« June 2012 | Main | August 2012 »
Between drinking, laziness, and focusing on other stuff, posts on the ol' SoulHonky haven't been up to date and they may not be for the rest of the week (more because of work and focusing on my writing than drinking and laziness... hopefully). But while you wait, here's the new trailer for the latest James Bond movie, "Skyfall"
While I have to admit that I was disappointed by the actual mixes on the Various Cruelties debut album (the demos of songs sounded better IMO), there's no denying their ability to write very good pop tunes. Here's an acoustic version of one of their singles, "Chemicals".
I haven't given 1883 Magazine, who recorded this version for their site, much of a look but at first glance, it looks pretty interesting.
The Wachowski Siblings have a new movie and it looks amazing but man, the dialogue is pretty hokey and I'm not sure it's going to be anything more than a bloated mess of a film. If they can somehow weave it all together it could work but it seems to me like the kind of movie in which they took a book that couldn't be cut down into two hours and tried to mash the whole thing into one sitting. Can't say I'm too excited about this once, despite how visually interesting it looks.
The short scene from Life of Pi that was in theaters before Prometheus was a bit of a head scratcher and the trailer, although absolutely beautiful, doesn't really win me over either.
One more non-spoiler spitballing idea about Batman and failure of third movies in general. The obvious issue with most third movies is that they add too many characters. But what might be even more problematic is that they lose track of the most important and often overlooked character: the people. Some of the greatest scenes in great sequels are when the people come together and help the hero. The ferry bombs in The Dark Knight. The subway scene in Spider-man 2. On the other hand, the reaction of the people to Hellboy in Hellboy 2 is a key moment.
In third movies, the people often don't matter at all. For all of the talk of socio-economic issues being discussed in The Dark Knight Rises, I found it hard to really connect to any of them because you barely saw any of the people. You had one moment with an orphan but that was really just there to explain how Bane recruited his workforce. For the most part, the people of Gotham are absent for the movie. If a film is about saving a city, we should see some of the people who are being saved. At the very least, let us see them react to being saved. Basically, third films often increase the scope of third films while whittling the actual focus of the film too much on the hero himself.
After spending three hours on The Dark Knight Rises, I'm not going to spend too much more explaining my disappointment but, in short, the scope is too big, the characters too thin, the action too aimless and little more than brute strength vs brute strength. The film hits a lot of action film cliches and relies on a stunning amount of expository dialogue, even up to the very end.
In the end, it was an empty, ultimately disappointing movie.
SPOILERS IF YOU CONTINUE READING
Again, SPOILERS BELOW.
My problems with The Dark Knight Rises came together at the end of the movie.
- We basically have a long expository monologue to explain our villain at the end of the film even though who he is doesn't really matter at that point. The Dark Knight basically lived and breathed off of an unknowable villain in the Joker yet this film acts like the true face of the League of Shadows is something that should blow our minds.
- Meanwhile Batman is stabbed in an injury that will ultimately not really bother him at all.
- Then we have a chase scene to nowhere. Seriously, where was she going? She was trying to blow up the bomb minutes earlier but decided, instead of telling the driver to blow it or instead of trying to blow it when she gets in the car, she just drives around to... no, really, where was she going? (Nevermind the comic booky nonsense of an unstable nuke being able to be pinpointed to the second when it's going to blow and the fact that it's decaying radioactive material yet Commissioner Gordon is just sitting next to it chilling with no adverse affects.) And is blowing shit up and shaking the carrier of an unstable nuke really the best plan to prevent the unstable nuclear core from blowing up?
Batman's plan in the whole finale is, again, brute strength, using his ship to force someone to drive where he wants, which is little more than him shooting at the truck carrying the nuke which inexplicably just doesn't stop or drive in the opposite direction. And, in the end, he's outwitted yet again (I don't think he outthinks anyone in this entire film. He's tricked every step of the way) but saves the day with the Batwing, which is really the hero of the story. The Batwing saves him in almost every scene besides the prison scene.
- Oh, and then order is restored in minutes after overtaking City Hall. Bain and his people take over a city and then taking over one place and killing Bain (in a death befitting a nameless henchman, not the main villain for most of the movie) just stops it. Thousands of criminals, armed to the teeth, and it just ends in a matter of minutes.
Nothing in the film really made a ton of sense. Alfred tells Bruce Wayne, after he's lost his fortune, that MAYBE he can argue fraud. Really? Only maybe? Armed mercenaries raided the stock exchange and downloaded something that apparently only cost Bruce his money and you think you only have a so-so case for fraud?
Bruce Wayne disappears at the same time as Batman. Commissioner "You can't believe in coincidences" Gordon doesn't figure that out?
The fall from the climb kills most people but not the guy who had his back broken before? And I know supervillains do stupid shit all the time but putting your nemesis in a place where people are invited to try to break out (and then acting surprised when he did escape) might be the stupidest.
And how did broke ass, no toys Bruce Wayne get from the middle of nowhere desert to the under siege, impenetrable Gotham, not to mention also find Selina Kyle in no time?
I know that it's a comic book movie and it requires some suspension of disbelief but to truly enjoy this movie, you basically have to exile disbelief completely while also not expect much in the way of ingenuity, characters, depth, or, well, what did the film have besides a half-thought out wink to the Occupy era. People will go gaga over this, of course, but in 20 years, this will be an ultimately forgotten film and I wouldn't be surprised if the trilogy as a whole does little to impress the future generations.
