The Spector Sector

Summer Movie Review - Star Trek Into Darkness

2013-05-19T22:29:00.001-04:00

When J.J. Abrams was offered the reigns to the Star Trek franchise I remember feeling a genuine sense of relief. After seeing that former frontrunner Rick Berman had pretty much run the franchise into the ground with its various incarnations on TV, Star Trek was dangerously wearing thin on its audience, despite their rabid devotion. The iconic American staple was on life support.

Toiling in mediocrity, Star Trek was resurrected by Paramount in 2009, effectively hiring J.J. Abrams as its savior. Finally, the studio was willing to give it its just due. Gone would be the penny pinching days of the past as Paramount poured over $150 million into Abram’s project. Star Trek was back, and bigger than Gene Rodenberry ever could’ve imagined.

I liked the premise Abrams offered in his Trek reboot. Introduce a force that changes the timeline which would alter the path that the iconic characters would eventually take, the path we’ve all come to know, resulting in a completely unknown outcome. All bets were off as Abrams and crew could take the franchise in any direction they wanted – without destroying the rich history that came before.

I know it’s a bit convoluted and you may need to dust off your understanding of how time travel and alternate universes are hypothetically supposed to work. Or you could just rent another of Abram’s work, the television show Fringe, and get your temporary doctorate in Quantum Mechanics.

Of course there were some die hard fans up in arms. How could Abrams change the sacred canon? But the 500 pound caveat in the room was that Abrams really wasn’t changing canon; this was an entirely new history being made here. I could live with the idea of multiple universes existing. It was dare I say, fascinating. Abrams spoke about how having an alternate timeline would open up new ideas and take the characters to places never before taken– something he’d be able to tackle after the initial reboot in 2009. So here we are, four years later, and J.J. Abrams has made good on that promise. Well...sort of.

I’m not going to try and keep this spoiler free so if you haven’t seen Star Trek Into Darkness then you better stop reading now. What we have here with this film is an Abrams-verse quasi mash-up of the original Star Trek episode Space Seed and Star Trek II – The Wrath of Khan. Yes, Benedict Cumberbatch really is playing Khan Noonien Singh, the character made famous by Ricardo Montalban. The sad part is his character in Into Darkness is hardly the real focus at all.

After months of denying that this was the case it turns out that Abrams was just toying with the fans as he usually does in the spirit of secrecy. He played the same coy game while he was filming Cloverfield. At the time, everyone thought that Cloverfield was just the code name for the actual film Abrams was working on, Voltron. Yeah, not so much; and to many a fan’s dismay it was about an alien under New York City who began wreaking havoc. Kind of like a really big version of Mike Bloomberg stuck in the subway searching for people carrying Big Gulps.

Into Darkness begins with the crew of the Enterprise on a developing planet whose indigenous population is at its earliest stage of evolution. The natives are in danger of extinction, as a nearby volcano is about to erupt. Kirk orders Spock to enter the volcano and use a cold fusion device to render it inert. Meanwhile, the shuttle used to lower Spock into the volcano becomes damaged and needs to return to the Enterprise, leaving Spock moments from certain death.

Kirk, realizing his first office and friend is about to die, orders his crew to move the Enterprise (under water no less) into transporter range – which also reveals the Enterprise to the primitive natives – breaking the major rule in Starfleet, the Prime Directive. Of course Spock reminds Kirk that “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one”, a clear homage to Wrath of Khan, one of many in this film. He pleads with Kirk to let him die rather than expose the ship to the inhabitants of the planet. Of course Kirk wouldn’t allow that.

The crew heads back to earth with Kirk having to face the wrath of his mentor as he’s scolded and once again demoted to first officer by Admiral Pike. Regardless of Kirk’s actions you would think by now, Pike and Starfleet would have a bit more faith in him. Instead we see a retread where he gets demoted, alliterating to the original films. After his demotion we’re introduced to the two main antagonists of the film, first the head of Starfleet, Admiral Alexander Marcus played by Peter Weller and later on we are introduced to John Harrison, a.k.a. Khan.

Because of what happened in the previous film – more importantly the destruction of Vulcan by Nero – Admiral Marcus in his desperation to protect the Federation, decides to thaw Khan and utilize his advanced intellect to build even more deadly weapons to keep Starfleet ahead of the curve, starting with the USS Vengeance; just think a REALLY big version of the Enterprise.

In exchange for his help Marcus offered Khan and his crew their freedom. The audience has no idea that any of this subterfuge is taking place. Khan attacks London and Starfleet headquarters, killing Kirk’s mentor Admiral Pike and begins Marcus’ plot to draw the Federation into an all-out war against the Klingons.

Marcus reinstates Kirk to captain of the Enterprise and sends him on a mission to kill Harrison. The film touches on a few relevant and current issues (drone strikes anyone?) when Marcus gives Kirk new long range photon torpedoes to kill Harrison who’s taken refuge on the Klingon home world.

Tensions rise on the Enterprise as no one is comfortable with the idea of executing Khan without bringing him to justice to answer for his crimes. Scotty issues his displeasure with the weaponry being considered and resigns his commission. Spock pleads with Kirk to reconsider assassinating Khan and in the moment where Kirk addresses the crew of the Enterprise we see Kirk’s true nature, as he states that they’re on a mission to capture Harrison. Among the crew we have a stowaway in Doctor Carol Marcus. Yes, that Carol Marcus. Those of you unaware she was Kirk’s love interest whom he fathered a child with who was killed by Klingons.

What ensues is a film filled with constant action beats; almost too many since I thought it sacrificed some character growth. The core of what made Star Trek so great was the interrelationships created by each of the characters and unfortunately, this crew just doesn’t have the luxury of having spent that much time together. And because Abrams decided to use moments from Wrath of Khan, many scenes that are meant to spur great emotion come off as forced. And yes…someone screams KHANNNNNN! And it isn’t who you’d think. Et tu Spock?

The more I think of this film the more I think of the criticism William Shatner made to Abrams regarding his films when he said they lacked “heart”. At first I just took it as sour grapes on Shatner’s part but I can see what he means by his criticism – even if it is slightly unfair. Like I said these particular actors haven’t spent decades in the consciousness of moviegoers therefore you can’t expect to feel exactly the same for them as you would the original cast – no matter how inventive the script is.

The reveal of Harrison as Khan came across to me as a bit of a letdown. First, Cumberbatch physically looks nothing like the history of the character which was essentially supposed to be of Indian heritage. Cumberbatch’s thick English accent even led many fans to believe him to be an alternate timeline version of Jean-Luc Picard. Ironically the role of Harrison/Khan was originally offered to Benecio del Toro. Then there was the months of denying from Abrams that Khan would even make it into the film at all.

Star Trek Into Darkness wasn’t a bad movie, far from it. It had a very moralistic message that resonates with the world we live in today. Maybe it was a bit too naïve for my tastes. Do we go down the same road Marcus does, trading long held values for the comfort of being secure? It’s interesting that Abrams and his team used the idea of long range photon torpedoes for Kirk to just kill Harrison – no questions, no trial – just a push of a button. Was it a condemnation of what we’ve become as a nation post 9/11? During the credits you see that the film is dedicated to the post 9/11 veterans with an iconic scene showing a Starfleet Honor Guard folding the Federation flag towards the end of the film.

Abrams makes Kirk question his purpose and his values and the film does the same to the viewers as well. Like last week’s Iron Man 3, Into Darkness is far from a perfect film. I had issues with the rehash of Khan and the ending – which I was almost not going to talk about here but decided I had to. When the Enterprise is falling to earth powerless, it is Kirk who realizes his purpose, and saves the Enterprise and her crew.

It was the death scene in Wrath of Khan, only flipped and it was a powerful scene and would’ve remained a powerful scene if Kirk would have been allowed to pay that ultimate price. Unfortunately Abrams played it safe as Bones discovered that Khan’s blood had Lazarus like abilities. So after Kirk “dies”, and after Spock takes on the final (unecessary?) battle to capture Khan (didn't Khan's crew also have the same type of life giving blood?), bringing him and his blood back to Bones, Kirk is injected and yes…lives again. In my opinion the worst part of the film as it downplayed the emotional impact of Kirk’s sacrifice and the original scene from Wrath of Khan, where Spock does the very same.

All Abrams had to do was allow Kirk to die, at least in the interim. An ending scene showing a distraught Carol Marcus in front of a computer screen with tears in her eyes, as she works on her “Genesis formula” would’ve set up the next film perfectly and even though it would have taken it’s clues yet again from the canon, it wouldn’t have lessened Kirk’s sacrifice. Not to mention it would’ve done exactly what Abrams always said he wanted to do – which is to put these characters in NEW situations we haven’t seen before.

If only…

The Sector gives Star Trek Into Darkness 3 out of 4.

Summer Movie Review - Iron Man 3

2013-05-09T18:33:00.002-04:00

~ WARNING THIS ARTICLE CONTAINS SPOILERS! IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE SPOILED, STOP! ~

~ LAST WARNING! ~

~ REALLY THIS IS IT! ~

When I heard that Shane Black was hired to replace Jon Favreau as the director for Iron Man 3, I wasn’t too sure of what to make of it. Black’s directorial resume isn’t exactly robust. His first and only time taking the helm was in 2005 when Black directed Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, a film which co-starred Tony Stark himself, Robert Downey Jr. Sure it was a pretty damn good flick but was it really all that wise to hand the reigns of a billion dollar franchise over to someone with such little directorial experience?

Well, when I dove further into Black’s career I discovered that he was part of the writing team that gave us the Lethal Weapon franchise, The Monster Squad, and The Last Boy Scout. Ok, so his writing history makes up for his lack of directorial experience, even if he was ultimately responsible for the screenplay to the grand disaster that was The Last Action Hero. Well what do ya want, nobody’s perfect.

I review films in two ways, the first being my initial gut reaction while I’m seeing the movie and the other is usually a day or two later, when I’m tearing the story a new a-hole. Knowing that Shane Black’s filmmaking background is more heavily weighted on the writing side makes me both intrigued but also very discerning of his work on Iron Man 3. And after I researched his film history, I could see how he uses certain themes throughout his writing career. I’ll get to that later on.

Iron Man 3 takes place not too far removed from the events of last summer’s, The Avengers, as we find Tony Stark suffering from post traumatic stress disorder from what he experienced in New York. He ends up suffering from insomnia and fills his time building a massive army of Iron Man suits for just about every possible threat – simultaneously alienating his love, Pepper Potts, again played by Gwyneth Paltrow. Tony begins to struggle with the question, “is he just a man in a tin suit” in a world with dangers far more deadly than he could ever imagine or handle?

Early on we’re introduced to main baddie in the film, The Mandarin, played by Academy Award winner Sir Ben Kingsley. In Shane Black’s world he’s essentially an amalgam of every enemy the United States has ever faced – be it Al Qaeda or the North Koreans. It’s a total deviation from the canon of the comics which had him more as an Asian mystical sorcerer; not exactly something that can be easily translated onto the big screen at least not with today’s savvy audience. Therein lay one of the really outstanding issues I had with this film and that too I’ll explain later on.

The Mandarin is threatening the world with an undetectable type of IED essentially. The technology known as Extremis, earned rave reviews when it was first introduced in the iron Man comics back in 2005. It’s a bio-weapon of the super soldier variety that makes whoever is injected with it invulnerable and apparently a mini human microwave oven set to overload and explode if let uncontrolled. The plot device wouldn’t exist without the secondary(?) baddie in the film, Aldrich Killian, played by Guy Pearce.

As the film starts it takes us back to 1999, and shows us that if anything, Tony Stark has consistently been a social SOB. In fact he runs into Killian at a Y2K New Years Eve party, who tries to sell Tony his idea of Extremis only to be dismissed by Tony as a kook. You begin to see the web that is being weaved here if you’re keen enough to notice that in one scene at the party is the man who was a prisoner with Tony in Afghanistan. If you remember from the first film, it was this man, Yinsen, who saved Tony’s life by constructing an electro-magnet keeping shrapnel from entering his heart. It seems Tony has been set up by the Mandarin all along.

Everyone, from Downey to Kingsley, Cheadle and even Paltrow all give excellent performances here. I single out Kingsley because Black took an absolutely HUGE chance with his character that has upset the die-hards to no end. I warned you there would be spoilers so; stop reading RIGHT NOW if you don’t want to know. Too late… the Mandarin in Shane Black’s world is a total manufactured fraud. He’s an actor hired by Killian to be used as a pawn fueling everyone’s fear but essentially he’s a straw man. I found it hilarious when and how it was revealed in the film. It was pretty damn witty. Kingsley is just such a great actor and I can see why they wanted him to play the Mandarin.

Now even though I found it a funny use of misdirection to have the Mandarin portrayed as a drunken English actor, I can totally relate to the hardcore fans of Iron Man who find this to be absolutely sacrilegious. To explain it better, how would fans of Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy feel if he gave Heath Ledger’s treatment of the Joker the same (in)justice, and turned him into a useful fool? Initially I chuckled but later on I found it disrespectful of the canon. I hope Zach Snyder doesn’t have any smart ass ideas up his sleeve regarding Lex Luthor in Man of Steel. The Sector WILL have issues if he does.

What I liked about Iron Man 3 was how it dealt with Tony Stark’s past and how he’s basically been the same person even prior becoming Iron Man, basically a douche, but fortunately a likeable one at that. Shane Black shows how Tony Stark has always kept everyone at arms length. But the thing is he’s not aloof in fact he actually remembers everything and everyone; he uses his faux aloofness as a cover. It’s interesting because Shane Black uses many repeating themes throughout the films he’s been a part of. The alliterations to the Lethal Weapon series are incredibly obvious and while it made me roll my eyes when I dissected Iron Man 3, I admit while watching it, I was totally buying it.

The only other main issue I had with Iron Man 3 was literally the final few minutes of the film. After finally coming to grips with his humanity, Tony acknowledges both his limitations but that HE is Iron Man, not the tech, not the armor. Here’s where it went south for me. So with that realization Tony decides to have heart surgery to remove the shrapnel surrounding his heart. You know the shrapnel that could NOT be removed without causing him a cardiac arrest and that annoying thing known as DEATH. Really Shane? Really?

Tony had a key line from The Avengers, when he spoke of having this “terrible privilege” that his injury had given him. Literally in a matter of probably 3 screen minutes, by downplaying Tony’s need for the ARC reactor to keep him alive, Shane Black pretty much took a royal crap on the canon of Iron Man. And Marvel allowed it. There are a few other nit-picky things I could bring up such as when the Mandarin sent choppers to destroy Tony’s home and why THEN he didn’t unleash his army of armored suits to take them out. But I won’t. You have to come at these movies with an open mind and you have to be able to suspend disbelief to some degree, otherwise you’ll go crazy with the minutia.

I enjoyed Iron Man 3. It wasn’t perfect and like I said I think it had two really HUGE flaws but it’s impossible to say that the slate isn’t clean for just about any possibility now. I’m interested to see where Marvel takes this. The Sector gives Iron Man 3, three out of four.

The Hail Mary Or As Jets Fans Call It - The Tebow Year

2013-04-29T22:31:00.002-04:00

Cue the ending theme song from "The Incredible Hulk"

So a little over a year ago, your humble blogger extraordinaire introduced the world to The Spector Sector and with that initial foray into the world of online opinion spewing came the story of the day, which was that the New York Jets traded their 4^th round draft pick to the Denver Broncos for quarterback Tim Tebow. Fast forward to present day and we can see how the ~~mighty~~, err I mean how the weak have continued to dig their shithole further into the ground as the New York Jets announced today that they have released Tim Tebow.

This is a story that would even make Hunter S. Thompson do a double and perhaps a triple take but nevertheless it’s the truth. They say that truth is stranger than fiction and the very same could be said of this man made drama, and yes that’s pretty much what it was. What else could it have been? Tebow, cost the Jets a 4^th round pick, $1.5 million clams, plus the $2.5 million clams they sent John Elway to just pry his death grip off Tebow’s contract. And what pray tell did the Jets get out of this deal you ask? Tebow took about 70 snaps on offense. He was 6 for 8 in passing for 39 yards. He ran the ball 32 times for 102 yards. No touchdowns. No bended knee glory shots post touchdowns. No glory whatsoever. All in all, just a shit bang of a deal. Thanks Tannenbaum.

I don’t blame Tebow, he is what he is. The thing is, I wish I friggin knew what he is or was. He could very well be just another really good college football quarterback that earned the spotlight during his collegiate years; he did win the Heisman. That’s no easy task but not one that always translates into NFL readiness. He was never really given a fair chance though whether the excuse was his inability or the fact that Mark Sanchez earns about 50 gillion a year and still finds it necessary to shove his head up his centers ass. We can’t have talent like that riding the pine can we?

Sanchez: "I'm looking for my talent.
Brandon Moore: "MY PANCREAS!"

