Part Two of "La Jetee"

I just thought I'd follow up with the second part of the movie I wrote so much about yesterday.

Mr. Hitchocock, meet Mr. Dick, Mr. Burns, Mr. Eisner and, oh, yes, Mr. Gilliam, who brought us all together

I happened to be awake early Friday morning, 3 a.m. early. What was running on TV but one of my favorite movies, “12 Monkeys?”
I have not seen it all the way through since I saw it in1995 at the Cla-Zel Theater in downtown Bowling Green, Ohio. So stunning was the film’s effect on me, I had deliberately avoided seeing it in pieces because I wanted to watch it whole if I was to watch it. Since I had never happened upon it as it was starting, I never had seen it again.
Friday morning, however, about a half-hour of the movie had passed, and I decided to watch the rest, anyway. In the early morning hours, sometimes you change your mind about things.
As before, I started watching and was swept along, completely trapped by the movie, until it was over. As before, I was captivated by the skilled and unique storytelling of director Terry Gilliam.
In watching “12 Monkeys,” I was almost trapped by the movie. I wasn’t guessing along with it to see what happened. I was a passive observer, reacting to what I saw on the screen. Perhaps this is the greatest compliment that can be paid to a filmmaker.
The future world in which James Cole lives looks like a weird, run-down version of our own, which is perfectly sensible for storytelling, since, in the story, the human race nearly died out from a plague virus released in 1997. Everything the survivors had was derivative of what they had when they fled underground a few years earlier.
(The Cla-Zel was the perfect setting to watch the movie, because it was a building that had once been a beautiful place to see a movie, but by 1995 needed major restoration work. This was as close to a merger of fantasy and reality as I have ever experienced in a movie theater.)
Gilliam uses camera angles differently than any other film director, favoring bird’s-eye and worm’s eye views as well as tipped horizon shots where everything is slanted and angled. The only other common example of this technique is the “Batman” TV show in which the villains’ lairs were always shot at this skewed tilt.
Gilliam also favors the use of extremely wide-angle lenses, which produces a depth of field so clear the viewer can always see everything in the background.
These two techniques give a certain weirdness to the look of his movies, as the camera angles are so different than what the normal human eye sees. The wide angle sometimes distorts the edges of the screen, stretching them out as the action moves through.
The movie’s stunning visuals enhanced the screenwriting, by David and Janet Peoples, which tells a story that’s part science fiction, part myth, part psychological thriller and part action film. Alfred Hitchcock meets Philip K. Dick in a rotting Victorian Catholic Church, if you will.
But, you ask, “Why do I care about “12 Monkeys” now and why are you telling me this in your ever-purple prose on your silly blog 15 years later?”
In addition to yet another opportunity to extend my list of never having written anything substantial without a typo in it, I said all that to preface the following video link for the movie “La Jetee.”
Huh? What’s some French film got to do with anything?
In 1995 when I saw the “12 Monkeys,” I knew it was inspired by “La Jetee.” It says so in the opening credits.
In 1995, the Internet was rather undeveloped, and we did not have YouTube.
I never was able to see “La Jetee” to dig deeper into the origins of my favorite movies.
This time, however, a day or so after watching "12 Monkeys," YouTube smiled upon me. I even had several choices of how to see the 1962 original: in the original French; with an English narrator; or with English subtitles.
After a viewing the few different options, I decided the English subtitled version was the best You Tube could offer.
I generally like subtitles better than dubbing anyway. I find it less distracting, and you get the sense of what the movie was supposed to sound like.
So, what do I say to compare the films?
The basic plot is the same in structure, but different in execution. I see no reason to go into detail here. If you have not seen either film, I’d just as soon not spoil either by telling you what happens in the end.
“La Jetee” is short. It’s only 28 minutes. It’s a series of black-and-white still photos with a narrator telling the viewer what’s going on. It’s a still photographer artistic stream-of-consciousness dream.
It is as visually unique and compelling as “12 Monkeys,” but in a totally different way.
To compare, think about a somber, chiaroscuro Ken Burns documentary with the camera panning across photos. Or, perhaps, a black-and-white Will Eisner “Spirit” comic book, images with no movement, with a somber narrator and plodding Russian music playing in the background.
I am talking too much here. If you are still reading this, thanks. I am not even still reading this, and I am writing it. If you went right to the link, you are probably viewing something at this very moment far more interesting than what I am writing about it.

I just watched this on TV ...

Amazing the entertaining things you see on children's TV! I wish I could rhyme this cleverly.

NFL Playoff Picks (Weak Three)

After raising my record to an illustrious 2-4 last week, and knocking out one of my Super Bowl teams (Atlanta) in the process, I shall try this thing again, just to see what happens. The worst I can do is drop my record to 2-6. The best I can do is break even.