And in keeping with my trying to stay more positive (which is hard here), the cinematography is great as always and the film doesn't completely fall apart like X-Men 3 or Spider-man 3 or Blade 3. I'd still argue that there hasn't been a great third movie in a comic book trilogy but this might be the best.
My thoughts to the people of Aurora, CO although I do that to add that while the tragedy was sad and senseless, the instant politicizing of it has been repugnant. A little restraint, people?
In order to perk up from the somber morning, here is the first episode of Jerry Seinfeld's new webseries "Comedians in Cars getting Coffee". This episode is with Larry David. Enjoy and may everyone have a safe and good weekend. (Crackle's embed video doesn't seem to be working; if it doesn't work for you, you can get to the site by clicking on the "Larry Eats a Pancake" link below.
There was a story yesterday in Politico, which quoted Jeff Daniels as citing cell phones and Twitter as a couple of the reasons that people today have "the attention span of a gnat." I posted my initial response to that article in the comments section.
I hate when people of Daniels' generation make the argument that cell phone/internet are to blame when it is his pre-Twitter generation who seem to be the leading the uninformed brigade. His generation ushered in the 24 hour news cycle. Also, hypocritically, it's usually the people who aren't on Twitter and don't know as much about the internet that blame it for society's ills.
I later checked to see if Daniels was on Twitter and noticed that he was. I also noticed that the way he used it is pretty much a waste. For his tweets, Jeff Daniels basically just self-promotes, which makes sense but you'd think someone who was so big on people becoming informed would constantly be retweeting news stories. Then I noticed that Daniels' followed list was mainly other celebrities (mostly singers and actors.) This is the type of list I had when I first joined Twitter and it's why I too initially thought it was stupid. What do I care what Zooey Deschanel ate or what airports Foxy Shazam was flying from/to?
But then I realized that what Twitter really is is a great source of information. It can essentially be a news wire for the everyman. I unfollowed most celebrities and started following reporters and pundits. Twitter has become a great way to stay up on the news and also get recommendations for other articles I should check out. It's a great tool to stay informed. Also, (usually more with sports stories), it gives me a chance at access to many reporters; access people in the past have never really had.
I'd recommend that Jeff Daniels follow the lead of his character Will McAvoy and start fresh. Start Jeff Daniels Twitter 2.0 and follow the news breakers and makers and retweet the arguments that he thinks are necessary for an informed electorate. Take Twitter, which can be used as a colossal waste of time, and put it to good use.
But, mostly, I'd remind Mr. Daniels that rather than looking down at people, or instead of looking back to the past, it's best to face forward and try to move one's self and lead others in that direction.
Paul Thomas Anderson's "The Master" has been the most intriguing upcoming movie of the year for some time now and the first two clips have only added to most everyone's anticipation. Well, we now have a full theatrical trailer and, well, after this one, I'm going to be avoiding all reports/clips because I don't want to know any more. I know this movie will be one that I see opening weekend and I don't need to see anything else until I'm in the theater watching the movie.
Former Tryout Freelance Whales have released a new song off of their upcoming sophomore album. Sadly, the song seems like Freelance Whales might be going closer to the electric faux-80's sound of most indie groups, which is something I don't really care for. Judge/Enjoy for yourself here.
To download the new song, click here.
Here's a couple of songs from their debut album, which I highly recommend that people get. Great record.
Old Crow Medicine Show has a new album out and I've noticed that this band hasn't been featured on the ol' Honky before. These guys helped inspire Mumford and Sons and recently toured with them.
This is one of their new songs.
This is my favorite song of theirs, "Wagon Wheel".
Here is one of the five "guerilla videos" they recorded recently. Each video takes place at someplace that was important in their career.
The Wire plus anything is amazing. This theory was put to test with Legos and, well, yes, still amazing.
One of my favorite things that the AV Club over at the Onion does is "Undercover" where they pick a random list of songs and then invite bands to pick one and cover it at their studio. It makes for some interesting listens. For instance, here's the Polyphonic Spree covering Neil Young's Heart of Gold.
On a related note, here's a song from the Polyphonic Spree's lead man's new group Preteen Zenith, which is a collaboration with a member of Secret Machines.
And who are the Secret Machines? Another indie band that had one of my favorite new songs a few years back.
Finally, I also enjoyed Trampled By Turtles cover of Arcade Fire because, while it's not better than the original, they took a different take of the song, making it a bluegrass jam. Most bands here just do straight covers of songs and I always appreciate when people try something new.
For more covers, check out the AV Club's Undercover series.While Tom Hanks's web series is just kicking off, Edgar Wright's shot at the web is just kicking off. And Wright, director of Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, and Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, does a better job of it. I've only seen the first episode but not only is it good, but it does more with the web element, having other little games and what not that you can do besides just watching the movie. No, it doesn't have something that brings people back every day but it at least takes advantage of the true web experience.
There's no way to embed it so if you want to check it out, click here to go to the world of Brandon Generator.
Thomas Jane made a short for Comic Con, reliving a former role. So here it is: "Dirty Laundry"
This is an amazing breakdown of what's going on with the Knicks right now. Taiwan's Next Media Animation does it again!
Mono, one of my favorite post-rock instrumental bands (probably a close second to Explosions in the Sky) is coming out with a new album and they have released the first single. Apparently this album was recorded with the Wordless Music Orchestra, who played with them on their amazing live album "Holy Ground".
