Just a quick note since I haven't had the chance to write in a while and I'm not sure when the next chance will be. Our closing, which was supposed to occur on the 24th, got pushed off till today (the 27th). Apparently, they hadn't gotten their Certificate of Owner Occupancy from the city of Evanston yet (the slip of paper confirming that the city considers our place up to code and habitable). Anyway, I was only scheduled to work one day this week, and I'll give you one guess which day that was. And of course I already had 3 meetings scheduled for this morning so I had to come into work anyway (by the way, I only have time to write this because my last meeting got out 15 minutes early and I'm waiting for my next one). We had our inspection last night and, in theory anyway, we will be having our closing in just over 3 hours from now (even though I still don't have a final settlement statement from the title company yet). Overall, to this point the process has gone fairly smoothly. I will say, though, that it just seems like there ought to be a better way to go about this. So much gets left off to the last minute and then if every domino doesn't fall just the right way it causes everything else to come to a screeching halt. Oh well, I guess that's why people only go through this a few times in their life (hopefully).
I did get a chance to take a break from packing and dealing with all of this and got out to see a couple movies yesterday. I decided to see No Country for Old Men and Alien Vs. Predator: Requiem. Without getting into too many specifics I'll just say seeing those two back-to-back does not make for a good double-feature. It's a bit strange to go from seeing a slow-paced, taut drama with lots of interesting dialogue and three dimensional characters to seeing a cookie-cutter action/sci-fi with dialogue that has been directly lifted from other (better) films and characters that essetially exist to act as minnows thrown into the Alien/Predator shark tank. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy stupid sci-fi/action as much as the next guy (if not more), but it's a rough transition.
Overall I think No Country for Old Men slots in as my 2nd favorite film of the year so far (just after Gone, Baby, Gone and just ahead of American Gangster), although I have yet to see both Atonement and Juno and I hear they are both excellent. There are a lot of people that are really bothered by the abruptness of the ending, but I have to say that it really didn't bother me. Maybe it was because I had already heard complaints about it beforehand, but to me I thought everything wrapped up as well as it good have and they had made the point they were trying to make. I read Ebert's review of the movie last night and I think one sentence he said about the film was perfect: "Many of the scenes in "No Country for Old Men" are so flawlessly constructed that you want them to simply continue, and yet they create an emotional suction drawing you to the next scene." I have a lot more to say about this film, but it's nearly impossible to do so without talking about specifics. If and when you see it, I'll be happy to sit down and chat with you about it.
OK, time to run to my 11:00 meeting. Hopefully all goes smoothly with the close and I will give an update as soon as I can.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Friday, December 14, 2007
Drug Addicts Are Smarter Than Baseball Players
So, since my wife decided this week to blog about a serious issue, maybe I'm supposed to do one about food?
Anyway, I suppose the big news (for sports fans anyway) that came out this week was the Mitchell report yesterday, which lists the results of the 18-month investigation into steroids in baseball headed by former Senator George Mitchell. Reaction to the report has ranged from "finally everything is coming out" to "this report is completely impotent". As usual, the truth lies somewhere in between. In general, I think your opinion of the usefullness of the report comes from what you expected the report to accomplish. What it boils down to is that most of the report is speculation, hearsay, and guilt by association. Almost all the names in the report of people who admitted to using steroids have already admitted to it previously. Most of the rest is those people saying "so and so once told me he did steroids" and everyone declining to be interviewed by Mitchell.
Probably the most interesting thing in the report is that there are a couple of "smoking guns" where copies of cancelled checks to known steroid dealers are included. This highlights the wonderful point of proving how dumb a lot of baseball players truly are. I'm willing to bet that very, very few illegal street drug transactions take place via check. Yes, this may be because many of them lack checking accounts, but I think it also has to do with a mutual desire between purchaser and vendor to avoid a paper trail. Alas, it appears that something which seems like common sense to a crack head does not also occur to the heroes of our national past time. Further heightening the level of idiocy prevalant among players is the fact that in 2003 when baseball did an announced, anonymous test 5 to 7 percent of major leaguers failed it. Yep, even though the players knew the test was coming, at least 5 percent made no effort to try and pass it. True, since it was anonymous they didn't face any direct repercussions, but again you would think that a person with any sense of logic would say "if we all pass this test, then we can say that the sport is clean, and hopefully avoid further scrutiny." Any sane person would realize that any result above the margin of error for the test would definitely result in further testing. I suppose the final argument that can be made is that there were players unknowingly taking steroids. However, I hardly think mindlessly popping pills and injecting yourself with unknown substances is a solid argument for the intelligence of said player.
Overall, my opinion about steroids in baseball remains unchanged, and it is this: I don't care, and no one else does either. Now, making such an inflammatory statement like that calls for some clarification, and it should surprise none of you that my reasoning lies in the realm of economics. Discounting the strike and its immediate ramifications, during the "steroid era" of baseball ratings and attendance (and as a direct result, salaries) have risen dramatically (I'm too lazy to look up the stats but I know that's true). For a while, it was pretty easy to dismiss the steroid issue as baseless speculation. In the wake of the '98 home run race with Sosa and McGwire things started changing. Suddenly people began to wonder why players were looking more like Hulk Hogan and less like Kenny Lofton and asking how it was possible that players who had never hit more than 20 HRs in their life were suddenly able to hit over 40 in their mid-30s and just why the hell is Barry Bond's head getting bigger? The result from the baseball world was a collective shrug and a "nothing's been proven so this is a witch hunt" attitude. And the result of that was that pretty much every baseball fan in the country came to the conclusion that steroids were rampant in the clubhouses. But here's where my point comes in; even though everybody admitted that, they still tuned in and went to games in record numbers. We live in a capitalist society, and thus where the free market is concerned we "vote" with our dollars. So, even though you may say "I'm against steroids in baseball" if you continue to support it after you know it exists then you're really not, just like you can't say that you are against Nike paying southeast asian kids 7 cents an hour while you're wearing Nike shoes. The bottom line is that when faced with the choice of having "baseball with steroids" or "no baseball" the fans overwhelmingly chose "baseball with steroids"; myself included. I think this result is similar to what you see in people's attitude towards Congress. When asked, "do you think Congressmen are corrupt?" people overwhelmingly answer "yes" but when asked "is your Congressmen corrupt?" the answer is generally "no". Hence, I think a lot of fans have/had the attitude that "yes, there's a lot of steroid use, but not on my team".
I bring this all up not to suggest that steroids shouldn't be abolished, but just to temper this outrage that "Bud Selig and the owner's haven't done enough to get rid of steroids." While I have great disdain every time I hear the empty rhetoric from Bud's mouth of "steroids are a serious problem, and we will get rid of them" I also realize that he has no real motivation to do so. This is true of every corporation. They will use every inch of the law to do what is in their own best interest. Whenever a corporation decides to do something "eco friendly" or charitable, they are not truly doing it out of the goodness of their hearts (despite what their 30-second tv spots may proclaim). They are doing so because they believe the PR boost (or sometimes recovery from a PR hit) will lead directly to boosting their bottom line. That's how we end up with the ridiculousness where the only advertising tobacco companies are now allowed to do is ads saying "don't use our product." They don't actually want you to quit, they just want to avoid future lawsuits!
I don't want anyone to think that the preceding is an attack on capitalism, because it is not. I think that's exactly how things should be. A corporation is not a person, so you should not expect it to act morally. You can, however, expect it to act legally. That's why the role of government needs to be to set up the rules under which companies must operate, and that's where government has failed (and is continuing to fail) with baseball. Hence, I am leaning more to the side of "this report is impotent" although I realize that it never was designed to do anything more than it did. The basic hope of both baseball and Congress is that the humiliation of a couple of big stars will be enough to turn fans against them, cost them the Hall of Fame, and then hopefully deter future players from doing it. My prediction? It won't work, especially given the prevalence of HGH use (for which there is not and probably never will be a urine test for). I think when a player is sitting in A or AA and realizes that they have hit the peak of their abilities, they won't care that a potential failed steroid test "may" cost them the fan's admiration down the line. They will only see the potential million dollar pay day down the road if they are able to get up to that next level. After all, after failing a steroid test at the end of his career, Rafael Palmeiro may now be living in disgrace. But he's doing so inside a multi-million dollar home with a well-padded bank account, and that's probably more than enough for a minor leaguer who makes $30k, rides a bus 8 hours a day, and sleeps in shady motels.
Anyway, I suppose the big news (for sports fans anyway) that came out this week was the Mitchell report yesterday, which lists the results of the 18-month investigation into steroids in baseball headed by former Senator George Mitchell. Reaction to the report has ranged from "finally everything is coming out" to "this report is completely impotent". As usual, the truth lies somewhere in between. In general, I think your opinion of the usefullness of the report comes from what you expected the report to accomplish. What it boils down to is that most of the report is speculation, hearsay, and guilt by association. Almost all the names in the report of people who admitted to using steroids have already admitted to it previously. Most of the rest is those people saying "so and so once told me he did steroids" and everyone declining to be interviewed by Mitchell.
Probably the most interesting thing in the report is that there are a couple of "smoking guns" where copies of cancelled checks to known steroid dealers are included. This highlights the wonderful point of proving how dumb a lot of baseball players truly are. I'm willing to bet that very, very few illegal street drug transactions take place via check. Yes, this may be because many of them lack checking accounts, but I think it also has to do with a mutual desire between purchaser and vendor to avoid a paper trail. Alas, it appears that something which seems like common sense to a crack head does not also occur to the heroes of our national past time. Further heightening the level of idiocy prevalant among players is the fact that in 2003 when baseball did an announced, anonymous test 5 to 7 percent of major leaguers failed it. Yep, even though the players knew the test was coming, at least 5 percent made no effort to try and pass it. True, since it was anonymous they didn't face any direct repercussions, but again you would think that a person with any sense of logic would say "if we all pass this test, then we can say that the sport is clean, and hopefully avoid further scrutiny." Any sane person would realize that any result above the margin of error for the test would definitely result in further testing. I suppose the final argument that can be made is that there were players unknowingly taking steroids. However, I hardly think mindlessly popping pills and injecting yourself with unknown substances is a solid argument for the intelligence of said player.
Overall, my opinion about steroids in baseball remains unchanged, and it is this: I don't care, and no one else does either. Now, making such an inflammatory statement like that calls for some clarification, and it should surprise none of you that my reasoning lies in the realm of economics. Discounting the strike and its immediate ramifications, during the "steroid era" of baseball ratings and attendance (and as a direct result, salaries) have risen dramatically (I'm too lazy to look up the stats but I know that's true). For a while, it was pretty easy to dismiss the steroid issue as baseless speculation. In the wake of the '98 home run race with Sosa and McGwire things started changing. Suddenly people began to wonder why players were looking more like Hulk Hogan and less like Kenny Lofton and asking how it was possible that players who had never hit more than 20 HRs in their life were suddenly able to hit over 40 in their mid-30s and just why the hell is Barry Bond's head getting bigger? The result from the baseball world was a collective shrug and a "nothing's been proven so this is a witch hunt" attitude. And the result of that was that pretty much every baseball fan in the country came to the conclusion that steroids were rampant in the clubhouses. But here's where my point comes in; even though everybody admitted that, they still tuned in and went to games in record numbers. We live in a capitalist society, and thus where the free market is concerned we "vote" with our dollars. So, even though you may say "I'm against steroids in baseball" if you continue to support it after you know it exists then you're really not, just like you can't say that you are against Nike paying southeast asian kids 7 cents an hour while you're wearing Nike shoes. The bottom line is that when faced with the choice of having "baseball with steroids" or "no baseball" the fans overwhelmingly chose "baseball with steroids"; myself included. I think this result is similar to what you see in people's attitude towards Congress. When asked, "do you think Congressmen are corrupt?" people overwhelmingly answer "yes" but when asked "is your Congressmen corrupt?" the answer is generally "no". Hence, I think a lot of fans have/had the attitude that "yes, there's a lot of steroid use, but not on my team".
I bring this all up not to suggest that steroids shouldn't be abolished, but just to temper this outrage that "Bud Selig and the owner's haven't done enough to get rid of steroids." While I have great disdain every time I hear the empty rhetoric from Bud's mouth of "steroids are a serious problem, and we will get rid of them" I also realize that he has no real motivation to do so. This is true of every corporation. They will use every inch of the law to do what is in their own best interest. Whenever a corporation decides to do something "eco friendly" or charitable, they are not truly doing it out of the goodness of their hearts (despite what their 30-second tv spots may proclaim). They are doing so because they believe the PR boost (or sometimes recovery from a PR hit) will lead directly to boosting their bottom line. That's how we end up with the ridiculousness where the only advertising tobacco companies are now allowed to do is ads saying "don't use our product." They don't actually want you to quit, they just want to avoid future lawsuits!
I don't want anyone to think that the preceding is an attack on capitalism, because it is not. I think that's exactly how things should be. A corporation is not a person, so you should not expect it to act morally. You can, however, expect it to act legally. That's why the role of government needs to be to set up the rules under which companies must operate, and that's where government has failed (and is continuing to fail) with baseball. Hence, I am leaning more to the side of "this report is impotent" although I realize that it never was designed to do anything more than it did. The basic hope of both baseball and Congress is that the humiliation of a couple of big stars will be enough to turn fans against them, cost them the Hall of Fame, and then hopefully deter future players from doing it. My prediction? It won't work, especially given the prevalence of HGH use (for which there is not and probably never will be a urine test for). I think when a player is sitting in A or AA and realizes that they have hit the peak of their abilities, they won't care that a potential failed steroid test "may" cost them the fan's admiration down the line. They will only see the potential million dollar pay day down the road if they are able to get up to that next level. After all, after failing a steroid test at the end of his career, Rafael Palmeiro may now be living in disgrace. But he's doing so inside a multi-million dollar home with a well-padded bank account, and that's probably more than enough for a minor leaguer who makes $30k, rides a bus 8 hours a day, and sleeps in shady motels.
Friday, November 30, 2007
In God's Bathroom, He Has This Showerhead
So Christy and I have begun compiling a list of things we'd like to get for the new place. During out trip to Hawaii this past summer, we stayed at a bed and breakfast that had a shower with a showerhead in it that was the size of a dinner plate. We thought this would be a cool thing to have in our new place and we started looking online to see how much they cost. We found this one on Amazon (http://tinyurl.com/yra96x). It's official name is the "Waterpik AST233CC Total Body Drenching 2 Mode Wall Mount Aquascape Showerhead." Impressed yet? Well, that is nothing compared to what one of the reviewers has to say about it. I'm still torn about whether this guy was doing this tongue-in-cheek, or if he's serious. You be the judge:"Right off the bat, let me warn that this showerhead is not for everyone. If you like standing in a gentle mist while being drizzled with cascading rain droplets, there are other units that accomlpish this . . .On the other hand, if you prefer to be pummeled by what feels like the Colorado River, the Aquascape stands alone. I am, by most standards, a hefty man, yet when fully engaged the Aquascape literally pushes me backwards in the shower as though I'm being sprayed with a firehose. . . Also, before buying note that this is a fixed wall mount unit. There is no detachable, handheld piece and, quite frankly, it's probably much safer that way, as a handheld component could easily spiral out of control with this kind of pressure."
Sweet; where do I sign up?
Anyway, it looks like we are full steam ahead with the condo. The contract is being reviewed by the attorney and the appraisal was done on Monday. Financing is getting finalized and we officially told our landlord that we will be leaving at the end of December.
As I think I mentioned before (maybe) I finally finished Greenspan's book (The Age of Turbulence). Probably the best book I've read this year (and I know you're all eagerly awaiting my top 10 from this year). I won't overly bore you with too much economic detail, but there were two things I found really interesting. Neither one is necessarily his idea (and in fact I'm sure many others have written about them) but he had a way of presenting them that made them very straight forward and easy to understand. The first is the concept of something called "Dutch disease" (not to be confused with Dutch Elm Disease that affects trees). This is a counterintuitive idea that talks about how the more natural resources a country has, the more crippled their economy will be. This is especially true of developing countries. The reason is that because there is high demand for the natural resources the country has, it keeps that country's currency at a much higher exchange rate than it would be otherwise. This, in turn, makes it nearly impossible for the country to be a low-cost leader in any other industry, since it is competing with countries with lower value currencies that can easily underbid them. Of course, the country can still achieve and maintain a relatively healthy GDP, but it will almost exclusively be due to sales of their resources which, as we all know, are finite. This goes a long way towards explaining why countries such as Saudi Arabia have not been able to make the leap to first-world standards despite the presence of the huge petroleum cash cow.
