This is a new effort to establish some sort of regular update of the blog. So, if all goes as planned, I'll be posting a short once-a-week recap of the highlights and lowlights from the preceding week. I'll still make an effort to write the longer, more focused articles, but those come and go with my inspiration, which has obviously been pretty low the past month.
(Note, posted 1/4/06: Yeah, I did a pretty crappy job keeping up with this.)
Good:
Hot Hot Heat at Starr Hill -
I recently got into this band by picking up their cool new album, "Elevator," as a premium item for my contribution to WNRN's fall fund drive and much to my surprise soon discovered that they were playing an upcoming show in Charlottesville. Though I dismissed my original idea to attend incognito in some sort of punk rock persona, I still had a great time. The band could have played longer, but I wasn't complaining when I managed to get home before 1:00am on a worknight.
Dave Leitao wins debut -
The Pete Gillen years are over, and the new UVA basketball coach wants fans to know it. While Pete was oft criticized for being soft on his players, Leitao wasted no time in showing that he will verbally chew out his players on the sidelines for playing soft defense or not rebounding. Not even the refs are safe, as DL's protest over the non-call for JR Reynolds' on-court assualt earned him his first career UVA technical. I'm sure this team will earn its fair share of weeks in the "bad" section of this blog, but freshman Mamadi Diane's team-leading 17 points gives some hope for the future.
Bad:
Hokies Eat Wahoos for Breakfast -
52-14 feels more like 106-4 when it comes in Scott Stadium at the hands of those poop-eating retards from Virginia Tech. This, the worst football game I've ever attended, gives UVA a 1-6 record against Tech since 1999, an 0-3 record against the Mexico brothers, and completes the season sweep of losses against our 3 biggest rivals, Maryland, UNC, and VT.
Arrested Development Cancelled by FOX -
The funniest show since Seinfeld has its order of episodes for the season trimmed down to 13, which shall mark its final, unlucky number. So far, no other networks seem likely to rescue the show from the jaws of defeat, although if HBO picks it up I'm switching to premium cable.
Monday, November 21, 2005
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
Firefly to Serenity: An Epic
Recently, thanks to the magic of DVD, I have been granted the opportunity to criticize FOX for hanging Joss Whedon's show Firefly out to dry in 2003. Under the obvious influence of LSD or some other hallucinogen, the network decided to air episodes of the witty and dramatic series out of order (for some reason, the pilot was the final one shown). Combined with its Friday night death slot, it comes as no surprise that FOX yanked the show after only 11 low-rated episodes.
Fortunately, in world where Joe Gibbs can return from retirement to coach the Redskins and Hollywood can finally come up with a decent Batman film, Firefly fans were not left hopeless. Miraculously, Whedon was able to get a green light for making a Firefly movie that could draw his series to a close. That movie, entitled Serenity, was released in theaters last Friday as a beacon of light to all victims of the TV axe.
Partially to blame for its cancellation, I ignored the positive reviews that came out about Firefly and have only been drawn to the series since I found out about the movie. I suppose that this makes me a poser among Firefly fans, but I'll take that distinction in exchange for being able to add the series to my own personal pop culture hall of fame. I'm instantly attracted to anything with a cult following, especially when it comes in the form of a short-lived television show, whose loose ends are tied up in a movie released solely due to fan demand. Taking an interest in Serenity, I was determined not to see it as some schmo off the street, but in the way that the fans who watched the show originally would. In order to do this, I dedicated myself to watching the series over the past few weeks (thanks to Linden for the birthday gift DVDs)...as well as to reading the 3 part Serenity comic book that bridges the gap.
With Firefly's sharp writing and great characterization, it is no shocker that Serenity is a wonderful movie. What impressed me most about it, however, is its success in following through on its promise to provide a satisfactory conclusion to a story which Joss Whedon had originally planned to develop over the course of years. Without feeling rushed or forced, Serenity compacts what would have been several seasons of TV into a spectacular two-hour movie. And while it certainly can stand on its own as a quality science fiction film, Serenity works best as a top notch series finale, a genuine rarity in television today.
Fortunately, in world where Joe Gibbs can return from retirement to coach the Redskins and Hollywood can finally come up with a decent Batman film, Firefly fans were not left hopeless. Miraculously, Whedon was able to get a green light for making a Firefly movie that could draw his series to a close. That movie, entitled Serenity, was released in theaters last Friday as a beacon of light to all victims of the TV axe.
Partially to blame for its cancellation, I ignored the positive reviews that came out about Firefly and have only been drawn to the series since I found out about the movie. I suppose that this makes me a poser among Firefly fans, but I'll take that distinction in exchange for being able to add the series to my own personal pop culture hall of fame. I'm instantly attracted to anything with a cult following, especially when it comes in the form of a short-lived television show, whose loose ends are tied up in a movie released solely due to fan demand. Taking an interest in Serenity, I was determined not to see it as some schmo off the street, but in the way that the fans who watched the show originally would. In order to do this, I dedicated myself to watching the series over the past few weeks (thanks to Linden for the birthday gift DVDs)...as well as to reading the 3 part Serenity comic book that bridges the gap.
With Firefly's sharp writing and great characterization, it is no shocker that Serenity is a wonderful movie. What impressed me most about it, however, is its success in following through on its promise to provide a satisfactory conclusion to a story which Joss Whedon had originally planned to develop over the course of years. Without feeling rushed or forced, Serenity compacts what would have been several seasons of TV into a spectacular two-hour movie. And while it certainly can stand on its own as a quality science fiction film, Serenity works best as a top notch series finale, a genuine rarity in television today.
A Debate Close to my Heart
This week's Entertainment Weekly features a Point/Counterpoint that voices in on one of the greatest crimes of pop culture today--plot spoilers. The obviously mentally challenged Jeff Jensen argues that plot leaks somehow enhance the experience of viewing a movie or show. Offering a much more levelheaded opinion, Dan Snierson criticizes spoilers for being the vampire on entertainment that they truly are. Read the article here.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Down the Hatch
On the more optimistic TV front (see the post below for the pessimistic), Lost continued to contend for superiority in ratings and quality as it opened it's second season Wednesday night. Miraculously, network TV has created a show with depth and meaning that you have to pay close attention to in order to fully get...and people watch it!
The season premiere didn't skip a beat in carrying on the story from the excellent first season. I was especially impressed with the way in which it answered last season's cliffhanger question ("What's inside the hatch?") right off the bat, but toyed with you for several minutes before revealing to you exactly what it was you were seeing. As has become standard, the show did a superb job in demonstrating that it was moving towards solving its mysteries, while leaving plenty of mystery left at the end. The only real downside to the episode was its relatively uninteresting flashback sequence, which once again focused on Jack. Typically, I haven't found the Jack flashbacks to be as compelling as those belonging to some of the other characters, mainly because I feel we already know a fair deal about his past. That being said, Derek and Travis can attest to you that the episode did a fine job in holding my interest. (Kize Lost Season Premiere Grade: B+)
I won't plead with you to watch Lost like I did Arrested Development. It already does fine in the ratings, and you're better off taking your time with the season one DVDs before diving into the current episodes. Go find yourself someone cool who has the DVDs with a name like, oh...let's say The Kize...and agree to watch the first season with him over the course of several weeks.
The season premiere didn't skip a beat in carrying on the story from the excellent first season. I was especially impressed with the way in which it answered last season's cliffhanger question ("What's inside the hatch?") right off the bat, but toyed with you for several minutes before revealing to you exactly what it was you were seeing. As has become standard, the show did a superb job in demonstrating that it was moving towards solving its mysteries, while leaving plenty of mystery left at the end. The only real downside to the episode was its relatively uninteresting flashback sequence, which once again focused on Jack. Typically, I haven't found the Jack flashbacks to be as compelling as those belonging to some of the other characters, mainly because I feel we already know a fair deal about his past. That being said, Derek and Travis can attest to you that the episode did a fine job in holding my interest. (Kize Lost Season Premiere Grade: B+)
I won't plead with you to watch Lost like I did Arrested Development. It already does fine in the ratings, and you're better off taking your time with the season one DVDs before diving into the current episodes. Go find yourself someone cool who has the DVDs with a name like, oh...let's say The Kize...and agree to watch the first season with him over the course of several weeks.
Arrested Development has been wrongfully imprisoned!
To my disappointment, the season premiere of Arrested Development was met with the same low ratings that plagued its first two seasons, and nearly drove the show to cancellation. This serves as a strong argument against my theory that my summer might have served as a microcosm for the universe of Arrested Development viewers. It seemed to me that I was surrounded by people who had been drawn to the show by word of mouth, the season one DVDs, and Fox's excellent summer rerun strategy. My parents, my uncle, and several friends of mine had become hooked to the chronicles of the Bluth family, and I was ready to see the show turn into the heir to Seinfeld.
Unfortunately, it appears as if Arrested may be fated to never overcome its Arizona Cardinal-like struggles. My summer test subjects may have been a tainted sample, a rare subset of the population at large who actually appreciate well-crafted, intelligent television. America as a whole still looks to be an army of That 70's Show style drones, unable to get any of the jokes in Arrested Development because they aren't followed up by a laugh track. My only hope is that the first week's ratings were affected by the large draw of ABC's Monday Night Football doubleheader, and that the millions of Americans who tuned into the game will switch over to Arrested next week.
If not, I might have to say goodbye to these.
Unfortunately, it appears as if Arrested may be fated to never overcome its Arizona Cardinal-like struggles. My summer test subjects may have been a tainted sample, a rare subset of the population at large who actually appreciate well-crafted, intelligent television. America as a whole still looks to be an army of That 70's Show style drones, unable to get any of the jokes in Arrested Development because they aren't followed up by a laugh track. My only hope is that the first week's ratings were affected by the large draw of ABC's Monday Night Football doubleheader, and that the millions of Americans who tuned into the game will switch over to Arrested next week.
If not, I might have to say goodbye to these.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Redskins 14, Cowboys 13
In 1999 there was the blown 21-point 4th quarter lead. In 2001 we suffered through the Stephen Davis fumble. Last year the heartbreak came in the form of a long bomb in the closing minutes.
But last night, we got to do it to them.
With less than 4 minutes remaining in the game, the most noble and virtuous team in all of sports, the Washington Redskins, trailed the epitome of putridity and unholiness, the Dallas Cowboys, by a score of 13 to 0. With the Redskin offense sputtering all night, my loyalty to see things through to the bitter end was the only thing keeping me half awake on the couch. On fourth down, Mark Brunell finally found Santana Moss in the end zone, at which point I was confident the Skins were giving me just enough renewed hope that I would have something left to squash when time expired.
That hope grew larger when the defense did what it has been doing largely without reward for the past 13 months and stonewalled the ensuing Cowboy drive. Rocking back in forth in my seat, I watched as Brunell and Moss hooked up again, this time for an explosive 70 yarder that gave Washington the go-ahead score. This couldn't be happening! The next 15 minutes were a rush of exuberation as intense as a man could exhibit without waking his roommate upstairs. The defense held again. Final score: Washington 14, Dallas 13. The fans in Texas Stadium (who at halftime had observed a ceremony honoring the Trio of Evil, Troy Aikman, Emmett Smith, and Michael Irvin) were left to drown in their own tears as Joe Gibbs and team rushed onto the field in a celebration unlike any seen by the Redskins in the last 10 years.
Perhaps the Redskin offense will continue to struggle in the weeks to come, and maybe the Redskins won't win another significant game all season. But if that happens, none of it will be able to undo the joy of victory that those who hail the Redskins were able to feel last night.
But last night, we got to do it to them.
With less than 4 minutes remaining in the game, the most noble and virtuous team in all of sports, the Washington Redskins, trailed the epitome of putridity and unholiness, the Dallas Cowboys, by a score of 13 to 0. With the Redskin offense sputtering all night, my loyalty to see things through to the bitter end was the only thing keeping me half awake on the couch. On fourth down, Mark Brunell finally found Santana Moss in the end zone, at which point I was confident the Skins were giving me just enough renewed hope that I would have something left to squash when time expired.
That hope grew larger when the defense did what it has been doing largely without reward for the past 13 months and stonewalled the ensuing Cowboy drive. Rocking back in forth in my seat, I watched as Brunell and Moss hooked up again, this time for an explosive 70 yarder that gave Washington the go-ahead score. This couldn't be happening! The next 15 minutes were a rush of exuberation as intense as a man could exhibit without waking his roommate upstairs. The defense held again. Final score: Washington 14, Dallas 13. The fans in Texas Stadium (who at halftime had observed a ceremony honoring the Trio of Evil, Troy Aikman, Emmett Smith, and Michael Irvin) were left to drown in their own tears as Joe Gibbs and team rushed onto the field in a celebration unlike any seen by the Redskins in the last 10 years.
Perhaps the Redskin offense will continue to struggle in the weeks to come, and maybe the Redskins won't win another significant game all season. But if that happens, none of it will be able to undo the joy of victory that those who hail the Redskins were able to feel last night.
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Kize's 2005 NFL Predictions
For the past few years, I've used my AIM profile to post predictions of the coming year's NFL playoff teams. With the extra space afforded by the blog, I'm pleased to announce the first full Kize's NFL Predictions, where I'll pick each division top to bottom. Sports Illustrated may have enough clout to call theirs an "NFL Preview," but I'll entertain no such illustions here. These are "predictions," which contain no guarantee to preview any part of reality. Comments are welcome, although if you're writing to disagree with one of my picks, then you're required to post your own pick in response.
NFC East
NFC East
- Philadelphia Eagles
Despite the off-season tumult, Terrell Owens will have plenty of opportunities for creative touchdown celebrations this year. They've declined enough to keep them out of a second consecutive Super Bowl, but their hold on the division remains strong. - Dallas Cowboys (Playoff wild card)
I've really been on a roll this year picking teams I'd rather drink pee than watch win (see VT in my ACC predictions). The bastards' defense got a major upgrade in the offseason. - New York Giants
Everyone seems to be sure that Eli Manning will either have a breakout year or be a Gigantic bust. Is it wrong to think that he'll take a gradual step towards becoming a better quarterback? It won't hurt that New York gets 9 home games this year. (grrr...Yeah, that move was real fair for the rest of the teams in the NFC East.) - Washington Redskins
Thanks to Mark Brunell's disappointing drain on salary cap space, the Skins had to part ways with Fred Smoot and Antonio Pierce as well as use first round draft picks on positions (QB and CB) they thought they had in place just a year ago. There will be many fits of rage from The Kize this year.