Here's the first single.
And here's the trailer for their filmed version of Holy Ground.
Tom Hanks has ventured into the world of the web with his new series "Electric City". The animated series follows a futuristic utopia, or Utopia-ish place since it doesn't seem to great from the first episode. The story here is insanely simple (as one would expect for a five minute short) but the dialogue was pretty silly and the first five minutes don't exactly kick things off in a way that makes it seem like anything new. It's definitely not a first five minutes that makes me eager to see what comes next.
While Political Animals and The Newsroom have let me down, I have to say that there are two shows that have reeled me in. The first is one I'm catching up on: The Good Wife. I wasn't a Julianna Margulies fan from her ER days but she is great in this show and Chris Noth's best co-star since his days of running with Lenny Briscoe on Law & Order. (I'm sure women would want to say Carrie Bradshaw but I never watched Sex & the City.) The show is a great mix of procedural and episodic and the first season and change that I've watched have been great. I definitely recommend checking it out.
The second show was one that I didn't love when it first premiered, slowly came to enjoy, but now love. "Suits" on USA still has what seems to be a questionable grasp on how the law actually works but this season has been heads and shoulder better than the first season. I can't remember a show that's improved so much from one season to the next (my guess is that Parks & Recreation would be the best comparison but that's just off what I hear.) The addition of a new foil and much improved dialogue, along with shifting the focus away from the super memory that was what kicked the show's premise off, have all boosted the quality of the hour. Also, I'm kind of infatuation with Sarah Rafferty, which is saying something since the show is chock full of beautiful women.
Part of me says that you should probably just read up on season 1 and start in with season 2 but I've grown to like season 1. Still, it might be smart to just start with season 2 and, if you like it, go back to see how we got to where we are.
Here's the second season premiere, which is annoyingly, the only full episode that's up on USA's website.
M. Night Shymalan and the Smith boys (Will and Jaden) are teaming up to make "After Earth", a new sci-fi movie. Night desperately needs a hit after The Happening, Lady in the Water, and The Last Airbender all disappointed while Smith the Elder could use a new movie to freshen up his filmography that is chock full of franchises.
This teaser doesn't offer much in the way of... well... anything, as it is a video about a Facebook page but it does establish the world in which the film will take place.
Thanks to Screen Rant for first finding and posting this. (Or first ones that I saw post it.)
The XX is prepping for the release of their second album and they've released the first single "Angels" on YouTube. It's a typically minimalist approach and has a sort of Explosions in the Sky feel to it in the beginning. It's another great loungey tune although it might drag on for 30 seconds too long since the song is a bit repetitive. Still, a solid effort and I'm excited for the new album.
As coincidence would have it, I was just listening to the XX this weekend and while I still love Intro and Chrystalised the most, I rediscovered "Islands".
I just finished watching the premiere of Political Animals and although it was an entertaining enough hour, it was one of those pilots that ended and left me with little-to-no desire to keep watching. There's nothing wrong with the show, it's just that the issues and characters don't have much of a draw to me and I can't imagine what further adventures they might have that would be worth an hour of my time. I might check out the second episode to see where it heads by I've gone for anxiously anticipating the show to halfheartedly considering watching episode #2.
As for the other disappointing TV show, "The Newsroom" ran the much talked about 4th episode - the episode that critics savaged when they first saw the opening four hours of the show. I have to say, I don't get the hatred for this episode. It's wasn't that good but it was on par with the rest of the episodes. In fact, while the mix between relationships and real news was as poorly connected as ever (ending with on the nose yet at the same time tone deaf use of Coldplay's "Fix You"), the relationship stuff wasn't nearly as annoying as in previous episodes. Allison Pill's character come off as human, even though it is bizarre that she's mad at her boyfriend for pointing out that she likes another guy. (And equally odd that Don just laughs it off when his girlfriend is broken up about it.)
The one thing that I could see as being an issue was the gun control angle. It seemed extremely hokey to play before the Giffords shooting and it, once again, showed just one half of the argument, and was pushed along by yet another wacky female character. (It almost felt like the Bigfoot storyline was added to show how men can be screwy too.) For a supposed Republican, Will McAvoy hasn't sided with the Republicans on a single issue yet.
I've just come to admit that "The Newsroom" will show some signs of Sorkin's great dialogue but is overall just a mediocre show that is going to push his agenda. Hopefully McAvoy can flex some of his conservative muscles in the past because Sorkin was always solid when he pushed the Right's agenda on The West Wing.
Also, I'll add that I think that many critics didn't like this past episode because, for the first time, they were on the wrong side of one of Will's speeches. I'm sure many of the writers were like the second lady that he preached to, thinking reality TV is a guilty pleasure that they love, and they probably didn't appreciate Will's condescending take on something they actually like.
On a side note, given his witty dialogue, I really hope that whoever is in charge of "The Thin Man" remake smartens up and gives Aaron Sorkin a shot at it. And if they have, I hope Sorkin stops and takes time to have a little fun and write a fun little screenplay for the show. I'd love to see what Johnny Depp could do with Sorkin's material.
Sadly, I can't make this show but tomorrow night at Los Globos will be a performance by a few bands, including Levels who have a first single "Regret" which has been stuck in my head since I first heard it this morning.
