Sports at its finest.
Sunday, May 04, 2008
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Follow the Leader?
I was perusing the comments section of ESPN's recap of the San Antonio Spurs' victory over the Phoenix Suns in game 1 of their opening round series. For those of you who didn't watch the game, you can check out the highlights here. Given the NBA's television ratings (especially ratings when the Spurs are playing), I'm pretty sure most folks did not tune into the game. That's a shame because it was a classic. Anyway, back to the comments. There are way too many comments to read, but I came across one that was especially insightful into the psyche of a what seems to be a typical Suns fan:
Looking at the box score, you can see that the Spurs were called for 3 more fouls than the Suns. They also attempted 7 more free throws and made a higher percentage of those free throws than the Spurs made of their free throws. It was an exciting game that could have gone either way. I'd like to think (for the sake of competitive fairness) that the Suns themselves wouldn't be given to such hysterical reactions. Then I remembered that this guy is their leader and that thought was quickly extinguished. And the fans' reactions made perfect sense.
The refs were horrible and decided the game against the Suns....AGAIN!
Looking at the box score, you can see that the Spurs were called for 3 more fouls than the Suns. They also attempted 7 more free throws and made a higher percentage of those free throws than the Spurs made of their free throws. It was an exciting game that could have gone either way. I'd like to think (for the sake of competitive fairness) that the Suns themselves wouldn't be given to such hysterical reactions. Then I remembered that this guy is their leader and that thought was quickly extinguished. And the fans' reactions made perfect sense.
Monday, April 07, 2008
Assessing Value: School is Great, So Shut Up About Your Debt
I've been hearing people complain recently about the cost of a higher education and that many students are going into quite a bit of debt in order to pay for their schooling. Never mind that there are places (Tennessee and Georgia, for example) where all in-state students receive free tuition at state schools, provided they maintain a certain GPA. In Tennessee, I believe the required level is 3.0 (that's a B). There are also prestigious universities (Stanford and Harvard, for example) that are using their massive endowments to ensure that students whose parents make less than a certain amount ($150k, I think) will leave school debt free.
That being said, the majority of students probably must still rely on some sort of financial aid. For those people fortunate enough to have their parents pay for everything, well that's nice. For everyone who is relying on student loans, it's not as bad as you think. Yours truly has attended 9 years of school, the first 6 of which relied almost exclusively on loans. I have had little to no help from the parents and inconsequential amounts of scholarships (until these last 3 years). As a result, I'm looking at about $70,000 in debt. Whoa is me. Whooooooaaaa is me!
Whatever. Consolidate that debt at a low rate and pay it off over 30 years. 30 years? Wait a second. That's like a house payment, except with a lower interest rate. People think of houses not only as places to live, but also as an investment. It's one of the few things you purchase that will usually increase in value over the years. Most people realize that. What most people fail to realize is that an education will as well.
Your house will make you money when you move out of it...and then you spend money on a new house. In the mean time you get to pay for your house and also pay taxes on it. Sign me up. Oh, and if someone could explain to me why you have to pay taxes on your home every year I'd appreciate it. I'm not paying taxes on the value of my car every year. Why should I have to pay every year for owning a home? If Ron Paul was President this probably wouldn't be happening. Hmmm, maybe we can get him to run as an Independent... Sorry, got sidetracked.
Your education is better than a house. Yes, your education will make you money as soon as you complete it. It will continue to make you money for as long as you're employed. $70,000 in school debt, at 4% interest, paid off over 30 years is about $335/month. 5% will put you at $375/month. People will spend that much a month on a car note. They'll spend $100 a month for cable (gotta have HBO). Eating out isn't cheap. Neither are cell phones, especially if you like to text. None of these things pay you back. People don't really complain about the cost of them either.
I'm guessing that most people don't have $70,000 in debt. Those that do have probably gone to graduate school (e.g., Rowrbazzle), medical school (e.g., Señor Entropy) or law school (e.g., uh, lawyers). Those folks are expecting to make more money than their friends with Bachelors degrees so their added debt will be offset. Of course there are some people who just went to some crazy-expensive private school and therefore have a lot of debt. Yeah, that probably wasn't worth it. Unless you're talking Ivy League, you're probably not going to get a better job than someone who did equally well at a state school. That's just my opinion, though.
Another option would of course be Military service. But, but, I don't wanna fight in a war, you say. Don't worry, you'll have plenty of time between now and when you're put on active duty so you probably won't have to. And even if you are called up you can just get religion to get out of it. Once that happens you won't have to go to war. Yeah, you might have to pay back that money, but I'd say it's a risk worth taking. You were going to have to pay it back anyway if you hadn't joined up.
The moral of this story is, of course, quit complaining. School is worth it. Also, U.S. tax laws are stupid. And Ron Paul is the voice of the people, but he'll never be elected because he's probably crazy. And appellate court judges are completely gullible.
That being said, the majority of students probably must still rely on some sort of financial aid. For those people fortunate enough to have their parents pay for everything, well that's nice. For everyone who is relying on student loans, it's not as bad as you think. Yours truly has attended 9 years of school, the first 6 of which relied almost exclusively on loans. I have had little to no help from the parents and inconsequential amounts of scholarships (until these last 3 years). As a result, I'm looking at about $70,000 in debt. Whoa is me. Whooooooaaaa is me!
Whatever. Consolidate that debt at a low rate and pay it off over 30 years. 30 years? Wait a second. That's like a house payment, except with a lower interest rate. People think of houses not only as places to live, but also as an investment. It's one of the few things you purchase that will usually increase in value over the years. Most people realize that. What most people fail to realize is that an education will as well.
Your house will make you money when you move out of it...and then you spend money on a new house. In the mean time you get to pay for your house and also pay taxes on it. Sign me up. Oh, and if someone could explain to me why you have to pay taxes on your home every year I'd appreciate it. I'm not paying taxes on the value of my car every year. Why should I have to pay every year for owning a home? If Ron Paul was President this probably wouldn't be happening. Hmmm, maybe we can get him to run as an Independent... Sorry, got sidetracked.
Your education is better than a house. Yes, your education will make you money as soon as you complete it. It will continue to make you money for as long as you're employed. $70,000 in school debt, at 4% interest, paid off over 30 years is about $335/month. 5% will put you at $375/month. People will spend that much a month on a car note. They'll spend $100 a month for cable (gotta have HBO). Eating out isn't cheap. Neither are cell phones, especially if you like to text. None of these things pay you back. People don't really complain about the cost of them either.
I'm guessing that most people don't have $70,000 in debt. Those that do have probably gone to graduate school (e.g., Rowrbazzle), medical school (e.g., Señor Entropy) or law school (e.g., uh, lawyers). Those folks are expecting to make more money than their friends with Bachelors degrees so their added debt will be offset. Of course there are some people who just went to some crazy-expensive private school and therefore have a lot of debt. Yeah, that probably wasn't worth it. Unless you're talking Ivy League, you're probably not going to get a better job than someone who did equally well at a state school. That's just my opinion, though.
Another option would of course be Military service. But, but, I don't wanna fight in a war, you say. Don't worry, you'll have plenty of time between now and when you're put on active duty so you probably won't have to. And even if you are called up you can just get religion to get out of it. Once that happens you won't have to go to war. Yeah, you might have to pay back that money, but I'd say it's a risk worth taking. You were going to have to pay it back anyway if you hadn't joined up.