- Minnesota Vikings
In a division where teams seem to have either an offense (GB) or a defense (Chicago), the Vikings finally have both. Fred Smoot will lead the defense to a Super Bowl birth. - Green Bay Packers
Fans keep talking about Brett Favre's inevitable decline, but I haven't seen it on the field yet. He should have gone to the Pro Bowl last year in place of Michael Vick. Where this team appears to have fallen is in its already pathetic pass defense. - Detroit Lions
The Lions have potentially the best receiving trio in the league. They also have Joey "Interception Machine" Harrington. - Chicago Bears
I had them fourth even before Rex Grossman got hurt. I'm very sold on the theory that you can't operate a true passing threat in the Windy City.
- Carolina Panthers
Injuries postponed this division title last year, yet they still nearly made the playoffs in a truly amazing second-half-of-season comeback last year. Plus, Rod Gardner just left the Redskins, so you know he'll be good (see Trent Green, Jeremiah Trotter, Brad Johnson, etc.). - Atlanta Falcons (Playoff wild card)
They've got a running game and a high quality defense, two of the three necessary components that Carolina has in place. The good teams can overcome Vick's mobility. - New Orleans Saints
For once, they finished a season strong. The South will be a competitive division, so they could finish at .500 and still end up third. If nothing else, they'll serve as the control group for an experiment testing home field advantage. - Tampa Bay Buccaneers
I'm not saying they'll be bad, but it's hard to describe their season as anything but a rebuilding year. Their defense is still good, if not feared like it once was.
- Arizona Cardinals
Once, this team couldn't win unless they were involved in a game somehow related to crushing the Redskins' playoff chances. Now, behind coach Denny Green, they've got the foundations for an explosive offense and an improving defense in the NFL's weakest division. - Seattle Seahawks
It's a proven fact that no one can predict how the Seahawks will do. Ever. They'd be the clear-cut best team in the division if they hadn't choked three times against the Rams last year. - St. Louis Rams
The Rams have a ton of great fantasy picks on offense. It's a good thing those players don't lose points for their team's questionable coaching decisions. - San Francisco 49ers
They're the only team whose fans I would take with me to a Redskins game.
- New England Patriots
They've never been fazed by injury or free agency, have they? For the past four years the Pats have been a testament to great coaching, and now both coordinators are gone. Might they actually have to play a playoff game in Indy? - Buffalo Bills (Playoff wild card)
The Bills were perhaps the only team more impressive than the Panthers in last year's final stretch. I love their touchdown-scoring defense and special teams, and I think second-year wideout Lee Evans is a star in the making. - New York Jets
It's a tough call between them and the Bills, but they spiral out of control whenever Chad Pennington hits his yearly injury. Wait, what am I saying? The rules of fate dictate that Laveranues Coles will catch 15 TDs in his first year after leaving Washington. - Miami Dolphins
The Patriots aren't going to let them get away with an upset this year.
- Pittsburgh Steelers
The Steelers are the only team in the NFL who can win 4 less games than it did the previous year and still finish in first. And that's what they'll do. - Baltimore Ravens
This has been my hardest pick to make out of them all, especially since I've already given up my wild cards to the AFC East and West. Kyle Boller should consider a second career as The Riddler, with all those question marks surrounding him. - Cincinnati Bengals
So, they had their first surprising 8-8 season thanks to new coach Marvin Lewis, and they had their second one thanks to the emergence of Carson Palmer as QB. Is 9-7 or better on the horizon with this offense? - Cleveland Browns
Last year, they fired the only coach in the NFL whose name I couldn't rattle off the top of my head.
- Indianapolis Colts
Corey Simon puts in place the final piece of the puzzle needed to vault them over the Patriots. Following their once mythical home playoff game against the Patriots, they take home a Vince Lombardi trophy at last. - Jacksonville Jaguars
Everyone else is picking them to be good, so I will too. I was really disappointed that their offense floundered under Bill Musgrave, who was a brilliant coordinator when he was here at UVA. - Houston Texans
I'll say they're a toss-up for second with Jacksonville. David Carr had a horrible preseason, so that's why they've been bumped down a notch. - Tennessee Titans
And it looks like there won't be any witty comments from me about the AFC South in this year's predictions.
- San Diego Chargers
Ever since his year with the Redskins, I've considered Marty Schottenheimer to be one of the best coaches in the league. Do yourself a favor, and download the Chargers' fight song here. You will believe! - Kansas City Chiefs (Playoff wild card)
Gunther Cunningham was the right coordinator to bring respectability to this defense, but last year he didn't have the players. He might now. - Denver Broncos
They've been barely making the playoffs and losing in the first round for years now. It seems to me that their plug-in-a-running-back strategy is wearing thin, as it didn't produce a superstar last year. - Oakland Raiders
Let's see here. A Norv Turner coached team with a much-hyped offense and questionable defense? Does this sound familiar to anyone?
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Watch Prison Break
Over the summer, previews for Fox's new fall drama, Prison Break, left most everyone I know asking, "How are they going to stretch a prison break story into an entire series?" While the premiere Monday night didn't quite answer that question, it did convince me that the show would be exciting and worth watching for as long as the tale unfolds. Without giving away much of the plot, I'll say that I can't wait to see Michael Scofield's intricate plan to free his brother from death row unfold bit by bit. If you are a fan of 24 and happened to miss Prison Break's first episode on Monday, I encourage you to check out the encore presentation Thursday at 8pm.
Monday, August 29, 2005
Batman is cool, but his comics kinda suck!
At a time where the movie version of Batman is enjoying its greatest critical success ever, his comic book counterpart is suffering through its lowest point of quality since before Frank Miller rebooted the franchise in 1986. Starting with the far overrated Hush storyline in 2002 (basically a comic book version of a Jerry Bruckheimer movie--a cash cow with no plot), Batman comics have favored cheap gimmicks over strong writing. While this has certainly been annoying, it has only recently escalated to a level that threatens to put an irreversable stain on the series.
In the past, the arrival of a good writer could do wonders to make you forget the bad storylines of the past. This made it possible to tolerate the predictable answers to the secret identity of Hush, the aimless storytelling of Broken City, and the inconsistent characterization littered throughout Tim Drake's temporary replacement as Robin by his girlfriend. The return of former Robin Jason Todd (one of comics' few reliably dead characters) as a villian was troublesome, but it could at least be undone with a run of the mill "oh, he's just a clone" explanation. Last week, however, writer Bill Willingham and his editorial staff managed to draw their graffiti over the world of Batman with a permanent marker.
The story "War Crimes" set out to explain who really killed Stephanie Brown, the aforementioned replacement Robin thought to have died in Gotham City's recent gang war. Never mind that there was no real mystery behind Stephanie's death, as it was pretty much shown in full on the printed page. The story behind the story had to be told! You see, it turns out that Miss Brown really was killed when Leslie Thompkins, the doctor who helped raise Bruce Wayne after the murder of his parents, secretly refused to give her medical treatment for her injuries. It seems that ol' Leslie, whose strong pacifism caused her to frequently oppose Batman's violent methods, decided to make an example of Stephanie, killing her to discourage others from following in Bruce's line of work. Nothing like a murder to champion the cause of nonviolence.
Who cares if this illogical turn of events brazenly defies years of characterization? We're selling comics, people! The future of a beloved character is nothing compared to the value of a moment of cheap suspense. It should only be a matter of time before we find out that, as Linden suggests, the Joker is the product of a torrid affair between Alfred and Mrs. Wayne. That is, unless solid writing once again returns to the main Batman books, returning them to the splendor that now exists on screen in Batman Begins.
"Oh, she's just a clone" stories wanted.
In the past, the arrival of a good writer could do wonders to make you forget the bad storylines of the past. This made it possible to tolerate the predictable answers to the secret identity of Hush, the aimless storytelling of Broken City, and the inconsistent characterization littered throughout Tim Drake's temporary replacement as Robin by his girlfriend. The return of former Robin Jason Todd (one of comics' few reliably dead characters) as a villian was troublesome, but it could at least be undone with a run of the mill "oh, he's just a clone" explanation. Last week, however, writer Bill Willingham and his editorial staff managed to draw their graffiti over the world of Batman with a permanent marker.
The story "War Crimes" set out to explain who really killed Stephanie Brown, the aforementioned replacement Robin thought to have died in Gotham City's recent gang war. Never mind that there was no real mystery behind Stephanie's death, as it was pretty much shown in full on the printed page. The story behind the story had to be told! You see, it turns out that Miss Brown really was killed when Leslie Thompkins, the doctor who helped raise Bruce Wayne after the murder of his parents, secretly refused to give her medical treatment for her injuries. It seems that ol' Leslie, whose strong pacifism caused her to frequently oppose Batman's violent methods, decided to make an example of Stephanie, killing her to discourage others from following in Bruce's line of work. Nothing like a murder to champion the cause of nonviolence.
Who cares if this illogical turn of events brazenly defies years of characterization? We're selling comics, people! The future of a beloved character is nothing compared to the value of a moment of cheap suspense. It should only be a matter of time before we find out that, as Linden suggests, the Joker is the product of a torrid affair between Alfred and Mrs. Wayne. That is, unless solid writing once again returns to the main Batman books, returning them to the splendor that now exists on screen in Batman Begins.
"Oh, she's just a clone" stories wanted.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
2005 ACC Football Predictions
Here are my picks for this year's ACC football standings:
Atlantic Division
The race in the Atlantic should be an exciting one, as I could see any of the top 3 picks here going to the Championship game. The bottom teams here stand a better shot at knocking off one of the top ones than they do in the Coastal.
Coastal Division
This division seems to be a fair bit more predictable than its counterpart. I pretty much agree with the official preseason media poll.
Virginia Tech will avenge their season opening loss to defeat NC State and move on to the BCS. And then it's on to another offseason of scandal! Go Chokies!!!
Atlantic Division
The race in the Atlantic should be an exciting one, as I could see any of the top 3 picks here going to the Championship game. The bottom teams here stand a better shot at knocking off one of the top ones than they do in the Coastal.
- NC State
I'm going out on a limb with this one, as BC and Florida State appear to be the popular picks. Still, I think it's undoubtable that the Wolfpack will be a contender. They return the core of a spectacular defense from last season, and over the past couple seasons they've been quite a formidable road team. They'll upset Tech in the season opener and take one of two out of their consecutive trips to Boston and Tallahassee. - Boston College
Being the fabled final piece to the ACC's 12 team puzzle, the Eagles are the team I know least about. While I believe they might be as good as some people say, I think the ACC will provide them with more rigorous competition than they're used to in the Big East. Of course, that's what everyone said about Virginia Tech last year... - Florida State
It brings me great pleasure to rank the Criminoles this low, but I think it's a legitimate spot for them. Leon Washington will be a force at running back and the defense will be strong, but their lack of a quarterback will make FSU one-dimensional. - Clemson
It's an odd-numbered year, so Clemson might stand a chance at being good. Charlie Whitehurst would do well to try to duplicate his sophomore season and ignore the one he had last year, which earned him the timeless brand of "overrated." - Wake Forest
Last year, Wake was within a few plays of beating some really great teams, yet ended up with a losing record. Their talent isn't good enough for talk of a title, but the team that finishes second in this division may be the one that loses to them. I'm glad they aren't on the Hoos' schedule. - Maryland
Yes, I hate them. Yes, they'll also be worse than last year, losing more than they'll gain on defense and having no forseeable breakout stars to undo the effects of last year's fat and slow Ralph Friedgen offense.
Coastal Division
This division seems to be a fair bit more predictable than its counterpart. I pretty much agree with the official preseason media poll.
- Virginia Tech
Yes, I hate them. Yes, it's also impossible to deny that the team that won the conference last year returns the bulk of its starters and is just about every publication's pick. If Marcus Vick can curb his perverse desire for 15-year-old tail long enough to actually concentrate on football, they might not even miss 2004 Player of the Year Bryan Randall. Bear in mind, though, I'm hanging this pick on the strength of Vick's supporting cast, not the virtues of the dimwitted heir to the throne himself.
- Miami
The Canes are no doubt a team on the decline, and I don't have a clue who their quarterback is. Nevertheless, they're still loaded with four-star recruits, and a down year for Miami still equates to a banner year for most. - Virginia
As much as I hope otherwise, I can't see how a team who had 7 players drafted by the NFL in the off-season gets better than 8-4 and rises to challenge the current powers of the ACC.
- Georgia Tech
They'll run neck and neck with Virginia until their meeting in Charlottesville on November 12, where they haven't won since 1990. If any team in the division rises as a sleeper, however, it'll be this one. They have a load of potential on offense with Reggie Ball at QB, Calvin Johnson at WR, and PJ Daniels at RB. - North Carolina
The Heels were impressive in the second half of last season, but in all likelihood they'll be back to their old tricks this year. They haven't had a defense in years, and last year's playmaker on offense, Darian Durant, is gone. - Duke
VMI better be scared over this matchup on Sept. 17. Everyone else can breath easy.
Virginia Tech will avenge their season opening loss to defeat NC State and move on to the BCS. And then it's on to another offseason of scandal! Go Chokies!!!
2005-06 UVA Basketball Schedule Released
As football season looms upon us, basketball is the last thing on most sports fans' minds. However, the University of Virginia's basketball schedule was released today, and it bears noting that an extremely difficult year lies ahead. Road games against Arizona and Gonzaga might as well be chalked up as losses already, and a trip to the oft-dangerous Western Kentucky (who took the Cavs to double OT last year in Charlottesville) could also catch the team off guard. Perhaps the schedule's only saving grace is in its regular season finale. This is when the University hosts Maryland in the final game ever to be played at University Hall, returning the despicable Terps the favor they extended to us when they closed the doors to Cole Field House on our heads in 2002.
Sunday, July 31, 2005
Mr. and Mrs. Linden Kiser
Congrats to Linden and Aimee Kiser, who got married on Saturday, July 30. May God bless them with many wonderful years together!
Kize These Two People Grade: A+
Kize These Two People Grade: A+
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
Comic Review: All-Star Batman and Robin #1
Today marked the return of Frank Miller in the world of Batman comic books. Writer of The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One (basically regarded as the best Batman stories ever), Miller has the ability to send fanboys rushing to comic stores by the millions whenever his name is attached to anything remotely Bat-related. Also able to generate such a sales frenzy (even when paired with horrible writing) is artist Jim Lee, who joins Miller on DC Comics' biggest summer release, All Star Batman and Robin, the Boy Wonder.
The comic marks the launch of DC's "All Star" line of books, in which top talent will be matched with marquee characters like Batman and Superman. The philosophy behind the All Star brand is that each series will feature the "iconic" versions of the characters, unlinked to any specific continuity or reliance on character history. In other words, to understand All Star Batman, you don't need to know the ins and outs of his every adventure from the past 10 years, you just need to have heard of the character at some point in your life.
