Game 4: Astros 4, Cubs 3
Game 5: Cubs 9, Astros 7
Game 6: Cubs 3, Astros 2
Well, it didn't take long for me to lag behind on this, not that that should surprise me. Basically, long story short, the Cubs looked a little bit more like the team they should be (and I can legitimately say "looked" because I was actually able to watch some of the Saturday and Sunday games), taking 2 of 3 from the Astros. The Cubs, who hit a surprisingly few number of homers last year up until the stretch run in September, have wasted no time going deep this year, hitting 8 in their first 6 games. Derrek Lee leads the way with 3, and seems to have put his quiet spring behind him. Carlos Zambrano got his first win yesterday, lasting 7 cramp-free innings giving up just two runs. Meanwhile, Kerry Wood picked up his 3rd save and hasn't allowed a run since he got lit up in his first outing. The Cubs haven't been striking out much at all thus far, and managed to get through a Roy Oswalt start in which they scored 5 runs off of him without striking out at all. This is an encouraging sign and is certainly a sharp departure from the days of Dusty Baker.
A couple of continued causes for concern, though, are Bob Howry, who looked bad again on Saturday pitching in the 8th, and had to be taken down in favor of Carlos Marmol, who seems to be headed towards another year where he pitches a ton of innings out of the pen. Also, Alphonso Soriano continues to struggle, hitting just 2-for-26 thus far, although he hit a solo home run yesterday.
Friday: W - W. Wright (1-0) L - Lieber (0-1) S - Valverde (1)
Saturday: W - Hart (1-0) L - Oswalt (0-2) S - Wood (2)
Sunday: W - Zambrano (0-1) L - Villarreal (0-2) S - Wood (3)
Next up: Cubs go on their first road trip of the year, as they face the Pirates in their home opener Monday.
Monday, April 07, 2008
Friday, April 04, 2008
One in the win column
Game 3: Cubs 6, Brewers 3
The Cubs prevented an opening series sweep yesterday, as they jumped all over Dave Bush, who was kind of all over the place for the Brewers. Ryan Dempster made his first start since 2005, and had a rocky start but improved as he went along, getting the win and giving up 2 runs over 6 IP with only one of them earned. The unearned run came from a bad throw from Kosuke Fukudome trying to made a throw home and completely missing Geovany Soto. Hard to be angry at Fukudome for this though, as he had another very good day at the plate, picking up his 2nd double of the year and drawing 2 more walks. It seems to see a lot of pitches in every plate appearance, and thus far it looks like he's worth every bit of the money the Cubs threw at him. The Cubs start a weekend series with the Astros later today. Kerry Wood came on and recovered from his awful outing in the opener, getting his first save of the year. I'll be much more worried if the Cubs drop two of three to the Astros than the Brewers.
W - Dempster (1-0) L - Bush (0-1) S - Wood (1)
The Cubs prevented an opening series sweep yesterday, as they jumped all over Dave Bush, who was kind of all over the place for the Brewers. Ryan Dempster made his first start since 2005, and had a rocky start but improved as he went along, getting the win and giving up 2 runs over 6 IP with only one of them earned. The unearned run came from a bad throw from Kosuke Fukudome trying to made a throw home and completely missing Geovany Soto. Hard to be angry at Fukudome for this though, as he had another very good day at the plate, picking up his 2nd double of the year and drawing 2 more walks. It seems to see a lot of pitches in every plate appearance, and thus far it looks like he's worth every bit of the money the Cubs threw at him. The Cubs start a weekend series with the Astros later today. Kerry Wood came on and recovered from his awful outing in the opener, getting his first save of the year. I'll be much more worried if the Cubs drop two of three to the Astros than the Brewers.
W - Dempster (1-0) L - Bush (0-1) S - Wood (1)
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
Try not to panic
Game 2: Brewers 8, Cubs 2
For whatever reason, a lot of people got really worked up, partly because of what was being said on TV and in the papers, about the fact that this is the 100th year since Cubs last won the World Series, as if the arbitrary milestone somehow increases their chances of winning this year. These people are probably on a ledge right now after the Cubs dropped to 0-2 in another mediocre game on offense. Two games does not a season make, however. Alphonso Soriano is not going to remain 0-for-the-season for much longer, nor is Aramis Ramirez. Losing the first two games to the team that will likely be your only serious rival for first place in the division is frustrating, but things will most certainly balance themselves out in the near future. Jeff Suppan held the Cubs to two runs over 6 1/3 innings, but only had 2 strikeouts along the way, so it's not like the Cubs couldn't make contact.
The Cubs got some baserunners today, finishing with 8 hits and 3 walks, but again couldn't get any home except by way of the home run (this time it was solo home runs by Derrek Lee and Geovany Soto). They made some gaffes along the way, namely a botched hit and run with Aramis Ramirez that wound up being a strike-em-out, throw-em-out double play. That's something that has been a problem in recent years and hopefully will get corrected. Ted Lilly's line looked pretty ugly, being charged with 4 runs in 4 2/3 innings, but wasn't really that bad. He allowed 5 hits and hit a batter, but didn't walk anyone. He only threw 70-some pitches so was apparently on a very short leash. Tomorrow will be another afternoon game (and thus another game I can't watch, rrrrrr...) with Ryan Dempster's return to the rotation.
W - Suppan (1-0) L - Lilly (0-1)
For whatever reason, a lot of people got really worked up, partly because of what was being said on TV and in the papers, about the fact that this is the 100th year since Cubs last won the World Series, as if the arbitrary milestone somehow increases their chances of winning this year. These people are probably on a ledge right now after the Cubs dropped to 0-2 in another mediocre game on offense. Two games does not a season make, however. Alphonso Soriano is not going to remain 0-for-the-season for much longer, nor is Aramis Ramirez. Losing the first two games to the team that will likely be your only serious rival for first place in the division is frustrating, but things will most certainly balance themselves out in the near future. Jeff Suppan held the Cubs to two runs over 6 1/3 innings, but only had 2 strikeouts along the way, so it's not like the Cubs couldn't make contact.
The Cubs got some baserunners today, finishing with 8 hits and 3 walks, but again couldn't get any home except by way of the home run (this time it was solo home runs by Derrek Lee and Geovany Soto). They made some gaffes along the way, namely a botched hit and run with Aramis Ramirez that wound up being a strike-em-out, throw-em-out double play. That's something that has been a problem in recent years and hopefully will get corrected. Ted Lilly's line looked pretty ugly, being charged with 4 runs in 4 2/3 innings, but wasn't really that bad. He allowed 5 hits and hit a batter, but didn't walk anyone. He only threw 70-some pitches so was apparently on a very short leash. Tomorrow will be another afternoon game (and thus another game I can't watch, rrrrrr...) with Ryan Dempster's return to the rotation.
W - Suppan (1-0) L - Lilly (0-1)
Monday, March 31, 2008
161-1 still possible
Game 1: Brewers 4, Cubs 3 (10 innings)
I'm sure a lot of Cubs fans are ready to jump off a bridge after a heartbreaking 10-inning loss to the Brewers on an Opening Day that, given the weather, almost didn't happen. I was at work, so I could only follow the game online (another unfortunate reality of post-college life) and I still haven't seen the highlights yet, which is frustrating because, even though the outcome wasn't what I was looking for it was a pretty exciting game.
Being opening day, each team had their ace on the mound to start and neither one would allow a run. Ben Sheets went 6 1/3 IP, giving up only two hits (both of which by Kosuke Fukudome; more on him later) and two walks. Apparently they had him on a pitch count for his first count because he left after 99 despite being so dominant. Carlos Zambrano has had a recent history of being awful in his first start of the year, but not so today. He went 6 2/3 IP allowing only 3 hits and 1 walk with 5 Ks in a surprisingly efficient 89 pitches. However, he left after a (successful) pick-off play at second where his forearm cramped up after the throw. Zambrano's seemingly chronic cramping problem was the subject of much discussion next year, and the fact that it happened on opening day this year on a mild, rainy day (its been theorized that his cramps step from dehydration) isn't a good sign at all. At the same time, while he was in the game, he was excellent and didn't get mired in 30+ pitch innings as he's been known to do, especially in early season games.
Carlos Marmol relieved Zambrano and pretty much picked up where he left off last year, pitching an inning and a third of perfect baseball. With the game still scoreless in the top of the 9th, enter: Kerry Wood. As I posted in my preseason threads, I've felt that Marmol, despite his youth, is the best man for the job. Well, my point was backed up today as Wood gave up three runs in the 9th to put the Cubs down. Obviously, this is only one game, and I'm sure Wood will have more than a few successful outing this year, but I still think Marmol is going to wind up being the closer by some time in May.
So, on a day in which the Cubs who weren't Fukudome were being no-hit going into the bottom of the 9th, it looked like a shutout was pretty much inevitable with the oft-injured, but one dominant Eric Gagne in to close. But then something crazy happened. Derrek Lee led off with a single, then Aramis Ramirez drew a 4 pitch walk. Up comes the new guy, Kosuke Fukudome, already 2-for-2 with a walk, who promptly hit a 3-run homer to tie the game. So Fukudome finished having reached base all 4 times (he did get picked off once) and was a triple away from the cycle. Not a bad first day on the job. Felix Pie tried to keep the 9th going with a single, but Mike Fontenot wasn't able to drive him home. Then, alas, the Brewers scored their 4th run on a sac fly in the 10th off of Bob Howry, and then David Riske worked a 1-2-3 bottom half to end the game. Frustrating game to say the least. Zambrano and Marmol were at their absolute best while they were in though, so hopefully the poor offensive output from everyone who isn't Fukudome was a one game aberration. There have been years in which the Cubs have been horrible offensive when they've scored like 16 runs on opening day, so who really knows. Off day tomorrow, then the Brew crew again on Wednesday.
