Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Movie Review: "The Way, Way Back"

"The Way, Way Back": B.  The tag line on the posters advertising The Way, Way Back is, "We've all been there."  Presumably that refers to fourteen year old Duncan (Liam James), the protagonist whose recently divorced mother has a real tool for a boyfriend, and whose father is a continent away, too busy setting up shop with his new young girl friend to pay attention to Duncan.  Thankfully, I have never "been there" myself, notwithstanding the movie's marketing slogan.  I grew up in a two parent household, which no doubt explains why they've never made a movie about me.

Duncan is en route to the worst summer of his life.  The plan is for him to stay at a summer beach house with his bratty older sister, his mother, Pam (Toni Collette), and her jackass boyfriend Trent (Steve Carell).  In the opening shot, Trent establishes his contemptibility by informing Duncan, without prompting, that he considers Duncan to be a 3 on a scale of 1 to 10.  What is Duncan supposed to say to that?  Trent mistakenly thinks he can step in as a father figure by, of all things, constantly demeaning Duncan.  Wrong!

Pam is almost as worthy of our sympathy as is Duncan.  She is a middle-aged woman for whom motherhood is not enough.  She needs a man in her life, and apparently, conscious of her fading youth, is willing to settle for a lot less than she deserves when she hooks up with Trent.  As the story progresses, Pam starts to see Trent more in the same way that her son, and we the audience, perceives him.  Interestingly, her world starts to unravel over a game of Candyland.

There are two means by which Duncan can save himself from this impending Summer From Hell.  First, as luck would have it, the best looking girl on the beach, Susanna (AnnaSophia Robb), is in the house right next door, and she is bored out of her wits too.  That proximity and common ground should enable Duncan to get his mind off of Trent.  Secondly, the community's most entertaining venue, a water park called Water Wizz, is a short bike ride away, and it is there that Duncan meets his savior, Owen (Sam Rockwell).  Owen is one of the park's managers, but he acts more like a comedic day camp director than a person charged with some serious responsibilities, including the well being of his youthful clientele.

Unbeknownst to Pam or anyone else in his entourage, Duncan accepts a minimum wage job at Water Wizz from Owen.  Unlike Trent, Owen makes an immediate connection with Duncan, treating him kindly without being patronizing or condescending, and actually listens to what Duncan has to say.  At least there is one male with whom Duncan can make a connection.  Duncan has found his niche, quickly being accepted by the park staff as a conscienscious worker and even awarded Employee Of The Month honors.   There is a stark contrast between Duncan's miserable time with his family and his hours at Water Wizz.

The Way, Way Back is one of those comedies where the best and funniest moments are the ones we've already seen in the trailers.  That usually results in disappointment for me, but I've carved out an exception here because, as funny as Owen is, the most humorous character is Betty, the hysterical mother of Susanna, played by Allison Janney.  When Janney played C.J. Cregg, the president's press secretary on TV's West Wing for all seven of its seasons, there was a hint of humor even though Cregg was a workaholic.  In The Way, Way Back, Betty is a party animal who is rarely seen without a drink in her hand.

James plays Duncan almost catatonically.  At one point Trent asks Duncan, "Are you for real?"  I wondered the same thing.

In order to describe my impression of Steve Carell in this movie, I have to start with Alan Alda.  M*A*S*H reruns used to be televised after the local news for years, and I watched every one of them.  Alda was Hawkeye Pierce, the wacky central character who never let his distaste for the Korean War get in the way of his duties as a surgeon.  A majority of the jokes in M*A*S*H were either spoken by Hawkeye or at least involved him.  After I finished watching the M*A*S*H reruns and saw Alda in a few movies, I wanted him to be Hawkeye all over again.  When he strayed too far from that persona [e.g., Tower Heist, reviewed here on January 17, 2012 (B-), and 1979's The Seduction Of Joe Tynan], I winced.

As is the case with Alda, a large part of the problem I have with Carell is my fault; I want him to reprise Michael Scott (from TV's The Office) in all his roles.  Since that is not possible, I like him more in movies where he is more like Scott [2011's pre-blog Crazy Stupid Love (B+)] than when he is not [Hope Springs, reviewed here on August 21, 2012 (C+)].  Carell is smart for wanting to avoid being stereotyped as strictly a comedian.  I just have to get used to it. 