With stand-alone storylines being the advertised nature of All Star, it seems peculiar that Miller would spend his first issue retelling the story of how Dick Grayson became Robin. In comics, the revision of origin stories is commonplace, but their purpose is almost exclusively limited to serving as a starting point for a new status quo or emphasis for the chosen character. Since the All Star titles are supposed to exist separate from the specificities of any one writer's version of the heroes, why dedicate an entire All Star storyline to the details of a main character's origin? Secondly, the origin of Robin is probably the third most commonly told story in the history of comics, behind only the origins of Batman and Superman. In my life, I've read at least six other elaborate and independent takes on this story, not to mention seen a movie and a TV episode about the same topic. Even the casual Batman fan has had plenty of opportunities to see these events unfold before picking up All Star Batman and Robin #1.
That said, it is not as if Frank Miller does an unsatisfactory job in telling his version of the murder of Dick Grayson's parents. He does a decent job in the limited space he has here in making their deaths feel tragic, and he adds a potentially interesting new plotline for the future by suggesting that corrupt Gotham cops were involved. As expected, Miller manages to throw his fair share of grim and gritty heroism into the story. The best part of the comic is Batman's internal monologue about the snake venom-laced Batarang he uses on the Graysons' killer. Still, the 18th version of the same story in the past 50 years can only be so interesting, and it's doubtful that any longtime Batman fans will be truly captivated by this first issue.
One really can't describe All Star Batman and Robin's first chapter as fantastic, though the larger story it begins may very well turn out to be. If that happens, my labeling of this current issue as mediocre will be quickly revoked. However, for that to be the case, Miller must eventually come to present us with something new.
Kize grade: C+
The comic marks the launch of DC's "All Star" line of books, in which top talent will be matched with marquee characters like Batman and Superman. The philosophy behind the All Star brand is that each series will feature the "iconic" versions of the characters, unlinked to any specific continuity or reliance on character history. In other words, to understand All Star Batman, you don't need to know the ins and outs of his every adventure from the past 10 years, you just need to have heard of the character at some point in your life.
With stand-alone storylines being the advertised nature of All Star, it seems peculiar that Miller would spend his first issue retelling the story of how Dick Grayson became Robin. In comics, the revision of origin stories is commonplace, but their purpose is almost exclusively limited to serving as a starting point for a new status quo or emphasis for the chosen character. Since the All Star titles are supposed to exist separate from the specificities of any one writer's version of the heroes, why dedicate an entire All Star storyline to the details of a main character's origin? Secondly, the origin of Robin is probably the third most commonly told story in the history of comics, behind only the origins of Batman and Superman. In my life, I've read at least six other elaborate and independent takes on this story, not to mention seen a movie and a TV episode about the same topic. Even the casual Batman fan has had plenty of opportunities to see these events unfold before picking up All Star Batman and Robin #1.
That said, it is not as if Frank Miller does an unsatisfactory job in telling his version of the murder of Dick Grayson's parents. He does a decent job in the limited space he has here in making their deaths feel tragic, and he adds a potentially interesting new plotline for the future by suggesting that corrupt Gotham cops were involved. As expected, Miller manages to throw his fair share of grim and gritty heroism into the story. The best part of the comic is Batman's internal monologue about the snake venom-laced Batarang he uses on the Graysons' killer. Still, the 18th version of the same story in the past 50 years can only be so interesting, and it's doubtful that any longtime Batman fans will be truly captivated by this first issue.
One really can't describe All Star Batman and Robin's first chapter as fantastic, though the larger story it begins may very well turn out to be. If that happens, my labeling of this current issue as mediocre will be quickly revoked. However, for that to be the case, Miller must eventually come to present us with something new.
Kize grade: C+
A New Day on the Horizon
Last week, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court. More so than for any particular judicial opinion that she wrote, O'Connor will forever be remembered as the first woman to ever sit on the bench for the highest court in the land. While her accomplishment in doing so certainly served as an inspiration to ambitious female law students everywhere, she did little during her tenure on the Court to combat the stereotype that women are fickle.
Commonly known for her role as the swing vote, O'Connor was as likely to side with the Court's liberal judicial activists as she was with its so-called conservative contingent. Her votes to uphold the legality of affirmative action and abortion were hardly the stuff you'd expect from a Reagan appointee, yet she sided with Dubya in 2000's famous Bush v. Gore case regarding the recount in Florida. The reason for her unpredictable inconsistencies? Simply a lack of any kind of consistent method of interpreting the Constitution. As described by my 3rd year Con Law professor, O'Connor, unlike the other justices, followed no particular judicial philosophy, favoring instead to apply arbitrary standards to issues on a case-by-case basis.
Though all signs currently point to the "moderate" Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, it certainly would be nice if Bush managed to place a strict constructionist on the Court who could help to finally reverse the last half-century's improper liberal abuse of judicial power. After all, judicial nominations are the main reason I vote for Republican presidents. If nothing else, however, we can at least hope for a justice who follows unified principles and a logical philosophy in deciphering the nation's law.
Commonly known for her role as the swing vote, O'Connor was as likely to side with the Court's liberal judicial activists as she was with its so-called conservative contingent. Her votes to uphold the legality of affirmative action and abortion were hardly the stuff you'd expect from a Reagan appointee, yet she sided with Dubya in 2000's famous Bush v. Gore case regarding the recount in Florida. The reason for her unpredictable inconsistencies? Simply a lack of any kind of consistent method of interpreting the Constitution. As described by my 3rd year Con Law professor, O'Connor, unlike the other justices, followed no particular judicial philosophy, favoring instead to apply arbitrary standards to issues on a case-by-case basis.
Though all signs currently point to the "moderate" Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, it certainly would be nice if Bush managed to place a strict constructionist on the Court who could help to finally reverse the last half-century's improper liberal abuse of judicial power. After all, judicial nominations are the main reason I vote for Republican presidents. If nothing else, however, we can at least hope for a justice who follows unified principles and a logical philosophy in deciphering the nation's law.
Saturday, July 02, 2005
Deleted Live 8 Post
For some reason, Blogger overwrote my post about MTV's coverage of the Live 8 music festival. Basically, I pointed out how retarded MTV was for promising to "cover" the landmark concert and then proceeding to show hardly any of the music on the air. In its place were numerous documentaries about the history of musicians and activism, mixed in with lame commentary about by VJs about the music, which you could hear faintly in the background. In a situation where MTV could have created quality programming simply by pointing a camera at the stage, they failed miserably.
Friday, June 24, 2005
Movie Review: Batman Begins
Batman is not silly or corny. He doesn't whip out Bat-shark repellent or joke Batman credit cards when battling his enemies. He most definitely does not wear rubber nipples on his suit. Instead, Batman is a dark creature of the night, striking fear in the hearts of evil-doers just as they would seek to do to innocents. He is not seen at press conferences or public charity functions, but rather lurking in the shadows of Gotham's rooftops and in the whispers and nightmares of the city's criminal element.
Batman is not a hero because of his "wonderful toys." Yes, while Bruce Wayne uses his access to high tech equipment to aid him in his war on crime, it is not the reliance on his tools alone that allows him to succeed. Through years of training and study, Batman has honed his mind and body to near perfection, elevating him to the status of superhero though he possesses no super powers in the traditional sense.
Batman is not a disguise for Bruce Wayne. In fact, Bruce Wayne is a false public persona constructed to conceal the hero's true identity as Batman. While Bruce Wayne might be spotted among high society with a supermodel on each arm, Batman remains more dedicated at heart to his mission than he ever could be to the pursuit of romance.
Batman's villains are not buffoons who provide more comic relief than they do a real threat. They are psychotic killers with cunning minds, more Hannibal Lecter than Dr. Evil. They do not employ oversize props or live in glitzy hideouts, preferring instead to concoct schemes of terror that would make your and my skin crawl if they were real.
Batman's ally Jim Gordon is not an incompetent and overweight figurehead in the world of law enforcement. He's a man of virtue in a city of corruption, a good cop who stands alone against a criminal underworld and dirty police force who are often one and the same.
Batman does not kill. Though he seeks to avenge his parents, Batman would never re-create the act of murder that stole them from him. After seeking an eye for an eye at a young age, Batman has learned that true justice is served when evil is defeated without resorting to using its methods.
Batman does not deserve to be exploited on screen for the sole purposes of being merchandised to children. His movies should not be mere popcorn flicks void of substantive plots. His story is one of complexity, the gripping tale of a man desperately fighting to redeem a severely broken world.
And Batman has never been accurately portrayed in a live action movie. Until now.
Kize movie grade: A+
Batman is not a hero because of his "wonderful toys." Yes, while Bruce Wayne uses his access to high tech equipment to aid him in his war on crime, it is not the reliance on his tools alone that allows him to succeed. Through years of training and study, Batman has honed his mind and body to near perfection, elevating him to the status of superhero though he possesses no super powers in the traditional sense.
Batman is not a disguise for Bruce Wayne. In fact, Bruce Wayne is a false public persona constructed to conceal the hero's true identity as Batman. While Bruce Wayne might be spotted among high society with a supermodel on each arm, Batman remains more dedicated at heart to his mission than he ever could be to the pursuit of romance.
Batman's villains are not buffoons who provide more comic relief than they do a real threat. They are psychotic killers with cunning minds, more Hannibal Lecter than Dr. Evil. They do not employ oversize props or live in glitzy hideouts, preferring instead to concoct schemes of terror that would make your and my skin crawl if they were real.
Batman's ally Jim Gordon is not an incompetent and overweight figurehead in the world of law enforcement. He's a man of virtue in a city of corruption, a good cop who stands alone against a criminal underworld and dirty police force who are often one and the same.
Batman does not kill. Though he seeks to avenge his parents, Batman would never re-create the act of murder that stole them from him. After seeking an eye for an eye at a young age, Batman has learned that true justice is served when evil is defeated without resorting to using its methods.
Batman does not deserve to be exploited on screen for the sole purposes of being merchandised to children. His movies should not be mere popcorn flicks void of substantive plots. His story is one of complexity, the gripping tale of a man desperately fighting to redeem a severely broken world.
And Batman has never been accurately portrayed in a live action movie. Until now.
Kize movie grade: A+
Thursday, June 09, 2005
Did you miss "What's the Matter, Kize?" as much as I did?
It's been quite a while since I've posted, though there have been a variety of topics over the past month worth writing about. Here's what earned my love/hatred over the past few weeks.
Was Season Four of 24 the best ever? Probably not...I think that honor is still reserved for Season Two, which had the best overall storyline despite an anticlimactic conclusion and some ill-advised Kim subplots. Season Four loses a few points in my book for featuring a string of largely singular terrorist threats rather than a coherent grand scheme. Even so, it earns a few 24 "best of" honors. Chief among those is "Best Season Finale," taking that prize by far. Historically, the 24 finales haven't had the luster that the rest of the season has, mainly because the format of the show requires most of the plot threads to be resolved prior to the final hour. This year's finale, however, broke that mold by changing the status quo of Jack Bauer's life in a manner that boasts a great deal of promise for Season Five (details withheld for the sake of our DVD viewers). Also, this season may have been the most exciting so far, due largely to Jack's one-man assault on the terrorists' compound to save Audrey as well as his race against the bad guys in to recover the president's nuclear football. Kize season grade: A
This year's Worst Season Finale Ever award goes to Alias, a show whose decline has been documented more than once in this blog. Ever since its inception, Alias has built a complex ongoing storyline about the prophecies and inventions of Milo Rambaldi, a scientist from 500 years ago far ahead of his time. This plot thread apparantly came to a conclusion in the finale, and a disappointing one at that. For a four-year epic to reach an appropriately exciting finish, it deserves a lengthy build-up to the end, not the three-episode arc that this year's continuity-hostile format imposed upon us. Furthermore, the promised epic showdown between Sydney and her sister Nadia turned out to be totally lame. Not only was the fight a let down, but it came about in the most contrived way possible. Rather than give Nadia and Sydney compelling motives to oppose each other, the show resorted to putting Nadia under mind control that turned her into a temporary bad guy. Kize finale grade: D+
Is there any musical act as heavily influenced by its choice of producer as is Dave Matthews Band? Just as occurred on "Everyday" with Glenn Ballard, new producer Mark Batson convinces DMB on its new album "Stand Up" to dumb down its music rather than indulge in the complex instrumental jams that earned them a fan base. This time around, the band adopts the sound of easy listening adult contemporary radio, much like Dave did on his solo effort a few years back. Most of the songs on the album are largely repetitive, with choruses that consist of singing the same line over and over and over. It's probably DMB's worst album, even though some of the tracks are enjoyable. Louisana Bayou is a fun, funky jam, and I like Hunger for the Great Light despite its unabashedly sex-filled lyrics. But considering that I plan on skipping over almost half of the songs every time this disc makes its way into my player, its Kize album grade can't be any higher than a C-.
Joining DMB in the Worst Album of Their Career category is Weezer, with "Make Believe." The good news, however, is that every song on the album is better than Beverly Hills, the first single and Weezer's Worst Song Ever. A good two-thirds of the album still has the trademark Weezer sound, complete with self-depricating lyrics and the singing of various "whoa-oh"s and "oo oo"s. It is only because these songs aren't quite as clever or musically original as much of the band's other catalogue that the album falls short of the mark set by the previous ones. Out of the remaining tracks which depart from Weezer's traditional sound, only one of them avoids sounding overly corny--"This is Such a Pity," in which the band explores what they might sound like if they were The Killers. Kize album grade: C+
Was Season Four of 24 the best ever? Probably not...I think that honor is still reserved for Season Two, which had the best overall storyline despite an anticlimactic conclusion and some ill-advised Kim subplots. Season Four loses a few points in my book for featuring a string of largely singular terrorist threats rather than a coherent grand scheme. Even so, it earns a few 24 "best of" honors. Chief among those is "Best Season Finale," taking that prize by far. Historically, the 24 finales haven't had the luster that the rest of the season has, mainly because the format of the show requires most of the plot threads to be resolved prior to the final hour. This year's finale, however, broke that mold by changing the status quo of Jack Bauer's life in a manner that boasts a great deal of promise for Season Five (details withheld for the sake of our DVD viewers). Also, this season may have been the most exciting so far, due largely to Jack's one-man assault on the terrorists' compound to save Audrey as well as his race against the bad guys in to recover the president's nuclear football. Kize season grade: A
This year's Worst Season Finale Ever award goes to Alias, a show whose decline has been documented more than once in this blog. Ever since its inception, Alias has built a complex ongoing storyline about the prophecies and inventions of Milo Rambaldi, a scientist from 500 years ago far ahead of his time. This plot thread apparantly came to a conclusion in the finale, and a disappointing one at that. For a four-year epic to reach an appropriately exciting finish, it deserves a lengthy build-up to the end, not the three-episode arc that this year's continuity-hostile format imposed upon us. Furthermore, the promised epic showdown between Sydney and her sister Nadia turned out to be totally lame. Not only was the fight a let down, but it came about in the most contrived way possible. Rather than give Nadia and Sydney compelling motives to oppose each other, the show resorted to putting Nadia under mind control that turned her into a temporary bad guy. Kize finale grade: D+
Is there any musical act as heavily influenced by its choice of producer as is Dave Matthews Band? Just as occurred on "Everyday" with Glenn Ballard, new producer Mark Batson convinces DMB on its new album "Stand Up" to dumb down its music rather than indulge in the complex instrumental jams that earned them a fan base. This time around, the band adopts the sound of easy listening adult contemporary radio, much like Dave did on his solo effort a few years back. Most of the songs on the album are largely repetitive, with choruses that consist of singing the same line over and over and over. It's probably DMB's worst album, even though some of the tracks are enjoyable. Louisana Bayou is a fun, funky jam, and I like Hunger for the Great Light despite its unabashedly sex-filled lyrics. But considering that I plan on skipping over almost half of the songs every time this disc makes its way into my player, its Kize album grade can't be any higher than a C-.