W - Gagne (1-0) L - Howry (0-1) S - Riske (1)
I'm sure a lot of Cubs fans are ready to jump off a bridge after a heartbreaking 10-inning loss to the Brewers on an Opening Day that, given the weather, almost didn't happen. I was at work, so I could only follow the game online (another unfortunate reality of post-college life) and I still haven't seen the highlights yet, which is frustrating because, even though the outcome wasn't what I was looking for it was a pretty exciting game.
Being opening day, each team had their ace on the mound to start and neither one would allow a run. Ben Sheets went 6 1/3 IP, giving up only two hits (both of which by Kosuke Fukudome; more on him later) and two walks. Apparently they had him on a pitch count for his first count because he left after 99 despite being so dominant. Carlos Zambrano has had a recent history of being awful in his first start of the year, but not so today. He went 6 2/3 IP allowing only 3 hits and 1 walk with 5 Ks in a surprisingly efficient 89 pitches. However, he left after a (successful) pick-off play at second where his forearm cramped up after the throw. Zambrano's seemingly chronic cramping problem was the subject of much discussion next year, and the fact that it happened on opening day this year on a mild, rainy day (its been theorized that his cramps step from dehydration) isn't a good sign at all. At the same time, while he was in the game, he was excellent and didn't get mired in 30+ pitch innings as he's been known to do, especially in early season games.
Carlos Marmol relieved Zambrano and pretty much picked up where he left off last year, pitching an inning and a third of perfect baseball. With the game still scoreless in the top of the 9th, enter: Kerry Wood. As I posted in my preseason threads, I've felt that Marmol, despite his youth, is the best man for the job. Well, my point was backed up today as Wood gave up three runs in the 9th to put the Cubs down. Obviously, this is only one game, and I'm sure Wood will have more than a few successful outing this year, but I still think Marmol is going to wind up being the closer by some time in May.
So, on a day in which the Cubs who weren't Fukudome were being no-hit going into the bottom of the 9th, it looked like a shutout was pretty much inevitable with the oft-injured, but one dominant Eric Gagne in to close. But then something crazy happened. Derrek Lee led off with a single, then Aramis Ramirez drew a 4 pitch walk. Up comes the new guy, Kosuke Fukudome, already 2-for-2 with a walk, who promptly hit a 3-run homer to tie the game. So Fukudome finished having reached base all 4 times (he did get picked off once) and was a triple away from the cycle. Not a bad first day on the job. Felix Pie tried to keep the 9th going with a single, but Mike Fontenot wasn't able to drive him home. Then, alas, the Brewers scored their 4th run on a sac fly in the 10th off of Bob Howry, and then David Riske worked a 1-2-3 bottom half to end the game. Frustrating game to say the least. Zambrano and Marmol were at their absolute best while they were in though, so hopefully the poor offensive output from everyone who isn't Fukudome was a one game aberration. There have been years in which the Cubs have been horrible offensive when they've scored like 16 runs on opening day, so who really knows. Off day tomorrow, then the Brew crew again on Wednesday.
W - Gagne (1-0) L - Howry (0-1) S - Riske (1)
Thursday, March 27, 2008
No Country for Old Men
No Country for Old Men (****)
Without question, No Country for Old Men is a movie that you need to see more than once to really understand. I was able to discern enough on my first time watching it to know that I really liked it, but I will certainly have to go back and watch it at least one more time to fully grasp everything that the Coen brothers put into the film. Hearing from other people who have seen it, I'm not alone. The film has a lot of subtleties that are easy to miss, and doesn't hold your hand with a lot of exposition explaining everything there is to know. Even if you don't want to feel like you have to study the intricacies of every scene, however, No Country for Old Men is still a tremendously exciting movie, and the reasons why it gets so much praise aren't hard to see at all.
First and foremost, this film is a huge departure from their previous films with both serious and funny elements like O Brother Where Art Thou? and The Big Lebowski. This movie is very dark and very muted and much more grounded in reality than the lighter side of Coen brothers movies. It sticks very close to the book on which its based, (so I'm told) and a lot of the film's dialog is lifted from it.
...
I put this off for way too long to remember what else I was going to write, but basically cliff's notes: its a very solemn, and subtle movie with a classic "unknown is more frightening than the known" type of villain that I think needs to be seen more than once to really appreciate.
Top 10 list for last year has been updated
Without question, No Country for Old Men is a movie that you need to see more than once to really understand. I was able to discern enough on my first time watching it to know that I really liked it, but I will certainly have to go back and watch it at least one more time to fully grasp everything that the Coen brothers put into the film. Hearing from other people who have seen it, I'm not alone. The film has a lot of subtleties that are easy to miss, and doesn't hold your hand with a lot of exposition explaining everything there is to know. Even if you don't want to feel like you have to study the intricacies of every scene, however, No Country for Old Men is still a tremendously exciting movie, and the reasons why it gets so much praise aren't hard to see at all.
First and foremost, this film is a huge departure from their previous films with both serious and funny elements like O Brother Where Art Thou? and The Big Lebowski. This movie is very dark and very muted and much more grounded in reality than the lighter side of Coen brothers movies. It sticks very close to the book on which its based, (so I'm told) and a lot of the film's dialog is lifted from it.
...
I put this off for way too long to remember what else I was going to write, but basically cliff's notes: its a very solemn, and subtle movie with a classic "unknown is more frightening than the known" type of villain that I think needs to be seen more than once to really appreciate.
Top 10 list for last year has been updated
Monday, March 17, 2008
The Darjeeling Limited
The Darjeeling Limited (***)
I kind of feel like I'm going to look back at this review at some point and wish I scored it higher, because Wes Anderson movies seem to grow on me the more I see them, but then again, who knows? The Darjeeling Limited is, indeed, the most recent film from auteur Wes Anderson, and unmistakably so. Anderson wastes no time reminding everyone of his off-beat style from the very beginning of the film, by actually beginning with a 10-15 minute "short film", dubbed "Hotel Chevalier", which is only later made clear to be in the continuity with the "main" Darjeeling Limited film. The short film is somewhat bizarre, introducing us to Jason Schwartzman's character Jack Whitman living in a surreal looking hotel room when he is suddenly visited by his once girlfriend, played by Natalie Portman. This scene/film/whatever runs for 13 minutes, contains almost no dialog, and adds almost nothing that I can discern to the main film that makes it worth it. I appreciate Wes Anderson's off-beat style, but in this case the whole venture of this short film is just awkward and detracts from the rest of the movie more than benefits it.
After the "Hotel Chevalier" segment, The Darjeeling Limited itself begins and quickly establishes that its less avant-garde and easier to digest than the aforementioned opening. At the same, it still is unmistakably Wes Anderson. The film's title refers to the train of the same name on which the three main characters spend much of the movie. Like the Belefonte, Steve Zissou's ship from The Life Aquatic, the Darjeeling seems sort of otherworldly in its design, and takes on a life of its own as Anderson pans from room to room. The central characters in the story are the Whitman brothers-- Francis, Peter, and Jack-- played by Owen Wilson, Adrian Brody, and Jason Schwartzman respectively. The relationship between the three brothers has been strained ever since the death of their father, and a trip on the Darjeeling through India is Francis's plan to reconcile the brothers, hoping they'll have some sort of spiritual revelation along the way. Each of the brothers seems to possess a fatal flaw: Francis is too controlling (orders for his two brothers in the dinner car), Peter is clingy (wears his father's glasses - with his father's prescription in them), while Jack writes passive-agressive stories with fictional characters who obviously aren't entirely fictional and seems to want to bang anything that moves.
The brothers go through some amount of reconciliation throughout the film, but like most of Wes Anderson's movies, the ending is somewhat muted, and the film seems to be more about how all the characters get to the ending. In The Life Aquatic, this was in the form of a voyage to kill a jaguar shark complete with claymated ocean scenes and a preposterous battle with modern day pirates. I actually liked the over-the-top surrealness of Life Aquatic (most professional critics seemed lukewarm at best about it), but I found myself liking Darjeeling Limited as well. Even though the train itself seems to come directly from the oddest corner of Wes Anderson's mind, some of the starkest scenes take place off of the train out in the vastness of actual rural India. The film is of the same sort-of comedy, sort-of drama, hard to place mold of his other films, though more towards the serious side than Royal Tennenbaums or Life Aquatic (that's not to say that there aren't a few laugh out loud moments because there are). The film is quieter on the whole, and seems to be itself a sort of meditation in the same vein that the characters within the film are trying to find. I'm not sure if it led me to any great personal revelation though.
The biggest flaw in the movie is one in all his films-- one which seems to turn off a lot of people completely, while I can deal with it, though nevertheless acknowledge it-- namely, that Anderson seems to be too eager to make the film as off-beat as possible. I already mentioned the biggest example of this: the strange short film before "the real film" that is in the same continuity but doesn't have the same tone whatsoever. But throughout the film there's examples of dialog between characters where one character will ask a question, and the other will give a response that doesn't seem to be applicable to the question at all. Sometimes, it's for humorous effect, but a lot of the time its merely distracting, and its hard to take the emotion in the film as serious as it should be taken when characters don't seem to interact like actual people. There are other examples of this same basic idea, like Owen Wilson's character, whose head is wrapped in an absurd amount of bandages and keeps losing teeth throughout the movie because of a motorcycle accident. It seems at first like its supposed to be funny, but later on there are hints that Owen Wilson's character may be suicidal, and suddenly its hard to determine how you're really supposed to feel.
Even with all the off-beat stuff in Rushmore, Royal Tennenbaums, and Life Aquatic, I "got" those movies more than I did this one, I think. Even though Darjeeling seems more grounded in reality, his previous movies seemed to resonate more with me for some reason. Still, there are some enjoyable scenes that use the backdrop of India beautifully, and the performances by each of the three brothers are quite good. There are many worse ways to spend an hour and a half
I kind of feel like I'm going to look back at this review at some point and wish I scored it higher, because Wes Anderson movies seem to grow on me the more I see them, but then again, who knows? The Darjeeling Limited is, indeed, the most recent film from auteur Wes Anderson, and unmistakably so. Anderson wastes no time reminding everyone of his off-beat style from the very beginning of the film, by actually beginning with a 10-15 minute "short film", dubbed "Hotel Chevalier", which is only later made clear to be in the continuity with the "main" Darjeeling Limited film. The short film is somewhat bizarre, introducing us to Jason Schwartzman's character Jack Whitman living in a surreal looking hotel room when he is suddenly visited by his once girlfriend, played by Natalie Portman. This scene/film/whatever runs for 13 minutes, contains almost no dialog, and adds almost nothing that I can discern to the main film that makes it worth it. I appreciate Wes Anderson's off-beat style, but in this case the whole venture of this short film is just awkward and detracts from the rest of the movie more than benefits it.