So what was the point of bringing Tebow here in the first place? Was it to light a fire under Sanchez with the primal fear that he could lose his job to Tebow at any given moment? Yeah, that didn’t happen. Perhaps it was the conspiratorial idea that Tebow was here to give the team some buzz? Yeah because nothing spells great buzz like having a born-again, who lives a clean, religious and pious life. How the tabloids didn’t salivate at having that as their icon of attention I’ll never know. And by no means do I fault the man for his lifestyle, just the boobs who think he was here to sell something beyond playing the game.

The Jets released a statement today with a quote from head coach Rex “Tinactin Toes” Ryan saying:

“We have a great deal of respect for Tim Tebow,” Ryan said in the statement. “Unfortunately, things did not work out the way we all had hoped. Tim is an extremely hard worker, evident by the shape he came back in this offseason. We wish him the best moving forward.”

Well there you have it, everything ~~explained~~ in one succinct statement from the guy who’s deep in the know. Don’t you feel so much more hopeful for the future of the Jets now? I sure know I do!

The Jets trading for Tim Tebow makes about as much sense as this video. You’re welcome by the way Rex.

Dog's Best Friend

2013-04-05T20:16:00.002-04:00

Writing is a form of therapy; sometimes I wonder how all those who do not write, compose or paint can manage to escape the madness, melancholia, the panic and fear which is inherent in a human situation.- Graham Greene

British author Graham Greene – who suffered from bi-polar disorder – spoke of the therapeutic need most writers have to utilize their own life experiences and incorporate it into their writing. I for one can’t imagine not having this as my own private pressure valve. I know for a fact that I would lose it. Some people turn to friends. Some turn to family. Some even turn to vices. Sometimes, I turn to all the above but always, without fail, I turn to writing. Having this blog - as open a place as I make it to the public - has afforded me the opportunities to do just that. And to you the reader, I want you to know that your interest in what interests me and everything I write about here, is humbling.

I recently had to make one of the toughest decisions anyone has to make in life - when is the right time to end the life of your pet? First off, I never thought of Pesci, our 10 year old Lhasa Aspo, as a “pet”. Most animal trainers are quick to point out that we shouldn’t bestow too much humanity onto our pets especially if they’re to be properly trained – because after all, they’re animals. Well, color me improper then. Pesci wasn’t just the family pet, he was family. Should I have treated him more like a pet, perhaps, but I was never interested in having a circus sideshow entertainer for a pet. Besides other than being spoiled (tell me a family dog that isn’t), Pesci was as good a companion as you could ever ask for.

The Lhasa Apso have quite a rich history dating back over 4000 years having originated in Tibet and carries the Tibetan name Apso Seng Kyi, which translates into “Bearded Lion Dog”. They are considered the 14^th most ancient dog breed in the world and were bred as the interior sentinels guarding the Buddhist monasteries alerting the monks to any danger. If you ever get a chance, check out the film Seven Years in Tibet starring Brad Pitt. The Lhasa’s are prominent throughout the film and according to Buddhist’s the bodies of the Lhasa’s could be entered by the souls of the departed lamas while they await reincarnation into a new body. Keep that thought in mind – you’ll see what I mean later on.

Pesci filled a void in our lives when my grandmother passed away. He became very attached to my mother, who became his de-facto master. Lhasa’s have a reputation for being loyal to their owners and a bit temperamental to outsiders. Let’s just say Pesci lived up to his name quite well. At first he was a handful, as most puppies are. But we were patient and consistent with him and eventually he began to mellow – a bit.

He wasn’t destructive and he got along with other dogs quite well. Even strangers didn’t faze him very much as his breed is generally known to be wary of outsiders. But Pesci wasn’t a lap dog; unlike their close cousins, the Shih Tzu, which are. Pesci definitely had an independent streak. He was the active duty Marine to the Shih Zhu’s Reservist.

For some reason, Pesci had it in for my grandfather. It was absolutely comical. For whatever reason he just couldn’t seem to get along with him, to the point that just being in his presence set him off. The running joke in my family became that Pesci must have had my grandmother’s soul in him and this was simply 50 + years of marital payback. Ironically enough when my grandfather was in Hospice and in the final stages of his life, Pesci wouldn’t leave his side.

On the evening before he passed Pesci began acting erratic as did my grandfather who began hallucinating and pointing to a corner in the room where he said he saw his wife calling him. It was the very same spot that Pesci sat eerily still, staring at the very same wall, barking. I believe like children, animals can see things that the rest of us are unable to. Perhaps it’s their common innocence that allows it, but I believe it to be true. Either way, it seemed to us, that Pesci, ever the guardian, helped guide my grandfather into his final journey.

Time passed and like any of us as we age we start losing our edge and eventually begin to break down. For Lhasa’s, it’s generally their spines that becomes susceptible to early arthritis and eventual paralysis or their eyes, in which a genetic disorder called progressive retinal atrophy occurs, causing blindness. For Pesci, he fell into the latter. What was originally thought to be simple conjunctivitis was in actuality something that was neither preventable nor curable.

As his blindness progressed there were noticeable changes in his entire demeanor. Gone were the days of playing fetch or his 3 o’clock mad dash running circles around the coffee table until he puttered out. He definitely had his quirks; I’m not going to sugar coat it. He was loveable but at times he could be one ornery little fuzz ball. He became easily frightened, which only exacerbated the aggressiveness. The Pesci we all knew would never be the same. Then the day came when my 2 ½ year old daughter, while playing, accidentally stepped on his tail. Pesci snapped at her. Luckily since he couldn’t see, he snapped in the opposite direction she was standing. My heart went to my throat and I knew at that moment, I couldn’t procrastinate any longer. Something had to be done.

My wife and I started reaching out to shelters to see if we could find one that would adopt Pesci. We began our search locally and eventually tried out of state shelters through the internet. Basically each shelter would be more than willing to take in any animal with just about any ailment; be it a dog with three legs, blind, deaf, and barking in Aramaic, but when we mentioned the aggression, it sparked the same result. No shelter would be willing to take in a blind dog that could potentially harm someone. It was a heartbreaking and utterly defeating moment for all of us because we knew what the only other option was. The last thing I would’ve wanted was for another family to be placed in a similar position as this but knowing that still didn’t make our decision any easier.

The drive to our veterinarian’s office was surreal and heartbreaking. Tears were running down our face. Pesci was never a huge fan of car rides as he’d always whimper as he lay in the backseat. This time he was silent. I’m not sure if that made it worse or better but it definitely made us unsure of what we were doing. Our Vet, a tall and slender gray haired man, had a pained look on his face as he was well aware of why we were here. He knew of these moments all too well. But here I was in all of my 38 years – in this position for the very first time.

Every day I wrestle with the decision we had to make. Was it the right thing to do? Could I have done more? Each time those thoughts enter my mind I see my daughter, and I’m thankful that her last memories of Pesci weren’t tragic. I know for a fact if they were, I wouldn’t have forgiven myself. Sometimes in life we’re faced with having to make absolutely impossible choices. This was definitely one of them. Our hearts are emptier today without Pesci and I know we’ll never forget the fun and unconditional love he gave to us for the time we were lucky enough to call him family.

Goodbye my little buddy.

R.I.P. Pesci

Hola Nueva Yorkers, Mi Llamo es Miguel Bloombito

2013-03-23T19:21:00.000-04:00

You know I’m beginning to think that maybe those Mayan’s were just really bad at record keeping. When actual news stories start to read as if they were hatched over at The Onion, you start to wonder if the Mayan they left in charge of their calendar had one too many the night before he sent it to print. My reasoning behind that: Take a look at the Mayor of New York City, Mike Bloomberg. It seems that the self-made billionaire financier, turned politician, turned defender of all New Yorker’s with elevated blood pressure, has been waging war on a massive scale for the last few years.

Waging war against what you ask? Could it be unemployment, which is at 8.8% in New York City and higher than the national average? Not a chance slick don’t you know, we’re in a recovery. The media says so. Is it against Al-Qaeda? Don’t be silly, we have them on the run. The President says so. Hell we can even bring knives on airplanes again. Besides, Al-Qaeda only cares about overseas diplomatic posts now. Oh wait, wasn’t it a silly YouTube video that caused that tragedy?

No my friends, you see the Honorable Hizzoner Euphegenia Doubtfire, finally found his political niche; he’s fighting the Jihad of all Jihads’: an intifada on soda, salt and just about any other vice that makes it into his crosshairs. He’s even taking on excess earbud volume (really I swear I’m not making this up) and–wait for it—the evil incarnate that is BABY FORMULA.

Now before you try to Google any of that, please, allow a few minutes for it to marinate in your brain if anything just to remind you of the fools we the people elect to public office. Even though there’s a strong likelihood that Andy Warhol will be reincarnated and ooze from your eardrum, take this moment to reflect. Ok you can breathe easy now; you’re not really crazy, just a bit misguided and occasionally fooled, kind of like a Taylor Swift ex.

Here we have the elected mayor of the largest city in America with over 8 million residents, with a legislative plate that should be quite full of real issues, working tirelessly to get his constituents to eat and drink and behave exactly how he would like them to. And to boot, he’s more than willing to use whatever executive powers he has as Mayor to force them to relent—no matter the ancillary effects. Effects like those silly separation of powers doctrines politicians are supposed to adhere to by you know that other silly thing called THE LAW.

But what’s having a little nuisance like the law that’s ever stopped this mayor? New York City had firm term limits in place until he convinced the City Council to allow him to run for a third term—how’s that working out for you New Yorker’s? He like so many politicians who prefer we do as they say --like good little lemmings--versus as they do themselves; but that doesn’t even scratch the surface of my indignation with this elected uber-nanny—and I’m not even a resident of New York.

He’s been fairly predictable Mayor Bloomberg. He started with a city wide initiative to reduce trans-fats in food served in city restaurants. After that his many targets became smoking in public –banning it in public parks and in city restaurants and bars. His assault continued when he focused his ire against salt-part of an overall initiative to combat high blood pressure in 2010- which took center stage at Gracie Mansion. So insane his rationale that he's instituted a ban on food that is donated to homeless shelters that cannot have their salt,fat and fiber content assessed. Of course we’re all aware of his desire to ban large sugary drinks, which was recently struck down in court as being an overreach of his executive powers.

Somebody pass the salt, oh wait, damn.

And just when you thought he’s had his fill of social tinkering, Major Bloombito (as his FAKE Twitter account parodying his less than eloquent use of the Spanish language would say) is becoming “loco en la cabeza”, deciding that excessive earbud noise is becoming a chronic danger to all human life within the 5 boroughs. I find myself constantly trying to remind you that I’m not making any of this up. With that said, I give you the piece de resistance – Mayor Mike has decided in his infinite wisdom—that he would like to STRESS to new mothers the benefits of breast feeding their children versus using baby formula. This man is a gift to comedians, political and social pundits alike. In fact he brings new meaning to the term “the gift that keeps on giving”.

The problem I have with this ninny nanny of a Mayor is how he’s using his position as an elected official, to micromanage people’s lives—all the while thumbing his nose at the legislative process and at the very same people he claims to be so concerned over. Somehow I find it hard to believe that when Jefferson and the boys sat down in Philly to hash out this whole concept of a free nation, that they envisioned anything remotely close to this.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s not that I’m in favor of people binging on Big Gulp’s until they’re blood registers as a natural sweetener or seeing people gorge themselves on Big Mac’s until the secret sauce oozes out of their pores. Although I've heard Nancy Pelosi can't say enough about it's anti-oxidant benefits. I’m just, as most people are, sick of elected officials trying to control every aspect of our lives and force us to behave in ways they believe is acceptable. That is not what government—at least ours- was ever designed to do. If anything it was that type of encroachment into people lives (not to mention those pesky little things like taxation without representation) that formed this nation in the first place.

Imagine if Mayor McNumbnutt decided that he wanted to lower the rates of abortions in New York City and pushed some half-baked idea using the city’s Department of Health as his vehicle. Some of the very same people who’ve been silent on the mayor’s mini-rampages would suddenly find their collective voices to protest. And I’m quite sure the media would find a way to highlight their anger on a daily basis. What are you saying Spector, that the media picks and chooses who and what they prefer in the national debate, skewing it just enough to frame the issue? Of course that never happens.

Let them eat cake, or pastrami on rye.

Remember this, anytime a politician tries to micro-manage your life, a founding father loses his wings. Whether it’s the social engineering of the left or that of the right neither should be excused. Society isn’t some Petri dish used for a politician’s grand experiment nor is it government’s responsibility to tell us how to live. That’s where freedom and responsibility kick in. Remember the old saying, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”. With so many greater issues that are at play you have to wonder if people like Michael Bloomberg are simply bored with their jobs.

I guess when you become a billionaire and want to kill a little time you either run for mayor and try to force people to do what you’d like them to do or you create a reality TV show pitting celebrities against one another for their favorite charity. Maybe Mayor Mike can hire Dennis Rodman as his public relations director when he gets back from negotiating peace with North Korea. I’ll take my liberty with a side order of stay the hell out of my life you nitwit politicians and a large Coke. Damn you Mayan record keepers. Damn you.

Stopping by CitiField on a Snowy Evening

2013-02-20T19:56:00.003-05:00

Every now and again something occurs in my life that makes me either shake my head or want to shake someone else’s head—often violently -- with the fleeting hope that doing so would magically scramble and reset their questionable thought process without causing any long term damage. Sometimes I even resort to utilizing Mr. Tyzik’s tactic, gleefully taking out my frustration on those “flatheads”. Using forced perspective to pinch the heads off of your adversaries may get you some odd looks my friends but don’t knock it ‘till you try it. Its inherent cathartic qualities can do wonders. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not really ready for anger management classes, yet. I’m lucky enough to say that just being with my 2 ½ year old daughter has done more to put my life into perspective than anything The Kids in the Hall ever had to offer. She has the light switch to my heart this little kid.

Now that she’s getting older and more aware of the world around her, I’m able to share more of what I enjoy with her and see how she reacts to understanding it. This is her second season watching, rooting and generally hanging out with me as I go through the emotional roller coaster that is being a Met fan. Of course this is something I always imagined doing ever since I could remember watching the Mets with my father as a child. It’s more than just a rite of passage or bonding. To me, I’m imprinting memories of our time together that I hope she’ll keep with her for all the days of her life. I guess the older I become, the more cognizant I am that this gift that is life isn’t guaranteed by age. My father wasn’t even 50 when he passed. There’s just so much that I want to show her, teach her, and experience with my daughter that sometimes I have to be mindful not to overcompensate, she is just a 2 ½ year old and I do plan on sticking around for a while, God willing.

One of the characteristics she seems to share with me is a love of reading. Granted she goes from Elmo to Mickey to Dora the Explorer in a matter of minutes – her attention span is fickle-- then again so is mine and I’m old so who am I to complain. I’m trying to get into the habit of reading to her. In fact I’ve already lined up the books that I want to read to her as she gets older. Of course there will have to be the classics but I wouldn’t be a proper parent to a young and becoming Met fan if I didn’t find a way to sneak in Faith and Fear in Flushing or Total Mets in there, maybe even The Bad Guys Won just to keep it fresh and edgy. Don’t worry I’d censor anything that came out of Dykstra’s mouth—including the chaw. But there’s one genre of literature that I’m going to introduce to her not because it was one of my favorites. In fact it was my least favorite form of writing because I found it so difficult to interpret – the world of poetry was never kind to me. But there were always exceptions.

I was never really attracted to poetry growing up. It wasn’t until I was in college and was lucky enough to have a professor, Mr. Chauncey G. Parker, who taught English Literature. Mr. Parker was quite the interesting cat. For one, he worked in the Lyndon Johnson administration and if I recall, he did some work for the United Nations as well. We would get into some really interesting arguments regarding policy and politics in general. We really didn’t agree on a lot but he was an amazing professor; never trying to indoctrinate as so many do in academia these days. He was a bona fide Renaissance Man. He wrote a novel, The Visitor, a crazy psychological horror about a man who becomes obsessed with a rodent that has overrun his upscale New York brownstone. His novel was later turned into a film starring Peter Weller, Robocop himself. Hey don’t laugh; I’m pretty sure there aren’t many of us that can boast that on our resumes. But Mr. Parker in his best Northeastern, Hyannis Port, Bostonian voice, explained to me the amazing talent that was Robert Frost.

Robert Frost is one of America’s most popular and storied poets of the 20^th century. His works have been studied over by students and scholars alike. Some of his classic works include The Pasture (1913), Mountain Interval (1916) and the beginnings of New Hampshire: A poem with Notes and Grace Notes (1923), which contained “Fire and Ice”, and my favorite, “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening”, his masterwork. It was that poem which reminded me of why I’m a Met fan. I know what you’re thinking, how in God’s name does a Frost poem translate into something relatable to a Met fan? Well first off here’s the poem:

Stopping By Woods on a Snowy Evening

Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village though;
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.

My little horse must think it queer
To stop without a farmhouse near
Between the woods and frozen lake
The darkest evening of the year.

He gives his harness bells a shake
To ask if there is some mistake.
The only other sound's the sweep
Of easy wind and downy flake.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.