The moral of this story is, of course, quit complaining. School is worth it. Also, U.S. tax laws are stupid. And Ron Paul is the voice of the people, but he'll never be elected because he's probably crazy. And appellate court judges are completely gullible.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
NCAA = Fraud
From USA Today
Does the NCAA not make enough money off of the TV contracts as it is? Get rid of all the VIP (nonsense) allocations. In my opinion the allocation numbers should be more like 75% for the schools, 20% to the public and 5% to whoever else (prize winners, foreign dignitaries, make-a-wish kids).
For that matter, basketball games aren't meant to be played in domes. Move them back to actual basketball arenas. Yes, they probably won't make as much money and fewer State Farm Senior VPs will be able to go to the game, but at least the players will be able to play a game in a more natural environment.
Plus, given the NCAA's deal with RazorGator, they could play it in a real basketball arena and still make plenty of money. Just sell all the tickets to RazorGator and watch the profit roll in.
Finally...
[The NCAA] is having its official ticket package provider, RazorGator, move large blocks of prime tickets online at markups of hundreds, even thousands, of dollars...
The tickets sold to RazorGator come from allocations reserved for public sale (22% of the tickets) and the association's use (10%). Tickets are also allotted to participating schools (35%), the local host committee (10%), the national basketball coaches' association (8%), college athletics directors (8%) and CBS and corporate sponsors (6%)...
Much of the public-sale allocation was distributed through a lottery for which prospective customers could purchase a maximum of two tickets. They could submit a maximum of 10 applications and be selected once.The "much" in paragraph three is nonsense. I applied and was randomly selected to purchase two tickets for each of the Final Four games. According to the letter the NCAA sent me with my tickets the seating capacity of the Alamodome is 43,500. If 22% of seats were allocated to the general public, that is 9,570 tickets. However, in the letter it also says plainly that 4,600 tickets were allocated through the lottery. 4600/9570 = 48%. Less than half of the 22% does not constitute "much" in my mind. The rest of 22% is seemingly sold directly to RazorGator so they can resell them and split the profits with the NCAA. 22% to the general public is bunk. Selling only 10.5% of the total capacity to the public and 35% to the schools isn't commensurate with a collegiate sporting event. It's a corporate function.
Under a partnership that began last year, the NCAA allows RazorGator to purchase an undisclosed number of tickets...
Does the NCAA not make enough money off of the TV contracts as it is? Get rid of all the VIP (nonsense) allocations. In my opinion the allocation numbers should be more like 75% for the schools, 20% to the public and 5% to whoever else (prize winners, foreign dignitaries, make-a-wish kids).
For that matter, basketball games aren't meant to be played in domes. Move them back to actual basketball arenas. Yes, they probably won't make as much money and fewer State Farm Senior VPs will be able to go to the game, but at least the players will be able to play a game in a more natural environment.
Plus, given the NCAA's deal with RazorGator, they could play it in a real basketball arena and still make plenty of money. Just sell all the tickets to RazorGator and watch the profit roll in.
Finally...
Roughly 95 cents of every dollar pocketed by NCAA will go to member institutions in support of student-athletes, says Greg Shaheen [the NCAA's senior vice president for basketball and business strategies].Really? Do the athletic programs really need the money? Wouldn't all this profit be better served in a general scholarship fund? I wish the Social Sciences program had a 43,000 seat tournament. Maybe then my student loans would be so outrageous.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Hit.Them.Hard
Apparently there are some folks out there who don't realize that putting periods after every word isn't clever. Really, it was never clever and no amount of persisting in this annoying style will make it clever.
If I ever meet the person who started this ridiculousness I will punch him or her in the face while speaking really slowly. I implore you all to do the same to anyone you encounter who types like that. I realize this is a difficult task, being as this kind of behavior generally exists only in virtual environments. Thus, the onus has to be on friends and families.
If you see someone in your family engaging in such bothersome behavior, hit them hard. The same goes for friends. If you have a friend who has fallen into the trap of singular word punctuation, do the right thing and hit them hard. Speaking slowly while you are pummeling them is optional, but doing so will really drive home the point.
I hope that soon the perpetrators of this phenomenon will learn their lesson and this irritation that plagues so many of us will be eradicated. Together, I think we can make it happen.
One final note: it is important that the beatings occur as close in time to the offending behavior as possible. If too much time has passed they might not be able to adequately pair the pain they're receiving with the appropriate problematic behavior. Let's face it; these people probably engage in numerous behaviors worthy of a beating. Then again, random beatings could very well result in some of their other repulsive behaviors being stamped out, though not necessarily this particular behavior. Hmmm. I suppose I'll leave it up to you.
If I ever meet the person who started this ridiculousness I will punch him or her in the face while speaking really slowly. I implore you all to do the same to anyone you encounter who types like that. I realize this is a difficult task, being as this kind of behavior generally exists only in virtual environments. Thus, the onus has to be on friends and families.
If you see someone in your family engaging in such bothersome behavior, hit them hard. The same goes for friends. If you have a friend who has fallen into the trap of singular word punctuation, do the right thing and hit them hard. Speaking slowly while you are pummeling them is optional, but doing so will really drive home the point.
I hope that soon the perpetrators of this phenomenon will learn their lesson and this irritation that plagues so many of us will be eradicated. Together, I think we can make it happen.
One final note: it is important that the beatings occur as close in time to the offending behavior as possible. If too much time has passed they might not be able to adequately pair the pain they're receiving with the appropriate problematic behavior. Let's face it; these people probably engage in numerous behaviors worthy of a beating. Then again, random beatings could very well result in some of their other repulsive behaviors being stamped out, though not necessarily this particular behavior. Hmmm. I suppose I'll leave it up to you.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
The 23rd
In the past couple weeks I've seen quite a few movies. Two in particular piqued my interest as a study in contrasts.
Both films deal with the death of a woman. Film 1 proceeds as a courtroom procedural, wherein an attorney seeks to bring a known killer to justice. Film 2 proceeds as a mosaic and examines the lives that are affected by the dead woman. The actors of Film 1 are bigger stars than those of Film 2, but both films feature easily recognizable performers. The director of Film 1 has previously made more well-known films than the director of Film 2, although neither is in any way an household name.
Still, what is more interesting than the actors in each film or even the approaches the films take, although that could be dissected at length, is the startling difference of the films post-release.
Film 1 received generally favorable reviews, with most of the praise going to the actors. This is understandable given that it featured actors who have combined for 6 Oscar nominations, with 1 win. Personally, I found the performances to be overpraised, but still the strongest part of the otherwise pedestrian film. It opened in over 2,000 theaters and grossed about $39 million in the US. You've no doubt heard of it, quite possibly seen it, and there's a decent chance you'll consider picking it up next time you're at Blockbuster.
Film 2 received generally favorable reviews, with most of the praise going to the actors. This is understandable given that it featured actors who have combined for 8 Oscar nominations, with 2 wins. Personally, I found the performances to be worthy of the praise given and the film far superior to Film 1. It opened in 2 theaters and grossed about $19,000 in the US. You've probably never heard of it, haven't seen it, and there's a decent chance you won't even find it next time you're at Blockbuster.
