Right After Left: February 21, 2010

2/25/10

Probability, Percentages and Poor Reasoning

The Weather Channel reports that your town has a 70% chance of precipitation tonight. RottenTomatoes.com reports that Valentine's Day has a 17% rating. The Doctor reports that you have a 25% chance of living beyond your 30th birthday. These are all things you hear all the time (well, hopefully all except the whole chronic illness thing). What do they mean? You know what it means.

It's probably gonna snow, Valentine's Day sucked and I'm not going to be living a long life. That's what it means.

Does it though? Not entirely.

The world is full of probabilities and percentages. Americans especially need quantifiable ideas like this. It is the reason Rolling Stone (an American media creature) gives albums and movies ratings on a star system. It is also the reason a foreign publication, like NME, does not. Both magazines could have the same opinion of the album. Both could even use the same exact words for their review. At the end of the NME review, cries of "Tell me what your review was!" would be heard from Boston to San Diego. "Give me a star rating or don't rate it at all!" The internet has allowed for the indulgence of this ratings world. Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes work as aggregate rating instruments compiling individual reviews from across the entertainment landscape. The visitor is given an easy to understand number which represents the merit of the work. Rotten Tomatoes works on a percentage basis. They determine whether each individual rating is positive or negative and then tally each side. After some simple math, we can see very clearly that Valentine's Day (17%) is a bad movie and Crazy Heart (92%) is a good movie. I shall now go see Crazy Heart. I will never see Valentine's Day. Here's the problem, that 17% is not like a grade on a paper. It is not as if Valentine's Day get good marks in 17% of the ratings criteria (ie. good landscaping, two characters are well developed, everything else is terrible so this equals a 17%). All this number means is that out of a hypothetical 100 reviewers, 17 gave it a positive review. Isn't this a much more positive way to look at it? The chances that any one individual will like this movie depends on a multitude of different factors. All I do know is the chances I personally like this movie is not 17%.

Vampire Weekend

Much has been written about the non-threatening tunes of the New York Upper West Side band, Vampire Weekend. Just this past week, they claimed the number one record in all the land with their sophomore effort, Contra (you can listen to the entire thing, for free, at the band's website). This followed the critically acclaimed self titled debut. You can lump me in with what seems like the rest of the world as a big fan. My first listen to Cape Cod Kwassa Kwassa and A Punk, in 2008, was a delight. The sounds were arranged differently than what I was used to; the lead singer (Ezra Koenig) sounded fresh with an accent of unfamiliar origin; the pace was quick and unaplogetic. This was fun music with an intellectual underpinning.

By now most know the basics of the band's story. Formed while all members were still attending Columbia University. Self-made band with no outside interference. Melting pot of Western, African and miscellaneous influences. Rise to acclaim quickly as their music was embraced from coast to coast. The story needs no further musings from myself.

What I am more interested in is why this particular band rose above the indie-hype machine. What makes this young band catch on more universally than similar acts? MGMT had similar reviews, developed in New York and an built a full indie following. But while MGMT is relegated to being nominated 2 years late for a proposterus Best New Artist Grammy and their album tops out at #38 on Billboard, Vampire Weekend blows them away nationally and sells 120+ thousand records in their first week. What separates these seemingly similar bands?

I Heart the Tea Party

The movement has been criticized as racist. The movement has been criticized as crazy. The movement is led by some outrageous figures. The movement is fueled by hyperbole and half-truths.

The movement is the American Tea Party and I love it.

-----
Perhaps I should explain myself at this point before I lose anyone who is actually reading this (as you know, 'teabaggers' cannot read, so if you are reading this you do not agree with my last statement. Give me a minute).

I voted for Barack Obama in 2008. I still agree with much of the Democratic agenda, however I am not a declared member of any political party. Neither party gets everything correct and I prefer to be in my own independent camp so I can form my own opinions. Overall, my opinions trend Democratic.

Fixing the NBA

I just got done reading Bill Simmons' latest column on ESPN.com about fixing the NBA (A fan-friendly solution to fix the NBA) and, for the most part, I agree with him. His main arguments deal with the economic situation and problems which are undoubtedly going to lead to a work stoppage of some sort (outrageous contracts for role players; guaranteed contracts for too many years; season ticket and overall ticket prices; etc.). These are points aimed at an audience interested in the inner workings of the world's top basketball league. I have an idea which might speak more to everyone else who simply enjoys the NBA on a casual level, but nonetheless would be interested in a better product.