Frost wrote this poem supposedly in an evening sitting and during a time of great personal frustration—something Met fans can easily sympathize with. Practically our entire history has been wrought with frustration on some level. Like all poetry, it’s subject to one’s own interpretation; Frost’s Snowy Evening is no exception. The woods, to some, describe the edge of civilization. To me the Met fan it describes the team. They are equally irrational and yet garner consistent support. It’s those qualities that attract us as fans and what attracts readers to the woods. They are restful, seductive, lovely and dark…like oblivion. Also like our team, at times. The woods can represent madness, the looming irrational and of course also beauty.

The owner of the woods (us and not Wilpon) –lives in this village – and travels there on the darkest day of the year. Perhaps this an alliteration of how we’ve stuck by this team even during their most dire and desperate times? It’s the basic conflict in the poem, which is resolved in the last stanza. What attracts us to the woods and what force (responsibility, frustration, and exacerbation?) pushes us away from the woods occasionally? This is the division between the village (the fans) and the woods (the Mets). It’s not as if the woods are particularly frightening or wicked, yet they still posses the seeds of the irrational, just waiting to prey on our emotions.

The woods, as much as it draws us in, consistently finds ways to repel us, drawing us away. “Society” in baseball terms could be translated into “the experts” –always pointing out the negative and condemning us from staying here in the dark, in the snow—why would we care for such a flawed team? With the last two lines, “And miles to go before I sleep” being repeated. Is it a forewarning? Are we masochists for this team of ours; do we have some sort of death wish? Or do we take it as Frost did that he had many good years of poetry still left in him and that we still have many more years of torture…I mean love for our team? Damn, poetry can be annoying.

Unlike the majority who see the darkness in this poem, I take the positive from it. I don’t try to dwell on the flaws this team of ours have. We know it as well as a geneticist knows what composes DNA. The Mets are in our DNA, it’s who we are, for better or worse and as long as there’s a hope for the future –and there almost always is even in our team’s darkest days—we stand true. We argue we root, we hem and haw. We sometimes take it too far and retract, remembering our roots. But we come. Every Spring, we come.

Somewhere, I hope Chauncey G. Parker III Is smiling. Smiling that I’m willingly passing down to a new generation – a new set of tortures—and enjoying every bit of it.

Sector Movie Review - Zero Dark Thirty

2013-01-23T19:28:00.002-05:00

Last last year the National Geographic Channel aired a docu-drama based on the Navy Seal raid that killed the Al-Qaeda terrorist leader and mastermind of the September 11^th attacks, Osama bin Laden. The film was told from the perspective of the soldiers who initiated the raid, Seal Team Six. It aired just two days before the Presidential election and was produced by Harvey Weinstein, a major supporter of the President’s. Naturally it created a furor as some assumed it would be a late-inning puff piece intended to influence undecided voters towards the President. Well, needless to say, it’s doubtful that the docu-drama did anything to sway voters in any direction, even though it did accentuate the President’s leadership.

Two months later, the big budget Hollywood version depicting the raid in Zero Dark Thirty has hit theaters. Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal, the director and writer of The Hurt Locker, take on bin Laden and the mythos encompassing the CIA, two Presidencies and the military – and may have scored another critical hit. The big difference between ZDT and its Nat Geo little brother is that Bigelow focuses all her attention on the decade-plus long investigation spearheaded at the CIA by Maya, (played by Jessica Chastain who has been nominated for best actress) a young woman who was recruited right out of college who’s only task has been to hunt down the world’s most wanted man.

The film is based on obvious true events and producers were given incredible access to certain information by the Obama administration, however Bigelow had the daunting task of keeping viewers riveted even though the outcome and ending was a given. By presenting the story to the audience through the eyes of Chastain, Bigelow was able to do what all great filmmakers are able to do—she created a film that made you emotionally invest in the main character. Early in the film we are shown a scene where Chastain and the CIA field agent Dan (played by Jason Clarke), are in the process of interrogating a man with information on a courier that worked for bin Laden. What ensues is probably the most controversial part of the film as it portrays “enhanced interrogation” including waterboarding scenes.

Personally I’ve always been on the fence regarding “enhanced interrogations” and much of what the post 9-11 world that President Bush both dealt with and helped to initiate under his watch. While some tactics are a necessary evil in the end, we do have to remain vigilant in not relishing them (see Abu Gharib). Regardless your opinion of the man, it’s hard to say that the tactics that he pushed through including the “enhanced interrogations” didn’t provide the intel our clandestine services needed to finally capture bin Laden. That’s not to say that “enhanced interrogations” alone were the reason he was finally captured – no endeavor of this magnitude can lend its success to one practice.

Is it morally ambiguous not to afford Geneva Convention rights to enemy combatants because they aren’t fighting for a particular sovereign nation? Perhaps it is. Then again is waterboarding torture? Is playing Gwar at 200 decibels around the clock? These are part of the psychological games the CIA used to weaken the resolve of some detainees. Some tactics may have played fast and loose constitutionally but one could argue if they weren’t done, would bin Laden have ever been caught? And to Bigelow’s credit, she didn’t try to paint President Obama as some Christ-like deity as compared to his predecessor’s Satan. The world is a far more complicated place than that and Bigelow is clearly aware of that throughout the film even if some of President Obama’s most strident supporters aren’t.

Bigelow takes a very straightforward systematic approach to the hunt for bin Laden in ZDT. At times it seemed a bit too procedural bordering on banal but given the length of the actual investigation and the stakes that were at risk, I’m sure those involved were anything but banal. Unfortunately that’s how it translated on film. Not to mention that much of Maya’s yeoman’s work is treated as commonplace as your typical office employee. That in itself lends to the view that much of the work done to capture bin Laden was tedious and often times unproductive—prompting her superiors to question her tactics--so Bigelow’s answer to that was to jump ahead a few years into the investigation.

To offset the rigidity of the pace of the film, Bigelow and Boal take advantage of the character of Maya to its fullest. Shining a light on her solitude as she’s so alone-- consumed by the hunt—Chastain owns this role without question. Even as she’s consistently beaten down by both her superiors lack of faith in her to struggles in the investigation, it’s her resolve that keeps the audience hooked and if you’ve ever seen the Showtime series Homeland, which is also led by a strong female protagonist, you’ll appreciate Chastain’s character even more as she actually represents someone who does exist—albeit without the neuroses of the character from Homeland.

The best example of her resolve comes when one of her colleagues was blown up by a suicide car bomber at the Camp Chapman base in Afghanistan in 2009, killing 7 CIA agents. Because Maya was spared, she believes it to be an omen that she’s meant to finish the job. She tells the Seals at the camp, wary of her and the CIA’s presence, “I’m gonna smoke everybody involved in this op,” speaking about the attack. “And then I’m gonna kill bin Laden”, prompting a few raised eyebrows from the Seal unit, not accustomed to such steeliness from a CIA field agent.

The supporting cast is stocked. You have the Deputy Director played by Mark Strong (Green Lantern, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) shouting at his agents in a conference room, “I want targets! Bring me people to kill! Do your fucking jobs!” James Gandolfini plays Leon Panetta, the CIA Director (now the outgoing Secretary of Defense) and along with them were Kyle Chandler as Maya’s cautious station chief, Edgar Ramirez as a CIA operative who tracks bin Laden’s courier, and Jennifer Ehle as a fellow veteran CIA agent. Each one did an amazing job with what they were given.

We finally head into the last 45 minutes of the film, introducing Seal Team 6 and the raid itself. What was a methodical investigative quickly grabs it’s war footing and takes us into what it must have been like to finally achieve one of the greatest battlefield victories in modern history. The raid itself, while bereft with its own problems (the hard landing of the stealth Blackhawk which later had to be destroyed) changes the viewers point of view, taking on the perspective of the Seal team. I found it interesting that even though I knew the outcome, I was still riveted and at times unsure of what was to come. It was ironic because it was that feeling of helplessness that Maya conveyed for the first time in the film, when everything was out of her control.

Zero Dark Thirty will certainly cement itself in cinematic history if anything for its subject matter and what it means to each viewer on a personal level. Is it flawed? Yes. Bigelow actually received little help logistically if any as she had zero access to weaponry or aircraft. Did Kathryn Bigelow use whatever access she was given to fall in suit with 90% of Hollywood and use this film as a political statement, no. This was neither a film that carried a torch for the President nor one that drove a stake in the heart of his predecessor. She created a drama akin to an episode of Law and Order but one that transitioned, at the pivotal moment, into the most significant on-screen adaptation of the most important military action of recent time.

In the end, after the Seal team successfully completes the mission, we see an emotionally spent Maya, unsure of what to feel—completely lost in the moment. She’s given the task of confirming the identity of bin Laden’s corpse—confirming that it was him and confirming for the audience that the long struggle to bring the world’s most wanted man to justice was accomplished. And Kathryn Bigelow has accomplished an excellent look into history in the process.

The Sector gives Zero Dark Thirty 8 out of 10.

Tour de Farce

2013-01-17T19:50:00.003-05:00

Apparently there is no lack of public humiliation encompassing the sports world these days. Everything from the fake dead cyber-girlfriend of Notre Dame’s Manti Te’o to the recent MLB Hall of Fame vote which resulted in zero inductees, the first time that’s happened since 1996 and only the 8th time ever, thanks mostly to the stigma left in the wake of the PED era. Now we have former cycling champion Lance Armstrong doing the latest PED mea culpa in an interview with that hard hitting, take-no-prisoners journalist, the Edward R. Murrow of our day, Oprah Winfrey.

Doing the proverbial interview with Oprah has become the staple of many a celeb looking to rehabilitate their often times self-destroyed public image. She’s basically the female Larry King minus the goofy suspenders; never really trying to pry the total truth out of their guests as much as wanting to be “the first” to air whatever the celebrity has to say – all of which has been vetted by their public relations handlers of course. I call it milktoast Entertainment Tonight journalism as it’s all about the fluff and little about the substance.

For many years Armstrong was accused of taking PED’s and always vehemently denied it both in the public arena and even during depositions while under oath – which could ultimately be his real undoing. Armstrong won a record breaking 7 consecutive Tour De France titles from 1999 to 2005. It amazes me how these celebrity/sports types have this complete disconnect with reality and believe that they can sustain charades like these indefinitely. In Armstrong’s case, I’m not even that upset over the fact that he used PED’s – I’ve become numb regarding PED use and athletes at this point.

It’s that Armstrong used his celebrity as a bludgeon to destroy the lives of friends, colleagues and business partners and anyone else who came along and questioned his veracity. Armstrong was no better than a typical mafia thug. But this mafioso was perfectly created, born from a media cauldron and clothed in cloak of infallibility – yellow bracelets included. Those yellow bracelets that everyone from politicians to movie stars to school teachers wore happened to be all the rage a few years ago were the creation of Armstrong’s Cancer research foundation, Livestrong and were designed as a way to accumulate donations for cancer research.

Even the name -- Livestrong -- has an air of invincibility to it and along with the people whose lives Armstrong’s destroyed, it’s the real damage that he’s done to the honest and good work of Livestrong that will test that invincibility over time. This was from an article on Yahoo Sports by Dan Wetzel and it’s so spot on I had to give him a hat tip. He has 9 questions that he hopes Oprah will ask:

1. Why now, Lance? Is it because in one potential perjury case the statute of limitations has passed? Is it because you've already lost almost all your sponsors, had to step back from your foundation and are no longer getting the attention you once earned?
Did you have to lose nearly everything until you sought the only possible out? And at this point, why are you worth listening to at all?

2. Why are you doing this with me, Oprah Winfrey? I'm not known for my cycling knowledge or for pointed follow-up questions or my investigative journalistic skills. In fact, it's the opposite.

Wouldn't sitting down with Scott Pelley at "60 Minutes" have been a more legitimate forum? How about the Sunday Times of London, which you sued for libel for printing the truth? Or any of the French or American media that you bashed all along when in fact they weren't wrong at all?

You always fashioned yourself as a tough guy, Lance. You beat cancer for crying out loud, why go soft now?

3. Let's talk Betsy Andreu, the wife of one your former teammates, Frankie. Both Andreus testified under oath that they were in a hospital room in 1996 when you admitted to a doctor to using EPO, HGH and steroids. You responded by calling them "vindictive, bitter, vengeful and jealous." And that's the stuff we can say on TV.

Would you now label them as "honest"?
And what would you say directly to Betsy, who dealt with a voicemail from one of your henchmen that included, she's testified, this:

"I hope somebody breaks a baseball bat over your head. I also hope that one day you have adversity in your life and you have some type of tragedy that will … definitely make an impact on you."

When you heard about that voicemail, why didn't you call Betsy and apologize then?

You can read the 6 other questions that Wetzel would like Oprah to ask Armstrong here. The questions have the reader feeling exactly what it would be like looking up at a predator drone strike right before a hellfire missle is launched.

Look I’m not some holier than thou righteous preacher here trying to cast Armstrong and the rest of the PED users off onto some sort of moralistic island where they are mandated to do penance and compete in weird games of skill against Jeff Kent. In fact when it comes to PED use I’m more upset on how we, the public treat these fools after we discover their indiscretions. Instead of shunning them we find them fascinating. Hell even Melky Cabrera who was suspended by MLB last year for 50 games because he tested positive for PED’s, was signed by the Toronto Blue Jays as a free agent to a 2 year $16 million dollar contract mere months after getting caught.

I take back anything and everything I’ve said about Armstrong or any of these guys, they’re geniuses. We’re the dopes.

Reign Delay?

2013-01-14T14:52:00.003-05:00

As I was driving home the other night, I was listening to Casey Stern and Jim Bowden on the MLB Network Radio channel on XM. They were discussing with Jill Painter, the L.A. Daily News sports columnist, the Baseball Hall of Fame vote which took place Wednesday. This is the same Jill Painter, member of the Baseball Writers Association of America who thought it made perfect sense to cast one of her Hall of Fame votes for the former Blue Jay, Dodger, Diamondback and Met, Shawn Green. As she was engaging in verbal kabuki, explaining her vote, I could almost feel the indignation boiling over from the two hosts. Big kudos goes out to both Bowden and Stern for having the combined patience of a saint. That interview alone should earn them a few Marconi votes in my view.

It’s a good thing I don’t do radio; I wouldn’t have been nearly as diplomatic as they were. As if there wasn’t enough preordained controversy with this year’s crop of candidates, we get this nonsense and I’m not even going to enrage you with her supposed rationale. I have too much respect for you to even try. It’s almost as bad as the one vote that someone gave Aaron Sele. Again, not going to enrage you with the facts, you can look up Sele’s pathetic career statistics here if you wish. Then you have my permission to curse uncontrollably - - and yes you can practice reading that line in your best Bane voice. Or Darrell Hammond’s Sean Connery as I believe they’re one in the same.

Call me naïve but I was always under the impression that those having been afforded the privilege of a Hall of Fame vote would show just a modicum of respect towards it. I’m not the only one who thinks this way as does the great Metstradamus. But this is unfortunately the year that common sense, fairness and respect for the game clearly went over the edge of the train tracks faster than a New York City subway commuter. Ouch.

Now I’ve been very sympathetic to the plight the writers have when it comes to wading through the waters that PED’s have polluted in Major League Baseball. But like Metstradamus, when voters use their privilege to make some grand statement (i.e. voting no one in), peppered with some who find it – I don’t know – comical, to vote for the likes of Sele and Green, it simply demonstrates to me that stupidity isn’t determined by who you write for or what and if you get paid for writing it.

At least I didn't Nair for short shorts Marty.

When the likes of Marty Noble, someone I’ve always had tremendous respect for, thinks that because Mike Piazza had an abundance of—wait for it—back hair, during his time as a Dodger and decides to connect the follicles and assume that it meant Piazza used. It shows me just how far we’ve fallen as a people more than anything. We’ll believe the very worst of each other just to protect our own vanity because God forbid a player is later found to have juiced.

We can’t have writers dealing with pangs of remorse now can we? To top it off, Noble then ironically said that as a Met, Piazza had a hairless back, which is ALSO a symptom of steroid use. So if Piazza essentially played with Robin William’s back he’s using yet if he’s smoother than an Abercrombie model he’s also using? Absolutely pathetic, especially that never, not once, has Piazza been accused or named in any report or tested positive for any performance enhancing drugs.

I always believed that MLB needs to be far more proactive of a guide for the BBWAA when it comes to Hall of Fame voting and steroids. I wrote a piece for Metsmerized in early 2011 calling for Bud Selig to commission a panel exploring the effects that PED’s have on actual playing performance. Of course Selig and MLB want absolutely nothing further to do with this issue—at least not what happened in the past. One bright spot happened a few days ago when the MLB Players Association and MLB agreed to year round drug testing for Human Growth Hormone and Testosterone.

I guess 3000 hits just ain't what they used to be huh?

The BBWAA and their writers refused to vote for some players and based it on innuendo and unproven allegations; and that is shameful itself. In part I can understand their fear of enshrining someone who later is proven to have used PED’s as players elected cannot be removed from the Hall of Fame. My question is why is that? Hypothetically if a Hall of Famer does something illegal, whether during or after their playing career, why are they not immediately open to removal? That, in my opinion, would allow the writers to choose players based on their careers and not on speculation.