Jets at Steelers: I'll take the Steelers, because they are at home, and Troy Polamalu is playing. I think the Jets are a worthy opponent, however, and they have a good chance to win. I imagine it will be a close game.

Packers at Bears: This is a really tough pick, because both teams are pretty good. Aaron Rogers is proving to be way better than Jay Cutler, but the Packers don't run the ball all that well (one playoff game excepted). The Bears have a great defense. The Packers lost to the Bears early in the year, then beat them the last week of the season. I am meandering all about, because I want to pick the Bears, but I think the Packers will win. So, I'll go with the Packers, I guess.
So that would make for a Super Bowl with the Steelers and Packers.

One more thing about Wendy's

I asked some of my co-workers about whether or not Wendy's has seemed to go downhill lately.
Most of them said they hadn't eaten at a Wendy's enough to make a judgement.
That says a lot right there.

What's happening at Wendy's?

Have my taste buds changed, or are Wendy's restaurants getting worse?
In the past, I always regarded Wendy's as one of the best fast food chains.
Lately, however, every time I have eaten ay Wendy's, the food has been mediocre in a way that Wendy's never used to be. Mind you, it has not been bad, It just has not been all that good.
This downward trend set in slowly. I only really noticed in the last few months, but as I thought about it, I didn't remember really enjoying a meal at Wendy's in a couple of years.
I have eaten at lots of them the last year or so in various places, including several exits along the Pennsylvania Turnpike, a few in the Hampton Roads, Va., area and a few other places like Indianapolis and Columbus, Ind., San Antonio, Texas and Atlanta, Ga.
Sadly, there has ben much mediocrity.
The burgers have less flavor. The buns are not as soft and fresh. The fries don't taste as good, and this pre-dates the new sea salt fries they have been advertising. I think the sea salt fries are bland and uninteresting.
Apparently, I am not the only one, as you can see here or here.
(I have a theory about the "new" Wendy's fries that is completely unsubstantiated, but they look an awful lot like Arby's "Homestyle" fries. Since the same company owns both franchises, I wonder if someone decided to buy only one type of fries for both. So, maybe what you are eating at Wendy's now is actually just a variation of what they are serving at Arby's.)
Other chains, especially Five Guys or Steak and Shake, are serving better versions of the same kind of food.
Five Guys food always seems fresher, their fries really are wonderful (I would eat them here or there, I would eat them anywhere.).
I had Steak and Shake last summer for the first time in a few years, and I think if there was one close to where I live, I'd probably eat there every week or so.
As for Wendy's, the last time I ate at one was about a week ago. It was less that I wanted their food, and more to try one last time at a different location to see if I got another mediocre meal. And, I did.
For what it's worth, I think I am done with Wendy's for a while.

Brady Quinn: Too much muscle?

Maybe I missed something, but I never heard anyone say the following about Brady Quinn when he was with the Browns. If it's true, it might explain his lack of success in Cleveland or his subsequent stops.

From today's Plain Dealer, by Tony Grossi:

Hey, Tony: If the Browns are going to go with the West Coast offense, don't you think that Brady Quinn would have been a better fit than Colt McCoy? Quinn is bigger and has a better arm for Cleveland weather. He can throw long, proven in the Detroit game. Who made the decision to trade Quinn? Holmgren or Mangini? -- Ernie, Columbus, Ohio
Hey, Ernie: I don't agree at all. McCoy is a better fit than Quinn in the West Coast offense -- or any system. To me, Quinn was too obsessed with body building and appeared too tight to make all the throws. It was strictly Holmgren's call to trade Quinn.

Peter Seeger sings us a song about bells

I have always really liked Seeger's version of this song.

Pete Seeger sings us a little song about school

And, what do I think about the Browns new head coach?

I am sure glad it wasn't Marty Mornhinweng.

I think maybe the Fox TV station in Philadelphia wishes the Browns had hired him. Isn't that a strange headline?

NFL Playoff Picks (Weak Two)

Because of my spectacular failure last week, I am going with the favorites in all the games this week.
I am not even sure who they are, but if I pick the favorites I can't go 0-4 again. Or can I?
Seriously, here's my best guess:
Pittsburgh over Baltimore, just because I think the Steelers are a little teeny bit better on offense and defense.
New England over the Jets, just because I don't think the Jets are that good in the first place. And, just because the Pats already beat them 45-3 barely more than a month ago.
Atlanta over Green Bay, just because I think Atlanta went 13-3 and Green Bay didn't.
Chicago over Seattle, just because Seattle can't keep winning. Or can they? Also just because Chicago keeps winning even though everyone seems to think they aren't that good. Who's to say they are gonna stop now?

Serial cereal blogging

Today, I had blueberry yogurt. I think I like blueberry flavored "Frosted Mini Wheats" better.

