When a noun verbs

AIM has this promotional tie-in with the upcoming remake of When a Stranger Calls that features an IM bot pretending to be the main character from the film. I found out about it because in the bottom of my IM window it said "When a Stranger Calls IM Jill" - and while I know that that means "When A Stranger Calls: IM Jill," I thought it was funnier to read it as "When A Stranger Calls, IM Jill!" So I thought maybe I could derive some amusement out of having a conversation in that vein. You can decide for yourself if I succeeded.

BigFlax29 (9:02:50 PM): a stranger is calling me!

jill020306 (9:02:51 PM): i could really use a friend 2 chat with. bobby is such a jerk.

BigFlax29 (9:03:00 PM): sorry, can't talk now - a stranger is on the phone

jill020306 (9:03:00 PM): i think it's my ex bobby but i'm not sure.

BigFlax29 (9:03:16 PM): who cares about you, lady! I'm on the phone with a stranger here!

jill020306 (9:03:16 PM): this whole week has been such a disaster.

BigFlax29 (9:03:20 PM): me me me.

jill020306 (9:03:20 PM): what about u?

BigFlax29 (9:03:30 PM): oh, finally. well, long story short, there's a stranger on the phone

jill020306 (9:03:31 PM): u always say such interesting things, bigflax29.

BigFlax29 (9:03:37 PM): you have been listening!

jill020306 (9:03:38 PM): i have been listening, huh?

BigFlax29 (9:03:46 PM): ...yes

jill020306 (9:03:46 PM): i c.

BigFlax29 (9:03:57 PM): but now I need some advice... what should I do about this stranger calling?

jill020306 (9:03:58 PM): so i am walking 2 third period and i c bobby and my best friend tiffany kissing in the hallway. how more obvious can u be?

BigFlax29 (9:04:11 PM): that is pretty obvious, I guess...

jill020306 (9:04:11 PM): so i broke up with him.

BigFlax29 (9:04:17 PM): good for you, girlfriend!

jill020306 (9:04:18 PM): and she and i r fighting.

BigFlax29 (9:04:33 PM): well, no shock there.

jill020306 (9:04:33 PM): oh no?

BigFlax29 (9:05:08 PM): no, but you're still avoiding my question... a stranger is calling

jill020306 (9:05:08 PM): no but i am still avoiding your question a stranger is calling? uh huh... so anyway... what else can u tell me?

BigFlax29 (9:05:23 PM): well, someone's on the phone, and I don't know them... I thought that was kind of self-explanatory

jill020306 (9:05:24 PM): i'll think about it. what else do u want 2 talk about, anyway?

BigFlax29 (9:05:37 PM): what else is there to talk about? this stranger calling me! hello!!!

jill020306 (9:05:38 PM): jill.

BigFlax29 (9:05:46 PM): um, okay, that is your name...

jill020306 (9:05:46 PM): my name is jill.

BigFlax29 (9:05:51 PM): good call, smartypants

jill020306 (9:05:51 PM): i think it's bobby

BigFlax29 (9:06:07 PM): you seem to be a little confused about your name situation

jill020306 (9:06:08 PM): i'm probably just overreacting.

BigFlax29 (9:06:14 PM): or confused

jill020306 (9:06:14 PM): who's confused?

BigFlax29 (9:06:21 PM): see, that says it all right there.

jill020306 (9:06:21 PM): oh yes? that says it all right there?

BigFlax29 (9:06:27 PM): is there an echo in here?

jill020306 (9:06:27 PM): i dunno if there is an echo in here.

BigFlax29 (9:06:38 PM): okay, thanks for proving my point

jill020306 (9:06:38 PM): u say the most interesting things.

BigFlax29 (9:06:50 PM): but what about this stranger? the one calling me? and I don't know them?

jill020306 (9:06:51 PM): try asking yourself that. ugh. it's the stupid phone again. hold on. brb

BigFlax29 (9:07:09 PM): I tried asking myself, but the IM told me that I should talk to you when a stranger was calling...

BigFlax29 (9:12:16 PM): so, jill, I understand you're babysitting

jill020306 (9:12:17 PM): omg. it was him. he talked 2 me this time. he asked about the children.

BigFlax29 (9:12:31 PM): that reminds me... have you checked the children?

jill020306 (9:12:31 PM): i think he can c me.

BigFlax29 (9:12:36 PM): mwahahaha!!!!

jill020306 (9:12:36 PM): omg. omg.

BigFlax29 (9:12:42 PM): when a stranger IMs, bitch!

jill020306 (9:12:42 PM): i think i'm going crazy. what if it's just a prank?