George Orwell was quoted as saying:

“Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proved innocent.”

Now the real question remains, who was Orwell talking about; the players or the writers?

The Triumph Through The Tragedy

2012-12-19T23:43:00.000-05:00

I was raised a Catholic. While I’m not what you would describe as your textbook Catholic, I still believe in God -- not so much in man and even more so lately. Part of what we’re taught when we’re young is to simply accept that everything that happens in this life, absolutely everything, is part of God’s divine plan. It’s one of those sacred canons that you’re not supposed to question, pending a yardstick to the wrists. Guantanamo has nothing on Catholic nuns I kid you not.

When a mother of three is diagnosed with Cancer in her early fifties and later dies, never to see her daughters marry or have children of their own, we’re supposed to accept that it was all part of God’s divine plan. Or when the elderly grandparent, having lived a long and hopefully meaningful life, takes a final breath, we’re told it was his time and more importantly, that it was all part of God’s divine plan. Oh the mystery of the existential always made me wonder why should we accept the mother dying from Cancer or the elderly whose life has seemingly run its course? Then you have children ranging in ages from 6 to 7, gunned down in their school by a deranged madman, we question how? How could God allow something like this to happen? I wish I had the answer to that.

We’re an interesting bunch; Catholics that is. We occasionally find refuge in the idea of God’s devine plan when things don’t go quite as planned. When it really hits the fan we pull out the-- it’s God’s will and works in mysterious ways card. You know because the mysterious will of a deity is completely valid when it allows children to be slaughtered before roll call especially a deity that proclaims to love us as his own. George Carlin, seen by many Christians as the anti-Christ, once said “I was a Catholic until I reached the age of reason”. Unlike Carlin, I never completely shared in his atheistic views but where he and I agree is how man uses Religion to fill in the blanks -- to essentially keep the herd moving along with the caveat being -- no questions allowed. Move along, move along.

When I heard that there was another mass shooting at a school, taking 26 lives 20 of which were children, I immediately thought of my own daughter who’s only two. I was thankful that she wasn’t at the age to understand what had happened thus prompting those questions that test a parent’s mettle. It may have been a selfish reaction but I have a feeling when all is said and done and the families are allowed to heal from this unthinkable tragedy, the common denominator is going to end up focusing on the role parents have and haven’t been playing in the lives of their children probably in the last 20 + years. Let me just tell you, being a parent is easily the most difficult job you could ever possibly have. Sure you have the self-help books some penned by famous authors such as Dr. Benjamin Spock. But in the end there are no user guides, no pdf files, nothing but your own life experiences and good judgment that you have to impart onto your child. If you fall short or fail in that regard there is no do-over, no restart.

There is so much that we don’t know right now as to why Adam Lanza, 20, would go on such a rampage killing his mother , the 26 lives at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut and culminating by taking his own life. I didn’t want to draw any conclusions regarding this tragedy. Like everyone, there is a time to grieve and heal and then a time to reflect and find resolution. I see this tragedy broken down into three equally important components, none of which should overshadow the other or be treated like a political football to score points with any issue groups.

We are living in a violent culture precipitated by a lack of parental guidance at home. We have parents allowing their children to sit in front of TV’s playing for hours on end video games like Call of Duty. These first-person shooter games are intensely realistic as they mimic wartime battlefield conditions and some in fact have been partially created and tested by current and former members of the military. That in itself has caused the Pentagon to take notice. This is from an article on Forbes.com:

Some have criticized the use of video game technology to train and equip military recruits, citing it as a form of desensitization that makes the taking of lives easier. But proponents argue differently, saying that the use of these video game trainings has allowed for the opposite. By training a soldier in an accurate recreation of former missions, military analysts believe that video game developers are helping to prepare soldiers for the battlefield in a way never before possible.

It’s the very same desensitization that’s affecting our children and that’s what we should find very concerning. I’ve played these games before and I would be lying if I told you that it didn’t raise my heart rate and put me on edge after just a few minutes of play. Kids today are spending hours playing these games and parents seem to be just fine allowing it and guess what, video games have ratings systems in place in hopes to preventing the young from playing them. How’s that working out especially when it’s the parents who often are the one’s buying these games for their kids?

Of the recent mass shootings, each perpetrator shared a similar profile. They were loners who were extremely intelligent, almost completely lacking in social skills and influenced in part by violent video games. Though each act of violence has its own distinct context, especially regarding Army Major Nidal Hassan, who was in active duty and who’s act should be treated more as a terrorist attack, over the past decade the social science research community has continued to search for more general frameworks of understanding. Indiana University commissioned a study of 28 students who were randomly assigned to play either a violent, first-person shooter game or a non-violent one every day for a week. None of the participants had much previous gaming experience. Researchers found that those who played the violent video games showed less activity in areas of the brain that involved emotions, attention and inhibition of impulses.

But some researchers believe that establishing more precise psychological/criminal profiles in the hope of preventing such events through interventions may ultimately prove elusive. We may not be able to exactly predict human behavior but what we can do, especially as parents, is to take note of our children and how they behave and the games they play. It’s inexcusable to allow teenagers to spend hours playing a game that mimics the ravages of war, only to have them become desensitized to it. We’re no longer in the age of Pac-Man, not when you have games so realistic that they’re used to train soldiers. This is the first step in addressing this epidemic.

The next step segues almost seamlessly as it concerns our mental health system or in fact our woeful excuse of a system. I work with the public and this may be viewed as simplistic of me to say but I’m very confident in the fact that I’ve dealt with the gamut of some --shall we say--psychologically challenged individuals. I say that tongue-in-cheek but in all honesty it’s something that’s always on my mind at work. To put it bluntly, I’ve dealt with people that absolutely should be institutionalized. I’ve had someone tell me that their Cable company was remotely viewing them in their homes from a camera placed inside their set-top box. She was completely and utterly serious and while we often reminisce at work about that incident jokingly, it makes me wonder why someone who clearly needed more than just a pill to get back on the right track again was out and about among the rest of us. I’ve had people threaten my safety, my life – the list can go on. All of them by people who are somehow operating under the radar of mental fitness.

In my home state of New Jersey, the Hagedorn Psychiatric Hospital closed on June 30, and the subject of a hearing that was held in Trenton where mental health advocates, legislators and opponents of the shutdown seemed to agree on one point: New Jersey needs to commit more money to support Hagedorn's patients as they move out of the hospital and into the homes of relatives, residential facilities in the community, and other psychiatric hospitals. As it is being reported, Adam Lanza may have had mental issues and was not properly diagnosed and treated. The question it raises is: are we doing enough to address the very real issue of mental health in this country or are we simply shaking our heads and making juvenile jokes when someone acts way out of what is generally the norm?

And to tie it into my first component -- why didn’t Adam Lanza’s mother do something about it? Reports are saying that she would tell babysitter’s that Adam was to never be left alone. That in and of itself should have warranted psychological help not to mention it brings into question the veritable arsenal Adam Lanza’s mother seemed to be amassing in her home--her home with a potentially mentally ill son.

This leads me to the third and last component that needs to be addressed and that involves guns. I’m a gun owner and have been for many years and it’s something that my father taught me to understand and respect from a very young age. I remember feeling both fearful and in awe of it simultaneously. I was about ten years old when he was comfortable enough to tell me about it. Some of my friends wonder why would I have a gun in the home especially with a two year old. First, I keep my handgun in a locked safe that only my wife and I have access to. According to reports Lanza’s mother was a gun collector -- owning handguns and rifles – all accessible to her son. Now if I knew my child had ANY psychological problems, the last thing I would do is keep my handgun where she could access it. Let alone a cache of weapons. It’s basic common sense.

One of the weapons Lanza used was the AR-15. It’s essentially a civilian version of the military M-16. It usually fires a .223 caliber round whereas its military counterpart fires the more powerful 5.56 full metal jacket round. The clip used in the AR-15 can hold from 5 to 100 rounds. As a gun owner and someone who believes in the 2^nd amendment, I find it ridiculous that ANY gun owner would find it necessary to have a weapon that holds as much as one hundred rounds. Forgive me how this comes across but my .357 Magnum holds 5 rounds -- I only need 1. I say that because the issue of gun control is something that over the coming days will be front and center because of this tragedy.

The fight over gun control is a battle between two diametrically opposing viewpoints – one on the political left and the other on the political right. Unfortunately, as with most issues, the extreme elements on both sides tend to have the loudest, and often times, most irrational voices. You see there are those who feel that there is no weapon, or ammunition type, or high capacity magazine that should ever be banned because of an irrational fear that someone like President Obama will somehow summon the Army in black helicopters to come door-to-door, confiscating their arms while burning the Constitution.

Trust me gun owners, if the President really wanted to do that, you and your AR-15, one in each arm, wouldn’t be able to stop it. What we do need is more in depth background checks and licensing. Yes, licensing. If I have to take a test to drive my SUV then I think taking a test to show that I’m responsible enough to use a handgun is only fair. The idea of everyone being armed isn’t feasible since most people aren’t mandated to be trained in the first place. Relying on armed untrained citizens to properly use firearms responsibly would be a huge risk. The last thing we all want is for guns to be in anyone and everyone’s hands –regardless of age or mental capacity.

Don’t get me wrong. There are those on the left who advocate a complete ban on firearms and they’re simply living in a utopia that only exists in their minds. But to juxtapose this with another hot-button issue, there are those on the right who think abortions, at any stage of the pregnancy, should be banned. They too show little in the way of compromising. It’s this inability to find common ground –something so lacking these days – that is why both ends of the political spectrum have little to no trust in each other. But to make the unfortunate assumption that simply banning guns will solve this issue is just the easy out and all it does is give the opportunistic politician a chance to prop up their brand all the while offering up a false sense of security at the expense of guaranteed rights.

If there was one element to this story that stands apart from the issues it has to be the media. I understand the role of the media is to inform but when informing takes a backseat to wall-to-wall sensationalism, a line has to be drawn especially when members of the media feel the need to express their own opinions on the matter. CNN anchor Don Lemon stated that despite gun violence actually going down since 1990, in his words said “it doesn’t matter” essentially saying restrictions need to be put in place. I agree to an extent but if the media continues to focus on only one aspect of this tragedy then their doing a disservice to us all.

To put this into perspective, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2009 there were 1,314 children under the age of 14 that died in motor vehicle crashes, and the numbers rose even higher in 2012. That’s like having 65 Sandy Hook tragedies yet the media doesn’t report that or come out for a ban on certain type of vehicles. Do we really need cars that can travel in excess of 100 miles per hour? Where’s the call for a ban on sports cars or sub compacts?

I don’t know what the next few days, weeks and months will come because of this. I do know that there are no easy remedies out there and anyone who tries to convince you that all we need is that “one” fix, is flat out lying and probably pandering to a particular group. There’s a saying that through tragedy comes triumph. I look at my daughter and I wish my faith was stronger --I really do. That’s the funny thing about faith, you either have it or you don’t. I want to believe that God wouldn’t want children to be slaughtered and I understand that we all have free will.

Free will –according to Christianity—the direct result of Eve eating the apple from the “tree of knowledge”. But I’m still at a loss as to how this all fits into His “Devine Plan”? By Eve’s actions we are now subject to life without God’s involvement? Is that our punishment? And why would God wish to punish us for seeking knowledge? We pray for things like this not to happen but if they’re predetermined, what’s the point? I wish it were easy for me to offer myself up to faith, as it was when I was younger. If there is anything we should all pray for, it’s the ability to find hope in a time when hope is slowly fleeting.

Generally Out-Managed...er

2012-12-14T21:44:00.000-05:00

Have you ever wondered what does the term "fair market value" really mean? It's often bantered about in the sports world when an athlete vying for a new contract, tries to sell his talents to the highest bidder. I hear it all the time. To me, it means getting paid for the service you're providing balanced against what others in your specific field are being paid for doing the same. Sounds fairly simple right? You get paid according to what your peers are being paid and how well they perform. That's how it works for everyone- everyone with the exception of one Robert Allan Dickey.

You see, Mr. Dickey, he's just weird. First off, what's with the name? Dickey. Really? He play's professional Baseball for a living but that's a loose term since he happens to play for the New York Mets. Don't get me started on that - talk about having regrets. He's a pitcher but I'll be damned, he's a weird one at that too. He's a knuckleball pitcher. The knuckleball happens to be a last resort pitch used by those trying desperately to hold onto their career.

It's kind of like when Lindsey Lohan play's Elizabeth Taylor in a Lifetime made-for-TV movie. He's also missing a ligament or a nerve or something in his elbow; weird and damaged goods I tell you. Oh and here's the cherry on the top of this sundae, he's 38 years old! He's weird, old, damaged goods - and he wants to get paid "fair market value". I got his nerve- right here.

I admit he did ok last year. He led the Mets in practically every pitching category including usage of the word "enigmatic" 247 times. He was the first Mets pitcher ever to quote Faulkner in a post game interview that left the dreamy Kevin Burkhardt mesmerized in the moment. Oh yeah, and he won the Cy Young award. It's not that I'm minimizing what he means to the Mets but he's replaceable especially that he thinks he should get both "fair market value" and long term security. Sure I know he's just looking for a 3 year extension but he's 38 years old for crying out loud. And you know I don't like long term relationships plus we all know I've had to put a ring on one player this winter so far - two is pushing it! Damn that Beyonce.

Word on the street is that Anibal Sanchez just inked a 5 year, $80 million dollar deal to return to the Detroit Tigers. That's a lot of coin for a guy who's career record is under five hundred. Then you have that kid with the mental issues in Anaheim, Grienke. He just signed a 6 year deal with the Dodgers worth almost $160 million. I guess I have to agree that Dickey is worth somewhere in between those guys, right? Damn market. Here I was hoping it would bottom out and come to me (that's code word for I was hoping Dickey would finally exibit oxygen deprivation from his Kilimanjaro ascent and sign for pennies on the dollar).

Well needless to say, he's feeling fine, a little peeved but otherwise ok. I would be peeved too if my boss asked me to dress like an Elf at the company Christmas party. Maybe asking him to park the cars took it too far. Oh well, you live and learn. I have to get going now, I'm currently texting Alex Anthopoulos but don't worry, I'm multitasking here. My box of chocolates order from Swiss Colony just got approved - on company credit no less. Now that's winning!

All my best and happy holidays,

Sandy

This IS the Mega Deal You Were Looking For

2012-12-06T18:07:00.001-05:00

There’s something about being in your mid-thirties to early forties where you can say without a shadow of a doubt, what a major impact Star Wars has had on your life. I remember being so sick and home from school with a cold in 1980 and all I wanted was for my dad to sneak me into the local theater to see The Empire Strikes Back. Of course that didn’t happen. Those crazy parents, always being so parental; bless their souls. Little did they know the scars it left me with as I had no choice but to watch the greatest of all Star Wars films on VHS – FOUR YEARS LATER and after having seen The Return of the Jedi. Oh the humanity.

Of course I eventually forgave my parents for their…insidious lack of vision – as I’m sure Palpatine would be remissed to point out. Yes my parents raised a good (hopefully) person who’s turned into a well adjusted, successful adult and a married parent to his own two year old daughter - who’s soon to be initiated into the world George Lucas envisioned some 35 years ago. So when I heard a few weeks ago that George Lucas announced his retirement from filmmaking and decided to sell Lucasfilm to the Walt Disney Corporation, I became full of more mixed and odd emotions than the result of a Luke and Leia kiss. I felt as if a part of my childhood had been surgically removed via lightsaber and sold to a bunch of pesky Jawas (for $4 billion no less). Yet at the same time I felt that if there was one company that could not only preserve but also cultivate the Star Wars Universe for years to come, it would be Disney.

The Walt Disney Company already has quite the portfolio having acquired Pixar (which ironically was a subsidiary of Lucasfilm created in the 70’s and later sold in 1986 to Steve Jobs) early in 2006 and most recently in 2009, added Marvel Studios. And with the success of this past summer’s The Avengers, it’s a safe bet that Lucas’ decision to sell to Disney will solidify that company for years to come. But the questions on the minds of fanboys and girls alike are, “Did the maker sell out?” Meaning will the Star Wars franchise become even more watered down now that Disney is in control? Granted, that’s somewhat overly critical but I thought about this for a while and with respect to George Lucas, after seeing the prequels, can it really get more watered down for the masses?

"Say Rebel...one...more...damn time."

I get it, George Lucas isn’t Quentin Tarantino and it’s not as if everyone is pining for a Star Wars version of Pulp Fiction (other than me perhaps). Part of what makes Star Wars so universal is that it speaks to everyone at any age but at its core, lay the very foundations of classic storytelling. Themes such as redemption, revenge, friendship, loyalty, the very battle of good versus evil, all of which make Star Wars timeless. As jaded as some Star Wars fans have become thanks to the mixed bag that are the prequels, I’m actually not worried that Disney will suddenly slip mouse ears onto Vader’s shiny dome – well maybe if it’s to sell merchandise – but hasn’t all of that cheese been done already and under Lucas’ force grip?

