenue: Steve Yeager played for the Dodgers at least a generation later than anyone else here, from 1972-1985. He's also the nephew of test pilot Chuck Yeager.

Across the street is another subdivision that contains mostly beachy names like Desert Shale and Coral Rainbow, but has a small section of roads named for comparatively newer Dodger names: Cedeno, DeShields, Hernandez, Nomo, and Tapani.

Orderly song lyrics

2008-05-23T16:37:00.001-07:00

Possibly a recurring feature here at Brevity. I was referred to this quiz by Matthew Baldwin, in which he takes 50 songs and rearranges their lyrics... in alphabetical order. He's removed all capitalization and the repeated use of any word. After all that, it's amazing how short (and similar to one another) the songs look.

Some people may be able to internalize a collection of words and visualize the song, but for the rest of us, it helps to look for titles ("yesterday"), uncommon words/names (like "scaramouche") or rhyming words ("higher" and "pyre") to figure them out.

Once you waste a couple of hours there, feel free to try my contributions below. It helps that each is wordy and includes at least one uncommon word.

1.
a again ahead and are barely battle battles beat between build but car catch causing clearing come comes counting cup deluge don't door dream drum end ever feeling freedom get heart hey hole i'm in is it's know let liberation lost many me my never no now of only over page paper possessions proof relief right road roof see shadows steps suspicion t.v. tales the them there there's they to today towing traveling try turn us walking wall war waste we when while win with within without won't world you you'll you're your

2.
a ability agility and are away be been better blessed blood bob born brother brow bucket but by can't 'cause chug-a-lug come confide continue cough dance dancin' daughter deliver distress do don't down drink everybody excess feelin' feeling fertility for free from get give giver gone gonna good goodness got greedy he heart hell her his hoosegow how hug i i'm i've if in is it juice kaiser keep kingpin know less let life like little long love lovin' low lucky mama marley material me miser mobility mom more my never no now of off on or papa pauper people piggies poet powwow prophet put realize receive reeling right river rock say scrub sea see she shiver smart stop swimmin' talk taught tell than the then there's time times to unimpressed up upriser walkin' wanna want warm water what when wisely wiser with wither won't yes you you'll you've young your

3.
a across all an and are as at be better black blessed blows boat built bury but by came church city cold come congregations could crazy crows crumbled did died dying earth edge empire endlessly exists eye falling fat father ferry final flapping flowed fog for found from fussing garrison geese get go gods good had having he hear here him home horses house how i i’d if in inherit is it jesus laughing learn left light like lived looked make man men murder my needle never night northern not october of offer old on one only our out place play poor prayed prayers priestly priests rite river romans round sad saw sea seagulls serve shall shire silent sodium sound spoken stone stones sun swear take teach teachers tear temple than that the their then these they this ‘til time to today told tonight tower town two up us used walking wall was way were what where which wind winter's words workmen world worth young

Guess the song titles in the comments.

UPDATE! Quinn the Brain used her, uh, brain to solve all three. So avoid the comments if you'd like to solve them yourself. Then, if you're done and hungering for more, I'd recommend clicking over to this forum thread I started to see if other members post some more.

Think inside the box

2008-05-17T11:48:00.000-07:00

Las Vegas culture, such as it is, creates an events checklist for the semi-ambitious resident.

Cirque du Soleil show? Check. (Mystere, O, and Zumanity.)
Speedway racing? Check. (NASCAR, still driving around in circles.)
Dinner-based production? Check. (Tony and Tina's Italian Wedding.)
Brush with D-list celebrity? Check. (Stupid Carrot Top.)
Hoops? Check. (UNLV vs. San Diego State, Minnesota, and 'Zona.)
Stage musical? Check. (Mamma Mia! and Avenue Q.)
Impersonator? Check. (Danny Gans and Trent Carlini.)
Red carpet movie premiere? Check. (88 Minutes earlier this year.)
Magic show? Check. (Lance Burton, Rick Thomas, and Brett Daniels.)
TV taping? Check. (NBC's America's Got Talent, just last week.)

Until Friday night, I'd never attended a boxing event. The sweet science has a long and storied history with the city of Las Vegas, but while fights aren't the high-priced attraction they used to be, there's still a place here for men determined to beat each other senseless.

The site was Cox Pavilion, just off UNLV's campus. Scheduled were a series of matches that were part of ESPN's Friday Night Fights. The undercard bouts were filled with comparatively young and hungry fighters, but the main event was the arrival of former heavyweight champion Chris Byrd, who slimmed down 2 weight classes over the past six months (from 211 to 175 pounds) to fight as a light heavyweight before he retires next year. I knew nothing about his opponent, Shaun George, but noticed that he looked a lot younger. (George is 30; Byrd 37.)

Opportunity appeared in the form of floor seats on the 4th row, just spitting distance from ringside. (Fortunately, no one on the canvas spit in our direction to prove this point.) We were in good company, surrounded by Byrd's friends and family members. Also present and seated two rows in front of us was ultimate fighter Randy Couture, who I didn't recognize but was very gracious in providing autographs and photo ops to fans and gawkers. (He was there just to have a good time, which is all you can ask for in a celebrity. Also, while casually dressed, he wears couture.)

A view from my camera phone. While the arena was far from packed, it was remarkable how quiet the match was. There were a few vocal fans who offered their coaching opinions, but you could still hear the pugilists breathe up there. Before the match I thought of things to yell (like "Eye of the tiger, baby" and "Sweep the leg") but abandoned them for fear of being, well, heard. So I applauded politely, and saved my loudest cheers for the Round 4 girl.

Both men got their share of punches, but you could tell that George had more energy and was tallying up the points on the scorecard. Byrd showed some fire toward the end, but a series of devastating punches floored him. He got up, but George kept at it, and his last punch left Byrd on the ropes, facing us. We saw what the referee saw: the former champ's eyes rolling, unable to focus on the man in front of him. TKO. Here's the ESPN recap.

So, boxing? Check. And I wouldn't mind checking it again.

[Final note: if you plan on visiting Las Vegas and would like to know more about any of the shows, venues, or events described in this post, let me know. Generally, I don't review local attractions, but I'll try to give you an idea as to what to expect.]

Second blood

2008-05-15T10:51:00.000-07:00

The summer movie season is upon us, and you can break down the cinematic offerings into four categories:

1. Big-budget successes (often called "blockbusters")
2. Big-budget failures ("bombs" or "international blockbusters")
3. Low-budget successes (also known as "sleepers")
4. Low-budget nonstarters (maybe "future DVD sleepers")

Earlier this week I saw an advanced screening of Son of Rambow, a British film that may or may not become a sleeper. It's low on budget but high on concept: in the year 1982, schoolboy Will Proudfoot has grown up without a father and with the strict guidelines of the Plymouth Brethren movement. Even without exposure to television, music, and other forms of entertainment, he manages to hide an overactive and illustrative imagination. A chance meeting with Lee Carter, a school thief and bully whose own parents are absent, leads to a viewing of a pirated copy of First Blood (then in theaters).

With his first worldly exposure being the original adventures of Rambo, the boy's mind is warped and in visual overdrive. He concocts a story about being the son of "Rambow" -- the spelling isn't explained, but I have a feeling that the filmmakers didn't want to get sued* -- who has to rescue his imprisoned father from evil forces. Lee, interested in entering a youth filmmaking competition sponsored by the BBC, borrows his brother's videocamera and makes Will both protagonist and stuntman.

As the stunts get more outlandish, they catch the attention of a bizarre French exchange student and his local disciples. As the moviemaking crew expands, the sets and story get more elaborate but the boys' friendship gets more strained. And all the while Will tries to hide his secret life from his deeply religious community.

I'm not sure why the audience was full of families, because I suspect the younger children were bored. The film doesn't try to be accessible to American audiences, which I suppose is part of its charm, but it's really a movie designed for critics to love. It's cute and clever in places, and there's enough of a payoff to call it a crowd-pleaser eventually, but many viewers will have lost their patience before then. Go see it only if you're in the mood for something offbeat.

* The filmmakers later received Sylvester Stallone's blessing.

Protagonist protagonist setting

2008-05-14T10:02:00.000-07:00

Woody Allen, still the world's creepiest celebrity stepfather, has a new movie entitled Vicky Cristina Barcelona. Find a surprisingly amateurish trailer here. I have two thoughts...

First: in a cast that includes Scarlett Johansson, Javier Bardem, Patricia Clarkson, and Penélope Cruz, I'm most excited to see Rebecca Hall. She played the charming brunette in Starter for 10, probably the best movie ever set in the world of 1980s British college quiz bowls. (Hmm, "excited" seems like a strong word, seeing as how I'm talking about a Woody Allen movie. Rephrase: I am not averse to seeing this, mostly because of Rebecca Hall.)

Second: the title "Vicky Cristina Barcelona" sounds like some exotic Euro-name but is far more mundane: it's about Vicky (Hall) and Cristina (Johannson) and their trip to Barcelona. Either the director has given up, or he's onto something. What if more movie titles followed the format "Protagonist protagonist setting"? Below are ten attempts to re-title famous movies; each is solvable, though tougher than, say, "Roxie Velma Chicago." Try to identify them in the comments. And feel free to create your own.

1. Norma Joe Hollywood
2. Tatiana Paul Kigali
3. Alfred Robert London
4. Rose Jack Atlantic
5. Joe Irving Rome
6. Billy Madolyn Boston
7. Colette Remy Paris
8. Red Andy Maine
9. Malcolm Cole Philadelphia
10. Daphne Sugar Miami

Where's the gong?

2008-05-12T23:22:00.000-07:00

For part of the Mother's Day festivities, we returned to the Planet Hollywood Hotel and Casino, this time to attend a taping of the NBC summer series America's Got Talent. At first we considered any combination of picnics, art walks, or community festivals to mark the day, but in the end we could not deny the sheer marquee power of host Jerry Springer and judges David Hasselhoff, Sharon Osbourne, and Piers Morgan.