Joining DMB in the Worst Album of Their Career category is Weezer, with "Make Believe." The good news, however, is that every song on the album is better than Beverly Hills, the first single and Weezer's Worst Song Ever. A good two-thirds of the album still has the trademark Weezer sound, complete with self-depricating lyrics and the singing of various "whoa-oh"s and "oo oo"s. It is only because these songs aren't quite as clever or musically original as much of the band's other catalogue that the album falls short of the mark set by the previous ones. Out of the remaining tracks which depart from Weezer's traditional sound, only one of them avoids sounding overly corny--"This is Such a Pity," in which the band explores what they might sound like if they were The Killers. Kize album grade: C+
A New Evil Arises
A few weeks ago, when The Kize posted "The TV Lover's Code," he must have ruffled a few feathers among those dastardly network execs who will stop at nothing to ruin your viewing experience. Faced with my posting of methods to combat each existing threat of plot spoilage, these villains have devised a new technique to suck the life out of surprising plot twists.
During the two hour episode of Alias that preceded the season finale, the show shamelessly displayed actress Lena Olin's name in the opening credits. As all Alias loyalists know, Lena Olin plays Sydney's mother Irina, a fan favorite character long thought dead. I speculate that Irina's return would have made for quite a climactic moment in the episode, but this potential thrill will remain forever theoretical, as the surprise was thoroughly ruined in advance.
I have yet to come up with a useful plan for shielding myself against such future abuses of opening credits. However, I am convinced that this new reign of terror will be ultimately vanquished.
During the two hour episode of Alias that preceded the season finale, the show shamelessly displayed actress Lena Olin's name in the opening credits. As all Alias loyalists know, Lena Olin plays Sydney's mother Irina, a fan favorite character long thought dead. I speculate that Irina's return would have made for quite a climactic moment in the episode, but this potential thrill will remain forever theoretical, as the surprise was thoroughly ruined in advance.
I have yet to come up with a useful plan for shielding myself against such future abuses of opening credits. However, I am convinced that this new reign of terror will be ultimately vanquished.
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Movie Review: Revenge of the Sith
In 1977, a single Roman numeral sparked nearly thirty years of imaginative speculation.
By dubbing his first Star Wars movie as "Episode IV," George Lucas created a lingering desire in the hearts of fans like myself to see the implied existence of Episodes I-III made into reality. The strength of this wish was only amplified by the original trilogy's many references to a hidden backstory involving the Jedi career of Anakin Skywalker, the fall of the Old Republic, and something called the "Clone Wars." It didn't help that Lucas spoke frequently of this history himself, suggesting that its complete plotline had been constructed in his head from the very beginning. (Star Wars was not, as many believe, based on an original series of 9 books, nor had George Lucas written a comprehensive script for any of his prequels prior to their being made.) For the majority of our lives, I and others silently and eagerly asked Lucas, "Why did Luke's father turn to the dark side?" "How did the Empire take power?" and "What happened to the Jedi?"
Though the release of Episode I in 1999 ensured that the questions Star Wars die-hards had would finally be answered, it is in Episode III - Revenge of the Sith that this promise is ultimately fulfilled. And whereas its two predecessors often fell short of living up to the Star Wars legacy thanks to some poor character development, the final intallment of the series is great enough to earn its place alongside the original trilogy in the epic movie pantheon.
If watching Revenge of the Sith doesn't fill you with a growing sense of dread as you watch Anakin Skywalker gradually succumb to the temptations of dark side power, then I question your ability to emotionally respond to movies. From Anakin's initial tendencies to give in to rage and fear to his chilling adoption of the name Darth Vader, Revenge spares no thrills in bringing you to its inevitable tragic conclusion. This spiral downward culminates in the long awaited battle between Vader and Obi Wan Kenobi, played by Ewan McGregor at the top of his game. When McGregor laments that Anakin was "supposed to bring balance to the Force, not leave it in darkness," I knew that we had experienced the birth of another one of the saga's unforgettable moments.
As its script comes straight from the pen of George Lucas (unlike The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, which had more polished screenwriters), some of the flaws we've come to expect in the prequels still haunts the film. The romantic dialogue between Anakin and his wife Padme still sounds excruciatingly forced, and we never actually feel anything more than a factual knowledge of the love between them. Even so, Episode III steers clear of some of the other pitfalls that plagued The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. Each moment of the movie fits appropriately within the fantasy Star Wars universe, and gone are some of the intrusions of modern day American society such as Episode I's out-of-place pod race sportscasters or Episode II's misfitting diner on Coruscant.
However, perhaps the greatest testament of Revenge of the Sith's success as a piece of the Star Wars saga is its ability to excite you about re-watching the rest of the series that is linked to it...Episodes I and II included.
Kize grade: A
By dubbing his first Star Wars movie as "Episode IV," George Lucas created a lingering desire in the hearts of fans like myself to see the implied existence of Episodes I-III made into reality. The strength of this wish was only amplified by the original trilogy's many references to a hidden backstory involving the Jedi career of Anakin Skywalker, the fall of the Old Republic, and something called the "Clone Wars." It didn't help that Lucas spoke frequently of this history himself, suggesting that its complete plotline had been constructed in his head from the very beginning. (Star Wars was not, as many believe, based on an original series of 9 books, nor had George Lucas written a comprehensive script for any of his prequels prior to their being made.) For the majority of our lives, I and others silently and eagerly asked Lucas, "Why did Luke's father turn to the dark side?" "How did the Empire take power?" and "What happened to the Jedi?"
Though the release of Episode I in 1999 ensured that the questions Star Wars die-hards had would finally be answered, it is in Episode III - Revenge of the Sith that this promise is ultimately fulfilled. And whereas its two predecessors often fell short of living up to the Star Wars legacy thanks to some poor character development, the final intallment of the series is great enough to earn its place alongside the original trilogy in the epic movie pantheon.
If watching Revenge of the Sith doesn't fill you with a growing sense of dread as you watch Anakin Skywalker gradually succumb to the temptations of dark side power, then I question your ability to emotionally respond to movies. From Anakin's initial tendencies to give in to rage and fear to his chilling adoption of the name Darth Vader, Revenge spares no thrills in bringing you to its inevitable tragic conclusion. This spiral downward culminates in the long awaited battle between Vader and Obi Wan Kenobi, played by Ewan McGregor at the top of his game. When McGregor laments that Anakin was "supposed to bring balance to the Force, not leave it in darkness," I knew that we had experienced the birth of another one of the saga's unforgettable moments.
As its script comes straight from the pen of George Lucas (unlike The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, which had more polished screenwriters), some of the flaws we've come to expect in the prequels still haunts the film. The romantic dialogue between Anakin and his wife Padme still sounds excruciatingly forced, and we never actually feel anything more than a factual knowledge of the love between them. Even so, Episode III steers clear of some of the other pitfalls that plagued The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. Each moment of the movie fits appropriately within the fantasy Star Wars universe, and gone are some of the intrusions of modern day American society such as Episode I's out-of-place pod race sportscasters or Episode II's misfitting diner on Coruscant.
However, perhaps the greatest testament of Revenge of the Sith's success as a piece of the Star Wars saga is its ability to excite you about re-watching the rest of the series that is linked to it...Episodes I and II included.
Kize grade: A
Friday, May 06, 2005
Hey! You! Get Offa my Field!
Today's Daily Progress reports that the Rolling Stones will perform a concert at the University of Virginia's Scott Stadium in October as part of their 2005 tour.
Needless to say, if these rumors are true, it would be one of the biggest events ever to hit the grounds of the University. Not only have special events at Scott Stadium been rare (the last one was the famous Dave Matthews Band and Neil Young show in April 2001), but the Stones occupy a status higher than almost any rock band still in existence. Serious debates are carried on as to whether they were a better band than The Beatles, and just about anyone would recognize more than a few Stones songs if they heard them. Of the acts still making music today, the only one I can think of that might equal the Rolling Stones in stature is U2, and the Stones predate them by about 20 years.
Despite all this, it seems ludricrous that UVA would consider such an event to take place. The word on the street is that the planned date for the concert would be in early October, during one of two away game weeks for the Cavalier football team. Historically, the University has been resistant to allow any non-football activity to take place within the stadium, even during the off-season. The potential effects of an in-season concert stand to be quite disruptive. Following the DMB show in '01, the stadium's turf had to be resodded because the existing one suffered irreparable damage due to the concert's on-field seating. While Dave was gracious enough to fund the repairs, and though the Stones may be expected to do the same, a football field cannot be replaced overnight. New grass needs time to take root, and a quick patch job could create dangerous field conditions for the Hoos' Oct. 15 showdown with Florida State (if you're looking for evidence, just ask anyone who was at JMU's national championship game this past fall, where UT-Chatanooga's recently replaced field came up in clumps any time a player shuffled his feet).
Even if the Rolling Stones rumor doesn't pan out, it still seems that UVA has committed to hosting a large musical event for the same timeframe. Why the administration would permit such a questionable act following countless springs and summers worth of empty stadiums is beyond me.
Needless to say, if these rumors are true, it would be one of the biggest events ever to hit the grounds of the University. Not only have special events at Scott Stadium been rare (the last one was the famous Dave Matthews Band and Neil Young show in April 2001), but the Stones occupy a status higher than almost any rock band still in existence. Serious debates are carried on as to whether they were a better band than The Beatles, and just about anyone would recognize more than a few Stones songs if they heard them. Of the acts still making music today, the only one I can think of that might equal the Rolling Stones in stature is U2, and the Stones predate them by about 20 years.
Despite all this, it seems ludricrous that UVA would consider such an event to take place. The word on the street is that the planned date for the concert would be in early October, during one of two away game weeks for the Cavalier football team. Historically, the University has been resistant to allow any non-football activity to take place within the stadium, even during the off-season. The potential effects of an in-season concert stand to be quite disruptive. Following the DMB show in '01, the stadium's turf had to be resodded because the existing one suffered irreparable damage due to the concert's on-field seating. While Dave was gracious enough to fund the repairs, and though the Stones may be expected to do the same, a football field cannot be replaced overnight. New grass needs time to take root, and a quick patch job could create dangerous field conditions for the Hoos' Oct. 15 showdown with Florida State (if you're looking for evidence, just ask anyone who was at JMU's national championship game this past fall, where UT-Chatanooga's recently replaced field came up in clumps any time a player shuffled his feet).
Even if the Rolling Stones rumor doesn't pan out, it still seems that UVA has committed to hosting a large musical event for the same timeframe. Why the administration would permit such a questionable act following countless springs and summers worth of empty stadiums is beyond me.
Monday, May 02, 2005
A Couple of Singles
On May 10, two of my favorite bands will release new albums. Dave Matthews Band, following a couple of its members' disappointing solo efforts, reunites on the long-awaited Stand Up, while Weezer, the one-time kings of geek rock, unveils Make Believe. Currently in rotation on radio are the debut singles from each of these upcoming LPs--DMB's "American Baby" and "Beverly Hills" from the Weez. Click the links above to hear a (legal) audio stream of each.
Ever since they became a mainstay on top 40 stations, there have essentially existed two versions of the Dave Matthews Band. The original version, the jam-loving concert performists who marched ants through Charlottesville in the early 90s, is currently funded by a second incarnation, a band ensuring its appearance on teenage girls' bedroom walls by virtue of slickly produced four-minute radio hits. It is the latter that brings us "American Baby," but not at the total expense of selling out fans of the former. Whereas DMB's pop sensibilities cannibalized the travesty that was 2001's Everyday, this doesn't look to be the case on the new album, if Baby is any indication. With a prominent display of Boyd Tinsley's violin and Leroi Moore's sax, the song actually sounds like DMB, even if its lyrics and musical structure are largely simplified. "American Baby" is a love song to the United States, a refreshing sentiment from a band who clearly couldn't have been happy with the results of last November's election.
I wish I could find a sliver of such tolerability in Weezer's "Beverly Hills," the latest generic package off the uninspired rock assembly line. With each album released since the epic Pinkerton (or, as I like to refer to it, the greatest album that ever has or ever will be created by man), it seems that Rivers Cuomo and company have drifted further away from their trademark creativity in music or in lyric. "Beverly Hills" represents the lowest point to date in this de-evolution, and it's hard to imagine that the pattern could descend much deeper. The song sounds like something from the latter day Everclear catalogue, landing firmly on the dark side of the catchy/annoying divide. Though my loyalties to the band will probably win out in the end, right now I'm questioning whether I should even buy the upcoming album. Weezer, you might as well take off your glasses and frost your hair if this is where your music is headed.
Ever since they became a mainstay on top 40 stations, there have essentially existed two versions of the Dave Matthews Band. The original version, the jam-loving concert performists who marched ants through Charlottesville in the early 90s, is currently funded by a second incarnation, a band ensuring its appearance on teenage girls' bedroom walls by virtue of slickly produced four-minute radio hits. It is the latter that brings us "American Baby," but not at the total expense of selling out fans of the former. Whereas DMB's pop sensibilities cannibalized the travesty that was 2001's Everyday, this doesn't look to be the case on the new album, if Baby is any indication. With a prominent display of Boyd Tinsley's violin and Leroi Moore's sax, the song actually sounds like DMB, even if its lyrics and musical structure are largely simplified. "American Baby" is a love song to the United States, a refreshing sentiment from a band who clearly couldn't have been happy with the results of last November's election.