But the contrast I found most interesting is an incredibly simple one. If I told you that one film primarily featured male actors and the other film primarily featured female actors, would you have difficulty guessing which film was which?
Both films deal with the death of a woman. Film 1 proceeds as a courtroom procedural, wherein an attorney seeks to bring a known killer to justice. Film 2 proceeds as a mosaic and examines the lives that are affected by the dead woman. The actors of Film 1 are bigger stars than those of Film 2, but both films feature easily recognizable performers. The director of Film 1 has previously made more well-known films than the director of Film 2, although neither is in any way an household name.
Still, what is more interesting than the actors in each film or even the approaches the films take, although that could be dissected at length, is the startling difference of the films post-release.
Film 1 received generally favorable reviews, with most of the praise going to the actors. This is understandable given that it featured actors who have combined for 6 Oscar nominations, with 1 win. Personally, I found the performances to be overpraised, but still the strongest part of the otherwise pedestrian film. It opened in over 2,000 theaters and grossed about $39 million in the US. You've no doubt heard of it, quite possibly seen it, and there's a decent chance you'll consider picking it up next time you're at Blockbuster.
Film 2 received generally favorable reviews, with most of the praise going to the actors. This is understandable given that it featured actors who have combined for 8 Oscar nominations, with 2 wins. Personally, I found the performances to be worthy of the praise given and the film far superior to Film 1. It opened in 2 theaters and grossed about $19,000 in the US. You've probably never heard of it, haven't seen it, and there's a decent chance you won't even find it next time you're at Blockbuster.
But the contrast I found most interesting is an incredibly simple one. If I told you that one film primarily featured male actors and the other film primarily featured female actors, would you have difficulty guessing which film was which?
Friday, August 24, 2007
Powder Blue? More like Powder Blow!
"...the San Diego powder blues are universally considered among the sweetest-looking sports uniforms ever"
~Gregg Easterbrook
No, no, no, one thousand times no. Powder blue is a weak, wussy color. Granted, the powder blue Charger unis aren't nearly as bad as those worn by the Denver Nuggets
but they are still pretty bad.
and it's not even close as far as I'm concerned.
~Gregg Easterbrook
No, no, no, one thousand times no. Powder blue is a weak, wussy color. Granted, the powder blue Charger unis aren't nearly as bad as those worn by the Denver Nuggets
but they are still pretty bad.This 
is so much better than this 
and it's not even close as far as I'm concerned.
Powder blue has thankfully been banished from other fashion realms,
if only our sports teams would do the same.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Be Advised.
I will be posting on this thing again. Content and frequency are as yet determined, but rest assured it's going to be brilliant.
You may begin anticipating a real post..............now!
You may begin anticipating a real post..............now!
Monday, March 06, 2006
Alternative Sources
I suppose it's possible that some of you might not get anything out of the list I made earlier, being as some of you have different tastes in movies than I. However, you might get more out of a different list. In light of that, here are two additional movie lists from two quality movie reviewers. You're welcome.
From the Balcony
Guys named Bill Clark can be found at various places on this here internet and a couple of them are even the same Bill Clark who runs From the Balcony. Bill's perspective is probably similar to most movie watchers. He doesn't review movies for a living and doesn't have time to see every movie released. Consequently, Bill's Top 10 list consists mainly of movies that tend to be more mainstream (not that Bill doesn't appreciate quality smaller films). If you're looking for good movies that you've actually heard of, here's a good place to look. He's also been so kind as to share a Bottom 10 list. If a movie you were thinking about renting shows up on that list, you might want to think again. Even though he's never been published on rogerebert.com, Bill's website is still worth a look. Bill appreciates the brilliance that is Tom Wilkinson and that's reason enough to read him.
Roger Ebert
Everyone knows Roger Ebert. He's the preeminent film critic in the US so it's not suprising that he has the be-all and end-all of movie lists. He provides a traditional Top 10, along with a host of additional movies that he finds worthy of a mention. As much as I try to see a variety of films, I've got nothing on Ebert. He doesn't see everything, but he sees more movies than any other reviewer out there. If you're looking for high-quality movies that range from major studio productions to the smallest indie films, this list is a great resource.
Okay, I've now provided you with three sources of information for finding great movies. Being as most of the films on these lists can be found on DVD it should be very easy for you to see them. So go ahead and add them to you NetFlix queue now and you can enjoy them without ever having to leave your home. Again, you're welcome.
From the Balcony
Guys named Bill Clark can be found at various places on this here internet and a couple of them are even the same Bill Clark who runs From the Balcony. Bill's perspective is probably similar to most movie watchers. He doesn't review movies for a living and doesn't have time to see every movie released. Consequently, Bill's Top 10 list consists mainly of movies that tend to be more mainstream (not that Bill doesn't appreciate quality smaller films). If you're looking for good movies that you've actually heard of, here's a good place to look. He's also been so kind as to share a Bottom 10 list. If a movie you were thinking about renting shows up on that list, you might want to think again. Even though he's never been published on rogerebert.com, Bill's website is still worth a look. Bill appreciates the brilliance that is Tom Wilkinson and that's reason enough to read him.
Roger Ebert
Everyone knows Roger Ebert. He's the preeminent film critic in the US so it's not suprising that he has the be-all and end-all of movie lists. He provides a traditional Top 10, along with a host of additional movies that he finds worthy of a mention. As much as I try to see a variety of films, I've got nothing on Ebert. He doesn't see everything, but he sees more movies than any other reviewer out there. If you're looking for high-quality movies that range from major studio productions to the smallest indie films, this list is a great resource.
Okay, I've now provided you with three sources of information for finding great movies. Being as most of the films on these lists can be found on DVD it should be very easy for you to see them. So go ahead and add them to you NetFlix queue now and you can enjoy them without ever having to leave your home. Again, you're welcome.
Sunday, March 05, 2006
The Best Films of 2005
Yeah, so this is very delayed, but I figured I would go ahead and share anyway. I'm going to guess that most of you haven't seen but two or maybe three of these movies. If you've seen them all, then 100 cool points to you. These are, in my opinion, the 10 best movies that I saw in 2005. Okay, I saw a couple of them in 2006, but that's what happens when movies don't make it to theaters where I live until a month or two after they're released.
1. Junebug
Junebug is a small movie. (It played on fewer than 150 screens in the US). However, it's the most truthful portrayal of life in smaller towns that I've ever seen. The movie deftly and subtly displays the differeneces between traditional big city and small town mentalities. Furthermore, it brings to light how behavior varies from one situation to the next. The characters have depth and the reasonings behind their actions are not explicitly explained. Isn't that true of most of our actions in real life? In the end, you're left with the feeling that you know so much about these characters, but that you also might not know anything at all. Amy Adams shines as Ashley, delivering the best performance in any movie this year. Junebug is the best film of 2005.
Buy Junebug on DVD
2. Crash
If you live in the US, then I'm sure you've heard of Crash. It was released way back in May and it still has people talking. I think that says something about the movie's power. The easiest way to describe Crash is to say it is a movie about racial issues that takes place over about 36 hours in Los Angeles. However, that doesn't convey just how far-reaching this movie is. It is a 2-hour parable. Crash presents you with one point of view and just when you think you have it figured out, it turns everything on its head and makes you think again. Crash will make you examine yourself and your own prejudices, which you probably didn't even know were there.
