300 (2007) * 1/2

Directed by:  Zack Snyder

Starring:  Gerard Butler, Lena Headey


300 is a video game masquerading as a movie.     300 Spartans defend their homeland from invading Persians.    The Spartans have to know this is a death sentence because there is no way to hold off that many Persians, but that doesn't stop their leader King Leonidas (Butler) from giving loud pep talks to his crew.    Somehow they believe they are nobly facing death.    To me, they're suicidal. 

But since everything in the movie is CGI, including the muscles on the Spartans, the battles are very, very bloody and little is gained.    Nothing looks realistic and the tone of the movie is depressing.   The Spartans kill a group of invaders and then, like a video game, another group is brought in to take their place.    Soon enough, the Spartans may be fortunate enough to kill enough Persians to battle Xerxes, the Persian ruler who sits on a throne atop a very long staircase.     If you kill him, the game, er, movie is over.     Or of course, if the Spartans are wiped out, the game, er, movie is over also.    Getting to that point, however, is a joyless enterprise.

There is really no one in this movie to root for.   The Spartans are loud, mean, arrogant guys who fight with their children to toughen them up.    The Persians are nameless, faceless drones who are there to be killed.    There is even a hunchback who wants to fight with the Spartans, but is rejected by Leonidas.    I don't get the King's thinking here.    What does one more body hurt, especially when facing the odds they were?    The hunchback reminded me of Gollum from The Lord Of The Rings movies.    Even the Queen of Sparta (Headey) is vicious.   Maybe the King should've taken her along too.   She seemed able to handle herself.

There is nothing inspiring, hopeful, or fun about 300.    There are gallons of blood spilled in the battle scenes and after a while, the killings become numbing.    I'm guessing the filmmakers wanted the film to be a rousing action thriller in which the undermanned good guys fight with all of their might against the big, bad Persians.     But since the Persians aren't presented in any light other than as targets to be slaughtered and the Spartans are hardly sympathetic, we're left with a blood-soaked slog of a movie.     It's sad that so many had to die ugly just so 300 could finally be over and we could all move on. 





  

The Oscars In Memoriam Segment

The day after the Oscar ceremony, three things will happen.   One, reviews of the show harshly criticizing either its length or its host.    Two, a review of the red carpet fashion hits and misses.   Three, the show producers will have to explain why many notable performers were left off the In Memoriam tribute montage.   

This year, it's especially puzzling.    Andy Griffith and Larry Hagman were two very noteworthy actors who died and yet were not in the montage.    However, there were no shortage of public relations gurus, agents, and other Hollywood folks no one has ever heard of.     Surely, there could have been some room for Griffith and Hagman somewhere.

I would think the show's staff can get its hands on a list of celebrities and show-biz types who died in the last year.    I  also think they would realize that Andy Griffith's body of work in film would merit an inclusion on the list.    Next year, they need to do it right and keep household names in the montage.    This way, we don't have to hear an Academy spokesperson come up with a lame excuse as to why certain actors were left off the list.

One more thing.    Instead of having the Oscar host joke about the show's length,   (Some of those were very funny by the way), cut down the length of the show.    I know this will never happen, but still...

A Good Day To Die Hard (2013) * 1/2

Directed by:  John Moore

Starring:  Bruce Willis, Jai Courtney

It's official.   John McClane is no longer a flesh and blood man caught up in situations where he has to waste bad guys.    He is now a cartoon character who is seemingly indestructible.    I'm not even sure that he even bleeds in A Good Day To Die Hard.    It seems that McClane can fall from great heights and even through panes of glass without getting a scratch on him.     It's as if the filmmakers didn't bother to make McClane human, but instead like the T-1000 in Terminator 2.    He'll take a licking and keep on ticking.

A Good Day To Die Hard is the fifth in the series and now it appears the series has lost its legs.    There's plenty of action in the film, but it's by rote and without much energy.    The plot is incomprehensible.  It isn't made very clear what the bad guy plans to do with all of that uranium he stored in the ruins of Chernobyl.   Make weapons I assume, but with all of the helicopters and equipment needed to move the stuff, the whole enterprise becomes an example of the law of diminishing returns.    