So far, the Summer Box Office challenge is going so-so. My picks seem solid but my guesses on grosses are all over the place. For a reminder, my picks were:
1. The Dark Knight Rises: 440 millionGI Joe 2 got pushed so that one's off and it seems like "Ted" is this year's Top 10 comedy.
I was right about Avengers being up near the top (tough call, I know) but I was about 300 million off.
My #10 movie Madagascar is currently at #2 for the summer, already breaking 200 million.
Brave will probably surpass it but it probably won't limp its way to my predicted 250 million, especially with Ice Age opening up this weekend.
I said I'd knock down Prometheus if it was rated R but I wouldn't have knocked it down to 123 million, where it stands right now. The film could be hard pressed to have its domestic gross meet its 130 dollar budget. Even with the 172 million foreign box office so far, the film has to still be considered a disappointment (for comparison, MIB3 made 400+ overseas, Battleship made 236 million.)
I wasn't too far off with MIB3 - it's at 173 million, fairly close to my 190 call.
Spider-Man's 265 million dollars prediction is looking so-so. A big weekend this week should help but with The Dark Knight Rises a weekend away, this might be the webheads last weekend to make much moolah.
I was close with Snow White and the Huntsman (guess 168, current gross 150) although my reasoning was off - I thought it was a good movie that would miss the mass market but instead it was a bad movie that made money off of its great trailer.
My bust of the year pick was dead on, domestically. Battleship sank with just 64 million on a 209 million dollar production budget, although, to be fair, I saw coming in closer to 100 million rather than being the complete bust it was on the US shores. Dark Shadows and Rock of Ages were also DOA as expected and Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter could probably be re-released around Halloween because, registering at just 34 million, it's not like many people seemed to notice that it actually came out.
I do think that I might have missed the boat on a couple of the later releases. Bourne Legacy moving down a week instead of facing off with Total Recall should bode well for the remake. I'm still not sold on Colin Farrell or Jessica Biel (but I do love me some Kate Beckinsale) but if that movie wasn't a remake, I think people would be going crazy over it. It looks pretty cool and should do decent money if it's halfway decent. Bourne's move might not help it because, while it's not the only action movie that weekend, it's up against two fairly high profile comedies. I still think it settles in outside of the top 10.
io9 posted this up a minute ago. An fantastic looking treat from Sam Raimi, featuring three of the most beautiful witches (Rachel Weisz, Mila Kunis, and Michelle Williams) and the never reliable James Franco.
I'm still struggling to find new music and almost decided to go with HAIM but then I realized that I already had them as a Tryout in February. In the end, I decided to roll with The People's Temple and their low-fi tune "The Looter's Game". Their name (from Jim Jones's infamous cult) reminded me of the Brian Jonestown Massacre and the second song below reminded me of them even more.
Unfortunately for these guys, Brian Jonestown Massacre was the top of the line for this sound and they could only muster a cult audience (even after being featured in Dig!, a documentary about the band's rise alongside the Dandy Warholds.) Right now, I'm not sure if People's Temple will be able to break out of the niche. Like Brian Jonestown Massacre, they might not want to either.
If you don't know BJM, here are a couple of their more popular songs. Once the 80's fad is gone, I wouldn't be stunned if we saw a band or three cover some of BJM's songs.
I'd say that this is the movie I want to see this week but after looking for showtimes in Los Angeles, I've come up empty. I think the film shouldn't go with a platform release since it's up against The Dark Knight juggernaut next week and, judging from the trailer and early reviews, it would be a shame if it got lost in the summer maelstrom of movies but this documentary looks extremely interesting. Can't wait to check it out.
Making the rounds in the news and film blogs yesterday was 4DX, the latest gimmick in movie theaters. This theater takes the moving D-box seats and goes even further, adding smells and smoke or fog so that the theater is very much like the scene that you're watching.
While I'm sure some people might go for this, I think that theaters like this are missing the reason that most people avoid the movies - there are already too many distractions. People don't want moving seats and smoke being shot at them, they want people to stop talking, stop texting, etc. Cinemas like The Arclight and Alamo Drafthouse are more along the lines of what people are hoping for. If they're going to spend the money to go out and see a movie, they don't want to hear people chattering away throughout it.
Also, I hope more theaters realize that to get customers, they also should make more special screenings, either offering smaller films or past classics. With digital projection becoming the norm, the old print costs shouldn't inhibit theaters from offering more options. Too often, multiplexes are little more than simulplexes, with 15 screens offering up just 5 movies.
Anyway, 4Dx doesn't have a US branch yet and looking at where they've tried it out so far looks like a map of where they first send questionable pharmaceutical drugs so that should tell you all you need to know about this venture. Just as D-box seats didn't take off, I can't see this being anything more than something that you might see at an amiusement park or someplace where you expect distractions.
For their first trailer for Lawless, the Weinstein Company tried to go the prestige pic route and the reaction from around the internet was "meh. This time around, the trailer is far more standard, quicker cuts, faster music, and not surprisingly, it makes the film look far more exciting. It doesn't make it seem like it offers anything new (which was the major weakness of the previous trailer) but this is still a trailer that is more likely to get people to the theaters.
Either way, though, I have tempered my expectations a bit. I was eagerly anticipating this film earlier in the year but now it's dropped pretty far down my list of Must See Movies of 2012.
There's really not much to review with Ted. If you like Family Guy, you'll like Ted because it's basically a live action, hour and a half version of Family Guy. The film definitely has a lot of laughs but they are almost all one-liners or side comments or random bits, almost nothing is built out of the story. If you like carefully crafted jokes or comedic set pieces, there might not be enough going for you here.