The other idea I found extremely revealing was a discussion on what prices are likely to do over the next 30 years or so. In general, over the last 20 years inflation has been pretty low. A big reason for this has been the emergence of developing countries taking over a lot of the outsourced manufacturing jobs (i.e. kids in Thailand making Nike shoes for $.07 an hour). Being able to exploit cheap labor markets has served to suppress the overall price of things, as company's have continually been able to find ways of making the same or better quality goods for progressively cheaper and cheaper. As a result, the money being poured into these countries has helped their economies develop tremendously. That has certainly been a net positive for them as a whole, but the one drawback is since their economies are stronger now their exchange rates are higher and thus they are finding it more difficult to remain the low-cost leader and underbid everyone else. As an example, China has now started complaining that they can't compete with Vietnam on cost since the Chinese currency has strengthened so much. So we see a cycle appear where developed countries outsource to developing ones until they improve themselves and then the investment shifts to a new, less developed country. The trouble is that we are running out of developing countries to do that with! We are rapidly approaching a point where there will be no "lower tier" to go to anymore because all the countries that are in a position to grow will have grown and all the other poor countries (i.e. most of Africa) are not yet ready to step up. The end result will be that this large deflationary force that has been present and increasing for the last 20 years will no longer be present and we can expect significantly higher inflation to be the norm. Of course, the key is determining when the inflation is going to start picking up, and not even the great Alan Greenspan knows that. All I can say is, despite the housing market slump I'm still thinking it's a good time to be buying a place. Even if property values continue to relatively decline, they are likely to still be buoyed up by inflation.
Ok, I think that's all I got for now. Got back from Houston early last Sunday and got back to the work grind this week. Looking forward to having a relaxing weekend and then I need to jump back into CPA studying next week.
Have a good weekend all!
Friday, November 16, 2007
Freedom and Bondage
Well, I have to this point succesfully managed to avoid prison. My experience with the police was not quite as bad as them slapping the cuffs on and throwing me in a lineup but it wasn't nearly as innocuos as "we just need you to make a statement to close out our investigation" either. It was pretty much a full-blow interrogation, complete with putting me in a little room with a two-way mirror and grilling me for about 20 minutes, and then leaving me locked inside by myself for another 20. But then he came back and asked me questions for about 5 minutes and that was it. Oh well, hopefully that is the end of it. Supposedly, the correct thing to do with your plates after you've used them is to return them to the DMV. Because if there's one thing everybody wants, it's another trip to the DMV.
Anyway, hot on the heels of maintaining my freedom it looks like I will be going into a different sort of prison: getting a home mortgage. Last week Christy and I made an offer on a condo in Evanston and, after some back and forth, we have a signed contract! There are still of course a couple of (hopefully) minor hurdles to clear, but as of now we are tentatively closing on December 24th and moving on the 26th. Not the stress-free Christmas I was imagining (but really does such a thing even exist?) but it will be nice to be in the new place to start the new year. It will be especially nice for Christy since her commute will be getting cut more than in half and right at the time of the year when snow can make any commute an absolute nightmare.
Right now I am down in Houston relaxing. Going to see a couple movies this afternoon (probably Beowulf and 30 Days of Night). Haven't been doing a whole lot else so far; mainly watching football. Tonight I get to break that up by watching the first televised Illini basketball game (10:30 tonight against Arizona St.), so that's exciting.
Think that's about all for now. If I don't blog again before then (likely) have a good Thanksgiving everyone and enjoy arguing with all your relatives!
Anyway, hot on the heels of maintaining my freedom it looks like I will be going into a different sort of prison: getting a home mortgage. Last week Christy and I made an offer on a condo in Evanston and, after some back and forth, we have a signed contract! There are still of course a couple of (hopefully) minor hurdles to clear, but as of now we are tentatively closing on December 24th and moving on the 26th. Not the stress-free Christmas I was imagining (but really does such a thing even exist?) but it will be nice to be in the new place to start the new year. It will be especially nice for Christy since her commute will be getting cut more than in half and right at the time of the year when snow can make any commute an absolute nightmare.
Right now I am down in Houston relaxing. Going to see a couple movies this afternoon (probably Beowulf and 30 Days of Night). Haven't been doing a whole lot else so far; mainly watching football. Tonight I get to break that up by watching the first televised Illini basketball game (10:30 tonight against Arizona St.), so that's exciting.
Think that's about all for now. If I don't blog again before then (likely) have a good Thanksgiving everyone and enjoy arguing with all your relatives!
Friday, November 09, 2007
Happy Birthday to Me!
OK, so it's not my actual birthday. However, I just realized that as of Halloween night my blog officially turned 1. Even though it wasn't technically till November 27th that I actually wrote about anything of substance I decided I'd bring it up now. So, I ended up with 38 posts total in the year, which was a bit below my goal of doing at least 1 per week but oh well. That just gives me something to shoot for during year 2.
In other news, I'm going to prison. Well, not really (I hope) but I do get to drive out to Schaumburg on Wednesday to talk to the police. I got a phone call from them last Friday afternoon and apparently someone with plates that were registered in my name two years ago was spotted driving away from a bank parking lot after breaking into a car and stealing stuff out of it. Of course, the plates have been expired since August of 2006 but apparently that doesn't matter. They were on Christy's Escort, which we sold back in July of 2006 and then threw the plates out. I am thinking that someone either working at a city dump or with a garbage hobby dug them out and then sold them to an unsavory type. In any case, apparently all I have to do is give them a statement so that they can close out the investigation. That sounds all nice and innocent until they slap the cuffs on me and put me in a lineup the second I walk into the station. Regardless, I think the lesson here for everyone is to not throw your plates away without shredding or otherwise destroying them first.
Finally, assuming I don't go to jail Christy and I were out looking at condos this past weekend and are hoping to move by the end of the year if all goes as planned (which of course rarely happens in real estate deals). We found a condo that we really like up in Evanston but we also found a house up there too for just slightly more money. We're going to take a look at it after work today. The prospect of going from a one-bedroom apartment to a single family home is hard to wrap my head around, but it's also very exciting too. I'll post some pictures if we end up putting an offer in to either place. Both places are within about 5 blocks of each other and are on the north side of Evanston near the Northwestern campus. It's also less than a 15 minute walk to the dowtown shop area, so although everything wouldn't be quite "at our fingertips" as it is right now, it's still very much an urban setting and I wouldn't need to rely on the car to get around. Perhaps most importantly, I have already made sure that the Taco Bell is within easy walking distance.
In other news, I'm going to prison. Well, not really (I hope) but I do get to drive out to Schaumburg on Wednesday to talk to the police. I got a phone call from them last Friday afternoon and apparently someone with plates that were registered in my name two years ago was spotted driving away from a bank parking lot after breaking into a car and stealing stuff out of it. Of course, the plates have been expired since August of 2006 but apparently that doesn't matter. They were on Christy's Escort, which we sold back in July of 2006 and then threw the plates out. I am thinking that someone either working at a city dump or with a garbage hobby dug them out and then sold them to an unsavory type. In any case, apparently all I have to do is give them a statement so that they can close out the investigation. That sounds all nice and innocent until they slap the cuffs on me and put me in a lineup the second I walk into the station. Regardless, I think the lesson here for everyone is to not throw your plates away without shredding or otherwise destroying them first.
Finally, assuming I don't go to jail Christy and I were out looking at condos this past weekend and are hoping to move by the end of the year if all goes as planned (which of course rarely happens in real estate deals). We found a condo that we really like up in Evanston but we also found a house up there too for just slightly more money. We're going to take a look at it after work today. The prospect of going from a one-bedroom apartment to a single family home is hard to wrap my head around, but it's also very exciting too. I'll post some pictures if we end up putting an offer in to either place. Both places are within about 5 blocks of each other and are on the north side of Evanston near the Northwestern campus. It's also less than a 15 minute walk to the dowtown shop area, so although everything wouldn't be quite "at our fingertips" as it is right now, it's still very much an urban setting and I wouldn't need to rely on the car to get around. Perhaps most importantly, I have already made sure that the Taco Bell is within easy walking distance.
Friday, October 26, 2007
I'll Take "Pragmatism" For Any Price, Alex
Since it’s Friday and I’ve got a slow day at work, I thought I’d dive into some more serious fare once again. Over the past year or two I have been ratcheting up my interest in politics to a level it hasn’t been at since I was a card-carrying member of the Young Republicans back in 1997. However, over the past couple months I have been increasingly getting disillusioned and reminded of why I have felt so much apathy towards politics in the past. I am really disheartened by the total lack of pragmatism that exists on both sides of the aisle. This has really been brought into focus for me by seeing what has been going on with the debate over the new Child Health Insurance bill currently moving through Congress. Just as a quick recap, this bill is a reauthorization of a program that already exists called SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program) which has the goal of ensuring that children of poor families are still able to get health care. OK, that seems like a pretty good, practical idea that should be bipartisan. Certainly doesn’t seem like something that would trigger a huge political battle. But of course it has. The bill was introduced into the House back in February where it passed overwhelmingly 360 to 45 (28 abstaining). It passed similarly in the Senate in August by a count of 68-31-1. It was then vetoed by President Bush. I think this is a good point to also interject that this veto by Bush was the first one he has wielded in his 6 and a half years in office. The fact that he chose to do it with a bill that passed with 89% of the House vote and 69% of the Senate is surprising, to say the least. But of course, all you need is 2/3 majority to override the veto so this thing will still have no problem becoming law right? Of course not. The veto override fails with a vote of 273-156-2 (63.6%).
Not surprisingly, public opinion about whether or not the veto was a good idea falls largely along party lines. People who identify with Democrats blame Bush for vetoing a bill that passed with overwhelming bipartisan support and those who identify with Republicans point out the bill’s weaknesses and blame Democrats for not coming up with a better bill. Of course, these both miss the mark on where the real blame belongs: on everybody! Now, I have no desire to start debating the pros and cons of this bill right now because it’s irrelevant to the point I’m trying to make, which is outrage at the process. When the bill was voted on in the House the first time, Republicans voted in favor of it 145-45-15. When the time came to override the veto, the Republican vote changed to 44-154-2. That is a complete 180 degree turn and it’s the same bill! Why was it a good idea in February but it’s a terrible idea now? The way I see it, there are only 3 possibilities for the Congressmen that changed their minds: 1) they didn’t read it carefully enough the first time, 2) they still believe in the bill but are being loyal to the President, or 3) they decided that by opposing this bill they could gain some political traction on the Democrats. For different reasons, all of those are unacceptable and work to the detriment of the best interests of the nation. First, if they didn’t read the bill closely enough the first time they were casting an irresponsible vote. Second, backing the President when you disagree philosophically is a neglect of their Congressional duty to act as a check and balance of the executive branch. Lastly, changing your mind simply to fan a political flame fulfills all the worst stereotypes about politicians placing themselves and their party ahead of the country’s interests.
OK, so I’ve harped on the Republicans but how about the Democrats? Well, after the veto failed they passed a slightly revised bill by a count of 265-142 (65%). Guess what? That’s still short of the veto-proof number. The heads and whips of each party know exactly where they stand on each bill at almost every moment. Why in the world would you bring a bill to vote knowing full well it is going to get vetoed again and that you are short of the override? If you couldn’t change a Rep’s mind before the initial vote, what chance are you going to have when the it involves not only changing sides on an issue but also breaking ranks with their own party and going against the President? But they voted on it anyway, Bush has already vowed to veto it, and now we’ll get to see a 2-week long song and dance with lots of speeches and fanfare, with each side blaming the other for the problems, and absolutely nothing getting done at the end of it. Then it will get thrown back in the House for another revision. At that point, most likely what it will take to get it through is the addition of a lot “pork” to a few of the dissenting voters to fund some of their pet projects so that they can go back to their constituents and say “yeah I voted for that bill, because even though I didn’t like the health care aspect, it got us this new highway!” Either that, or the bill will get so watered down that in the process of removing the objectionable parts the beneficial parts will get taken out too and we’ll be left with yet another big expensive government program that doesn’t work.
Please forgive me for being naïve, but does it have to be this way? I mean, if a public company operated in this way they would face the ire of a mob of angry stockholders who would vote the board of directors out of their chairs in a heartbeat. And they wouldn’t stop to ask “well, who is it that is really clogging up the works here?” they’d just say “you guys can’t get the job done; you’re out”. So where’s the ire from us, the stockholders of the democracy? Of course there is none, because this isn’t seen as anything new. The headline “Congress Inefficient” on a newspaper would garner about the same level of interest to people as the headline “Oxygen Discovered to be Breathable.”
Whatever happened to the idea that when two sides couldn’t agree on something, they locked themselves in a room and didn’t come out till they could come up with a compromise? I realize that doesn’t work on everything (abortion comes to mind) but if you can’t do that with something as seemingly universal as “poor kids should have access to doctors too” how on in the world are you ever going to solve any real sophisticated problems (like, for instance, the war in Iraq)?
I mean, has it always been like this? I didn’t think so, and now I have Alan Greenspan to back me up. I am in the process of reading his book The Age of Turbulence (which is easily the best book I’ve read this year) and he has this to offer about partisan politics:
“The four congressional caucuses, two in each body, have shifted dramatically over the years. Each caucus, two Republican, two Democratic, used to comprise liberals, moderates, and conservatives. To be sure, the proportions differed by party, but there was rarely enough cohesion to produce overwhelming majorities for any piece of legislation in any of the four caucuses. Votes on legislation typically would be Democrats 60 percent for, 40 percent against, and Republicans 40 percent for, 60 percent against, or vice versa. Today’s congressional caucuses . . .have become either predominantly liberal (the Democrats) or conservative (the Republicans). Accordingly, legislation that used to split party votes 60 percent to 40 percent is now more likely to be 95 percent to 5 percent. Legislation has consequently become highly partisan.”
He goes on to say:
In 1974 “partisan fervor was largely set aside as the sun went down. The dinners I attended (a Washington political ritual) were invariably bipartisan. Senators and representatives from both parties would mix with administration stalwarts, the media, and the city’s social power brokers. During 2005, my last full year in government, the ritual dinners were still there, but they had become intensely partisan. On many occasions, I was the only Republican present. And at “Republican dinners” I attended, there were few, if any, Democrats.”
I think the crux of the second quote is intricately linked with the results of the first. As elected officials increasingly identify themselves as “Republican Congressmen” or “Democratic Congressman” rather than “US Congressman” it almost becomes a gang-type affiliation and the Capitol becomes the battleground for trench warfare rather than fertile ground for ideas and legislation to grow. And you can see it in the way issues are presented and debated. Rather than one side saying “well this is a pretty good bill, but there are some problems we need to iron out” you end up with one side saying “this is a horrible bill that will take the country in the absolute wrong direction.” And of course it’s easy to see what happens next. Have you ever been engaged in a debate where you didn’t care much one way or the other but the person you were talking to started spouting off exaggerations and half-truths in such a one-sided manner that you found yourself vehemently arguing for the other side and doing some of the same things? That’s what happens here, as the other side basically says “this is a wonderful bill that is critical to the country’s success and must be passed immediately.” So now, instead of the debate being framed around the tweaks that need to be made, we get to hear about the exaggerated benefits from one side and then get the problems catastrophised from the other. And, of course, lost in the shuffle is the middle ground, which also happens to contain the truth.
So, what exactly am I saying? I’m saying that it depresses me that the political debates are such in this country that I always feel as if I have to choose between two extremes. It is especially troubling because I, as well as most people, usually prefer the middle ground. I am hopeful that this age of uber-partisan politics is only a phase and that good sense will prevail in the end. Whether or not you agree with his views, Obama’s message of “the politics of hope” (meaning campaigning on the issues and not on opponent attacks) as well as his commitment to not accepting funds from lobbyists are a good start, but so far he stands largely alone amidst of sea of polarizing forces.
I spend at least 4-5 hours a month talking politics with my friend Joe. Sometimes we agree and sometimes we don’t, but I always have respect for him and his views and I’m always more than happy to sit down and have a beer with him before, during, and/or after. I guess I’d just like to see that same kind of civility from our government. Am I asking too much?