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Sometimes You Get A Mulligan, Sometimes You Don't

Vince Flynn was a best selling author of government intrigue/spy thrillers.  A native Minnesotan, he died of prostate cancer on June 19, 2013 at the young age of 47.  I heard him interviewed many times on Dan Barreiro's afternoon show on KFAN and he seemed like a regular guy, even though he was a national celebrity.

On June 29 the Star Tribune published an Op-Ed piece written by Albert Eisele, who is currently a senior editor of a political newspaper called The Hill in Washington, DC.  Back in 1996, two years before Flynn's first book was published, Eisele was a literary agent and Flynn was an aspiring author.  Eisele wrote that he missed the boat when Flynn submitted a manuscript to him.  Eisele liked the story "very much and thought it very well written."   He even wrote to Flynn to tell him so, yet he rejected the manuscript on the grounds that Flynn hadn't quite captured the feel of the "Washington milieu," and that his (Eisele's) excitement did not rise to a high enough level while reading.

To make a long story short, Flynn self-published that first book, Term Limits, and it did so well that it was eventually picked up by a big time publisher. That was the last time Flynn had any trouble whatsoever getting any of his fourteen novels published.

In his Op-Ed piece -- which, by the way, has a great headline, Sometimes you miss talent as it flashes before you -- Eisele expresses regrets not only for Flynn's passing but for his own error in rejecting Flynn's manuscript.  I found Eisele's piece to be sincere and moving, plus it struck a personal cord with me.

In the eleven years I had the privilege of teaching, and notwithstanding my reputation of being a tough teacher, I only recall one instance where I was unfair to a student.  Obviously it has left an imprint in my little brain, because it happened over thirty-five years ago.  In my 8th grade English class, a large portion of the curriculum was devoted to composition.  The capstone for the year was a term paper requirement.  One of my students was Jim Diehl, a nice kid with plenty of enthusiasm, yet unfocused.  He was polite but never applied himself to the degree someone with his intelligence should have.  I predicted Jim would wait until the last minute to start working on his term paper, while most of his classmates got an early jump.  Sure enough, that is exactly what happened.

I do not remember what Jim's topic was, but he wrote a very good paper, another of my predictions which turned out to be true.  However, he submitted the paper in pencil, a definite no no under the rules and directions which I had clearly given the class.  To "teach him a lesson," I docked his term paper grade an entire letter, from a B+ to a C+.  I still remember the look of disbelief in his eyes when I told him he was only getting a C+.  Both he and I knew his paper was too good to earn such a low mark.  I am not sure which of us felt worse.
 
The punishment did not fit the crime, and that has gnawed at me.  (Yes, I have considered it may simply be my Catholic school guilt rearing its ugly head.)  I've asked myself many times if I would have handled things the same way if one of my other students had done the same thing.  As much as I wanted the answer to be "yes," I knew then as I know now that the answer is "no."

In Eisele's article, he writes that he had the opportunity to catch up with Flynn a few years ago, and conceded his mistake.  Flynn took the high road, and told Eisele not to feel bad.  Eisele writes, "Still, I couldn't help but cringe every time I would see one of the latest Vince Flynn novels prominently displayed in bookstores and airports through the years.  I wish I hadn't let my superior knowledge of the Washington milieu mislead me when he asked me to help get his first novel published."

Unless Jim Diehl writes under a pseudonym, I don't believe he is a published author, although his writing talent held promise as an eighth grader.  Eisele is lucky he had an opportunity to tell Flynn to his face that he wished he had a mulligan for his 1996 decision.  I haven't seen Jim Diehl since 1976.  If I ever get the same chance as Eisele, I will tell Jim I've wished for a mulligan too.

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Movie Review: "20 Feet From Stardom"

"20 Feet From Stardom": A-. When Darlene Wright was nineteen years old, she recorded a song written by Gene Pitney called He's A Rebel.

He's a rebel and he'll never ever be any good,
He's a rebel 'cause he never ever does what he should.