We had good (free) seats in the auditorium right next to the main cameras, which was ideal: we were close enough for a great view, but still hidden under the cameras. (Many have the desire to be captured on television; I am not one of those people.)

Before anyone famous showed up, the production crew filmed the audience doing things like standing ovations, seated applause, concerted booing, and the ever-usable collective shock and anger. Presumably, they'll add these moments where appropriate during the editing process. But it confirmed what I've long believed about television: it's all fake.

[Dramatic aside: After all that phony audience interaction, I became nauseous. I looked right and left, searching for ANYTHING that seemed real. And there he was, God's gift to Germany: David Hasselhoff. Thank you, Herr Hair.]

The judges ran down the aisle to their seats amidst timely applause, and the show began. After a few opening remarks in which he reminds us that he's not talented, Jerry Springer tries to invoke an anything-can-happen atmosphere, and reports that last season's winner has a recurring gig at the Las Vegas Hilton. So it's appropriate that the showrunners (including exec producer Simon Cowell, who didn't appear) wanted the competition here.

We witnessed about 16 acts perform, and some were clearly there for the sake of television. We were coached by the warmup guy, a Lewis Black wannabe, to chant "Off! Off! Off!" when we desired a performer to stop. (To me, this is a poor word choice. We were already cheering on Mr. Knight Rider with "Hoff! Hoff! Hoff!" so anything similar just made things confusing.)

Frequently I felt the need to act upon my wiseass tendencies in this venue. For example, when a mother/daughter pair of whistlers (they performed "Climb Every Mountain") interacted with the judges, the daughter -- who said she was about 40 -- started getting sassy. She mentioned to David Hasselhoff that she used to keep a life-size poster of him on her bedroom wall. "So did he," I yelled as a reply. I doubt he heard that, and I'm sure the adjacent cameras cut out the ambient noise, but at least I entertained those around me.

I met my sarcasm Kryptonite when a U.S. Army serviceman came on stage wearing fatigues and a guitar, and mentioned that he'd spent the past 15 months in Iraq. As he chatted with the judges, each of his responses was met with applause. Which was fine, but then he started singing that dreadful Edwin McCain song "I'll Be." Whether or not he was good enough, I sure as heck wasn't going to say anything.

Overall, it was an okay experience; I can kind of see why shows like American Idol have such a young, Stepford-esque audience willing to behave like idiots on cue. I would like to think that a taping of something like The Daily Show would be more entertaining, though similarly filled with stops and starts.

The cure for anemic cinema

2008-04-30T13:06:00.000-07:00

Alternate title: The Futurist. (Totally pretentious, worth a listen.)

So much has changed since my days with Robert Downey, Jr. and James Spader at the Chateau Marmont. (Good times.) While I'm still building my legend, Spader's become an Emmy-winning liberal superhero of the law on Boston Legal, and Downey's taking his mightiness quite literally these days: he IS Iron Man.

This is a clear case of having the right actor in the right role at the right time. It's not a stretch to picture Downey as billionaire playboy and technical wizard, more pleased with tinkering in his lab and leaving corporate matters to his late father's partner (Jeff Bridges). His skill in weapons manufacture has brought him both success and isolation; he works at home and only interacts with his loyal assistant (Gwyneth Paltrow) and his close friend in the military (Terrence Howard). When he learns the truth about how his technology also helps his enemies, he grows a conscience.

The cast is in good form. Bridges' best work is probably behind him, but there's a certain amount of nonchalance and underacting that I appreciated here. (The Dude still abides.) Howard is not given that much to do -- part of the plot requires him to stay out of the loop -- but you get the feeling that his importance could grow in time. And as is common with superhero films, the heroine is the weak link, but Paltrow does well enough in her steely Girl Friday role to appear worthy of acting opposite Downey.

The film itself delivers as well; it's ambitious, but not overly so. There's a satisfying origin story that takes its time but provides sufficient humor and action. And the central conflict is, well, local in nature, so that director Jon Favreau can let loose in the inevitable (and welcome) sequel.

More (and more) of the same

2008-04-24T16:20:00.000-07:00

Wednesday night offered an advanced screening of Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay. While events in this movie take place immediately after the end of their first film, Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle, John Cho and Kal Penn have used the 4-year interim to become much bigger names. It's tough to imagine that when that film was made, these guys were pretty much nobodies with small supporting roles in teen comedies (Cho in the American Pie series, Penn in Van Wilder). And now they've got high-profile gigs in Star Trek and House. Way to go, guys.

If there's anything you liked in the first film, chances are there's more of it in the sequel. More mockery of (white) America and its authorities. More locations. More marijuana. More obnoxiousness. More sentimentality. And especially more Neil Patrick Harris.

The plot is too ridiculous to recount, but I will say that Guantanamo Bay is a very small part of the film. (I'm surprised they went with that title.) The movie is genuinely funny in places -- Rob Corddry's Homeland Security character exists solely to project his stunningly clueless stereotypes of every minority -- but, man, is it filthy. I should add "more bodily fluids" to the list.

A final complaint: after this and Forgetting Sarah Marshall, is it asking too much to see a comedy without male full frontal nudity? (In the movie, one of Harold and Kumar's college friends has organized a bottomless party.) This is not a good trend; as a viewer, I'd gladly pass up female nudity if it would guarantee sausage-free cinema.

So what's the prognosis, Fertile Myrtle?

2008-04-23T11:17:00.000-07:00

Regular readers know that I'm a big fan of Tina Fey. Over the years she's graduated from SNL staff writer to Weekend Update co-anchor to 30 Rock creator to award-winning TV actress. And through it all she's written most of her own material. This makes her new film Baby Mama a slight change of pace; while staying within the SNL family, she cedes control to Michael McCullers, who also wrote Austin Powers and Undercover Brother.

That's not to say that her role and dialogue lacks her distinct touch. The film is about surrogacy and an odd coupling, but is basically a buddy comedy using women instead of men. Kate (Fey) is a single VP exec of a supermarket chain similar to Whole Foods, reporting directly to an aging hippie CEO (Steve Martin, with a ridiculous ponytail). Afflicted with babyfever and a fickle uterus, she finds a surrogate through an agency (owned by Sigourney Weaver, older but not terribly different from her Working Girl days).

As Angie the surrogate, Amy Poehler is meant to be worlds apart in financial security and sophistication, but it doesn't take long to see the two women mesh, as the two actresses have built-in chemistry. The plot is mildly predictable, but is a nice mix between silly and serious. Greg Kinnear shows up as Kate's love interest, and Romany Malco has the funniest lines as Kate's straight talking doorman.

Planet Hollywood hotel and Pacino

2008-04-17T10:49:00.000-07:00

Usually the advanced screening is a fairly muted affair: some cineplex cancels the 7:00 showing of one of its underperforming movies so that the screening room can be used to show local critics the latest studio offering. The critics, in turn, can write reviews that get published before the movie's release date. Meanwhile, a few hundred civilians (myself included) obtain passes to fill up the room. This is how I see a movie early.

Occasionally there's something called a world premiere. It's a red carpet affair where celebrities, studio people, and other VIPs congregate to sell the film as an event. This happens in Los Angeles and New York all the time, and does happen on occasion here in Las Vegas. The term "world premiere" is a misnomer; for many major studio films, a few test screenings or advanced screenings have already taken place. (I've seen quite a few films before their "world premiere.")

I attended my first world premiere last night when we won tickets to see 88 Minutes at the Planet Hollywood Hotel and Casino (formerly the Aladdin, if you haven't been here recently). For those so inclined, there's a chance to catch a glimpse of the movie's stars on their way in. In this case, that would include Al Pacino, Alicia Witt, Leelee Sobieski, and Benjamin McKenzie. (Amy Brenneman and Neal McDonough were scheduled to be there, but I don't think they were. Wire Image has posted pictures here.)

Not considering myself the starstruck type -- though I'm sure there are exceptions -- I was not so inclined. We went to our (assigned) seats in the mezzanine where I read a book and amused myself compiling a short list of

Things NOT to say when you first meet Al Pacino
1. "Whoo-ah!" (That's how the script spells it.)
2. "I loved you in Meet the Parents."
3. "Listen, I've got some ideas for The Godfather Part IV if you..."
4. "Could you ask Neal McDonough if NBC is bringing back Boomtown?"
5. "Hold on. I'm looking for the scar on your face."

Feel free to add on in the comments. Anyway, we ended up seeing a few of the stars anyway as they stood up during the movie intro. So I guess that was a bonus.

As for the movie itself? Yikes. Pacino plays a brilliant forensic psychiatrist (is there any other kind?) whose persuasive testimony drove a jury to convict McDonough's character. Fast forward to the day of execution, and events happen that suggest Pacino got the wrong man. Meanwhile, he gets a mysterious phone call: "You have 88 minutes to live." The rest of the movie takes place in real time as he tries to track down the culprit when everyone's a suspect, etc.

If making this movie can be considered a crime, then I would finger the script as the criminal. It runs the gamut from unspeakably bad to hilariously bad. The actors do their best, and there are some clever moments, but you can tell early on that you're in for an experience that's anything but thrilling.

I'd count the implausibilities, but those who post to the film's IMDb page have already begun compiling "88 stupid things in this movie." Pacino himself looks tired, which is part of his character but is more likely how he felt while filming.

For a better example of real drama in real time, check out Shakespeare 24.

Nudity plus time equals comedy?

2008-04-15T23:25:00.000-07:00

While I did see the recent bracketology episode of How I Met Your Mother -- and its brilliant homage ending -- I must admit that I haven't watched the past season or two. Back when I did see it, though, I found it consistently enjoyable, and considered Jason Segel the show's secret MVP. So I was interested to see how his talents translated to the big screen in Forgetting Sarah Marshall when I caught an advanced screening last week.