BigFlax29 (9:12:50 PM): man, you're not even listening, are you

jill020306 (9:12:51 PM): maybe i should call the police. what do u think i should do?

BigFlax29 (9:13:21 PM): yeah, I would call the police

jill020306 (9:13:21 PM): i have an idea. look, all my friends r at a bonfire party right now. i can't reach them. i need u 2 do me a favor. i need u 2 call me and listen in on this guy's call. i'll three-way u in.

BigFlax29 (9:13:39 PM): a three-way with you and some dude? don't you have any female friends who'd be down?

jill020306 (9:13:40 PM): seriously, call me at 877-467-7675.

BigFlax29 (9:13:55 PM): oh, jill, that's not even a real area code... you're not fooling me

jill020306 (9:13:55 PM): the phone is ringing again. call me now, okay?

BigFlax29 (9:14:08 PM): only if you tell me that I'm going to get rich

BigFlax29 (9:14:16 PM): miss cleo

BigFlax29 (9:14:24 PM): I've seen right through your little game, "jill"

BigFlax29 (9:14:32 PM): jill and jamaica both start with J, I see what's up

jill020306 (9:14:33 PM): this weird guy keeps calling me.

BigFlax29 (9:14:50 PM): you? what about me? did you not see before when I told you this stranger was calling?

jill020306 (9:14:51 PM): help me figure out what 2 do.

BigFlax29 (9:15:05 PM): how about I give you my number and we have a three-way... I think you were saying something about that

jill020306 (9:15:06 PM): i have an idea. look, all my friends r at a bonfire party right now. i can't reach them. i need u 2 do me a favor. i need u 2 call me and listen in on this guy's call. i'll three-way u in.

BigFlax29 (9:15:33 PM): I have an idea... take off your bra

jill020306 (9:15:34 PM): seriously, call me at 877-467-7675.

BigFlax29 (9:16:19 PM): if I call you, will you take your bra off?

jill020306 (9:16:19 PM): the phone is ringing again. call me now, okay?

BigFlax29 (9:16:33 PM): okay, but that clasp better be half-undone by the time you pick up

Lemon, indeed

The verdict is in on C.C. Lemon. And it is: well, that's an hour or so of my life I'm not getting back.

Mitsuwa is actually right off the Kennedy in Arlington Heights (is it even still the Kennedy west of O'Hare? I-90, whatever), but because the Kennedy was so backed up at the Junction, I ended up taking local streets... woof. I got off at Caldwell and took 14 all the way to Golf, then took that west to Arlington Heights Rd. This took forever, as I'm sure you'd expect.

Mitsuwa itself is a bit funny. First of all, it's like a weird little enclave designed to recreate Japan for all the expatriates - it's not just a grocery, in other words. There's also a travel agency, video store, food court, wireless store, all in the same building. Second of all, there's a sign out front that instructs visitors not to take any pictures inside. I know the stereotype is that Japanese people all have cameras everywhere they go, but when even Japanese people are worried that other Japanese people will be taking pictures at the grocery store, that's quite the robust stereotype.

Anyway, I got some Pocky to bring back for Alma (because the last time I went to an Asian market, she asked me if I'd bought any), and then picked up a couple bottles of C.C. Lemon. I haven't been this underwhelmed by a lemon soda since... well, to be perfectly honest, just about any lemon soda that isn't Lift, Solo, or Club Lemon (that San Pellegrino Limonata is okay too, but the cans are too small). Among the problems here:

1. Not sweet enough. The nutrition facts actually say that there are just eight grams of sugar in the entire bottle, which can't possibly be right when there's no artificial sweetener either. On the other hand, I would totally believe it, because the soda really does just taste like weak lemonade mixed with club soda.

2. Not tart enough. When my coworker first mentioned it (along with the apparently non-existent tagline "Power of a Thousand Lemons," which is so cool that I'm sad that it's not real), he seemed to suggest that it was quite tart - aaaaand, 0 for 2.

3. Not cool enough. The bottle design is spare, and the tagline isn't even "the juice of 70 lemons in every bottle" - it's "the vitamin C of 70 lemons in every bottle." Boring! Also, I know lemons are fairly small, but the bottle only contains 200% of your vitamin C RDA - that's 70 lemons' worth?

In summary, kind of a waste of a trip - there's Club Lemon in Chicago, and for that matter there's Kool-Aid and seltzer, which certainly couldn't be any worse.

You say tomato, I say squid peanuts

Drew and I went to Chicago Foods last night because I thought they would have C.C. Lemon (a Japanese soda which certainly sounds right up my alley). They didn't, but they did have plenty of crazy crap, some of which is immortalized in my new Gallery of Strange Food.