Not surprisingly, public opinion about whether or not the veto was a good idea falls largely along party lines. People who identify with Democrats blame Bush for vetoing a bill that passed with overwhelming bipartisan support and those who identify with Republicans point out the bill’s weaknesses and blame Democrats for not coming up with a better bill. Of course, these both miss the mark on where the real blame belongs: on everybody! Now, I have no desire to start debating the pros and cons of this bill right now because it’s irrelevant to the point I’m trying to make, which is outrage at the process. When the bill was voted on in the House the first time, Republicans voted in favor of it 145-45-15. When the time came to override the veto, the Republican vote changed to 44-154-2. That is a complete 180 degree turn and it’s the same bill! Why was it a good idea in February but it’s a terrible idea now? The way I see it, there are only 3 possibilities for the Congressmen that changed their minds: 1) they didn’t read it carefully enough the first time, 2) they still believe in the bill but are being loyal to the President, or 3) they decided that by opposing this bill they could gain some political traction on the Democrats. For different reasons, all of those are unacceptable and work to the detriment of the best interests of the nation. First, if they didn’t read the bill closely enough the first time they were casting an irresponsible vote. Second, backing the President when you disagree philosophically is a neglect of their Congressional duty to act as a check and balance of the executive branch. Lastly, changing your mind simply to fan a political flame fulfills all the worst stereotypes about politicians placing themselves and their party ahead of the country’s interests.
OK, so I’ve harped on the Republicans but how about the Democrats? Well, after the veto failed they passed a slightly revised bill by a count of 265-142 (65%). Guess what? That’s still short of the veto-proof number. The heads and whips of each party know exactly where they stand on each bill at almost every moment. Why in the world would you bring a bill to vote knowing full well it is going to get vetoed again and that you are short of the override? If you couldn’t change a Rep’s mind before the initial vote, what chance are you going to have when the it involves not only changing sides on an issue but also breaking ranks with their own party and going against the President? But they voted on it anyway, Bush has already vowed to veto it, and now we’ll get to see a 2-week long song and dance with lots of speeches and fanfare, with each side blaming the other for the problems, and absolutely nothing getting done at the end of it. Then it will get thrown back in the House for another revision. At that point, most likely what it will take to get it through is the addition of a lot “pork” to a few of the dissenting voters to fund some of their pet projects so that they can go back to their constituents and say “yeah I voted for that bill, because even though I didn’t like the health care aspect, it got us this new highway!” Either that, or the bill will get so watered down that in the process of removing the objectionable parts the beneficial parts will get taken out too and we’ll be left with yet another big expensive government program that doesn’t work.
Please forgive me for being naïve, but does it have to be this way? I mean, if a public company operated in this way they would face the ire of a mob of angry stockholders who would vote the board of directors out of their chairs in a heartbeat. And they wouldn’t stop to ask “well, who is it that is really clogging up the works here?” they’d just say “you guys can’t get the job done; you’re out”. So where’s the ire from us, the stockholders of the democracy? Of course there is none, because this isn’t seen as anything new. The headline “Congress Inefficient” on a newspaper would garner about the same level of interest to people as the headline “Oxygen Discovered to be Breathable.”
Whatever happened to the idea that when two sides couldn’t agree on something, they locked themselves in a room and didn’t come out till they could come up with a compromise? I realize that doesn’t work on everything (abortion comes to mind) but if you can’t do that with something as seemingly universal as “poor kids should have access to doctors too” how on in the world are you ever going to solve any real sophisticated problems (like, for instance, the war in Iraq)?
I mean, has it always been like this? I didn’t think so, and now I have Alan Greenspan to back me up. I am in the process of reading his book The Age of Turbulence (which is easily the best book I’ve read this year) and he has this to offer about partisan politics:
“The four congressional caucuses, two in each body, have shifted dramatically over the years. Each caucus, two Republican, two Democratic, used to comprise liberals, moderates, and conservatives. To be sure, the proportions differed by party, but there was rarely enough cohesion to produce overwhelming majorities for any piece of legislation in any of the four caucuses. Votes on legislation typically would be Democrats 60 percent for, 40 percent against, and Republicans 40 percent for, 60 percent against, or vice versa. Today’s congressional caucuses . . .have become either predominantly liberal (the Democrats) or conservative (the Republicans). Accordingly, legislation that used to split party votes 60 percent to 40 percent is now more likely to be 95 percent to 5 percent. Legislation has consequently become highly partisan.”
He goes on to say:
In 1974 “partisan fervor was largely set aside as the sun went down. The dinners I attended (a Washington political ritual) were invariably bipartisan. Senators and representatives from both parties would mix with administration stalwarts, the media, and the city’s social power brokers. During 2005, my last full year in government, the ritual dinners were still there, but they had become intensely partisan. On many occasions, I was the only Republican present. And at “Republican dinners” I attended, there were few, if any, Democrats.”
I think the crux of the second quote is intricately linked with the results of the first. As elected officials increasingly identify themselves as “Republican Congressmen” or “Democratic Congressman” rather than “US Congressman” it almost becomes a gang-type affiliation and the Capitol becomes the battleground for trench warfare rather than fertile ground for ideas and legislation to grow. And you can see it in the way issues are presented and debated. Rather than one side saying “well this is a pretty good bill, but there are some problems we need to iron out” you end up with one side saying “this is a horrible bill that will take the country in the absolute wrong direction.” And of course it’s easy to see what happens next. Have you ever been engaged in a debate where you didn’t care much one way or the other but the person you were talking to started spouting off exaggerations and half-truths in such a one-sided manner that you found yourself vehemently arguing for the other side and doing some of the same things? That’s what happens here, as the other side basically says “this is a wonderful bill that is critical to the country’s success and must be passed immediately.” So now, instead of the debate being framed around the tweaks that need to be made, we get to hear about the exaggerated benefits from one side and then get the problems catastrophised from the other. And, of course, lost in the shuffle is the middle ground, which also happens to contain the truth.
So, what exactly am I saying? I’m saying that it depresses me that the political debates are such in this country that I always feel as if I have to choose between two extremes. It is especially troubling because I, as well as most people, usually prefer the middle ground. I am hopeful that this age of uber-partisan politics is only a phase and that good sense will prevail in the end. Whether or not you agree with his views, Obama’s message of “the politics of hope” (meaning campaigning on the issues and not on opponent attacks) as well as his commitment to not accepting funds from lobbyists are a good start, but so far he stands largely alone amidst of sea of polarizing forces.
I spend at least 4-5 hours a month talking politics with my friend Joe. Sometimes we agree and sometimes we don’t, but I always have respect for him and his views and I’m always more than happy to sit down and have a beer with him before, during, and/or after. I guess I’d just like to see that same kind of civility from our government. Am I asking too much?
Monday, October 22, 2007
I'll Have Nothing (and Like It)
This weekend for the first time in what seems like forever I did pretty much nothing and I must say that it was everything I dreamed it would be and more. It was awesome to have an entire weekend where the most pressing engagements I had were 1) going to see a movie on Friday night and 2) dragging myself a mile away to watch the Illini game at The Fieldhouse Saturday night. Apart from those distractions (and a couple trips to the gym) I spent a lot of quality time on the couch watching and gambling on football. Ultimately, gambling-wise I had a pretty good weekend (+$130) but really the point for me isn't to win money it's just to avoid losing my bankroll and thus having to put more in (one of my favorite gambling quotes is "I hope to break even this week; I really need the money." That only makes sense to you if you're a gambler). As a fan, the weekend was a mixed bag. The Illini game was quite disappointing. Ultimately it was probably a meaningless loss though since they will almost certainly still be bowl-eligible. Also, they didn't really have a legit shot at the Big Ten title anyway since their chances of beating Ohio St in Columbus were pretty remote. As a side note, as it turned out The Fieldhouse was just not a good place to be Saturday night as the crowd was packed with fans of the Illini, the Indians, and the Terrapins; all of whom lost. However, the Bears game Sunday more than made up for the Saturday letdown, as Brian Griese temporarily saved the Bears season by engineering a 97-yard TD drive with just under 2 minutes to go and no timeouts. It became even more impressive when it came out later that he had lost the audio in his helmet and thus was forced to call all the plays himself. After last week's crushing last-second defeat, it was nice to get one of those back.
So while things evened out for me, I've got to say that I really feel for Indians fans. 3 chances to win one game to get to the World Series and they come up short. Since the Cubs got swept out of the playoffs 2 weeks ago I had been comtemplating whether I would rather have had them go out the way they did this year or in 2003. I thought at the time that I'd rather have this year's result and now after watching the Indians I'm sure of it. It sucks to just get swept out of the playoffs; but it's something entirely different and far more cruel to get "this close" and then have your heart torn out. And by the way, why do I get this feeling that the Red Sox are going to win like 4 more World Series titles in the next 10 years and become the new Yankees? All that good will of being the team that always comes oh-so-close but never wins it is going to evaporate in a hurry, let me tell you. Actually, between the Series-bound Red Sox, the undefeated Patriots, and #2 Boston College most of the Boston goodwill is probably already gone.
Speaking of gone, the movie I mentioned that we saw on Friday night was Gone Baby Gone, which is the directorial debut of Ben Affleck and is based on the novel by Dennis Lehane (who also wrote Mystic River). Christy and I both agree that it's the best movie we've each seen this year. Since it's a thriller, I can't really talk about it without giving away too much, but what makes it so good is that when the inevitable twists come they actually make a lot of sense within the context of the story and are consistent with the characters and don't simply happen because the writer decided there needed to be a twist here. Casey Affleck also does a much better job than I thought he would. It's not an Oscar-worthy performance, but anytime you can share the screen with Ed Harris and Morgan Freeman and hold your own, you've done an admirable job.
So while things evened out for me, I've got to say that I really feel for Indians fans. 3 chances to win one game to get to the World Series and they come up short. Since the Cubs got swept out of the playoffs 2 weeks ago I had been comtemplating whether I would rather have had them go out the way they did this year or in 2003. I thought at the time that I'd rather have this year's result and now after watching the Indians I'm sure of it. It sucks to just get swept out of the playoffs; but it's something entirely different and far more cruel to get "this close" and then have your heart torn out. And by the way, why do I get this feeling that the Red Sox are going to win like 4 more World Series titles in the next 10 years and become the new Yankees? All that good will of being the team that always comes oh-so-close but never wins it is going to evaporate in a hurry, let me tell you. Actually, between the Series-bound Red Sox, the undefeated Patriots, and #2 Boston College most of the Boston goodwill is probably already gone.
Speaking of gone, the movie I mentioned that we saw on Friday night was Gone Baby Gone, which is the directorial debut of Ben Affleck and is based on the novel by Dennis Lehane (who also wrote Mystic River). Christy and I both agree that it's the best movie we've each seen this year. Since it's a thriller, I can't really talk about it without giving away too much, but what makes it so good is that when the inevitable twists come they actually make a lot of sense within the context of the story and are consistent with the characters and don't simply happen because the writer decided there needed to be a twist here. Casey Affleck also does a much better job than I thought he would. It's not an Oscar-worthy performance, but anytime you can share the screen with Ed Harris and Morgan Freeman and hold your own, you've done an admirable job.
Monday, October 15, 2007
We Be Cultured
Starting with a poor decision to see a truly awful musical called Bark! (which is in the spirit of cats where all the actors are dogs at a local pound) right after we moved into the city Christy and I have struck out more times than not whenever we have attempted to delve into the realm of Chicago Theatre. All you really need to know about the play Bark! is that it ends with the line (shouted by all the characters) "Come on you pussies, bark!" On the heels of that debachle, we saw Wicked a month later and despised that as well. All you really need to know about that play is that it says "how about we take the Wicked Witch and model her after the ugly duckling, take the Good Witch and model her after Reese Witherspoon in Legally Blonde, and take the Professor and model him after Hitler." We did finally break the trend when we saw "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolfe?" this past summer, but even that wasn't without incident since Kathleen Turner was sick and missed the performance. On Friday, Christy and I once again decided to try our luck with Chicago Theatre by going to see a play called Passion (no relation to the Mel Gibson movie) at the Chicago Shakespeare Theatre at Navy Pier. The result was, well, better than Bark! and Wicked but not much else. To summarize, it's a musical drama set in the early 1900s about a love triangle between a married woman, a young soldier, and the sickly cousin of his commanding officer. It was pretty well written and all the performances were solid, but the music just really detracted from the whole thing. I have no bias against musicals, but in this case there were absolutely no memorable songs or even clear melodies most of the time. Basically most scenes boil down to some good dramatic dialog that builds to a crescendo and then the singing begins and rather than elevate the level of emotion and drama it ends up completely deflating it. Had they just spoken the exact same lines instead of singing them, the result would have been a far superior product. It's a shame, too, because every other piece of this play works (acting, writing, direction, pacing) but ultimately it's a case of trying to fit a round peg into a square hole that derails it. So far, the common thread that has run through two of our poor selections is Ana Gastemeyer (the SNL alum who starred in both Wicked and Passion). Sorry Ana, but I think we're done with you for a while.
We did fare better last night when we went to see the premier of Slipstream, a new film starring Anthony Hopkins that was playing as part of the Chicago Film Festival at the Music Box Theatre. In addition to starring in it, he also wrote, directed, and scored it. He was also present to introduce the film as well. About all I can say about him is that he seemed like a nice guy, since he didn't say much other than thank a bunch of people and hoped that we enjoyed it. There's really no good way that I can describe the film to you, since it's one of those "warped reality" type of films. The closest I can come is to say that it's about a writer who is losing his mind and the characters he is writing about start appearing in his life and vice versa. In general, though, I'd say that if you are a fan of David Lynch then you will like this movie (which I am and did). However, Christy is not a fan of Lynch but she still liked it. It's one of those films where although it is weird and certainly not everything ties together, you still do have the notion that it is playing by a real set of rules (rather than just randomness) and that there is some sense amidst the disorder. With movies like this, since you don't have a linear, cohesive storyline it becomes essential that each individual scene is able to work and entertain on its own, and that's something that I think this film does exceptionally well (something I think can also be said for Lynch's Mulholland Drive, which is one of my favorite movies of all time). The movie aside, I'd just like to say that everyone who hasn't yet needs to experience a film at the Music Box Theatre. It really is like going back in time to see a movie. The main theatre is a huge 400-500 person auditorium with extremely intricate designs and gold trim on the walls. A large red velvet curtain hangs over the screen before the show and music from an antique gold organ located just to the left of the screen provides the pre-show entertainment (even if you don't like organ music, you can't deny that it is light years better than the 15 minutes of advertising you're forced to sit through at AMCs now). Sure, there are drawbacks. There's no stadium seating and of course the old style seats lack modern amenities like cup holders and frankly aren't the most comfortable things in the world. But when you see a film there, you feel like you're connecting back with a time when it really was an event to go and see a movie, rather than just a way to kill 2 hours on a Saturday night when nothing else is going on.
I finally finished Fiasco and am still dilligently working on my Iraq War post. I hope to have something suitable for blogging by the end of the week. In the meantime, I am starting on Alan Greenspan's book this week and also am going to begin studying for the first part of the CPA exam. Lucky, lucky me. Finally, I got out and ran for the first time since the marathon yesterday. Only 3 miles, but it felt good to run and my knee held up pretty well.
We did fare better last night when we went to see the premier of Slipstream, a new film starring Anthony Hopkins that was playing as part of the Chicago Film Festival at the Music Box Theatre. In addition to starring in it, he also wrote, directed, and scored it. He was also present to introduce the film as well. About all I can say about him is that he seemed like a nice guy, since he didn't say much other than thank a bunch of people and hoped that we enjoyed it. There's really no good way that I can describe the film to you, since it's one of those "warped reality" type of films. The closest I can come is to say that it's about a writer who is losing his mind and the characters he is writing about start appearing in his life and vice versa. In general, though, I'd say that if you are a fan of David Lynch then you will like this movie (which I am and did). However, Christy is not a fan of Lynch but she still liked it. It's one of those films where although it is weird and certainly not everything ties together, you still do have the notion that it is playing by a real set of rules (rather than just randomness) and that there is some sense amidst the disorder. With movies like this, since you don't have a linear, cohesive storyline it becomes essential that each individual scene is able to work and entertain on its own, and that's something that I think this film does exceptionally well (something I think can also be said for Lynch's Mulholland Drive, which is one of my favorite movies of all time). The movie aside, I'd just like to say that everyone who hasn't yet needs to experience a film at the Music Box Theatre. It really is like going back in time to see a movie. The main theatre is a huge 400-500 person auditorium with extremely intricate designs and gold trim on the walls. A large red velvet curtain hangs over the screen before the show and music from an antique gold organ located just to the left of the screen provides the pre-show entertainment (even if you don't like organ music, you can't deny that it is light years better than the 15 minutes of advertising you're forced to sit through at AMCs now). Sure, there are drawbacks. There's no stadium seating and of course the old style seats lack modern amenities like cup holders and frankly aren't the most comfortable things in the world. But when you see a film there, you feel like you're connecting back with a time when it really was an event to go and see a movie, rather than just a way to kill 2 hours on a Saturday night when nothing else is going on.