I wish I could find a sliver of such tolerability in Weezer's "Beverly Hills," the latest generic package off the uninspired rock assembly line. With each album released since the epic Pinkerton (or, as I like to refer to it, the greatest album that ever has or ever will be created by man), it seems that Rivers Cuomo and company have drifted further away from their trademark creativity in music or in lyric. "Beverly Hills" represents the lowest point to date in this de-evolution, and it's hard to imagine that the pattern could descend much deeper. The song sounds like something from the latter day Everclear catalogue, landing firmly on the dark side of the catchy/annoying divide. Though my loyalties to the band will probably win out in the end, right now I'm questioning whether I should even buy the upcoming album. Weezer, you might as well take off your glasses and frost your hair if this is where your music is headed.
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
The TV Lover's Code
As a growing number of people come to discover the glory of continuity-based television series such as Alias and 24, it seems that there is also a growing percentage of these viewers who develop a number of reckless habits regarding these shows. In an age of Internet and entertainment as big business, there exist many tempting methods of spoiling a plot. So that you may guard yourself against such harmful practices, I have written the following guide to maintaining suspenseful plotline integrity. If you value your television-watching experience, take heed.
Rule #1: Do Not Watch Next Week's Previews!
The biggest mistake a fan of plot twists and suspense can make is to watch the network's preview of next week's episode. As tempting as this may be, especially following cliffhanger episodes, there is no quicker way to suck the life out of a show. Remember, Fox, ABC, and the others value ratings higher than your actual enjoyment of their programs, therefore they won't hesitate to reveal next week's most climactic moment in a preview if they think it could grab them a few more viewers. If these people had designed the preview poster for The Empire Strikes Back, it would have had the tagline "Luke, I am your father."
Between Alias and 24, such betrayals of viewership have been numerous. From Ira Gaines' demand that Jack Bauer shoot his partner Nina, to Arvin Sloane's revelation that he had an affair with Irina Derevko, several of the most dramatic moments in television over the past few years have been ruined by blabbermouth previews. Keep in mind that while it may be fun to catch a glimpse of an episode's pivotal moments a week in advance, it is far more exciting to see such moments occur as their writers intended them, in context following an appropriate build-up.
Rule #2: Always Be Ready to Shield Yourself from a Preview if Necessary
Though you can always easily turn the channel or switch off the TV before the standard post-episode preview, you never know when a network will slip in a preview during the week prior to an episode's airing. Whether it be a football game or The Simpsons, no hour on TV is safe. Therefore, you must be vigilant when watching other programs on a network that carries your favorite show. The best thing to do in these situations is to leave the room or change the channel as soon as you realize a preview is starting. If you are in a social situation where this is not possible, simply close your eyes and cover your ears until the standard preview length of 30 seconds has passed, then explain to your friends the importance of purity in savoring each installment of Alias, 24, or other ongoing show of your choice.
Rule #3: Do Not Talk About What Happened in Previews You Have Seen
If you accidentally see a preview or are so bold as to ignore Rules 2 and 3, do not under any circumstances make reference to the contents of said preview in the company of your fellow fans. Just because you like ruining 24 for yourself doesn't mean that your friend wants to know that next week Michelle will return to CTU or that Marwan will scour the wreckage of Air Force One for the nuclear football.
Rule #4: Ease into Your Conversations about Last Night's Episode
As much as we love our shows, sometimes an important event like a UVA basketball game prevents us from watching them on their designated night. If you see an Alias watcher sign onto AIM at 10:30 on a Wednesday night, don't immediately exclaim to him, "Wasn't that Sloane duplicate awesome?!?!?" Your friend might have missed the episode and plans on watching a tape later on. Instead, open with a non-revelatory question like, "What did you think of Alias?" or simply, "Did you watch?"
Rule #5: Avoid Reading Reports of Actors' Contracts
The entertainment news media loves to publish stories about what actors have struck what deals to appear on what shows. As harmless as this might seem, it can turn out to spell doom for those who want to keep their plot twists involving surprise character appearances under wraps. Months ago, it was reported that Dennis Haysbert had signed on to appear in 6 episodes of the 4th season of 24. As anyone who has ever seen the show knows, this signalled the return of David Palmer, the former president who resigned at the end of last season, and the advance news sapped all shock value from Palmer's appearance in Monday's episode.
And finally...
Rule #6 (exclusively for those of you who wait until the following year to watch 24, Alias, or Lost on DVD):
Don't read this blog.
Rule #1: Do Not Watch Next Week's Previews!
The biggest mistake a fan of plot twists and suspense can make is to watch the network's preview of next week's episode. As tempting as this may be, especially following cliffhanger episodes, there is no quicker way to suck the life out of a show. Remember, Fox, ABC, and the others value ratings higher than your actual enjoyment of their programs, therefore they won't hesitate to reveal next week's most climactic moment in a preview if they think it could grab them a few more viewers. If these people had designed the preview poster for The Empire Strikes Back, it would have had the tagline "Luke, I am your father."
Between Alias and 24, such betrayals of viewership have been numerous. From Ira Gaines' demand that Jack Bauer shoot his partner Nina, to Arvin Sloane's revelation that he had an affair with Irina Derevko, several of the most dramatic moments in television over the past few years have been ruined by blabbermouth previews. Keep in mind that while it may be fun to catch a glimpse of an episode's pivotal moments a week in advance, it is far more exciting to see such moments occur as their writers intended them, in context following an appropriate build-up.
Rule #2: Always Be Ready to Shield Yourself from a Preview if Necessary
Though you can always easily turn the channel or switch off the TV before the standard post-episode preview, you never know when a network will slip in a preview during the week prior to an episode's airing. Whether it be a football game or The Simpsons, no hour on TV is safe. Therefore, you must be vigilant when watching other programs on a network that carries your favorite show. The best thing to do in these situations is to leave the room or change the channel as soon as you realize a preview is starting. If you are in a social situation where this is not possible, simply close your eyes and cover your ears until the standard preview length of 30 seconds has passed, then explain to your friends the importance of purity in savoring each installment of Alias, 24, or other ongoing show of your choice.
Rule #3: Do Not Talk About What Happened in Previews You Have Seen
If you accidentally see a preview or are so bold as to ignore Rules 2 and 3, do not under any circumstances make reference to the contents of said preview in the company of your fellow fans. Just because you like ruining 24 for yourself doesn't mean that your friend wants to know that next week Michelle will return to CTU or that Marwan will scour the wreckage of Air Force One for the nuclear football.
Rule #4: Ease into Your Conversations about Last Night's Episode
As much as we love our shows, sometimes an important event like a UVA basketball game prevents us from watching them on their designated night. If you see an Alias watcher sign onto AIM at 10:30 on a Wednesday night, don't immediately exclaim to him, "Wasn't that Sloane duplicate awesome?!?!?" Your friend might have missed the episode and plans on watching a tape later on. Instead, open with a non-revelatory question like, "What did you think of Alias?" or simply, "Did you watch?"
Rule #5: Avoid Reading Reports of Actors' Contracts
The entertainment news media loves to publish stories about what actors have struck what deals to appear on what shows. As harmless as this might seem, it can turn out to spell doom for those who want to keep their plot twists involving surprise character appearances under wraps. Months ago, it was reported that Dennis Haysbert had signed on to appear in 6 episodes of the 4th season of 24. As anyone who has ever seen the show knows, this signalled the return of David Palmer, the former president who resigned at the end of last season, and the advance news sapped all shock value from Palmer's appearance in Monday's episode.
And finally...
Rule #6 (exclusively for those of you who wait until the following year to watch 24, Alias, or Lost on DVD):
Don't read this blog.
Thursday, April 21, 2005
My Friends' Blogs: Addendum
A couple friends of mine started blogs in the past week too late to be included in the power rankings. So, out of fairness, I'm including links to both.
The Aderall Sessions (Derek Mondeau)
An all-purpose blog (pop culture, sports, religion, life). Won me over with a poop joke in the first post.
The Power of Common Sense (Brian Kirby)
Opinions on politics and interesting links. And you can bet there'll be some posts about the Baltimore Ravens come September.
The Aderall Sessions (Derek Mondeau)
An all-purpose blog (pop culture, sports, religion, life). Won me over with a poop joke in the first post.
The Power of Common Sense (Brian Kirby)
Opinions on politics and interesting links. And you can bet there'll be some posts about the Baltimore Ravens come September.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Power Rankings: My Friends' Blogs
It's power rankings time again, folks, and this go 'round, I'm ranking my friends' blogs. That's right, I have the audacity to take the blogs my friends work so hard to write and put them in a list ordered according to how I rate them. I didn't even have the guts to give numbered rankings to my top 5 comic books in my post on that topic last month, yet here I am recklessly doing that very thing to people I know and like.
Chances are, if you're my friend and you have a blog, then I enjoy reading it...so consider your appearance here a compliment regardless of where you fall in the rankings.
The criteria were as follows: Writing style; Informative Value; Entertainment Value; and Frequency of Updates. (Yes, I know that last one is a clear case of the Kize calling the kettle black). Also, I only considered "amateur" blogs. That is, if you write for a blog that gets wide public recognition and is currently creating ripples throughout Virginia's political landscape, you weren't considered for the list.
Chances are, if you're my friend and you have a blog, then I enjoy reading it...so consider your appearance here a compliment regardless of where you fall in the rankings.
The criteria were as follows: Writing style; Informative Value; Entertainment Value; and Frequency of Updates. (Yes, I know that last one is a clear case of the Kize calling the kettle black). Also, I only considered "amateur" blogs. That is, if you write for a blog that gets wide public recognition and is currently creating ripples throughout Virginia's political landscape, you weren't considered for the list.
- The Essential Joe Morse
The tagline for this blog reads, "Brilliant Insights From Your Friend Joe," and that's a pretty accurate description. From sports, to politics, to music, to life, Joe rarely has an uninteresting take on a topic. I highly suggest playing a game of Unpredictably Imminent History with yourself. The only flaw here is an occasional long wait between postings, but this is partially made up for by having 2-3 posts per update. - The Red Stater (Chris Rivera)
Otherwise known as the hardline conservative's guide to political thinking. This blog earns points purely for updating on a near daily basis, and it almost always provides links to recent news stories or conservative articles about recent political issues. Though I would like to see a more frequent departure from by-the-book conservative opinions, Chris would be betraying himself to do so. - Hail to the Cheat (Kyle Goggin)
Yeah, it's mainly just a personal update site of no interest to anyone who isn't friends with Kyle, but within those boundaries it does its job wonderfully. It's easy to call for more frequent updates, but it should also be appreciated that this blog doesn't go overboard with nonessential details like some personal blogs do. What would really be nice to see is another piece of pop culture analysis, along the lines of "24 and the Great Commission." - The Last Nerve (Linden Kiser)
A blog with a future, this one will surely jump in the rankings once it has more than 2 posts to its name. So far, Last Nerve has been a successful mix of humor and political commentary (within the same posts, even), though I suspect that comedy will eventually come to play a larger role...espeically if the author's hilarious guest posts on Quotidian were any indication. - Ahmad for America (Ali Ahmad, now inactive)
Dropped like a rock in the rankings after it was deleted by its creator. This was once a perfect blog representation of Ali Ahmad's in-your-face political ranting and sense of humor, and it was the blog I was reading when I decided to create my own. A tragedy that it now only exists in the memories of those who were fortunate enough to read it. - Pokemon Are The Best (Travis Oakes)
What the---??!!??!? This is the worst blog on the entire Internet. Seriously, Trav, what are you thinking? Would it kill you to act non-gay for at least 2 seconds?
Sunday, April 03, 2005
Movie Review: Frank Miller's Sin City
There's a fairly large subsection of comic book fandom who judges comic book movies on the basis of their literal adherence to the source material. For these fans, Sin City will in no doubt be considered the greatest achievement in modern American cinema. As advertised, the movie is a near page-by-page simulation of three of comic legend Frank Miller's Sin City stories (The Hard Goodbye, The Big Fat Kill, and That Yellow Bastard). This holds true not just visually, as indicated in the trailers, but in a verbatim carryover of dialogue from page to screen that renders co-director Robert Rodriguez's role as screenwriter to that of mere transcriptionist.
On the aforementioned visual level, Sin City triumphs. It's selective use of color to highlight significant character features against a black-and-white background is striking, and it also adds a lot to the dramatic and emotional weight of the film. For example, when tough guy Marv looks at Goldie, the woman he loves, we see the rareness of her beauty shown in color contrasted against the grim and grit that engulfs the grey Sin City, just as Marv sees her. In addition, the action sequences are fluid and thrilling, ranking right up there with comic movies' best. Highlights are the ferocious fighting style of psychotic cannibal Kevin brought to life in full creepiness, as well as the ruthless execution of a drunk chauvinist at the hands of hooker-assasin Miho.
It is in the movie's loyalty to Frank Miller's dialogue, however, where Sin City suffers. In the comic, Miller's narration read flawlessly, bringing you to the heart of despair that he intended his fictional city to be. Unfortunately, when spoken in the movie, many of these lines sound exactly as if the actors are simply reading them from the comic, occasionally without regard to where appropriate pauses or inflections should lie. We aren't accustomed to hearing live actors speak so quickly without wasted words, and it this efficiency of dialogue doesn't work so well in a live action context. Rodriguez and Miller would have been wiser to decompress the film's spoken lines, or at least to have instructed their actors to take a breath here and there. I feel that a less direct translation of speech from the comic would have resulted in a better representation of the comic's mood.
That being said, Sin City is a good movie, and it should be treasured as one of the few comic book movies that doesn't betray fans of the source comic in even the slightest way. Strangely enough, I think I would have been able to enjoy Sin City much more if I hadn't just recently read the comic versions, as I knew exactly when and how each sword swipe, gun blast, and electrocution was going to play out. I caught a glimpse of what my movie-viewing experience might have been like through my favorite scene, a short final sequence that never appeared in the comics which ties up one of the movie's loose ends in a particularly chilling manner.