(One of the things at the store I did not buy was a package of what sure looked like chocolate-covered peanuts that were being hawked by a squid for some reason. According to my co-worker, though, the bag actually contains peanuts covered in a cracker-like shell that tastes like squid. As a famous philosopher once said, you have got to be fucking kidding me. This is why I adhere to a rule where you only buy things featuring at least one English word.)

Sort of ask and ye shall kind of receive

As far as good musical news goes, it turns out that all five bands/artists mentioned in the previous post appear to have upcoming projects scheduled to be released during the next few months.

The Long Winters' album prospects I already knew about, but their Wikipedia entry confirms that the as-yet-untitled album is currently targeted for a "first quarter of 2006" release.

Guster's album, apparently entitled Ganging Up on the Sun, is described in their Wikipedia entry as set for an April release.

A podcast interview with Steve Burns that I recently heard suggested that his next album is in fact in the works, though it may not have the rumored title of Deep Sea Exploration. He did cite a label name (it sounded like it, anyway, but I couldn't make out the name), which suggests that it's more likely than not to happen at this point.

The Wikipedia entry for the Shins had the following to say (my dad passed this one along, which spurred me to check on the other bands): "The next album from The Shins, tentatively titled Sleeping Lessons, is planned to be released in July or August of 2006." Later, in the summary of the group's albums, the entry states that Sleeping Lessons' tentative release date is April. Either way, we'll see it this year.

Finally, the guy who posted in the last entry's comments was definitely not just blowing smoke, as Wikipedia has this to say on Snow Patrol's latest: "After finishing their opening act duties and extensive 2 year touring of Final Straw in late July, the band took a few weeks off and began writing and recording songs for a new album. The band completed recording the upcoming release, Eyes Open, in December 2005, and it is set to be released in April 2006."

If you didn't get around to checking in during the last post's run at the top, you can do it in this one... I'm still curious.

Roll out

Because I'm always curious about this site's readership, do me a favor: when you read this entry, make a post in the comments section just to say hey. You're not obligated to do it, of course, but I would be appreciative.

Just so your time isn't totally wasted, here's a new list for you:

Five Bands/Artists Whose Next Albums I Would Really Like to Come Out Soon

Note: this does not include bands or artists with relatively recent albums. For example, I would love it if Ben Folds came out with another album this year, but it would be silly for me to expect him to do so when he just put one out last spring.

5. The Long Winters
They just put out an EP in October that acts as teaser to a new album supposedly out this spring. That will mark a mere three years since the magnificent When I Pretend to Fall, however, after that album followed the group's debut by just a single year. I haven't gotten too heavy into the Ultimatum EP yet, but I haven't sat down and listened to the whole thing yet either; there's still plenty of time, and any band that can put out When I Pretend to Fall deserves a chance on any album.

4. Guster
Every Guster album so far has sounded different, and if the single "Manifest Destiny/Sorority Tears" is anything by which to judge, the eventual new album will not break that pattern. Naturally, "Destiny" is much closer in sound to Keep It Together than it is a return to earlier sound for the band; still, the Beatles changed their sound several times over in a period of just eight years, and Guster's first album is now more than a decade old. (Not to suggest that Guster are as great as the Beatles, of course, though they've yet to make a song I dislike... though "Destiny" has yet to grow on me, but it may still, as I've only really listened to it once or twice.)

3. Steve Burns
Songs for Dustmites bowed in August 2003, meaning that when all is said and done it will probably have taken three years for us to get a follow-up. Given how unjustly the first album seems to have been ignored by the pop audience, though, I guess we can't be surprised that Burns wasn't simply able to churn out a second. And when you get right down to it, there's nothing inherently wrong with taking a little longer to make sure the album sounds how you want it to. Still, three years should have every fan of the first album - one of the most solid debuts in recent memory - plenty ready for the next.

2. The Shins
With Chutes Too Narrow dating to late 2003, the Shins are definitely overdue for another album, especially if they're going to put out another that clocks in at barely over 30 minutes of music. (Although James Mercer's stuff is so good you never feel ripped off, when a 35-minute CD from most other bands would be infuriating.) The name-check in Garden State was a year and a half ago already, so the new fans earned from it (myself among them) have to be starting to get a bit antsy.

1. Snow Patrol
The group's most recent and best album, Final Straw, was released in March of 2004, meaning they should soon be due for another one - or maybe they would be if their usual release schedule didn't involve three-year breaks between albums (When It's All Over We Still Have to Clear Up came out in April 2001 and Songs for Polar Bears dates to 1998). Hopefully we won't have to wait until spring of 2007 for another album, though, especially if the improved listenability of Final Straw presages the future direction of the band's work. If we can't have a new Snow Patrol album for another year, is there at least a chance the Reindeer Section could reunite?