After the "Hotel Chevalier" segment, The Darjeeling Limited itself begins and quickly establishes that its less avant-garde and easier to digest than the aforementioned opening. At the same, it still is unmistakably Wes Anderson. The film's title refers to the train of the same name on which the three main characters spend much of the movie. Like the Belefonte, Steve Zissou's ship from The Life Aquatic, the Darjeeling seems sort of otherworldly in its design, and takes on a life of its own as Anderson pans from room to room. The central characters in the story are the Whitman brothers-- Francis, Peter, and Jack-- played by Owen Wilson, Adrian Brody, and Jason Schwartzman respectively. The relationship between the three brothers has been strained ever since the death of their father, and a trip on the Darjeeling through India is Francis's plan to reconcile the brothers, hoping they'll have some sort of spiritual revelation along the way. Each of the brothers seems to possess a fatal flaw: Francis is too controlling (orders for his two brothers in the dinner car), Peter is clingy (wears his father's glasses - with his father's prescription in them), while Jack writes passive-agressive stories with fictional characters who obviously aren't entirely fictional and seems to want to bang anything that moves.
The brothers go through some amount of reconciliation throughout the film, but like most of Wes Anderson's movies, the ending is somewhat muted, and the film seems to be more about how all the characters get to the ending. In The Life Aquatic, this was in the form of a voyage to kill a jaguar shark complete with claymated ocean scenes and a preposterous battle with modern day pirates. I actually liked the over-the-top surrealness of Life Aquatic (most professional critics seemed lukewarm at best about it), but I found myself liking Darjeeling Limited as well. Even though the train itself seems to come directly from the oddest corner of Wes Anderson's mind, some of the starkest scenes take place off of the train out in the vastness of actual rural India. The film is of the same sort-of comedy, sort-of drama, hard to place mold of his other films, though more towards the serious side than Royal Tennenbaums or Life Aquatic (that's not to say that there aren't a few laugh out loud moments because there are). The film is quieter on the whole, and seems to be itself a sort of meditation in the same vein that the characters within the film are trying to find. I'm not sure if it led me to any great personal revelation though.
The biggest flaw in the movie is one in all his films-- one which seems to turn off a lot of people completely, while I can deal with it, though nevertheless acknowledge it-- namely, that Anderson seems to be too eager to make the film as off-beat as possible. I already mentioned the biggest example of this: the strange short film before "the real film" that is in the same continuity but doesn't have the same tone whatsoever. But throughout the film there's examples of dialog between characters where one character will ask a question, and the other will give a response that doesn't seem to be applicable to the question at all. Sometimes, it's for humorous effect, but a lot of the time its merely distracting, and its hard to take the emotion in the film as serious as it should be taken when characters don't seem to interact like actual people. There are other examples of this same basic idea, like Owen Wilson's character, whose head is wrapped in an absurd amount of bandages and keeps losing teeth throughout the movie because of a motorcycle accident. It seems at first like its supposed to be funny, but later on there are hints that Owen Wilson's character may be suicidal, and suddenly its hard to determine how you're really supposed to feel.
Even with all the off-beat stuff in Rushmore, Royal Tennenbaums, and Life Aquatic, I "got" those movies more than I did this one, I think. Even though Darjeeling seems more grounded in reality, his previous movies seemed to resonate more with me for some reason. Still, there are some enjoyable scenes that use the backdrop of India beautifully, and the performances by each of the three brothers are quite good. There are many worse ways to spend an hour and a half
Friday, March 14, 2008
CUBS: Spring Update 3
Jason Marquis pitched 4 innings yesterday, giving up no runs on 2 hits and 2 walks. This is his second consecutive good start, and it certainly looks like he's going to be in the rotation. As I said in my first post about this year's Cubs, I wasn't a huge fan of Marquis last year, so I dunno how I feel about that. His ERA in '07 wasn't that bad, but a lot of his good starts were towards the front of the season, and towards the end of the season he didn't seem to be able to get much past hitters. The last time I played baseball was coach pitch, but just observing on TV, it seems like he pitched worse last year than his ERA indicated. His ERA of over 6.00 the year before that with the Cardinals goes a long way to backing me up on that, methinks.
The Cubs made a round of cuts a few days ago and are now down to something like 42 players. Shingo Takatsu was among them, not surprisingly, as he got roughed up in several of his spring outings. He says he still wants to play in the states if given another opportunity, but he's not getting any younger and I really don't see it happening. I think it would be a futile effort on his part. Apparnetly, the Cubs are leaning towards a 12 man pitching staff, which I certainly advocate as every time the Cubs have tried to go to an 11 man staff since I've followed baseball closely everything has seemed to immediately go to hell. Also, according to Len Kasper the last time I saw the Cubs on TV, the Cubs are considering starting the year with Scott Eyre as their only left-hander. Carmen Pignatiello has yet to give up a run in 4 1/3 IP, which would seem to warrant a look, but we'll see.
One other note that I just heard while going to lunch on The Score, apparently the Cubs are now offering a package of Ronnie Cedeno, Donald Veal, Sean Gallagher, and someone else whose name escapes me for Brian Roberts. I suppose I'd be okay with that. It's giving up some young pitching, but Roberts would look great at 2nd base for the Cubs, and the Cubs are in a "win now" mode all the way.
Closer race update:
Carlos Marmol: 6 IP, 0.00 ERA, 1/1 Sv
Kerry Wood: 5 IP, 5.40 ERA
Bob Howry: 5.1 IP, 11.81 ERA
I said at the beginning of the year that I'd like to see Marmol get a chance, and the numbers seem to be in my favor to this point. ^^
Derrek Lee is now hitting .107 with 0 home runs for the spring, which is discouraging, but there's still another 2 weeks before opening day so we'll see what happens.
Next update: Probably after there's another round of cuts and battles for the last few roster spots start to manifest themselves.
The Cubs made a round of cuts a few days ago and are now down to something like 42 players. Shingo Takatsu was among them, not surprisingly, as he got roughed up in several of his spring outings. He says he still wants to play in the states if given another opportunity, but he's not getting any younger and I really don't see it happening. I think it would be a futile effort on his part. Apparnetly, the Cubs are leaning towards a 12 man pitching staff, which I certainly advocate as every time the Cubs have tried to go to an 11 man staff since I've followed baseball closely everything has seemed to immediately go to hell. Also, according to Len Kasper the last time I saw the Cubs on TV, the Cubs are considering starting the year with Scott Eyre as their only left-hander. Carmen Pignatiello has yet to give up a run in 4 1/3 IP, which would seem to warrant a look, but we'll see.
One other note that I just heard while going to lunch on The Score, apparently the Cubs are now offering a package of Ronnie Cedeno, Donald Veal, Sean Gallagher, and someone else whose name escapes me for Brian Roberts. I suppose I'd be okay with that. It's giving up some young pitching, but Roberts would look great at 2nd base for the Cubs, and the Cubs are in a "win now" mode all the way.
Closer race update:
Carlos Marmol: 6 IP, 0.00 ERA, 1/1 Sv
Kerry Wood: 5 IP, 5.40 ERA
Bob Howry: 5.1 IP, 11.81 ERA
I said at the beginning of the year that I'd like to see Marmol get a chance, and the numbers seem to be in my favor to this point. ^^
Derrek Lee is now hitting .107 with 0 home runs for the spring, which is discouraging, but there's still another 2 weeks before opening day so we'll see what happens.
Next update: Probably after there's another round of cuts and battles for the last few roster spots start to manifest themselves.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
CUBS: Spring Update 2
(Updated Sunday)
The Cubs played two split-squad games yesterday, winning the game in which most of the probable starters for the regular season played with Jon Lieber on the mound, and losing a game with mostly reserves (Daryle Ward was hitting clean-up) with Sean Marshall starting. Lieber was excellent, pitching 4 shutout innings allowing just 2 hits and no walks. Earlier in the week, Sean Marshall pitched 3 shutout innings himself. Today, Ryan Dempster went 4 innings allowing 1 run vs. the Royals. The Cubs put up 20+ hits against the Royals' pitching staff. Daryle Ward went 4-for-4 and Felix Pie had 3 hits of his own. Cubs look pretty good right now.
The Cubs played two split-squad games yesterday, winning the game in which most of the probable starters for the regular season played with Jon Lieber on the mound, and losing a game with mostly reserves (Daryle Ward was hitting clean-up) with Sean Marshall starting. Lieber was excellent, pitching 4 shutout innings allowing just 2 hits and no walks. Earlier in the week, Sean Marshall pitched 3 shutout innings himself. Today, Ryan Dempster went 4 innings allowing 1 run vs. the Royals. The Cubs put up 20+ hits against the Royals' pitching staff. Daryle Ward went 4-for-4 and Felix Pie had 3 hits of his own. Cubs look pretty good right now.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
CUBS: Spring Update 1
The Cubs are 2-4 for the spring so far, and are beating the Diamondbacks 4-1 as I write this. Spring training records are always pretty much arbitrary, and indeed this year, despite the losing record, the individual performances for players who are actually going to make the roster have, by and large, been pretty good.
Let's start with Carlos Zambrano, who made his 2nd start of the spring today finishing with 3 IP
, 0 ER, 1 H, 1 BB, 3 K. Zambrano has been notoriously shaky at the start of seasons, especially last year, so hopefully we keep seeing numbers like this as he starts to build up more innings. Certainly only 1 walk is a stat you like to see, as Z's control was kind of all over the place last year. Oh yeah, he threw in a solo home run at the plate as well.