If you don't like Family Guy, don't see it. MacFarlane stayed in his lane on this one and it's not going to be anything that is going to win you over. As someone who liked the little that I've seen of Family Guy, I thought this film had a number of laugh out loud moments, was lacking in the story department, but was ultimately a good time.
This is one of the few movies that you can watch the trailer and know whether you should see it or not.
The one thing I will make note of, however, is that MacFarlane nailed the issue of Boston girls not being the best looking breed but then the women he cast to play Boston women were all gorgeous, including Jessica Stroup from the new 90210. It just struck me as odd to open the movie with a comment about how Mila Kunis was such a catch in the looks department and then surround her with women who were just as beautiful.
Of course they sent the black guy.
"Savages" is an average crime drama that even includes everyone's favorite action/horror movie cliche regarding the life expectancy of the only black character. More generous viewers will find the film to have enough to be entertaining but I was disappointed. The opening narration seemed to go on forever and ultimately proved to be pointless since the backstories for the characters could have been set-up for more easily (or ignored at all.) It's the kind of film that you could tune in midway through and not have missed a beat. Honestly, the only reason for the long backstories was to show Blake Lively in a couple of sex scenes.
Also, the relationships of all the characters were solid so any tension was muted: the two guys shared the girl openly so there was no tension there, nobody trusted anyone so possible deceptions were expected, not surprised. There were some nice moments when the film glanced at the differing societies/lifestyles of the two different savages (the Mexican cartel and the Laguna Beach drug profiteers) but, as I said, those were just mere glances.
Taylor Kitsch seemed more at home in his usual broken meathead role, Aaron Johnson was fine but had a little too much confidence to start to really sell his nerdy philanthropist who was in over his head character. But everyone in the movie, including Oscar nominated Demian Bechir, was basically blown out of the water by Benicio Del Toro. This was the kind of film that kind of hurts careers because you are supposed to see Kitsch and Johnson as future leading men but you just want to watch Del Toro and you start to wonder why someone like Kitsch gets three major leading roles while Benicio's only real shots at leading roles were the small "Way of the Gun" and "Excess Baggage".
"Savages" just doesn't offer enough to be considered a good movie, even a below-average movie like "Haywire" offered better fight scenes and a little more style in terms of directing (Stone's style here was as empty as Tony Scott's approach to film but not as energizing as Scott's) and there's really no reason to see it in the theaters. Waiting until DVD or streaming might boost the element of added surprise that the movie is halfway decent.
At first, I was skeptical when I saw a post on Slash Film about Michael Bay stealing shots from David Fincher. And the first few weren't THAT bad, but then it got to Janie's Got a Gun and, man, it seems like some very close "homage" going on, to say the least.
The greatest charlatan in the world would be impressed by Daryl Morey. He gets: lauded for trading Donte Greene for Ron Artest, kudos for letting Artest walk and signing Trevor Ariza, pats on the back for seeing Ariza wasn't working and dumping his contract and getting Courtney Lee in return.
The problem is that when you look at the lineage of that player movement, it ends with Lee being allowed to walk away for nothing (the Rockets rescinded their offer to him, he's now a free agent) and the whole ball started off with the acquisition of Donte Greene... who they got in return for Nic Batum, an extremely talented player who teams are throwing money at this offseason.
Looking at the pieces along the way, Morey seemed to do alright. But when you look at the big picture of Nic Batum for nothing? It's not surprising that the Rockets are a team going nowhere.
Houston Rockets General Manager Daryl Morey is, at the same time, his own worst enemy and a victim of the media. Like many subjects that the media has tackled over the years, Morey was initially regarded too highly, and since he didn't match those too-lofty expectations, he's being discarded too quickly.
When Morey took over the Rockets, the media rushed to gush over his new school approach towards the game. He approached team building like a Mathlete, breaking down numbers to a degree that most of his peers couldn't even begin to understand. Moneyball had finally made it to the NBA. A new day was dawning.
Once he started working, Daryl proved the pundits correct because every time he made a trade, he seemed to come out ahead. But what people slowly started to notice is that while Morey came out ahead in the trades, the Rockets never moved ahead as a team.
The first issue that those writers overlooked was the fact that, unlike baseball, the NBA is a league driven almost completely by The Superstar. If a GM can't land a superstar player, he's basically destined to spend the rest of his career mired in mediocrity or trying to become the exception to the rule. And the main ways to land a superstar player is via luck or location - either you draft a star like Tim Duncan or Kevin Durant or you are based in a big media market (LA, NY) or a warm weather state with nice tax laws (ORL, MIA).
Daryl Morey couldn't draft a superstar because the Rockets were always good enough to avoid the top of the lottery. He couldn't convince superstars to sign to Houston because, well, it's Houston. So this offseason, Morey has decided to go after a superstar, one way or another. The problem for Morey, or rather the thing that the media has made into a problem, is that the "one way" is a complete 180 from "another" and the media can't handle that kind of change without thinking someone is to blame.
In short, Daryl Morey opened the offseason by trying to take the assets he'd compiled in Houston and trade them for Dwight Howard, the one superstar available who could, overnight, make the Rockets a contender. Unfortunately for Daryl, he didn't get Dwight Howard so now he has apparently decided to tank this season. He's recycled Houston's current assets into potentially better assets. He's likely looking to move his veterans for more youth. He's starting over.