A couple of years later that song, with Wright's vocals, became a pop smash, reaching # 1 on the Billboard charts in the fall of 1962.  Imagine Wright's surprise the first time she heard the song on the radio, when the disc jockey informed his audience that the artist was the Crystals!  Wright's group was the Blossoms.  That would not be the last time that Wright, whose professional name was Darlene Love, would be the victim of the unethical producer Phil Specter's shenanigans.  He had used her vocals to promote a girl group in which she was not a member.  Her story is one of several featured on the new documentary, 20 Feet From Stardom.

The Rolling Stones, self-described as "the world's greatest rock and roll band," has had dozens of hit singles over the fifty-plus years of their existence.  Ironically, one of their biggest songs, Gimme Shelter, was never released as a single.  Yet, it is still played often on classic rock stations, is a staple on the Stones' concert tours, and without fail makes every list compiled of the Stones' most important and favorite songs.  Why the love?  A big reason is the background vocals of Merry Clayton.  Listen as she takes over the lead from Mick Jagger coming out of the guitar break.  She sings with so much passion that you can hear her strained voice crack on the word "murder" the third time she sings:

Rape, murder!
It's just a shot away,
It's just a shot away.

Clayton is also one of the interviewees in 20 Feet.  Her interviews, interspersed with Jagger's reflections, are among the many highlights of the film.

Raise your hand if you've heard of Aretha Franklin.  Just as I suspected, everybody.  Now raise your hand if you're familiar with Tata Vega.  Hmm, I don't see very many.  Vega is a tremendous singer who was in demand for background vocals by a plethora of artists and producers.  She has worked with Chaka Khan, Elton John, Lou Rawls, Leon Russell and Madonna, to name a few.  Just like Clayton, Vega was one of the Raelettes, gorgeous background singers who were a big part of Ray Charles' recordings and concerts.  Some industry insiders opined on camera that Vega's only "fault" was that she sounded astoundingly similar to Aretha, and there is only one Aretha.  To be compared to Aretha, who like Vega was reared on gospel music, is the epitome of compliments.

Among the several other singers interviewed on film are: Lisa Fischer, who has been hired to furnish background vocals on every Stones tour since 1989; exotically beautiful Judith Hill, whose appearance on The Tonight Show backing up inferior (in the filmmaker's opinion) Aussie star Kylie Minogue she had hoped to pull off in anonymity; and Claudia Lennear, widely thought to be the inspiration for the Stones' classic rocker, Brown Sugar.

The movie is an educational and sociological mixture of on-camera interviews with a dozen or so background singers who got their music careers started in the sixties and seventies, plus archival footage from early concerts and television shows, and more interviews with headliners such as Bruce Springsteen, Jagger, Stevie Wonder and Sting.  The film is also a fascinating study of what makes the difference between a lead singer and a background singer, and how luck, politics and, yes, talent, all come into play.  All but one of the non-headliners are women, and none appears to be caucasian.  Two other common threads: Virtually all of them got their start as youths by singing in church choirs, and all of them had the vocal chops to be stars in their own right had the cards fallen more favorably for them.  Still, there is no bitterness, at least none captured on film by documentarian Morgan Neville.  The women have loved to sing their whole lives, and the absence of fame and fortune did not change that.  A poignant observation, made by Vega, is that she isn't so sure she would have been able to stay away from drugs had her career as a solo artist taken off.

One quibble is that the film editors could have done a little better job of presenting the sequence of interviews and concert footage to make things more cohesive.  The movie tends to volley back and forth between "now and then," and from one singer to another and back to the first.  It is not always easy to figure out which artist is on the video from forty years ago, because she bears little resemblance to how she appears in her modern day interview session.  In all fairness, there are several subtitled graphics from time to time to remind us of who we are seeing and which headliners she supported with background vocals.

Seeing and posting about 20 Feet reminds me of another movie which covered similar ground, Standing In The Shadows Of Motown (2002), and which I have on my "gotta see" list.  It is the story of another group of unsung musical heroes, the Funk Brothers, who were the session musicians working at Motown Records, and whose contributions to that label's large stable of hit makers was a story that demanded to be told.  What a double feature Shadows and 20 Feet would make!  