Kize Grade: B+
On the aforementioned visual level, Sin City triumphs. It's selective use of color to highlight significant character features against a black-and-white background is striking, and it also adds a lot to the dramatic and emotional weight of the film. For example, when tough guy Marv looks at Goldie, the woman he loves, we see the rareness of her beauty shown in color contrasted against the grim and grit that engulfs the grey Sin City, just as Marv sees her. In addition, the action sequences are fluid and thrilling, ranking right up there with comic movies' best. Highlights are the ferocious fighting style of psychotic cannibal Kevin brought to life in full creepiness, as well as the ruthless execution of a drunk chauvinist at the hands of hooker-assasin Miho.
It is in the movie's loyalty to Frank Miller's dialogue, however, where Sin City suffers. In the comic, Miller's narration read flawlessly, bringing you to the heart of despair that he intended his fictional city to be. Unfortunately, when spoken in the movie, many of these lines sound exactly as if the actors are simply reading them from the comic, occasionally without regard to where appropriate pauses or inflections should lie. We aren't accustomed to hearing live actors speak so quickly without wasted words, and it this efficiency of dialogue doesn't work so well in a live action context. Rodriguez and Miller would have been wiser to decompress the film's spoken lines, or at least to have instructed their actors to take a breath here and there. I feel that a less direct translation of speech from the comic would have resulted in a better representation of the comic's mood.
That being said, Sin City is a good movie, and it should be treasured as one of the few comic book movies that doesn't betray fans of the source comic in even the slightest way. Strangely enough, I think I would have been able to enjoy Sin City much more if I hadn't just recently read the comic versions, as I knew exactly when and how each sword swipe, gun blast, and electrocution was going to play out. I caught a glimpse of what my movie-viewing experience might have been like through my favorite scene, a short final sequence that never appeared in the comics which ties up one of the movie's loose ends in a particularly chilling manner.
Kize Grade: B+
Sunday, March 20, 2005
Better Than Eating Poop, I Guess
Last week, I pretty much took every opportunity available to complain about how much I was dreading having to go on my company's annual retreat. So, I'd like to thank everyone who listened to my constant whining, as well as to say that the retreat was not as bad as I thought it would be. However, this is only due to the fact that I expected it to be the worst 42-hour period of my entire life. In the same way, you could say that Spy Kids 3D doesn't look as bad as Pokemon: The Movie, System of a Down isn't as horrible an excuse for a band as Nickelback, or that this week's episode of That 70's Show wasn't as unfunny as last week's.
So, what was I up to at retreat while people who work for normal companies were watching basketball?
Friday night after dinner was comprised of breaking into groups and coming up with competing skits about what we would do if we were CEO of the company. Our group won the contest because it supposedly had the best mixture of serious suggestions and humorous presentation, which basically means that it was neither legitimately productive nor truly funny.
Saturday morning, we had the pleasure of listening to a 3 hour presentation by a consultant/motivational speaker, the kind of guy who comes across as being just as genuine as any Clinton-era politician. The main thrust of his speech was to encourage us to "think outside the box" and come up with creative new answers to the questions we face every day. Never mind that, today, the phrase "think outside the box" itself is inside "the box." As a follow-up to the speaker, we discussed in groups the things that our company should start doing, stop doing, do more of, and do less of. It was nice to see office politics taking firm control of this exercise, as most people in my group wouldn't make meaningful suggestions because they were scared of making waves.
From this point on, the retreat went uphill a bit. The Saturday afternoon discussion of the priorities in making additions and changes to our company's main software product was tedious, but at least relevant and important for me to take part in. Of course, none of my interest manifested itself physically, as my tiredness began to take its toll. Numerous people asked me if I were feeling ok, and my boss said I looked like Pete Gillen's depressed son. Saturday evening was free time, and we were done by 11am on Sunday, so there wasn't much time for things to suck then.
In retrospect, I'd still say that the retreat has an overall negative impact on my company, as it largely serves to demoralize its employees in the week prior and wear them out for the one upcoming. However, I will admit that it serves its purpose in providing some social interaction between coworkers, as well as a chance to get everyone together to discuss some important company issues. Of course, all of these things could take place in late May, far removed from the college sports season and closer to some built-in time off for holidays.
You know, I hope no one at work finds out I have a blog.
So, what was I up to at retreat while people who work for normal companies were watching basketball?
Friday night after dinner was comprised of breaking into groups and coming up with competing skits about what we would do if we were CEO of the company. Our group won the contest because it supposedly had the best mixture of serious suggestions and humorous presentation, which basically means that it was neither legitimately productive nor truly funny.
Saturday morning, we had the pleasure of listening to a 3 hour presentation by a consultant/motivational speaker, the kind of guy who comes across as being just as genuine as any Clinton-era politician. The main thrust of his speech was to encourage us to "think outside the box" and come up with creative new answers to the questions we face every day. Never mind that, today, the phrase "think outside the box" itself is inside "the box." As a follow-up to the speaker, we discussed in groups the things that our company should start doing, stop doing, do more of, and do less of. It was nice to see office politics taking firm control of this exercise, as most people in my group wouldn't make meaningful suggestions because they were scared of making waves.
From this point on, the retreat went uphill a bit. The Saturday afternoon discussion of the priorities in making additions and changes to our company's main software product was tedious, but at least relevant and important for me to take part in. Of course, none of my interest manifested itself physically, as my tiredness began to take its toll. Numerous people asked me if I were feeling ok, and my boss said I looked like Pete Gillen's depressed son. Saturday evening was free time, and we were done by 11am on Sunday, so there wasn't much time for things to suck then.
In retrospect, I'd still say that the retreat has an overall negative impact on my company, as it largely serves to demoralize its employees in the week prior and wear them out for the one upcoming. However, I will admit that it serves its purpose in providing some social interaction between coworkers, as well as a chance to get everyone together to discuss some important company issues. Of course, all of these things could take place in late May, far removed from the college sports season and closer to some built-in time off for holidays.
You know, I hope no one at work finds out I have a blog.
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
Soccer Players Love Goals, Tennis Players Love Rackets...Everyone Else Loves NCAA Brackets
The first two rounds of the NCAA basketball tournament make up the best weekend in sports, and though my job can try to rob me of the pleasure of watching by forcing me to go on a Friday through Sunday company retreat, it cannot steal away the joy of filling out a bracket. That said, here's my analysis of some this year's teams:
Final Four:
UNC: Will win it all. They powered through the ACC, even when star guard McCants was battling illness. They have the backcourt to match up with #1 Illinois, but also have in Sean May the inside presence to send the Illini home.
Illinois: Hard to pick against them making the Final Four, as Oklahoma State is pretty much the only team in their bracket that might be good enough to do it. Loses to UNC in the title game.
Wake Forest: The Deacons are one ACC tournament game win away from being a #1 seed, and they're in the same region as this year's weakest top seed, Washington. Everyone knows that guards Chris Paul and Justin Gray are good, but teams still have to answer to Eric Williams at center, a great player who doesn't get the spotlight.
Syracuse: The Big East was the best conference in the country this season from top to bottom, and Syracuse won its tournament title, beating hot pick UConn in the semis. They'll get to the Final Four, with their biggest hurdle being Kentucky, not Duke.
Others:
Duke: They deserve a #1 seed for what they've accomplished, but Coach K will lose to Syracuse in the Sweet 16. Historically, whenever Duke has had problems with depth, they've struggled in the tournament, and this is definitely one of those years. The ACC was a lot weaker this year in the middle than people think, and Duke only went 2-2 in the regular season against the other top 3 conference teams. They had the ACC Tourney handed to them, as each team they faced was the lower seed from the previous round's game.
Louisville: What in the world is this team doing in the 4 slot? For the past two years, I've unsuccessfully tried to give Rick Patino his triumphant return to the Final Four, but this could be the year that he finally does it, using this wrongfully high seeding as motivation for his players. While the Cardinals could knock off questionable Washington, I still don't see them making it past Wake. An Elite 8 team in my book.
Kansas: Roy Williams can breath easy, because I don't think he has to worry about facing the team he betrayed by leaving for North Carolina. Kansas is hitting a slump at exactly the wrong time and has several chances to lose before making the Elite 8, which I have them doing to Wisconsin in the second round.
Florida: People criticize Billy Donovan's teams for choking in the NCAAs, but doesn't anyone remember 2000 when his Gators made a surprise run to the championship game? Florida is red hot coming off the SEC championship against Kentucky, even hotter than Villanova, their likely second round opponent. It's a shame that they'll have to go up against the Heels in the Sweet 16.
Georgia Tech: This is probably the only team in the tournament that could lose in the first round just as likely as they could win the whole thing. I have them doing the former against an underseeded George Washington team, who knocked off Michigan State and Maryland on consecutive days early in the season.
Iowa State: They use their speed to run right past Minnesota to the second round. After a great start which included beating UVA (back when we were good), Iowa State hit a road block midseason. They came out of that slump to earn a Big Dance bid and are quite deserving of one.
Pacific: There's a ton of hype around this team, but I don't think their record puts them that far above any other mid major who's had a successful season. I don't like their chances against Pittsburgh, who fought alongside the toughest the Big East had to offer, which, this year, was pretty darn tough.
Charlotte: If the season had ended two weeks earlier, I'd have had Charlotte making the Sweet 16 as a no-brainer. However, this team's stock is falling fast, having lost 3 straight games by double digits. This doesn't bode well for their first round matchup against NC State, whose improved play in the final weeks of the season culminated in an ACC tournament blowout of Wake Forest.
Old Dominion: There's always a temptation to pick a CAA team to win its first round game, as the league almost always puts up a surprising fight. That pick looks especially alluring when you take into account ODU's 28-5 record. Sure, the Monarchs might be good, but their Strength of Schedule outside of the conference is one of the weakest in the nation. They won't see a second game, losing to a solid Michigan State.
Final Four:
UNC: Will win it all. They powered through the ACC, even when star guard McCants was battling illness. They have the backcourt to match up with #1 Illinois, but also have in Sean May the inside presence to send the Illini home.
Illinois: Hard to pick against them making the Final Four, as Oklahoma State is pretty much the only team in their bracket that might be good enough to do it. Loses to UNC in the title game.
Wake Forest: The Deacons are one ACC tournament game win away from being a #1 seed, and they're in the same region as this year's weakest top seed, Washington. Everyone knows that guards Chris Paul and Justin Gray are good, but teams still have to answer to Eric Williams at center, a great player who doesn't get the spotlight.
Syracuse: The Big East was the best conference in the country this season from top to bottom, and Syracuse won its tournament title, beating hot pick UConn in the semis. They'll get to the Final Four, with their biggest hurdle being Kentucky, not Duke.
Others:
Duke: They deserve a #1 seed for what they've accomplished, but Coach K will lose to Syracuse in the Sweet 16. Historically, whenever Duke has had problems with depth, they've struggled in the tournament, and this is definitely one of those years. The ACC was a lot weaker this year in the middle than people think, and Duke only went 2-2 in the regular season against the other top 3 conference teams. They had the ACC Tourney handed to them, as each team they faced was the lower seed from the previous round's game.
Louisville: What in the world is this team doing in the 4 slot? For the past two years, I've unsuccessfully tried to give Rick Patino his triumphant return to the Final Four, but this could be the year that he finally does it, using this wrongfully high seeding as motivation for his players. While the Cardinals could knock off questionable Washington, I still don't see them making it past Wake. An Elite 8 team in my book.
Kansas: Roy Williams can breath easy, because I don't think he has to worry about facing the team he betrayed by leaving for North Carolina. Kansas is hitting a slump at exactly the wrong time and has several chances to lose before making the Elite 8, which I have them doing to Wisconsin in the second round.
Florida: People criticize Billy Donovan's teams for choking in the NCAAs, but doesn't anyone remember 2000 when his Gators made a surprise run to the championship game? Florida is red hot coming off the SEC championship against Kentucky, even hotter than Villanova, their likely second round opponent. It's a shame that they'll have to go up against the Heels in the Sweet 16.
Georgia Tech: This is probably the only team in the tournament that could lose in the first round just as likely as they could win the whole thing. I have them doing the former against an underseeded George Washington team, who knocked off Michigan State and Maryland on consecutive days early in the season.
Iowa State: They use their speed to run right past Minnesota to the second round. After a great start which included beating UVA (back when we were good), Iowa State hit a road block midseason. They came out of that slump to earn a Big Dance bid and are quite deserving of one.
Pacific: There's a ton of hype around this team, but I don't think their record puts them that far above any other mid major who's had a successful season. I don't like their chances against Pittsburgh, who fought alongside the toughest the Big East had to offer, which, this year, was pretty darn tough.
Charlotte: If the season had ended two weeks earlier, I'd have had Charlotte making the Sweet 16 as a no-brainer. However, this team's stock is falling fast, having lost 3 straight games by double digits. This doesn't bode well for their first round matchup against NC State, whose improved play in the final weeks of the season culminated in an ACC tournament blowout of Wake Forest.
Old Dominion: There's always a temptation to pick a CAA team to win its first round game, as the league almost always puts up a surprising fight. That pick looks especially alluring when you take into account ODU's 28-5 record. Sure, the Monarchs might be good, but their Strength of Schedule outside of the conference is one of the weakest in the nation. They won't see a second game, losing to a solid Michigan State.
Monday, March 14, 2005
A Glance at (Bad) Comics 3/05
As promised, here are the worst comic book series I've read in the past few months:
- Superman -
The boost in sales this book has earned over the past year must be due exclusively to Jim Lee's top notch art, which stands in stark contrast to the low-level of writing being presented. I gave the current 12-part "For Tomorrow" storyline several chances to pick up steam, but after the 7th or 8th chapter it was clear that the "suspense" generated early on was leading nowhere. The only way to justify the half a year of build up in Superman would be to write a really spectacular payoff, but instead readers have received nothing but overly cryptic nonsensical dialogue and a depressed Supes acting like a watered down version of Batman--a take that is as untrue to the character as any I've read.
- Robin -
As a kid, my favorite comic month after month was this title featuring the solo adventures of Batman's teenage partner as he dealt with both crimefighting and high school life. Under new management, this book has devolved into a silly sci-fi parody of the characters it once respected. Recent storylines have featured Robin facing off against a supernaturally powered gangster possessed by some sort of giant demonic thumbtack, as well as the Penguin placing orders for weaponry from outer space. And don't get me started on how this series characterizes Batman whenever he appears, turning the stoic Dark Knight into a cartoonish wisecracker.
- Catwoman: When in Rome -
Once upon a time, writer Jeph Loeb crafted brilliant Batman mysteries like "The Long Halloween" and "Dark Victory." This companion piece to those wonderful storylines only serves to show how fall Loeb has fallen in the years since. Supposedly fitting between the gaps of events told in "Dark Victory," "When in Rome" features a mystery so unintriguing that I can't even remember what it is. The hidden villain of the story uses weapons patterned after those of Batman's famous rogues, presumably for no other reason than to have the artist draw these familiar images. The plot seeks no such excuse for the nude Catwoman scenes that crop up two or three times an issue.