Also pitching today was Rich Hill, who finished with a line of 3 IP, 1 ER, 0 H, 3 BB, 1 K. Ted Lilly has made one start giving up 1 run, while Jason Marquis and Jon Lieber have been a little bit shakier, giving up 2 runs each in 1 start. Ryan Dempster has pitched 5 IP and allowed 2 earned runs, so the Dempster as starter experiment is off to an okay start. Obviously it's only March 5th, and going 2-3 innings barely constitutes "starting," so I don't know how much can be read into these numbers. I don't think anything will be settled in terms of the rotation for a while yet.
Carlos Marmol, with 2 scoreless innings, has fared the best out of the contenders for closer thus far, with Bob Howry and Kerry Wood giving up 4 and 3 runs respectively between them in 2 IP each. I'm on record as saying I'd prefer Marmol for the closer's spot. Elsewhere in the 'pen, Neal Cotts, trying to come back from a season in which he got sent down to AAA, didn't do himself any favors getting rocked in an outing on Sunday in a game that I actually caught some of on TV. Shingo Takatsu's return to American baseball is off to a rocky start as well.
As for the hitters, first and foremost let's talk about Kosuke Fukudome, who's done well for himself thus far. 5 games in his Avg/OBP/Slug is .400/.600/.700, and he hit his first spring training home run. Obviously, he's not going to have a .600 OBP in the regular season, but hopefully he does get some walks on a regular basis, something that Cubs hitters have not been able to do well enough in recent years. Ryan Theriot is off to a good start as well, with 7 hits and 2 steals. People fell in love with Theriot at the beginning of last year, but kind of wavered on him towards the end of the season when he got into a hitting slump. Hopefully he can start off well again this year and keep the momentum going this time. Geovany Soto's hitting 4-for-10 thus far, after a great end to 2007, so every indication points to him being just fine as the Cubs' starting catcher this year. Felix Pie probably has the early lead for the center field job, as he's hit 2 home runs already. Derrek Lee has 2 singles in 8 ABs, but he has 4 walks as well. There's no reason to believe that he won't be as good as should be expected.
So yeah, that's what's happening so far. Obviously these are really small sample sizes for statistics, and things may be completely different come April. We'll see. Next update: Whenever I feel like. Over the weekend maybe.
Full spring stats
Let's start with Carlos Zambrano, who made his 2nd start of the spring today finishing with 3 IP
, 0 ER, 1 H, 1 BB, 3 K. Zambrano has been notoriously shaky at the start of seasons, especially last year, so hopefully we keep seeing numbers like this as he starts to build up more innings. Certainly only 1 walk is a stat you like to see, as Z's control was kind of all over the place last year. Oh yeah, he threw in a solo home run at the plate as well.
Also pitching today was Rich Hill, who finished with a line of 3 IP, 1 ER, 0 H, 3 BB, 1 K. Ted Lilly has made one start giving up 1 run, while Jason Marquis and Jon Lieber have been a little bit shakier, giving up 2 runs each in 1 start. Ryan Dempster has pitched 5 IP and allowed 2 earned runs, so the Dempster as starter experiment is off to an okay start. Obviously it's only March 5th, and going 2-3 innings barely constitutes "starting," so I don't know how much can be read into these numbers. I don't think anything will be settled in terms of the rotation for a while yet.
Carlos Marmol, with 2 scoreless innings, has fared the best out of the contenders for closer thus far, with Bob Howry and Kerry Wood giving up 4 and 3 runs respectively between them in 2 IP each. I'm on record as saying I'd prefer Marmol for the closer's spot. Elsewhere in the 'pen, Neal Cotts, trying to come back from a season in which he got sent down to AAA, didn't do himself any favors getting rocked in an outing on Sunday in a game that I actually caught some of on TV. Shingo Takatsu's return to American baseball is off to a rocky start as well.
As for the hitters, first and foremost let's talk about Kosuke Fukudome, who's done well for himself thus far. 5 games in his Avg/OBP/Slug is .400/.600/.700, and he hit his first spring training home run. Obviously, he's not going to have a .600 OBP in the regular season, but hopefully he does get some walks on a regular basis, something that Cubs hitters have not been able to do well enough in recent years. Ryan Theriot is off to a good start as well, with 7 hits and 2 steals. People fell in love with Theriot at the beginning of last year, but kind of wavered on him towards the end of the season when he got into a hitting slump. Hopefully he can start off well again this year and keep the momentum going this time. Geovany Soto's hitting 4-for-10 thus far, after a great end to 2007, so every indication points to him being just fine as the Cubs' starting catcher this year. Felix Pie probably has the early lead for the center field job, as he's hit 2 home runs already. Derrek Lee has 2 singles in 8 ABs, but he has 4 walks as well. There's no reason to believe that he won't be as good as should be expected.
So yeah, that's what's happening so far. Obviously these are really small sample sizes for statistics, and things may be completely different come April. We'll see. Next update: Whenever I feel like. Over the weekend maybe.
Full spring stats
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Michael Clayton
Michael Clayton (****)
The tone of Michael Clayton is set immediately as the film begins with a voice over from Tom Wilkinson's character, Arthur to the title character played by George Clooney. Off of his medication, Arthur, a manic-depressive, claims to have had a moment of clarity when he steps outside of the huge law firm where he works. After going through several alternate theories, he eventually concludes that as he emerges from the office building, its as if he's emerged from "the asshole of an organism who's sole function is to excrete the poison, the ammo, the defoliant necessary for other, larger, more powerful organisms to destroy the miracle of humanity" (IMDB). This grandiose monologue is a microcosm of the entire movie. It's a biting commentary not just about the greed of corporations or the ruthlessness of the lawyers who represent them, but also about the entire lifestyle and business culture that encapsulates them.
Despite his struggles with his mental illness, Arthur is an absolute genius at what he does, and has made a Arthur has been working on the same case-- the defendant in which is a fictional company that makes agricultural products called uNorth-- for something like six years. Essentially, uNorth is facing a class action lawsuit over the possibility that a weed killer that they produce has posed a risk to humans. As the case has sluggishly played out, Arthur amassed boxes upon boxes full of data breaking down every meticulous detail. At some point, Arthur became simply tired of working on the same case, or realized he couldn't in good conscience defend uNorth any more (maybe both) and appeared to begin to change the way he looked at the case so as to start building a case against uNorth. At the same time, he goes off of his antidepressants which leads to him becoming obsessed with one of the plantiffs, a young girl named Anna who lives on a farm. Everything goes to hell when Arthur naked while rambling about Anna during a routine hearing (no seriously). This would pose an obvious problem for uNorth were it to be disclosed. Enter: Michael Clayton.
Michael is the "cleaner" for the same law firm that employs Arthur (think Mr. Wolf from Pulp Fiction -- he solves problems). He was a trial attorney before and liked it, but he has shown a knack for being able to handle the dirty work, and his boss, played by Sydney Pollack has every intention to keep him in his current position. He's been friends with Arthur for years and has nothing but respect for him, but its his job to diffuse the situation, and its in his best interest to do his job well at the moment. Michael attempted to open a bar, something he could fall back on in anticipation of the day when he would want out of his current career. To do so, however, he had to borrow money from people who don't like to have debtors. And so Michael has a two-fold dilemma: he has to do his job and do it well if he's to have the money to get out of debt, but as time goes on and shady dealings start to reveal themselves, he has a hard time not sympathizing with Arthur. The antagonist in the film is Karen Krowder, a uNorth employee who wants to keep the company's pristine image in tact no matter what the cost. While her actions are certainly villainous, she's not really portrayed as an evil character, so much as she's portrayed as someone whose worked her way up the corporate ladder to a position with prestige, but that also requires morally bankruptcy, and is too meek to try and change that fact.
I think one of the keys to Michael Clayton is that Arthur, the "crazy" guy, is actually the character who seems most trustworthy to the viewer. It's an important distinction, that while his manic depression is a very real and very serious illness, his revelation about the system in which he and his colleagues work is genuine. That he seems to see the truth that's clouded to everyone else around him is what makes Arthur a great tragic character and it's what makes Michael Clayton stand out so far above and beyond most legal thrillers.
The tone of Michael Clayton is set immediately as the film begins with a voice over from Tom Wilkinson's character, Arthur to the title character played by George Clooney. Off of his medication, Arthur, a manic-depressive, claims to have had a moment of clarity when he steps outside of the huge law firm where he works. After going through several alternate theories, he eventually concludes that as he emerges from the office building, its as if he's emerged from "the asshole of an organism who's sole function is to excrete the poison, the ammo, the defoliant necessary for other, larger, more powerful organisms to destroy the miracle of humanity" (IMDB). This grandiose monologue is a microcosm of the entire movie. It's a biting commentary not just about the greed of corporations or the ruthlessness of the lawyers who represent them, but also about the entire lifestyle and business culture that encapsulates them.
Despite his struggles with his mental illness, Arthur is an absolute genius at what he does, and has made a Arthur has been working on the same case-- the defendant in which is a fictional company that makes agricultural products called uNorth-- for something like six years. Essentially, uNorth is facing a class action lawsuit over the possibility that a weed killer that they produce has posed a risk to humans. As the case has sluggishly played out, Arthur amassed boxes upon boxes full of data breaking down every meticulous detail. At some point, Arthur became simply tired of working on the same case, or realized he couldn't in good conscience defend uNorth any more (maybe both) and appeared to begin to change the way he looked at the case so as to start building a case against uNorth. At the same time, he goes off of his antidepressants which leads to him becoming obsessed with one of the plantiffs, a young girl named Anna who lives on a farm. Everything goes to hell when Arthur naked while rambling about Anna during a routine hearing (no seriously). This would pose an obvious problem for uNorth were it to be disclosed. Enter: Michael Clayton.