When I said "talents," I meant as an actor and writer. I was not interested to see his bits and pieces in two separate scenes. What is this, How I Met Your Member?

Aside from the full frontal stuff, the movie was kinda... predictable. Peter (Segel) is a songwriter who puts off his dream project by composing morose music for a TV procedural starring his girlfriend, actress Sarah Marshall (~~Linda C~~ Kristen Bell). She dumps him for a popular rock poseur (Russell Brand), and his devastation is of the weepy pathetic variety. He goes to Hawaii to clear his head, and what vacationing couple should he find there?

The movie does have its funny places -- Brand in particular gets many of the good lines -- but I couldn't help feeling that none of the actors brought anything unique to the characters, and could easily have been replaced (especially Bell). There is one creative idea: Peter's dream project is a Dracula puppet musical, and the friendly hotel clerk (Mila Kunis) exists more or less to bring that creative side out of him.

It's not too much of a spoiler to say that we do get to see some of the puppet musical, performed a bit like Avenue Q but with a real Jim Henson pedigree. Segel will next tackle a new Muppet movie, which could be good, as he has a flair for the melodramatic (watch this clip) and will likely keep his pants on.

Three years old

2008-04-13T15:33:00.000-07:00

Not a Pic-Tac-Toe:

Seemed appropriate to use a 3x3 grid to signify this blog's 3rd birthday. Three years of Brevity -- makes it sound kind of long-winded. (All of the images above relate in some way to the concept of Three. Let me know if any explanation is needed.)

I was half right!

2008-04-08T00:12:00.000-07:00

The Lady Vols of Tennessee won their second straight title; good for them. My year-in-advance prediction had Connecticut and Stanford in the Final Four, so at least I was half right. Rutgers made the Elite 8, but my champion, the Oklahoma Sooners, lost in the second round.

So the bad news is another title that cements the UConn-Tennessee rivalry as something we're supposed to care about. But I don't, and I never have. The lack of parity makes the sport boring. There are more than two ways to win a title, and other powers need to step up and break the dual stranglehold. Unfortunately, everyone -- the media, the fans, and even the top girl recruits -- fail to realize this.

The good news is that seniors (and junior Candace Parker) graduate, so a change is unavoidable. While the 2008 Final Four -- Tennessee, Stanford, Connecticut, and LSU -- are reloading talent as usual, they've all lost the leadership and seasoned depth that will get them back to the Final Four in St. Louis next season.

So who'll crash the 2009 Final Four instead? One year in advance, I say California, Duke, Oklahoma, and Louisville. (Sooners, don't burn me a second consecutive year.) Berkeley's hippie fans will hit a new high -- ahem -- as Cal's sharp rise culminates in a national title for head coach Joanne Boyle.

I called it!

2008-04-07T23:13:00.000-07:00

Congratulations to the Kansas Jayhawks for winning the 2008 men's basketball championship. As always, a combination of talent, discipline, coaching, and luck went into their title run. But I'd like to think that my year-in-advance prediction had something to do with it too. Oh yeah.

Even if I were wrong about my picks -- and, admittedly, I was way off on USC -- I enjoy doing them. It gives me a chance to evaluate the college basketball world without much media influence. Let SI and ESPN make their ridiculously early opinions tomorrow and later this week; I'll make my ridiculously early opinion tonight.

A year from now, Detroit hosts the 2009 Final Four. Who's there? I say Notre Dame, Texas, Michigan State, and UCLA. Catholics rejoice as Mike Brey and the Fighting Irish ascend to the top of the mountain. Three point Jesus!

Secret 'stache

2008-04-01T23:43:00.000-07:00

I've made a habit of watching Jeopardy! recently. I was obsessed with the show back when I was in high school, but have caught it only sporadically since then. I'm sure one of the reasons for my renewed interest has to do with record-breaking champion Ken Jennings, whose blog and forums are a safe haven for closeted trivia nerds like me.

Someone on the forum alerted me today to a temporary, perhaps April Fool's related return of host Alex Trebek's ~~beloved~~ ~~silly~~ divisive ~~moustache~~ ~~mustache~~ hairy upper lip.

I wanted to see it, but I needed to screencapture it. Sure enough, it's there for the first round...

...but gone by Double Jeopardy! Was it a fake? A quick shave? Sadly, this is a question (answer?) that even the smartest people can't answer (question?).

I was hoping for a fake beard to accompany the final clue, but it was not to be. As that same person on the forum observed, maybe Alex was just complying with Ken's photo endorsement.

Still the ones

2008-03-31T15:14:00.000-07:00

Congratulations to top seeds UNC, Kansas, UCLA, and Memphis, who all made the Final Four. While I don't think this is a great story, I do believe that next weekend could feature some outstanding basketball.

Kansas and UCLA stayed true to form, and took advantage of their comparatively easy brackets. (Davidson and Xavier were worthy Elite 8 opponents, mind you, but the Midwest and West regions never looked that daunting.)

Memphis was unfairly perceived as having no discipline or finesse, and changed a lot of minds when beating Michigan State and Texas -- and hitting their free throws in the process.

UNC, in my opinion, was the weakest of the top seeds based on the regular season -- their highest profile games were against BYU, Kent State, Davidson, and Kentucky. (I could criticize Duke as well, but at least they played Marquette, Wisconsin, and Pittsburgh in addition to Davidson.) But in adding big wins against Arkansas, Washington State, and Louisville, Carolina deserves to be where they're at right now.

How did I do with my year-in-advance picks? Same as last year.

April 2006 picks:
Ohio State, UCLA, UNC, Georgia Tech

2007 tournament:
Ohio State: Final Four, lost in final
UCLA: Final Four, lost in semis
UNC: Elite 8
Georgia Tech: lost in 1st round

April 2007 picks:
Kansas, Memphis, Louisville, USC

2008 tournament:
Kansas: Final Four, ?
Memphis: Final Four, ?
Louisville: Elite 8
USC: lost in 1st round

To complete the pattern, next Monday's championship must have UCLA beating Kansas or UNC beating Memphis. I mention this now to try to ensure that the latter does not happen.

Pic-Tac-Toe (14th edition)

2008-03-26T00:01:00.000-07:00

I realize it's been months since I composed one of these, but the well ran dry for a while. I still have some ideas (i.e. unusual themes) to try building future puzzles, but I think we all know the days of seeing these once a week are over.

For those new to this, the following 9 images are laid out in a 3x3 grid, and each row, column, and diagonal is connected by a different theme. Determine the themes and solve the puzzle.

(Click the image to enlarge. Guess in the comments.)

Probably not my best effort, but certainly doable. Good luck!

SOLVED! Frequent solver Bill of Shakespeare Teacher came to visit and figured out all 8 themes. (I hope he hasn't been coming every Wednesday for the past 2 months and leaving disappointed.)

Syrupy sixteen (women)

2008-03-25T21:34:00.001-07:00

Ouch. My year-in-advance pick to win it all, Oklahoma, lost in the second round. Now I wonder how long coach Sherri Coale can keep going without that Pantene endorsement. Sooner? No, later.

The ACC did very nicely; Virginia and Florida State came painfully close to joining Duke, UNC, and Maryland in the Sweet 16. That would have been 5 teams, which is the exact number of survivors the Big East can now boast. (Impressive.) Like the ACC, the SEC has 3 teams remaining, while the Big 12 got two and the Pac-10 one. Old Dominion and George Washington went colonial on the bracket to join the group, but all in all, it was very chalky.

The women's Sweet Sixteen:

East (Greensboro) Regional
01. Connecticut
08. Rutgers
~~09. California~~
~~16. Virginia~~
17. Old Dominion
24. George Washington

South (New Orleans) Regional
02. North Carolina
07. LSU
10. Oklahoma State
15. Louisville

Midwest (Oklahoma City) Regional
03. Tennessee
06. Texas A&M
11. Duke
~~14. Oklahoma~~
17. Notre Dame

West (Spokane) Regional
04. Maryland
05. Stanford
~~12. Baylor~~
13. Vanderbilt
21. Pittsburgh

Syrupy sixteen (men)

2008-03-24T15:53:00.000-07:00

Welcome back, double digits! After last year's chalk-like opening weekend, we were due some upset excitement.

As expected, at least by me, Duke was one of the high-seed casualties. After almost losing to Belmont -- is it wrong to admit that by the end I was rooting for the 15 seed? -- they finally succumbed to West Virginia, a team that just wanted it more. To put some salt in the wound, keep in mind two things: (1) Coach K lost to Bob Huggins, and (2) the Mountaineers are undersized and not that deep.

After all the huffing and puffing over West Coast versus East Coast bias (what is this, 1990s hip-hop?), the Pac-10 and Big East each put 3 teams in the Sweet 16. The lowly Big Ten managed to sneak in 2 teams, while Kansas and Texas played to form in representing the Big 12. The ACC and SEC showed their true colors, each getting a lone team to survive the weekend.

The men's Sweet Sixteen:

East (Charlotte) Regional
01. North Carolina
08. Tennessee
09. Louisville
16. Washington State

West (Phoenix) Regional
02. UCLA
~~07. Duke~~
10. Xavier
~~15. Connecticut~~
26. West Virginia
47. Western Kentucky

South (Houston) Regional
03. Memphis
06. Texas
11. Stanford
~~14. Pittsburgh~~
17. Michigan State

Midwest (Detroit) Regional
04. Kansas
~~05. Georgetown~~
12. Wisconsin
~~13. Vanderbilt~~
37. Davidson
45. Villanova

The All-Hogwarts team

2008-03-23T00:37:00.000-07:00

More on the actual NCAA tournament later. Some fun for now.