- Ultimate Elektra -
This attempt to cash in on the recent Jennifer Garner Elektra movie would have done better to follow in the footsteps of its predecessor, Ultimate Daredevil, and hired Greg Rucks to continue his defining take on the Daredevil-Elektra relationship. In that series, Matt Murdock and Elektra's love was torn apart by the latter's willingness to cross moral lines in order to see justice served. This sequel tries to re-create that same tension, as Elektra agrees to steal evidence for the Kingpin in return for his help in preventing her father from being framed for money laundering. However, any potential for a compelling moral gray area falls flat once it becomes clear that Elektra had non-criminal options for clearing her father. It seems that the title character in this story isn't overcome by passion as much as she is stupidity.
Sunday, March 13, 2005
A Glance at (Good) Comics 3/05
Here's a look at the 5 best comic books I'm reading currently:
- Y: The Last Man - Brian K. Vaughn's masterpiece about the lone survivor of a plague that killed all men on earth continues to be as thought-provoking and suspenseful as ever. I especially appreciate how the mysteries of the story are unfolding at a gradual, but steady, pace. While the last storyline revealed the answer to one of the series' biggest questions (why Yorick survived the plague), it didn't place all cards on the table, leaving readers to still wonder how the plague was created and what the motivations are behind those who are apparantly seeking to stop its cure. Unlike The X-Files, which eventually fell under the weight of its own unresolved plot threads, Y seems to be moving to an eventual end, though not at too quick a rate as to rob it of its excitement.
- Gotham Central - Though it places a central focus on the detectives of Gotham City and includes only minimal appearances of the Dark Knight, Gotham Central reads like the only true Batman book on the market right now. This makes sense, considering that the series' alternating writers Greg Rucka and Ed Brubaker have pretty much been the only writers to contribute relevant stories to the mainstream Bat-books in the past 3 years. Sadly, Brubaker's recent signing of an exclusive contract with Marvel means that his days breathing life into the world of Gotham City have come to an end.
- Wonder Woman - Yeah, I realize how homo it sounds to say that Wonder Woman is one of my favorite comic books, but the fact that I'm doing so is a testament to the excellent writing that Greg Rucka is also doing in this title. Rucka has taken the two core elements of the heroine's character, her role as an ambassador and her ties to Greek mythology, and crafted an interesting product that is just as much a politcal drama as it is heroic epic. Particularly stirring was WW's recent battle with Medusa, in which the title character was forced to permanantly blind herself in order to defend against her enemy's ability to turn people into stone with a single gaze.
- Green Lantern: Rebirth - After several years, DC has decided to bring hero-turned-villain-turned-dead Hal Jordan back to the Green Lantern identity, and it is doing so with a bang. In this mini series, details and plot threads dating back to the earliest GL stories have been woven together to form a highly original explanation for Hal's descent into madness, as well as a legitimate reason for his return. It's almost as if the past 15 years of Green Lantern comics have been leading to this point, and I'm a sucker for a continuity-based climax.
- The Ultimates -
It's hard to pick just one of Marvel's "Ultimate" titles (a set of modern-day restarts of the company's classic heroes) for my top 5, but the others don't quite match up to the movie-quality plots being told in The Ultimates. While leftist writer Mark Millar likely intends his morally ambiguous government-funded superteam to be a metaphor for his disapproval of the Bush administration's foreign policy, he doesn't hesitate to allow readers to feel sympathetic for the heroes' goals. Though I usually don't consider art as a criteria by which the quality of a book should be judged, penciller Bryan Hitch is doing some of comics' best work in this series.
Sunday, March 06, 2005
Nationals vs. Orioles: The Battle for my Fanship
Ever since the end of baseball season, when the city of Washington was awarded a Major League franchise, a debate has carried on in the back of my mind as to whether this team should become my new favorite. Historically, I have been a Baltimore Orioles fan, but this has only been because the Orioles were essentially the adopted team of the DC area, whose teams I root for in every other professional league. Now that there exists a Washington Nationals, it seems only logical that this is the team I should pull for. Of course, since the Nationals will be a National League squad and the Orioles are in the American, I could potentially consider both teams a favorite without any conflict of interest aside from the ocassional interleague series or unlikely World Series matchup. Instead of doing this, however, I've chosen to throw all my support to the Nationals. I'm no sports polygamist, and I don't think a man is justified in having both an NL wife and an AL wife.
(Well...considering that this is baseball we're talking about, in my case it would be more like casually dating two girls at the same time, which I still wouldn't do. As hard as I try, I still can't get into baseball like I do other sports. I'll go ahead and acknowledge to baseball fans that their sport isn't exactly "boring," like most haters of the game claim, but I still find there to be several obstacles in the way of my being passionate about an MLB team. Chief among my complaints is the complete lack of suspense over any individual regular season game. In baseball, even powerhouses like the Yankees and Red Sox lose about a third of their games, and teams within the same division play each other countless times throughout the year. Therefore, there can really be no meaningful excitement or disappointment over beating another team on any given night, especially if your team isn't in playoff contention. In football, Dolphins fans can get psyched over beating the Patriots even if their season is in the toilet, but who cares if Tampa Bay sqeaks one out against the Yanks?)
On the surface, there are several good arguments for why I should continue as an Oriole fan. First of all, there's the question of loyalty and the natural skepticism I should have over abandoning my old team in favor of the new kid. Secondly, it's quite likely that the Orioles will be the better team between the two for quite a while, having just added Sammy Sosa to an already potent offense. Remember, the Nationals may have a new coat of paint, but underneath they're just a few free agent signings better than last year's Montreal Expos.
On the other hand, I'd be a complete tool to pick a favorite team based on their chances of success. Don't forget, this is a Redskins and UVA basketball fan writing here. Aside from my brief consideration of defecting to the Minnesota Timberwolves after the Wizards drafted Steve "Elmo" Blake, I've shown as much (or more) love to my bad teams as bandwagon fans do to theirs. Plus, even if Baltimore is an overall better team than Washington, the Nationals still probably have a more open road to the playoffs for the forseeable future. The Orioles could be the third best team in baseball and still finish behind the payroll-powered Yankees and Red Sox. It's true that the Braves have dominated the NL East since the early 90's, but from year to year that division seems a more likely candidate for parity.
Still, the deciding factor for me in picking the Nationals is my consistency in rooting for Washington area teams. Keep in mind that Baltimore is in Maryland, and the only other thing I've ever found from that state worth tolerating is Dave Theisz. If I stay an Orioles fan, I'm only allying myself with a bunch of Ravens loyalists, most of whom hate the Redskins. There's nothing worse than a blue state who only turns red to shout obscenities and burn trashcans whenever they fail to "protect their house" at Terrapin basketball games. Over time, local TV and newspaper coverage here will shift towards focusing on Washington baseball just as it does with other sports. In Virginia, it continues to make the most geographic sense to stick with the Redskins, Wizards, Capitals...and now the Washington Nationals.
(Well...considering that this is baseball we're talking about, in my case it would be more like casually dating two girls at the same time, which I still wouldn't do. As hard as I try, I still can't get into baseball like I do other sports. I'll go ahead and acknowledge to baseball fans that their sport isn't exactly "boring," like most haters of the game claim, but I still find there to be several obstacles in the way of my being passionate about an MLB team. Chief among my complaints is the complete lack of suspense over any individual regular season game. In baseball, even powerhouses like the Yankees and Red Sox lose about a third of their games, and teams within the same division play each other countless times throughout the year. Therefore, there can really be no meaningful excitement or disappointment over beating another team on any given night, especially if your team isn't in playoff contention. In football, Dolphins fans can get psyched over beating the Patriots even if their season is in the toilet, but who cares if Tampa Bay sqeaks one out against the Yanks?)
On the surface, there are several good arguments for why I should continue as an Oriole fan. First of all, there's the question of loyalty and the natural skepticism I should have over abandoning my old team in favor of the new kid. Secondly, it's quite likely that the Orioles will be the better team between the two for quite a while, having just added Sammy Sosa to an already potent offense. Remember, the Nationals may have a new coat of paint, but underneath they're just a few free agent signings better than last year's Montreal Expos.
On the other hand, I'd be a complete tool to pick a favorite team based on their chances of success. Don't forget, this is a Redskins and UVA basketball fan writing here. Aside from my brief consideration of defecting to the Minnesota Timberwolves after the Wizards drafted Steve "Elmo" Blake, I've shown as much (or more) love to my bad teams as bandwagon fans do to theirs. Plus, even if Baltimore is an overall better team than Washington, the Nationals still probably have a more open road to the playoffs for the forseeable future. The Orioles could be the third best team in baseball and still finish behind the payroll-powered Yankees and Red Sox. It's true that the Braves have dominated the NL East since the early 90's, but from year to year that division seems a more likely candidate for parity.
Still, the deciding factor for me in picking the Nationals is my consistency in rooting for Washington area teams. Keep in mind that Baltimore is in Maryland, and the only other thing I've ever found from that state worth tolerating is Dave Theisz. If I stay an Orioles fan, I'm only allying myself with a bunch of Ravens loyalists, most of whom hate the Redskins. There's nothing worse than a blue state who only turns red to shout obscenities and burn trashcans whenever they fail to "protect their house" at Terrapin basketball games. Over time, local TV and newspaper coverage here will shift towards focusing on Washington baseball just as it does with other sports. In Virginia, it continues to make the most geographic sense to stick with the Redskins, Wizards, Capitals...and now the Washington Nationals.
PTI, Here I Come
Last Wednesday, at the final UVA basketball home game of the season, a reporter for NBC 29 news randomly picked me out of the crowd to give a sound byte about the miserable state of the program this year. The spot aired on the morning and noon broadcasts the following day, March 3, and featured my heartfelt lament over how quickly my high hopes (generated by a strong finish in '04 and a huge upset of Arizona in November) were dashed onced UVA entered ACC play.
I have two thoughts regarding this recent contribution to the local news. 1) NBC 29 was extremely lucky to have interviewed me, a loyal and knowledgeable fan, rather than some random schmuck like the two guys sitting behind me, who didn't even stand up to applaud the seniors. 2) It should only be a matter of time before ESPN tenders me a generous offer to become an on-air analyst.
I have two thoughts regarding this recent contribution to the local news. 1) NBC 29 was extremely lucky to have interviewed me, a loyal and knowledgeable fan, rather than some random schmuck like the two guys sitting behind me, who didn't even stand up to applaud the seniors. 2) It should only be a matter of time before ESPN tenders me a generous offer to become an on-air analyst.
Sunday, February 20, 2005
The Theology of Trilogies
Anyone who has studied theories of epic narrative has most likely come across the notion that all classic stories contain the same basic elements -- themes of heroism and archetypal characters that are essentially the same across the board. The bulk of these patterns are summed up in Joseph Campbell's concept of the "monomyth," or hero cycle, a template for heroic stories that many modern day and historic stories unconsciously follow.
Interestingly enough, many aspects of the hero cycle resemble Biblical concepts. The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is a close parallel to the mythical hero's descent into and eventual triumph over darkness. Secularists would argue that the story of Jesus is nothing more than another incarnation of the monomyth, succumbing to the same archetypes as the rest. However, Christians like myself are of the opposite belief -- that archetypes resonate so strongly with humanity because God has "hard-coded" aspects of his being into creation.
A common form for the telling of such hero stories is the trilogy, a genre that has been especially popular in film throughout the last 25 years. Star Wars, The Matrix, and The Lord of the Rings are all saturated with monomythical elements. Again, I believe that Christian theology goes a long way towards explaining why the three-part structure is so well suited to telling epic tales.
The number three holds a high significance in Christianity, as it symbolizes the perfection found in the trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In a discussion about trilogies I had with my cousin, he suggested that humanity found trilogies appealing because they mirror God's triune nature. While there is certainly something to this, I think the natural tendency of hero stories to unfold as trilogies has an explanation that goes a bit deeper.
When looking at human history through a Biblical lens, three divisions of time emerge. The first era, spanning the years chronicled by the Old Testament, involves the fall of man in the Garden of Eden and a period of waiting for Christ to come. Man currently lives in the second time period, where Christ has arrived and his work to redeem us from the clutches of sin is ongoing. The third and final stage of human existence will occur when Christ returns and the relationship between God, man, and creation is restored to its rightful state.
So, if people are living in the midst of a real-life trilogy, it makes sense that they would write their stories according to the same structure. Even non-Christians, like George Lucas or the Wachowski brothers, unknowingly divide their stories into three parts that correspond to the stages of God's salvation of humanity. I won't go into depth analyzing Star Wars and The Matrix in terms of Christianity here, but if you've seen those movies you probably have an idea of what I'm talking about. And if you liked the stories they told...
...I can think of a few books to recommend.
Interestingly enough, many aspects of the hero cycle resemble Biblical concepts. The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is a close parallel to the mythical hero's descent into and eventual triumph over darkness. Secularists would argue that the story of Jesus is nothing more than another incarnation of the monomyth, succumbing to the same archetypes as the rest. However, Christians like myself are of the opposite belief -- that archetypes resonate so strongly with humanity because God has "hard-coded" aspects of his being into creation.
A common form for the telling of such hero stories is the trilogy, a genre that has been especially popular in film throughout the last 25 years. Star Wars, The Matrix, and The Lord of the Rings are all saturated with monomythical elements. Again, I believe that Christian theology goes a long way towards explaining why the three-part structure is so well suited to telling epic tales.
The number three holds a high significance in Christianity, as it symbolizes the perfection found in the trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In a discussion about trilogies I had with my cousin, he suggested that humanity found trilogies appealing because they mirror God's triune nature. While there is certainly something to this, I think the natural tendency of hero stories to unfold as trilogies has an explanation that goes a bit deeper.
When looking at human history through a Biblical lens, three divisions of time emerge. The first era, spanning the years chronicled by the Old Testament, involves the fall of man in the Garden of Eden and a period of waiting for Christ to come. Man currently lives in the second time period, where Christ has arrived and his work to redeem us from the clutches of sin is ongoing. The third and final stage of human existence will occur when Christ returns and the relationship between God, man, and creation is restored to its rightful state.
So, if people are living in the midst of a real-life trilogy, it makes sense that they would write their stories according to the same structure. Even non-Christians, like George Lucas or the Wachowski brothers, unknowingly divide their stories into three parts that correspond to the stages of God's salvation of humanity. I won't go into depth analyzing Star Wars and The Matrix in terms of Christianity here, but if you've seen those movies you probably have an idea of what I'm talking about. And if you liked the stories they told...