Michael is the "cleaner" for the same law firm that employs Arthur (think Mr. Wolf from Pulp Fiction -- he solves problems). He was a trial attorney before and liked it, but he has shown a knack for being able to handle the dirty work, and his boss, played by Sydney Pollack has every intention to keep him in his current position. He's been friends with Arthur for years and has nothing but respect for him, but its his job to diffuse the situation, and its in his best interest to do his job well at the moment. Michael attempted to open a bar, something he could fall back on in anticipation of the day when he would want out of his current career. To do so, however, he had to borrow money from people who don't like to have debtors. And so Michael has a two-fold dilemma: he has to do his job and do it well if he's to have the money to get out of debt, but as time goes on and shady dealings start to reveal themselves, he has a hard time not sympathizing with Arthur. The antagonist in the film is Karen Krowder, a uNorth employee who wants to keep the company's pristine image in tact no matter what the cost. While her actions are certainly villainous, she's not really portrayed as an evil character, so much as she's portrayed as someone whose worked her way up the corporate ladder to a position with prestige, but that also requires morally bankruptcy, and is too meek to try and change that fact.
I think one of the keys to Michael Clayton is that Arthur, the "crazy" guy, is actually the character who seems most trustworthy to the viewer. It's an important distinction, that while his manic depression is a very real and very serious illness, his revelation about the system in which he and his colleagues work is genuine. That he seems to see the truth that's clouded to everyone else around him is what makes Arthur a great tragic character and it's what makes Michael Clayton stand out so far above and beyond most legal thrillers.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
...to be the best in the National League
As promised, part 2 of my look at the Cubs going into the 2008 season, focusing on hitting.
The Cubs were a so-so hitting team last year. They were 8th in the NL in runs, basically putting them right in the middle. Really, they had a lot of the same problems that they've seemed to have for a lot of years now, even though the roster has complete changed. Even though some of the worst offenders are gone, like Corey Patterson, Juan Pierre, Jerry Hairston Jr., Sammy Sosa, et. al., their plate discipline was still pretty bad, and they were 2nd to last in the NL in walks. They also left guys on base in a lot of key situations, which they were notorious for in the Dusty Baker era. They hit far fewer home runs than they had hit in past years, but in a way that's actually encouraging, because they did find a way to get some runs home regardless, even if they should've been able to score more than they did. So here's a breakdown of the Cubs offensively as they look now:
Outfield
The big free agent move in the off-season for the Cubs was the acquisition of right-fielder Kosuke Fukudome from the Chunichi Dragons in Japan. Fukudome played 8 years in Japan (stats) and had a .300+ average and an OBP close to .400. Who knows how well those numbers will transfer over though. Often times Japanese hitters have really good plate discipline, so hopefully Fukudome is of that ilk. Apparently, Lou is toying with idea of having Fukudome hit 3rd with Lee in clean-up, which would seem to be a big endorsement of his hitting. Soriano is going to be in left again, which leaves center field which is going to be a much less cut and dry situation. It seems like its Felix Pie's job to lose, but if he hits like he did at times last year who knows if he'll stay there. They really don't have as many options at center though. Matt Murton can't really play center with any degree of success, and he may end up being traded before season starts. Apparently Ronny Cedeno spent the winner learning center field in an attempt to stay on the team as a utility guy, but Cedeno in center on any sort of a regular basis isn't really anything I want to see. Then there's Sam Fuld who was called up last September, but didn't really do anything besides pinch run. I have no idea if he can hit or not. So all signs seem to point to Pie starting in center. He needs to show much more consistency than he did last year though. He kept alternating from AAA to MLB, and it seemed like every time he was called up he'd go on a brief hot streak and then all of a sudden not be able to make contact with the ball.
Infield
Derrek Lee obviously has the 1st base position locked up. Darryl Ward will see be around to back him up there. At 2nd, it looks like DeRosa is the starter for now (at least he's first on the depth chart on cubs.com), but if Fontenot goes on a tear again maybe he'll win the job. Shortstop would seemingly belong to Theriot who was very good for most of 2007 before slowing down at the end, and Ramirez will be back at 3rd, at least until he gets hurt again. 2007 was awful for the Cubs at the catching position. They began with Michael Barrett, who was promptly traded after fighting Carlos Zambrano in the dugout and playing generally terrible defense. They then went through a clusterf*** of Rob Bowen, Koyie Hill, and Jason Kendall, until they finally brought up Geovany Soto at the very end of the year and, as it turned out, the kid could hit. I'm very exciting to seeing more of Soto this year. I've seen him on a couple of different top prospects lists, and who knows, maybe he could make a run for rookie of the year.
So it seems like the lineup is going to look something like this going into 2008:
1. Soriano
2. Theriot
3. Fukudome
4. Lee
5. Ramirez
6. DeRosa
7. Soto
8. Pie
9. (pitcher)
That has the potential to be a very good lineup if Fukudome makes the adjustment to MLB pitching well enough to hit 3rd effectively. I like the idea of Ramirez down a spot. Obviously, he has a ton of power, but he also has a habit of grounding into double plays at inopportune times and I think Fukudome and Lee will be better at ensuring that runs get home. If The Riot doesn't return to the form he showed in the middle of last year and just sort of hovers in the ~.250-.260 range and doesn't draw that many walks, I'd like to see him possibly moved down to 7th, with Soto bumped up a spot, and DeRosa or Pie in 2nd depending on which one of them is hitting better. If he hits close to .300 again though, obviously you want his base stealing ability high up in the order.
So yeah, that's what I think. But then again, the last time I played baseball was coach pitch in like 2nd grade, so what do I know really?
Next update: Thoughts on the first few spring training games that are going to start at the end of the month.
The Cubs were a so-so hitting team last year. They were 8th in the NL in runs, basically putting them right in the middle. Really, they had a lot of the same problems that they've seemed to have for a lot of years now, even though the roster has complete changed. Even though some of the worst offenders are gone, like Corey Patterson, Juan Pierre, Jerry Hairston Jr., Sammy Sosa, et. al., their plate discipline was still pretty bad, and they were 2nd to last in the NL in walks. They also left guys on base in a lot of key situations, which they were notorious for in the Dusty Baker era. They hit far fewer home runs than they had hit in past years, but in a way that's actually encouraging, because they did find a way to get some runs home regardless, even if they should've been able to score more than they did. So here's a breakdown of the Cubs offensively as they look now:
Outfield
The big free agent move in the off-season for the Cubs was the acquisition of right-fielder Kosuke Fukudome from the Chunichi Dragons in Japan. Fukudome played 8 years in Japan (stats) and had a .300+ average and an OBP close to .400. Who knows how well those numbers will transfer over though. Often times Japanese hitters have really good plate discipline, so hopefully Fukudome is of that ilk. Apparently, Lou is toying with idea of having Fukudome hit 3rd with Lee in clean-up, which would seem to be a big endorsement of his hitting. Soriano is going to be in left again, which leaves center field which is going to be a much less cut and dry situation. It seems like its Felix Pie's job to lose, but if he hits like he did at times last year who knows if he'll stay there. They really don't have as many options at center though. Matt Murton can't really play center with any degree of success, and he may end up being traded before season starts. Apparently Ronny Cedeno spent the winner learning center field in an attempt to stay on the team as a utility guy, but Cedeno in center on any sort of a regular basis isn't really anything I want to see. Then there's Sam Fuld who was called up last September, but didn't really do anything besides pinch run. I have no idea if he can hit or not. So all signs seem to point to Pie starting in center. He needs to show much more consistency than he did last year though. He kept alternating from AAA to MLB, and it seemed like every time he was called up he'd go on a brief hot streak and then all of a sudden not be able to make contact with the ball.
Infield
Derrek Lee obviously has the 1st base position locked up. Darryl Ward will see be around to back him up there. At 2nd, it looks like DeRosa is the starter for now (at least he's first on the depth chart on cubs.com), but if Fontenot goes on a tear again maybe he'll win the job. Shortstop would seemingly belong to Theriot who was very good for most of 2007 before slowing down at the end, and Ramirez will be back at 3rd, at least until he gets hurt again. 2007 was awful for the Cubs at the catching position. They began with Michael Barrett, who was promptly traded after fighting Carlos Zambrano in the dugout and playing generally terrible defense. They then went through a clusterf*** of Rob Bowen, Koyie Hill, and Jason Kendall, until they finally brought up Geovany Soto at the very end of the year and, as it turned out, the kid could hit. I'm very exciting to seeing more of Soto this year. I've seen him on a couple of different top prospects lists, and who knows, maybe he could make a run for rookie of the year.
So it seems like the lineup is going to look something like this going into 2008:
1. Soriano
2. Theriot
3. Fukudome
4. Lee
5. Ramirez
6. DeRosa
7. Soto
8. Pie
9. (pitcher)
That has the potential to be a very good lineup if Fukudome makes the adjustment to MLB pitching well enough to hit 3rd effectively. I like the idea of Ramirez down a spot. Obviously, he has a ton of power, but he also has a habit of grounding into double plays at inopportune times and I think Fukudome and Lee will be better at ensuring that runs get home. If The Riot doesn't return to the form he showed in the middle of last year and just sort of hovers in the ~.250-.260 range and doesn't draw that many walks, I'd like to see him possibly moved down to 7th, with Soto bumped up a spot, and DeRosa or Pie in 2nd depending on which one of them is hitting better. If he hits close to .300 again though, obviously you want his base stealing ability high up in the order.
So yeah, that's what I think. But then again, the last time I played baseball was coach pitch in like 2nd grade, so what do I know really?
Next update: Thoughts on the first few spring training games that are going to start at the end of the month.
Monday, February 18, 2008
They got the power, they got the speed...
Alright, so this year I decided I'm going to blog about the Cubs this season. We'll see how long this lasts. Anyway, it seems like a big thing in the media this year is going to be the fact that this is "year 100" since the Cubs won the World Series. People in the media seem to be playing this up to be way more significant than it actually is, and I'm sure it won't be long before people start talking about how they're destined to win it all this year. That's not to say that I don't think they're capable of winning the World Series this year, because they very well could. At the same time though, people have to reign in their excitement and realize that this is a team that was 85-77 and reached the playoffs largely because the NL Central was a terrible, terrible division. They have made some good additions, but none of them seem to scream "this makes them the frontrunners!" especially with the Mets acquiring Johan Santana, making their rotation a pretty damn good one if it can stay reasonably healthy.