As the film opens, John McClane is visiting his estranged son Jack, who he finds out is in Russia through expert detective work, I suppose.    However, McClane's detective work doesn't reveal that his son is a CIA spy who is rescuing an imprisoned Russian scientist.    Everyone wants "the file" from the scientist and it is not revealed what exactly is on this file.    Considering the amount of trouble Jack and John go through to keep the scientist from getting killed, including causing a 50-car collision on a Moscow freeway, it would be nice of him to let us all in on the file's contents.  

Throughout all of this, Jack calls his father "John", except when he first sees him he says, "Dad?"  That is for the viewers who haven't guessed that Jack is John's son.    Jack is a resentful man who believes his father was never there for him.     Didn't he hear about any of the goings-on in the first four Die Hards?   Maybe not.    The old man singlehandedly thwarted a high-profile robbery, stopped rogue US Army soldiers by blowing up a plane, rescued the nation's gold supply, and prevented a madman from shutting down the US infrastructure.    Considering he did all of that, I'm amazed he can go anywhere in the world without being recognized.    Captain Sully landed a plane safely and he can barely stand up straight because of the weight of all the medals he received.     You would think Jack would want to cut his old man a little slack.  

There are enough breaks in the action so father and son can work out their differences and become an expert killing team.    They destroy half of Moscow before heading on to Chernobyl.   Yes, that Chernobyl.   I can't recall exactly how they figured out the baddies were hiding their uranium there.   At that point I think I was texting somebody or went to the rest room.  

The final showdown is ludicrous, even by cartoonish action film standards.    Plenty of things are blown up and shrapnel and glass fly everywhere, but none of it hits anybody.    With all of the explosions and gunfire, it's amazing that no one nearby calls the police.     John and Jack destroy the villains and apparently get out undetected.    You would think the Russian government would want to have a chat with them first.    After all, the Moscow freeway was still in ruins.  

The 85th Oscars: A Look Back

This is the strangest year I've seen in a while for the Oscars.    Ben Affleck inexplicably wasn't nominated for Best Director and for the first time in 23 years, a movie wins Best Picture without an accompanying director nomination.    The victory totals for the winners were spread around too.   Life Of Pi led the way with 4 Oscars including a surprise win for its director Ang Lee.   I thought for sure Steven Spielberg was going to win with Affleck out of the way.    In the major categories, I went 4 for 8 and I predicted 9 categories right out of a possible 23.   I really need to get back to the drawing board.  

Here are some highlights and lowlights from last night's telecast.

*  Seth MacFarlane did a pretty good job.    It was fun to see William Shatner as Captain Kirk, but the segment ran too long.    There were three bad dance numbers which slowed things up.    Nonetheless, MacFarlane's self-deprecating delivery was fun to watch and the jokes were certainly edgier than in years past.   I especially liked the line, "The only actor who could get inside Lincoln's head was John Wilkes Booth."  When the crowd groaned, he came back with, "150 years later, is it still too soon for that joke?"    Some of the pre-taped skits were hit and miss.  

*  The audience was standing-ovation happy last night.    Standing O's for Shirley Bassey, Jennifer Hudson, Barbra Streisand, Ben Affleck & crew, Ang Lee, Jennifer Lawrence (only after she tripped walking up to accept her Best Actress award), the cast of Les Miserables, the Governor's Awards winners, and I'm sure I missed one.    Hudson and Bassey were dreadful by the way and their standing ovations baffled me.

*  The theme of the night was "Music In Film", which gave the producers the excuse to extend the show's running time with numerous musical numbers including the Best Original Song nominees.   There was a celebration of "the last decade of movie musicals", which included songs from Chicago, Dreamgirls, and Les Miserables.    Aside from High School Musical, these were the only three musicals I can remember from the past decade.    I guess Tenacious D: The Pick Of Destiny didn't qualify, thank goodness.     Although I liked Chicago, is it necessary that we commemorate the 10th anniversary of its Best Picture win? 

*  The Grammys present certain awards before the telecast that wouldn't really interest viewers, like Best Kazoo Recording and Best Ska Album.   The Oscars should do the same with many of the technical awards and short subject stuff.    As far as I know, the show isn't contractually obligated to run 3 1/2 hours, so why have these awards?   I admire the craftsmanship involved by all of the filmmakers, but their long speeches gum up the proceedings.   It takes them five minutes to walk to the stage, there are usually a group of winners, and each has to thank everyone associated with the film.   

*   Thank goodness the Best Actor and Best Actress Oscar presentations just showed clips and announcement of the winner.    For the past four years, each nominee was lavished with praise by the presenter, a fellow actor, or both.   We know the Academy liked the performances, that's why they were nominated!