Buy Crash on DVD
3. Oldboy
Oldboy is an incredibly violent movie, or at least you think it is after you're finished watching it. In reality, much of the violence is off-camera and only a few characters actually die onscreen. The implied violence is brutal at times, which is reason enough to remember the movie, but it's the underlying reasons for the violence that make the movie so memorable. Director Chan-Wook Park tells a tale of a man who is locked up for 15 years, by who and for what reason, he does not know. The bulk of the story is about this man's search for answers. At its peak, Oldboy played on 28 screens in the US, so it's no surprise that very few had the opportunity to see it. That's a shame. Oldboy is not for the faint of heart, but it's an ingenius story told masterfully.
Buy Oldboy on DVD
4. Capote
Capote is a movie that I think validates me (and my friend Ricky) and our appreciation for the incredible talent of Philip Seymour Hoffman. Capote tells the story of real-life author Truman Capote and his attempt to write a book based on a murder in Kansas. Hoffman has rightfully receieved critical acclaim for his performance in the movie and without him I'm sure the movie would be far less powerful. However, we musn't ignore the story. The story of Capote's attempt to write his book is compelling and Hoffman portrays brilliantly a man torn between his desire to finish his story and his affection for the killers that form the subject of the book. I think Hoffman deserved an Oscar for his performance in Owning Mahowny so it's nice to finally see him getting the recognition he deserves.
Buy Capote on DVD
5. Proof
Gwyneth Paltrow and Anthony Hopkins headline this small-budget flick that is based on a play. Maybe that's why the dialogue is so well-written. Paltrow stars as the daughter of Hopkins - a brilliant, but literally crazy mathematician. Hopkins shows yet again what a fine actor he is. Solid supporting performances are also turned in by Jake Gyllenhaal and Hope Davis, but this is Paltrow's movie. Paltrow is magnetic even as her character tries to push others away and her simple reading of a piece of paper will break your heart. The bulk of the film is devoted to her character as she tries to make sense of her father as well as her own brilliance and possible insanity.
Buy Proof on DVD
6. The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada
Tommy Lee Jones makes his directorial debut in this tale of friendship on the Texas/Mexico border. The story is unique and powerful. Of course, I would expect nothing less from Guillermo Arriaga, the man who wrote Amores Perros and 21 Grams. Jones stars as a cowboy whose best friend is Melquiades Estrada, an illegal immigrant from Mexico. Melquiades is killed and Jones wants justice. However, this is more than just a revenge movie. The story is one of isolation. All the characters in the film suffer from isolation and loneliness and when Jones loses his best friend he is overcome by it. Jones is outstanding in his portrayal of the old cowboy as is Barry Pepper as a border patrol officer.
Buy The Three Burials on DVD
7. Munich
Munich is the latest offering from acclaimed director Steven Spielberg. Spielberg, perhaps like no other director of my time, is able to skillfully make a wide variety of movies. The same man that made Jurassic Park and E.T. also made Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan and now Munich. Munich is based on the true-life story of a group of Israeli "soliders" who go about exacting revenge on the Palestinian terrorists who killed 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympics. Eric Bana plays Avner, the leader of the group, and the man through which we experience the retribution and the consequences of said retribution. The consequences are, of course, on both a personal and societal level and Spielberg is wise to take us but so far before allowing us to figure out the rest for ourselves. Political and religious opinions aren't something that you can be assigned. They are personal and deeply held and how we try to rectify the differences we have with others in those respects is what Munich is all about.
Buy Munich on DVD
8. Sin City
Sin City is the other incredibly violent flick on the list. However, unlike Oldboy, Sin City's violence takes place right in front of the camera. Sin City is essentially a twisted live-action cartoon so instead of red blood, we get white blood. Actors and actresses undergo physical transformations and there is even a character who is completely yellow. Yes, yellow. Of all the movies on this list, Sin City is probably the most well-known and the one that most of you will have seen. The story (or stories, as it were) of the movie is almost inconsequential. This is a movie for Robert Rodriguez to do his thing and he does it well. Sin City is a treat for the eye and imagination and I look forward to the sequel.
Buy Sin City on DVD or Buy it on Super-Duper Special Edition DVD
9. Palindromes
Todd Solondz's latest movie makes you about as uncomfortable as his previous movies. If you've seen any of those, then you pretty much know what to expect here. Palindromes tells the story of a young girl named Aviva. The details of her life can't adequately be explained in one paragraph. Plus, to try and explain what happens in the movie would betray what I think is the point of the movie. The character of Aviva is played by 8 different actresses and 1 actor. Like Crash, Palindromes shows you a point-of-view and convinces you of its correctness only to turn around a few minutes later and show you that a completely different point-of-view might be just as correct. At least that's what I think is happening. It's never easy to tell with Solondz. If you're interested in truly unique movies, then put Palindromes at the top of your list.
Buy Palindromes on DVD
10. The Upside of Anger
I read a column in the Chicago Tribune the other day, which said that this year female roles have basically been relegated to "nurturing friends, neglected wives, pregnant helpmeets, and objects of lust." Clearly the author didn't see The Upside of Anger (or Proof for that matter). The Upside of Anger is all about a strong woman. Joan Allen stars as a mother of 4 daughters (Look, more strong women!) who is abandoned by her husband. How does she deal with this? She gets angry and drinks a lot. She makes friends with a nice man who lives around the corner (Kevin Costner, surprisingly not annoying us) who is also kind of angry and likes to drink a lot. Writer/Director Mike Bender created the movie for Joan Allen and she doesn't let him down. Allen gives us a strong woman who is trying her level best to keep her family together even though she can barely keep herself together. The Upside of Anger edges out Match Point and Me and You and Everyone We Know to round out this year's Top 10 List.
Buy The Upside of Anger on DVD
1. Junebug
Junebug is a small movie. (It played on fewer than 150 screens in the US). However, it's the most truthful portrayal of life in smaller towns that I've ever seen. The movie deftly and subtly displays the differeneces between traditional big city and small town mentalities. Furthermore, it brings to light how behavior varies from one situation to the next. The characters have depth and the reasonings behind their actions are not explicitly explained. Isn't that true of most of our actions in real life? In the end, you're left with the feeling that you know so much about these characters, but that you also might not know anything at all. Amy Adams shines as Ashley, delivering the best performance in any movie this year. Junebug is the best film of 2005.
Buy Junebug on DVD
2. Crash
If you live in the US, then I'm sure you've heard of Crash. It was released way back in May and it still has people talking. I think that says something about the movie's power. The easiest way to describe Crash is to say it is a movie about racial issues that takes place over about 36 hours in Los Angeles. However, that doesn't convey just how far-reaching this movie is. It is a 2-hour parable. Crash presents you with one point of view and just when you think you have it figured out, it turns everything on its head and makes you think again. Crash will make you examine yourself and your own prejudices, which you probably didn't even know were there.