Last year's All-Simpsons team was so successful that I decided to try another approach. Here are my choices for the All-Hogwarts team, tracking down the players who share a name with characters in the Harry Potter series of books. The team is led by co-MVPs Drew Lavender and Derrick Brown, both of Xavier.

FIRST TEAM

Derrick "Lavender" Brown, Xavier
DeAndre "Lee" Jordan, Texas A&M
Drew Lavender "Brown", Xavier
Steffphon "Peter" Pettigrew, Western Kentucky
Will "Dean" Thomas, George Mason

SECOND TEAM

Keegan "Katie" Bell, Vanderbilt
Austin "Angelina" Johnson, Oklahoma
Rockwell "Alastor or Mad-Eye" Moody, St. Joseph's
David "Harry" Potter, Clemson
Surry "Oliver" Wood, UNC

HONORABLE MENTION (not in the NCAA tournament)

Michael "Professor" Binns, Fordham
Jeremy "Barty" Crouch, Bradley
Darin "Hermione" Granger, Evansville
Rahmon "Mundungus" Fletcher, Wisconsin-Green Bay
Phillip "Gilderoy" Lockhart, Jackson State

The NCAA double dip (2008)

2008-03-19T18:14:00.000-07:00

In 2006 and 2007 I tried to predict which schools would have the best chance to place both their men's and women's teams in the Final Four. So I'm doing the same this year. Can any college get a double dip like the ones below?

1983: Georgia
1999: Duke
2002: Oklahoma
2003: Texas
2004: Connecticut
2005: Michigan State
2006: LSU

Success must love company, because quite a few schools have placed both teams in the NCAA tournaments. There were 20 in 2006, 23 in 2007, and 22 this year. Here are (in my opinion) the most likely of those schools to be doubly pleased in early April.

1. Stanford. Men are a #3 seed; women are a #2 seed. I think the brackets for each work in their favor. The men have the size and skill to beat smaller Texas and Memphis. The women stay in their time zone and have it in them to defeat Maryland. I'm not saying it's going to happen for both teams, but it could.

2. Tennessee. Men #2; women #1. Some people have the men losing in the 2nd round to Butler or South Alabama, but I think they will reach the Final Four. The women are favored to get there, but they may have to face Oklahoma in Oklahoma City. And the recently fallen Sooners have something to prove.

3. North Carolina. Men #1; women #1. While the only school to get a pair of top seeds, I think the men's team is very beatable in that tough East region, specifically by the aforementioned Tennessee. The women's team should get there, but beating LSU in New Orleans is a tall order.

4. Connecticut. Men #4; women #1. Sorry, but a return to 2004 just isn't that likely. The women are heavily favored (again), but the men just aren't going to beat UCLA, even if they get that far.

5. Texas. Men #2; women #8. Just thought I'd throw a longshot in there. Honestly, I think the men will lose to Stanford, if not earlier. But I'd like to see the women do well; for coach Gail Goestenkors, formerly of Duke, a postseason win over UConn is long overdue.

For the record, the other 17 schools are Baylor, Cornell, Duke, Georgia, Kansas State, Louisville, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, Purdue, San Diego, Temple, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt, West Virginia, Western Kentucky, and Xavier.

Regular season wrap-up

2008-03-10T22:38:00.000-07:00

Haven't talked about college basketball for a while, but I have seen quite a few games in the interim. (Missed the UNC-Duke game last weekend, as we finally finished the move we started in January.)

Some talking points:

1. Player of the Year. In the great debate between UNC's junior center Tyler Hansbrough and KSU's freshman forward Michael Beasley, I find myself solidly in Hansbrough's corner, and I feel guilty about that. Not because he's a Tarheel, but because he'll return next year, and Beasley won't. Isn't that strange? It's like I said about Kevin Durant last year: you have to start thinking of these one-and-done players as seniors rather than freshmen.

But while Beasley is tearing up the Big 12 with double-doubles, Hansbrough is doing the same within the context of a much better team, and as the most hated player in America. (Anyone who tells you that Duke's Greg Paulus is more hated is just being ridiculously biased. Aside from the occasional Virginia Tech player, anyone would rather slug Hansbrough than Paulus if given a chance. In fact, of all the people who most deserve to be punched in the face, Tyler's up there with Pete Wentz.)

2. Coach of the Year. No debate here, because it's the same guy that would win Coach with the Coolest Name: Keno Davis. Imagine how easy his recruiting pitch would be:

"Hello, young man. I coach basketball up at Drake University, and I'd like you to be a part of my team. I can't guarantee you playing time or stardom, but I run a clean and fair program where you'll get a solid education and exposure to a really outstanding level of basketball. Oh, and my name is Keno."

Sure, his team overachieved greatly this year, and he deserves the award anyway, but it's all about the name. Too awesome for words. He should win this award every year, or at least until his brothers Blackjack and Craps join the profession.

3. Final Four in advance. The teams I picked in April 2007 to make the 2008 Final Four are doing pretty well. Memphis has been a top 3 team all season. Kansas has hovered in 1-2 seed range. Louisville and USC struggled early but have come on strong recently. All four will make the tourney, and I feel confident all are Sweet 16 material at the very least. (Though USC is probably a 6 or 7 seed right now.) How they fare from there depends a great deal on where they appear on the bracket.

I'm happy with the teams I picked, but if I had to choose alternatives, I'd go with UCLA, Tennessee, Xavier, and Indiana.

4. Who wins it all? A year ago I said Kansas, and nothing's happened this year to make me change my mind. They have the most talent, and almost none of the pressure that can cripple high-profile favorites UNC, Memphis, Tennessee, or UCLA. Again, a proper evaluation requires me to look at where the teams are seeded on the bracket, and I'll try to do that next week.

5. The Lopez twins of Stanford. I can't decide: are they strikingly attractive, or just plain ugly? Click on their names here and decide for yourself.

With conference tournaments underway, and Selection Sunday fast approaching, here is my final seeding chart.

South Regional (Houston)
01. Memphis: Calipari's year to return to the Final Four.
08. Xavier: Tennessee-like depth, without the hype.
09. Duke: So tired of fellow fans giving the kid glove treatment.
16. Notre Dame: Annual underachievers now kinda dangerous.

West Regional (Phoenix)
02. UCLA: Won't have to face Florida this year.
07. Texas: I'm sensing an early upset victim here.
10. Louisville: February's hottest team could March on.
15. Butler: As tourney-tested as UCLA. Perhaps more.

East Regional (Charlotte)
03. UNC: No bad losses, but still the least tested top seed.
06. Georgetown: Held off all kinds of Big East challengers.
11. Drake: Adam Emmenecker is a hero to one of my readers!
14. Indiana: Will Dan Dakich be the next Steve Fisher?

Midwest Regional (Detroit)
04. Tennessee: Creamsicles not as visually repulsive now.
05. Kansas: Yes, you can win a title without Danny Manning.
12. Wisconsin: Pull out wins by boring you for 40 minutes.
13. Stanford: Late slippage prevents a 2 or 3 seed.

Also considered: BYU, Gonzaga, Kent State, Davidson.

Injury report

2008-03-06T22:30:00.000-08:00

How to explain my greatly reduced web presence? Well, the simple answer is that I spend a lot less time online.

The more complicated answer is that I twisted my ankle, and try to limit my walking. I'm starting to heal, but for a while it was sheer, uh, Misery.

Well, okay, the circumstances were slightly different; I wasn't hobbled by my number one fan. Instead, my leg buckled while I was fetching the mail. But if I were a horse, I'd be dead by now.

Oscar's most likely (2008)

2008-02-22T18:05:00.000-08:00

The Academy Awards have 21 categories for feature-length films. Last year I ranked the frontrunners of these categories by how likely they were to win. I've decided to do the same this year. (All frontrunners determined by Entertainment Weekly.)

For the record, I saw 4 of the 5 Best Picture nominees, missing out on There Will Be Blood. As always, I attempt to be objective.

Update: with the ceremony over, how did the frontrunners do?

1. Best Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem, No Country for Old Men
WINNER!

He's not quite the shoo-in that Helen Mirren was last year, but he's close. He's never won before, he embodied a very memorable villain, and his film is nominated for Best Picture. Of the others, I think Tom Wilkinson has the best (slim) chance to upset.

2. Best Makeup: La Vie En Rose
WINNER!

Against Norbit and Pirates 3, this win should be in the bag. (Purse?)

3. Best Original Score: Dario Marianelli, Atonement
WINNER!

Using a typewriter as percussion might be considered a gimmick, but it's a good gimmick. And there's no competition from No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood. But there's an outside shot for Michael Giacchino's characteristically upbeat Ratatouille score.

4. Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood
WINNER!

First, can I say how fantastic this lineup is? Expected (and deserving) nominations for George Clooney and Johnny Depp, but then the Academy goes out on a limb for Tommy Lee Jones and Viggo Mortensen. Apologies to Josh Brolin and James McAvoy, but you could not pick a better shortlist. As for the win, Clooney is very popular, but even he concedes.

5. Best Visual Effects: Transformers
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... The Golden Compass.

A bit less than meets the eye, at least to me, but Pirates won last year, and The Golden Compass (whose less bombastic effects I preferred) isn't as well-received.

6. Best Director: Ethan Coen & Joel Coen, No Country for Old Men
WINNER!

Another year with no women, but at least the ampersand strikes back. I think the Academy recognizes that this is their year. They're up against 4 first-time nominees. Paul Thomas Anderson might upset, but only if his film did as well. Read on.

7. Best Picture: No Country for Old Men
WINNER!

People are saying this is a wide-open race like last year, but I'm not buying it. While it's certainly not a lock, it combines elements of tradition and edginess that could constitute a Best Picture. Atonement, in my opinion, is the superior technical achievement, but is a hard film to love. Juno has made twice as much bank, and people seem to like it, but its win was just being nominated. Michael Clayton markets itself as the spiritual heir of 1970s ethical dramas, but those films never won Best Picture either. There Will Be Blood stands the best chance to upset, I guess, but I think voters will opt for the more ensemble-oriented movie.