"Gratuitous product placement you have"

I’ve always believed that the qualities that make George Lucas as great as he is are some of the very same qualities that have constricted much of his work and disappointed some of his fans. Like any filmmaker, Lucas has always desired (and more times than not has attained) total control over his films as he was essentially one of the original independent filmmakers in Hollywood. Sometimes the trade off that comes with total control ends up resulting in tunnel vision. As much as I’m a fan of his work, I don’t think there’s one fan of filmmaking that thinks George Lucas is a master of the English language. Dialogue has just never been his strong suit as even Harrison Ford was always fond of saying, “You can write this shit, but ya can’t say It.” – in regards to Lucas’ scripts.

Another drawback of Lucas’ is his almost fervent desire of filming everything digitally. Any Star Wars fan worth his salt knows the visual differences between the original versus the prequel films. Because the technology didn’t exist back in the late 70’s and 80’s, Lucas literally had to create the technology himself thus ushering in ILM. There isn’t a filmmaker in Hollywood today who doesn’t owe a bit of gratitude for the work Industrial Light and Magic have afforded them but sometimes a good thing can be overused and abused.

There’s a lack of substance and physical reality to some of the work ILM did on the prequels. Was it really necessary to digitally create a single clone trooper in a single scene? Was it necessary to replace actual landscapes with digital mock ups? Sometimes just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should and Hollywood seems to be gravitating more towards blending technology with traditional techniques rather then totally relying on computers to enhance their films.

It has to be difficult for Lucas to turn what has essentially been his life’s greatest work over to someone else even if it is someone he’s known his entire career. But letting go of the reigns may be exactly what is needed to bring in new, fresh ideas. Luckily for both Lucas and fan’s alike he’s turning it over to someone who has had a hand in creating some of the most memorable films ever to grace the silver screen, films such as, E.T., Raiders of the Lost Ark, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, to name a few.

Kathleen Kennedy has been given quite the daunting task of maintaining one of the greatest film franchises ever made. Kennedy, a highly respected Hollywood vet, has worked along side the likes of Spielberg, Eastwood, Fincher and Scorsese over the years. She’s one half of the powerhouse producing team of Kennedy and Frank Marshall, her husband, and alongside Steven Spielberg, formed a triumvirate at Amblin Entertainment.

Letting go for a filmmaker is probably the most difficult thing to do. There’s a quote that films are never really finished, only abandoned. I for one feel great hope about the future of Star Wars and what it’s going to mean not only to my child very soon but perhaps even to her children someday. Plans have already been in place for new films to hit theaters starting in 2015, starting with Star Wars: Episode VII. Star Wars is rightfully going to become a rite of passage passed down from one generation to the next. That my friend is what Star Wars is truly about. Not the special effects or the merchandise or the theme parks.

In the words of Master Yoda (sort of): Hopeful, you should be.

Have Knee Will Jerk

2012-12-03T16:16:00.001-05:00

We can file this under the title: Well that didn’t take long.

Over the weekend we learned of a tragedy out of Kansas City when Kansas City Chief’s linebacker Jovan Belcher murdered his girlfriend and committed suicide - in front of team officials. Apparently according to reports, Belcher thanked general manager Scott Pioli and head coach Romeo Crennel then shot himself in the team’s practice facility parking lot.

Police reports over the weekend had a woman reporting that her daughter had been shot multiple times at a home just outside of Arrowhead Stadium. It turned out to be the mother of Kassandra Perkins, Belcher’s girlfriend.

There were serious questions as to would the Chief’s ask the NFL to cancel their Sunday game versus the Carolina Panthers but the team chose to play on despite the horror that took place. It was during that game, which was aired on NBC’s Sunday Night Football that Bob Costas gave an on air opinion of the situation and took the proverbial knee jerk reaction that in my opinion, is beneath him as one of the finer sports broadcasters of our generation. Here is what Costas said:

BOB COSTAS:

Well, you knew it was coming. In the aftermath of the nearly unfathomable events in Kansas City, that most mindless of sports clichés was heard yet again: Something like this really puts it all in perspective. Well, if so, that sort of perspective has a very short shelf-life since we will inevitably hear about the perspective we have supposedly again regained the next time ugly reality intrudes upon our games. Please, those who need tragedies to continually recalibrate their sense of proportion about sports would seem to have little hope of ever truly achieving perspective. You want some actual perspective on this? Well, a bit of it comes from the Kansas City-based writer Jason Whitlock with whom I do not always agree, but who today said it so well that we may as well just quote or paraphrase from the end of his article.

"Our current gun culture, “Whitlock wrote, "ensures that more and more domestic disputes will end in the ultimate tragedy and that more convenience-store confrontations over loud music coming from a car will leave more teenage boys bloodied and dead."

"Handguns do not enhance our safety. They exacerbate our flaws, tempt us to escalate arguments, and bait us into embracing confrontation rather than avoiding it. In the coming days, Jovan Belcher’s actions, and their possible connection to football will be analyzed. Who knows?"

"But here," wrote Jason Whitlock," is what I believe. If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today."

First off I’m not against anyone giving their opinion, even a sports broadcaster during a football game. But for Costas to come out and sort-of kind-of separate himself from Jason Whitlock - by saying he normally doesn’t agree with him but on this he does, is just a cop out if you ask me. Anytime you try to explain actions of insanity with rationality not only are you missing the point that crazy has no boundaries but you prove the point that good intentions mean jack shit.

If a mother drowns her children in a bathtub do we place a ban on Mr. Bubble? If a husband cheats on his wife & she decides to snip off his Twinkie with a scissor do we ban scissors or Twinkies if that? Don't get me started on Twinkies. What about the mother who drove her minivan full of her kids into oncoming traffic on a Long Island highway after she did a few lines of coke...what should we ban there Bob? Minivans? Soccer mom’s with suspiciously deviated septums?

Human beings are capable of the most vile behavior. Yes, if guns didn’t exist, perhaps Jovan Belcher and Kassadra Perkins would be alive today. You could say the very same about minivans or bath tubs and exacto knives.

I’m disappointed in you Bob, I always thought of you as someone far more intelligent and far less susceptible to knee-jerk reactions to even the most horrible of situations. I can understand being emotionally distraught, I’ve been there. I guess the culture at NBC has even taken its hold onto you.

Fall Movie Review - Skyfall

2012-11-25T17:46:00.002-05:00

James Bond will be back.

That’s been the promise moviegoers have been given over the past 50 years at the end of every Bond film dating back to the early days of Sean Connery. The world’s most famous spy is back on the big screen for the 23^rd time in Skyfall as MGM studios has finally navigated its way out of a financial abyss. Daniel Craig reprises the role of the British MI6 agent for the third time. His first sip of the Martini came in 2006, when the series was re-booted and left the audience happily shaken and stirred for the future of the franchise.

The producers wisely tapped into the original and realistic Ian Fleming source material. Gone was the fanciful turn that was beginning to embody the Brosnan films. The studio scored a major box office hit with Casino Royale and continued in 2008 with the somewhat disappointing Quantum of Solace.

Let’s just say, the four year wait was more than worth it.

In Skyfall we see a Bond, especially since he earned his double-o status in Royale, far more polished if not a bit weary from the realities of the job. He’s teamed with a fellow agent, Eve, who are both in pursuit of a terrorist(s) who has acquired a hard drive containing the names of MI6 operatives inbedded in terrorist organizations globally. This may not be an entirely original premise as I’m sure Tom Cruises’ Ethan Hunt would raise an eyebrow to this, however it works for Skyfall and leads into one of the best opening Bond scenes to date.

Sam Mendes, who directed Craig in Road to Perdition, has created not just a stand-alone Bond film with Skyfall but a Bond film that pays proper homage to the 50 year history of the franchise with many alluding references to previous themes of redemption to the joy that is the Bond Aston Martin. In fact I would consider Casino Royale as the much needed re-boot of Bond with Quantum of Solace transitioning him past the personal loss of Vesper Lynd with Skyfall bringing him back full circle to the roots of his character – both figuratively and literally as Skyfall just so happens to be Bond’s childhood home.

One of the reasons for EON’s reboot of the franchise was the fact that they felt it was headed into a more unrealistic slightly video game-esque genre. And with Pierce Brosnan getting up in age and no longer under contract, producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson decided to go in a different direction casting a younger Bond and stripping the character of its previous fanciful turns, i.e. no more crazy Q gadgets and an almost complete lack of humor.

In both cases the producers took it too far and in Quantum of Solace you would be hard pressed not to assume you were watching a Jason Bourne film and not Bond. Mendes and the producers finally realized this and while they have remained true to re-booting Bond, Skyfall does put a smile on the faces of long time Bond fans.

Once again Q branch is resurrected and this time around Q is played by Ben Whishaw. He’s incredibly young, cocky and the perfect Yin to Bond’s Yang. No pun intended there, really. The sly and comedic repertoire between he and Bond are part of what made these films so fun and to see it back in the franchise and done this way was enjoyable.

Judi Dench returns for the seventh time as the head of MI6, M. Beyond bringing obvious gravitas and weight to the film, Dench’s’ M, referred to by her aides and agents as ‘Mum’, is about as close to a mother Bond has had. And without giving away too many spoilers let’s just say at the end of Skyfall, that feeling is more than shown and appreciated by Bond.

Ralph Fiennes joins the cast as Gareth Mallory, a minister in the PM’s cabinet who’s essentially M’s boss, and with the loss of the hard drive, is intent on seeing M sent out to pasture. Again without giving too much away, it’s safe to assume we’ll be seeing Mr. Mallory again in future Bond films.

It’s not really a spoiler to mention that Javier Bardem plays the baddie – Silva. There’s something about Bond villains that either puts them in the forgettable category or the infamous category.

Bardem’s acting chops clearly put him in the latter. You can see that Bardem really relished this role and while there were times he came awfully close to camping it up, he kept it just creepy enough to keep it in check. The scene where he meets Bond for the first time turns into the most uncomfortable yet amusing seduction scene ever in a Bond film. Yes, a seduction scene.

Skyfall centers on the relationships between Bond, M and Sliva and how they all interconnect with each other. Silva is looking to kill M for some past indiscretion and Bond acknowledges the ‘Mum’ relationship that he has with her and takes it upon himself to protect her. The writers and Mendes do a remarkable job at giving the audience a view into Bond’s history unlike any we’ve seen in previous films.

The ending will leave you shaken and stirred that the future of Bond is now firmly re-booted and re-set properly and fully. Bond once again can laugh at himself and the audience can once again feel the future for this iconic character is set to go, even when the ending credits come and tell us, he’ll be back.

What Can Be Learned From The Yankees Collapse

2012-10-20T22:37:00.002-04:00

Ok, I admit, I did my best Quagmire impersonation the other night, in spite of my better angels trying desperately to keep me in check. Not even Charlie’s Angels could keep me from succumbing to the dark side when I saw the best team money could buy get brutally swept by the best thing to come out of Detroit that wasn’t bailed out by the government. It’s one thing to get to the American League Championship Series and lose but for the New York Yankees to lose 4 in a row and lose them by barely showing up was hard to watch, even for a Mets fan.

To think that the Yankees actually made President Obama look thoroughly engaged in his first debate in comparison to their performance against the Tigers. But I digress, who are we kidding; it wasn’t that hard for me to watch. I may have revelled in the poetic justice of it all yet I ironically realized in the end that I don’t despise the New York Yankees as some people do, and I’m very ok with that. Now, as to some of their fans – well that’s a whole different ballgame altogether.

Look I get it. Who am I to criticize the Yankees for being swept in the Playoffs? My team hasn’t even had a whiff of a whiff of playoff baseball since Carlos Beltran stood like a deer in headlights taking Adam Wainwright’s curveball for strike three in 2006. You can make a good argument that stemming from that moment the Mets began their spiral into the mediocre mess that they have become today. And make no mistake about it; it’s rare to find a Yankee fan that doesn’t like to remind us of that among other things. Because you know, it’s always endearing to be a bully.

What other things you ask? How about their 27 World Championships? Sure I’d be proud of my team if they racked up that many Championships, who wouldn’t? But I’m pretty sure, no I’m very sure I wouldn’t rub it into everyone’s faces or use it as my main retaliatory weapon anytime someone criticizes my team. It reeks of elitism – and that is why no one is shedding a tear that Detroit handed the Yankees a beatdown of the ages. I particularly enjoy the brand of Yankee fan who just about takes personal credit for those 27 championships. As if it weren’t for their bloviating ad nauseum about their greatness, those teams never would have existed. Over-compensating much pre tell? We get it, your team is great.

I know I’m not breaking any new ground here saying this. We all know where the Mets are financially as an organization or at least we think we do and it’s no secret that times have been better. There’s that certain percentage of Yankee fans that love to say how the Mets are cheap and don’t care about their fans. Hell at times even I’ve felt the same malaise from this organization but when you look at the facts you realize that to say the Mets have always been cheap is more like a cheap shot than fact.

It doesn’t take much to Google the numbers and see where the Mets have ranked in payroll over the years. We all know they spend (spent). They’re just very good at doing it very bad. Athlon Sports ranks the Mets the worst of all MLB teams from 2001 to 2010 when it comes to spending in relation to wins. But don’t try and get intellectual when arguing with these particular Yankee fans. To them it’s all about the bling and boy do they have the bling in the Bronx enough so that even their mistakes (Carl Pavano, Jose Contreras, Brien Taylor, A-Roid) can be easily swept under the rug. However even the mighty have their limits as Hank and Hal Steinbrenner have made it clear that they want to get their payroll under the luxury tax threshold.

Of course there’s that “aura” that playing for the Yankees brings. Even I fell for it when Raul Ibanez seemed to channel every Yankee great in this postseason with his homerun fest. Not bad for a 39 year old. Yet if you ask anyone impartial, which team regardless their finances, has a better crop of young talent making its way up, one would be hard pressed to say it’s the Yankees.

It’s not like I’m drinking the Kool-Aid here. I know the Mets aren’t exactly overflowing with minor league talent – as a Mets fan I know that’s hardly the case – but tell me what version of Zach Wheeler or Matt Harvey or even Wilmer Flores do the Yankees have? If they did, don’t you think one or two would have been promoted this year and don’t try to pull Ivan Nova out of your pinstriped posterior. If he’s really one of their top prospects Brian Cashman has a lot more to worry about than how he’s going to try to convince a team to take Alex Rodriguez off his hands. It seems Cashman could care less that his team has become the professional sports poster children for AARP as they have the oldest team on average in MLB. This is what Cashman said about his geriatric lineup:

“I don’t care if it’s old. I care about if it’s good.”

Well Socrates has spoken I suppose. Talk about short sighted and the epitome of elitist. The only reason Brian Cashman can say that is solely because of his owner’s pockets.

The Mets and we as fans can learn a great deal from the debacle that is unraveling in the Bronx. Sure if you’re one of those superficial, seasonal Yankee fans that only come out of the woodwork in October then you probably should ignore the warning signs. Yes having almost unlimited funds can buy great players – eventual Hall-of-Famer players even. But if history has shown, it doesn’t buy championships. It’s signing the right players to augment your team, when you’ve developed it enough from within. Sure the Yankees can sign whoever they want and I’m pretty sure they’ll make a push for Texas’ Josh Hamilton this winter. Talk about lighting a fuse on a Molotov cocktail. The moment he steps out of his taxi cab onto 42^nd street, expect an epic implosion worthy of wall-to-wall TMZ coverage.

Some of those Yankee fans might think I sound like just another jaded Met fan. Sure it’s been rough the last few years but what they call being jaded I call appreciation. Mets fans appreciate their team. Darren Meenan over at the 7Line rounded up hundreds of his troops on the final game of the year at Citifield with his mantra: loyal to the last out. Now compare that to the empty seats in Yankee stadium during the playoffs. It was shameful that Yankee officials asked fans to move to the lower decks to keep the empty seats out of the TBS camera view. Elitist, entitled, arrogant and now you can add indifferent. There is no other way to define it.

If the Wilpons can ever get their financial house in order, hopefully with the proper gameplan which includes taking advantage of the amateur draft, including signing and developing the players they draft, and spending wisely in the free agent market, perhaps the Mets can right this ship. If the finances continue to tighten just enough to keep the Wilpon’s treading water and whatever funds made available are spent poorly, then nothing changes. The greatest success the Yankees had happened when their core players were supplemented with talent around them. The opposite of that is what never seems to truly work at least not long term. All that’s going to do is make you laugh under your breath at your TV when that house of cards comes falling down.

Giggity. Giggity.

The Apple Bites Back

2012-09-02T21:57:00.003-04:00

I remember when Apple first introduced the iPhone in 2007. How can anyone forget? Steve Jobs stood there dressed in his iconic blue jeans and turtleneck with what looked like a prop straight out of Star Trek – but this was far from being science fiction. It was unlike anything anyone had ever seen before. It was seductive with its sleek, curved edges. Its screen was incredibly vibrant, nearly covering the entire face of the device.