Buy Crash on DVD
3. Oldboy
Oldboy is an incredibly violent movie, or at least you think it is after you're finished watching it. In reality, much of the violence is off-camera and only a few characters actually die onscreen. The implied violence is brutal at times, which is reason enough to remember the movie, but it's the underlying reasons for the violence that make the movie so memorable. Director Chan-Wook Park tells a tale of a man who is locked up for 15 years, by who and for what reason, he does not know. The bulk of the story is about this man's search for answers. At its peak, Oldboy played on 28 screens in the US, so it's no surprise that very few had the opportunity to see it. That's a shame. Oldboy is not for the faint of heart, but it's an ingenius story told masterfully.
Buy Oldboy on DVD
4. Capote
Capote is a movie that I think validates me (and my friend Ricky) and our appreciation for the incredible talent of Philip Seymour Hoffman. Capote tells the story of real-life author Truman Capote and his attempt to write a book based on a murder in Kansas. Hoffman has rightfully receieved critical acclaim for his performance in the movie and without him I'm sure the movie would be far less powerful. However, we musn't ignore the story. The story of Capote's attempt to write his book is compelling and Hoffman portrays brilliantly a man torn between his desire to finish his story and his affection for the killers that form the subject of the book. I think Hoffman deserved an Oscar for his performance in Owning Mahowny so it's nice to finally see him getting the recognition he deserves.
Buy Capote on DVD
5. Proof
Gwyneth Paltrow and Anthony Hopkins headline this small-budget flick that is based on a play. Maybe that's why the dialogue is so well-written. Paltrow stars as the daughter of Hopkins - a brilliant, but literally crazy mathematician. Hopkins shows yet again what a fine actor he is. Solid supporting performances are also turned in by Jake Gyllenhaal and Hope Davis, but this is Paltrow's movie. Paltrow is magnetic even as her character tries to push others away and her simple reading of a piece of paper will break your heart. The bulk of the film is devoted to her character as she tries to make sense of her father as well as her own brilliance and possible insanity.
Buy Proof on DVD
6. The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada
Tommy Lee Jones makes his directorial debut in this tale of friendship on the Texas/Mexico border. The story is unique and powerful. Of course, I would expect nothing less from Guillermo Arriaga, the man who wrote Amores Perros and 21 Grams. Jones stars as a cowboy whose best friend is Melquiades Estrada, an illegal immigrant from Mexico. Melquiades is killed and Jones wants justice. However, this is more than just a revenge movie. The story is one of isolation. All the characters in the film suffer from isolation and loneliness and when Jones loses his best friend he is overcome by it. Jones is outstanding in his portrayal of the old cowboy as is Barry Pepper as a border patrol officer.
Buy The Three Burials on DVD
7. Munich
Munich is the latest offering from acclaimed director Steven Spielberg. Spielberg, perhaps like no other director of my time, is able to skillfully make a wide variety of movies. The same man that made Jurassic Park and E.T. also made Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan and now Munich. Munich is based on the true-life story of a group of Israeli "soliders" who go about exacting revenge on the Palestinian terrorists who killed 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympics. Eric Bana plays Avner, the leader of the group, and the man through which we experience the retribution and the consequences of said retribution. The consequences are, of course, on both a personal and societal level and Spielberg is wise to take us but so far before allowing us to figure out the rest for ourselves. Political and religious opinions aren't something that you can be assigned. They are personal and deeply held and how we try to rectify the differences we have with others in those respects is what Munich is all about.
Buy Munich on DVD
8. Sin City
Sin City is the other incredibly violent flick on the list. However, unlike Oldboy, Sin City's violence takes place right in front of the camera. Sin City is essentially a twisted live-action cartoon so instead of red blood, we get white blood. Actors and actresses undergo physical transformations and there is even a character who is completely yellow. Yes, yellow. Of all the movies on this list, Sin City is probably the most well-known and the one that most of you will have seen. The story (or stories, as it were) of the movie is almost inconsequential. This is a movie for Robert Rodriguez to do his thing and he does it well. Sin City is a treat for the eye and imagination and I look forward to the sequel.
Buy Sin City on DVD or Buy it on Super-Duper Special Edition DVD
9. Palindromes
Todd Solondz's latest movie makes you about as uncomfortable as his previous movies. If you've seen any of those, then you pretty much know what to expect here. Palindromes tells the story of a young girl named Aviva. The details of her life can't adequately be explained in one paragraph. Plus, to try and explain what happens in the movie would betray what I think is the point of the movie. The character of Aviva is played by 8 different actresses and 1 actor. Like Crash, Palindromes shows you a point-of-view and convinces you of its correctness only to turn around a few minutes later and show you that a completely different point-of-view might be just as correct. At least that's what I think is happening. It's never easy to tell with Solondz. If you're interested in truly unique movies, then put Palindromes at the top of your list.
Buy Palindromes on DVD
10. The Upside of Anger
I read a column in the Chicago Tribune the other day, which said that this year female roles have basically been relegated to "nurturing friends, neglected wives, pregnant helpmeets, and objects of lust." Clearly the author didn't see The Upside of Anger (or Proof for that matter). The Upside of Anger is all about a strong woman. Joan Allen stars as a mother of 4 daughters (Look, more strong women!) who is abandoned by her husband. How does she deal with this? She gets angry and drinks a lot. She makes friends with a nice man who lives around the corner (Kevin Costner, surprisingly not annoying us) who is also kind of angry and likes to drink a lot. Writer/Director Mike Bender created the movie for Joan Allen and she doesn't let him down. Allen gives us a strong woman who is trying her level best to keep her family together even though she can barely keep herself together. The Upside of Anger edges out Match Point and Me and You and Everyone We Know to round out this year's Top 10 List.
Buy The Upside of Anger on DVD
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Insert "Cheney Shoots People" Joke Here
Instead of talking about how Dick Cheney accidently shot someone while hunting, couldn't we find a more important topic? I'm thinking, I dunno, maybe we could talk about people that are purposely shooting other people. Last I checked there was still quite a bit of that stuff going on. Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't that more important than an hunting accident on some ranch?
Thursday, February 02, 2006
Pondering the Imponderables
What is the opposite of sandwich?
About a year ago I was approached by an acquaintance and asked a simple question. Actually that's not true. The structure of the question was simple, however the question itself was anything but. I was told it was a question that was meant to make them think and basically stump them. So after thinking about the question for a bit I gave my response. I then inquired as to whether or not my answer was correct.
I was informed that the questioner, in fact, did not know the answer to the question. As I said, the purpose of the question was to stump people and make them think. Although the lack of certainty in the question and its missing answer initially frustrated me, I soon grew to embrace it. I had an answer to the question and I was pretty confident in its correctness. At least, I thought it was clever and about as correct as anyone was going to get. The fact that my inquiring cohort could not tell me whether or not I was actually correct did not matter anymore.
What is self-esteem squared?
Now, just two days ago, I encountered a similar question. This question was not posed to stump its audience, but was posed to make a point. Regardless, it got me thinking. The bottom line was simple. If one is going to raise questions, analyze data (of whatever kind) and draw conclusions, one must be clear in what is actually being studied. If we measure something we must base our conclusions on what we've measured. This was a topic-specific idea, but I think the underlying thesis is applicable to our everyday experiences as well.