I finally finished Fiasco and am still dilligently working on my Iraq War post. I hope to have something suitable for blogging by the end of the week. In the meantime, I am starting on Alan Greenspan's book this week and also am going to begin studying for the first part of the CPA exam. Lucky, lucky me. Finally, I got out and ran for the first time since the marathon yesterday. Only 3 miles, but it felt good to run and my knee held up pretty well.
Monday, October 08, 2007
26.2: The Play by Play (or Step by Step)
Yes, I am the exceptionally goofy-looking guy in all white wearing the headband. And just to my right and slightly ahead of me is my friend Phil who was both stupid enough to allow me to con him into running this one drunken night and also gracious enough to run it step for step with me the whole way yesterday. Just over Phil's right shoulder you can see my dad, who met us at the 25 mile marker and went most of the rest of the way in with us. The person taking the picture is my brother Joe, who met us at just past the mile 21 marker and walked with us the rest of the way (which was more work than it sounds considering he'd made the poor decision to wear a black t-shirt).
So, the end result was 5:53:34 but the bottom line was that I finished, got my medal, and am still alive to tell the tale. I would have considered that an accomplishment under any setting, but coming during the hottest Chicago Marathon on record and on a knee that I was positive was going to give out on me I couldn't be happier with the result. I also can't believe that a day after I had to witness in-person the demise of the Cubs season I am still considering this a really good weekend (the Bears come from behind victory helped too).
I'd just like to take a quick moment to thank everybody who sent me words of encouragement and congratulations leading up to and after the marathon. It was nice to feel the love and also just to know that people cared about something I was doing. I'd also like to thank Christy, Liz, Megan, my dad, my brothers Joe and Zack, and Phil and Christy's parents for coming out yesterday and supporting Phil and I. It's one thing to get random encouragment from spectators, but it means so much more when it comes directly at you from people you know. Of course I have to save a special thank you to Christy, who dealt with our lives revolving around my training schedule for the last 4 months and encouraged me at every step even though as a wife she was more worried about my health and safety than she was excited about me doing this. Thanks dear, you are the best!
Now I'd just like to share some thoughts, sights, and quotes from the day to give you a feel for what the experience was like.
5:30 A.M. - The alarm goes off. Way too early, considering that I just got to sleep a little before 1. I get up, shower and dress and greet Phil (who stayed over Saturday night) with "I don't know about you, but I'm ready to do something incredibly stupid!"
6:40 A.M. - We get on the el which, predictably, is a madhouse. At the next stop, a group of four French people get on. One of them is wearing an all red-white-and-blue spandex suit and has a giant French flag strapped to his back. He is also wearing a beret. All he needs is to be holding wine and cheese in his hand and he would be the perfect French stereotype.
7:35 A.M. - Phil and I reach the starting gate and get ourselves in with the 9:00 min/mile pace people so that we can get across the starting line earlier. We're not trying to be jackasses, but the course closes 6 and a half hours after the gun and thus the faster you get across the start line the more time you have. If you haven't seen the marathon before, just imagine they took Wrigley Field during a sold out Cubs game and emptied them all out into a 4 block area and held them there. Now also imagine that there are people from about 50 different countries present, all speaking different languages and holding or wearing flags you've never seen before. We sit down and stretch for a while and try not to think about the fact that we'll be running for the next 6 hours.
8:10 A.M. - We get across the starting line quicker than I thought, leaving us a whole 6:20 to finish in. We can do over 14-minute miles now and still finish in time. Woo-hoo!
~9:00 A.M. - We stop at the Port-O-Potties at the 5 mile marker. This is only significant because, despite the fact that at just about every water station the rest of the way we drink at least 2 cups of gatorade and one cup of water we will never even feel the slightest need to use the facilities again.
~9:35 A.M. - We are near the 8-mile marker and my knee starts to whine. Uh oh.
~9:50 A.M - My knee goes numb. Score! We are in upper Lakeview/Boys Town and there are massive crowds on both sides. I want to skip our walk break because it's very easy to run when you've got shade and a big audience.
~10:00 A.M. - Just before the 10-mile marker we see Christy, Liz, and Megan and about a minute later see my dad and brothers. Then we turn onto North Ave. There's a good amount of shade and a huge crowd on both sides of the street cheering us on. Just before the turn at Wells, there is an Elvis imitator performing. I don't feel the least bit tired. I say to myself "This is actually a lot more fun than I thought it would be. You know what? I might actually end up running another one of these."
~10:20 A.M. - After running down Wells for a mile and a half, during which time there is virtually no shade, no breeze, and the temperature has risen to approximately the temperature of the surface of the sun I think to myself "This is quite possibly the worst idea I've ever had. You know what? I'm glad that the first guy that ever ran a marathon dropped dead afterwards. Served him right."
~10:45 A.M. - We reach the halfway point, and the comfortable numbness of my knee is gone. I have the distinct feeling (correct, as it turns out) that this time it will not be going numb again.
~11:15 A.M. - We are past the west loop, over by the United Center. This area is markedly more suburban-looking which means both smaller buildings (and thus less shade) and not nearly as many people cheering us on. Fatigue starts to become a real issue, and I make the executive decision to modify our ratio of 4 mintes of running and 1 minute of walking to 3/2. Phil concurs with this decision.
~11:45 A.M. - We are entering Little Italy and coming to the 18-mile marker. There's a lot more people here and we are getting a 2nd (or third, or maybe fourth) wind. Christy, Liz, and Megan have come down from the north side to cheer us on here and Christy's parents are here as well. We get a nice boost.
~12:00 P.M. - We get to the water station past the mile 19 marker and hear that "the marathon has been cancelled." We have pretty much no other information other than that, but everyone seems to still be doing the course so we just keep going.
~12:15 P.M. - Just past the 20 mile marker, police officers are coming into the street and forcibly stopping people from running. We still have no idea what exactly is going on, and the announcement over the bullhorn that "the marathon has been cancelled due to a heat emergency" is decidedly unhelpful. All I can think of is "after all this, are you seriously going to tell me that I'm not going to be able to finish this and I'll have to run another one?"
~ 12: 35 P.M. - Walking now, we pass the 21 mile marker in Chinatown and see my dad and brother Joe. Joe decides to walk along with us and we see if he has any additional information. All he knows is that out of the 45,000 registered entrants, 10,000 didn't even show up due to the heat. My knee informs me that it will be doing no more bending the rest of the way.
~12:55 P.M. - Around the 22 mile marker we finally get the real story from a police officer. Yes, we are still allowed to complete the course but we are supposed to walk due to the heat and the fact that some water stations are out of water and the paramedics have been overwhelmed. We are still being timed and will still get our medals. This information improves the mood significantly.
2:03 P.M. - After walking the last 5 miles, we run through the giant mister (the photo at the top), walk the giant hill on Roosevelt, and then run down Columbus through the finish. We get our medals and then a free beer. What more could you ask for?
So all in all, had we not been forced to walk I think our time would have been right around 5:30. However, the difference between a time of 5:53 and 5:30 doesn't really mean anything. Anyone who's run a marathon before knows that both times are slow, and anyone who hasn't has absolutely no frame of reference and is just impressed that you finished.
Alright, not to make this post any more long-winded, I'll just leave you with some best-ofs from the day:
Best sign: Tie: Giant picture of David Hasselhoff captioned with "The Hoff says run Maria!" and one that said "Release Your Inner Kenyan"
Best outfit (runner): A man dressed up as giant pair of hairy testicles. Apparently he was running to benefit testicular cancer research. We only saw him once around the 5 mile mark, and none of our cheering section saw him so I'm guessing he dropped out pretty quick. That suit looked sweltering. Honorable mentions to Captain American and The Flash running together. By the looks of things, The Flash has really let himself go.
Best outfit (spectator): Two guys in Lakeview. One with a shirt that said "Gay" and next to him a shirt that said "Gayer".
Best Quote: Also a tie:
Spectator: You guys are beautiful.
Runner: I don't feel beautiful.
and
Cop (in a car, through the bullhorn after we had been told to walk): Do not run, or we will chase you.
OK, that's all I got folks. Today I am at home recuperating, icing the knee, blogging, and generally taking some well earned r&r. I plan to take my shirt (after washing of course), number, medal, and the picture of Phil and I after the finish and have them all framed together to hopefully hang in my study/den/office one day alongside my degrees (and, knock on wood, my CPA certification). When I'm recovered, I plan to go back to running about 15 miles per week (3 miles, 5 times per week). But more importantly I plan to never, EVER, run another one of these again!
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
The Good and the Bad
Update (9/27): This didn't warrant a separate entry, but just wanted to add that I was able to succesfully run 5 miles yesterday and the knee feels pretty good today, so that's good news.
Well, the good news is that I succesfully completed my 20 mile run, and actually did it in less time than it took me to run 18.8 miles (3:52 vs. 4:01), due mainly to having absolutely perfect weather (mid-60s and overcast) and not having to contend with any real hills. The bad is that starting around mile 15 my knee started acting up on me but it was still bearable so I plowed through to the end. I figured I would take a few days off and then get back to it. I have been waiting the last 10 days to blog about the success of my 20-mile run and how positive I was feeling about the marathon on the 7th because I wanted to make sure my knee was going to bounce back. Well, I'm still waiting. It's not that the knee is in pain all the time; after the first 2 days it's actually been fine during my normal, everyday activities. But when I tried to go run last Thursday I could feel it start to ache about half a mile in and then again on Monday right around the 1 mile mark. I think a lot of it is that I'm supremely sensitive about it now because I know that any setback at this point is going to mean missing the marathon, and I can't think of anything worse than that after I've gone through all the hell runs. I've still got another 10 days though, so I'm not worried . . .yet. The only thing that is disappointing is that I haven't been able to get in my last 2 10-mile runs, and at this point I've already accepted that those aren't going to happen. In the grand scheme of things, though, the extra 20 miles wasn't going to make a big difference one way or the other. Also, I have been substituting by exercising on the elliptical machine to at least keep up my cardio. Going to do another hour/hour and a half tonight and then try to get back to running on Saturday with a quick 3 miles and then (hopefully) Sunday I'll be able to do 5. If I get those both in I will be back to feeling pretty optimistic again.
So it's come down to the home stretch for the Cubs, and while it still is looking good for them it was looking a lot better 2 days ago when they had a 3.5 game lead (it's down to 2 now). I slept right through when playoff tickets went on sale Sunday morning at 9:00, but I have been thinking about ponying up the extra cash and buying them off of e-bay. However, I can't help but think that I am jinxing them everytime I go search through the listings. Ah, the joys of being a Cubs fan; having the feeling that every little mundane action you do somehow has this grand effect on the team's performance.
In other, semi-related news, I did receive my $3000 check from Bodog on Monday night (it's related because that's the only reason I am considering buying Cubs playoff tickets). So as long as the check doesn't bounce I can officially declare my drunken evening a roaring success!
Have the 10-year high school reunion this weekend. Looking forward to it but of course I have a whole lot of competing thoughts on the matter: 1) wow, I'm old, 2) I hope it's not ridiculously awkward, 3) I hope I don't get ridiculously drunk as a result of the afore-mentioned awkwardness, 4) hopefully, the people that I don't recognize also won't recognize me. Overall, I'm sure it will be a good time. I'm looking at it much like how I view going to a wedding: something you look forward to when it's a long ways away, then as it gets closer you see it as more of an obligation, but then you go and end up having a really good time. That's the hope, anyway.
On the day that the Bears officially made the switch from Grossman to Griese, how long before the Orton chants start? Just asking.
About halfway through Fiasco now. Newsflash: books about the Iraq War are depressing.
Well, the good news is that I succesfully completed my 20 mile run, and actually did it in less time than it took me to run 18.8 miles (3:52 vs. 4:01), due mainly to having absolutely perfect weather (mid-60s and overcast) and not having to contend with any real hills. The bad is that starting around mile 15 my knee started acting up on me but it was still bearable so I plowed through to the end. I figured I would take a few days off and then get back to it. I have been waiting the last 10 days to blog about the success of my 20-mile run and how positive I was feeling about the marathon on the 7th because I wanted to make sure my knee was going to bounce back. Well, I'm still waiting. It's not that the knee is in pain all the time; after the first 2 days it's actually been fine during my normal, everyday activities. But when I tried to go run last Thursday I could feel it start to ache about half a mile in and then again on Monday right around the 1 mile mark. I think a lot of it is that I'm supremely sensitive about it now because I know that any setback at this point is going to mean missing the marathon, and I can't think of anything worse than that after I've gone through all the hell runs. I've still got another 10 days though, so I'm not worried . . .yet. The only thing that is disappointing is that I haven't been able to get in my last 2 10-mile runs, and at this point I've already accepted that those aren't going to happen. In the grand scheme of things, though, the extra 20 miles wasn't going to make a big difference one way or the other. Also, I have been substituting by exercising on the elliptical machine to at least keep up my cardio. Going to do another hour/hour and a half tonight and then try to get back to running on Saturday with a quick 3 miles and then (hopefully) Sunday I'll be able to do 5. If I get those both in I will be back to feeling pretty optimistic again.
So it's come down to the home stretch for the Cubs, and while it still is looking good for them it was looking a lot better 2 days ago when they had a 3.5 game lead (it's down to 2 now). I slept right through when playoff tickets went on sale Sunday morning at 9:00, but I have been thinking about ponying up the extra cash and buying them off of e-bay. However, I can't help but think that I am jinxing them everytime I go search through the listings. Ah, the joys of being a Cubs fan; having the feeling that every little mundane action you do somehow has this grand effect on the team's performance.
In other, semi-related news, I did receive my $3000 check from Bodog on Monday night (it's related because that's the only reason I am considering buying Cubs playoff tickets). So as long as the check doesn't bounce I can officially declare my drunken evening a roaring success!
Have the 10-year high school reunion this weekend. Looking forward to it but of course I have a whole lot of competing thoughts on the matter: 1) wow, I'm old, 2) I hope it's not ridiculously awkward, 3) I hope I don't get ridiculously drunk as a result of the afore-mentioned awkwardness, 4) hopefully, the people that I don't recognize also won't recognize me. Overall, I'm sure it will be a good time. I'm looking at it much like how I view going to a wedding: something you look forward to when it's a long ways away, then as it gets closer you see it as more of an obligation, but then you go and end up having a really good time. That's the hope, anyway.
On the day that the Bears officially made the switch from Grossman to Griese, how long before the Orton chants start? Just asking.
About halfway through Fiasco now. Newsflash: books about the Iraq War are depressing.
Friday, September 14, 2007
No Mas
So last Saturday I head out to my dad's in Tinley Park to do my long run. I have to do 17 miles, and he says he knows this 8-mile loop that we can do twice and then I can run a little extra to get to 17. He'll ride the bike along side me while I run. Sounds great. Then we get about 4 miles in and realize that, in fact, it is actually a 9.4 mile loop. So my 17-mile run turns into 18.8, which would be fine except that prior to that the longest I have ever run in my life is 14 miles. Well, to make a long (and I do mean LONG) run a short story I did survive and actually wasn't in too much physical pain. However, I immediately started thinking about how I need to run even farther this coming weekend and that made the mental pain close to unbearable. I really just want to fast-forward my life to Sunday at about 1:30 when I will be finished with it and it's quite depressing to be sitting here on a Friday morning and wish that most of your weekend was already over with. The good news is that after this weekend my training is pretty much done. I do have a couple more 10-mile runs but I no longer dread those as I once did. For the most part it will be just getting healed up and praying that I don't get a freak injury that knocks me out of commision and renders all this training useless. I do know this, though. If somehow I don't get to run the marathon in 3 weeks, that will just be a life goal that doesn't end up getting met because I am absolutely NOT going through this crap again.
In other news, if the marathon doesn't kill me I'm pretty sure the Cubs will. It's nice that they are playing meaningful baseball in September but I don't know if my heart can take it. Monday they blew a 4-1 lead and lost in 12 innings in heart-breaking fashion and then Tuesday they did their best to give up a 9th inning lead only to pull it out with a miracle double play. I was happy they won, but that didn't make the ulcer in my stomach any smaller.