8. Best Film Editing: No Country for Old Men
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... The Bourne Ultimatum.

The Coen brothers contend in four categories, and are unlikely to win all four. I do think they have a good chance to win three, though. And I think they will probably win for editing instead of writing their film. The editors guild gave their top award to The Bourne Ultimatum, though.

9. Best Art Direction: Sweeney Todd
WINNER!

Oh, that bleakly awesome gray-ashy London. So very Tim Burton, and also perhaps the most Dickensian set ever. Bonus points for the hilarious beach and picnic scenes. Viewers differ on the aural experience, but visually it was great. Atonement can spoil, maybe.

10. Best Original Screenplay: Diablo Cody, Juno
WINNER!

Liked the movie, liked the script, like the cute ex-stripper. But my tastes are not always shared with others, so I have some reservation about the widely held assumption that it will win. Truth be told, I would rather see Ratatouille win here, and it might, though Michael Clayton (which, aside from the Tom Wilkinson character, is a bit underwritten) is better positioned.

11. Best Foreign Language Film: The Counterfeiters
WINNER!

With Persepolis surprisingly omitted, there's not a lot of hype about the films in this category. I'm told this is the favorite, and don't know enough to say otherwise.

12. Best Animated Feature: Ratatouille
WINNER!

With Persepolis surprisingly omitted in the Foreign Language category, it could upset here, but I think most people recognize that Ratatouille is a sumptuous piece of animation.

13. Best Original Song: "Falling Slowly," Once
WINNER!

Still haven't seen this movie, but people who have really, really like it. Normally I would say that an Enchanted song (specifically "That's How You Know") would win, but there are three such nominees. So score for the Euro-unknowns.

14. Best Actress: Julie Christie, Away from Her
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... Marion Cotillard.

I'd rank her higher, but there's so much buzz about Marion Cotillard and Ellen Page nipping at her heels that I can't ignore. As I said, I like Juno, but I really don't think Page is going to win this award. I've read a lot of criticism about Cotillard's louder-is-better approach, so I'm skeptical, and it is a performance in French. But the Academy is more international than ever...

15. Best Costume Design: Sweeney Todd
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... Elizabeth: The Golden Age.

Like Art Direction (above), I consider this a contest between Sweeney Todd and Atonement. This time, though, I think Atonement has the advantage. Everyone knows about the green dress, but all the outfits were quite impressive.

16. Best Cinematography: Robert Elswit, There Will Be Blood
WINNER!

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford was widely perceived as the most beautifully filmed release of 2007, and I think Roger Deakins will win, even though he's also nominated for No Country for Old Men.

17. Best Documentary Feature: No End in Sight
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... Taxi to the Dark Side.

It's hard to ignore the well-regarded doc on Bush's war on terror, but there's some political overlap among three of the other nominees, including Michael Moore's Sicko. Just a hunch, but look for Taxi to the Dark Side to get the win.

18. Best Adapted Screenplay: Ethan Coen & Joel Coen, No Country for Old Men
WINNER!

If they lose a category, it'll be this one. And yet the upset victor is unclear: will it be a past winner, like Christopher Hampton or Ronald Harwood? Or maybe a younger upstart, like Sarah Polley or Paul Thomas Anderson? Polley would be the surprise of the night, but I'll guess Anderson.

19. Best Sound Editing: Transformers
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... The Bourne Ultimatum.

20. Best Sound Mixing: Transformers
LOSER! The Oscar goes to... The Bourne Ultimatum.

Still don't know the difference. Still no opinion.

21. Best Supporting Actress: Tilda Swinton, Michael Clayton
WINNER!

I feel fairly confident that Saoirse Ronan (Atonement) will not win, but the rest is uncertain. Cate Blanchett and Amy Ryan dominated the precursors, but then Ruby Dee and Tilda Swinton came on strong. I... don't know. I saw American Gangster, and would be ready to hand this to Ruby Dee if she had more than one really good scene. Blanchett's won before. Swinton seems unlikely, unless the Academy is trying to create The Year of the Villain. If I had to guess, I'll say Amy Ryan.

What movie will win?

2008-02-21T17:57:00.000-08:00

The nominees for Best Picture are...

FATONEMENT

UNO

MICHAEL CLAYTHING

NO COUNTRY FOR COLD MEN

THERE WILL BE FUDD

Chart Attack!

2008-01-25T09:05:00.000-08:00

Still settling in. But if you're really hankering for some of my writing, go here. I've contributed to the new blog Popdose as a guest author of their feature CHART ATTACK!

I revisit the Top 10 songs from this week in the year 1976. Click over and check it out.

Movin' on up

2008-01-10T23:39:00.000-08:00

Hiatus explained!

I'm working on an in-town move. The do-it-yourself kind. Painful and time consuming. No point in blogging at the moment.

Hiatus continued.

Pic-Tac-Toe (13th edition)

2008-01-02T09:27:00.000-08:00

New year, same puzzle. As always, I've arranged 9 images into a 3x3 grid so that each row, column, and diagonal can be connected by a theme. There are 8 themes total.

(Click the image to enlarge. Guess in the comments.)

While not my best effort, this puzzle emphasizes my reliance on text, and how I'll probably never be able to do a wordless edition.

SOLVED! K-Lyn was the first to act, solving 5 themes. Then Bill closed up shop with the last 3. But feel free to do a little solving yourself before checking the answers.

Winding down

2007-12-31T14:12:00.000-08:00

We here at Brevity are in the process of killing the main reason people come to this site: the Advanced Screenings Guide. Its pages will remain (probably), but our efforts are sliding over to:

You can find it here. When the transfer is complete -- sometime in January, if all goes to plan -- all provider and screening info will be available on a single page tailored to your (major) city.

For the time being, though, you can still use our General Tips page to find local, regional, and national providers of free screenings in a long list of cities. Or check the 17 movies listed in our Specific Offers page, which covers the U.S. and Canada:

27 Dresses
The Bucket List
Cassandra's Dream
Cloverfield
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
First Sunday
How She Move
Mad Money
The Orphanage
Persepolis
Rambo
The Savages
The Spiderwick Chronicles
Strange Wilderness
There Will Be Blood
Untraceable
Welcome Home Roscoe Jenkins

Filmy residue

2007-12-28T02:27:00.000-08:00

Clearly, the advanced screenings subculture has been more than just a passing phase, as you can tell from my 2007 viewing habits.

Free advanced screenings (56): Freedom Writers, Happily N'Ever After, Code Name: The Cleaner, Thr3e, Stomp the Yard, Smokin' Aces, Catch and Release, Because I Said So, The Astronaut Farmer, Music and Lyrics, Breach, Amazing Grace, Reno 911!: Miami, Black Snake Moan, Wild Hogs, The Ultimate Gift, Shooter, Hairspray, The Last Mimzy, Blades of Glory, Meet the Robinsons, Are We Done Yet?, The Hoax, Knocked Up, Fracture, Hot Fuzz, Next, Year of the Dog, Lucky You, Georgia Rule, Waitress, Evan Almighty, Transformers, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry, Bratz, Hot Rod, Sydney White, The Kingdom, Balls of Fury, The 11th Hour, The Brave One, In the Valley of Elah, Eastern Promises, The Game Plan, Dan in Real Life, August Rush, Enchanted, Beowulf, Juno, The Golden Compass, The Bucket List, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Atonement, Sweeney Todd, Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story

Paid or had passes to see in first run theater (9): I Think I Love My Wife, The Namesake, Spider-Man 3, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, Shrek the Third, The Simpsons Movie, The Bourne Ultimatum, American Gangster, No Country for Old Men

Saw on DVD (9): Starter for 10, Gracie, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Pride, Incident at Lokhandwala, In the Land of Women, Talk to Me, Ratatouille, The Nanny Diaries

For whatever reason, there were probably another 10-15 movies I had received from the library on DVD, but never watched. It's almost as if I lose interest in a movie if I can't see it before it gets released. Strange.

Rather than play favorites for the year, here are a few select irreverent categories.

Best Example of My Alienation from Younger Audiences

Smokin' Aces is the winner, though I have a feeling Alpha Dog would win if I hadn't walked out of the screening. Both are guilty of inundating us with soulless and violent characters, with nary a point in sight. Fortunately, I think audiences are so desensitized by this by now that they've stopped attending.

The "Watch Your Back, Dakota Fanning" Award

Hmm. What does this award mean now? Is it devoted to precocious children, or intensely dramatic adolescents who act like miniature adults? If the former, then the Apatow/Mann kids in Knocked Up. If the latter, then Saoirse Ronan in Atonement; even Dakota Fanning would ask her to lighten up.

Style Over Substance Award

Hot Fuzz, but I think that was the point.

Substance Over Style Award

Amazing Grace: I can't remember a single scene, but I could tell you quite a bit about what happened and why I felt it mattered.

Best Line Delivery

I'm not a Hilary Swank fan at all, but it's been over 11 months since I saw Freedom Writers, and her very white-bread reading of the somewhat urban line "Were you trippin'?" still cracks me up.

Best Eye Candy, Female (co-winners)

Jenna Fischer, Blades of Glory: Yeah, Pam from TV's The Office. Until I saw her here, I had no idea.

Kerry Washington, I Think I Love My Wife: With her, I already had an idea. Ms. Washington is all kinds of fine to begin with, and her femme fatale in this strange (and not altogether effective) comedy was, well, altogether effective. You know what I mean.

Best Eye Candy, Male

Ryan Gosling, Fracture: I'm guessing? I'm not good at speculating this. But he plays a charming and intelligent lawyer who comes to a court arraignment wearing a tux. That has to count for something.