At times it is cumbersome, if not impossible, to analyze and draw conclusions from a certain set of observations. In order to counter this, we've developed accepted ways of twisting and transforming our observations to allow for easier analysis. We banish the abstrusity, allowing ourselves to reach some measure of closure. But at this point, after we've twisted and transformed our experiences, how much substance can we actually draw from them? I don't have the answer. I don't think there is an exact answer. I guess that's what makes it an imponderable.
About a year ago I was approached by an acquaintance and asked a simple question. Actually that's not true. The structure of the question was simple, however the question itself was anything but. I was told it was a question that was meant to make them think and basically stump them. So after thinking about the question for a bit I gave my response. I then inquired as to whether or not my answer was correct.
I was informed that the questioner, in fact, did not know the answer to the question. As I said, the purpose of the question was to stump people and make them think. Although the lack of certainty in the question and its missing answer initially frustrated me, I soon grew to embrace it. I had an answer to the question and I was pretty confident in its correctness. At least, I thought it was clever and about as correct as anyone was going to get. The fact that my inquiring cohort could not tell me whether or not I was actually correct did not matter anymore.
What is self-esteem squared?
Now, just two days ago, I encountered a similar question. This question was not posed to stump its audience, but was posed to make a point. Regardless, it got me thinking. The bottom line was simple. If one is going to raise questions, analyze data (of whatever kind) and draw conclusions, one must be clear in what is actually being studied. If we measure something we must base our conclusions on what we've measured. This was a topic-specific idea, but I think the underlying thesis is applicable to our everyday experiences as well.
At times it is cumbersome, if not impossible, to analyze and draw conclusions from a certain set of observations. In order to counter this, we've developed accepted ways of twisting and transforming our observations to allow for easier analysis. We banish the abstrusity, allowing ourselves to reach some measure of closure. But at this point, after we've twisted and transformed our experiences, how much substance can we actually draw from them? I don't have the answer. I don't think there is an exact answer. I guess that's what makes it an imponderable.
Saturday, January 28, 2006
United in Division
Okay, I'm gonna try something different here. Well, it's not really different, as I've seen plenty of other places that do it. However, this is the first time I've done it so it's different for me. Here's an excerpt from the Washington Post.
Broder lays it out pretty well. Democrats and Republicans have spent the past year bitterly disagreeing on one matter after another. Yet they almost universally state agreement with those in their own party. A good amount of agreement is to be expected, of course. I mean, politicians aren't randomly assigned to political parties. They choose their affiliation and people vote for them. I think they probably choose their positions too, perhaps too often.
However, there's a reason members of the House and Senate are referred to as representatives. They're supposed to represent their constituents. CNN is saying that only 30 percent of Americans oppose the Senate confirming Samuel Alito. However, the Senate vote is shaping up to fall right down party lines. Sounds like poor representation to me. On the other hand, if one took a sampling of the country and asked their opinions on The Patriot Act or the Iraq War, you're likely to find a big divide. So on some issues it seems the representatives are doing a good job of representing their constituents.
Still, if no one agrees, then what purpose are our representatives serving? Our representatives are supposed to stand up for our interests, but what happens when we all disagree? What should our representatives do now? Maybe they should be working to bring those with differing opinions to a common accord. I mean, if they're just going to be bitterly divided, we could pretty well just scrap the whole thing and do it ourselves.
The party-line vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee to confirm Judge Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court, presaging a similar outcome in the full Senate, certifies the depth of the division between Republicans and Democrats on basic national policy.
That reality shadows the start of this session of Congress and raises doubt about the government's ability to address any of the major challenges facing the country.
David S. Broder
Broder lays it out pretty well. Democrats and Republicans have spent the past year bitterly disagreeing on one matter after another. Yet they almost universally state agreement with those in their own party. A good amount of agreement is to be expected, of course. I mean, politicians aren't randomly assigned to political parties. They choose their affiliation and people vote for them. I think they probably choose their positions too, perhaps too often.
However, there's a reason members of the House and Senate are referred to as representatives. They're supposed to represent their constituents. CNN is saying that only 30 percent of Americans oppose the Senate confirming Samuel Alito. However, the Senate vote is shaping up to fall right down party lines. Sounds like poor representation to me. On the other hand, if one took a sampling of the country and asked their opinions on The Patriot Act or the Iraq War, you're likely to find a big divide. So on some issues it seems the representatives are doing a good job of representing their constituents.
Still, if no one agrees, then what purpose are our representatives serving? Our representatives are supposed to stand up for our interests, but what happens when we all disagree? What should our representatives do now? Maybe they should be working to bring those with differing opinions to a common accord. I mean, if they're just going to be bitterly divided, we could pretty well just scrap the whole thing and do it ourselves.
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
What about the Home Builders Organization?
No, HBO is never gonna want us.Many of you have been on the receiving end of my pleadings for Arrested Development. I never ask much; just watch the show and I'll be happy. Some of you have obliged and I appreciate that. Others of you have not, but don't worry there's still time to make up for your poor judgment.
For those who aren't aware, the past couple months have not been good for the show. After renewing the show for a third season in May, FOX decided it wasn't going to order any episodes beyond the initial run of 13. Since that time there have been reports of ABC and Showtime negotiating with Mitch Hurwitz (the man behind the genius of the show) to pick up the show once FOX officially cancels it. (It's still not officially axed yet, though every indication says it will be.)
After pulling the show from its schedule repeatedly, FOX announced that it would aire the final 4 episodes on Friday, February 10 at 8pm EST. We're getting 4 new episodes of Arrested Development in a row? Awesome. (Radical! Tubular!) Oh, but there's a catch.
To those who aren't aware (and I certainly wasn't), the Winter Olympics begin on February 10. Airing Arrested Development against the Olympics isn't exactly a recipe for high viewership. However, there are plenty of sane people in America who don't care about the Olympics, much less the opening ceremonies. So, to all of you who find the opening ceremonies to be boring, overwrought, and just all-around lame here's some counter-programming for you. Yeah, it's a Friday night, but who goes out before 10 anyway?
If you've never seen the show, then you're probably going to be a little lost during the first episode or two. Of course, you could always head over to FOX's page for the show and check out the "In Case You Missed It" link. Even if you don't, after the first 2 episodes you should be okay.
So why should you watch? Although Showtime has reportedly made an offer of 2 seasons for a total of 26 episodes, that offer has yet to be accepted. Plus, how many people do you know that actually have Showtime? It's still possible that the unthinkable happens and we lose Arrested Development from our televisions forever. This may well be your last chance to see what is, in my opinion, the best television comedy of my lifetime.
...and that's why you always leave a note.
Saturday, June 18, 2005
Inside the Confessional
I'd like to take a few moments and share something personal. That comes as a shock to some of you, I'm sure. However, I just can't keep this information to myself. It's something that has been a great benefit to my life and I think it might benefit other lives as well. I realize that some of you have already learned this information, but I know others are still unaware. I want to share a personal triumph. It's one that I hope, nay, I know, will be inspirational to whomever may read it.