*  Just what we needed at the end of a long evening, a speech by First Lady Michelle Obama from the White House about how great Hollywood is before presentation of Best Picture.    I'm sure by this time the audience was eyeing up the exits.   

*  Between Jennifer Lawrence tripping over her gown and Meryl Streep having to tug at hers to keep from stepping on it, isn't it time the ladies do away with the long gowns?    Jennifer Lawrence also had a dress mishap at the SAG awards in which she tore her dress walking up to accept the award.    She should get hazard pay for accepting awards.    I'm beginning to wonder how much of her performance in Silver Linings Playbook was actual acting.

*  I'm wondering if Quentin Tarantino's Original Screenplay win wasn't more of a lifetime achievement award.    He won previously for Pulp Fiction nearly 20 years ago, but I felt Django Unchained was a weak effort.    

*  I enjoyed the Jaws theme that was played by the orchestra to play off winners who went too long with their speeches.    Inspired.

*   Enough, enough, enough of the "witty banter" between co-presenters.    We're trying to blow through the categories no one cares about like Live Action Short Film or Sound Editing and the presenters are delivering uneasy jokes at one another.   This usually draws polite chuckles at best.   Add the time wasted with presenter dialogue and it's no wonder why the show runs long.

*   It seems no matter what critical reviews say the day after the awards show, next year's producers will continue to add extraneous nonsense and make the show run way longer than it should.    Oscar telecast producers have a very short memory.   This is a show that could easily wrap up in 2 1/2 hours but before you know it it's midnight and Best Picture hasn't been announced yet.    There's no point in discussing this because it won't change. 

Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence In The House Of God (2012) * * * *

Directed by:  Alex Gibney

The documentary Mea Maxima Culpa begins with a crawl that the first public complaint against a priest for sexual abuse came in Milwaukee in 1972.    Lawrence Murphy, the head of St. John's School For the Deaf, was accused by several deaf male students of sexual abuse.    These initial allegations wouldn't be the last for Murphy or of course the Catholic Church.    Mea Maxima Culpa documents the Church's complicity in covering up abuse by priests at the highest level.    Since the 19th Century, the Vatican's policy on abuse is secrecy and moving the offending priests from parish to parish in hopes it would go away.    It is a sad, moving, and terrifying film.    If you're a believer in Hell, you couldn't imagine Hell being much worse than what these victims endured.

How did the abuse become so rampant in the church?   Why did the church protect abusive priests instead of excommunicating them and turning them over to the police?    It appears that getting rid of such priests would negatively affect the church's coffers.    Murphy himself was considered a superior fund raiser and was only removed to be given "administrative duties" within the church.    He had access to children until his death and he was buried in his priestly robes, which outraged the victims who knew him as a monster.    He even had the gall to write a letter to Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) asking not to be defrocked because he "repented his past sins."   This wish was apparently granted. 

There have been documented cases of abuse for over 1000 years and there is little doubt the Vatican knows about many, if not all, of the cases.    Current (and soon to be former) Pope Benedict XVI oversaw every sex abuse case since the mid-1990s.    To assume that former Popes before Benedict weren't aware of the abuse would be naive thinking.    It's telling that a French priest who brought in millions fund raising was a close confidant of Pope John Paul II was protected, even though he not only abused children, but had a family of his own.   The film also focuses on an Irish priest who was famous for doing Elvis Presley impersonations, but also left Irish parishes in chaos after being arrested for child abuse.  

The primary emotions I felt watching Mea Maxima Culpa were outrage and sadness.   Outrage that the church showed such little compassion for the victims and sad that the victims had to fight for years to have their voices heard.    Much of the focus is on the deaf men who were boys when Father Murphy began his abuse.    Murphy developed a system in which he would abuse boys whose parents didn't know sign language and thus it would be more difficult for the child to convey what happened.    He even enlisted older boys to round up victims for him.    He was by all accounts a despicable man who wasn't the least bit repentant.     In a chilling part which moved me to tears, two of the men confronted the retired and ailing Father Murphy at his Wisconsin home screaming at him with every bit of energy and communicative ability about his abuse.    "Go to prison now" they yelled.    The odd ending to this videotaped saga was Father Murphy's maid yelling at the men, "Aren't you Catholic?", as if these men weren't good Catholics because they sought to confront the man who abused them.   