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Seven Baseball Myths That Are... well, Myths

Florida cop wannabe George Zimmerman was acquitted of murder and manslaughter charges by his criminal trial jury on Saturday.  Although my unfailing humility nearly keeps me from doing this, I must point out that I correctly predicted that outcome here back on June 2, 2012 (Three Defendants Will Walk) and again on June 13, 2012 (Roger The Dodger).  Just think of all the money the state of Florida could have saved if only they had consulted with me before spending millions prosecuting the case.  I know the public demanded a trial, but given the facts revealed through the media, I did not foresee any way the prosecution could meet the criminal trial standard of having to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.  It didn't hurt that Zimmerman's defense team was outstanding.

As proof of my modesty I will not remind you that, in addition to the Zimmerman case, I was also correct on last year's John Edwards corruption case and Roger Clemens obstruction of justice case, as descibed in the two posts cited above.  Just don't mention my January 7, 2013 prediction of the Alabama-Notre Dame National Championship Game (Take The Ten, Bet On Green).

***

Tonight's main attraction is the Major League Baseball All Star Game, to be played in the new home of the New York Mets, Citi Field.  In spite of its well-documented faults, baseball's version of an all star game is the best, if for no other reason than it is the only one of the four major sports in which all star defense is played with the same amount of professionalism that a fan would witness in a regular season game.  Therefore, with apologies in advance to readers who don't give a rat's patootie about baseball, I deem it appropriate and timely to offer one more missive about my favorite sport.  (Full disclosure:  I already have a draft of yet another baseball-related post in the hopper, so my apology is not really heartfelt.)

I decided long ago that when I attend a game, I will resist the temptation to throw in my two cents when a nearby fan loudly expounds on something happening on the field, even if that fan is, in my view, misinformed.  The sun will still rise in the east the next day, regardless of what that nincompoop sitting behind me says to his ten year old son.  However, my kinder and gentler approach does not apply to talking heads who get paid to analyze.  A lot of other baseball fans apparently feel the same way, as former Big Red Machine second baseman (and Hall Of Famer) Joe Morgan was forced out of a network job by disgruntled fans who could not bear to hear Joe, week after week, utter one falsehood after another.  (Plus, he was dull!)  One of the great mysteries surrounding the sport is how preposterous analyst Tim McCarver, a two-time World Series winning catcher for the St. Louis Cardinals, manages to keep his job on Fox Sports.  He is prone to offer such gems as, "It is well established that if a right-handed batter connects on a 3 & 2 slider, the ball will tail away from the right fielder."  No wonder fans set up "FireJoeMorgan" and "FireTimMcCarver" web sights.  Joe is long gone, and this is Tim's last year.  Ostensibly Tim is retiring.  In any event, good riddance, Tim!

Whether it be from paid analysts, fans in the stands, or elsewhere, baseball is replete with "known facts" that ain't quite factual.  In honor of the Twins' Joe Mauer, the $23 million a year catcher who wears # 7 and is starting for the American League tonight, here are seven myths about America's favorite pastime.

Myth # 1: Stick the stiff in right field.  When I was a kid, the coaches always put the poorest player in right field, on the theory that a weak glove can be hidden out in the south forty, where no one ever hits the ball.  I later realized that the practice is not limited to youth baseball, as many managers at the high school level and above follow the same practice.

There is more to playing right field than shagging a ball or two during a nine inning game.  Many Major League stadia, including Fenway Park (Boston Red Sox), Comerica Park (Detroit Tigers) and Minute Maid Park (Houston Astros), require the right fielder to cover a lot more ground than the left fielder.  (By the way, take a peek at this cool website: www.andrewclem.com.  It shows the dimensions of all MLB parks since the early 1900's.)  One of the most underrated aspects of the game is what is known as "defending the first base runner."  In my June 6, 2012 post (The Art Of The Double Play) I noted that a handful of current right fielders are known for their strong throwing ability. This not only keeps base hits down the line from turning into doubles, but keeps the runner who started at first base from getting to third on a single.  As they say in constitutional law, the right fielder's throwing prowess has a "chilling effect" on that base runner and his third base coach.  That is important because, unlike a runner at second, a runner on third can score on a balk, a wild pitch, a passed ball, an infield base hit, an infield chopper, a sac fly, a suicide squeeze, a safety squeeze or a one-base error.  Plus, there is a slight chance of stealing home.