I want to talk to you about Herpes. I'm not talking about the cold sore variety. I'm talking about good ole fashioned Genital Herpes. Until recently living with genital herpes was, to say the least, a big pain. My nads constantly itched and it really hurt when I would pee. (Not to mention the abnormal urethral discharge, which was quite unbecoming.) But now those days are a thing of the past. Eventhough there's no cure for genital herpes, there is Valtrex and that's good enough for me. With Valtrex I've been outbreak free for nearly a year. Those painful, itchy blisters on my dong and scrote are now just a distant memory. I'm living my life again on my own terms. Best of all, with Valtrex the ladies never know what I might be giving them when I'm giving it to them.
I hope my personal story of triumph has touched you in some way. I hope you can be comforted knowing that even if you do contract genital herpes you can still live a fun-filled life. I hope you can sleep easier knowing that the pharmaceutical industry is working hard for you. They're working hard to ensure that we can all live our lives however we choose, knowing that most negative consequences can be managed with a pill. More than anything, I hope you realize that the fool you just screwed could've very well had herpes. If he/she did, then you'll find out soon enough. You might be upset, but once you get past that and feel like living your life again, you'll be glad you read this. And you'll be saying the same thing I'm saying; "Thank you, Valtrex."
I want to talk to you about Herpes. I'm not talking about the cold sore variety. I'm talking about good ole fashioned Genital Herpes. Until recently living with genital herpes was, to say the least, a big pain. My nads constantly itched and it really hurt when I would pee. (Not to mention the abnormal urethral discharge, which was quite unbecoming.) But now those days are a thing of the past. Eventhough there's no cure for genital herpes, there is Valtrex and that's good enough for me. With Valtrex I've been outbreak free for nearly a year. Those painful, itchy blisters on my dong and scrote are now just a distant memory. I'm living my life again on my own terms. Best of all, with Valtrex the ladies never know what I might be giving them when I'm giving it to them.
I hope my personal story of triumph has touched you in some way. I hope you can be comforted knowing that even if you do contract genital herpes you can still live a fun-filled life. I hope you can sleep easier knowing that the pharmaceutical industry is working hard for you. They're working hard to ensure that we can all live our lives however we choose, knowing that most negative consequences can be managed with a pill. More than anything, I hope you realize that the fool you just screwed could've very well had herpes. If he/she did, then you'll find out soon enough. You might be upset, but once you get past that and feel like living your life again, you'll be glad you read this. And you'll be saying the same thing I'm saying; "Thank you, Valtrex."
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
Echt Ben.
So this girl I know has been sharing tidbits of information with me about another girl. Girl #2 is described as "really Christian" and a "good girl" who's choosing to remain a virgin (until marriage, one assumes). A couple pictures reveal that she is actually quite attractive so the virginity thing is most likely a choice. I'm pleased to discover that there really do seem to be attractive, good girls left in the world, even though most evidence tends to point to the contrary. A few weeks later Girl #1 shares with me new pictures of Girl #2, which are most unlike what I would expect from a person who has been described as above. Instead of the big smiles and intriguing beauty from earlier shots, we now have short skirts, no shirt, and sultry poses. Surely anyone I went to school with has witnessed a similar kind of dichotomous behavior in girls, most likely between Saturday night and Sunday morning.
Still, I don't actually know this person. I don't know her intentions. It's possible she's just trying to have a little fun with the camera and mess with guys' heads (as girls are prone to do). Then again, it's possible she's turned the corner and has abandoned the good-girl persona. Which conclusion are we to draw? I can't say. Still, I'm reminded of Dave Chappelle's comments on girls who dress like hos and how they get upset if you assume they actually are hos. He says, "You may not be a whore, but you're certainly wearing their uniform." So while the cross ring on her finger is straight out of the James Avery catalog her shirt isn't. Oh wait, what shirt? Well, I'm sure the bra didn't come from there either. Given the angle of one of the shots, the bra provides an excellent view of some fabulous cleavage. Still, it does cover the "off-limits areas" so the pictures are still modest enough for Maxim.
Now, it's not that this girl is committing some egregious crime against humanity or anything of the sort. It's simply that I'm detecting a pattern. As I said, I'm sure anyone I went to school with is all too familiar with these sort of contrasting behaviors existing in good girls. I still believe that there are girls who aren't freak-hos at heart and really do mean what they say, but the evidence is really starting to pile up in opposition to that belief. I have met a few girls who do seem to be who they purport to be; but how long before I'm proven wrong about them too? Is it just a matter of time and/or opportunity? That remains to be seen.
What I do know is that we're all hypocrites. We all do things that contradict our intentions and past proclamations. It happens. But I remember what my good friend CB used to tell our pledges during induction. "Be real," he would say. Again and again he would stress it. He couldn't have been more right. The only way to truly connect with others is to be open with them. We all have our faults and our vices. We aren't perfect and we're not the same as everyone else. If you are ashamed of or have regrets about things you've done, then admit it and work to change. Pretending to be something you're not serves only to alienate those who know otherwise. True, some will alienate you for your imperfections, but such is life. If you want to take seductive pictures to share over the internet, then feel free to do so. If you want to go to church on Sundays instead of sleeping in, then feel free to do so. This is America. But, please, let's be honest with each other. If you're good, then just be good. If you're a freak-ho at heart, then stop hiding it. Save us all the disappointment of an untimely revelation. Or, at least, just save me.
Still, I don't actually know this person. I don't know her intentions. It's possible she's just trying to have a little fun with the camera and mess with guys' heads (as girls are prone to do). Then again, it's possible she's turned the corner and has abandoned the good-girl persona. Which conclusion are we to draw? I can't say. Still, I'm reminded of Dave Chappelle's comments on girls who dress like hos and how they get upset if you assume they actually are hos. He says, "You may not be a whore, but you're certainly wearing their uniform." So while the cross ring on her finger is straight out of the James Avery catalog her shirt isn't. Oh wait, what shirt? Well, I'm sure the bra didn't come from there either. Given the angle of one of the shots, the bra provides an excellent view of some fabulous cleavage. Still, it does cover the "off-limits areas" so the pictures are still modest enough for Maxim.
Now, it's not that this girl is committing some egregious crime against humanity or anything of the sort. It's simply that I'm detecting a pattern. As I said, I'm sure anyone I went to school with is all too familiar with these sort of contrasting behaviors existing in good girls. I still believe that there are girls who aren't freak-hos at heart and really do mean what they say, but the evidence is really starting to pile up in opposition to that belief. I have met a few girls who do seem to be who they purport to be; but how long before I'm proven wrong about them too? Is it just a matter of time and/or opportunity? That remains to be seen.
What I do know is that we're all hypocrites. We all do things that contradict our intentions and past proclamations. It happens. But I remember what my good friend CB used to tell our pledges during induction. "Be real," he would say. Again and again he would stress it. He couldn't have been more right. The only way to truly connect with others is to be open with them. We all have our faults and our vices. We aren't perfect and we're not the same as everyone else. If you are ashamed of or have regrets about things you've done, then admit it and work to change. Pretending to be something you're not serves only to alienate those who know otherwise. True, some will alienate you for your imperfections, but such is life. If you want to take seductive pictures to share over the internet, then feel free to do so. If you want to go to church on Sundays instead of sleeping in, then feel free to do so. This is America. But, please, let's be honest with each other. If you're good, then just be good. If you're a freak-ho at heart, then stop hiding it. Save us all the disappointment of an untimely revelation. Or, at least, just save me.