I believe the reason the abuse went so rampant in the Catholic Church was twofold.    One, the church didn't want to disrupt the money flowing in.   Two, priests themselves were elevated to nearly Godlike status for many years and accusing a priest of wrongdoing was like accusing Jesus himself of that wrongdoing.     Victims tried for many years to gain justice through the legal system only to have the statute of limitations run out on them.    Soon after, the Vatican forked over billions in lawsuits to the abused men and their families.     According to one of the victims, money was the only way left to hold the priests and church accountable for the abuse which shattered their lives.   
Not that it would ever make them whole again. 

 

Identity Thief (2013) * *

Directed by: Seth Gordon

Starring:  Jason Bateman, Melissa McCarthy, Amanda Peet, John Cho

Identity Thief is a road-buddy movie with some of the most absurd plot contrivances I've seen in many a moon.     Basically, three-quarters of it is action slapstick involving chases, nasty car crashes, shootings, blood, and ugly sex.   There also is a bit of schmaltz courtesy of Melissa McCarthy's Diana, who gives a tearful speech about her rotten childhood and how it led to her career choice as a criminal.    Jason Bateman's Sandy sits across from her with the there-there eyes which absolve her of her sins, which include stealing Sandy's identity and putting his credit, job, and future in jeopardy.    But hey, she had a rough childhood so give her a break.    Please.

As the film opens, Sandy is tricked by Diana, who poses as a fraud consultant, into giving up his social security number, birthdate, etc. which allows her to print phony credit cards and run up tabs in his name that total in the tens of thousands of dollars.    One night while partying in a bar, she is arrested for disturbing the peace.   This leads to trouble for the real Sandy, who has two kids and one on the way and suddenly has insurmountable debt and an arrest record.    Oh, and he lives in Denver while Diana lives in Florida.    When Sandy is accused of being arrested in Florida, the local police are able to produce a mug shot of Diana posing as Sandy, but that's not enough to convince Denver police they have the wrong man.    In a ridiculous sequence which defies logic and likely police procedure, the detective working the case requires Sandy to go to Florida and bring her back to Denver himself so they can trick her into facing the music.   I quote Marge Gunderson in Fargo , "I don't agree 100% with you on your police work there, Lou."   Please.

Identity Thief is so intent on throwing these two together in a cross-country trip that it will bend and twist the plot in ungainly ways to do so, including introducing two local thugs and a creepy bounty hunter to tail them.    I guess Diana's credit cards got a local mobster thrown in jail somehow, but it is not made clear how and why this is.    The thugs and the bounty hunter were unnecessary characters introduced so they could give the filmmakers an excuse to fill up screen time with the aforementioned chases and crashes.   Some of these crashes are brutal too.   One van flips over several times and one of the characters is hit by a speeding car but emerges without a scratch on her.   These scenes made me wince.

And I don't think I'm giving away plot spoilers by revealing that Sandy and Diana, different as they are, will develop a close friendship and when they get to Denver, Sandy has second thoughts about turning in Diana.    Diana then decides to Do The Right Thing and manages to get Sandy off the hook.   I have to mention the numerous scenes in which Diana escapes potential captors by punching them in the throat.    This is done nearly half a dozen times and not one of the times was it funny.   I guess the idea that portly Diana punches people in the neck is supposed to be funny, but it made me recoil instead of laugh. 

Bateman and McCarthy do what they can with the material.    They possess a lot of energy and try hard, but ultimately they just become creatures of a plot that even for a road-buddy movie is ridiculous.    Perhaps if the film developed itself as a satire playing on people's fears of identity theft, it may have worked better.    The theft is just the excuse needed to get these two on the road.   One other question, how exactly did Sandy survive that nasty snakebite in his jugular?    You'll see what I mean if you don't take my advice and see this movie. 

Get Rid Of The Point System In Hockey Already!

My father told me the other day how the Chicago Blackhawks at a record of 6-0-2 were an undefeated team.    I corrected him stating that the Blackhawks had 2 losses but both were in overtime and thus the reason for the third column.    I'm sure he wasn't the only one who was fooled by that.

Before the advent of shootouts, hockey games used to end in ties if neither team scored a goal in overtime.    The point system was used to give a team an attaboy for not losing the game.    The system was as follows:  2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss.     Recently, the shootout was installed to ensure there would be a winner.    Ok, sounds simple enough.   One team wins, the other loses and no more need for a point system since ties were eliminated, right? 