Now for most people, this is logical. Try for a superstar via trade, if that fails, see what the top of the lottery might get you. Rockets fans tired of first round playoff exits years ago so I doubt they'd be appeased by a mere playoff appearance so it's better to go all-in on the rebuild.
But that's too benign a storyline for the sports media. For the media (and they eventually convince many fans of this), the cardinal sin for a GM is to promise the playoffs and then aim for the lottery. The most recent example of this was the Golden State Warriors - coach Mark Jackson promised the playoffs but, midway through the season, the team switched course and tanked in order to salvage their lottery pick. To many in the media, this was unacceptable. Nevermind the long term benefits, this type of retreat was a sure sign of failure and failure must be met with punishment. And for sportswriters, that means calls for one's job and/or snarky chastisement.
(Note: Not that staying the course would have been received any better. If Morey had dealt his current assets for a lesser player, be it Pau Gasol or Al Jefferson, the media still would have likely given him crap for banishing the team to mediocrity.)
That fact of the matter is that Morey did what most teams stuck in the middle of the pack should do - swing for the fences first, if that fails, start over. He did his best at the former and now he's going with the latter and shouldn't be damned for it.
He should be damned. Just not for that.
What he should be damned for is being exactly what people had once praised him for being.
Daryl Morey's great failure is his purported greatest strength. Morey was hailed as a stat geek supreme but the fact is that when you focus too much on stats, you miss everything else that matters. If the NBA was a crime show, Morey would be the geeky CSI who always gets shown up by the slovenly detective who goes with hunches or his gut. Morey treats player as if they are pawns and kings and has been touted as someone who played chess while his peers played checkers; the problem is that what he needed to focus on was chemistry. Human beings are unknown, unstable compounds; there's no statistic that can really predict how we'll react when thrown together in a group. Stats can tell you what a player did, it can't tell you how a team will perform when said player is added into the mix.
This is the second issue that writers who hailed Morey's metrics failed to recognize.
Take, for instance, the acquisition of every NBA Mathlete's favorite player at the time, Kevin Martin. Martin looked like an All-Star when you looked at his advanced stats but what the numbers didn't show was that his game included bogging down the offense and killing the flow of many plays, he didn't play much defense, and, most importantly, did nothing to make his teammates better, wasn't a leader, and was paid too much for what he actually delivered outside of his stats. So while sports writers crowed about what a great trade Morey made when he landed Kevin Martin for Carl Landry, the team essentially did nothing but spend more money for similar team results.
Similarly, when it comes to my Celtics, heading into last year's offseason, I think most everyone would have preferred getting OJ Mayo instead of Keyon Dooling or Mickeal Pietrus. Mayo is a better player, younger, higher ceiling. But he also has a crap attitude and whereas Dooling and Pietrus played huge roles in salvaging what had been a deteriorating Celtics locker room, Mayo might have been the straw that broke Ubuntu's back.
So has Morey learned his lesson? Judging from his draft, I'd say no. The Rockets are heading into the tank and added two players with questionable motors (Jeremy Lamb and Terrence Jones) and one guy with a major anxiety disorder (Royce White). Not only is tanking probably not going to bring out the best of these guys but two of them (White and Jones) play positions in which the Rockets are stacked which means the only real competition for the players will be for playing time and having guys going at one another isn't really the best way to build team unity.
Talent-wise, Morey had a heck of a draft. Results-wise, well, those three guys aren't going to change anyone's mind that it's time to start tanking.
Now, obviously, the offseason has barely even begun so all of this could change but, for now, I think Morey's past failures are his own fault but his current level of vilification is another example of the media making a mountain out of a molehill and then acting shocked and chagrined when said mountain turns out to be a molehill. For me, I'd take Daryl Morey on my team's front office in a heart beat; I just would never have him actually be the guy running the show.
The search for the first big crossover web series continues, this time with Bryan Singer's intriguing looking H+ show that starts with a cool look about the web in our brains and then becomes a kind of show about surviving in a world thrown into chaos. It looks fantastic for a web show but the key to me is how they develop the website. The multiple worlds should open up a way to have constant updates from characters and have a reason to bring people back to the site every day or, at least, multiple time a week. This is key for shows IMO. You won't make your money back on downloads alone; webshows need to be one part of an online experience that drives people to a website. Yes, the show needs to be standalone so people don't HAVE to go to the site but I think the best way to make these shows profitable is to have a daily web presence that can build a site. Also, if you build a site, you can introduce new show and build off of the success of this initial offering.
Will this show take the next step and embrace what the internet has to offer or will it just be another film that looks as the web as little more than a new disseminator in the old style media world?
So two comedians get in a car to get some coffee...
Jerry Seinfeld is apparently trying a new talk show in which he and another comedian sit and talk while driving to get and then drinking coffee. It strikes me as a mix of "Coffee and Cigarettes" and "The Jeannie Tate Show" except unscripted. Or maybe Charlie Rose on caffeine. The teaser here doesn't give too much of an idea of what is going on but I'm still eager to hear more about the project.
If you didn't get the Jeannie Tate reference, here's one of her episodes with Bill Hader. The show also features Aubrey Plaza as Tate's angsty daughter.
Did you think an Oscar would help Melissa Leo get better roles? Did you think that Jesse Eisenberg couldn't get worse than "30 Minutes or Less", I give you "Why Stop Now?"