Yes it was a device – far more than just the cell phone it was designed to be. It was…art and I wanted it…bad. Since then the iPhone has taken the cellular industry by storm and has advanced it immeasurably in the past 5 years. It set the industry standard and became the juggernaut that it is today – with Apple having sold more iPhones in five years than it has sold Macs in the past 28 years.

I admit I’m a bit of a technophile perhaps a borderline tech geek – so sue me. I probably shouldn’t say that and give anyone an idea. It seems to be the way business in America – if you still have a business – is done these days. If you didn’t build it, then I guess the next best thing you can do is sue it – especially if that business is your main competitor and you can claim they’re culpable of copyright infringement.

That’s exactly what Apple did when it sued Samsung in April of 2011 and just a few days ago won that lawsuit with a landmark decision when that jury determined that Samsung “was guilty of patent infringement time and time again on many devices spanning many carriers”. The jury then slapped Samsung with a fine of over a billion dollars.

Apple has since filed notices with the courts as to which devices they now want banned from being sold in the U.S. Here’s the list:

Galaxy S 4G

Galaxy S2 (AT&T)

Galaxy S2 (Skyrocket)

Galaxy S2 (T-Mobile)

Galaxy S2 Epic 4G

Galaxy S Showcase

Droid Charge

Galaxy Prevail

And just the other day Apple included Samsung’s newest flagship the Galaxy SIII, the Galaxy Note and the Galaxy Note 10.1. Keep in mind this is separate from the first decision that was rendered by the jury, so in essence, the lawsuits continue perhaps in perpetuity. According to the website Engadget, at issue here are some of Apple's utility patents that it says Samsung has infringed upon. The headliner patents at issue are '721 which covers slide to unlock, and '604, which could apply to the universal search feature Samsung has been pulling from its phones recently. Another familiar entry is the '647 patent Apple slapped HTC with in 2010, which has a vague description but applies to clicking on a phone number in an email, for example, to call it.

Ok, so I might have lost some of you with that last paragraph, right? I mean I’m fairly sure that all you want to do is have a cell phone that actually makes a phone call and maybe do some cool stuff like listen to music and check the internet maybe even toss around a few Angry Birds. Now you have to wonder if you’re holding some kind of contraband akin to a Mexicali cartel with the ATF ready to bust down your door for crossing the mighty wunderkinds in Cupertino.

Allow me to get a few things out of the way here. First, I’m neither a lawyer nor do I try to pretend to be – that in and of itself would just be weird. My opinions on this matter don’t originate from a legalistic point of view but from what I like to think of as a practical, common sense point of view. I don’t believe anyone has the right to steal copyrighted ideas and sell them off to consumers as their own. As a part of the lawsuit against Samsung, Apple claimed that Samsung “stole” many of Apple’s aesthetic designs such as the “rounded corners” of the iPhone and iPad and the universal search function along with the pinch-to-zoom function – which allows you to zoom in on pictures.

First off, let’s talk design. Now I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed but I find it hard to believe that anyone has a corner on the market of rounded cellular phone edges. And God forbid they make a cell phone with rounded edges, they’re open to litigation for doing so. In 2006 Samsung designed a cell phone called the F700. Here is what it looked like.

Look familiar? Now who’s to say that the boys over at Apple didn’t take some, I don’t know, divine inspiration from this and use it in their iPhone designs?

It’s kind of a silly argument that Apple is trying to make because what they are saying is they invented the rectangle. Elmo better get his checkbook ready because he and his friends on Sesame Street need to cough up some coin if they want to keep using that signature Apple product. Apple didn’t invent the touchscreen. No that honor goes to Mr. E.A. Johnson of the Royal Radar Establishment in Malvern, UK around 1965 to 1967. They certainly didn’t invent the cell phone. That would be Mr. Martin Cooper of Motorola.

So what is it with Apple and they’re litigation happy mentality that seems to be on an unending, self-sustained path? Does the Ford Motor Company get to sue Chevy because it too makes cars with four tires and an engine? Could all of this be something far grander and far more Machiavellian than trying to take out the expected competition from other cell phone designers? It’s not like Apple needed the billion dollars, they’re more valuable as a company than some nations – perhaps the U.S. included.

When Walter Isaacson wrote his unauthorized biography of the late Steve Jobs, he shed a great deal of insight into how deep a dislike Jobs had for Google and it’s Android operating software – the lifeblood if you will of all of the competitors Apple is suing. In his book Isaacson reports Jobs saying,

“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

Interesting because according to the history of Apple’s rise to power, it is well know that Jobs was given access to some of Xerox’s technology, including the mouse – and upon paying for the rights to see the technology – Jobs instructed his people at Apple to design a cheaper and better version of Xerox’s mouse. The better mousetrap – pun intended was underway. I don’t recall Xerox soiling their panties on that one.

This is pretty simple if you ask me. This is a new Cold War and Apple has Google and Android in its crosshairs. Apple doesn’t give two rips about rounded edges or pinch-to-zoom or screen size. This is Steve Jobs’ final edict as CEO of Apple – destroy Google. Just like the actual Cold War – the United States and the Soviet Union never fired one shot at each other directly – only against their subordinates – the Vietnam’s and Latin American nations of the world.

There was a time I really wanted that iPhone. Guess what happened? I found the better mousetrap. This saga is far from over and you can be sure the only winners of all of this and the future litigation's will be the lawyers. Shakespeare was right I think.

Keep F@k#g That Chicken

2012-08-01T22:57:00.001-04:00

So it seems the fast-food industry has now become the new battleground for politics in the United States. No, Mike Bloomberg hasn’t put a hit out on Ronald McDonald...yet. No this time is was the CEO of Chick-fil-A, Dan T. Cathy, who a few days ago proclaimed his opposition to gay marriage – setting off a debate not only on gay marriage but also freedom of speech across the country.

Since his proclamation, groups supporting gay marriage have issued statements condemning Chick-fil-A and its CEO, calling for boycotts and the ultimate failure of the company. In fact his proclamation even prompted the Jim Henson Company to announce that they would sever ties with the company, even though they’ve had a relationship for many years.

When I first heard what the CEO of Chick-fil-A said regarding gay marriage I wasn’t really all that shocked. The last time I was in a Chick-fil-A was about ten years ago and I then remember hearing Christian music playing in the lobby and I noticed they were closed on Sundays – I assumed to acknowledge the Christian Sabbath.

I thought the CEO, making such a personal opinion public, was selfish at best, considering the backlash it opened up to all of his employees from those who don’t agree with him. At worse, it speaks to the foolishness of a business decision that does nothing but alienating its consumers – some of the same consumers who’ve probably been patrons for years, simply because the CEO had to make a grand political statement. Sure it’s well within his rights, but you’re selling chicken man. You’re not changing the world one nugget at a time. If you were in business to make grand political statements versus making a profit then you’d be giving your chickens on a biscuit away for free, no?

What I always find amazing is how some of us fall comfortably into our little boxes with the predetermined views that we use to define and separate ourselves from one another. It’s one of the reasons why I consider myself a Libertarian. My views aren’t easily sorted and collated. I’m not your typical demographic. I can’t be ‘expected’ to follow marching orders; voting a certain way like a good little lemming. I hate being grouped and I certainly don’t fall in line with what “the cool people” think. Democrats I’m pretty sure don’t like me thinking that I’m probably a Republican and Republicans think I should be more like them - if I only had a brain- and yes you can hum the tune to that, I did.

What really annoys me about this poultry fiasco is the rampant hypocrisy being volleyed back and forth – by each side. You have a few groups here, all vying to scale the summit of the socially conscious mountaintop. Take for instance those who are so incensed by Chick-fil-A’s stance that they’re setting up rallies against the company around the country. Just as the CEO of the company was within his rights to make his statement, the folks who disagree are well within their rights to do so as well.

But it would be nice if they were consistent with their ire. It was just a few months ago that President Obama had the very same opinion regarding same sex marriage until he rightfully changed his mind – whether due to convictions or softening polls with his base is debatable. Where was this group then? Where was the outrage? Quite selective.

Most of us drive a vehicle or are driven by vehicles. Over 50% of the oil the United States uses comes from OPEC nations. Countries such as Saudi Arabia have prosecuted homosexuals for their orientation and Iran in particular has put men and women to death for the crime of being homosexual. In fact while giving a speech at the UN, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denied the very existence of homosexuals in Iran all together. I have yet to see a rally at my local Mobil station decrying that however.

Look I get it; we rely on fuel. It’s the lifeblood of our economy and it’s vital to our way of life. But that doesn’t change the facts and because it would put a crimp in many lifestyles, some choose to take on the evil incarnate that is a fast food joint. It’s very easy and awfully convenient to thump your chest and scream at the top of your lungs at a ridiculous decision some owner of a company made – a company that has about 1600 locations in 39 states. But if that decision enrages you how can you justify in ANY way the use of OPEC supplied oil? If you’re going to have righteous indignation shouldn’t it be somewhat consistent? Or at least look as if you’re being consistent? Some people are consistent and walk the walk, but so many others are playing this up far more than the coverage it deserves.

Then you have those who are calling for a ‘Chick-fil-A Day’, an idea spawned by the former Arkansas governor – no, not that one – Mike Huckabee. Even Sarah Palin, the dimmest bulb in the GOP LiteBrite playset made it a point to head to a Chick-fil-A and snap a Twitter pic with her husband, giving the thumbs up. You betcha! It reeks of an Al Sharpton move – total ambulance chasing – and in Palin’s case, in the name of “American Values”. Sorry I call BS. It reeks of cheap personal gratification politics.

I also get annoyed when the argument is made that marriage is an ‘institution’, to be respected and honored and somehow homosexuals will somehow sully that. Yeah, let’s see the divorce rate for first marriages in the US is between 41 to 50%. Second marriage divorce rates are between 60 and 67% and the third time is certainly not the charm as the rate is between 73 and 74%. But somehow, heterosexuals are showing marriage great deference and respect and I didn’t even bring up the Kim Kardashians or Britney Spears of the world.

Everyone needs to step back for a moment and stop trying to win the award for the most socially conscious citizen in America. Chick-fil-A isn’t the reason gay marriage isn’t becoming more accepted. The reality is - it is. But to those who want to equate religious beliefs automatically with oppression are doing a disservice. I was raised a Roman Catholic. I did the whole Catholic grade school thing. I have many issues with the Catholic Church. I believe Jesus didn’t judge school children by what their parent’s net worth was. I believe Jesus drank out of a carpenter’s cup and not the 24 karat gold jewel incrusted joke the Pope sips out of at each mass. Those who claim gay marriage is going to unravel society as we know it need to admit to themselves that the very institutions they hold dear have done far greater damage to society than whether or not Ellen should be allowed to marry Portia. It’s time for people to stop listening to the masses, the groups, the parties, the churches, the states, and start listening to themselves and what is inside themselves. You are your best judge of what is right and wrong. Never forget that.

Summer Movie Review - The Dark Knight Rises

2012-07-29T19:05:00.000-04:00

Even though The Dark Knight Rises has been in theaters over a week now, the Sector still had to offer up an opinion on what is now the final installment in this version of Batman. Director Christopher Nolan envisioned his idea of the Dark Knight over 10 years ago when the character was on life support thanks in partly to the royal crapfest that was Joel Schumacher’s Batman & Robin. From molded nipples on the Batsuit to George Clooney’s wrecking of the iconic superhero, Warner Brothers came within a Bat’s short and curly hair away from ending the franchise. Luckily the suits at Warners decided they needed to go in the opposite direction from the Burton/Schumacher era into the more “real” world Nolan was offering.

Nolan’s first film in the series was Batman Begins in 2005 which became a huge success both critically and financially and set into motion what would become the judging barometer of superhero films to follow. With the initial success of Batman Begins, Nolan followed up three years later with The Dark Knight in 2008. Rarely a sequel to a film enjoys greater success than its predecessor; The Dark Knight has grossed well over a billion dollars and earned the late Heath Ledger an Academy Award for his portrayal of Batman’s arch-nemesis, The Joker. It also set the bar so high for Christopher Nolan, that whichever road he decided to take to end his trilogy would be wrought with some controversy, excitement and disappointments; and make no mistake about it – The Dark Knight Rises – is all of that and then some.

If you haven’t seen this movie yet and don’t want to be spoiled – then this is your last and only warning.

The Dark Knight Rises takes place about 8 years after the events of The Dark Knight where Batman with Commissioner Gordon’s acquiescence, takes the fall for the death of Harvey Dent to cover up the villainous actions by the former respected Gotham District Attorney thus keeping Gotham’s citizens from losing hope in the true system of law and order. Well according to the film the ruse was a success as helped to create the Dent Law – a nod to the Patriot Act? – which in essence, helped to eliminate mob control over Gotham. But as Bane actually says to Batman in the film,

“Victory has made you weak.”

Gotham is now relatively crime free and Bruce Wayne has hung up the cape and feeling the years of physical abuse of his body. The man is a virtual mess with cartilage loss just about everywhere, concussion damage to the brain and who knows what else but it’s his damage to his soul that is far more difficult to repair. It seems that Nolan has placed Bruce Wayne in a world that no longer needs him but it’s the fight that Wayne only knew and fed off of and has now left him a Howard Hughes type.

I see the parallels between pre and post 9-11 in regards to the Dent/Patriot Act and how the success of becoming secure can create a false sense of calm and self-congratulating. It also reminded me of the line from The Dark Knight where Dent says, “Either you die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.” Regardless Nolan has done something that probably makes most fanboys annoyed – he makes Bruce Wayne human with all the failings that come with it. In the comics, Batman would never sulk, or hang up the cape or tire out or become so distraught with the loss of the love of his life to retire. He’s everlasting in every regards. Well, in order to create a relatable version of the story Nolan had to show this. I have no issues with it.

Even when Alfred admits to Bruce that he destroyed the letter Rachel gave him in The Dark Knight. The letter which said she was in love with Dent and wanted to spend her life with him. Alfred decides to leave Bruce because he feels that he’s simply wanting back in the game to kill himself; I can feel how difficult it would be to leave someone you love because you felt it was the only way to save them from themselves. It also illustrates how the theme of keeping lies for the sake of others always ends up costing in the end.

The character of Bane played by Tom Hardy, had to be the hardest role to play since he had the ghost of Heath Ledger’s incredible performance looming over his head. Hardy wasn’t horrible by any means but was nowhere near as mesmerizing as Ledger’s Joker and essentially his Bane character was simply the junk yard dog to the real villain in the film. I had issue with his odd muffled British voice and in fact my cousin reminded me it sounded like Darrell Hammond’s Sean Connery from SNL. That was weird. Bane comes to Gotham to finish what Ra’s Al Ghul didn’t in the first film.

Nolan once again mixed canon with creative license by insinuating that Bane was the son of Liam Neeson’s Ra’s Al Ghul from The Dark Knight, causing fanboys to have meltdowns in their seats. It did make for a somewhat interesting if not predictable plot point towards the end involving another character who actually is related to Al Ghul. Another sore point for me was when Bane actually picks Batman up and what seemingly looks like he’s breaking his back, as in the Knightfall comic series. It was at that point in the film where I became disillusioned and felt Nolan was trying to squeeze too many ideas into a 2 and a half plus hour movie. I guess you can take the movie out of the big studious but you can’t take the suits out of the big movie.

After Bane sorta snaps the Bats back he then kidnaps him, finds time to fly to some remote part of the world, and places Bruce in the prison he spent time in – you know so he can set up a flat screen in his cell so he can watch on CNN as he blows up Gotham. By the way did I forget to mention that Bane has a nuclear device that’s ready to go cablooey hidden by his people in Gotham. Did I also forget to mention that one of Bruce’s cell mates pops one of his vertebrae back into place and just a few weeks later, he’s up and ready to rock? I kid you not it pays to have a chiropractor as your cell mate. Yeah this part of the film really had me wondering if the writers just said, screw it, its Batman we’re gonna make bajillions anyway. Really Nolan is this how you want this to end? Come on.

I wasn’t taken aback by Anne Hathaway’s Selina Kyle. In Nolan’s “real” world she’s never referred to as Catwoman, which is fine – she is by default obviously. Her motivations didn’t explain how it ended with her and Bruce at the café and without spoiling it much further, there was just no reason for her to be with him anymore. A bright spot however in the film was Joseph Gordon Leavitt’s character of police officer John Blake. Again I won’t totally spoil it for you but yes, he’s who you’re thinking he is and at the end you’ll get the idea and how overarching the studios influence must have been here.

I kinda get it. It definitely leaves the door open at least conceptually if the studio wants to continue with these characters but with a different director at the helm. I tell you what though, it flies in the face of what everything Christopher Nolan said about this being a definitive end to “his” trilogy. Perhaps he was just being coy, he did say “HIS” trilogy. The Dark Knight Rises wasn’t a bad film. It was just an unfortunate victim of its predecessors success; A familiar theme throughout.

Overall the Sector gives The Dark Knight Rises 2.5 out of 4 stars.