Sadly wrong.    The NHL won't let go of the point system and have figured out a ridiculous way to keep it going.   How?   Well, if a team loses in overtime, that team is awarded one point.   That's right folks.   You are rewarded for losing the game, hence the reason for the Wins, Losses, and Overtime Losses columns in the hockey standings.    Currently, the Flyers have a 6-7-1, or as I see it, 6-8 record.   I fail to see why a team should receive any special recognition for losing a game in overtime or a shootout vs. losing a game in regulation time.    A loss is a loss.  

In baseball, teams losing a game in extra innings aren't awarded 1/2 of a win.   You could say the same for basketball.   A football regular-season game can end in a tie, but it goes down as a tie.   Nothing else.    In the standings, the records read wins and losses and any team not in first place is listed in the Games Behind column.    Why can't hockey adopt that?    It's a possibility, albeit a very, very remote one, that a team could lose all 82 of its games in overtime, have 82 points, and be a contender for a playoff berth.    How bizarre would that be?  

Hockey is unique in many ways without the dopey point system.   It's a sport in which players are allowed to openly fight in front of the referee.   I covered that in an earlier post, but still it's a strange phenomenon.    A spectator gets to see a boxing match every now and then if he goes to the right games.   

Rounders (1998) * * * 1/2

Directed by:  John Dahl

Starring:  Matt Damon, Edward Norton, Gretchen Mol, John Turturro, John Malkovich


Mike McDermott is a smart young man with a love for poker.    No matter how seedy the venues or how much danger is involved, he is looking for the game which will win him enough cash to pay for the World Series of Poker entry fee.     As Rounders opens, Mike is oh-so close to realizing his dream when he loses everything to Russian mobster Teddy KGB (Malkovich) on a hand with dueling full houses.   He then retires from poker at the behest of his girlfriend Jo (Mol) and concentrates on law school.    We all know he won't be appearing in too many courtrooms, especially as his friend Worm (Norton) is released from prison and looking for a card game.

Worm is the friend Mike always felt the need to look out for.    This gets Mike into serious trouble with gangsters as Worm's debts pile up and then he starts trading on Mike's good name.    Worm refuses to play games straight, always looking for an angle or a way to cheat.    In one instance, this gets Mike and Worm beaten by cops who catch on while playing at a local FOP game.     Soon enough, the two are in $15,000 to Teddy KGB and we all know that Mike is headed for another poker showdown with KGB.

Rounders is a smart film which is wise about poker and the seedy underworld Mike and Worm inhabit.    The club KGB operates from is realistically unwelcome and depressing.   Why anyone hangs out there is a mystery, but I guess that's the price one pays for hanging out with the Teddy KGB's of the world.     It's tough not to like the performances, although Mol's is a one-note character.    Her job is to look judgmentally at Mike as he shows up late to mock trials and warn him about getting back into poker.    Damon is intelligent, knowing, and ultimately sucked in one too many times by Worm.   Worm as played by Norton is a slimy loser who knows how to push Mike's buttons and falls back on the belief that Mike will always bail him out.   He senses Mike's pity for him and plays to it without worrying about the danger he puts them in.  

Teddy KGB is played by John Malkovich in hammy fashion with a thick Russian accent.    However, it's a lot of fun watching Malkovich bombastically splash the pot and needle Mike with thinly-veiled insults about his play.    "Ok, meester son-of-bitch, let's play some cards, " says Teddy KGB in said Russian accent and you can't up but smile at Malkovich upping the energy during the final game.    In contrast, Turturro as Joey Knish, a player who grinds out a living playing poker, is cool and plays it close to the vest.   He feels sorry for Mike, but understands all too well that Mike has risked it all and will likely risk it all again. 

The best parts of Rounders involve the poker playing and their intrinsic suspense.    Worm adds to the suspense by trying to cheat to gain the edge, while Mike wants to win straight up.    He believes his skills can match up with anyone's and when he tells Knish about how he played one-on-one with World Champion Johnny Chan, you sense that he is probably right.    He may get to play him again if he survives KGB, which is the likely outcome considering the remote chance that he would lose a second showdown.  