It is during this time of the year that I am always starkly reminded of the difference between watching football vs. baseball. They are definitely my two favorite sports and I would probably give the nod to baseball as my #1 only because it is virtually every day for 6 months while you only get to see your football team for 3 hours a week. However, I must say that I find the two sports very difficult to watch simultaneously. A lot of people say that baseball is very slow and for most of the year I vehemently disagree. Once you get into the strategy that goes into pitch selection and how much the count matters to every batter, then every pitch becomes crucial and there's a lot of tension all the time even if to the non-fan it looks like nothing's happening. But when you're forced to compare baseball side by side with football it's hard to argue that it's definitely a lot slower. I'll have the baseball game on at the start of the inning, just as the first batter is getting ready to dig in at the plate. Then I flip over to football and see the kickoff and 22 guys running at an all-out sprint over and into each other. Then you see the offense run 3 more plays where there is just non-stop motion on the field. Maybe you even see a long run or pass or a turnover or none of that and just a punt but it all seems critical because precious seconds are ticking off the clock and the even more important strategic field position game is being waged. So then you flip back over to the baseball game and see that the same guy's still up after fouling off 4 pitches with a full count and now the catcher has gone out to hold what seems like an hour-long conference with the pitcher about pitch selection. Seriously, you start expecting a Power Point presentation to break out at any minute. It's just amazing how your perspective can change things. It's like you're driving down a normal road doing 40, and it seems neither slow or fast. But then you get on the expressway and speed up to 80 for a couple minutes. Then you go back and do 40 again and it seems like you're crawling.
I am working on another serious piece, which I was going to post today. I have come back from my break of reading fiction and finally got around to reading State of Denial (by Bob Woodward). This is the 3rd book I have read about Iraq (My Year in Iraq by Paul Bremer and The Prince of the Marshes by Rory Stewart are the others) and I already bought Fiasco by Thomas Ricks and plan to read that next. In addition to all that, I've been pretty religiously watching This Week and Meet the Press every week as well as reading The Economist and the latest GAO report on Iraq progress. So, anyway, I feel pretty well versed in what's going on over there and realized I have a lot of thoughts on the matter. So many thoughts, in fact, that I fear it is going to end up rivaling my thoughts on the national debt in length and I just wasn't up for that today. So, anyway, you can look forward to (or dread) that piece coming in the next couple weeks. I can pretty much summarize what has gone wrong over there with the following list: Rumsfeld bad, inadequate and (at times) non-existant planning, not enough troops, too much bureaucracy, money not getting to the people that needed it.
Have an excellent weekend all (3 of you)!
In other news, if the marathon doesn't kill me I'm pretty sure the Cubs will. It's nice that they are playing meaningful baseball in September but I don't know if my heart can take it. Monday they blew a 4-1 lead and lost in 12 innings in heart-breaking fashion and then Tuesday they did their best to give up a 9th inning lead only to pull it out with a miracle double play. I was happy they won, but that didn't make the ulcer in my stomach any smaller.
It is during this time of the year that I am always starkly reminded of the difference between watching football vs. baseball. They are definitely my two favorite sports and I would probably give the nod to baseball as my #1 only because it is virtually every day for 6 months while you only get to see your football team for 3 hours a week. However, I must say that I find the two sports very difficult to watch simultaneously. A lot of people say that baseball is very slow and for most of the year I vehemently disagree. Once you get into the strategy that goes into pitch selection and how much the count matters to every batter, then every pitch becomes crucial and there's a lot of tension all the time even if to the non-fan it looks like nothing's happening. But when you're forced to compare baseball side by side with football it's hard to argue that it's definitely a lot slower. I'll have the baseball game on at the start of the inning, just as the first batter is getting ready to dig in at the plate. Then I flip over to football and see the kickoff and 22 guys running at an all-out sprint over and into each other. Then you see the offense run 3 more plays where there is just non-stop motion on the field. Maybe you even see a long run or pass or a turnover or none of that and just a punt but it all seems critical because precious seconds are ticking off the clock and the even more important strategic field position game is being waged. So then you flip back over to the baseball game and see that the same guy's still up after fouling off 4 pitches with a full count and now the catcher has gone out to hold what seems like an hour-long conference with the pitcher about pitch selection. Seriously, you start expecting a Power Point presentation to break out at any minute. It's just amazing how your perspective can change things. It's like you're driving down a normal road doing 40, and it seems neither slow or fast. But then you get on the expressway and speed up to 80 for a couple minutes. Then you go back and do 40 again and it seems like you're crawling.
I am working on another serious piece, which I was going to post today. I have come back from my break of reading fiction and finally got around to reading State of Denial (by Bob Woodward). This is the 3rd book I have read about Iraq (My Year in Iraq by Paul Bremer and The Prince of the Marshes by Rory Stewart are the others) and I already bought Fiasco by Thomas Ricks and plan to read that next. In addition to all that, I've been pretty religiously watching This Week and Meet the Press every week as well as reading The Economist and the latest GAO report on Iraq progress. So, anyway, I feel pretty well versed in what's going on over there and realized I have a lot of thoughts on the matter. So many thoughts, in fact, that I fear it is going to end up rivaling my thoughts on the national debt in length and I just wasn't up for that today. So, anyway, you can look forward to (or dread) that piece coming in the next couple weeks. I can pretty much summarize what has gone wrong over there with the following list: Rumsfeld bad, inadequate and (at times) non-existant planning, not enough troops, too much bureaucracy, money not getting to the people that needed it.
Have an excellent weekend all (3 of you)!
Friday, September 07, 2007
A (Drunken) Night's Tale
So I know that you all have barely been able to contain your excitement awaiting my next post to see what incredibly inspirational and life-changing story I had for you. OK, so probably not, but I'm going to tell you anyway.
So exactly two weeks ago we had our corporate summer outing, which took place on one of those lunch-time cruises that leave from Navy Pier. They're fun, but the only thing that's relevant about that to this story is that it meant that I started drinking while on board at about 1:00 and then got to leave work immediately after we docked at 2:00. I met some of my friends that I used to work with at HSBC for a happy hour over at Sidebar on Lasalle. Well, Christy was on her way to St. Louis for the weekend so I knew I had nowhere to be and as a consequence happy hour turned into about happy 6-hours. As I stumbled my way out of the bar and into a cab at around 8:30, I was feeling pretty good and decided that it was time to place some drunken phone calls.
Earlier in the week, my brother and I had kicked around the idea of him coming up and us going to see Superbad together so I decided to give him a call and see what the plan was. Turns out that his flight back from Charlotte Thursday night had been cancelled and he had spent the night on the floor and waited through 3 flights before finally getting home at around 6, so he wasn't in much of a mood to head right out to the city. This all seemed very logical to me, but I was in no mood for logic so I calmly presented him with his options. He could either come down to the city, or he could opt to stay home. However, if he opted to stay home I vowed to call him twice per hour to tell him 1) what I was doing at the time 2) how drunk I was; and 3) how much he sucked for not coming down and seeing Superbad with me. He carefully weighed his options and wisely chose the route that avoided future drunken phone calls (I suppose the idea that he could have simply turned off his phone did not occur to him). Anyway, he gets down to our place at around 10:30 and of course he is completely sober so naturally we need to have a few beers together before leaving to see the movie. I'm not sure what exactly it is (most likely alcoholism), but somehow when you're drunk and someone sober shows up and starts drinking you instantly feel like you're sober too and need to drink at their pace. Of course, in actuality that's the last thing you need to do, but again we're not dealing in the realm of logic at this point.
In any case, we head out to see an 11:30 showing of Superbad. The lights go down in the theatre and suddenly, now that alcohol has been removed from the equation, my body is finally able to get a message through to my brain that due to the 10 hours of non-stop drinking it is actually quite tired and now that it is dark it will be assuming that it is bedtime and act accordingly. An epic, but ultimately fruitless struggle to stay awake plays out over approximately the next 25-40 minutes (that's the best I can estimate) and the next thing I know my brother is waking me up to tell me the movie's over. Disappointed, but refreshed from my nap, we head back to my place where I begin drinking again (naturally) while playing him excerpts from The Muppet Show (Season 2) on DVD (which are kind of funny all the time, but really funny when it's 2:00 A.M. and you've been drinking for the better part of 13 hours). Finally, at around 2:45 my bro takes off to go home since he stopped drinking at 11:15 before the movie.
At this point, any sane, logical, rational being would have simply called it a night and gone to bed. So of course I did the only thing that made sense to me at the time: started gambling online. Now, this is hardly the first time that in an inebbriated state it has seemed like a good idea to me to gamble online. And pretty much uniformily the story is the same: played for a while, was up briefly, then lost it all. I had set aside $500 to load up my betting account for football season at bodog and decided I might as well get started on losing it. Of course, the problem is that there tends to not be a lot of professional sporting events being played at 3:00 A.M. (I am hoping to organize a professional curling league in Zaire to correct this problem, but I digress). Fortunately (or unfortunately) bodog has prepared for that contingency by offering online casino games 24 hours a day. Well, I have had some bad experiences playing blackjack and pai-gow poker, so those didn't really interest me. But I had only played craps a little before, to mixed results. I went through the first $100 in about 10 minutes and then loaded up with another $150. I went back and forth for about the next 45 minutes and after an hour I found myself up about $100. What occurred over the next 20 minutes pretty much defies description (mainly because I can't remember it all that clearly). The upshot of it was that during that time I did not roll a single 7 (in case you haven't played craps before, that's a very, very good thing). After a few minutes I had every number covered and was slowly but steadily increasing my bet. During the last 5 minutes, I do remember that I had over $1000 total on the board (I know because that was the table limit and it wouldn't let me bet any more) and was winning around $200 every time I rolled the dice. When I finally did roll the 7 I had to instantly double and triple-check that I was actually playing on a "real money" table because I was up over $5000. It was indeed amd I really was. I think I sat there in disbelief for about 5 minutes waiting for it all to sink in. Then, of course, I decided to push my luck. Over the next hour I gave about a grand back but still quit with my account at just over $4250 and a night's profit of over $4000. The next day I cashed out $3000 and am now using the rest for football betting. Of course, I haven't physically received my check yet so nothing's real until that happens but from every indication I've gotten (from other gamblers) bodog is legitimate. The check takes a month to a month and a half to come, but you will get paid.
In any case, I guess the moral of the story is: just because you're too drunk to stay awake during Superbad doesn't mean you're too drunk to luck your way into $4000.
And yes, I'm available to speak at children's parties.
So exactly two weeks ago we had our corporate summer outing, which took place on one of those lunch-time cruises that leave from Navy Pier. They're fun, but the only thing that's relevant about that to this story is that it meant that I started drinking while on board at about 1:00 and then got to leave work immediately after we docked at 2:00. I met some of my friends that I used to work with at HSBC for a happy hour over at Sidebar on Lasalle. Well, Christy was on her way to St. Louis for the weekend so I knew I had nowhere to be and as a consequence happy hour turned into about happy 6-hours. As I stumbled my way out of the bar and into a cab at around 8:30, I was feeling pretty good and decided that it was time to place some drunken phone calls.
Earlier in the week, my brother and I had kicked around the idea of him coming up and us going to see Superbad together so I decided to give him a call and see what the plan was. Turns out that his flight back from Charlotte Thursday night had been cancelled and he had spent the night on the floor and waited through 3 flights before finally getting home at around 6, so he wasn't in much of a mood to head right out to the city. This all seemed very logical to me, but I was in no mood for logic so I calmly presented him with his options. He could either come down to the city, or he could opt to stay home. However, if he opted to stay home I vowed to call him twice per hour to tell him 1) what I was doing at the time 2) how drunk I was; and 3) how much he sucked for not coming down and seeing Superbad with me. He carefully weighed his options and wisely chose the route that avoided future drunken phone calls (I suppose the idea that he could have simply turned off his phone did not occur to him). Anyway, he gets down to our place at around 10:30 and of course he is completely sober so naturally we need to have a few beers together before leaving to see the movie. I'm not sure what exactly it is (most likely alcoholism), but somehow when you're drunk and someone sober shows up and starts drinking you instantly feel like you're sober too and need to drink at their pace. Of course, in actuality that's the last thing you need to do, but again we're not dealing in the realm of logic at this point.
In any case, we head out to see an 11:30 showing of Superbad. The lights go down in the theatre and suddenly, now that alcohol has been removed from the equation, my body is finally able to get a message through to my brain that due to the 10 hours of non-stop drinking it is actually quite tired and now that it is dark it will be assuming that it is bedtime and act accordingly. An epic, but ultimately fruitless struggle to stay awake plays out over approximately the next 25-40 minutes (that's the best I can estimate) and the next thing I know my brother is waking me up to tell me the movie's over. Disappointed, but refreshed from my nap, we head back to my place where I begin drinking again (naturally) while playing him excerpts from The Muppet Show (Season 2) on DVD (which are kind of funny all the time, but really funny when it's 2:00 A.M. and you've been drinking for the better part of 13 hours). Finally, at around 2:45 my bro takes off to go home since he stopped drinking at 11:15 before the movie.
At this point, any sane, logical, rational being would have simply called it a night and gone to bed. So of course I did the only thing that made sense to me at the time: started gambling online. Now, this is hardly the first time that in an inebbriated state it has seemed like a good idea to me to gamble online. And pretty much uniformily the story is the same: played for a while, was up briefly, then lost it all. I had set aside $500 to load up my betting account for football season at bodog and decided I might as well get started on losing it. Of course, the problem is that there tends to not be a lot of professional sporting events being played at 3:00 A.M. (I am hoping to organize a professional curling league in Zaire to correct this problem, but I digress). Fortunately (or unfortunately) bodog has prepared for that contingency by offering online casino games 24 hours a day. Well, I have had some bad experiences playing blackjack and pai-gow poker, so those didn't really interest me. But I had only played craps a little before, to mixed results. I went through the first $100 in about 10 minutes and then loaded up with another $150. I went back and forth for about the next 45 minutes and after an hour I found myself up about $100. What occurred over the next 20 minutes pretty much defies description (mainly because I can't remember it all that clearly). The upshot of it was that during that time I did not roll a single 7 (in case you haven't played craps before, that's a very, very good thing). After a few minutes I had every number covered and was slowly but steadily increasing my bet. During the last 5 minutes, I do remember that I had over $1000 total on the board (I know because that was the table limit and it wouldn't let me bet any more) and was winning around $200 every time I rolled the dice. When I finally did roll the 7 I had to instantly double and triple-check that I was actually playing on a "real money" table because I was up over $5000. It was indeed amd I really was. I think I sat there in disbelief for about 5 minutes waiting for it all to sink in. Then, of course, I decided to push my luck. Over the next hour I gave about a grand back but still quit with my account at just over $4250 and a night's profit of over $4000. The next day I cashed out $3000 and am now using the rest for football betting. Of course, I haven't physically received my check yet so nothing's real until that happens but from every indication I've gotten (from other gamblers) bodog is legitimate. The check takes a month to a month and a half to come, but you will get paid.
In any case, I guess the moral of the story is: just because you're too drunk to stay awake during Superbad doesn't mean you're too drunk to luck your way into $4000.
And yes, I'm available to speak at children's parties.
Monday, August 27, 2007
The Home Stretch
Well, as much as it saddens me to have to replace my favorite blog title to date, it has been almost 2 weeks since I last wrote anything and it's probably time.
I'll start with a marathon training update. This past week was a planned light week although I ended up making it even lighter than scheduled, running only 10 miles total. Not good, but hopefully I have allowed my body to prepare itself for the rough road ahead. The next 3 weeks figure to be pretty brutal, as I need to log totals of 30, 32, and 39 miles each week. The good news is that once I get to the end of this stretch I really am pretty much done. Well, except for the small detail of running the actual marathon itself on October 7th.
After some brief forays into fiction for a while, I returned to reading non-fiction this past week when I picked up The Secret Man by Bob Woodward. It was written and published immediately after the identity of Deep Throat (the informant from Watergate) was finally revealed as No. 2 FBI-man Mark Felt. Woodward discusses in depth how he originally met him and for the first time provides details on how they would signal each other and the exact nature of the info that he provided. I've always had something of a fascination with Watergate and that made this book an essential read. It really helps to tie together all the ends that have until now intentionally been left loose in order to protect the source's identity. Woodward also gives a couple of interesting anecdotes about how close others came to guessing the source (and some who actually did) and how close the lid was to being blown off at any given time. It's also just interesting to reflect on the accomplishment of keeping something like this a secret for 30 years. Lastly, there's a couple of great ironies to be found. Stemming from the House investigation into the FBI's handling of Watergate, Felt was actually indicted on charges of conducting unauthorized searches on suspects. At his trial, former President Nixon testified on his behalf (the only time Nixon ever testified in court after resigning). Felt was found guilty, but a few years later Reagan pardoned him. So, basically, the man who was almost single-handedly responsible for bringing down Nixon has Nixon himself show up at his trial to defend him and then gets pardoned by Reagan. In any case, the only thing that's disappointing about the read is that you never really get a clear understanding of the exact motives Felt had when he did it. There's a lot of pretty well grounded speculation on Woodward's part, but in the end speculation is just that. Ultimately, the reason for this is that Woodward and Felt's relationship was pretty icy after Watergate and they really didn't speak for over 20 years. When Woodward finally gets up the courage to track him down again, what he finds is a frail old man in his mid-80s that suffers from dementia and can barely remember who Nixon was, let alone any of the specifics behind his downfall. If it were a novel you'd definitely call it anti-climactic but I think it just serves to remind us that real life doesn't like to wrap up all the loose ends most of the time.