American sports in general suffer from two major problems which are inherently linked:

1.) Regular season games do not carry much importance.

2.) Teams have no incentive to finish in the middle of the standings as opposed to last place, this leads to teams "tanking" (not trying) at the end of the season

These same problems are not found in European sports or, more specifically, the English Premier League (EPL). It is by no means a stretch to compare these two leagues and they will provide the foundation for the argument moving forward. First, some basic information about the composition of the two organizations highlighting the important parts.

Say What You Want, Just Not About Us

Media outlets are walking on thin ice these days. Here is the dilemma:

Talking heads have become news makers and are no longer just vessels for pushing information.

If you accept this as true, the next step is to understand that other talking heads are going to run into instances when they need to speak about their fellow brethren. Suddenly the media outlets become nervous. For some reason they turn into self-conscious teenage girls laughing along when the barbs and jabs are directed elsewhere, but shattered by anything aimed in their direction.

The most topical example is the Tony Kornheiser suspension. Kornheiser is a well-known sports radio personality and co-host of the immensly popular daily sports banter-fest Pardon the Interruption. Both of Kornheiser's outlets are part of the bigger ESPN world. A world which is becoming all encompassing. A world which leaves all other sports outlets impotent.

The Anatomy of the Kornheiser Suspension

The infamous quote from Kornheiser (02/16/2010):

Hannah Storm in a horrifying, horrifying outfit today. She’s got on red go-go boots and a catholic school plaid skirt … way too short for somebody in her 40s or maybe early 50s by now. She’s got on her typically very, very tight shirt. She looks like she has sausage casing wrapping around her upper body … I know she’s very good, and I’m not supposed to be critical of ESPN people, so I won’t … but Hannah Storm … come on now! Stop! What are you doing? … She’s what I would call a Holden Caulfield fantasy at this point.

2/23/10

Google News Explains the Public vs. Private Dilemma

In the political world, almost all issues come down to the same, single difference in opinion. One side wants less governmental involvement and the other side wants more governmental involvement. Strip away the nonsense and this is the ideological divide that keeps people on their own side of the aisle (talking American politics in this post, but the same idea is almost universal). Extrapolate this out a bit and what are are left with is one simple question:

Who do you trust to manage the world around you, public (governmental) forces or private (business) forces?

Ask anyone this question and their political leanings will flow out. Too bad there is no easy answer or else our problems would be solved.

Something interesting happened when I loaded up Google News this morning (02/22/2010). What I saw in the top two headlines was symbolic of the ugly side of both private and public forces. Say what you will about either methodology, there have been countless aggravating stories which make you just hang your head.

The Dream NBA Playoff Scenario

Time to peer into the crystal ball and look ahead a couple of months until the start of the NBA Playoffs. The first round will kick off on April 17th and here is how I hope things end up.

Eastern Conference

(1) Cleveland vs. (8) Miami

What it will take?: Cleveland is going to lock up the number 1 seed with no problems, the complication could be Miami falling to the eight seed. Luckily, they did nothing at the trade deadline and could drop below Charlotte.

Why would it be appealing?: Would you like an entire series of LeBron vs. Wade? Yes, please. These are two of the most competitive guys in the league. I feel like Cleveland would most likely make short work of Miami, but there would be the chance that the two mega-stars would push each other to levels we haven't seen from them yet.

(2) Orlando vs. (7) Toronto

What it will take?: Orlando will be fighting off Boston and Atlanta for this second seed. They have the advantage currently, Boston is falling and Atlanta is middling as well. Toronto is playing well right now and are locked into the fifth spot. It isn't out of the question that they fall to seven as the bottom of the Eastern conference is a jumbled mess.

Moon: Review

Moon has received a fair share of praise and yet many have never heard of the plucky little film from David Bowie's little boy. The sci-fi drama is a pure vehicle for its (only) star, Sam Rockwell, which plays out like an extended interpretation of a Twilight Zone-esque feature. I mean this in the best way possible. In a world of blockbuster, CGI-enhanced films, Moon stands as a nice reminder that the best sci-fi films focus on well-paced, well-written stories, not in over the top special effects.