The Usual Suspects (1995) * 1/2

Directed by:  Bryan Singer

Starring:  Gabriel Byrne, Chazz Palmintieri, Kevin Spacey, Stephen Baldwin, Benicio Del Toro, Pete Posthlewaite

After three viewings of this movie, I'm sorry, I just don't get the hoopla.    The film won an Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay and has been lauded as an influential, (dare it be said great), crime film.    Kevin Spacey also won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for this film.    It's stylish I suppose, but the film slogs its way to its now famous trick ending that really wasn't that tricky.   If you haven't seen the film, there will be spoilers here  Although if you haven't seen it in the 18 years since its release, you're not in any hurry and a spoiler won't bug you.

Throughout the film, a detective, Dave Kujan (Palmintieri) is questioning a witness to a heist gone horribly wrong.    There was at attempted heist followed by an explosion on the docks in, I believe, Santa Monica.    The witness is "Verbal" Kint (Spacey) who is the opposite of most people being interrogated; he can't seem to shut up.    He is given to long, meandering testimony that amazingly doesn't cause the detective to zone out.    A lot of praise is due Kujan for his ability to focus much better than I did on Kint's long-winded answers.   

A suspect (or maybe even the ringleader or the person being heisted) is the enigmatic Keyser Soze, who is given almost a mythical stature to those who have heard of him.    He's a scary guy too.   Kint describes a story in which Soze kills mobsters attempting to harm his family.   Soze then kills his family I guess to show that he has no qualms about killing anybody.   It's no wonder Kint doesn't want to get on the wrong side of Soze, even if no one has ever seen him.

There isn't much here I found myself caring about.   There's a bunch of goofy criminals thrown together for a heist that goes spectacularly wrong.    It became apparent to me following the laws of screenplays who Soze must be.    It doesn't take much thinking considering everyone else associated with the crime dies.    All of this is told in flashbacks, so anyone who is actually shocked when Soze's identity is revealed must not have seen that many movies before.   

But when the surprise is revealed, I'm assuming we're seeing Soze.   But is that actually the case?    Or are we just seeing Kint getting over on Kujan and worming his way out of a predicament?    My overall feeling when watching The Usual Suspects comes down to two words:  Yeah?  And? 

  

What's All The Fighting About In Hockey?

I went to the Flyers game vs. Tampa Bay last night.    I watched the game from a corporate suite courtesy of my brother, which was awesome.     I was expecting to pay an arm and a leg for parking, a soda, and a pretzel, but the suite covered food, drink, and parking.    There was waitstaff as well.   Wow!

But that's not the theme of this post.    Early in the game, a fight broke out between a Flyers goon and a Tampa goon.     I wasn't aware there was such animosity between these two teams from different divisions.     The crowd roared like Romans watching gladiators go at it in the Roman Colosseum.    Later on, there was another throwdown between two more goons and the crowd again showed its bloodlust.    The first fight was won the Flyers guy, the second by the Lightning's.    That's a 1-1 tie in fights even though the Flyers won in the only score that ultimately matters:  Goals.

I find it fascinating that, other than boxing, hockey is the only sport which allows its players to fight during a game.    And better yet, the fighters may not necessarily be ejected from the game.   Hockey is a rough enough sport with checks, boarding, knocking players to the ice, having your face rearranged by a stick, and getting hit with a frozen puck.    Fighting is the element which can be controlled and yet the referees stand and watch it go on until one of the players drops to the ice.   At that point, the referee jumps in because they have to responsible for player safety after all.

It's 2013 and hockey fans love to see a fight.    I would think we've evolved more, but as Danny Devito put it in War Of The Roses, "We came from mud and millions of years later, at our core is still mud."    I hear all of the reasons why fighting is "necessary" in hockey:  it gets the team riled up, it gets the fans riled up, it shows who is boss, etc.    Actually I don't find those reasons to be compelling.   I feel the fighting has outlived its usefulness, in case it ever really had any.    In the 70s, when hockey was trying to gain a foothold with the American sports fan, fights and rougher play were much more common.    It made the sport unique, if not necessarily better than football, baseball, or basketball.   


When both fights broke out, I just sat there hoping they would be over soon so we could all get back to watching hockey.     Hockey is an exciting sport and I think fighting detracts from it.    But I'm waging a losing battle here, I know.    I'm waiting for the class action lawsuit from hockey players who suffered long-term effects of concussions blaming the NHL for doing nothing to stop them.    What could be the NHL's defense?   All you need to see is refs standing around watching players duke it out and you will see that the NHL won't have a leg to stand on.    Unless they don't believe that punching and knocking players to the hard ice has any impact on the brain.   Until then, keep on punching. 