Also watched a few movies this past week: Vacancy, Persona, and Letters From Iwo Jima.
Vacancy deserves only a one-word review: lame.
Persona (an old Ingmar Bergman film) deserves quite a bit more but I can sum it up with one word: huh? This movie really confused me, and even after I read two Ebert articles about it I still can't say whether they helped me figure things out or just confused me more. If you are into classic and/or foreign cinema and/orBergman films, then you absolutely need to see it but if you don't fall into any of those groups I can't imagine you liking it. And I generally love weird movies (like pretty much any David Lynch film except Inland Empire) but I'm just not sure about this one. I think the real problem is that most of the movie is presented very "normally" and then just all of a sudden it veers off into these really weird tangents for a minute or two before returning. At least with a Lynch film I'm expecting a midget and a person wearing an antelope head to come onscreen at any given moment so I'm not so caught off guard when it happens.
Letters From Iwo Jima I was really impressed with; definitely the best war film I've seen since Saving Private Ryan. It is very unique in that although it is an American film it shows the battle from the perspective of the Japanese and thus is portraying the U.S. as the "enemy". You also get a really interesting glimpse into the conflict that was going on in Japan at the time between modern "Westernized" thinking and their classic samurai culture. When the acting general (who has spent time studying in America) orders a battalion to retreat from their post and rendevous with another squadron at a fall-back position, the head of the battalion disobeys the order and he and most of his men commit suicide by falling on their own grenades. Looking at it now, it's inescapable to not think "wow, what a waste" but that's such a great illustration of a nation with an identity crisis. The strategic move is clearly to conserve your forces and rally them at a new tactical position, but the samurai way dictates that you will die with honor where you stand before you abandon your post for any reason. As you look at the Japan that exists today as a technological powerhouse among first-world nations, it's pretty evident what manor of thinking won out in the end.
I also sort of saw Superbad on Friday night, but fell asleep a little under half-way through. From what I remember, it was really funny.
Have some other interesting news, but I want to save it since this is already too long and I want to make sure I have something interesting to talk about next time. I know that all 4 of you can hardly contain your excitement . . .
I'll start with a marathon training update. This past week was a planned light week although I ended up making it even lighter than scheduled, running only 10 miles total. Not good, but hopefully I have allowed my body to prepare itself for the rough road ahead. The next 3 weeks figure to be pretty brutal, as I need to log totals of 30, 32, and 39 miles each week. The good news is that once I get to the end of this stretch I really am pretty much done. Well, except for the small detail of running the actual marathon itself on October 7th.
After some brief forays into fiction for a while, I returned to reading non-fiction this past week when I picked up The Secret Man by Bob Woodward. It was written and published immediately after the identity of Deep Throat (the informant from Watergate) was finally revealed as No. 2 FBI-man Mark Felt. Woodward discusses in depth how he originally met him and for the first time provides details on how they would signal each other and the exact nature of the info that he provided. I've always had something of a fascination with Watergate and that made this book an essential read. It really helps to tie together all the ends that have until now intentionally been left loose in order to protect the source's identity. Woodward also gives a couple of interesting anecdotes about how close others came to guessing the source (and some who actually did) and how close the lid was to being blown off at any given time. It's also just interesting to reflect on the accomplishment of keeping something like this a secret for 30 years. Lastly, there's a couple of great ironies to be found. Stemming from the House investigation into the FBI's handling of Watergate, Felt was actually indicted on charges of conducting unauthorized searches on suspects. At his trial, former President Nixon testified on his behalf (the only time Nixon ever testified in court after resigning). Felt was found guilty, but a few years later Reagan pardoned him. So, basically, the man who was almost single-handedly responsible for bringing down Nixon has Nixon himself show up at his trial to defend him and then gets pardoned by Reagan. In any case, the only thing that's disappointing about the read is that you never really get a clear understanding of the exact motives Felt had when he did it. There's a lot of pretty well grounded speculation on Woodward's part, but in the end speculation is just that. Ultimately, the reason for this is that Woodward and Felt's relationship was pretty icy after Watergate and they really didn't speak for over 20 years. When Woodward finally gets up the courage to track him down again, what he finds is a frail old man in his mid-80s that suffers from dementia and can barely remember who Nixon was, let alone any of the specifics behind his downfall. If it were a novel you'd definitely call it anti-climactic but I think it just serves to remind us that real life doesn't like to wrap up all the loose ends most of the time.
Also watched a few movies this past week: Vacancy, Persona, and Letters From Iwo Jima.
Vacancy deserves only a one-word review: lame.
Persona (an old Ingmar Bergman film) deserves quite a bit more but I can sum it up with one word: huh? This movie really confused me, and even after I read two Ebert articles about it I still can't say whether they helped me figure things out or just confused me more. If you are into classic and/or foreign cinema and/orBergman films, then you absolutely need to see it but if you don't fall into any of those groups I can't imagine you liking it. And I generally love weird movies (like pretty much any David Lynch film except Inland Empire) but I'm just not sure about this one. I think the real problem is that most of the movie is presented very "normally" and then just all of a sudden it veers off into these really weird tangents for a minute or two before returning. At least with a Lynch film I'm expecting a midget and a person wearing an antelope head to come onscreen at any given moment so I'm not so caught off guard when it happens.
Letters From Iwo Jima I was really impressed with; definitely the best war film I've seen since Saving Private Ryan. It is very unique in that although it is an American film it shows the battle from the perspective of the Japanese and thus is portraying the U.S. as the "enemy". You also get a really interesting glimpse into the conflict that was going on in Japan at the time between modern "Westernized" thinking and their classic samurai culture. When the acting general (who has spent time studying in America) orders a battalion to retreat from their post and rendevous with another squadron at a fall-back position, the head of the battalion disobeys the order and he and most of his men commit suicide by falling on their own grenades. Looking at it now, it's inescapable to not think "wow, what a waste" but that's such a great illustration of a nation with an identity crisis. The strategic move is clearly to conserve your forces and rally them at a new tactical position, but the samurai way dictates that you will die with honor where you stand before you abandon your post for any reason. As you look at the Japan that exists today as a technological powerhouse among first-world nations, it's pretty evident what manor of thinking won out in the end.
I also sort of saw Superbad on Friday night, but fell asleep a little under half-way through. From what I remember, it was really funny.
Have some other interesting news, but I want to save it since this is already too long and I want to make sure I have something interesting to talk about next time. I know that all 4 of you can hardly contain your excitement . . .
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Screw You Weir
Is that a good enough title for you?
Actually, I have to do something now that pains me immensely. I find myself in the unenviable position of having to admit that, shockingly and against all odds, Eric Weir was right about something. He successfully predicted my half-marathon time within 32 seconds. He said I'd knock it out in 2 and a half hours and my official finishing time clocked in at 2:29:28. I will add though, that unofficially my time was 2:28:19, which is what I had on my watch. I think the discrepancy is due to my chip activating a little early while I was still behind the starting line. In any case, my time puts me at about an 11:22 min/mile pace, which is truly mindblowing considering that I have been training at right around 12 min/mile and I had never done 13 miles before. What can I say, I guess I'm a gamer. As another pedestrian achievement, I was in fact the fastest Delaney in the race. I don't know who Tony Delaney is; I just know he's 2 minutes slower than me. Anyways, as of today I am officially recommitted to doing the marathon. Looking at my training schedule, it's actually not as bad as I thought. I really only have 4 more hellacious runs to do before the marathon; a 14-miler this weekend, a 16-miler on Sept 2, an 18-miler on Sept 9th, and a 20-miler on Sept 16th. Actually, the whole week of the 16th pretty much sucks, as I'm supposed to run a grand total of 39 miles (5-10-4-20). But after that I get to taper off for 3 weeks before the big race on October 7th.
In other exciting news, Christy and I just bought a new Prius! Actually, more accurately we will be buying it tonight. We went in yesterday and put down a deposit and the car came in today, so we will be picking it up tonight at 7:30. It will be the first new car that either of us have ever owned, and also will be quite an upgrade from our current Sunfire as well as the Escort we owned before that. We had intended to go look at a number of dealerships yesterday but after we saw the Prius we both just really liked it and decided we didn't need to look any farther. One of the cool things that will take some getting used to is the fact that the car does not have any rearview mirrors. It has a camera mounted in the trunk that shows up on a display in front of you. Very strange to back up without looking behind you, but I think the many hours I wasted playing video games will finally pay off!
While recovering from the half-marathon Sunday and yesterday, I finally got around to watching Ben-Hur. That film had the distinction of being the DVD that I have owned the longest without ever watching (~4 years). Overall I can see why the film is a classic and it has held up well almost 50 years after it was made. It is truly amazing to look at all the extravagant sets, costumes, and the sheer number of extras that were used. In modern films when you see ancient cities recreated you just assume that only a small part of it was built and the rest was all CGI. But back then they didn't have any of that so they had to build it all for real. The highlight of the film, of course, is the big 20-minute chariot race 2/3 of the way through the movie. While it lacks the explosions and manic energy of modern action movies, it again just blows your mind that something like this could be done with little to no special effects. I read later that the colliseum where the race takes place was at that time the most expensive and elaborate set ever built and that the whole sequence took over 3 months to film. I also learned that Charleton Heston really had to learn how to drive the chariot and that there is only one stunt in the sequence where a double is used. In any case, the only semi-negative I can say about the film is that it is very in-your-face Christian. Jesus shows up at pivotal points and if you're not a Christian yourself a lot of the revelry and awe that the characters feel and the story expects you to feel just won't be there. But, as long as you know that going in I don't see that as really detracting from the experience.
By the way, if you haven't gotten around to seeing The Simpsons Movie yet I highly recommend it. If you do, stick around for 3-4 minutes after the credits start to roll.
Actually, I have to do something now that pains me immensely. I find myself in the unenviable position of having to admit that, shockingly and against all odds, Eric Weir was right about something. He successfully predicted my half-marathon time within 32 seconds. He said I'd knock it out in 2 and a half hours and my official finishing time clocked in at 2:29:28. I will add though, that unofficially my time was 2:28:19, which is what I had on my watch. I think the discrepancy is due to my chip activating a little early while I was still behind the starting line. In any case, my time puts me at about an 11:22 min/mile pace, which is truly mindblowing considering that I have been training at right around 12 min/mile and I had never done 13 miles before. What can I say, I guess I'm a gamer. As another pedestrian achievement, I was in fact the fastest Delaney in the race. I don't know who Tony Delaney is; I just know he's 2 minutes slower than me. Anyways, as of today I am officially recommitted to doing the marathon. Looking at my training schedule, it's actually not as bad as I thought. I really only have 4 more hellacious runs to do before the marathon; a 14-miler this weekend, a 16-miler on Sept 2, an 18-miler on Sept 9th, and a 20-miler on Sept 16th. Actually, the whole week of the 16th pretty much sucks, as I'm supposed to run a grand total of 39 miles (5-10-4-20). But after that I get to taper off for 3 weeks before the big race on October 7th.
In other exciting news, Christy and I just bought a new Prius! Actually, more accurately we will be buying it tonight. We went in yesterday and put down a deposit and the car came in today, so we will be picking it up tonight at 7:30. It will be the first new car that either of us have ever owned, and also will be quite an upgrade from our current Sunfire as well as the Escort we owned before that. We had intended to go look at a number of dealerships yesterday but after we saw the Prius we both just really liked it and decided we didn't need to look any farther. One of the cool things that will take some getting used to is the fact that the car does not have any rearview mirrors. It has a camera mounted in the trunk that shows up on a display in front of you. Very strange to back up without looking behind you, but I think the many hours I wasted playing video games will finally pay off!
While recovering from the half-marathon Sunday and yesterday, I finally got around to watching Ben-Hur. That film had the distinction of being the DVD that I have owned the longest without ever watching (~4 years). Overall I can see why the film is a classic and it has held up well almost 50 years after it was made. It is truly amazing to look at all the extravagant sets, costumes, and the sheer number of extras that were used. In modern films when you see ancient cities recreated you just assume that only a small part of it was built and the rest was all CGI. But back then they didn't have any of that so they had to build it all for real. The highlight of the film, of course, is the big 20-minute chariot race 2/3 of the way through the movie. While it lacks the explosions and manic energy of modern action movies, it again just blows your mind that something like this could be done with little to no special effects. I read later that the colliseum where the race takes place was at that time the most expensive and elaborate set ever built and that the whole sequence took over 3 months to film. I also learned that Charleton Heston really had to learn how to drive the chariot and that there is only one stunt in the sequence where a double is used. In any case, the only semi-negative I can say about the film is that it is very in-your-face Christian. Jesus shows up at pivotal points and if you're not a Christian yourself a lot of the revelry and awe that the characters feel and the story expects you to feel just won't be there. But, as long as you know that going in I don't see that as really detracting from the experience.
By the way, if you haven't gotten around to seeing The Simpsons Movie yet I highly recommend it. If you do, stick around for 3-4 minutes after the credits start to roll.
Friday, August 10, 2007
So again I have allowed myself to slack. Been very busy lately, but at least it's because of fun stuff. After Hawaii, the following Saturday we made our yearly pilgrimmage into the bleachers at Wrigley, only to watch the Cubs lose 3-2. However, much beer was drank and a generally good time was had by all. The following weekend we went up to Alpine Valley to camp and see Jimmy Buffett. Much beer was drank and a generally good time was had by all. Then I just spent the last week down in Houston visiting family. So basically I decided that Chicago in August just wasn't quite hot enough for me and I needed to go to one of the few places that was both hotter and more humid. Seriously, around this time down there you have to swim through the air and bail it out of your car with buckets. While there, though, I did get a chance to attend two Cubs games, which (of course) they lost. However, much beer was drank and a generally good time was had by all. Are you sensing a theme here? Actually, the second game I went to I had an opportunity to sit in the Crawford boxes, which are the couple rows directly above the scoreboard in left field. It's a prime spot to catch a home run ball, since it's only 315 feet right down the line. Looking out from home plate, our seats were immediately to the right of the foul pole. 10 minutes into the game, Cliff Floyd hit a ball that was just foul and landed less than 10 feet from us. We thought that was just the beginning of the excitement, but alas no other ball got within 50 feet of us the rest of the game. Still, the seats were great and I'll definitely try to sit there again next time me and the Cubs come to town.
This weekend is the half marathon, and I would by lying if I said I was not dreading it. I ran 12 miles on Monday (in 2 hours, 27 minutes) and ran a very fast 5 yesterday (52:54; well, it's fast for me anyway), so I do feel like I'm physically prepared, but mentally . . . Also, all my training (except for the one 3.5 mile race I ran in April) has been on a treadmill, so it will be a big change to be on the pavement. And of course the final obstacle is that the race kicks off at 6:30 A.M. Sunday morning, so I'll be getting up at around 5:15. I guess the good news is that I should be done by 9:30 and then I can go home and crash for 3 hours before the Cubs game starts. Anyway, I will be honest and admit that my will to run the marathon is weakening (but not broken . . .yet), so I am using this race as a barometer. Best I can figure is that I should finish in ~2:47:00; if I finish ahead of that I'll feel pretty good about my chances of finishing the marathon in under 6 hours; if I finish over that I won't feel so good. And if it takes me more than 3 hours . . .
One thing of interest I saw in the news yesterday was a new study that found that women with breast implants are more likely than average women to commit suicide (http://tinyurl.com/3clnet). I don't know how much was spent on this study, but they could have paid me $10 and I would have told them the same thing. I think it would be fair to say that women who get breats implants are more likely to have lower self-esteem than average women. If we all accept that as true, then this study boils down to the stunning discovery that women with lower self-esteem are more likely to commit suicide. Truly groundbreaking, no? The study goes on to say that "women with breast implants also had a tripled risk of death from alcohol and drug use". It's almost as if the demographic of women with implants overlaps heavily with the hard-partying crowd. Next you're going to tell me that all those nice young strippers aren't really just working to pay their way through college. All of my bubbles are bursting at one.