Poster of the Year

Michael Clayton. That wasn't hard to determine; the image to your right is perhaps one of the 10 finest me movie posters I've ever seen. (I'm curious to hear what Glenn of Stale Popcorn, who's slowly releasing his own top 100 poster list, might say.) The orange, the font, the bold all-caps text, and the face that still looks good with just the right amount of blurring. It worked so well that some thought the title was The Truth Can Be Adjusted. (Maybe it should have been.)

Honorary Brevity Award

This is tricky, because the last two winners are back with new films this year. David Cronenberg (who won in 2005 for A History of Violence) returns to direct the 100-minute Eastern Promises. Meanwhile, Fox Searchlight (2006 winner for Little Miss Sunshine) can boast Juno, which clocks in at 91 minutes.

Both films address the subject of teen pregnancy, but in VERY different ways. At first I was tempted to give the award to Juno, because Eastern Promises is notorious for star Viggo Mortensen's full frontal turn, and I think he'd be upset if I characterized anything about this film as short. But Juno mostly works because it gives us a sample of scenes for each trimester. It does not flow as well as Eastern Promises, though it does have the better ending.

So I'm going to do something that I tend to do, which is be supremely fair and give the award to neither. This year's Brevity Award goes to The Last Mimzy, a vastly underrated family movie that, at 90 minutes, manages to address time travel and all of humankind, present and future. Also, it makes better use of Rainn Wilson than Juno, which gave him a one-scene cameo.

Me against the music

2007-12-26T06:34:00.000-08:00

Whatever happened to popular music?

Sure, I'm not the best judge of this, as I find music the least essential of all entertainment media; given the choice, I would rather be deaf than blind. Heck, I'd rather have my legs than my ears. But music historians -- assuming they exist, getting paychecks and everything -- would probably agree with me when I say that 2007 was a truly sucky year for singles.

If you ask me, though, I think the music in television commercials has improved, and YouTube has given everyone their own music search engine and video archive. So now I wonder if radio (at least the terrestrial version) is no longer a relevant way to find and listen to music. Or, in the alternative, that corporate radio has become so afraid to play new music that they wait until it becomes famous elsewhere (case in point: Feist). I'll love to hear some opinions on this subject.

Anyway, I had a moderately difficult time last year narrowing down a 10-best list. This year I can't even think of 10. A decent minority of the songs released were okay, but only a few are noteworthy here. So here are the 7 exceptions to the rule that the entire year in music was useless:

7. "Dashboard" by Modest Mouse. In 2004's great debate of Modest Mouse vs. Franz Ferdinand -- whose respective songs "Float On" and "Take Me Out" became popular at roughly the same time -- I sided firmly with the latter. But a few years and a Smiths guitarist later, there's no need to be modest.

6. "You Know I'm No Good" by Amy Winehouse. In 2007's great debate of Amy Winehouse vs. Lily Allen, I sided firmly with... you get the idea. Sorry, but I just prefer fun self-mocking crazy over scary trainwreck crazy. But I have to hand it to Winehouse for getting it just right on this track.

5. "Paralyzer" by Finger Eleven. Once upon a time, I wasn't so fond of this act either. Over at Mostly Modern Media, I commented that 2007's ubiquitous suckfest "Hey There Delilah" was the most boring song to play on the radio since this band's 2003 hit "One Thing." But "Paralyzer" seems downright fun -- I certainly hope they're not being serious -- and its video seems to re-envision The Matrix as a shampoo commercial (maybe for this hair care line).

4. "Girlfriend" by Avril Lavigne. Yeah, I know. But you have to give her credit for taking herself lightly this one time. Even though she took the Toni Basil route, I can't help but wonder why this song wasn't "Mickey" popular. I mean, this could be a great for marketing Bring It On 4: In It to Win It. If that's not happening already.

3. "The Pretender" by Foo Fighters. I've never really given the Foo their due. Sure, I've appreciated their videos over the years (especially this parody of Mentos commercials), and their consistent output of rock albums is a rarity in this day and age. So let me publish a statement I've said privately, and mostly to deaf ears: Foo Fighters is the best band Dave Grohl's ever been involved with. My apologies for the delay. (Here's the video.)

2. "Over It" by Katharine McPhee. She's too chameleonic with her voice. Worked to her advantage on American Idol, but on her album it's distracting. With this song, however, she's not trying to sound like someone else. Pity this wasn't a hit; it's easily one of the best 5 songs ever released by a former contestant. Also: pretty.

1. "Stronger" by Kanye West. The near-annual event album, this song, its video... doesn't it seem like he's the only one who's trying anymore? It's like Daft Punk is in his basement, and everyone else is skipping the party. Thanks, Kanye. With your massive ego comes massive effort. (That goes for you too, Rainn Wilson.)

The Finer Things on TV Club

2007-12-24T07:08:00.000-08:00

Despite what I said about Heroes here, I'm enjoying television quite a bit. Even if you don't pay for HBO and Showtime, there's a lot to see. Below I list the best of 2007, but before I start, I'd like to cite a pair of honorable mentions.

First, to Saara Akaash (on AZN occasionally), a goofy Hindi soap opera about terrorists that threaten India/Pakistan relations. While it originally aired a few years ago, this year some obscure Asian channel in my digital cable lineup decided to carry part of the series. It's like Alias on crack.

Second, to Chuck (Mondays on NBC), if only for Zachary Levi's slacker reading of this culinary compliment: "That 7-layer dip, Ellie? Tasted like 8." It's like Alias on weed.

10. Reaper (Tuesdays on The CW). Sure, it's got a solid lead in Bret Harrison, a likeable galpal in Missy Peregrym, a demented devil in Ray Wise, a massive tool in Donavon Stinson, and apparently we needed Tyler Labine to be the next Jack Black. But this show makes my list because of the guy pictured above. Rick Gonzalez is the funniest third banana on TV.

9. Prison Break (Mondays on FOX). I've always said that this was the perfect two-season show, which means a 3rd season is completely unnecessary. But dang if it ain't still watchable. I dislike the idea of having a Season 1 character killed (rather unbelievably) by a new character, just to retain the show's signature shock value. But I'm so invested in the surviving characters by now that I'm locked in.

8. How It's Made (nightly on the Science Channel). I have never been one of those viewers hooked to the Discovery Channel and its spinoffs. But I have to make an exception for this show, an marvelous, step-by-step examination of machine craft and hand craft that also creates a kind of utopia: items are manufactured as efficiently as possible, and with a level of precision you would not expect from mass production. This is the world we choose to live in, at least until Skynet goes online and the robots take over.

7. Psych (summer Sundays on USA). Dulé Hill needed to leave The West Wing to hit his acting stride. Here he's the most comically enjoyable straight man on television, becoming the ideal (and stronger) partner to sorta-funny James Roday in this fake psychic comedy. Episode titles like "Meat is Murder but Murder is Also Murder" can't hurt.

6. 30 Rock (Thursdays on NBC). This show gets so lovably dumber every week, it's irresistible. Tina Fey's finally hit her stride in balancing the characters into a true ensemble, no longer needing Alec Baldwin to fill in all the awkward moments. And this show makes better use of guest stars than any other show.

5. Pushing Daisies (Wednesdays on ABC). Anna Friel is on American television! Sure, the narration is a bit precious, the quirk level is freakishly high, and it takes half an episode to set up a "Birdhouse in Your Soul" joke, but Anna Friel! Love that girl; always have. Anna Friel!

4. House (Tuesdays on FOX). Kal Penn is on American television! But it's all about odd couple Hugh Laurie and Robert Sean Leonard. You have to let go of the formulaic plots -- the fun is in the dialogue, and the constant ribbing. Sure, it's a present-day medical version of Sherlock Holmes, but that also means the writers are well aware of that modern invention, slash fiction.

3. Journeyman (Mondays on NBC). Recent industry news and rumors suggest that this show may not even last the whole season, which seems almost tragic. But the same lack of hype was one of the show's strengths. NBC doesn't promote it endlessly. People seem surprised they like it. It's just a hard working performer that delivers, and unlike Heroes, is unafraid of revealing its secrets before the end of the season... if there is one.

2. The Office (Thursdays on NBC). I was late to the party on this one; two high school friends sat me down and forced me to watch. (This was probably for the best; the show didn't hit its comedic stride for me until the third season.) Now I'm a total convert. Signs that I've become addicted: (1) I articulate every syllable of a spoken sentence, like Kevin; (2) I make quirky faces to the invisible cameras in front of me, like Jim; and (3) I find the character with whom I most closely identify: surprisingly, it's Angela.

1. Mad Men (summer Thursdays on AMC). I think Elisabeth Moss is miscast; she's too modern for a show set in the year 1960. And maybe to justify that promo line "from the writer-director of The Sopranos," creator Matthew Weiner tries too hard to balance the work and home life of the main characters. But other than that? Outstanding show, with an atmosphere, attitude, and appeal unlike anything else on television. Like the impossibly proportioned Joan (Christina Hendricks), they don't make 'em like this anymore, but they sure can simulate the experience. With solid anchor work by Jon Hamm and January Jones, and a starmaking, lean and hungry performance by Vincent Kartheiser (pictured).

Beginning to get interesting

2007-12-22T23:41:00.000-08:00

Dick Vitale may be sidelined, but the game of college basketball itself is enough to start getting excited.

Wednesday night I attended the UNLV-Arizona game, expecting a high-scoring performance by super soph Chase Budinger. Didn't happen -- he couldn't buy an outside shot, going 1-for-7, and ended up with 6 points. But the Wildcats won anyway, mostly behind man-among-boys Jordan Hill, who had a double-double at the half and finished with 16 points and 19 rebounds. They made a few smart plays at the end, and UNLV (which had led for most of the game) showed a lack of poise with some strange, rushed shots. Still, I would consider it a quality win for the newly Lute-less team.