Think about this:  The two infielders who are most often used as relay men are the shortstop and the second baseman, and in almost every case, the shortstop has the stronger arm.  Because of that, shortstops can go out farther to take a throw from the left fielder than a second baseman can afford to go to take a throw from a right fielder.  That is another reason most managers will put the outfielder with the cannon in right, and the weaker arm in left.

Myth # 2: The catcher is the defensive captain, and therefore has the right-of-way on pop-ups, especially foul pop-ups.  First of all, although the catcher is, arguably, the defensive captain who signals most defensive plays in advance, he is the last guy you want catching a pop-up if another player has at least an equal opportunity to get under it.  On any fair ball pop-up hit in front of the mound, the pitcher is supposed to take charge on appointing an infielder to make the play.  On any fair ball pop-up behind the mound, that duty falls to the shortstop unless the ball is more or less coming down directly toward one of the other infielders.  On any foul ball where the choice is between the corner infielder or the catcher, the corner infielder should take it because (i) they have bigger glove pockets, (ii) the ball is not spinning backwards away from them like it is for the catcher, and (iii) the corner infielders do not have to deal with gear.

Myth # 3: An infield is either playing back, or it isn't.  That may not qualify as a myth, but it is, shall we say, imprecise.  Generally there are four depths a manager might pick from to position his infield.  Normal depth means that the infielders are back near, if not on, the outfield grass, i.e., on the edge of the infield skin.  Double play depth still has the infielders behind the base paths, but closer in than normal depth.  To turn a double play, the ball has to be fielded more quickly than normal depth would allow, and the middle infielders have to be closer to the second base bag to enable them to be in position to take the throw for the force.  If the infield is in (or "up") that means the four are each up to the infield grass, hoping the ball is hit right at one of them to permit a quick throw to the plate.  Finally, there is medium depth, commonly called "half way," which has the infielders in front of the base path, but farther from the plate than the "in/up" position.  As all you physics and geometry scholars know, the closer in the infield plays, the easier it is for the batter to get a base hit, because there is less reaction time and it's harder to play the angles for a fielder who is up.

When I am at a game, I like to see which depth the manager chooses to set his infield.  This is an aspect of the game that television does not show enough.  Early in a game, he may decide to concede a run by playing his infield back even though there is a runner at third and less than two out. If the same situation presented itself late in a close game, he might bring the infield in to cut down the runner trying to score on an infield grounder.  With runners at the corners and less than two out early in the game, most teams will play the infield at double play depth, willing to give up a run (if there is no one out) in exchange for two outs.  That is called "avoiding the big inning."  When a manager plays his infield half way, he is hedging his bets.

In addition to the four depths described above, there are combo platter hybrids, such as "corners up," which has only the first and third basemen playing in, and infield shifts, where there might be three infielders on the same side of the diamond.  When left handed Adam Dunn of the White Sox bats against the Twins and several other teams, the second baseman looks more like a shallow right fielder, because Dunn runs like his feet are in cement.  One novel concept regarding infield shifts is employed by manager Joe Maddon of the Tampa Bay Rays.  When his team shifts by placing three infielders to the right of second base, he leaves his shortstop as the only man on the left side.  In other words, as you look out from the plate, the third baseman is to the right of the shortstop.  I think that's brilliant, because his shortstop has far more range than the third baseman, so he (instead of the third baseman) is left to patrol the entire left side of the infield.

Myth # 4: A good catcher will totally block the plate to keep a runner from scoring.  I must confess that I was not set straight on this myth until this season, when I learned something new from former Twins catcher Tim Laudner.  He said that when a catcher is anticipating a play at the plate, he should give the incoming runner a very small glimpse of the plate, so that the runner has something to shoot for without intentionally attempting to bowl over the catcher.  The catcher is still blocking the plate, but not entirely obfuscating it.  The catcher, who is wearing protective equipment (including his mask which he should not have removed!), maintains the advantage, plus more often than not he is the bigger player.  Also, a runner is more likely to go into a head first slide -- posing less danger to the catcher -- if he can see a piece of the plate when he's getting close.

I am happy to report that, no thanks to me, none of the catchers I coached was ever killed by an incoming base runner.  I wish I had heard Tim's instructional back in 1971, when I coached my first team.  But then again, Tim would have been just thirteen years old at that time, the same age as the kids I was coaching, so I probably wouldn't have paid him much heed.