So let's break down exactly how the Cubs are looking going into Spring Training:
Starting Pitching
For the first time since 2003, the Cubs had a rotation that stayed healthy and, for the most part, effective for the entire year. They had 4 guys make 30+ starts, and Sean Marshall made 19 after being inserted into the rotation after Wade Miller started off the year in awful fashion. Jason Marquis was pretty erratic, and finished with a so-so ERA of 4.60, but the rest of the rotation had ERAs under 4. Carlos Zambrano had a down year by his standards and had some serious issues like the fist-fight with Michael Barrett, and yet still managed to win a career high 18 games. With Kerry Wood, Bob Howry, and Carlos Marmol in the running for the closer's spot, the Cubs are trying to work Ryan Dempster back into the rotation. Dempster made 6 starts at the beginning of 2005 and was bad in that role, but we'll see what happens this year. They also acquired the one time ace of the Cubs staff Jon Lieber, who has battled injury since leaving the Cubs, but is still a solid pitcher when healthy. On top of that they have guys who spent most of 2007 in AAA like Sean Gallagher who could come in in a pinch. So the Cubs might have somewhat of a logjam at starting pitcher, but better too many than not enough. Personally I think a rotation of Zambrano/Lilly/Hill/Marshall/Lieber sounds good to me. I don't know if the Cubs will be willing to have Marquis as the odd man out though, as they paid a good amount of money for him.
Relief Pitching
As mentioned above, the closer's role is going to be openly contested between Carlos Marmol, Bob Howry, and Kerry Wood. Kerry Wood made 22 relief appearances last year, and looked somewhat shaky at first, but managed to post a 3.33 ERA. If he's as healthy as is being claimed now going into the season, I'd say there's a really good chance he'd get the job. The biggest question mark would be how he would be able to handle pitching on consecutive days if the Cubs had a big string of close games. Carlos Marmol was fantastic last year as a set-up man and has shown he could handle the workload, appearing in 59 games last year despite the fact that they didn't call him up until about a month or so into the season. Bob Howry has also been very good in the back of the bullpen, with a 3.32 ERA last year, but may not be overpowering enough to be a "lights out" closer at this point in his career. Personally, I'd like to see Marmol get a shot, but I'd understand if they went with a more veteran option. Will Ohman and the Cubs parted ways at the end of last season, so the Cubs are probably going to have to find another left-hander to go along with Scott Eyre in the bullpen, who had a down year last year. The Cubs resigned Neal Cotts, so he might be an option, even though spent most of last season in AAA. They also have Carmen Pignatiello who appeared in some games scattered throughout last year. It'll be interesting to see what they do with Kevin Hart, who was called up in September and looked very good in 11 innings pitched. They also still have Angel Guzman and Michael Wuertz available. I dunno if this is going to be an overpowering bullpen, but it will probably be reasonably deep in the case of injuries.
Next update: Hitters
So let's break down exactly how the Cubs are looking going into Spring Training:
Starting Pitching
For the first time since 2003, the Cubs had a rotation that stayed healthy and, for the most part, effective for the entire year. They had 4 guys make 30+ starts, and Sean Marshall made 19 after being inserted into the rotation after Wade Miller started off the year in awful fashion. Jason Marquis was pretty erratic, and finished with a so-so ERA of 4.60, but the rest of the rotation had ERAs under 4. Carlos Zambrano had a down year by his standards and had some serious issues like the fist-fight with Michael Barrett, and yet still managed to win a career high 18 games. With Kerry Wood, Bob Howry, and Carlos Marmol in the running for the closer's spot, the Cubs are trying to work Ryan Dempster back into the rotation. Dempster made 6 starts at the beginning of 2005 and was bad in that role, but we'll see what happens this year. They also acquired the one time ace of the Cubs staff Jon Lieber, who has battled injury since leaving the Cubs, but is still a solid pitcher when healthy. On top of that they have guys who spent most of 2007 in AAA like Sean Gallagher who could come in in a pinch. So the Cubs might have somewhat of a logjam at starting pitcher, but better too many than not enough. Personally I think a rotation of Zambrano/Lilly/Hill/Marshall/Lieber sounds good to me. I don't know if the Cubs will be willing to have Marquis as the odd man out though, as they paid a good amount of money for him.
Relief Pitching
As mentioned above, the closer's role is going to be openly contested between Carlos Marmol, Bob Howry, and Kerry Wood. Kerry Wood made 22 relief appearances last year, and looked somewhat shaky at first, but managed to post a 3.33 ERA. If he's as healthy as is being claimed now going into the season, I'd say there's a really good chance he'd get the job. The biggest question mark would be how he would be able to handle pitching on consecutive days if the Cubs had a big string of close games. Carlos Marmol was fantastic last year as a set-up man and has shown he could handle the workload, appearing in 59 games last year despite the fact that they didn't call him up until about a month or so into the season. Bob Howry has also been very good in the back of the bullpen, with a 3.32 ERA last year, but may not be overpowering enough to be a "lights out" closer at this point in his career. Personally, I'd like to see Marmol get a shot, but I'd understand if they went with a more veteran option. Will Ohman and the Cubs parted ways at the end of last season, so the Cubs are probably going to have to find another left-hander to go along with Scott Eyre in the bullpen, who had a down year last year. The Cubs resigned Neal Cotts, so he might be an option, even though spent most of last season in AAA. They also have Carmen Pignatiello who appeared in some games scattered throughout last year. It'll be interesting to see what they do with Kevin Hart, who was called up in September and looked very good in 11 innings pitched. They also still have Angel Guzman and Michael Wuertz available. I dunno if this is going to be an overpowering bullpen, but it will probably be reasonably deep in the case of injuries.
Next update: Hitters
Juno
Juno (****)
I've been neglecting this again, and now it's been a while since I saw Juno so this review isn't really going to do the movie justice. In short, it's the best movie released in 2007 to this point (still have a lot of work to do there though). The title character as well as Michael Cera's character are both fantastic, it's brilliantly written (by a first-time screenwriter), and the movie has a Wes Anderson-ish quirkyness to it that absolutely sells the whole thing. Juno represents the same sort of celebration of non-conformity that Napolean Dynamite did, except Juno is a much more complete and much less annoying character.
I've been neglecting this again, and now it's been a while since I saw Juno so this review isn't really going to do the movie justice. In short, it's the best movie released in 2007 to this point (still have a lot of work to do there though). The title character as well as Michael Cera's character are both fantastic, it's brilliantly written (by a first-time screenwriter), and the movie has a Wes Anderson-ish quirkyness to it that absolutely sells the whole thing. Juno represents the same sort of celebration of non-conformity that Napolean Dynamite did, except Juno is a much more complete and much less annoying character.
Monday, January 28, 2008
3:10 to Yuma & Cloverfield
Picked up 3:10 to Yuma on DVD and watched it in the afternoon yesterday before going to see Cloverfield in the evening.
3:10 to Yuma (***1/2)
A western that reminded me somewhat in tone (if not so much story) of Open Range, 3:10 to Yuma is an enthralling western that combines some great gunfighting and action sequences with an interesting presence. Russel Crowe and Christian Bale star in what could be considered the roles of the villain and hero respectively if you had to sum the movie up in one sentence, but the film is very morally ambiguous and more complex than a good vs. evil story.
The film opens with Crowe's character, Ben Wade, leading a gang of outlaws as they rob a train full of railroad money, and kill the pinkertons assigned to guard it in the process. Meanwhile, Christian Bale's character, Dan Evans, is a rancher and Civil War veteran (who lost a good part of his foot in said war) in debt to people who don't have much sympathy for debtors. Their stories intertwine as Christian Bale witnesses the robbery, which eventually leads to Ben Wade's captor. Wade is scheduled to be transported by train (the 3:10 to Yuma specifically, hence the title) to where he'll be tried (and hung since his guilt of numerous crimes is obvious). In the meantime, however, Wade's tremendously imposing gang is scheming to free Wade from his captors. Evans agrees to guard Wade until he can be put on the train and collect a reward for his service.
Evans's oldest son William has always thought his father to be somewhat of a coward, and is somewhat seduced by Ben Wade's much more direct and violent way of handling situations. Wade and Evans, also develop a "two sides of the same coin" sort of relationship, as they realize they respect certain aspect of each other's character, even if their moral fabric is not much alike. As the film develops it becomes more about Evans's struggle to save his ranch by collecting the reward for the delivery of Wade, rather than Wade himself being brought to justice. At times, Wade seems to show a genuine sympathy for Evans's plight. In this way, the film is a lot like a Sergio Leone movie, in that its not so much about a heroic figure bringing evil men to justice on behalf of the townspeople, as it is a story with very complex and individualistic characters who seem to exist outside of the realm of the "commonfolk."
3:10 to Yuma also sports some beautiful cinematography, and takes time to show the beauty of the setting, and has some great shots that visually match the tone of the story. The only thing that may be off-putting to some is that in a few climactic action sequences the film seems to develop a case of "Bad Boys syndrome," and becomes more focused with the violence and body count itself rather than why its happening.
Cloverfield (**1/2)
Cloverfield is a movie that's not quite like any movie that's been made before, and that's not entirely a good thing. On one hand, it's a great technical achievement, combining state-of-the-art computer effects with a very "ground level" documentary style. At the same time, however, there really isn't much substance to the film besides the experience that this combination creates, and while it was fun to watch the first time, I can't really imagine the film having a lot of staying power. There's a couple genuinely terrifying moments, but at other times the entire thing almost seems too surreal for it to even register as fear.