The Exorcist (1973) * * * 1/2

Directed by:  William Friedkin

Starring:  Ellen Burstyn, Max von Sydow, Jason Miller, Linda Blair, Lee J. Cobb


The Exorcist is scary in a different sense now than when it was released in 1973.   Back then, there was more shock value in having a 12-year-old girl possessed by the devil shout obscenities, puke up green goo, and rotate her head.    Since then, we've seen plenty of demonic possessions and laffaminit Airplane! like satires based on those, so these images lose their power.    What hasn't lost its power is the sense of hopelessness and dread that The Exorcist inspires.     That fear permeates Ellen Burstyn in nearly every scene she's in.     One day, your daughter is an outgoing, smiling 12-year-old and the next she is chained to a bed because the demon inside her causes violent outbursts and seizures which threaten to tear the girl to pieces.    The green vomit comes later.  

The Exorcist tackles the William Peter Blatty novel in a realistic way.    How exactly does a mother approach the fact that her daughter is now the vessel of a demon?   Her daughter as she knows her no longer exists.    Medical science has no answers and the church is even leery to perform an exorcism because of the danger involved to the priests performing it and the possessed child.     A properly performed exorcism doesn't guarantee anything.    All of the characters here are entering an unknown world.    The priests aren't superheroes who fearlessly save the day, but human beings with their own physical and psychological issues that can be exploited.  

The Exorcist works better as a psychological thriller with wounded characters, especially Miller, who is plagued with guilt over his mother's death and makes him vulnerable to the demon's manipulation.     Von Sydow only appears in the beginning and the climactic exorcism, but he casts a long shadow with his physical presence.    He is the only living priest with experience in these matters, but his first exorcism nearly killed him.    Linda Blair is physically present while chained to the bed, although her voice is dubbed by a sinister sounding male voice,    Still it is disconcerting to see a 12-year-old screaming "Fuck me" with her legs spread and that's the point, even though it's not really "her" saying it.

Does The Exorcist hold up?  For the most part, yes.   I could've done without Lee J. Cobb's movie-loving detective who asks Miller to accompany him to the movies.    His scenes don't add much and in the "director's cut" released in the early 2000's, Cobb has a monologue at the end discussing his favorite movies.   What this has to do with anything I have no clue and this takes away from the chilling final shots accompanied by Tubular Bells on the soundtrack.   

Some Post-Superbowl 47 Thoughts

Final score- Ravens 34, 49ers 31

Before a power outage delay in the third quarter, the Ravens held a 28-6 lead and a blowout was at hand.    However, after play resumed, the Niners came back and made it interesting, although never took the lead or even tied the game.    Ravens QB Joe Flacco wins Superbowl MVP and will get plenty of ka-ching in his new contract.     Ravens LB Ray Lewis retires after 17 seasons amidst controversy over alleged use of peformace-enhancing drugs, but he wins his second Superbowl championship.    Here are some thoughts:

*  A key series came in the final three minutes as the Niners set up 1st and goal from the 5.   4 plays later, they didn't get into the end zone and that sealed the victory for the Ravens.    There has been controversy surrounding a possible illegal contact penalty on 4th down that wasn't called by the referees.    There was contact from both players and even if the penalty was called, the ball would've been set at the 2 1/2 yard line and the Niners would still have to get in to take the lead.   

*  I had more of an issue with the play calling in this situation than anything else.   All of the plays called were passes and didn't utilize the running abilities of RB Frank Gore and QB Colin Kaepernick.   Plus, the Niners burned a timeout which left them with only one, which proved critical as they tried to get the ball back after the Ravens final possession.   To me, games aren't decided by referee calls or non-calls.   The Niners did plenty to put themselves in a hole they couldn't dig out of. 

*  The commercials were awful, even by recent standards.    The commercials have become a sport in themselves, but I haven't found Superbowl commercials to be interesting in many years.   This year's crop won't change my perception.   The worst of the worst was a Dodge RAM ad featuring a voiceover from the late Paul Harvey about farmers.   The ad dragged on endlessly.    Am I the only one to believe that Superbowl commercials' best days are behind them?