At least for Tracy Morgan, this seems like a step up from Cop Out but this plot sounds like something that you drunkenly come up with your friends while joking about potential silly comedies. I'm sure it'll find a following since it doesn't look completely inept or without laughs but it definitely looks more like a Take the Money and Run type role for everyone involved than anything else.
The Tryout, the post where I put up a new band each week, has been severely lacking so I've decided to make two changes. First, I'm going to move it from Mondays to Thursdays and I'm also going to lower my standards and put up buzzed about bands instead of just bands that I like.
So we'll kick off the new brand of Tryouts, here are The Drums, a Smiths-esque band hailing from Brooklyn. The songs are good but just not necessarily something I could see myself ever feeling the urge to listen to. They fall into that range of songs that I'd be happy to hear on the radio but wouldn't buy the album. Still, I felt the same way about Foster The People and while I'm not saying they have a "Pumped Up Kicks" breakout, I wouldn't be surprised if these guys found a good sized following.
Fans of the Jack Reacher series were very upset when Tom Cruise was cast as the main character. No, they aren't Team Katie, they didn't like the fact that the famously short Cruise was taking the role of a guy who was supposedly an imposing 6'5 and 250 pounds. And judging from the trailer, it does seem a bit like the film would be better with a no nonsense, built to kick ass type guy. Or, at the very least, with a guy with a harder edge like Tom Hardy.
Still, the trailer isn't terrible even though it is awfully generic. It also apparently doesn't have too much faith in the new franchise since it employs guitars that sound like they are straight from the Cruise era Mission Impossible theme. I'm very interested to see how Chris McQuarrie does; the Oscar winning screenwriter of The Usual Suspects, McQuarrie's first venture into directing was the off-kilter but entertaining "The Way of the Gun" (Which reminds me, Benicio Del Toro might have been pretty bad ass in this lead role, even if he's not exactly what people would expect, casting-wise), the heist film that he said he wrote and directed because he wanted to stop people from asking him to make heist films. I'm not sure if he's a guy that you want directing action scenes but I feel good about the story being more than the usual action film (and maybe even doing justice to the pulpy yet entertaining book).
Ever since Nets GM Billy King traded for Deron Williams, his job has been focused on one thing: re-signing Deron Williams. He's made some highly questionable deals over the last few months but today they paid dividends as Williams decided to re-up with New Jersey.
Does that mean King's moves were right? Not really. The Gerald Wallace trade might have prevented a possible Dwight Howard deal and there's a very real chance that the Nets could have landed someone better like Luol Deng in a trade with the #6 pick. The Joe Johnson gambit severely impairs Brooklyn's ability to add help but it does give them, for a couple years at least, the best backcourt that money (a lot of money) can buy in the NBA.
Personally, I'm not in love with the moves because Wallace and Johnson are already on the decline and already weren't worth the money that they're making. I wouldn't be surprised if their window closed around the same time as the current Celtics contending (for the Eastern Conference Finals, at least) window. I do think that the Billy King has built a team that could be the #3 team in the East but if he doesn't land Dwight Howard, I think #3 is their peak. Then again, when you're moving into a new marketplace and competing against long time heroes like the Knicks, they couldn't afford a slow rebuild and third best is a helluva lot better than sixth worst.
So what happens with the rest of the league? Is it time for the Mavericks to deal Dirk? Do the Hornets match the max contract offered to Eric Gordon? What about Indiana and Roy Hibbert and Portland with the reportedly huge offer that the Wolves offered Nic Batum? Here are a few deals and decisions that could be made to spice up the NBA offseason.
The Phoenix Suns trade their 2013 #1 pick and Markieff Morris to New Orleans for Eric Gordon
I know this might not be popular with some Hornets fans but if Eric Gordon's heart is really in Arizona, I think the Suns #1 pick and a prospect is a decent return for him. I'd rather not roll the dice on a max deal and Gordon's health risks and instead would gladly tank again next year, get another top pick, and add another lotto (and potentially very good) pick from Phoenix, who agree to the deal so they can land Gordon, a talented 2 guard who actually wants to play for them.
Kyle Lowry, Kevin Martin*, Chandler Parsons, and Terrence Jones to Orlando, Carmelo Anthony to Houston, Andre Iguodala to Phoenix, Tyson Chandler to Philadelphia, Dwight Howard, Steve Nash to NY Knicks.
Daryl Morey doesn't get Dwight but finds a way to spin his multitude of assets into a superstar. The Magic toy with keeping 'Melo but after dealing with an unhappy star, they opt instead of take on some prospects who still should be good enough to keep the Magic afloat in the weak East (*and they may be able to swing Kevin Martin's expiring contract to somewhere like Chicago, Utah, etc. to pick up more value.) The Knicks make their play to stay ahead of the Nets, adding Dwight (who gets to land in NY, if not in BK) and Nash. The Suns continue their march to respectability by landing Iggy, who the Sixers send off in an effort to shore up their front court. A few other pieces need to switch spots to make it even/help match salaries (depending on what Nash gets paid) but I think this is a way that most everyone gets what they were looking for. (Also, Philly could be replaced in the deal by Indiana, who could add Chandler while waving goodbye to Roy Hibbert, who I've never been a fan of and would let walk rather than matching the max deal Portland gave him. Paul George moves to 3 and they make a run at Ray Allen to fill the shooting guard spot.)
