Saturday, January 24, 2009
First Impulse: Oscar Nominations
For many reasons, it's a shame that the big storyline is going to be the late Heath Ledger's all-but-certain win for Best Supporting Actor. I watched "Showbiz Tonight" on Headline News Thursday just to see some Oscar Talk (Don't I have a channel that's supposed to be all about movies? Oh, yes, it's called Reelz Channel, but it canceled its news show a few months ago), and it felt like 85% of the discussion was Ledger talk. I understand that's gonna look like the best angle, especially with a series of "races" that look like foregone conclusions. But it's a disservice to the other films and performers to overlook their work.
Overall, it looks like an uninteresting ceremony, and I think poor Hugh Jackman is walking into a perceived ratings bomb. Maybe I would feel differently had I seen more of these movies.
BEST PIC: Its surprise entry in this category notwithstanding, I still have little if any interest in seeing "The Reader." "Milk" is one of those movies that only interests me because of its rapturous critical acclaim, so I'll eventually see it for that, not necessarily for any awards. "Benjamin Button" might be interesting, but it's so damn long...The only two in this category I may really make an effort to see before the ceremony are "Frost/Nixon," which I really wanted to see, anyway, and "Slumdog Millionaire,' which should be the big winner of the night.
BEST DIRECTOR: No backdoor surprises here, as all 5 Best Picture directors get the spots here.
BEST ACTRESS: I was interested in seeing Angelina Jolie in "Changeling," but did that movie actually even come out yet? Meryl Streep gets nominated for everything. I'll say this: "Doubt" is the kind of movie for which all the acting nominations does pique my interest. I like Anne Hathaway and Kate Winslet, and I know at least one diehard "Homicide" fan who has to be happy for Melissa Leo.
BEST ACTOR: I'm rooting for Mickey Rourke just because he plays a professional wrestler. I really need to see "The Wrestler." I'm sure Frank Langella does a fine job, but whenever I see a notable thespian "do" Richard Nixon, my first reaction is laughter. It's no exception when I see those commercials for "Frost/Nixon."
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Is there any way Ledger doesn't win? Not that I'm complaining; it was a memorable performance that will endure. I haven't seen "Tropic Thunder" yet, but the Robert Downey Jr. nod sure seems like a "We're happy to see your umpteenth comeback" thing and a choice more strictly sentimental than Ledger's.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: No strong opinions here, but I love Amy Adams, I'm glad to see Marisa Tomei follow "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead" with another strong role, and I need to see Cruz in "Vicky Christina Barcelona," and not just because she kisses Scarlett Johansson.
Friday, January 23, 2009
This Week in DVD
My Three Sons Season 1 Volume 2: You know the drill by now, right? Split seasons, overpriced sets, replaced underscore. I've watched some season 6 episodes lately, and this show is way more entertaining than I remember. It's a shame that Paramount is screwing with this show so much it likely won't make it to season 6 in a decent form, if at all.
Magnificent Obsession (Criterion Collection): I confess that the films of Douglas Sirk comprise one of the many glaring holes in my movie-watching resume. I kind of liked that one with Julianne Moore and Dennis Quaid, though.
Spain...On the Road Again: TV chef Mario Batali finds time to eat, cook, and sample the local sights in between hitting on travel companion Gwyneth Paltrow. For reasons I can't divulge, this show makes me break into a cold sweat. Why do I even mention it at all, then? I'm hoping this is part of the long healing process.
Rockford Files Season 6: Nice to see a quality show nearing completion.
Chris Rock: Kill the Messenger: Rock's recent HBO standup special shows that, much like fellow legendary comedian Ralph Malph, he's still got it!
MGM When the Lion Roars: Epic documentary of the legendary studio. There had better be a lot of Wally Beery in it. Now available on DVD, which comes in handy for me since I was a dope and didn't record it off TCM for later viewing.
The Express: This underseen football picture about the first African-American Heisman Trophy winner is on my must-rent list. When this was opening in theaters, one ad started with a voice-over: "The first African-American..." and then something happened to cut it off. So my wife and I amused ourselves with the notion that this movie purported to be about "The first African-American."
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Page Ought: George Clooney is a nice guy?
OVERHEARD by one observer early Thursday morning at a well-populated public spot...
OK, OK, it was me, I was at the pediatricians', and I was listening as some of the receptionist/administrative staff were talking about the celebrities in D.C. for the inauguration.
One said that her friend was with George Clooney the whole day (not a "Pretty Woman" arrangement but some kind of minder/assistant function, I gather) and he "is the nicest guy." Another woman echoed that sentiment, saying, "That's what I hear from everyone," and then they both agreed that Clooney's a great person as others nodded assent.