As a fan who appreciates the art of the rebound, I wondered how perennially undersized Duke would fare against a talented big man like the 6'10" Jordan Hill. My question was somewhat answered Thursday, as Pittsburgh's 6'7" frosh DeJuan Blair notched 15 points and 20 rebounds in his team's win over my alma mater. I saw only part of the game, so I feel unqualified to comment, but I wonder if the Blue Devils can learn from this experience and neutralize the ACC's big men (including Tyler Hansbrough, who's no longer fooling anyone with his goofy looks).

Memphis beat Georgetown. Michigan State beat Texas. Mississippi beat Clemson. (Go M teams!) After this weekend's games, only 9 undefeated teams remain. So here's the latest Seeded 16:

South Regional (Houston)
01. Memphis: Down goes Georgetown, but next comes Arizona.
08. Vanderbilt: Eaten cupcakes thus far, plus GT and Wake.
09. Sam Houston State: Will they run the table? Probably not.
16. UCLA: Open Pac-10 play with a couple of Bay Area games.

Midwest Regional (Detroit)
02. Kansas: Has 7 weeks to prepare for that Texas game.
07. Miami: Might keep winning for another month.
10. Tennessee: Great road win vs. Xavier. Next up is Gonzaga.
15. Butler: Most likely to win out rest of regular season.

East Regional (Charlotte)
03. UNC: Good work, Roy. They're like the Kansas of the East.
06. Mississippi: Showed something by giving Clemson first loss.
11. Michigan State: Statement win against a strong Texas team.
14. Texas A&M: Only loss to Arizona in tough McKale Center.

West Regional (Phoenix)
04. Washington State: Exercised state superiority at Zags.
05. Pittsburgh: Played to their strengths in beating Duke.
12. Texas: Can't slip too far after close loss in Auburn Hills.
13. West Virginia: Tough stretch of games in next 2 weeks.

Also considered: Georgetown, Marquette, Duke, Arizona.

Pic-Tac-Toe (12th edition)

2007-12-19T12:50:00.000-08:00

This will be the last Pic-Tac-Toe of 2007. By now you know that it's a puzzle of nine images arranged into a 3x3 square, Brady Bunch style. Each row, column, and diagonal has a theme. Your mission is to solve the puzzle by figuring out all 8 themes. Good luck!

(Click to enlarge, and make your guesses in the comments.)

SOLVED! K-Lyn mastered 5 themes, Billie got 2, and Bill was the closer. Speaking of, Bill's new 3-D Pic-Tac-Toe can be found here. It's really an amazing creation -- 27 images, 49 themes -- and it must be seen to be believed.

Single blade technology

2007-12-18T23:04:00.000-08:00

As a public service, I feel that there are two things you all should know about the new film version of Sweeney Todd. First, it's bloody. Second, it's a musical.

It's a bloody musical! People come in thinking it's Edward Scissorhands with slightly more mishaps. Sorry, no. The actors start singing from the get-go, and let's just say a lot of red corn syrup gets used. I figure many audience members will still walk out, but really, it's their own fault. A little mental preparation can go a long way toward making an informed ticket purchase.

As for the movie itself: there is much to like, but not a lot to love. Sweeney Todd (Johnny Depp) returns to London and seeks revenge against the wicked judge (Alan Rickman) who tore him from his family many years ago. He teams up with meat pie maker Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter) to set his plan in motion.

There's a clear disparity in the singing talents of the two leads and the rest of the cast, but I didn't mind. Depp has a sort of pop-rock voice that actually worked well with Rickman in their duet. Bonham Carter has a sort of whispery voice, but her lyrically loaded songs played to her strengths. It all flows well, but I have no great desire to check out the soundtrack.

Depicted here is a London that is both perfect for the film and well within the borders of Tim Burton's world. The principal characters wear a skin that's practically gray. The collective attitude is sufficiently dismal. The streets are harsh and dirty. The factory belches filth into the sky. It really is an ideal combination of director and material.

That said, I know a lot of Tim Burton fans are breathlessly waiting for some Oscar recognition, but I just don't see it happening. It's a much darker tale than you'd expect, faithful in spirit to the source material. Burton has always struck me as a director who delights in the macabre, but prefers his violence off screen. Not this time. The deaths can be downright visceral at times, and the blood spray almost gets a little silly.

A final note to Alan Rickman lovers. Sweeney Todd has the same problem as his other films: not enough Alan Rickman. Sorry.

Crackin' wisdom

2007-12-15T10:00:00.000-08:00

I don't have much to say about the Golden Globe nominations. Honestly, I was more curious about the TV nods than the film ones, and so I was thrilled to see rookies Mad Men and Pushing Daisies get multiple notices.

Still, I came across this article about how the writers' strike might affect next month's ceremony, and felt the need to extract a bit:

House actor Hugh Laurie alluded to the strike in statement to Usmagazine.com: "I have to emphasize how much I owe to David Shore and all the writers on House. Without them, I wouldn't even know how to finish this sentence without... you know..."

Brief, witty, and meta. How can you not love this guy?

The skinny on Keira Knightley

2007-12-14T13:01:00.000-08:00

By my loose, nobody-knows-anything estimation, Atonement is your likely Best Picture winner at the next Academy Awards, alongside nominees American Gangster, The Kite Runner, No Country for Old Men, and There Will Be Blood. But would I pay to see it? Fortunately, I didn't have to, as I caught a screening Thursday evening.

Good thing, because I feel like a paid ticket is somehow supporting Keira Knightley to keep her scary, alien-like frame. Look at her shoulders in this picture! They are pointy, not willowy. (Memo to the studios: drop the Kool-Aid already, and quit convincing us that this is how women are supposed to look. Hetero men aren't stupid -- well, no, we are -- but we're pretty sure that our gaze was not intended for human hangers wearing stylish clothes.)

So, the movie: it has the makings of a major award winner -- meaty title, themes of war and romance, long passage of time -- but I felt a little cold by all of it. For whatever reason, it plays around with its timeline; usually, I feel a movie is better told simply and linearly, but in this case, the skipping around kept me interested.

For a few fleeting moments, leads Knightley and James McAvoy have a lively chemistry, and might have made more of it in a less heavy-handed movie. The direction, sticking to this overall solemn tone, comes across as appropriately theatrical. Watching the film with a mind toward awards, you see all bases properly covered: music, costumes, makeup, cinematography, etc. I was especially fond of the use of a typewriter (the film's symbolic weapon) as a percussive instrument.

Haven't read the book, but I want to believe that there was more reason to care about what happened. What we're given instead is -- my apologies, Keira -- a very barebones approach.

A list I'd like to see

2007-12-13T07:25:00.000-08:00

I know Rolling Stone has formulated several all-time lists, so many that you could rank them in order of worthlessness. But have they (or anyone else reputable) ever compiled a definitive list of the greatest rock bands of all time? Like, a real list, with no cheating: sneaking in solo artists, including genres outside of rock, etc.

Because I have a few questions:

1. Who's number 1?
2. Who's number 3?
3. Does U2 make the top 5?
4. How many American bands make the top 10?
5. Which woman will appear on the list first: a musician like Tina Weymouth, or a frontwoman like Grace Slick?
6. Will backup bands like the E Street Band and Crazy Horse get respect?
7. Aside from the Jimi Hendrix Experience, Bob Marley and the Wailers, and maybe Prince and the Revolution, does the list look entirely white?
8. If the bands are graded, does Guns 'n Roses get an incomplete?
9. What's a good length for this kind of list: 10? 100? 1,000?
10. How inflated would Nirvana's ranking be this time?

My more musically-inclined readers (and the rest of us) are free to speculate and share their own preferences here.

Pic-Tac-Toe (11th edition)

2007-12-12T11:11:00.000-08:00

Last week I took a step back and re-evaluated my skillz as a puzzle maker. Or mad skillz, as it were. I decided to go a little less crazy with these and get back to basics. The goal was to simply construct a puzzle that worked, rather than get too caught up with obscure themes. I think I did a fair job of it below. (Better still, I've already composed next week's puzzle.)

The Pic-Tac-Toe is a picture puzzle in which 9 images are arranged in a 3x3 grid so that each row, column, and diagonal contains three images that share a common theme. Determine all 8 themes, and you solve the puzzle.

(Click the image to enlarge. Guess in the comments.)

SOLVED! Bill gets 5, K-Lyn gets 4. But feel free to solve this puzzle yourself, and then check your answers in the comments section.

Fedora, the explorer

2007-12-11T14:09:00.000-08:00

So, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. (Image by artist Drew Struzan, taken from Coming Soon.) I suppose the first poster and a release date brings it all closer to reality, doesn't it?

Crystal skull, huh?

"Alas, poor Yorick! I didn't mean to drop you."

God, the Devil, and Bucket

2007-12-10T08:34:00.000-08:00

Alternate title: Jack and dyin'. But I liked the one I chose better. Think of Bruce/Evan Almighty and The Witches of Eastwick and you'll see what I mean.

It's nice to see Rob Reiner back in fine directorial form with The Bucket List, a film in which Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman are cancer ward patients who, while still in decent health, decide to do a make a list of things to do before they die. The film follows their adventures as they (and thankless assistant Sean Hayes) try to cross each item off.

As part of the ridiculous end-of-year ~~Oscar~~ holiday schedule, this film opens in Los Angeles and New York City on Christmas Day, and people anywhere else will have to wait until January 11 at the very least. (Sticking it to a bad system: just one of the many reasons I choose the advanced screening route.)