Computers + squid = crazy delicious

Today I was searching the internet for logos while at work and ended up at the website of PC Club, which is apparently some sort of computer supplies retailer out west. They are currently running the following promotion:

http://www.bigflax.com/Images/what-the-fuck-is-this.jpg

I think the name I gave to the image says it all. Just click there, and then tell me: what the fuck is that? Does this make any sense to anyone? PC Club's website actually has a "what's this all about?" link on the squid page, but personally, I found that the information within the link shed absolutely no light on the subject. It looks like someone is drawing a comic strip (book?) that has something to do with PC Club, and the last installment mentions a squid in one frame, so that means it's time for a week of crazy squidtastic savings. Whatever you say, nutbars.

Everyone into the pools

A dual announcement:

First of all, it's never too early to announce that the BigFlax.com NCAA Tournament Challenge is returning for yet another installment. All are welcome (again, as long as I know who you are in at least some vague fashion), but be prepared to send five bucks through the mail in some form (unless you're Drew, I guess). To sign up, drop me a line at you know the place - bigflax at gmail dot com.

Second, a free pool. I believe that earlier I mentioned the "Last Guy to Get a Hit" award where the songs on my iTunes playlist were concerned. While we're still not quite at 20 or so songs left, we are getting much closer than we were (the total number unplayed is now at 996, or about 44% of the total). Meanwhile, "congratulations" to A.C. Newman's "The Battle for Straight Time," which at 9:00 this morning, just a couple minutes after I got to work, became the first track to play five times.

But I'm rambling. The point here is that, based on an idea from Drew, there will be a little contest to guess the last song to get played. (And don't worry, I have no intention of fixing the results by playing songs outside of shuffle. On the rare occasions I do such a thing, I always stop it before the end so that the play doesn't register with iTunes.) I'm a little unsure of how to go about it, though. Ideally I'd like everyone to choose a different song, but is a first-come, first-serve thing totally fair? I don't know. I also feel like I should award some kind of prize, but I'm not sure what exactly that would be. "A CD of my most-played songs," for example, is fitting but seems more than a bit lame, though it does have the added benefit of not costing me anything. I suppose it could be something like "a CD of 'Songs I Think You Should Hear,'" which could be tailored at least somewhat to the individual (depending on who it was). That at least could be somewhat interesting, and people share mix CDs all the time (Greg had a whole thing on his blog about it a while back). By the way, don't you love how I basically think out loud as I type in a lot of these entries? Anyway, feel free to sign up in the comments or via e-mail if you're interested in participating and if you have ideas regarding prize or format.

In other news, several movies I haven't yet seen because I'm an idiot won awards at the Golden Globes last night. My one comment on the matter is this: no matter how many Johnny Cash songs Joaquin Phoenix sang, Walk the Line is not a fucking musical, and it's absolutely scandalous how the Golden Globes lets movies get away with this ridiculous gerrymandering year after year (see: Ray just last year, among others) just in the name of winning awards. (Which Walk the Line did, taking Picture, Actor, and Actress, with absolutely no competition in each field.) I don't care if it's about a musician; Walk the Line is clearly a drama taking advantage of antiquated category names (how many musicals do we see a year now? One? Two, tops?) and it should have been forced to compete against its own kind, where presumably it would have been washed away by Brokeback Mountain's near-landslide. At the Oscars, where the categories are combined, Walk the Line will - I'm going to go ahead and guarantee it right now - be the only "Musical or Comedy" competitor from the Globes that gets so much as a nomination for any major award (with the possible exception of Best Actress which is, almost without exception, a thin category in most Oscar years, or maybe Screenplay only because they have so many spots to fill). It'll also be telling to note where Witherspoon goes; an Actress at the Globes because she was such a cinch under Musical/Comedy, it'll be interesting to see if she is pushed back to Supporting. Based on the Actress nominees at the Globes, though, I'm not sure there's a performance out there scary enough to back her off - the Actress in a Drama category looks shockingly weak, even by Hollywood standards.

Either way, I really need to see some movies in the next month and a half so I don't just feel stupid on Oscar night.

Musical shares

In lieu of more sports-related whining (at least I can hang my hat for the weekend on the recent Devils return to form and City's 3-1 win in their home leg of the Manchester derby), time for a little discussion of music based on a couple recent ideas I had. Let's start with the gripes.