There are reasons I am not a professional NFL prognosticator

The main one is that I am almost always wrong. I went 0-4 this weekend. I was wrong abut every single game. I even picked the Saints to beat the Seahawks like everyone else in the free world, and I got that one wrong.
Well, to all of you who want a really hot tip -- next week bet against all my picks. You'll sweep then.
Unless I decide to deliberately pick against what i think will happen. Then, of course, because I picked differently, the teams I really thought would win, will win.
Maybe you better not use my picks for anything. Except maybe a good laugh after the games are over.

How could they do this to She Hulk?

Since the most popular posts on this blog seem to be about She Hulk, I ought to address the latest comic starring the large, green version of attorney Jennifer Walters.
Boy, what an awful comic book.
"She Hulk" is poorly written poorly drawn and ill conceived.
It is a far, far cry from the past series full of personality by people who seemed to care about making Jen interesting, like John Byrne and the team of Dan Slott and Juan Bobillo.
Bleah.
That's all I have to say about that.

Serial cereal blogging

Golden Grahams get kind of gross when they are in milk too long.
They get really slimy, and their taste dramatically changes.
So, that's as good an excuse as any to eat them really, really, fast.

NFL Playoff Picks (weak one)

Just for fun, here are my NFL playoff picks:

1. Kansas City over Baltimore. Why? KC is at home in Arrowhead Stadium, which is one of the most hostile environments to visiting teams in the NFL. I think Baltimore has better players on defense, better receivers and a better quarterback. But, KC has better coaching, a good running game and home field. I bet it will be close, but I say KC will break its six-game playoff losing skid, dating back to when Marty Schottenheimer was the coach. If there's to be an upset, I think this may be the one.

2. Indianapolis over the New York Jets. Why? I didn't the Jets were all that good last year when they went to the AFC championship game and for beat by the Colts. i think the Jets and Browns could easily have had each other's records if a few breaks went the other way. The jets barely bear the Browns and Lions in back-to-back weeks. Their running game hasn't been as good. Consequently, their quarterback hasn't been as good. The team has been surrounded by controversy all year. They took an absolute drubbing from the Patriots late in the year. Payton Manning has all he needs to carve up a weakened team.

3. Philadelphia over Green Bay. Why? Green Bay has too many injuries, and no running game. Aaron Rogers could lift them above their shortcomings, but I think Michael Vick is playing better right now and has a better supporting cast.

4. New Orleans over Seattle. Why? Because I will be rooting for Seattle.

Two former Cleveland Indians go to the Hall of Fame

Roberto Alomar was going to get in eventually. He was just too good not to.
I don't have much to say about him other than he was probably the best second baseman of his era, and an absolute joy to watch on defense, especially when paired with Omar Vizquel from 1999-2001.
I doubt he'll go into the Hall as an Indian, though. He'll probably go as a Blue Jay, where he won two world champeenships. He did get to play with his brother Sandy during his time in Cleveland, and was generally well received by the fans.
I highly doubt Bert Blyleven will go in as an Indian, either. Regardless, he should have been in a long time ago. He didn't quite get to 300 wins, finishing with 287, and I'd guess that was probably what held him back.
But, Blyleven belongs in the Hall if only because of his 3,701 strikeouts. When he retired, that was good for third on the all time list. Now, it's fifth, but anybody who ranks in the top five of any major category like that should be in the Hall.
And, anyway, if not for a few years when he battled injuries, and the awful records of the some of the teams he played on, he would have won 300 games. He was pretty durable, but he did miss enough time that he could have earned another 13 wins easily. He only made 12 starts in 1976, four in 1982, and missed the entire 1991 season. He also missed some time in 1976 and 1983. In the strike year of 1981, he made 20.
In 1984, when I was a wee lad of 14, he went 19-7 with the Indians, who were a 79-87 team. I am not doing the math, but when Blyleven didn't pitch, the team was just awful. But, the Dutchman was downright great every time he pitched. I remember really, really hoping, he'd win 20, but he just missed. I didn't get to see a 20-game winer in Cleveland until Cliff Lee in 2008.
Blyleven aged well, too, winning a World Series with the Twins in 1987, and then at age 38, going 17-5 with the 1989 California Angels.
Here are the players he was most similar to, according to Similarity Scores at Baseball-Referece.com:
Don Sutton (914) *
Gaylord Perry (909) *
Fergie Jenkins (890) *
Tommy John (889)
Robin Roberts (876) *
Tom Seaver (864) *
Jim Kaat (854)
Early Wynn (844) *
Phil Niekro (844) *
Steve Carlton (840) *
Everybody on this list except John and Kaat are in the Hall of Fame.
Which leads nicely to my little I told you so: Here's the case I made for Blyleven back in 2007.
From the list I made then, I think John may eventually get in and so might Jack Morris.
Kaat may deserve it, but I don't think there's been much movement toward getting him elected. He has only four fewer wins than Blyleven and five fewer than John.
It looks, sadly, like Mel Harder will never get in. With the death of Bob Feller, Harder lost one of his most vocal supporters. I think the argument could be made that Harder deserves to be in the HOF if only as a pitching coach. And, he was a pretty good pitcher, too.