Summer Movie Review - The Amazing Spiderman

2012-07-08T23:21:00.000-04:00

We should just get this out of the way but I have been of the mindset that the Marvel/Sony reboot of the Spiderman franchise was done too soon and all about merchandising. Both I believe are still true but after seeing The Amazing Spiderman I have to admit, it doesn’t bother me as much as it once did. I know this is going to hurt all the die-hard fan boys out there who view Sam Raimi’s Spidey trilogy as the Citizen Kane of superhero flicks but as enjoyable as those films were, they weren’t without their own flaws. I do get it; Sam Raimi set the bar pretty damn high. Marc Webb with his take on this classic character pole vaulted it Olympic style and I’m pretty sure soiling the Russian judge’s underoos along the way.

When I first heard that the director, Marc Webb, was going to take a “darker” more intense look at the character I immediately went into eye-roll mode. Here we go another “dark” superhero movie dripping in angst and then somewhere along the way I found out that Peter Parker would be this brooding, hoodie wearing, teen struggling with the weight of the world on his shoulders – bearing it all on Facebook with witty quotes of course. All I could see in my mind’s eye was a total screw job by the studios with the suits deciding Spiderman meets Twilight. Just what we need an Emo Spiderman. This was my first mistake.

Webb took a bit of artistic license with the backstory of Spiderman and for some of the die-hards that’s totally sacrosanct. I’m not going to say they’re off base because if Spidey’s your guy and you’ve enjoyed the history of the character, this movie does change things completely but trust me in a good way. I feel it will be revealed over however many sequels the studio can squeeze out of this version but it should be interesting. In this version Peter Parker’s parents are missing (or are they?) and have close ties to Oscorp – the company founded by Norman Osborn who in the comics became Spiderman’s arch-enemy the Green Goblin.

Instead of feeling betrayed by that change I think it’s enhanced this story in ways Sam Raimi’s didn’t in terms of Peter’s father/son relationship, which was never really touched on. It opens up a whole new level of emotions that you’ll see throughout the film as Andrew Garfield who plays the Parker/Spiderman role flawlessly. As much as I enjoyed Tobey Maguire’s take on the character he never did physically come across as the wall crawler to me. Garfield is physically gangly, embodying the lean look that was made famous in the comic book. If The Social Network introduced us to Andrew Garfield, The Amazing Spiderman will make us not forget him any time soon.

Peter’s love interest in this film isn’t Mary Jane Watson, made famous by Kirsten Dunst in the Raimi films. Instead we have Gwen Stacy played very nicely by Emma Stone. Now for those of you who DO know the history of Spiderman, Gwen was Peter’s first love and was killed by none other than Norman Osborn. I totally see where Webb is going with this and I have to say I’m impressed. He’s absolutely building an emotional crescendo with – I hope – a huge payoff in the end. I’ll get into that a bit later but as someone who wasn’t a fan of Miss Dunst’ sometimes annoyingly clueless attitude, the writers of the Amazing Spiderman, James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent and Steve Cloves have begun to weave a solid story with fantastic character dialogue that will OVER TIME connect with everyone. Again, I’ll get into that later…patience.

Rhys Ifans plays the dual role of mentor and adversary to Parker as Dr. Curt Connors/The Lizard. It seems Connor’s and Peter’s father, Richard, were colleagues at Oscorp, researching ways to combine human and animal DNA to find cures for diseases, etc. It looks as if Webb is going down the Island of Doctor Moreau road when it comes to supplying enemies for Spiderman. Some of Spidey’s enemies from the comics were The Vulture and Rhino. Can we say potential sequel villain? Ifans does the role justice and the CGI to create the Lizard wasn’t as horrible as many had been saying leading up to the film.

Speaking of CG I can now see how incredibly different it is when a film relies heavily on CGI as the Raimi films did and how this film opted for more realistic action scenes that required real people doing stunts the old fashioned way. Sometimes less is more and filmmakers like Webb and Christopher Nolan who decry the use of CGI should be modeled after. The CGI in The Amazing Spiderman flowed perfectly and wasn’t overdone, making for a more “real” look and feel to the film. Having just seen the Raimi films on FX recently, I could point out the differences easily. The idea of doing things digitally just because you can is quickly losing steam in Hollywood. Sorry George “Jar-Jar” Lucas.

Overall this was one of the finest superhero origin based movies I’ve seen. In spite of the deviations from canon, which if handled by the writers properly, will make for at least 2 more really solid sequels that will give the audience a real sense of who Peter Parker really is. What I alluded to earlier was in regards to the writing and if you’re going to see this film, just listen and watch the relationship Peter and Gwen have throughout. If Mary Jane is Peter’s true love and Gwen does actually meet the same fate as she did in the comic, then this film was what Casino Royale was to James Bond. Peter has to know loss beyond that of his parents to know love and I have a feeling that’s where this is headed over time. Time is the key to these types of films and it seems the studios are finally learning that they don’t have to cram every single idea and emotion into a two hour block. Doing so only cheapens the payoff – if any – for the audience.

The Sector gives The Amazing Spiderman 3 out of 4 stars.

He Stole Their Souls

2012-06-25T08:30:00.000-04:00

At first I was unsure if I really wanted to wade into this tragic story mainly because of how disgusted I am with the subject; however psychologists have often said that talking about something unsettling is the vehicle which provides a catharsis. I’m not sure if it’s really a catharsis I seek since the only emotion I have about Jerry Sandusky is the all-encompassing satisfaction that I would feel from tossing him into a pit with death row convicts high on bath salts. Here’s hoping the experts are right but more importantly here’s to hoping that his victims who desperately need some solace, can in some way find it.

Jerry Sandusky was found guilty Friday night on 45 of 48 counts related to the sexual abuse of boys. The verdict encapsulated what began with Sandusky’s arrest in November of last year which prompted the school to fire the iconic head football coach, Joe Paterno, stating that he exhibited a lack of leadership after fielding a report from assistant coach Mike McQuery who witnessed Sandusky in the Penn State locker room shower in 2001 raping a boy. Yes, in 2001.

Now ask yourself this question, if you or someone close to you suspected a colleague - a subordinate – of systematically abusing children and the very least you did was to simply report it to your boss, would you be alright with that especially if nothing materialized afterward? To those who’ve defended Paterno tooth and nail to the end, did it ever occur to you that Paterno could have asked for Sandusky to step down as his assistant? He never even demanded an answer from Sandusky, which we know of or even a plea that he receive counseling. Paterno, himself a father and grandfather could have gone to the police with these allegations, as difficult as it would be considering Sandusky was a personal friend besides colleague. But he chose not to. Why?

Some have argued that Paterno didn’t have autonomy over personnel changes. That’s very possible but you can bet that he damn well had a significant say in it but chose to look the other way. Deniability is so much simpler than the truth and it keeps one’s collegiate football program immune from bad publicity and flush financially. According to the Business of College Sports, the Penn State football program generated over $50 million dollars in the 2009-2010 school year. Gee I wonder why anyone would even fathom the idea of covering up something as horrible as having a predator of children employed at a school, especially if that predator happens to be one of the gatekeepers to the money pot.

I remember when students of Penn State held a rally in support of Joe Paterno, when his integrity came into question when the scandal became public. Paterno, like so many in positions of authority at Penn State, hid behind either ignorance or in Parterno’s case, administrative process – as he did inform his superiors at Penn regarding the allegations involving his assistant coach Sandusky – and left it at that. Case closed. He was one of many enablers. His career and honor, which was sterling prior to this display of human depravity, came crumbling to an unfortunate end. The moral here, just because you've done good in the past for many, it doesn't inoculate you from making the right decision when it matters most - no matter what the costs (financially) may be. Inexcusable and to the students, where's the rally to support these victims?

To me the greatest of those enablers was Jerry Sandusky’s wife Dottie, who sat by his side the entire trial and when she was called to testify told prosecutors that she never heard anything going on in their basement, as it was one of the places where Sandusky’s accusers said he was raped by the “Tickle Monster”, Sandusky’s self-given nickname. I guess when you’re living a life or veritable luxury, you tend to hear what you want, see what you want and literally believe what you want, as long as it doesn’t interfere with your lifestyle. I guess she didn’t hear anything when her adopted son Matt, who at the very end of the trial admitted that he too was abused by his father.

To the enablers, Joe Paterno, passed away not too soon after he lost his job as head coach from Cancer, has to answer to a higher authority. University President Grant Spanier was forced to step down and two Penn State administrators, Athletic Director Tim Curley and now retired vice-president Gary Schultz are facing criminal charges for failing to report suspected child abuse and perjury. Both are fighting the allegations and awaiting trial. Of course they are.

Even NBC slithered its way into this story by once again adhering to its sterling journalistic standards, curiously edited the Bob Costas interview of Jerry Sandusky, removing this particular sound bite. The original audio had Sandusky saying

“I didn't go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I've helped," Sandusky told Costas in footage that never made the November airing.

Not every, just some. Shame on you NBC and you really wonder why both MSNBC and NBC are losing viewers by the droves. You can’t blame it all on Fox. Take some damn responsibility.

Arthur Aidala, a former prosecutor turned criminal defense attorney said it best the other night when he said that Sandusky, “Stole the souls of these boys. Leaving them with years of trying to regain what was taken from them.” Sadly, those 10 boys who are now men, will most likely never have what we would consider a normal life, how could they? The only respite these victims can have is that the evil that embodied Jerry Sandusky will never see the light of day again.

I want to say that something like this could never happen again but unfortunately as much as I question my own beliefs in a higher power, I’ve pretty much given up on humanity. When the quest for greed trumps the safety of children, how can you find it easy to have faith?

I have a feeling Matthew Sandusky asked himself that more than a few times.

HI57ORY

2012-06-02T18:14:00.000-04:00

First off, hat tip to the 7Line.com for the title of this article, it was just too fitting not to use. Usually I watch the Mets play upstairs, in the bedroom. I don’t mind it to be honest; it allots me some relaxation from my day. Even though my wife isn’t much of a baseball fan, she does tolerate my screaming at the television for reasons she has the slightest clue about. Last night there was a strange yet calm silence directed towards my bedroom television and as a Met fan accustomed to the twisted ire of the Baseball Gods, I increasingly became concerned; can this really be finally happening?

The sixth inning came and went and something inside me said Joe, you need to take this downstairs to the big screen and get the baby. This is different. Trust me this is different. So I go downstairs and my wife is sitting there watching Jerseylicious. Now you know why I was upstairs. My wife is addicted to reality television the way I’m addicted to watching the Amazins’, so I really can’t complain but she saw on my face that this was very different. I literally said to her, “History is going to be made tonight.” I got a quick glance a, whatever you say dear. She smiled and flipped me the remote. It was pretty obvious that this wasn’t her first rodeo with the Amazins’ and me.

My nerves a wrecking havoc on my body as my mouth is so dry I’m tempted to grab my daughter’s sippy cup. I pop open a can of Sprite Zero and gulp it as if I just traveled across the Sahara. My wife noticing my pacing begins to see on Facebook what the whole commotion is about. One of her girlfriends whose husband, also a die-hard, tells her he’s “about to pop a blood vessel”. I totally relate. As a child I can remember my dad introducing me to the legend of Jimmy Qualls and how he became as important a figure in Mets history as anyone. I remember the exacerbated look on his face as he described every close call, every what if and could have been the Mets had over the years. My dad’s explanations of the Mets failure to accomplish a no-hitter, instilled in me a true appreciation of what success really is. And damn it made me wish for it even more so.

I had the extraordinary luck to have attended Tom Glavine’s one-hitter against the Colorado Rockies at Shea on May 23^rd 2004. I also attended Jon Niese’s one-hitter against the San Diego Padres at Citi on June 10^th 2010. While I may not get to many games it seems I’m fortunate to see the special ones. And even though I wasn’t physically at last night’s game, I can say as most fans probably can today, that I felt I was there in spirit. I remember the electricity in the air at the Glavine and Niese games; it was absolutely palpable. I can’t even imagine what it must have felt like being there last night. As fans we tend to put the game into a different perspective than those who play the game. We live and die with each pitch. Yet with every cut to the dugout, the SNY camera’s showed the emotion on the player’s faces. This was no ordinary game. Last night was so very different even for them.

Yes Beltran’s line drive in the 6^th should have been a double. Not tonight though. Tonight was our night and Yul Brenner himself could have been heard saying from the grave, “So it was written, so it shall be done.” Mike Baxter, the local boy who made good, the Whitestone Kid, cemented his name in the annals of Mets history alongside Johan Santana when in the 7^th inning he sacrificed his body, slamming into the left field wall robbing Yadier Molina with what would have been another notch in his Met killer belt. Not tonight Yadier Molina. Not tonight. The 8^th inning comes and goes. It’s as real as it’s ever been. I’m in uncharted territory, a stranger in a strange land. The tension is unlike anything I’ve ever felt with this team.

Finally the 9^th inning arrives and I’m sweating as if I just ran wind sprints in the 90 degree August weather of Port St. Lucie. My hands are pressed to my face, praying. I know it’s silly, why would God care about such things. However to me, he did last night and I wasn’t taking any chances if he didn’t. The first out, a liner to Torres in center and I’m thinking, “This can’t really be happening, is it?” My daughter starts to hop on and off the couch and is reminding me that she wants to watch Bubble Guppies. Not tonight my baby. Not tonight.

The second out, a sinking liner to left. Shortstop Omar Quintanilla and left fielder Kirk Nieuwenhuis nearly collide. Did the Baseball Gods have one last goof left for us after all? Even my daughter stopped jumping up and down. It was as surreal a moment as I ever experienced. Nieuwenhuis dodges disaster and makes the catch. We exhale slowly and I looked down and saw my daughter, smiled and reveled in the possibility that one day I’ll tell her about the history we experienced together.

Santana was approaching 130 pitches, well above the 110 range Terry Collin’s had originally planned. Considering the road he has been down the past two years it makes what’s happening even more unexplainable and amazing. Having fully recovered from shoulder capsule surgery, I admit I was one of a few who thought the days of Johan Santana pitching for any team were over. I’m thrilled to feast on this massive slice of humble pie. If there was anyone who could make a comeback from such a devastating injury for a pitcher, it’s Johan Santana. Silly me.

David Freese, last year’s World Series Most Valuable Player and a St. Louis native, steps to the plate. I can’t believe the Mets are one out away from a date with history. Santana falls behind in the count immediately. We’re exhausted. I mean he’s exhausted. I can’t imagine what must be going through his mind at this point. I’m pacing, mumbling, totally in a zone of my own making at this point. The count is now full. He can’t go on much longer and Molina is coming up. I yell at the screen, “YOU get him out now dammit!” Santana musters his very last ounce of guile. My eyes are so welled with tears I can barely make out the picture in front of me. I can hear Gary Cohen’s voice and barely make out the pitch. Changeup. Low. Freese swings and misses!

Time comes to a standstill as I was standing, hands clutching my face praying and at that moment, sobbing with tears pouring down my face. There were so many images of my father and I talking about the Mets overwhelming me even as I write this. It was as if a video montage of my life were playing before my mind’s eye. I so wish he were here to see this finally happen. Perhaps he was. Is this how it’s supposed to feel? For one brief moment, all the pain all the trials, both literally and figuratively that we as Mets fans have endured the last few years, were exorcised by the performance of Johan Santana. Whatever happens from this point on, whatever road we take as fans with this team of ours, Johan Santana will forever hold a special if not the most special place in all Mets fans hearts. Today I feel so, young.

Taryn Cooper Joins Team McGraw In The 2012 ING New York City Marathon Honoring Gary Carter

2012-05-24T10:20:00.000-04:00

Sometimes it can be incredibly insidious; a stalking relentless beast that methodically operates on a timetable of its own choosing. It has no regard to your wishes, desires or your plans. You’re a number to it at best. You go about your life indifferent to your own mortality – at least if you’re under 30 you do. Ultimately, you have no real control over it. Sure you can try to do the obvious. Eat well. Exercise. Don’t smoke. Don’t drink. But really that’s advice for just about anyone who’s trying to maintain a healthy lifestyle. However, it’s a far cry from being a panacea. Hell it’s a far cry from being a foolproof model for prevention. For this predator, in spite of all of our 21^st century medical advances, still has an unmovable vice grip on humanity. James Rodgers, if he were here would agree. Who’s James Rodgers? He is and was my wife’s Uncle and last week Uncle Jimmy was laid to rest after battling cancer for two years until it finally metastasized to his brain. He was 60 years old, still married to his high school sweetheart with whom he had three daughters.

It’s not the first time Cancer has taken a member of my family. My Grandfather battled with bladder Cancer and fought almost two years on hospice until he could fight no longer. It ravaged a man who in his prime could walk entire New York boroughs barely breaking a sweat. It took my wife’s mother, Arlene Rodgers, just a few years ago, she was only 54. It’s taken the young, the elderly, the poor and the wealthy affording zero prejudice along the way. Of all the medical advances we’ve made as a species, it kills me to think that we’re able to re-grow hair for balding men, lengthen women’s eyelashes with a cream, reverse the signs of aging using Botulism shots in the face and let’s not forget what that little blue pill can do for men.