OK, that's all I got today (I know it ain't much). I will definitely check in early next week with an update on how the half went and the prognosis for the biggun in October.
Have a great weekend!
This weekend is the half marathon, and I would by lying if I said I was not dreading it. I ran 12 miles on Monday (in 2 hours, 27 minutes) and ran a very fast 5 yesterday (52:54; well, it's fast for me anyway), so I do feel like I'm physically prepared, but mentally . . . Also, all my training (except for the one 3.5 mile race I ran in April) has been on a treadmill, so it will be a big change to be on the pavement. And of course the final obstacle is that the race kicks off at 6:30 A.M. Sunday morning, so I'll be getting up at around 5:15. I guess the good news is that I should be done by 9:30 and then I can go home and crash for 3 hours before the Cubs game starts. Anyway, I will be honest and admit that my will to run the marathon is weakening (but not broken . . .yet), so I am using this race as a barometer. Best I can figure is that I should finish in ~2:47:00; if I finish ahead of that I'll feel pretty good about my chances of finishing the marathon in under 6 hours; if I finish over that I won't feel so good. And if it takes me more than 3 hours . . .
One thing of interest I saw in the news yesterday was a new study that found that women with breast implants are more likely than average women to commit suicide (http://tinyurl.com/3clnet). I don't know how much was spent on this study, but they could have paid me $10 and I would have told them the same thing. I think it would be fair to say that women who get breats implants are more likely to have lower self-esteem than average women. If we all accept that as true, then this study boils down to the stunning discovery that women with lower self-esteem are more likely to commit suicide. Truly groundbreaking, no? The study goes on to say that "women with breast implants also had a tripled risk of death from alcohol and drug use". It's almost as if the demographic of women with implants overlaps heavily with the hard-partying crowd. Next you're going to tell me that all those nice young strippers aren't really just working to pay their way through college. All of my bubbles are bursting at one.
OK, that's all I got today (I know it ain't much). I will definitely check in early next week with an update on how the half went and the prognosis for the biggun in October.
Have a great weekend!
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Insert Clever Title Here
So I finished the new (and last) Harry Potter book last night at around 12:30. Started reading it on Sunday, so that makes it 4 days to read 759 pages. Of course, the type is large, the indents are big, and the spacing is more than ample, so really I'd say it's about equivalent to a "normal" 400-45o page book. I was told by my brother Zac that this was a "weak performance" by Harry Potter fan standards, but then he told me that he had purposefully started the day by waking up at 8:30 to watch billiards on ESPN and then he baked a cake, so I'm not so sure he's in a position to criticize anyone. Anyway, the book (which I won't spoil) is excellent. It is very refreshing to see that something that was so mammothly hyped still managed to not disappoint. While I can't say that it's my favorite of the series (I like "Goblet of Fire" the best) I can't think of a better way that it could have ended. It also firmly convinced me of something I suspected ever since I read "Order of the Phoenix" (which I absolutely hated). After "Goblet of Fire", I think Rowling had a pretty clear idea of how it was all going to end, or at least a good outline of the final story arc. But, it was really only 2 books worth of material, so she needed a way to kind of "mark time" for a book before she could start it, and the result was a generally horrid waste of time. Yes, there were a couple of things introduced in that book that come back later, but there are more strange things that never get resolved and characters acting completely unnaturally and, most importantly, very little happening in the whole book. Anyway, while the first 4 books can somewhat stand on their own as individual stories (having at least some semblance of an arc that is introduced and resolved by the end), the 6th and 7th books are clearly just one story and can very much be likened to Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. People reading this series in the future may be able to stop for a while after each of the first 5 books, but most likely no one will even take a coffee break between the 6th and 7th.
Well, while we're speaking of things that are interesting to some people and could not be any less interesting to others, I'd like to revisit my preseason Cubs preview. I was tempted to give an update on this towards the end of May, and let's just say that I am very glad that I waited. Had I done it then, it probably would have looked something like this: "I was wrong. All wrong. There's not even the faintest trace of right in anything I said. I am utterly baffled by my wrongness. You would think, just by sheer chance and law of averages, that one of my statements would have been right, but no. I was wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong." Now, however, things are a little different. I hesitate to write about it for fear of jinxing the team, but I suppose if I am to believe that the Cubs ever have a chance to win it all (and I do), then I have to stop believing in curses, hexes, and such. Anyway, the Cubs season so far has been a tale of Jekyll and Hyde. The first two months, they were one of the most overpaid, underperforming group of stooges to ever don a uniform. All the bounces went against them, and it was Murphy's law everyday. If they managed to get a clutch hit, you were absoutely stunned. The last two months, it seems that they can do almost nothing wrong and all the breaks are going their way. Now, the couple times when they DON'T get a clutch hit, you feel stunned. I'm not going to talk in too much depth about it, since those that care already know all this and those that don't have probably already skipped this paragraph. All I'll say is that the whole Cubs season can be summarized in Carlos Zambrano's numbers: his record through June 1st was 5-5 with a 5.62 ERA. His record since is 8-2 with a 1.56 ERA. Anyway, while I don't think the Cubs are quite as good as they have played lately, I am very optimistic that the "real" Cubs are closer to this version than the one that took the field the first 2 months, and I am just going to enjoy the hot streak while it lasts (which will hopefully go through October).
Heading up to Wisconsin this weekend to camp and see Jimmy Buffett at Alpine Valley. I believe this will mark the 5th time I've seen him, and the first time at Alpine. To date, the band I've seen the most times is Van Halen (also 5 times), so this will tie that. However, since one of those times was during the ill-fated Gary Cherone experiment, I'm not sure it really counts. And since Buffett manages to keep coming back every year and Van Halen . . . uh . . .doesn't, it seems like only a matter of time before I've officially seen him more. Besides those two, the only band/acts I have seen more than once are Mike Doughty (3X solo and once with Soul Coughing) , Joe Satriani (3X), BB King (2X), Buddy Guy (2X), and Eric Johnson (2X). I'd feel better about myself as a person if a couple of those names weren't on the list (hint: I'm not talking about Mike, BB, and Buddy).
Going to see The Simpsons movie tonight at midnight with my bro. Not expecting anything fantastic, but it should be fun. It's always fun to see a midnight show or a premier; always makes it seem like much more of an event to go to a movie, like it was back in the day. Over/Under on number of people I see dressed as Simpsons characters: 15.
Quick marathon update: Did end up running the 10 miles after work on Friday (1:59:37; 11:58 min/mile pace). Wasn't fun, but I did it. Brought my total mileage for last week up to 24, which I'm pretty proud of. This week hasn't been as good. Legs were still sore for a while, so I eased back in with a 3-mile run Monday (31:59; 10:40 min/mile pace) and then a 6-miler Wednesday (1:10:37; 11:46 min/mile pace). Gonna try to get an 11-miler in tomorrow before heading out of town. The half marathon looms large 2 weeks from Sunday.
Have a good weekend everyone (by which I mean all 5 of you)!
Well, while we're speaking of things that are interesting to some people and could not be any less interesting to others, I'd like to revisit my preseason Cubs preview. I was tempted to give an update on this towards the end of May, and let's just say that I am very glad that I waited. Had I done it then, it probably would have looked something like this: "I was wrong. All wrong. There's not even the faintest trace of right in anything I said. I am utterly baffled by my wrongness. You would think, just by sheer chance and law of averages, that one of my statements would have been right, but no. I was wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong." Now, however, things are a little different. I hesitate to write about it for fear of jinxing the team, but I suppose if I am to believe that the Cubs ever have a chance to win it all (and I do), then I have to stop believing in curses, hexes, and such. Anyway, the Cubs season so far has been a tale of Jekyll and Hyde. The first two months, they were one of the most overpaid, underperforming group of stooges to ever don a uniform. All the bounces went against them, and it was Murphy's law everyday. If they managed to get a clutch hit, you were absoutely stunned. The last two months, it seems that they can do almost nothing wrong and all the breaks are going their way. Now, the couple times when they DON'T get a clutch hit, you feel stunned. I'm not going to talk in too much depth about it, since those that care already know all this and those that don't have probably already skipped this paragraph. All I'll say is that the whole Cubs season can be summarized in Carlos Zambrano's numbers: his record through June 1st was 5-5 with a 5.62 ERA. His record since is 8-2 with a 1.56 ERA. Anyway, while I don't think the Cubs are quite as good as they have played lately, I am very optimistic that the "real" Cubs are closer to this version than the one that took the field the first 2 months, and I am just going to enjoy the hot streak while it lasts (which will hopefully go through October).
Heading up to Wisconsin this weekend to camp and see Jimmy Buffett at Alpine Valley. I believe this will mark the 5th time I've seen him, and the first time at Alpine. To date, the band I've seen the most times is Van Halen (also 5 times), so this will tie that. However, since one of those times was during the ill-fated Gary Cherone experiment, I'm not sure it really counts. And since Buffett manages to keep coming back every year and Van Halen . . . uh . . .doesn't, it seems like only a matter of time before I've officially seen him more. Besides those two, the only band/acts I have seen more than once are Mike Doughty (3X solo and once with Soul Coughing) , Joe Satriani (3X), BB King (2X), Buddy Guy (2X), and Eric Johnson (2X). I'd feel better about myself as a person if a couple of those names weren't on the list (hint: I'm not talking about Mike, BB, and Buddy).
Going to see The Simpsons movie tonight at midnight with my bro. Not expecting anything fantastic, but it should be fun. It's always fun to see a midnight show or a premier; always makes it seem like much more of an event to go to a movie, like it was back in the day. Over/Under on number of people I see dressed as Simpsons characters: 15.
Quick marathon update: Did end up running the 10 miles after work on Friday (1:59:37; 11:58 min/mile pace). Wasn't fun, but I did it. Brought my total mileage for last week up to 24, which I'm pretty proud of. This week hasn't been as good. Legs were still sore for a while, so I eased back in with a 3-mile run Monday (31:59; 10:40 min/mile pace) and then a 6-miler Wednesday (1:10:37; 11:46 min/mile pace). Gonna try to get an 11-miler in tomorrow before heading out of town. The half marathon looms large 2 weeks from Sunday.
Have a good weekend everyone (by which I mean all 5 of you)!
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Things I've Learned Over the Last Two Weeks
Just got back from our great vacation in Hawaii and I'm not gonna give the play-by-play description of the trip since my wife is doing such an admirable job of it herself (insert plug for www.christydelaney.blogspot.com here). Anyway, I just wanted to start out with some general things that have been floating around in my head over the past couple of weeks.
- Only after being in Hawaii for a week will you find the following thoughts running through your head: "Well, sure it's one of the most beautiful waterfalls in the world, but can we walk down and swim in it? No, then let's skip it."
- Despite the fact that you are on vacation, if your wife is tired enough you can convince her to have Taco Bell for dinner. Twice.
- It's a very strange feeling when you see conch shells for sale on the side of the road the day after you've finished reading "Lord of the Flies"
- It's also a very strange feeling to be running on a treadmill and have OK Go come on your iPod.
- The all-you-can-eat prime rib and king crab leg buffet with unlimited champagne is possibly mankind's greatest achievement. Seriously; if the human race had to apply for a job somewhere, it would be on the resume.
- Walking 4 miles over treachorous terrain just to get to a waterfall is totally not worth it - until you see it and get to swim under it. The walk BACK, however . . .
- Just in case you were wondering, the slowest moving human being on Earth lives just north of the town of Hilo, HI and works at a small convenience store/deli. We ordered a shaved ice there and watched her being repeatedly passed by stationary objects as she made it. We were going to order 2, but our flight was leaving in just over 20 hours and I knew it would be a close call. As a purely scientific experiment, if you had a large group and needed to order more than 6 I'd be curious to see if she could make them before the sun explodes.
- Everywhere in Hawaii is beautiful, with the exception of Honolulu, which has all the charm of Omaha, NE.
- Listening to a Cubs game on your laptop at 8:15 A.M. while having breakfast on a balcony that overlooks the ocean is a really good way to start the day.
OK, I think that's about it. Overall I managed to finish 3 books while on vacation (with most of the reading getting done on the lengthy plane rides): the aforementioned Lord of the Flies (which I was supposed to have read in high school but never did) and two more books by Neil Gaiman (Neverwhere and The Anansi Boys). All of them were excellent and Neil Gaiman is fast becoming one of my favorite authors. In my opinion, he's a lot like Stephen King in that while he doesn't create great literature he is a phenomenal storyteller. I just saw a trailer for a movie called Stardust, which is based on his graphic novel series and is coming out in the next couple weeks. I probably would have waited to rent it but now I might have to see it in theatres. I haven't started War and Peace yet, because I know I am going to be reading the last Harry Potter book (pre-ordered months ago on Amazon) as soon as it comes out next week and once I get started on the behemoth I don't want to stop. I'm still trying to get through the bio on Einstein but alas I don't see it happening in the near future.
On the marathon training front, I can't say that I was completely dilligent while on vacation, but I did about as well as could be expected. The Sunday after we got there I was due to run 8 miles and I had every intention of doing so. Unfortunately, the hotel we were at decided that their exercise room should double as a sauna and it was just unbearably hot. I threw in the towel (actually multiple, sweat-soaked towels) at the 5-mile mark. On Tuesday we switched hotels and I got in my 4 miles as planned. But on Thursday I slacked again because it was a travel day (to the Big Island) and I didn't feel like waking up at 6. Sunday, I was due for 9 miles but felt exhausted after getting in at 5:20 A.M. so I ended up pushing it off till Monday but got it done in 1:51:41 (12:24 min mile pace). This morning I woke up early and ran 5-miles in a personal best time of 53:37 (10:44 min mile pace). I am supposed to run a 10-mile race in Darien, IL this Saturday but I've already decided I am skipping it since I have a Cubs game to go to at noon and that's just asking for disaster. I'm still going to run the 10 miles, though, either Friday night or Saturday morning though. Hoping to do it in right around 2 hours. I will admit that the training is starting to get pretty brutal. It's not so much the getting tired as it is just the drudgery of being on a treadmill that long. I probably should start running outside but the humidity is pretty brutal unless I get out there at 6:00 A.M.
The one bit of other news is that I decided to take a meditation class at the Zen Buddhist temple. It's something I've been wanting to do for a long time, ever since I read Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind and The Three Pillars of Zen about 5 years ago but just never seemed to get around to it. Last night was the first class and it went well. I don't think "hard" is the right word for it but it's definitely different trying to use my mind in a way that I never have before. I think it will do me a lot of good, though, and not just in helping me calm down when Will Ohman walks consecutive batters to walk in the go-ahead run in the 8th inning, you stupid ^&^#$%!!!!! As you can see, I have a long way to go to achieve inner peace.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Chills, Thrills, and Michael F'N Bay!
I'll start out by saying that my all-time record for most movies seen in a theatre in a week is 12 (actually seen in the span of 4 days). This occurred while I was visiting my parents in Houston over Christmas right after I graduated in 2000. This is not something I recommend. The movies I saw, in no particular order, were: Proof of Life, Cast Away, Vertical Limit, Dungeons and Dragons, What Women Want, Dude, Where's My Car?, Miss Congeniality, Quills, The Family Man, The Grinch, Dracula 2000, and Little Nicky. I don't honestly remember any of them, unless I have seen them again since that time. They all just pretty much run together, and all I have is a vague sense of whether or not I liked them at the time. I bring this up because, although it is nowhere near my record, I have gone to the theatre 3 times in the past 5 days and I don't remember the last time I did that. So I figured I might as well post a review of them all, especially since 2 of them were advance previews (Live Free or Die Hard and Transformers) and the other (1408) is still less than a week old. So without further ado . . .
1408
It might not be saying much, but this is without a doubt the scariest PG-13 movie I've ever seen. It just goes to show you the oddities of the MPAA ratings criteria. They are always looking for the things you can quantify (i.e. how many uses of profanity, how many total seconds of nudity, and how much blood is shown) that when you get to some ambiguous things like tone and tension they have no idea what to do. So you end up with a film like this, which is far scarier than any Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th, going out the door with a PG-13 because there's almost no swearing and not a whole lot of blood. All I know is that had I gone to the theatre to see this as a 13-year old I probably would have run out crying and slept with the covers over my head for a month. In any case, on the whole I thought this was a real solid movie; definitely in the upper tier of the Stephen King adaptations. If any of you don't know, it's about an author (Mike Enslin played by John Cusack) who makes his living staying overnight at supposedly haunted places and then writing about them. He doesn't actually believe in the supernatural and so, when one day he gets a postcard from The Dolphin Hotel in New York that says simply "Don't Go Into 1408", of course he boards the next flight there. Samuel L. Jackson does a great job in a very small part as hotel manager who tries in vain to keep Mike from going into the room. He delivers the single best line in the movie, which I won't ruin here in case anyone plans to see it. Well of course it goes without saying that once Mike gets in the room it doesn't take too long for him to change his mind about the supernatural.