You might expect that the appeal of the film lies in its powerhouse leads. You'd be correct, but still unaware of how the marvelously simple script is so carefully crafted to play to their individual strengths. The actors aren't breaking new ground here, but rather embodying worn-to-perfection roles as would Paul Newman, Sidney Poitier, or James Garner. We get a little (not too much) of Freeman's narration as he attempts to explain the unusual friendship that frames the movie. Nicholson is funny in his much-put-upon way, and becomes a nice negative counterbalance to all that intelligence and optimism.

What's interesting is that how the film eventually confounds your expectations. Freeman turns out to be the clear lead, at least emotionally, displaying a curiously selfish desire to embrace the Bucket List and stick with it. He's a logical know-it-all that finds an obsession in the unknown. In turn, it's nice to see Nicholson being the noble one in his respectful support of Freeman's ambition to stretch beyond his boundaries of familiarity.

Where the streets... (take 2)

2007-12-09T11:29:00.000-08:00

Four months ago I tried to start a special series here at Brevity called "Where the Streets Have Fun Names." Basically, I provide a screen capture of an unusual Las Vegas neighborhood found in Google Maps. Despite finding quite a few, I never got around to writing the posts, and kinda forgot about it. Well, this is my first step toward improving that lousy track record.

This is the least creatively named set of streets in human history:

Some questions:
1. Who thought this was a good idea, and how high were they?
2. To what decibel levels did the county authorities laugh?
3. How do you not get lost?

"From Decatur, turn right on Royal Ridge. Then take the first right onto Royal Ridge -- what? No, right onto Royal Ridge Drive, then right onto Royal Ridge Way. Right, Royal Ridge Way. Then take Royal until you get to Royal Ridge Boulevard. That's right, Royal. If you get to Ridge then you've gone too far. No, not the... wait... I'll send you the GPS coordinates."

The bother of Seville

2007-12-08T16:35:00.000-08:00

Alvin and the Chipmunks is a sobering cautionary tale about the perils of fame, and the exhausting and often humiliating antics of stage parents. No, I'm kidding; it's a standard family movie. The trailer looked downright awful, but when I saw a free screening this morning, it wasn't so bad. Once again, it's amazing how one's low expectations can improve a movie.

Much of the credit goes to stars Jason Lee and David Cross, both edgy choices for this kind of family fare. Dave Seville (Lee) is a struggling songwriter who happens upon the titular characters and gains the special attention of a record exec (Cross). Over the film they battle over control of the instantly popular chipmunk recording act, who are depicted as the equivalent of children.

While the script is nothing to write home about, it does a few things well. No time is wasted on the talking chipmunk thing; it's a novelty, but it's never becomes a scientific issue. Also, any shenanigans meant to turn Dave's life upside down are kept to a merciful minimum. And the evilness within the greedy Cross character is of the boo-hiss variety, so that audiences can just delight in that actor's general weirdness.

With this movie and last summer's Underdog, Lee has become one of those actors who settle down in their old age and make movies their kids could watch. Thing is, he's actually pretty good at it. So you don't have to blame little Pilot Inspektor Riesgraf-Lee for his father's change in output.

17 undefeated teams

2007-12-07T15:23:00.000-08:00

I'm paying about half-attention to the early goings this college basketball season. (I'll be at the UNLV-Arizona game in a couple of weeks, so by then I should be a lot more excited.)

I have, however, been keeping an eye on those teams that have yet to lose a game. Last time I wrote about the sport, there were 41 undefeated teams. Since then, 24 have lost.

Seems unfair to leave a team out, so my Seeded 16 is a Seeded 17.

South Regional (Houston)
01. Memphis: Good neutral court wins strengthened their profile.
08. Clemson: Could be 13-0 when they host UNC in the new year.
09. Pittsburgh: Get a pre-holiday test against Duke in NYC.
16. Texas-Arlington: These two Southland teams could both be...
17. Sam Houston State: ...undefeated when they play January 30.

Midwest Regional (Detroit)
02. Kansas: Great win at USC in possible Final Four preview.
07. Butler: Beat Ohio State by 19 points last week.
10. Miami: Could coast through rest of 2007.
15. Vanderbilt: A few okay wins, but rest of SEC not convinced.

East Regional (Charlotte)
03. UNC: I'm frustrated to say that I don't hate these guys yet.
06. Georgetown: Great chance to show stuff at Memphis soon.
11. California: Can measure themselves vs. Kansas State.
14. Mississippi: Matchups against Winthrop, Clemson lay ahead.

West Regional (Phoenix)
04. Texas: Early wins vs. Tennessee, UCLA count a lot.
05. Washington State: Exercised state superiority at Zags.
12. Duke: Lost Martynas Pocius to season-ending injury.
13. St. Mary's: But Gonzaga's still the WCC team to beat.

Also considered: No one for now.

Due north

2007-12-06T12:00:00.000-08:00

The Golden Compass is the first movie of a proposed trilogy. The last time I sat down for such an experience, it was the first Lord of the Rings, and my aching rear end never forgave me. (After three-plus hours of that, I finally took a stand, in more ways than one.) Fortunately, this movie clocks in around 1:45, and isn't about a fellowship of men trying to win a makeup contest.

I saw an advanced screening of this movie Tuesday, and have now reserved some room for optimism. Spunky kid Dakota Blue Richards (hippie parents?) is raised in a safe university setting by avuncular Daniel Craig. He has to leave for parts north to prove an audacious scientific theory that puts his life in danger with the powers that be, and she is scooped up by mysterious patron Nicole Kidman, who only seems free-spirited.

Let me stop here. Maybe it's a coincidence, but why is the anorexic crazy blonde with an establishment fetish named Mrs. Coulter? I floated away from the movie for a while as I considered the ways the film was making statements against Republicans. I could have sworn that I saw a Fox News crawl at the bottom of the screen, but maybe my mind was playing tricks.

Adventure ensues, as our young, compass-toting heroine finds allies in a space cowboy (Sam Elliott), ageless witch (Eva Green), and talking bear (Ian McKellen), among others. It's a testament to the film that these characters aren't as silly as you'd think they would be. As befitting a first installment, there is a hopeful but incomplete resolution, as the stage is set for future storytelling.

Finally, someone will have to explain to me why religious types find this material so controversial. Maybe it's all in the Philip Pullman novels, because I saw nothing here that taught kids atheism or even said anything anti-religious. The central conflict appears to be between academia (good) and law (bad), both of which use some eye-glazing science to achieve their goals.

Pic-Tac-Toe (10th edition)

2007-12-05T08:19:00.000-08:00

We all go a little mad sometimes, and I found myself supremely frustrated trying to finish this one. So I enlisted the help of K-Lyn, who pushed this puzzle through many incarnations, allowing me to stop thinking about it for a while and then actually be productive, finishing it when the time was right. Really, this could just as easily been over at her blog. But it's my addled brain on display, so my 10th Pic-Tac-Toe (two whole feet!) is here instead.

Below are 9 images arranged in a 3x3 format. A unique theme connects the images of each row, column, and diagonal. That's a total of 8 themes. Solve the puzzle and I'll try to do it all over again. As K-Lyn will attest, that order's getting taller and taller.

(Click on the image to enlarge; guess in the comments.)

Obviously, K-Lyn is ineligible, so my thanks will have to do.

SOLVED! Bill did quite well on his own, perhaps even improving my left column. Don't know if I'll come up with an 11th puzzle in a week; the process is exhausting, even with the gracious help/control of another.

There can be only two!

2007-12-04T01:02:00.000-08:00

(Alternate title: TV's Heroes, and why you should still care.)

Like everyone else, I've been less than excited about the current season of this show, even before the Hollywood writers' strike drew it to a merciful close. While its early problems had to do with slow pacing and an anticlimactic finale, now the problems run deeper: too many satellite characters, too many storylines stretched thin, no real sense of cohesion.

But I'm not writing this to complain. I've been playing around with a theory about the show for a few months now, and the more I think about it, the more I feel that I'm right. For a TV series that has relied heavily on advertising taglines, I have this distinct notion that they will eventually borrow a page from Highlander and commit to the phrase "There can be only two!"

This is my theory: for whatever genetic and geographic reasons, the development of unique abilities will manifest in exactly two people in the world, giving each hero a doppelgänger. So far we know of the following pairs. (For a show that works in elements of time travel, power transfer, and resurrection, I'm not ready to accept that any of these people listed are necessarily dead.)

1. Adam Monroe (David Anders) and Claire Bennet (Hayden Panettiere) are indestructible, and each have shown that their blood holds curative properties.

2. Nathan Petrelli (Adrian Pasdar, pictured above, right) and West Rosen (Nicholas D'Agosto) each make you believe a man can fly.

3. Matt Parkman (Greg Grunberg) and his father Maury (Alan Blumenfield) can read and manipulate the minds of others.

4. Even the much-maligned twins Alejandro and Maya Herrera (Shalim Ortiz and Dania Ramirez) -- she of the virus and he of the antidote -- have previous generation equivalents in Mohinder Suresh (Sendhil Ramamurthy, pictured below, left) and his late sister Shanti. Does anyone else think that the planned biological fallout is due to an active Maya, rather than some decades-old Shanti virus samples from a company lab?

This theory of course suggests that the showrunners have yet to introduce the doubles for any of the other heroes (alive or dead, of the older generation or current) and will have to do so soon or in the upcoming seasons. That last night's Volume 2 finale episode ended with a few minutes of Volume 3 -- entitled "Villains" -- may bear this out.

I feel my theory is validated by the fact that not a single power was repeated until the beginning of this second season. I believe this was intentional, as the first season was designed to introduce the people that will have to fight their counterparts by the show's endgame, and future volumes will shape this central conflict.

Final note: despite the potential excitement about what the showrunners could do in future seasons -- a live-action Superfriends and Legion of Doom holds great appeal -- it's a little sad that any hope I have for the show right now seems to be more my own creation than theirs.

Should Brevity have a swimsuit edition?
	No!
	Hell no!

Courtesy of Pollcode.com