The Sixers deal Elton Brand and Jrue Holiday for Richard Jefferson, Andris Biedrins, and Steph Curry
In order to to cut a year off of the deals of Biedrins and Jefferson by getting the expiring contract of Elton Brand, the Warriors downgrade from Steph Curry to Jrue Holiday. The Warriors also might agree to the downgrade because, while Steph is better, he does have ankle issues which make him less durable than Holiday but overall, I think the point guards are better fits on their new teams. Jrue can defend better and attack the lane while Klay Thompson and Harrison Barnes loom on the perimeter while Steph is a near perfect complement to Evan Turner.
As for the Blazers, a Roy Hibbert, LaMarcus Aldridge, Nic Batum core, eating up around 3/5's of the salary cap doesn't make a ton of sense to me, especially when the team is relying on a scoring point guard fresh out of Weber State to get the ball to them. Sadly, I think they have to bid Batum adieu and they might want to wait until next season to see what free agent small forwards they can land. The worst thing they can do is go out and throw away all of their cap space this offseason, when there isn't much available. Maybe they make a run at the cheaper Jeff Green to take over the small forward spot.
And then there's the Mavericks. Mark Cuban and Co. basically half-assed the defense of their title in order to maintain cap room to land Deron Williams. Now that Deron is gone, their options are to go after Plan C's like Goran Dragic or Jeremy Lin or to stand pat once again and hope for Dwight Howard and Chris Paul to sign in the Big D in 2013. Cuban will never do it but it really is time to consider trading Dirk. Dallas doesn't seem to hold much allure for Dwight and if Dwight doesn't go to Dallas, I'm not sure why any other marquee free agent like Chris Paul would (especially since Paul is on an up-and-coming team and in a HUGE market in Los Angeles.) Would Paul George, David West, and Darren Collison make sense? I'd love a Rondo, Sullinger, Fab Melo, and S&T of Jeff Green deal but I still can't imagine Cuban pulling the trigger on that. In the end, I don't see Cuban shipping Dirk anywhere so it might be another wait and see year for the Mavs.
I'm not sure which is more surprising: that this straight-forward, fairly schmaltzy looking film was directed by David O. Russell (I Heart Huckabees, The Fighter, Three Kings) or that this was the project that finally dragged Chris Tucker out of semi-retirement. On the bright side, I will say that it's nice to see Jennifer Lawrence finally flash some personality and charm; she's been buried in rather sedate roles since her breakout in "Winter's Bone".
Still, if it wasn't for the fact that I couldn't find any new music and didn't feel like writing about the boring second episode of "The Newsroom" and wanted to wait to see where Deron Williams landed before completely going off on the Joe Johnson trade, I probably wouldn't be posting this trailer. But this is all I've got.
I just finished working on Masterchef and I have to admit that the fake outs at the end of the show, when Chef Gordon Ramsey was announcing the winner, were starting to get borderline comical. Thankfully, Key and Peele had already noted this and created a great sketch which everyone at the show loved.
The NBA free agent negotiation period opened up yesterday and owners were throwing around money as if they almost didn't cancel the season to avoid this exact kind of thing. One reason that I could never side with ownership during the NBA labor issues was that their main problem was their inability to curb their own employees. General managers are constantly overpaying players and blaming it on the NBA marketplace even though they ignore the fact that they, or rather the dumbest of them, are the ones that set the market.
Take, for example, James Harden. Many people floated the idea that Harden was a max player but that idea seemed to be crushed when he put out one of the worst performances in the Finals since John Starks. Well, after yesterday, Harden can sleep easy. Roy Hibbert, an All-Star center who should have dominated a Chris Bosh-less Miami Heat team but instead disappeared for long stretches, was offered a max contract by the Portland Trailblazers. Omer Asik, a backup big man who showed little promise as a starter when he filled in for an injured Joakim Noah during the playoffs, got 8 million a year. The small market Minnesota Timberwolves offered Nic Batum 12.5 million a year, which means, if he pans out, he'll still be in the Andre Iguodala/Luol Deng class of quality small forwards who their teams want to trade because they overpaid them.
The way the NBA works, those contracts are going to be the measuring stick for Harden, a player who is, at worst, even with the likes of Hibbert. So while most people who follow basketball question whether Hibbert is worth a max contract, the Oklahoma City Thunder will likely have to deal Harden because they know that a) they can't afford to pay him that much and b) they know someone else will be dumb enough to throw that kind of money his way when he becomes a free agent next year.
Now while the argument is always, "You have to spend money to get talent", my response is, "How talented are these guys?" Hibbert's a nice player but you certainly can get 12/8 and two blocks for cheaper than a max deal. Nic Batum is better than Chase Budinger, who the Wolves acquired for the 18th pick, but Chase is good enough and much cheaper. He may now have to play out of position at the shooting guard and the Wolves will probably be challenged to re-sign their starting center Nikola Pekovic. Omer Asik is a nice enough player but he's most certainly not going to be the difference between the Rockets making the playoffs and spending yet another season as an also-ran.
Even worse, the NBA put in a harsher luxury tax (for teams who are over the tax year after year) so it may become harder for teams to eventually dump these contracts. I'm sure in a few years we'll hear a bunch of owners crying poverty because they can't afford the contracts that their shelling out right now. Contracts that most people think are overpays. Contracts that are nobody's fault but their own.
Angel Haze