However when it comes to Cancer, we’ve barely scratched the surface on discovering a cure. Hasn’t it’s time come, no? And only through research – painstaking and ultimately expensive research, will that day come when we can stop blindly shooting arrows at this cagy beast. That’s one of the reasons when my fellow blogger at Metsmerizedonline, Taryn Cooper, also the driving force behind A Gal For All Seasons, approached me with writing this, I couldn’t help but feel both honored and proud of what she’s doing.

This coming November, as it has since it’s humble beginning in 1970 when a mere 127 runners paid a $1 entry fee, Taryn will be running in the ING New York City Marathon as a member of Team McGraw which benefits the Tug McGraw Foundation. The Foundation seeks to improve the quality of life for children and adults affected by neurological conditions such as brain tumors, post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury. As a part of Team McGraw, Coop is raising funds to support in this effort. I’m not the only one to feel a sense of pride with what Taryn is doing. I think her husband, Ed Leyro, sums it up best:

Think of how proud Mets fans are of the 1969 and 1986 World Championship teams. That level of pride doesn't even come close to what I feel for Taryn. I have difficulty running around the block without complaining. She's going to run around the entire city of New York! And she's doing it for a fantastic cause. It's impossible not to gush with pride when I think about her selfless act.

Brimming with pride for what Taryn is undertaking, the Leyro family are no strangers to the harsh reality that Cancer is as Ed told me:

Cancer has hit very close to home in my family. My mother is a two-time cancer survivor. She was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1979 and colon cancer in 1990. I'm happy to report that the year is now 2012, and my mother is still with us and cancer-free! Without all the money raised for cancer research over the years, I might not have been able to enjoy all these years with my mother.

It’s sobering when you think of it that according to the American Cancer Society one out of every two men will have some form of Cancer in their lifetime and one out of every three women will as well. Think of that next time you’re at work or with your friends and family. Cancer, if anything, is such a harsh reminder of our mortality. I asked Taryn what drove her to attempt this incredible mental and physical challenge:

The NYC Marathon has been on my "bucket list" of things to do since I was probably a teenager. I just thought the event was something larger than myself, and I wanted to be part of it. The interest has waned over the years simply because the magnitude of running 26.2 miles just seemed too unrealistic. Until a few things changed. I live a few blocks from the finish line of the marathon, and every year on marathon Sunday, I see all the finishers walking through my neighborhood. And every year, I wonder if I'll do it myself.
My friend Sharon Chapman ran the marathon in 2010, and she was the one who suggested that instead of relying on the lottery to enter the marathon, that I run for charity. Her charity was the Tug McGraw Foundation, which raises funds to assist in quality of life issues for brain cancer survivors and those living with neurological disorders.

To a Mets fan, the very concept of "Ya Gotta Believe" hits home and this was something Tug McGraw believed in until his untimely death, due to brain cancer. It made perfect sense, especially since my hero, Gary Carter, died of the affliction early this year. My friend Kara is also running the marathon for Team McGraw in honor of some family members who had brain cancer, and her father who suffers from a seizure disorder. Team McGraw just made sense for me. If I can run 26.2 miles, and bring awareness to a charity that does great work, then my job is pretty easy!

Those of you who know me know that I rarely if ever ask you to do something. I would never tell you who to vote for or what to believe, for I personally believe that those ideas HAVE to come to you on your own. YOU have to do the legwork for that, especially if it’s ever going to have some greater meaning for you. This is one of those rare times when I ask all of you to imagine if every reader pledged a dollar to Taryn in the New York City Marathon – just a dollar. The hundreds of thousands of dollars would be mind blowing and the good works that the Tug McGraw Foundation provides would be greatly effected and enhanced. Taryn’s goal is to get to $3000 and so far she’s already raised more than half of that. I say why stop there. You Gotta Believe anything is possible.

Please support Taryn and the Tug McGraw Foundation by heading here to donate

http://www.active.com/donate/teammcgrawnyc2012/NYCM12TCooper

The Tug McGraw Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, tax-exempt organization designated by the Internal Revenue Code. Their tax identification number is 20-0586256.

Summer Movie Review - The Avengers

2012-05-05T09:05:00.000-04:00

The year was 1975. Yours truly was still in diapers here. Gerald Ford replaced the disgraced Richard Nixon as President of the United States. Disco was in its prime. And a young director by the name of Steven Spielberg forever changed the film industry and ushered in what we’ve come to know as the summer movie blockbuster when his film Jaws premiered June 20^th, eventually earning over 2 billion dollars (inflation adjusted) worldwide.

Everything from the iconic Star Wars to the utter failure of Waterworld, Hollywood saves its best and occasionally its worst and definitely their most expensive productions for the summer release. With the kids out of school, it’s hard to question that strategy; in fact, this summer can easily be considered one of the most anticipated in recent time.

Over the next few months audiences will be glued to their seats as Ridley Scott returns to the Alien franchise when his film Prometheus debuts on June 8^th. The Fourth of July weekend will mark the big screen return of Peter Parker as Sony Pictures somehow deemed it necessary to reboot The Amazing Spider-Man. Christopher Nolan will complete his Batman trilogy on July 20^th with the release of The Dark Knight Rises. And Marvel studios, after four years of preparing audiences with films such as Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Thor and Captain America, assigned writer/director Joss Whedon with the daunting task of assembling those main characters for The Avengers which hits theaters this weekend.

Let me be clear, this movie will summon the uber-geek out of anyone, including the most starched buttoned down personalities. There was a time when Marvel really didn’t have all these ships in line but they’ve seriously moved on from that. Whedon is a self-described fanboy who knows what he wants to achieve with these characters. He totally understands the archetypes these characters represent and more importantly, he knows how to build upon them. It’s definitely a great time to be comic geek as the visual technology has finally caught up to the imagination, making the ruminations of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby that much more of a reality.

Admittedly I was always more of a DC fan than Marvel. DC being the home of Superman, Batman and the Justice League were always viewed as having the more fanciful of characters whilst Marvel was lauded for being far more rooted in reality, having main characters with more relatable flaws. One thing is certain, Marvel has been able to translate their vision onto the big screen with much greater success than anything DC has done so far even with the success of Nolan’s Batman films. Ironically the Marvel vision hasn’t taken on the same dark tones as seen with Nolan’s Batman films, go figure.

The Avengers is visually stunning, and that’s without seeing it in 3D, sorry I’m not a fan of that medium. It begins on another planet where Loki and an unknown ally of his (you’ll find out later if you stay after the credits) are discussing enslaving Earth – yes I know shocking. If you’re going to enjoy these films you have to suspend disbelief at least for 2 hours. From there the team begins to assemble with each main character given their just-due screen time.

At times it seems the script could have been tightened in the first Act, especially with the sub-plots each of the characters brings to the film. Let’s face it; Scarlett Johannson’s Black Widow is visual eye candy here but Whedon does his best to give her character some justice. Unfortunately I thought the various sub plots took away from the main conflict of the story which by the end of the second half kicks into high gear.

Whedon captures actions scenes in a way that should make Michael Bay green with Hulk envy. Once the film hits its stride at about an hour in, prepare to envision Michael Bay peeing himself from both joy and utter shame as Joss Whedon flicks on the badass switch with Samuel L. Jackson-esque directorial swagger. He’s able to do what Bay never seem to be able to do, which is to make you give a rat’s ass about his characters while creating visually jaw dropping action scenes. Whedon brings his personal style of dialogue, which if you were ever a fan of Buffy, was witty bordering on smartass, a style I happen to love as it brings a real texture to these larger than life characters. Sometimes it did get too convoluted and Banner's at times did seem a bit forced, as if he was shocked to be there. Umm hello.

You’ll find Robert Downey Jr’s lines absolutely spot on. Tony Stark is the antithesis to Chris Evans’ Captain America, who’s lines border on becoming too earnest. But Joss Whedon makes it work. Loki played by Tom Hiddleston, is just slimy enough without becoming a caricature. You'll love how he meets his fate towards the end of the film and who brings it to him. That was a gem. And even though technically he appears in the 3^rd Act when it all hits the fan, you will be shocked to know which character steals this movie in a – hint - smashing way. All I can say is, Ed Norton you silly silly man you. What were you thinking?

Overall it’s hard not to enjoy this film. It delivers on what Marvel Studios has had in mind over the span of over 4 movies and then some. Hopefully the executives at DC are taking detailed notes on this and perhaps over the next few years we’ll be seeing the same treatment given to their franchise stars as well. Man of Steel, the latest Superman reboot from 300 director Zack Snyder, is due to hit theaters next summer.

My few nit picking problems with the film were the inclusion of Loki’s army called the Chitauri. Basically they were to the Avengers as what the Droid armies in the Star Wars prequels were. Slightly annoying, undefined, and purposeless other than for something for the heroes to beat the ever-loving snot out of, these CGI creatures did little other than that. It would have been nice to know what their motivation was. But it’s a minor flaw in the grand scheme of things.

Overall, The Avengers delivers on what a blockbuster summer action movie should be hands down. I’ll try not to skip in the parking lot on the way back to the car. Bad enough my wife is pretending she doesn’t know me tonight.

The Sector gives The Avengers 3 out of 4 stars.

When You Bedazzle A Fish

2012-04-26T22:15:00.003-04:00

Purdy. Ain't it?

Some of you may find this odd but I’ve always had a special fondness for the Florida Marlins. I remember their inaugural year of 1993 as if it were yesterday, partly because I lived in Florida at the time and was caught up in the fanfare of finally having a Major League Baseball team in my backyard. Partly because it was the year my father passed away. In fact we had planned on going to a few games that year, driving down to Miami which was just a few hours from where we lived in Orlando. He had planned it to be part of my high school graduation gift. Dad and I never did get to see the Marlins together as he passed away that March, just over a week into Spring Training.

I remember his excitement that we would finally be seeing a meaningful Mets game nearby. One that wasn’t some meaningless match up in March, with players who had jersey numbers straight out of the NFL. It was a moment that we shared that 19 years later I have never forgotten or wanted to, that is until I saw the monstrosity that Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria had assembled this past off-season in south Florida.

Donned in their new tropical rainbow Skittled colored uniforms with hues of blue, red, orange, green and yellow and black are the new Marlins. Even Ozzie Guillen, their loose lipped manager, implied on the current season of The Franchise which airs on Showtime, that the new uniforms looked terrible. I swear if you look at those new uniforms long enough, they could trigger seizures, especially in small children and the elderly. On their opening day of the new stadium in Miami, the players were escorted onto the field by Brazilian showgirls. I kid you not. It was the most ridiculous thing I’ve even seen done by a Major League Baseball team. I was waiting for Rip Taylor to jump out of the dugout and start tossing confetti at everyone. They even carted out former Heavyweight Boxing Champion Muhammad Ali to “throw” out the first pitch. Yeah, you can’t make this stuff up.

Loria this past off-season went on a spending spree, with guaranteed contracts given to Jose Reyes, Heath Bell, and Mark Buehrle totaling over $191 million dollars. The last time the Marlins doled out that much cash, they won the World Series and like the great owner Loria is, he rewarded his Florida fan base by selling off his expensive players as if he were trafficking human body parts on the black market. I shouldn’t be so hard on Loria; Wayne Huizenga did the very same thing in 1997 when he owned the Marlins who also ironically won the World Series that year. Those fickle Floridians; incidentally 57% of that original fanbase has passed away since then leaving time shares in Boca available.

But that was then. Now Loria can boast his new tacky stadium with its fish tank backstop. Again I kid you not. And the piece de resistance, the sculpture…thing that was built in left center. Designed by artist Red Grooms, this pyramid eyesore twirls and whirls pastel colored Marlins in a circular motion each time Jose Reyes flashes a smile or when the team hits a homerun. Somewhere Abner Doubleday is flipping in his grave.

You mean I MAY not be here for my ENTIRE contract?

Look I get that the Marlins are a south Florida team, I’m not geographically challenged. In fact when they debuted in 1993, and introduced the color teal to MLB, it was followed by many hems and haws from old school types. I thought it was a fitting color considering the locale. But with this new incarnation of the Marlins, it seems they’ve adopted more of the South Beach club persona than anything else. And speaking as a Met fan, as much as it was enjoyable to watch Jose Reyes play, let’s not try to make him out to be more than what he was. He personified the fast, exciting, and energetic player but honestly not the smartest one ever to put on the uniform. It seems quite appropriate for Reyes to have been lured into the shallow lifestyle that is South Beach. Not that the Mets actually made him a real offer, but that’s an argument for another day. The good thing though for Reyes, he’ll never know just how big of a mistake he made leaving New York until he hangs up his cleats and finds out that in Miami, he’s just a really small fish in a huge pond. Probably by then he’ll be touring with Pit Bull.

Baseball just ain’t what it used to be. Dad, you’re not missing anything although the Mets did sweep the Marlins in Reyes’ return to New York. Gotta love the silver or teal or yellow or red or black lining.

Honor Thy Mets Family First

2012-04-12T17:33:00.002-04:00

I’m old enough to recall when Chipper Jones was considered the Bryce Harper of his day. I remember seeing him on the cover of his first Beckett, an action shot of Jones turning a double play- he was a shortstop back then. Like most players from 1985 on, I had a cornucopia of his rookie cards. He was as hot of a commodity as a share of Google stock right before it went public. At the time I lived in Orlando, Florida and we didn’t have access to WWOR, the then flagship television station of the New York Mets. Satellite TV was somewhat in its infancy, not that we could have ever afforded such a luxury back then or the inclination to make the backyard look like the Arecibo listening post in Puerto Rico.

So I was essentially a Met fan living in the south and the only television channel that showed baseball was TBS, home of the Atlanta Braves. That might explain why I didn’t get deep into baseball again until around 1985. Sure we watched the Mets as they ventured to Fulton County stadium to take on Dale Murphy but it just wasn’t the same. The Braves were just plain horrible to watch. From the muted bluish hue of their uniforms to the laughable lack of talent on the field, we really watched just to see the opposing team. Of course as years went on, the Mets became synonymous not just as the team in New York but the nation; in spite of the annoying moniker the Braves self anointed themselves with as “America’s Team”.

But I admit as time went on, and as we were still without a way to follow the Mets, I did learn to appreciate what good baseball was, especially good pitching. As a Baseball fan I found myself fortunate enough to have seen the likes of Tom Glavine and John Smoltz in their early years before they earned their eventual places in Cooperstown. I remember my father telling me that Glavine would be a star one-day even though he was absolutely terrible at first. As the years progressed the Braves were finally piecing together a team that would eventually earn their franchise 14 consecutive division titles and my personal ire as a Met fan. When one of those pieces came along - one Larry Wayne “Chipper” Jones Jr. – I realized that as a Met fan, with a team that was in the midst of the Jeff Torborg era…that we were in trouble.

While the Mets seemed obsessed with winning the back pages of the New York Post and the Daily News during that time, the Atlanta Braves were biding theirs, and collecting minor league talent along the way. Chipper Jones to any Met fan old enough to know is what Kryptonite is to Superman; as if we could actually try to compare the Mets of the late nineties to the iconic superhero. Over the span of his career Jones has hit 48 home runs off Met pitching and has driven in 154 runs. It’s the kind of domination that the eventual Hall-of-Famer will forever be remembered in Met history, for better or worse as it seems the team has decided to “acknowledge” his career sometime during the 2012 season, which is going to be Chipper Jones’ last.

Look I get it. As a fan of the game, Jones is one of the greatest and deserves to be inducted one day into the Hall. As a Met fan, who has also witnessed his rise from phenom to Met-sassin, I prefer the team not take part in some elaborate, on-field ceremony to honor a guy who routinely beat the ever-loving crap out of this team. Do I blame HIM for the way the Mets were run as a franchise during Chipper’s rise, absolutely not. In many ways I look at Jones and the success the Braves have had and realize that if the Mets had the proper leadership in the front office and an ownership that wasn’t hell bent on trying to keep up with the headline grabbing Yankees, then Met fans would be the ones doing the gloating right now with one of their homegrown, retiring stars being honored by the Atlanta Braves. But things didn’t pan out quite that way at least not during that span of Met history.

I don’t hate Chipper Jones as some fans are probably going to affirm with blind affinity to the Mets. I just don’t think it’s proper for the Mets to honor him other than with a quick montage, BETWEEN INNINGS, during a game at Citifield. For a team that has yet to retire Gary Carter’s or Keith Hernandez’ or even Mike Piazza’s number, it’s inexcusable to give Chipper Jones anything other than an acknowledgment. But lets face it; this is the same team that took three years to get Citifield finally up to standards. Everything from the overemphasis on the Brooklyn Dodgers (Jackie Robinson specifically) to the lack of an area that honored the METS team history (now represented by the Mets Hall Of Fame in the lower concourse). These were major oversights that fans have been very vocal about over the last three years, and rightfully so. I just hope the organization does the right thing here. Charity isn’t the only thing that begins at home. So does showing respect for your family first.