The movie is divided into three distinct acts. The first part introduces us to Mike, gives us a small bit of background on him, and then gets him into the room. The second act takes place in the room, and the third act wraps things up. The first and third acts are both solid, particularly when Jackson is on the screen, but it's the second act that really sets this movie apart. I have to give the director (Mikael Hafstrom) a lot of credit for knowing just how to create an extremely intense 35 minutes of cinema. He knows exactly how far to take you before giving you the "jump scare" or letting the air out and then building it up again. This is not an easy thing to achieve, especially when you are trying to keep things PG-13 (sorry to keep harping on that). He keeps reaching the point where it's about to go over the top and become absolutely terrifying, but he always manages to recede right before the brink in a way that feels like a real relief rather than a copout to the audience. Cusack is good here, too, although this will most likely not go down as one of the roles he's widely remembered for 10 years from now. The key with him is that while his character certainly has problems, he's largely a likeable guy who is given a solid backstory that unfolds slowly throughout the movie. It makes you actually invested in his character and that's what makes it all the worse to see him endure what he goes through.
Anyway, I know I haven't given a lot of specifics, but I think it's better that way. This movie is all about tone and suspense and it does a great job with each. Easily the best horrorish movie of 2007, although considering the competition that's not saying all that much.
Live Free or Die Hard
A very popular discussion to have while tipping back a few pints is "which is the 2nd best Die Hard movie?" Everybody is unanimous that the first one is superior, but opinions are very much divided after that. I am firmly in the Die Hard: With a Vengeance camp. I thought Samuel L. Jackson brought a lot to the movie and I also thought that Jeremy Irons made a great villain. Die Hard 2, on the other hand, I just thought was pretty much the same movie as the first Die Hard, and thus seemed pretty repetitive and unnecessary. That's not to say I won't sit and watch it when I come across it while flipping channels, though. In any case, the real question is will this new Die Hard enter into the discussion as the 2nd or, dare we dream, best Die Hard movie? Um, no. At least not for me. While I still put this one above Die Hard 2, to me it is quite a bit behind Die Hard and With a Vengeance.
Again here I have to bring up the rating. This is the first Die Hard to not be released with an R. I presume that when the studio took a look at the script's action sequence requirements and corresponding budget they wanted to make sure they hit as large an audience as possible. Overall, the movie is just as violent as its predecessors, and the only real difference is that John McClane must have gotten himself a swear jar sometime during the last 12 years and learned to say things like "jerkwad" a lot more. While that doesn't necessarily take away from the movie, there are times when he's speaking to the villains and it just doesn't seem like he's saying what John McClane would really say. I guess that's probably the most general problem with this movie; somehow it just doesn't "feel" like a Die Hard movie. In fact, change the character's name and remove about 3 different lines of dialogue, and this would just be a generic Bruce Willis action movie.
OK, so that's what's "generally" wrong with it. Specifically, there is one glaring problem with this movie and that is with the villain. I won't blame the actor (Timothy Olyphant), but this character is just one of the most bland, boring bad guys to ever appear in a big budget action film. While action movies certainly aren't known for developing 3-dimensional villains too often, this is Die Hard and the ghost of Hans Gruber really bites them here. Alan Rickman gave us one of, if not THE best, action villains of all time and to see such a cookie cutter replacement just shows us how far the series has fallen. The fact that the plot centers around high tech thievery and data manipulation doesn't help matters either. There was a time when the evil villain had a brainy henchman that did the geek-speek so that the main baddy could concentrate on being cool and evil and it just doesn't have the same affect when McClane is essentially hunting down a tech support guy. One of the head henchman (actually a woman) is pretty interesting, but as soon as she gets dispatched of (about halfway through the movie) there's really no one left worth caring about and McClane might as well be shooting at stormtroopers for the rest of the film.
You know, I realize that I am really sounding overly negative about this film and I'm really not intending to. I absolutely enjoyed it and think it's a real fun film. The action sequences are way over the top, but that's a really good thing in a Die Hard film and they are done very well. Also, some kudos to the director (Len Wiseman) for opting to not use CGI; the difference really shows. He also uses some really cool tracking shots during a car chase that some other action movie directors should take notice of. So, overall, a solid although admittedly flawed film that most fans of the series will have fun with but probably not rave about. Had this actually been a generic Bruce Willis movie I probably would have been more forgiving, but that's the double edged sword for the studio. You can't have the hype around a new Die Hard film without raising the expectations.
Transformers
Last night I had the opportunity to see an advanced screening of Transformers. Not only was it free, but it was at the theatre which is only a mile away from our apartment and the theatre was only about half full so we got some great seats. With all that going for me, I should have known my luck would not hold up.
I'm searching for the right words to use here. How about this? This. Movie. Sucks. Yep, I think that about covers it. To any of you out there that are excited to see this movie, all I can say is that the other 5 people who saw it with me all enjoyed it, so I appear to be in the minority here. 20th Century Fox and Michael Bay better hope that I am. For me, the only thing this film successfully transformed was my large Cherry Coke into a gallon of piss.
I'll take the opposite approach of my last review and talk about the good things first. By and large, the transformers look good. Going live action means you are pretty much forced to use CGI, and kudos to the special FX guys for a job well done here. Also, most of the action scenes, especially the one at the end, are pretty cool. And Megan Fox is absolutely smoking hot. Every scene she's in is good just because she's in it; usually with not a lot of clothes on.
So what's wrong with the movie? Everything else. With a run-time of 2 hrs. and 20 minutes, the transformers have maybe 40 minutes of screen time. That means we get 100 minutes of not very interesting story all about the human characters. In the Transformers cartoon, humans were very minor characters. It was all about the war between the machines. Here, it is the other way around. We are forced to follow the humans, and pretty much only see the transformers when they are around the humans. What has Optimus Prime been up to before he appears more than an hour into the movie? We don't know and don't get to find out, but I bet it was a hell of a lot more interesting than the B-movie plot we're forced to sit through. I don't know whether it was a budget constraint or a creative decision to not show more of the Transformers, but the end result is some not very entertaining cinema. The other glaring problem is that (mild spolier alert) Megatron only appears for the last 25 minutes. Why they decided to have the main villain pull a disappearing act for 75% of the film is beyond me, but they did. The other problem is that even though individually the transformers look good, in a battle it's really difficult to tell them apart (with the exception of Optimus Prime). You just see a mess of metal colliding and rolling around and have no idea who you're supposed to root for, so it quickly becomes pretty boring. Finally, again with the exception of Optimus Prime, most of the transformers speak maybe 3 lines in the whole movie. Once more, the transformers are relegated to the background while the humans take front and center. Finally, and most obnoxiously, there is an approximately 25 minute subplot concerning Rachael Taylor and Anthony Anderson's characters that goes absolutely nowhere. And I'm serious; you could completely cut them out of the movie and lose nothing (other than the gratuitous minutes). In a movie that is already pushing the boundaries with its running time this is just completely unacceptable. Even the other people I saw it with that enjoyed it couldn't tell me what the point of this subplot was.
Overall I can't say I was disappointed with this movie, only because from the moment I heard Michale Bay would be directing I instantly had zero expectations of it being good. As Trey Parker and Matt Parker said in Team America "why does Michael Bay get to keep on making movies?" With the exception of The Rock, this guy has had the reverse Midas Touch on everything he has been involved with. And given that somehow his movies continue to make money despite him, I don't see things changing anytime soon.
I'm quite certain that most of you will see Transformers at some point, and some of you will probably even like it and try to convince me that it's good. I'm always open for discussion, but I will only sit down and talk to you about it if you can answer me this: why do the Transformers growl?
1408
It might not be saying much, but this is without a doubt the scariest PG-13 movie I've ever seen. It just goes to show you the oddities of the MPAA ratings criteria. They are always looking for the things you can quantify (i.e. how many uses of profanity, how many total seconds of nudity, and how much blood is shown) that when you get to some ambiguous things like tone and tension they have no idea what to do. So you end up with a film like this, which is far scarier than any Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th, going out the door with a PG-13 because there's almost no swearing and not a whole lot of blood. All I know is that had I gone to the theatre to see this as a 13-year old I probably would have run out crying and slept with the covers over my head for a month. In any case, on the whole I thought this was a real solid movie; definitely in the upper tier of the Stephen King adaptations. If any of you don't know, it's about an author (Mike Enslin played by John Cusack) who makes his living staying overnight at supposedly haunted places and then writing about them. He doesn't actually believe in the supernatural and so, when one day he gets a postcard from The Dolphin Hotel in New York that says simply "Don't Go Into 1408", of course he boards the next flight there. Samuel L. Jackson does a great job in a very small part as hotel manager who tries in vain to keep Mike from going into the room. He delivers the single best line in the movie, which I won't ruin here in case anyone plans to see it. Well of course it goes without saying that once Mike gets in the room it doesn't take too long for him to change his mind about the supernatural.
The movie is divided into three distinct acts. The first part introduces us to Mike, gives us a small bit of background on him, and then gets him into the room. The second act takes place in the room, and the third act wraps things up. The first and third acts are both solid, particularly when Jackson is on the screen, but it's the second act that really sets this movie apart. I have to give the director (Mikael Hafstrom) a lot of credit for knowing just how to create an extremely intense 35 minutes of cinema. He knows exactly how far to take you before giving you the "jump scare" or letting the air out and then building it up again. This is not an easy thing to achieve, especially when you are trying to keep things PG-13 (sorry to keep harping on that). He keeps reaching the point where it's about to go over the top and become absolutely terrifying, but he always manages to recede right before the brink in a way that feels like a real relief rather than a copout to the audience. Cusack is good here, too, although this will most likely not go down as one of the roles he's widely remembered for 10 years from now. The key with him is that while his character certainly has problems, he's largely a likeable guy who is given a solid backstory that unfolds slowly throughout the movie. It makes you actually invested in his character and that's what makes it all the worse to see him endure what he goes through.
Anyway, I know I haven't given a lot of specifics, but I think it's better that way. This movie is all about tone and suspense and it does a great job with each. Easily the best horrorish movie of 2007, although considering the competition that's not saying all that much.
Live Free or Die Hard
A very popular discussion to have while tipping back a few pints is "which is the 2nd best Die Hard movie?" Everybody is unanimous that the first one is superior, but opinions are very much divided after that. I am firmly in the Die Hard: With a Vengeance camp. I thought Samuel L. Jackson brought a lot to the movie and I also thought that Jeremy Irons made a great villain. Die Hard 2, on the other hand, I just thought was pretty much the same movie as the first Die Hard, and thus seemed pretty repetitive and unnecessary. That's not to say I won't sit and watch it when I come across it while flipping channels, though. In any case, the real question is will this new Die Hard enter into the discussion as the 2nd or, dare we dream, best Die Hard movie? Um, no. At least not for me. While I still put this one above Die Hard 2, to me it is quite a bit behind Die Hard and With a Vengeance.
Again here I have to bring up the rating. This is the first Die Hard to not be released with an R. I presume that when the studio took a look at the script's action sequence requirements and corresponding budget they wanted to make sure they hit as large an audience as possible. Overall, the movie is just as violent as its predecessors, and the only real difference is that John McClane must have gotten himself a swear jar sometime during the last 12 years and learned to say things like "jerkwad" a lot more. While that doesn't necessarily take away from the movie, there are times when he's speaking to the villains and it just doesn't seem like he's saying what John McClane would really say. I guess that's probably the most general problem with this movie; somehow it just doesn't "feel" like a Die Hard movie. In fact, change the character's name and remove about 3 different lines of dialogue, and this would just be a generic Bruce Willis action movie.
OK, so that's what's "generally" wrong with it. Specifically, there is one glaring problem with this movie and that is with the villain. I won't blame the actor (Timothy Olyphant), but this character is just one of the most bland, boring bad guys to ever appear in a big budget action film. While action movies certainly aren't known for developing 3-dimensional villains too often, this is Die Hard and the ghost of Hans Gruber really bites them here. Alan Rickman gave us one of, if not THE best, action villains of all time and to see such a cookie cutter replacement just shows us how far the series has fallen. The fact that the plot centers around high tech thievery and data manipulation doesn't help matters either. There was a time when the evil villain had a brainy henchman that did the geek-speek so that the main baddy could concentrate on being cool and evil and it just doesn't have the same affect when McClane is essentially hunting down a tech support guy. One of the head henchman (actually a woman) is pretty interesting, but as soon as she gets dispatched of (about halfway through the movie) there's really no one left worth caring about and McClane might as well be shooting at stormtroopers for the rest of the film.
You know, I realize that I am really sounding overly negative about this film and I'm really not intending to. I absolutely enjoyed it and think it's a real fun film. The action sequences are way over the top, but that's a really good thing in a Die Hard film and they are done very well. Also, some kudos to the director (Len Wiseman) for opting to not use CGI; the difference really shows. He also uses some really cool tracking shots during a car chase that some other action movie directors should take notice of. So, overall, a solid although admittedly flawed film that most fans of the series will have fun with but probably not rave about. Had this actually been a generic Bruce Willis movie I probably would have been more forgiving, but that's the double edged sword for the studio. You can't have the hype around a new Die Hard film without raising the expectations.
Transformers
Last night I had the opportunity to see an advanced screening of Transformers. Not only was it free, but it was at the theatre which is only a mile away from our apartment and the theatre was only about half full so we got some great seats. With all that going for me, I should have known my luck would not hold up.
I'm searching for the right words to use here. How about this? This. Movie. Sucks. Yep, I think that about covers it. To any of you out there that are excited to see this movie, all I can say is that the other 5 people who saw it with me all enjoyed it, so I appear to be in the minority here. 20th Century Fox and Michael Bay better hope that I am. For me, the only thing this film successfully transformed was my large Cherry Coke into a gallon of piss.
I'll take the opposite approach of my last review and talk about the good things first. By and large, the transformers look good. Going live action means you are pretty much forced to use CGI, and kudos to the special FX guys for a job well done here. Also, most of the action scenes, especially the one at the end, are pretty cool. And Megan Fox is absolutely smoking hot. Every scene she's in is good just because she's in it; usually with not a lot of clothes on.
So what's wrong with the movie? Everything else. With a run-time of 2 hrs. and 20 minutes, the transformers have maybe 40 minutes of screen time. That means we get 100 minutes of not very interesting story all about the human characters. In the Transformers cartoon, humans were very minor characters. It was all about the war between the machines. Here, it is the other way around. We are forced to follow the humans, and pretty much only see the transformers when they are around the humans. What has Optimus Prime been up to before he appears more than an hour into the movie? We don't know and don't get to find out, but I bet it was a hell of a lot more interesting than the B-movie plot we're forced to sit through. I don't know whether it was a budget constraint or a creative decision to not show more of the Transformers, but the end result is some not very entertaining cinema. The other glaring problem is that (mild spolier alert) Megatron only appears for the last 25 minutes. Why they decided to have the main villain pull a disappearing act for 75% of the film is beyond me, but they did. The other problem is that even though individually the transformers look good, in a battle it's really difficult to tell them apart (with the exception of Optimus Prime). You just see a mess of metal colliding and rolling around and have no idea who you're supposed to root for, so it quickly becomes pretty boring. Finally, again with the exception of Optimus Prime, most of the transformers speak maybe 3 lines in the whole movie. Once more, the transformers are relegated to the background while the humans take front and center. Finally, and most obnoxiously, there is an approximately 25 minute subplot concerning Rachael Taylor and Anthony Anderson's characters that goes absolutely nowhere. And I'm serious; you could completely cut them out of the movie and lose nothing (other than the gratuitous minutes). In a movie that is already pushing the boundaries with its running time this is just completely unacceptable. Even the other people I saw it with that enjoyed it couldn't tell me what the point of this subplot was.
Overall I can't say I was disappointed with this movie, only because from the moment I heard Michale Bay would be directing I instantly had zero expectations of it being good. As Trey Parker and Matt Parker said in Team America "why does Michael Bay get to keep on making movies?" With the exception of The Rock, this guy has had the reverse Midas Touch on everything he has been involved with. And given that somehow his movies continue to make money despite him, I don't see things changing anytime soon.
I'm quite certain that most of you will see Transformers at some point, and some of you will probably even like it and try to convince me that it's good. I'm always open for discussion, but I will only sit down and talk to you about it if you can answer me this: why do the Transformers growl?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