...I can think of a few books to recommend.
I'm Not the Only One
Gillian Flynn's review of Alias that appeared in Entertainment Weekly's Feb. 18 issue is an excellent analysis of where the once-great show is now heading. She addresses the issues of continuity and simplification that I touched upon in my earlier post. Find the review online here. (Note that the EW grade of A posted on this page is a typo. The print version of the magazine lists the rating as a B-.)
Sunday, February 13, 2005
Television Power Rankings
One of the interesting things that the major sports websites do these days is to post weekly "power rankings" for the major professional sports leagues--sort of a simulation of college sports' top 25 polls, with greater weight given to teams who are enjoying recent hot streaks. These rankings hold no official meaning, as pro leagues still decide their playoff seeding purely based on wins and losses, but they're a fun way to compare teams' performance at the present moment. (See the current ESPN.com NBA Power Rankings.)
I'd love to see the same concept applied to ranking TV shows, based on their rising or declining quality. While I certainly have a high enough geek level to do it, I don't watch enough different shows or have enough time to routinely maintain such a list. Even so, here's my shot at what this week's TV Power Rankings would look like:
I'd love to see the same concept applied to ranking TV shows, based on their rising or declining quality. While I certainly have a high enough geek level to do it, I don't watch enough different shows or have enough time to routinely maintain such a list. Even so, here's my shot at what this week's TV Power Rankings would look like:
- 24
--Bringing Tony back into the lineup further solidifies what looks to be a banner year. - Lost
--Still generating X-Files level speculation as to "What the heck is going on???" - Arrested Development
--It's always fun to finally get a joke you heard four episodes ago. - The Simpsons
--Superbowl episode shows that it's still a contender, if no longer a dynasty. - Alias
--Sellout for ratings continues. Give us Rambaldi and the Covenant!
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Superman = liberal; Batman = conservative
Most of you have heard my frequently voiced opinion that Superman is a liberal and that Batman is a conservative. I believe that this opinion is consistently backed by the portrayal of both heroes throughout time, and not simply an instance of me projecting my own ideology onto my favorite character.
Demographically, both characters fit neatly into the stereotypical left/right categories. Clark Kent is not only a big city journalist, but is married to one as well. Bruce Wayne, on the other hand, comes from wealth and is the head of a large corporation that makes money from defense contracting. Superman's best friend, Jimmy Olson, is also a member of the news media, while Batman's is a cop (Jim Gordon). Lex Luthor, Superman's archenemy, is a corrupt businessman with an innate hatred of foreigners (hence his feelings towards the Kryptonian). Batman's rogues gallery, however, includes two environmentalists (Poison Ivy and Ra's al Ghul), a psychologist (Hugo Strange), and a college professor (The Scarecrow).
The personalities of each hero also support these labels. Batman believes first and foremost that criminals should be punished, and he never trusts a villain who claims he has reformed. Though he frequently works with the police, Batman neglects to follow any of the civil rights-based restraints that bind the arms of the boys in blue. Batman willingly uses physical violence to intimidate and extract information from a suspect, and doesn't concern himself with probable cause when conducting a search.
Conversely, Superman sees himself primarily as an inspiration to humanity, even to those on the wrong side of the law. While he has put his fair share of bad guys behind bars, he would rather forgive than incarcerate. Though it can be debated whether or not it presented an accurate vision of Superman, the movie Superman IV shows the Man of Steel unilaterally disarming the nuclear capabilities of the Cold War superpowers. Superman is an advocate of multiculturalism, preserving the remnants of his Kryptonian heritage in the Fortress of Solitude, despite the fact that he has never technically set foot on Krypton. (The modern version of Superman was "born" in the United States, once his ship opened up on Earth.)
Does all of this mean that Superman cannot be enjoyed by a conservative like myself? Even at his worst, Superman mostly embodies the good side of liberalism, and the universe he occupies is basically a vision of what the world would be if liberals were right. My argument does, however, lend further validity to the notion that Batman is the superior character, and that he, like most conservatives facing liberals, could probably defeat Superman in a fight.
Demographically, both characters fit neatly into the stereotypical left/right categories. Clark Kent is not only a big city journalist, but is married to one as well. Bruce Wayne, on the other hand, comes from wealth and is the head of a large corporation that makes money from defense contracting. Superman's best friend, Jimmy Olson, is also a member of the news media, while Batman's is a cop (Jim Gordon). Lex Luthor, Superman's archenemy, is a corrupt businessman with an innate hatred of foreigners (hence his feelings towards the Kryptonian). Batman's rogues gallery, however, includes two environmentalists (Poison Ivy and Ra's al Ghul), a psychologist (Hugo Strange), and a college professor (The Scarecrow).
The personalities of each hero also support these labels. Batman believes first and foremost that criminals should be punished, and he never trusts a villain who claims he has reformed. Though he frequently works with the police, Batman neglects to follow any of the civil rights-based restraints that bind the arms of the boys in blue. Batman willingly uses physical violence to intimidate and extract information from a suspect, and doesn't concern himself with probable cause when conducting a search.
Conversely, Superman sees himself primarily as an inspiration to humanity, even to those on the wrong side of the law. While he has put his fair share of bad guys behind bars, he would rather forgive than incarcerate. Though it can be debated whether or not it presented an accurate vision of Superman, the movie Superman IV shows the Man of Steel unilaterally disarming the nuclear capabilities of the Cold War superpowers. Superman is an advocate of multiculturalism, preserving the remnants of his Kryptonian heritage in the Fortress of Solitude, despite the fact that he has never technically set foot on Krypton. (The modern version of Superman was "born" in the United States, once his ship opened up on Earth.)
Does all of this mean that Superman cannot be enjoyed by a conservative like myself? Even at his worst, Superman mostly embodies the good side of liberalism, and the universe he occupies is basically a vision of what the world would be if liberals were right. My argument does, however, lend further validity to the notion that Batman is the superior character, and that he, like most conservatives facing liberals, could probably defeat Superman in a fight.
Sunday, January 30, 2005
The State of the Alias Address
During the week of Jan. 16, I was stabbed through the heart twice by men named JJ. First, JJ Redick, a.k.a. the most annoying (and probably gay) basketball player in the world, three-pointed UVA to death in an otherwise decent Wahoo showing Sunday at Duke. Fine, I could deal with that, just as I had the six previous times. The more tragic of the two emotional assaults came from a rather unlikely double J -- JJ Abrams, the creator and producer of Alias.
My spirits fell as I watched the Jan. 19 broacast of "Ice," the first Alias episode in four seasons of existence to completely lose my interest before its conclusion (even the season 1 clip show had been quality television). Not only was the episode boring, but it confirmed my suspicions that ABC was willing to sell out Alias' longstanding fan base in order to dumb-down the show enough to make it accessible to new viewers. Gone was the concept of providing the series with a consistent and long-term enemy, and missing were any references to the mysteries that had developed over the past three years.
It's true that a full understanding of a new Alias episode once required having previously viewed each of the previous installments. A rich continuity had developed since the season premiere, and an individual episode served only as a small piece of a much larger and more complex storyline featuring the ancient prophecies of Milo Rambaldi and their ties to Sydney Bristow and her family. But just as this aspect of the show constituted a barrier to new viewership, it was also the glue that held the existing audience firmly to their couches every week. Complete stand-alone episodes like "Ice" compel little dedication to their viewing, as they feature villains and supporting characters who have no history with the show and are unlikely to play a role in its future.
Abrams now seems content to transform Alias into a CSI or Law and Order, easily digestible shows that can be seen on an ocassional basis or out-of-order without suffering a loss to their dramatic effect. While I'm sure the fans of these shows like watching them, the potential enjoyment one can obtain from a single, self-contained CSI cannot match the intrigue generated by the realization of a plotline that has been steadily brewing in Alias for years. A better solution for improving Alias' ratings would be to follow the pattern set by 24, wherein each season begins with a new story arc, but dangling plot threads from previous years are still addressed. With the advent of television on DVD, it isn't difficult for interested viewers to catch up with what they missed.
As troubling as the series current direction is, all hope is not lost. The Jan. 26 episode, while still self-contained, at least offered longstanding fans a few token references to events from seasons one and two, and it hinted at the development of a conspiracy brewing between Jack and Sloane.
My spirits fell as I watched the Jan. 19 broacast of "Ice," the first Alias episode in four seasons of existence to completely lose my interest before its conclusion (even the season 1 clip show had been quality television). Not only was the episode boring, but it confirmed my suspicions that ABC was willing to sell out Alias' longstanding fan base in order to dumb-down the show enough to make it accessible to new viewers. Gone was the concept of providing the series with a consistent and long-term enemy, and missing were any references to the mysteries that had developed over the past three years.
It's true that a full understanding of a new Alias episode once required having previously viewed each of the previous installments. A rich continuity had developed since the season premiere, and an individual episode served only as a small piece of a much larger and more complex storyline featuring the ancient prophecies of Milo Rambaldi and their ties to Sydney Bristow and her family. But just as this aspect of the show constituted a barrier to new viewership, it was also the glue that held the existing audience firmly to their couches every week. Complete stand-alone episodes like "Ice" compel little dedication to their viewing, as they feature villains and supporting characters who have no history with the show and are unlikely to play a role in its future.
Abrams now seems content to transform Alias into a CSI or Law and Order, easily digestible shows that can be seen on an ocassional basis or out-of-order without suffering a loss to their dramatic effect. While I'm sure the fans of these shows like watching them, the potential enjoyment one can obtain from a single, self-contained CSI cannot match the intrigue generated by the realization of a plotline that has been steadily brewing in Alias for years. A better solution for improving Alias' ratings would be to follow the pattern set by 24, wherein each season begins with a new story arc, but dangling plot threads from previous years are still addressed. With the advent of television on DVD, it isn't difficult for interested viewers to catch up with what they missed.
As troubling as the series current direction is, all hope is not lost. The Jan. 26 episode, while still self-contained, at least offered longstanding fans a few token references to events from seasons one and two, and it hinted at the development of a conspiracy brewing between Jack and Sloane.
UVA Must Fire My Identical Twin
Few things make me angrier than those few UVA basketball anti-fans who attend games consciously hoping for a Cavalier loss, so as to expedite the firing of head coach Pete Gillen. In 2004, I found these traitors even more despicable than the obnoxious supporters of visiting Georgia Tech, UNC, Wake Forest, and Arizona, top-15 programs that Gillen knocked off to demonstrate that he was still the man to take the Hoos to national prominence. And while I still wish the anti-fans could be forever banned from University Hall, over the past few weeks I have regretably come to concede the validity of their central argument. Gillen must go.
It seems like ages since everyone thought PG was the leprechaun who would soon lead the Cavaliers to a pot of gold in the Final Four. In fact, it was only as far back as the 1998-99 season (Gillen's first) when he earned a surprising 4 ACC wins with a dismantled UVA team made up mostly of walk-ons. Within two seasons, he had transformed University Hall into one of the NCAA's most feared arenas, a place where fans would camp for days to see the Wahoos routinely arrest, convict, and execute members of the unholy triumvirate of Duke, Carolina, and Maryland. A friend of mine once agreed that Pete Gillen had reached demigod status in the Charlottesville pantheon (with Dave Matthews being one of its gods, and Thomas Jefferson, of course, being its Zeus).
But even those golden days had their signs of discontent. UVA could never manage to steal a quality win on the road, and it was a sure bet to flounder in the first round of any post-season tournament, whether it be ACC, NCAA, or even the lowly NIT. The problems became more apparent in later years. Home wins were no longer a guarantee, and even members of basketball's special-ed class, like Virginia Tech and Ohio, could give the Cavs a run for their money. Still, I could always come up with a legitimate, Gillen-unrelated excuse for these shortcomings. Keith Jenifer was an NBA level player in all areas but basketball-playing ability. Majestic Mapp injured his knee more frequently than Kim got kidnapped on 24. The refs were sexually attracted to Coach K.
This season, no such excuse is to be found as ACC losses pile up. The Cavs have a pair of competent point guards, and had regained some momentum following a series of miraculous wins at the conclusion of last year. Yet, they still seem to lack discipline either on or off the court, and they've shown once again that they are unable to build on the successes of the previous year. Freshman players in the mold of Derrick Byars and Chris Williams show potential, then remain stagnant or get worse as time moves on. While the academic suspension of Jason Clark is currently giving UVA problems under the basket, the team had already fallen into a downward spiral before the big man's departure.
As long as it's taken me to say it, the best way for a loyal fan to support UVA basketball these days is to root for a new coach.
It seems like ages since everyone thought PG was the leprechaun who would soon lead the Cavaliers to a pot of gold in the Final Four. In fact, it was only as far back as the 1998-99 season (Gillen's first) when he earned a surprising 4 ACC wins with a dismantled UVA team made up mostly of walk-ons. Within two seasons, he had transformed University Hall into one of the NCAA's most feared arenas, a place where fans would camp for days to see the Wahoos routinely arrest, convict, and execute members of the unholy triumvirate of Duke, Carolina, and Maryland. A friend of mine once agreed that Pete Gillen had reached demigod status in the Charlottesville pantheon (with Dave Matthews being one of its gods, and Thomas Jefferson, of course, being its Zeus).
But even those golden days had their signs of discontent. UVA could never manage to steal a quality win on the road, and it was a sure bet to flounder in the first round of any post-season tournament, whether it be ACC, NCAA, or even the lowly NIT. The problems became more apparent in later years. Home wins were no longer a guarantee, and even members of basketball's special-ed class, like Virginia Tech and Ohio, could give the Cavs a run for their money. Still, I could always come up with a legitimate, Gillen-unrelated excuse for these shortcomings. Keith Jenifer was an NBA level player in all areas but basketball-playing ability. Majestic Mapp injured his knee more frequently than Kim got kidnapped on 24. The refs were sexually attracted to Coach K.
This season, no such excuse is to be found as ACC losses pile up. The Cavs have a pair of competent point guards, and had regained some momentum following a series of miraculous wins at the conclusion of last year. Yet, they still seem to lack discipline either on or off the court, and they've shown once again that they are unable to build on the successes of the previous year. Freshman players in the mold of Derrick Byars and Chris Williams show potential, then remain stagnant or get worse as time moves on. While the academic suspension of Jason Clark is currently giving UVA problems under the basket, the team had already fallen into a downward spiral before the big man's departure.
As long as it's taken me to say it, the best way for a loyal fan to support UVA basketball these days is to root for a new coach.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)