Under the heading of more statistics than we really need, here's what the Indians sent out in an e-mail on the subject of today's announcement:
Right-hander Bert Blyleven and Second baseman Roberto Alomar, both of whom spent portions of their careers with the Indians, were elected to the Hall of Fame on Wednesday, garnering 79.7% and 90% of the vote, respectively, with 75% required for election.
Bert Blyleven, who pitched for the Indians from 1981-85, notched 287 career wins, 27th on the all-time list, and is fifth in career strikeouts with 3,701. Blyleven went 19-7 with a 2.87 ERA with the Tribe in 1984, finishing third in the Cy Young voting.
A switch-hitter, Alomar amassed 2,724 hits, 210 homers, 1,134 RBIs and 474 steals playing for seven teams. From 1999-2001 with the Indians, the 10-time Gold Glove winner batted .323 with a .405 on-base percentage, 63 home runs, 309 RBIs, 362 runs scored and 106 stolen bases.

My pick for Cleveland Browns head coach ...

... would still be Marty Schottenheimer (NOT the above Marty Mornhinweng but that part comes later.). But, since there's no chance in heck of that happening, I'll rank my top five of the rumored candidates, assuming it's not Holmgren himself, who would probably be number one on the list. I'll also give you the one guy I would not pick. (Hint: He used to wear a blue shirt.)

1. John Gruden would be my first choice. He is from nearby Sandusky, he has coached two teams to Super Bowls and won one. He is from the West Coast Offense style of play that is favored by team President Mike Holmgren and General Manager Tom Heckert. He has been away from coaching for a couple of years, and maybe has gained some perspective from the TV booth. He is probably the biggest name out there, though, and that will make him popular with other teams and also expensive.
2. Bill Cowher. Ha-ha. That's a good one. I am so funny. Funny me. Like they are going to hire Bill Cowher. But, just think, wouldn't that make Steeler week even better? Maybe he'd give the Browns some of the smash-mouth in your face swagger that would allow them to not get beat three times in one year, or by scores of 41-0, or 34-7, or 31-0, or 41-9.
3. Mike Mularkey used to be Cowher's offensive coordinator in Pittsburgh. I have said for a long time the Browns should play just like the Steelers. If they hired one of their former coaches, even if it wasn't Cowher, maybe he would understand what it takes to win in the AFC North. However, Mularkey's record in two years as Buffalo Bills head coach was 14-18. (Which, by the way, is better than 5-27, but that's also the part that comes later.)
4. I am intrigued by Pat Shurmur, but it's easy to be intrigued by someone who has never coached in the NFL. It's an interesting tie to Holmgren because Shurmur's dad was Holmgren's longtime defensive coordinator. But, he has a good resume of coaching quarterbacks, including San Bradford and Donovan McNabb. Would he be able to do the same with Colt McCoy? (First time NFL coaches sometimes struggle a lot. But, that's the part I'll get to later.)
5. John Fox is just a good all around coach who has been to the Super Bowl.

I really hope, however, the Browns don't hire the other Marty, Marty Mornhinweg. (This is the part I said I was getting to. Later is now.) He was awful with the Lions in 2001-2002, going 5-27. I have never seen a more clueless looking fellow on the sidelines of a professional NFL game, except maybe Rich Kotite. (Kotite, at least, had a few good years. Here are his win totals with Philadelphia and the Jets. Note they drop like a stone: 10, 11, 8, 7, 3, 1.) I don't care how well Michael Vick has played under Mornhinweg's tutelage, 5-27, even with a bad organization like the Lions, is still 5-27. Why should anyone think he is suddenly going to be good with another team that is, well, about as bad as the Lions?

That said, I offer my prediction: In a few weeks, the Browns will announce Marty Mornhinweng as their new head coach. I just have that feeling in my bones. A 5-27 record (or something like it) later, they will be looking for another coach. Some guys are meant to be coordinators. Some teams are meant to conduct coaching searches.

Guys who aren't said to be candidates, but wouldn't it be fun if they were: Marty Schottenheimer, Brian Billick (I have long felt the Browns blew it when they let him go to Baltimore), Marty Schottenheimer, Urban Meyer, Marty Schottenheimer, Jim Tressel, Marty Schottenheimer, bring Chris Palmer back and give him a real chance this time, Marty Schottenheimer, Dick Vermeil, Mike Ditka, Steve Mariucci, run-and-shoot offense specialist Mouse Davis or maybe even Marty Schottenheimer. Hey, I can dream, right?