3:10 to Yuma (***1/2)
A western that reminded me somewhat in tone (if not so much story) of Open Range, 3:10 to Yuma is an enthralling western that combines some great gunfighting and action sequences with an interesting presence. Russel Crowe and Christian Bale star in what could be considered the roles of the villain and hero respectively if you had to sum the movie up in one sentence, but the film is very morally ambiguous and more complex than a good vs. evil story.
The film opens with Crowe's character, Ben Wade, leading a gang of outlaws as they rob a train full of railroad money, and kill the pinkertons assigned to guard it in the process. Meanwhile, Christian Bale's character, Dan Evans, is a rancher and Civil War veteran (who lost a good part of his foot in said war) in debt to people who don't have much sympathy for debtors. Their stories intertwine as Christian Bale witnesses the robbery, which eventually leads to Ben Wade's captor. Wade is scheduled to be transported by train (the 3:10 to Yuma specifically, hence the title) to where he'll be tried (and hung since his guilt of numerous crimes is obvious). In the meantime, however, Wade's tremendously imposing gang is scheming to free Wade from his captors. Evans agrees to guard Wade until he can be put on the train and collect a reward for his service.
Evans's oldest son William has always thought his father to be somewhat of a coward, and is somewhat seduced by Ben Wade's much more direct and violent way of handling situations. Wade and Evans, also develop a "two sides of the same coin" sort of relationship, as they realize they respect certain aspect of each other's character, even if their moral fabric is not much alike. As the film develops it becomes more about Evans's struggle to save his ranch by collecting the reward for the delivery of Wade, rather than Wade himself being brought to justice. At times, Wade seems to show a genuine sympathy for Evans's plight. In this way, the film is a lot like a Sergio Leone movie, in that its not so much about a heroic figure bringing evil men to justice on behalf of the townspeople, as it is a story with very complex and individualistic characters who seem to exist outside of the realm of the "commonfolk."
3:10 to Yuma also sports some beautiful cinematography, and takes time to show the beauty of the setting, and has some great shots that visually match the tone of the story. The only thing that may be off-putting to some is that in a few climactic action sequences the film seems to develop a case of "Bad Boys syndrome," and becomes more focused with the violence and body count itself rather than why its happening.
Cloverfield (**1/2)
Cloverfield is a movie that's not quite like any movie that's been made before, and that's not entirely a good thing. On one hand, it's a great technical achievement, combining state-of-the-art computer effects with a very "ground level" documentary style. At the same time, however, there really isn't much substance to the film besides the experience that this combination creates, and while it was fun to watch the first time, I can't really imagine the film having a lot of staying power. There's a couple genuinely terrifying moments, but at other times the entire thing almost seems too surreal for it to even register as fear.
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
2007 Top Ten list
Like the other ones, expect this to be edited from time to time as I getting to seeing other '07 movies in the future.
1. Juno - An amazingly well written movie that takes a story about a teenage girl getting pregnant and spins it into a broader exploration into what happens when someone who is a complete non-conformist has to deal with some huge societal issues. Plus, it's really funny.
2. Michael Clayton - Awesome legal triller that both gets you involved in the plot while also offering a scathing commentary on the whole system in which corporate lawyers thrive.
3. No Country for Old Men - A movie with a lot of subtleties that I'm not sure I picked up on fully watching for the first time, but even at face value its a great cat and mouse story with a terrifying "the world is meaningless so I might as well kill everyone" sort of villain.
4, There Will Be Blood - Even though it looks like a period piece with a grand message about what it meant to live in that place and that era, this is in fact a movie that looks inward at its black-hearted, nihilistic main character. Daniel Day Lewis's performance is fantastic.
5. American Gangster - A lot of people called this a new Scarface, but Denzel Washington's character is more quiet and calculating than was Tony Montana, and Russel Crowe's parallel story as an honest cop in a dishonest city adds a lot.
6. Sweeney Todd - Great black humor and great visuals from Tim Burton. A musical for all of us who feel musicals are too sappy.
7. Once - Review of this coming soon. A very low-key and simple film about two people who randomly meet and realize that together they make a great musical voice.
8. Black Book - An intense film taking place in occupied Holland in World War II. An exciting espionage movie, and simultaneously a melancholy personal story.
9. Knocked Up - Judd Apatow's dialog is some of the funniest ever put to paper.
10. Zodiac - David Fincher, whose Seven was creepy as hell because of its black atmosphere, makes another creepy and intriguing movie here, and does it this time by sticking very close to the facts of a real life case. Probably one of most interesting murder mysteries out there.
-------------------------------------------------------------
11. 310 to Yuma
12. Hot Fuzz
13. Bourne Ultimatum
14. Superbad
15. 300
The Darjeeling Limited
Breach
Transformers
Spiderman 3
Beowulf
Pirates 3
Movies I have not seen that I suspect could make the list: There Will Be Blood, Eastern Promises, Paprika, Persepolis, No End in Sight, Grindhouse, King of Kong, and probably some more.
1. Juno - An amazingly well written movie that takes a story about a teenage girl getting pregnant and spins it into a broader exploration into what happens when someone who is a complete non-conformist has to deal with some huge societal issues. Plus, it's really funny.
2. Michael Clayton - Awesome legal triller that both gets you involved in the plot while also offering a scathing commentary on the whole system in which corporate lawyers thrive.
3. No Country for Old Men - A movie with a lot of subtleties that I'm not sure I picked up on fully watching for the first time, but even at face value its a great cat and mouse story with a terrifying "the world is meaningless so I might as well kill everyone" sort of villain.
4, There Will Be Blood - Even though it looks like a period piece with a grand message about what it meant to live in that place and that era, this is in fact a movie that looks inward at its black-hearted, nihilistic main character. Daniel Day Lewis's performance is fantastic.
5. American Gangster - A lot of people called this a new Scarface, but Denzel Washington's character is more quiet and calculating than was Tony Montana, and Russel Crowe's parallel story as an honest cop in a dishonest city adds a lot.
6. Sweeney Todd - Great black humor and great visuals from Tim Burton. A musical for all of us who feel musicals are too sappy.
7. Once - Review of this coming soon. A very low-key and simple film about two people who randomly meet and realize that together they make a great musical voice.
8. Black Book - An intense film taking place in occupied Holland in World War II. An exciting espionage movie, and simultaneously a melancholy personal story.
9. Knocked Up - Judd Apatow's dialog is some of the funniest ever put to paper.
10. Zodiac - David Fincher, whose Seven was creepy as hell because of its black atmosphere, makes another creepy and intriguing movie here, and does it this time by sticking very close to the facts of a real life case. Probably one of most interesting murder mysteries out there.
-------------------------------------------------------------
11. 310 to Yuma
12. Hot Fuzz
13. Bourne Ultimatum
14. Superbad
15. 300
The Darjeeling Limited
Breach
Transformers
Spiderman 3
Beowulf
Pirates 3
Movies I have not seen that I suspect could make the list: There Will Be Blood, Eastern Promises, Paprika, Persepolis, No End in Sight, Grindhouse, King of Kong, and probably some more.
Sweeney Todd
Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (***1/2)
More musicals need wanton, graphic violence. That's my conclusion upon seeing Tim Burton's movie adaptation of Sweeney Todd, originally a Tony award winning musical. Johnny Depp, oft-used in Tim Burton films, stars here as the title character who was once a barber in industrialized London, before a corrupt judge (Alan Rickman) sentences him to a false charge out of envy for his wife. The judge ends up raping his wife and keeping his daughter as his ward. Years later, Todd returns to London hellbent on revenge. He meets Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter), who has taken over his old barber shop and converted it to the self-proclaimed worst meat pie shop in London. Sweeney retrieves his old barber's shears, which he seems to treat like a samurai would treat his katana, buried underneath the floor on the upper level. He's set to slit the judge's throat with them, but he finds the judge difficult to get to. Eventually Sweeney and Mrs. Lovett get sidetracked and devise a scheme which significantly increases the reputation of Mrs. Lovett's shop, while at the same time turns the tables on the wealthy elite in London and finds them at the mercy of the poor, in a manner of speaking. Mrs. Lovett is eventually convinced that she and Sweeney can start a new, if somewhat bizarre, life with each other, while in the meantime a young sailor attempts to steal away Joanna, Sweeney's daughter from the captivity of the judge.
I like some of the songs in Sweeney Todd better than others, but then again I'm really not much for musicals in general, and I have to admit that at its best the film's music is pretty damn good. The setting of industrialized London is perfect for Tim Burton to run wild with the dark, Gothic style he's become known for. Some of the set pieces are fantastic, and if anything some of them are actually too "loud" and distract from the characters to an extent.
Overall, Sweeney Todd is a lot of fun with brilliant macabre humor and social commentary with a lot of fun, outside-of-the-norm musical numbers.
More musicals need wanton, graphic violence. That's my conclusion upon seeing Tim Burton's movie adaptation of Sweeney Todd, originally a Tony award winning musical. Johnny Depp, oft-used in Tim Burton films, stars here as the title character who was once a barber in industrialized London, before a corrupt judge (Alan Rickman) sentences him to a false charge out of envy for his wife. The judge ends up raping his wife and keeping his daughter as his ward. Years later, Todd returns to London hellbent on revenge. He meets Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter), who has taken over his old barber shop and converted it to the self-proclaimed worst meat pie shop in London. Sweeney retrieves his old barber's shears, which he seems to treat like a samurai would treat his katana, buried underneath the floor on the upper level. He's set to slit the judge's throat with them, but he finds the judge difficult to get to. Eventually Sweeney and Mrs. Lovett get sidetracked and devise a scheme which significantly increases the reputation of Mrs. Lovett's shop, while at the same time turns the tables on the wealthy elite in London and finds them at the mercy of the poor, in a manner of speaking. Mrs. Lovett is eventually convinced that she and Sweeney can start a new, if somewhat bizarre, life with each other, while in the meantime a young sailor attempts to steal away Joanna, Sweeney's daughter from the captivity of the judge.