So, Clooney haters, and I know you're out there, much as you might like to paint him an elitist out-of-touch Hollywood egomaniac, among this sector of "the people," he's a a helluva bloke.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Brooks on Books: "Not So: Popular Myths About America From Columbus to Clinton" (1995)
Fortunately, "Not So" is...not so. One could take entries here and there and argue an agenda towards or against politically-correct thinking, but I didn't find one slant to the book as a whole. In fact, I believe he takes on sacred cows of both the left and the right. This was written during the Clinton years, mind you, and Boller actually kind of defends the former First Couple.
More importantly, he emphasizes debunking the original story and explaining the truth, as opposed to ranting about why the original story has taken hold. His list of myths includes both matters of trivia and matters of more intellectual debate. It's a light read with 40-some short chapters, each on a single topic. Boller talks about whether America "lost" China to the Communists, but he also discusses the love lives of figures like Lincoln, James Buchanan, and Eleanor Roosevelt.
Boller doesn't write like an academic, either. Sometimes he's quite the opposite, as when he writes about Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr.:
In January 1989, when the two men parted after Bush's inaugural ceremony, they exchanged brisk military salutes that looked awesome on television.
The book doesn't go into depth, but it's not designed to. It stimulates some thought, disproves a bunch of myths, and will likely provoke interested readers to get more info. However, I'm not sure that, even in 1995, all these beliefs were as commonly held as Boller indicates. Do a lot of people really think FDR knew Japan was gonna bomb Pearl Harbor? Is the legend of Washington's false teeth still famous for anything besides being a falsehood?
Embarrassingly, at least for present-day readers, Boller is probably wrong on at least one "myth." He asserts that Thomas Jefferson did not father a child with slave Sally Hemings, and his scholarship is a little weak in that chapter even if you don't know that it's generally accepted now that he or one of his close relatives did. At the very least, there's enough evidence to make Boller's matter-of-fact tone on this look dated at best and agenda-driven at worst. It makes you wonder what else in the book is wrong, and a book that is so assertive about righting wrongs and changing misconceptions doesn't need that kind of baggage.So I would approach this as a light read for someone interested enough in history to enjoy exploring the myths, but maybe not a rewarding experience for someone well versed enough to know this stuff already.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Congratulations, Rickey Henderson
It's easy to feel jaded about the Baseball Hall of Fame these days, especially when several dozen voters have the gall to leave an all-time great like Henderson off their ballots (A lot of fans are bent out of shape out of this, but I think it's just mainly due to the fact that writers vote on this, many writers don't like Rickey, and many writers have this weird hangup about certain players being "worthy" of going in "on their first ballot), but I'm charged about this.
Rickey in fact was the very first "favorite" individual athlete I had as a kid. I wish I could tell you with certainty that the young Ricky Brooks was captivated purely by Henderson's dynamic blend of speed, power, and charisma. I wish I could tell you that my reason for not liking him WASN'T that his name was the same as mine. But you know what? The name thing wasn't all of it, but it was a big part of it. The extra "e" somehow was the bit of extra spice that made the aural similarity even cooler.
Oh, when I was 7, 8 years old, I guess I tried to "pattern my game" after Henderson. But my game was whiffleball, and while you can screw around with replicating signature batting stances and baserunning styles in whiffleball, you can't do that in Little League. Yep, organized baseball was the end of that weak attempt at imitation, as I wasn't really allowed to steal bases, I didn't play the outfield, and working the count to draw walks wasn't so much a skill but something that just happened for you when the kid on the mound had the jitters.
Henderson, though, was a great major leaguer, probably the best leadoff hitter of all time, and a guy who seemed to dominate on his way to awards and stolen base records. He had a panache about him that could be seen as hot doggin', and he got some bad press for perceived selfishness. Yet teammates generally seemed to like him, and he was indisputably an outstanding performer by both statistical and observational measures.
A threat to hit a home run each time up, a threat to steal a base each time he was on, Henderson had an aura about him that made the game exciting. Statheads often get frustrated when people build a case for a player around a so-called immeasurable quality like "aura" (as many voters wanted to do for Henderson's fellow inductee Jim Rice), but I think those of us who watched him in the eighties would find it hard to argue the effect Henderson's presence could have on a game.
Then there was the off-the-field stuff, the stories and quotes that lingered on as he lingered on, refusing to leave the game until he exhausted every last chance he had to play in the big leagues. Some of the stories were even true. There's an awesome summary of the Legend of Rickey Henderson right here if you're interested.
In the wake of the big announcement last week, Henderson was all over the media, and I found him appropriately humble, charming, and engaging. In particular, his appearance on MLB Network's "Hot Stove" show was a treat. In some ways, it's hard to believe it's only been 5 years since Rickey finally retired, because his election to the Hall of Fame takes me back to the 1980s, when I once dreamed I could be like him...if only I could hit a whole lot better, were a whole lot more athletic, and weren't so slow.
Disappointed already
Could it be possible that our new leader is already in the pocket of Big Video?