*  Beyonce wasn't a whole lot better.    Most of the halftime show was her dancing and maybe singing a verse from a song before moving on to the next one.    I don't find dancing to be nearly as entertaining as a musical act actually singing or playing an instrument, but lately there has been more emphasis on dancing.    I could do without the pyrotechnics too, but it looks like those are here to stay.   At least there wasn't lip-synching...barely.

*  Not a fan of Alicia Keys' Star-Spangled Banner.   Too much vocal exercising.   The song is powerful if you sing it with no frills.   Heaven forbid, though, that someone actually sings it that way anymore.

*  The power outage was an unexpected dynamic.   35 minutes of sitting around and promises by everyone in New Orleans that the power will come back on "within 10 minutes."   I'm sure that someone is going to take the fall for this and lose his job.    Investigations are ongoing, although apparently Beyonce's halftime show has been cleared of blame.  

*  Something I heard today which I found annoying.   On Mike & Mike In The Morning, ESPN reporter Sal Paolantonio discussed a meeting between 49ers coach Jim Harbaugh and his father Jack.   According to Sal, they "stood in a room for 25 minutes."    Dude, the past tense of "stay" is "stayed" not "stood".   Stood is the past tense of stand.    Got that?   

*  Next year's Superbowl will be at Met Life Stadium in North Jersey.   This will be the first time a Superbowl won't be played in a dome or a warm-weather city.    Maybe it will snow, sleet, or there will be an ice storm and the halftime show will be cancelled.    I hear rumors to this effect.   I can dream, can't I?

* I wrote a post about 49ers CB Chris Culliver earlier.   He's the player who made the unenlightened anti-gay comments.   He had a terrible game.   He was burnt on a long touchdown pass and he was flagged for the game's only pass interference penalty.    All in all, he had a terrible week.

Carlito's Way (1993) * * * 1/2

Directed by:  Brian De Palma

Starring:  Al Pacino, Sean Penn, Penelope Ann Miller, John Leguizamo

During a recent read through of my blog, I came across a review of Scarface, a Brian De Palma film with Al Pacino as a criminal.    It's a great film and I mentioned near the end how Carlito's Way could be seen as a companion piece to Scarface.   If Tony Montana lived long enough, he might've turned out like Carlito Brigante.   Either way, a life of crime is a case of high risk and temporary reward filled with regret, loss, and paranoia of losing it all.

Carlito's Way opens in a New York courtroom circa 1975.   Carlito, a crime lord serving a 30-year prison sentence, is being freed after 5 years on a technicality.    Carlito delivers an ecstatic speech about how he is a changed man and will walk the straight and narrow.    No one believes him, especially the district attorney who thinks he will be sent back to prison very soon.     However, Carlito makes it clear that he is through with a life and crime.   He wants to buy a share of a rental car company in the Bahamas and pick up the pieces with the ex-girlfriend Gail (Miller) left behind when he went to prison.    Unfortunately, Carlito's past haunts him at every turn, as does his loyalty to his attorney David Kleinfeld (Penn) who got him out of prison early.    It is this loyalty that gets him trouble with the mob later.  

Pacino as Carlito is streetwise, insightful, and knows all too well how hard it will be to walk away.   Gail also knows this and is hesitant to come along with him in his new life.    She has been down the road too many times with him.    Kleinfeld, played as an oily hustler by Penn, knows Carlito's loyalty and uses it to his advantage; having Carlito partake in schemes both know will end badly.   However, like all tragedies, we see this unfolding and can only shake our heads.     Carlito believes he can escape his old world and start fresh in a new one, but as it has been said, he is through with the past, but the past isn't through with him. 

Looking over De Palma's resume, it is amazing that he is so underrated.    Breaking into the business along with Scorsese, Spielberg, and Coppola, he has been overlooked, but look as the titles to his credit:  Carrie, Dressed To Kill, Blow Out, Scarface, Wise Guys, The Untouchables, Casualties Of War, Carlito's Way, and even Bonfire Of The Vanities, which I found to be pretty good even if others didn't.    De Palma is a master filmmaker who aims big.   His milieu isn't small, personal projects, but big films that swing for the fences.   He has mostly succeeded too.   

I've seen Carlito's Way a few times now and it's funny how the final shootout at the train station works on me.    As Carlito eludes the men sent to kill him, I know how it turns out but I keep hoping that somehow it doesn't work out like fate seems to have planned it.   His tragic flaws came back to haunt him.    What a shame.