I like some of the songs in Sweeney Todd better than others, but then again I'm really not much for musicals in general, and I have to admit that at its best the film's music is pretty damn good. The setting of industrialized London is perfect for Tim Burton to run wild with the dark, Gothic style he's become known for. Some of the set pieces are fantastic, and if anything some of them are actually too "loud" and distract from the characters to an extent.
Overall, Sweeney Todd is a lot of fun with brilliant macabre humor and social commentary with a lot of fun, outside-of-the-norm musical numbers.
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Superbad + Futurama's back!
Superbad (***1/2)
In the same year as the similarly brilliant Knocked Up, comes Superbad, another movie from Judd Apatow's production company. The film isn't directed by Apatow, but it's co-written by Seth Rogan, who starred in Knocked Up, and the movie has the same sort of dialog that's over the top vulgar, yet more accurate to real life than that of most any other movie. The movie is essentially a chronicle of high school seniors being high school seniors on their last big weekend before graduation. They're horny, they want to get trashed, and they don't really care what ridiculous measures they have to go to accomplish either of those two goals.
Michael Cera, who was absolutely brilliant as George Michael in "Arrested Development" is amazing here as Evan for the same reasons. He has excellent comedic timing, and has one of the best "wow, this is awkward" type of expressions around. Jonah Hill (the guy from Knocked Up who used a hospital wheelchair to do a Steven Hawking impression, among other things) is hilarious as well and complements Evan, who is more of the straight man, very well.
Futurama: Bender's Big Score (***)
The first of what is to be four direct-to-DVD Futurama films tells a great story, and has several memorable bits, though at the same time a fair share of bits fall flat. Enough of them work to make it worth a buy, and if you liked the series you'll like this.
Capote (***)
Had this for a while but just watched it recently. May do a write up soon. Lazy right now.
In the same year as the similarly brilliant Knocked Up, comes Superbad, another movie from Judd Apatow's production company. The film isn't directed by Apatow, but it's co-written by Seth Rogan, who starred in Knocked Up, and the movie has the same sort of dialog that's over the top vulgar, yet more accurate to real life than that of most any other movie. The movie is essentially a chronicle of high school seniors being high school seniors on their last big weekend before graduation. They're horny, they want to get trashed, and they don't really care what ridiculous measures they have to go to accomplish either of those two goals.
Michael Cera, who was absolutely brilliant as George Michael in "Arrested Development" is amazing here as Evan for the same reasons. He has excellent comedic timing, and has one of the best "wow, this is awkward" type of expressions around. Jonah Hill (the guy from Knocked Up who used a hospital wheelchair to do a Steven Hawking impression, among other things) is hilarious as well and complements Evan, who is more of the straight man, very well.
Futurama: Bender's Big Score (***)
The first of what is to be four direct-to-DVD Futurama films tells a great story, and has several memorable bits, though at the same time a fair share of bits fall flat. Enough of them work to make it worth a buy, and if you liked the series you'll like this.
Capote (***)
Had this for a while but just watched it recently. May do a write up soon. Lazy right now.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Beowulf
Beowulf (**1/2)
Firstly, I saw this in I-Max 3D and, if you ask me, any novelty in the 3D effect wears off pretty quickly and eventually just gets distracting. As for the movie itself, Beowulf has some elaborate and satisfying fight scenes, but doesn't really have enough supporting these fight scenes to be anything more than a run of the mill action movie. Neil Gaiman co-wrote the script, and at some points his knack for successfully combining myth with history-- which he does so well in his graphic novels like Sandman-- is able to come through, but at other times its unevenly paced and awkward. There isn't much character development, which is in part due to the fact that the movie is based on the centuries old epic poem, but more still needed to be done to make Beowulf a protagonist worth caring about. There is a big jump ahead in time midway through the film after which point Beowulf becomes much more of a two-dimensional character, and this half of the film is much more enjoyable. Almost no effort is made to establish the origins or motives of the villains: the grotesque zombie-like Grendel and his Siren-like mother, played by a very naked Angelina Jolie. Again, this is party due to the fact that this is based on an epic poem which has more room for ambiguity, but it doesn't make it any less frustrating watching characters battle demons whose reasons for being haven't really been established whatsoever. The animation is far superior to the genuinely creepy animation of Robert Zemekis's last animated film, The Polar Express, but some of the character's motions are still a bit stiff looking, and there is definitely some degree of an Uncanny Valley effect still going on.
Firstly, I saw this in I-Max 3D and, if you ask me, any novelty in the 3D effect wears off pretty quickly and eventually just gets distracting. As for the movie itself, Beowulf has some elaborate and satisfying fight scenes, but doesn't really have enough supporting these fight scenes to be anything more than a run of the mill action movie. Neil Gaiman co-wrote the script, and at some points his knack for successfully combining myth with history-- which he does so well in his graphic novels like Sandman-- is able to come through, but at other times its unevenly paced and awkward. There isn't much character development, which is in part due to the fact that the movie is based on the centuries old epic poem, but more still needed to be done to make Beowulf a protagonist worth caring about. There is a big jump ahead in time midway through the film after which point Beowulf becomes much more of a two-dimensional character, and this half of the film is much more enjoyable. Almost no effort is made to establish the origins or motives of the villains: the grotesque zombie-like Grendel and his Siren-like mother, played by a very naked Angelina Jolie. Again, this is party due to the fact that this is based on an epic poem which has more room for ambiguity, but it doesn't make it any less frustrating watching characters battle demons whose reasons for being haven't really been established whatsoever. The animation is far superior to the genuinely creepy animation of Robert Zemekis's last animated film, The Polar Express, but some of the character's motions are still a bit stiff looking, and there is definitely some degree of an Uncanny Valley effect still going on.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Knocked Up & American Gangster
Knocked Up (****)
One of the best comedies in recent years which, like The Forty Year Old Virgin shows Judd Apatow's ability to combine edgy-- but not overly crass-- comedy with a well-written and intelligent story. Seth Rogan is very good as Ben, the well meaning but lazy and uncultured stoner, as is Katherine Heigl, the woman who gets "knocked up," as well as Paul Rudd, as a married guy wishing he was still single. There are brilliant examples of satire involving all of these characters, combined by some hilarious bits from Ben's cast of stoner friends. An excellent comedy.
American Gangster (***1/2)
A very enjoyable crime drama from Ridley Scott, based on the true story of Frank Lucas, a black man who beat the Italian mafia at its own game selling heroin in New York City. Denzel Washington is very good as the unassuming, but methodical and calculating Lucas, and the way his plan to undercut the mob comes to fruition is interesting to watch, but the best half of the movie may be the other half. On the opposite side of things, a cop played by Russel Crowe tries to discover the source of the new heroin while constantly trying to dodge entanglements with others in the police force who are corrupt and don't like people butting in on their jurisdiction. His performance is very good as well. There's an epilogue that's sort of necessary to tie of the story, but doesn't quite fit with the rest of the film, and some other sections throughout that probably could've benefited from better pacing. Still, this is a movie that runs near three hours and remains pretty engrossing throughout. A very good movie that might see a few Oscar nods.
One of the best comedies in recent years which, like The Forty Year Old Virgin shows Judd Apatow's ability to combine edgy-- but not overly crass-- comedy with a well-written and intelligent story. Seth Rogan is very good as Ben, the well meaning but lazy and uncultured stoner, as is Katherine Heigl, the woman who gets "knocked up," as well as Paul Rudd, as a married guy wishing he was still single. There are brilliant examples of satire involving all of these characters, combined by some hilarious bits from Ben's cast of stoner friends. An excellent comedy.
American Gangster (***1/2)
A very enjoyable crime drama from Ridley Scott, based on the true story of Frank Lucas, a black man who beat the Italian mafia at its own game selling heroin in New York City. Denzel Washington is very good as the unassuming, but methodical and calculating Lucas, and the way his plan to undercut the mob comes to fruition is interesting to watch, but the best half of the movie may be the other half. On the opposite side of things, a cop played by Russel Crowe tries to discover the source of the new heroin while constantly trying to dodge entanglements with others in the police force who are corrupt and don't like people butting in on their jurisdiction. His performance is very good as well. There's an epilogue that's sort of necessary to tie of the story, but doesn't quite fit with the rest of the film, and some other sections throughout that probably could've benefited from better pacing. Still, this is a movie that runs near three hours and remains pretty engrossing throughout. A very good movie that might see a few Oscar nods.
Monday, October 22, 2007
The Bourne Ultimatum
The Bourne Ultimatum (***1/2)
A perfect final installment in the Bourne trilogy (although it might not actually be final), The Bourne Ultimatum's frantic action sequences manage to capture the same excitement that the first two provided without feeling redundant nor jumping the shark. Matt Damon gives another very good performance as Jason Bourne, a man who has a stoic resolve but is deeply internally haunted by the fragments of the memories he has of his entry into the "Treadstone" program. Joan Allen reprises her role from Supremacy as Pamela Landy, a woman trying to balance the responsibility of her government job with her sympathy and understanding of Bourne's plight. Paul Greengrass Ultimatum as he did Supremacy and he directs it in the same sort of ground level, "shaky camera" documentary style. This is sometimes distracting and can make it difficult to follow the action, but at the same time it captures the every-second-counts nature of Bourne's pursuit. The Bourne series provides some of the best action films in recent years and this entry is no exception.
A perfect final installment in the Bourne trilogy (although it might not actually be final), The Bourne Ultimatum's frantic action sequences manage to capture the same excitement that the first two provided without feeling redundant nor jumping the shark. Matt Damon gives another very good performance as Jason Bourne, a man who has a stoic resolve but is deeply internally haunted by the fragments of the memories he has of his entry into the "Treadstone" program. Joan Allen reprises her role from Supremacy as Pamela Landy, a woman trying to balance the responsibility of her government job with her sympathy and understanding of Bourne's plight. Paul Greengrass Ultimatum as he did Supremacy and he directs it in the same sort of ground level, "shaky camera" documentary style. This is sometimes distracting and can make it difficult to follow the action, but at the same time it captures the every-second-counts nature of Bourne's pursuit. The Bourne series provides some of the best action films in recent years and this entry is no exception.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)