Twitter Pitch: Company draws energy from dark side of moon. Only one employee. Themes: isolation with new technology, corporations mistreating workers.

Rewatchability: When a story is drawn out over the course of a film, like it is in Moon, it detracts from the fun of each additional viewing. I would gladly watch the film a few more times simply to pick up on certain plot twists which become more apparent when the credits finally roll. After my third or fourth viewing, I feel like the charm of Moon will be gone.

Time Limit: Moon clocks in at brisk 97 minutes. I would not complain about the pacing, but I must admit that around the 80 minute mark I checked my watch. With only one character the plot begins to slow near the end before the climax.

When to Watch: The mood of the film is rather dark (as you might assume being based on the dark side of the moon). An overwhelming sense of existentialism begins to set in as the story progresses which might make you reconsider your place in the world. If it's a rainy night and you are in a calm mood, Moon will suit you well.

When not to Watch: Do not watch if you are in a gregarious mood because it will bring you back down to Earth (pun intended). Might not be good for an already depressed mood, a lonely person or someone in a long distance relationship.

Dear John: Review

You know what to expect from Dear John. The structure is just like any other love story film. Act 1: star crossed lovers fall in love. Act 2: circumstances prevent easy relationship, they struggle to endure. Act 3: the resolution. This film has not strayed much. Yes, they add some elements which make it seem new and different (the inclusion of special needs characters and September 11th), but overall it is rehashing similar themes. To make matters worse, Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried do not inspire the audience to hope for their relationship. They just aren't likable. And neither is the film.

Twitter Pitch: Take another book from author of The Notebook, get dude from G.I. Joe and girl from Big Love. And make sure there's a rainy kiss scene.

Rewatchability: Almost zero. I have never understood the appeal of re-watching a love story. The best parts of the movie come from the unknown twists in the relationship, if you know how the characters' lives are going to progress how do you enjoy it. Action movies have impressive explosions, comedies have jokes, thrillers have parts you might miss. Dear John is like any other story in its genre, it's a fine movie but it moves slowly and has nothing I would want to see again.

Time Limit: I looked at my watch around the 1:30 mark. No problem with the length, although there were a couple of montages which basically served the same purpose. The final time clocks in right under two hours and could have been more tightly done in 1:45-1:50.

When to Watch: The best time to watch Dear John would be on a rainy day with your boy/girlfriend. You will not leave this film with a wonderful feeling so make sure you are either with a friend (if you are a girl) or with your partner.

When NOT to Watch: If you are a girl and your boyfriend is leaving for the military soon or you are in a relationship with someone in the military, don't watch the movie. Screw it, don't watch this if you are in any long distance relationship.

NASCAR is China

Glenn McBride is no NASCAR fan. A couple of times a year I find myself watching a race due to the Egg Roll Theory*. I just can't find the appeal. Watching the action may be more exciting for car buffs (something I could not be farther from) or speed freaks, but for me it just seems repetitive and dull.

*The Egg Roll Theory: There are certain things that a person believes they should like despite evidence proving otherwise. They continue trying said thing occasionally with the same poor reaction, just hoping to like it one day. For me these items include: Egg Rolls (of which the theory is based), olives, classic movies of yesteryear and NASCAR to name a few.

Just over a week ago, NASCAR held its self-proclaimed 'Super Bowl of Racing' in the Daytona 500. As much as I would like to write about how silly it is to kick off your sport's season with its climactic event, I will save this for another day. Instead, I want to draw attention to what NASCAR has become. The sad realization I came to after digging only a couple levels into the structure of the car behemoth is that NASCAR is run much like a state organization. This became painfully true after the nauseatingly poor coverage of the race last Sunday.

For most who watched, the Daytona 500 was a disaster. Multiple delays, lasting past the hour mark, were caused by a pothole on a portion of the track. You can't make this kind of stuff up. The ratings show that some 30 million people watched some part of the NASCAR showcase, so there is no debating whether the 500 is a major sporting event. Unfortunately, NASCAR has not administered itself like a major sports league. The push has been so strong from everyone involved in NASCAR to tell the world that they are the fastest growing sport in America; that they will be the next major sport; that they will be the number two (behind the NFL) before we know it. Well, NASCAR, turns out you are in no way ready to take that step (and you are getting passed by MMA within your own demographics, you know, with the meatheads).

Right After Left

Pages