Myth # 5: A perfect throw from an outfielder to the plate arrives on the fly.  If you thought that, go directly to jail.  Do not pass Go; do not collect $200.  A perfect throw from an outfielder arrives on exactly one hop.  If the ball hops more than once it will be too late to nail the runner.  If the ball arrives on the fly it is harder for the catcher to make the play because, for one thing, long throws tend to curve.  Also, they are harder for the outfielder to control.  Fielding a short bounce is an easier play than trying to catch a ball on the fly after it's traveled over a hundred fifty feet.

Two other considerations about long throws from the outfield.  First, if the outfielder's goal is to have his throw reach the plate on the fly, there is less chance of him hitting the cut-off man.  Unless it is the walk-off winning run coming in or there is no other base runner to defend, the outfielder needs to have a throw that the cut-off man can reach if signaled to do so by the catcher.  Second, if the walk-off winning run will score on a sac fly, the outfielders should position themselves no deeper than the distance they can throw to the plate on one hop.  Playing any deeper than that is pointless.

Myth # 6:  If a relief pitcher wasn't used in a game, he should be available to pitch the next day.  Each pitcher is different, but as a rule of thumb it takes a relief pitcher anywhere from twenty to twenty-five pitches in the bullpen to get warm.  This does not include pre-game long toss, playing catch in front of the bullpen mound before actually working on his pitches from the bullpen rubber, or the eight warmup pitches he is allowed to throw from the diamond's mound.  Barring extra innings, each pitcher in the pen has a defined role, such as long relief, middle relief, set-up (i.e., seventh or eighth inning), or closer.  If the starter gets in trouble in the fourth inning, the long reliever knows that when the phone rings it will be his "get ready" signal.  If the starter lasts until the eighth -- a highly unlikely occurrence for the Twins -- and then requires relief, the set up guy will be the one called.  Pitchers are accustomed to routine.  In view of all the above, if a pitcher is asked to warm up a second time in the same game, he either needs to go in then, or else he is done for the day. If a relief pitcher warms up twice but does not go in the game, for purposes of determining whether he's available for the next game it's treated the same as if he had gone in.  After all, by that time he would have thrown forty or fifty pitches in the pen.  The point is this:  You can't tell by looking at a box score from yesterday's game whether a relief pitcher will be available to pitch today.  Just because he didn't appear in the game does not mean he will be ready and able to go today.

Myth # 7: A relief pitcher's won/loss record and ERA (earned runs per nine innings) are the best measuring sticks for determining his effectiveness.  While it's true that those two stats are the ones most often shown on the TV screen or announced on the radio, the two most telling stats for a relief pitcher are his WHIP and the percentage of his inherited runners he has allowed to score.  For set-up relievers, who are often brought in to pitch with men on base when the game is on the line, I also want to know their ratio of strikeouts to innings pitched. Sometimes only a strikeout (or a harmless pop up) will do.  If the strikeouts to innings pitched ratio is equal to or better than 1 to 1, that is excellent.  By way of contrast, closers are more liable to start an inning, so where that's the case I place more reliance on the WHIP.

"WHIP" means walks and hits allowed per innings pitched.  The trouble with WHIP stats, and the reason why won/loss records and ERAs are used more than WHIP during broadcasts and telecasts, is that the difference between a good WHIP and a poor WHIP can be a matter of tenths of a point.  For example, a good WHIP would be around 1.1 and under, while a poor WHIP would be around 1.4 and above.  That small margin might be too much for a lot of casual baseball fans to digest.

ERA for most relief pitchers is not that predictive, especially with teams that have managers who like to use six or seven pitchers in a close game.  There is too much reliance on the subsequent pitcher being able to keep his inherited runners from scoring.  A high ERA for a relief pitcher (except, I would argue, closers) can be deceiving, because once he is pulled from the game he is reliant on his incoming colleague to hold things at bay.  A good example of what I'm addressing occurred in the Twins' June 19 game against the White Sox.  Brian Duensing came on in the eighth inning to relieve Ryan Pressly with runners on second and third and two outs.  Duensing was being asked to retire just one batter, Adam Dunn.  Dunn hit Duensing's second pitch to center for a single, knocking in both runs, whereupon Duensing was removed in favor of Josh Roenicke.  The two runs Duensing allowed were charged to Pressly, and since Dunn never came around to score, Duensing's ERA was not affected one iota.