Monday, May 09, 2005
Le Horla
Whence come those mysterious influences which change our happiness into discouragement, and our self-confidence into diffidence? One might almost say that the air, the invisible air, is full of unknowable Forces, whose mysterious presence we have to endure. I wake up in the best of spirits, with an inclination to sing. Why? I go down by the edge of the water, and suddenly, after walking a short distance, I return home wretched, as if some misfortune were awaiting me there. Why? Is it a cold shiver which, passing over my skin, has upset my nerves and given me low spirits? Is it the form of the clouds, or the tints of the sky, or the colors of the surrounding objects which are so changeable, that has troubled my thoughts as they passed before my eyes? Who can tell? Everything that surrounds us, everything that we see without looking at it, everything that we touch without knowing it, everything that we handle without feeling it, everything that we meet without clearly distinguishing it, has a rapid, surprising, and inexplicable effect upon us and upon our senses, and, through them, on our ideas and on our being itself.
How profound that mystery of the Invisible…
~Guy de Maupassant
How profound that mystery of the Invisible…
~Guy de Maupassant
Saturday, May 07, 2005
The following is based on true events. Some of the names have been changed/edited to protect the innocent. The names that have not been changed are those of the guilty.
Dear Dr. Burks,
In light of recent events we feel it necessary to submit a letter of apology and to explain the situation to you and to Harding University. We would like to express our sincerest apologies and regrets over the incidents that have occurred over the past few days. The actions we took regarding the function, including the sponsors and the printing of senior wills, were irresponsible and were not intended to bring any harm to the individuals present, to Harding University, or the student body therein.
As graduating seniors we have made every effort to be Christian examples to our fellow students. The senior wills were written in jest, were not an admission of past events, and were not meant to be an affront to Harding or its values.
As far as the accusations regarding the use of inappropriate behavior during and following our function, we want to say that those accusations are completely unfounded and untrue. We realize our actions were thoughtless and we wish to take any possible action to rectify the situation at hand. As of now, we have collected and turned in to Dean C all of the wills in our possession. We have spoken to Dean C at length about the matter and have expressed our sincerest apologies. If necessary we would be more than willing to make a public and/or written apology to whomever it is deemed necessary.
We want to address the accusations in any way we can to clear up this matter. We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you at your earliest convenience to discuss these matters.
Sincerely,
Jiz, Braintard , Phildo, Hadoken!
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Timmy!
Good sports day. Derrek Lee was huge today (4-4, 2HR, 6RBI) and Corey Patterson came through in the clutch with a walk-off shot. Lee, a notoriously slow starter, is now batting .430 and has an OPS of 1.297. He's also on pace for 208 RBI. Highly unlikely he'll reach it, I know, but wouldn't that be something? Despite numerous injuries the Cubs are only 4 back of the Cards, who have been on an absolute tear of late. It's early and, like any good Cubs fan, I'm still confident that this will be the year of the Cubs.
In even better sports news; the Spurs bounced back big-time. This was total domination, holding Denver to just 76 points on 36% shooting. Meanwhile, San Antonio was nearly flawless. The FT shooting still isn't cutting it, but what's new? Duncan looked like his old self dropping 24 points in only 28 minutes, while handing out 5 assists and sending back 3 shots. The entire team was playing smart basketball, as evidenced by a 47% reduction in TO's from Game 1. There isn't much analysis to give other than to say San Antonio gave notice that one poor 4th quarter does not a series make. So stop your yelling K-Mart. Timmy just shut you up.
One last thing: Has there ever been a single word in the history of television that even comes close to being as funny as TIMMY!? Yeah, I didn't think so.
In even better sports news; the Spurs bounced back big-time. This was total domination, holding Denver to just 76 points on 36% shooting. Meanwhile, San Antonio was nearly flawless. The FT shooting still isn't cutting it, but what's new? Duncan looked like his old self dropping 24 points in only 28 minutes, while handing out 5 assists and sending back 3 shots. The entire team was playing smart basketball, as evidenced by a 47% reduction in TO's from Game 1. There isn't much analysis to give other than to say San Antonio gave notice that one poor 4th quarter does not a series make. So stop your yelling K-Mart. Timmy just shut you up.
One last thing: Has there ever been a single word in the history of television that even comes close to being as funny as TIMMY!? Yeah, I didn't think so.
Monday, April 25, 2005
Do you know what a duvet is?
I'm not sure where this term "shout-out" came from, but I wish it would go away. In perusing various boards devoted to television shows, I come across this word far too frequently. For instance, if a character who acts in a way contrary to how most characters on that show typically act, then it must be a "shout-out" to the fans who've commented on the typical character actions. What causes these people to draw this delusional conclusion? It's probably the same thing that causes people to make blogs and start their own websites; an over-inflated sense of self-importance. (I'm fully aware of the irony in my characterization of bloggers et al. in a blog of my own.). This is also why people inform you on bulletin boards of their reasoning for editing something they've said. It's wholly unimportant, but they think people care. The reality is that most people don't. Then again, some people do.
This leads, invariably, to Fight Club:
We're by-products of a lifestyle obsession. Murder, crime, poverty -- these things don't concern me. What concerns me is celebrity magazines, television with five hundred channels, some guy's name on my underwear. Rogaine, Viagra, Olestra...
Fictional character Tyler Durden is spot on in his assessment. So what drives this sort of behavior? Is it the same over-inflated sense of self-importance that drives the "shout-out" crazed fan or the *whatever*-conscious blogger? No, it's quite the opposite. It's a sense of self-unimportance that leads people to care about the irrelevant. It's what drives them to read Us Weekly and Star Magazine, as if any information found in those pages is going to affect their lives in any meaningful way. It won't. It's a search for fulfillment in things that can never be fulfilling. In your quest for completeness you'll lose weight, grow hair, and get an erection, only to find that now you need to change shirts, cut your hair, and drive a nicer car. The line is always moving and you're never going to cross it.
I say never be complete. I say stop being perfect. I say let's evolve and let the chips fall where they may.
And, yes, I'm further aware of the irony in quoting a movie in my condemnation of America's obsession with popular/celebrity culture. This post is just cholk-full of irony.
This leads, invariably, to Fight Club:
We're by-products of a lifestyle obsession. Murder, crime, poverty -- these things don't concern me. What concerns me is celebrity magazines, television with five hundred channels, some guy's name on my underwear. Rogaine, Viagra, Olestra...
Fictional character Tyler Durden is spot on in his assessment. So what drives this sort of behavior? Is it the same over-inflated sense of self-importance that drives the "shout-out" crazed fan or the *whatever*-conscious blogger? No, it's quite the opposite. It's a sense of self-unimportance that leads people to care about the irrelevant. It's what drives them to read Us Weekly and Star Magazine, as if any information found in those pages is going to affect their lives in any meaningful way. It won't. It's a search for fulfillment in things that can never be fulfilling. In your quest for completeness you'll lose weight, grow hair, and get an erection, only to find that now you need to change shirts, cut your hair, and drive a nicer car. The line is always moving and you're never going to cross it.
I say never be complete. I say stop being perfect. I say let's evolve and let the chips fall where they may.
And, yes, I'm further aware of the irony in quoting a movie in my condemnation of America's obsession with popular/celebrity culture. This post is just cholk-full of irony.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)