Won/loss record is useful and instructive for starting pitchers, who by rule must complete five innings to qualify for getting credit for a win.  But there is too much luck involved to rely on that stat for relievers.  A lot of the same rationale used in connection with ERA for relievers also applies to W/L.  Theoretically, a relief pitcher can get credit for a win without ever throwing a pitch.  He could pick a runner off first for the third out before delivering to the plate.  Then, if his team takes the lead and never surrenders it, Presto!  He is the winning pitcher.  Another example is a closer getting credit for a win after a blown save.  Say a closer blows the lead in the top of the ninth, yet the manager leaves him in to complete the half-inning.  If his team wins the game in the bottom of the ninth, the closer gets the W, even though he failed to accomplish his primary function, viz., getting the save.  

Thursday, July 11, 2013

Movie Review: "The East"

"The East": B-.  The East raises the question of how emotionally attached, if at all, an undercover infiltrator could become to the brotherhood of a revolutionary cell before questioning her role.  Brit Marling is Sara Moss, an attractive young woman who is hired by Hiller Brood, a security company run by Sharon (Patricia Clarkson) and specializing in high tech corporate security.  Hiller Brood's clients tend to be companies which engage in activities which are unsafe, unhealthy, borderline immoral, and yet legal: oil companies, pharmaceuticals, lumber, energy, mining, etc.  The stage is set when the CEO one of those nefarious businesses, responsible for massive pollution from its oil drilling and shipping operations, becomes the target of a small group of anarchists called The East.  That group, also known in some circles as a cell, covertly gives its targets a taste of their own medicine, such as sneaking into the CEO's house and dumping massive quantities of oil into the ventilation system.

After going to work for Hiller Brood, Sara's first challenge is to find The East's members and convince them that she can be trusted as a colleague within their commune.  Some of the first act scenes, in which she rides the rails with them like a hobo and gashes herself so that her new acquaintances might take her into their compound for treatment, are tense and exciting.  The members of the cell reside deep in the forest in an old house.  They look and act like woodland hippies living in a family atmosphere.  One moment they are playing spin the bottle or having a bon fire.  A day later they are planning to poison the upper crust guests of a pharmaceutical executive's private party.

Following the oil spill caper, The East has big plans for more "jams," as they call them.  As Sara learns more about their motives and becomes more attached to some of its members, she internally struggles with her own values.  The East is led by Benji (Alexander Skarsgard), a man who can look foreboding one minute and normal the next.  Is Sara falling for Benji, or is she still in-character as her employment requires?  She periodically checks in with her boss, Sharon, via clandestine phone calls, and inconspicuously attempts to soften the blow of The East's harsh measures against their victims.  Over time she realizes that her employer is not in business to save humanity from a small group of terrorists.  Rather, Hiller Brood's main objective is to make money, just like The East's corporate targets.  She wonders who the real enemy is.

The level of satisfaction you will get from watching this film will partially be dependent on your tolerance for missing details.  For example, the cell is comprised of only a half dozen members, yet they are able to get their hands on whatever materials they need to pull off their jams.  There is very little effort by the police or the FBI to find the terrorists, who are free to come and go to and from their rustic hideaway as they please.  The brief scenes involving the estranged father of East participant Izzy (Juno star Ellen Page) are almost preposterous.  Except for a couple of short scenes, I never felt as though Sara was in any grave danger.  The one East member who puts a knife to her throat inexplicably disappears from the story shortly thereafter. Still, this movie is, for the most part, engrossing.  One thing I took away is the probable truism that not every anarchist or rebel with a cause has to look like Charles Manson or Squeaky Fromme.

Apparently The East cell members thought more highly of Sara's acting talents than I did of Marling's.  If I were a member of The East, I would be a lot more suspicious of the young blonde newbie who looks like she belongs behind a desk in a bank, especially since if I were ever caught, the punishment for my crimes would either be death or life imprisonment.  It's impossible for me to know what percentage of my negative view of Marling's work should be attributed to director Sal Batmanglij, but frequent long poses with a dull blank stare does not a great actress make. 

Monday, July 1, 2013

Quarterly Cinema Scan - Volume XII

I don't recall bragging on this blog before -- the result of a dearth of material -- but the opportunity has now presented itself with this latest addition of my Quarterly Cinema Scan.  Yes, it is true.  I did, indeed, have a Hollywood brush with fame.  In my fifth (1973-74) of eleven years at Most Holy Trinity School in St. Louis Park, I was Kelli Maroney's eighth grade teacher.  She went on to become a professional actress, thus fulfilling the dream she always had since she was a kid.  She is one of the two leads in Night Of The Comet, a campy 1984 sci-fi movie included on the list below. 

Kelli's official website [classickellimaroney.com] states that she started on her quest to become an actress by attending theater classes at the Guthrie while in high school, then followed that by studying at the prestigious National Shakespeare Company Conservatory in New York.  That is not entirely true.  Kelli unofficially initiated her acting career in my class, seeing whether her little girl cuteness and flirtatious voice could buy her some leeway on a homework assignment or a test now and then.  Once she caught on that I had caught on, we had some good laughs out of her ploy.  Of course, that didn't mean she stopped trying.  If you happen to watch Night Of The Comet, pay close attention to the scene where Kelli's character, Samantha, is pulled over by what she thinks is a state trooper.  Seconds after she stops the car, she fixes her hair in the mirror, bats her big eyelashes, and says to the cop in a wistful voice something like, "I'm so sorry, officer, I must have not been watching my speed."  That is the Kelli I know.  It was not a stretch for her to film that scene.  I'll bet it was done in one take!  

I remember talking to Kelli's mother at parent-teacher conferences, and found her to be very nice.  I never met her dad, but I believe he taught at De La Salle High School.  He must have been quite a character.  One time I asked Kelli about her dad, and she told me that the night before he had inquired about me with the words, "What's new with the SOB?"   

Kelli got her big break in 1979 when, at age 18, she was cast as the villainous Kimberly in the TV soap, Ryan's Hope.  She appeared in over three hundred episodes of that show.  Her first part in a feature film was a quick appearance or two in 1982's Fast Times At Ridgemont High, which has become a cult classic.  She has had relatively steady employment ever since, appearing in various TV shows and B-list movies, not to mention Comet.

I am happy for Kelli, as I would be for all of my former students, that she has been able to make a living doing what she loves to do.  Even though I quit teaching thirty-three years ago, I like to believe I remember all of my former students.  But, those with a humorous side are the easiest to recall.  Kelli was certainly in that category.  My only disappointment is that her website doesn't reveal that I inspired her to "keep her feet on the ground and keep reaching for the stars."  Come to think of it, that wasn't me; it was Casey Kasem.

Here are the films I watched at the Quentin Estates during the second quarter of 2013.          

1. Before Sunrise (1995 drama; American Ethan Hawk and Parisian Julie Delpy meet on a train, then stroll around the streets of Vienna before he has to catch a morning flight back to the US) A

2. Before Sunset (2004 drama; Ethan Hawke is an author who hooks up with Julie Delpy nine years after first meeting her on a train in Austria) A-

3. Driving Miss Daisy (1989 drama; Dan Aykroyd hires Morgan Freeman to be a chauffeur for his mother, Jessica Tandy, who is resistant to the idea) A- 

4. Hitchcock (2012 drama; Anthony Hopkins is Hitch, the famous director who is in the midst of filming one of his masterpieces, Psycho, and is married to a sharp independent woman, Alma, played by Helen Mirren) A- 

5. The Hunchback Of Notre Dame (1939 drama; Charles Laughton is the cathedral bell ringer in medieval Paris who tries to help gypsy dancer Maureen O'Hara beat a homicide rap) B

6. King Of Kings (1961 biblical drama; Jeffrey Hunter is Jesus) C+  

7. Life Of Pi (2012 drama; Suraj Sharma is a young boy who somehow makes it from the Phillipines to Mexico in a small boat, accompanied by a tiger) B

8. Night Of The Comet (1984 sci-fi; Catherine Mary Stewart and Kelli Maroney are Valley Girl sisters who survive an apocalypse and try to outwit the zombies and the mad scientists) B-