Five Songs That Are So Bad, Not Only Should They Never Be Played Again by Anyone Ever, but Their Artists Should Serve Time for Crimes Against Humanity

Dishonorable Mention. Northern State, "At the Party"
Truth be told, every Northern State song I've had the misfortune to hear is as bad as this one, but this is the first one and also the only title I could remember (with the assistance of Alma, who for some reason actually seems to enjoy some of them). When it comes to rap, I can't think of worse contributors to the form than white women who think they're "gangsta," and Northern State's terrible rhymes make them no exception to the rule (in particular, this song is one of those "we are [rap group X]"-style tracks that generally bore me but just make me want to cry when it's white girls embarrassing themselves). Originally this was fifth spot, but Alma reminded me of another song that I hate more, and also one that more than a handful of people will actually have heard of.

5. Joss Stone, "Fell in Love with a Boy"
There are few things I hate more than when an artist does a cover song and changes words in it, especially when it's a woman covering a song written from a male perspective. Sure, I don't expect Stone to deliver some lesbian ode to a girl, but her refusal to change more than a couple words means that she's attempting to rhyme "boy" with "world," which sounds absolutely retarded. The "Sarah says it's fine" line also makes me cringe, but then so does the whole thing; how can you take a rock song that clocks in under two minutes and drag it out with your obnoxious drone to nearly twice that length? This song oozes nothing so much as trying way too hard to earn pop-culture cred. Sadly, it seems to have worked, because people are easily fooled.

4. Gwen Stefani, "Hollaback Girl"
Speaking of tuneless white girl rap, it's Gwen Stefani, who should get a lifetime achievement award for her contributions to the field of absolute shit for the stuff on "Love Angel Music Baby" alone. Few things are more annoying than an album meant half as shill for the artist's own product line, and the songs therein are even worse, including the abominable "Rich Girl" (which would have easily cracked this list if I weren't trying to restrict it to one track per artist), another one that violates my rules for cover songs. "Hollaback Girl" wins its place because of its automatic induction into the "songs most likely to be stumbled through by drunken 20-something women at karaoke night" Hall of Fame; also, "I don't insult people because I'm not a BITCH LIKE YOU" is such faux-girl-power cattery it's not even funny.

3. Pussycat Dolls, "Don't Cha"
What a concept. "Don'tcha wish your girlfriend was hot like me?" Get the fuck over yourselves. The basic idea behind this song appears to be "I'm a nasty skank who will perform any sexual act without question. Jealous???" No, you wannabe whores, I am not.

2. LFO, "Summer Girls"
An absolute all-timer. The irony here is that a later LFO single, "Every Other Time," would actually make it onto my list of top five embarrassing guilty pleasures. This one, however, not only lacks the catchy melody that makes "Every Other Time" listenable, it also features some of the worst rapping - and equally painful rhyming - in music history. Plus it extols the virtues of Abercrombie & Fitch, and, well, ugh. The free-association bullshit is what makes it terrible, though; "Fell deep in love but now we ain't speakin'/Michael J. Fox was Alex P. Keaton" just makes me want to punch something. It's like they wrote a song in which they admitted they couldn't write worth a damn.

1. Black Eyed Peas, "My Humps"
I always take all-time music countdowns to task for including songs too new to have earned "classic" status, but it doesn't take a shelf life to become an anti-classic. So bad that the Onion AV Club included a shout-out in its year-end look at the music of 2005 ("Three Things to Do with a Time Machine: 1) Warn Lincoln about going to Ford's Theater. 2) Kill Hitler. 3) Prevent the Black Eyed Peas from recording 'My Humps'"), this song's lyrics - delivered by another woman clearly obsessed with her belief in her own hotness, in this case Fergie - are so bizarrely off-putting I refuse to even cite examples of them here. Put it this way: Fergie refers to the more uniquely feminine aspects of her body using terminology that I can't imagine would make anyone hot for them, even if they were particularly appealing... which I can't say they are. Add to this yet more proof of my theory that the only thing worse than a white guy who wants to be black is a white girl who wants to be black, and you have what just might be the worst song ever recorded, a track so painful it can't even deliver marginal ironic enjoyment. Sometimes I wonder if recording artists should be forced to get "music licenses" every time they record an album to prevent the release of stuff like this to the public; on the other hand, this song has been consistently among the most downloaded on iTunes for weeks if not months, so clearly the public can't make worthwhile music decisions either.

And now, the better stuff.

Five Albums You Probably Aren't Listening To, But Should Be

Bear in mind that this is only from my perspective, and I'm not going to claim that I have the same musical taste as everyone in the world. In particular, some of the stuff I like will probably sound too pedestrian or what have you for the hopelessly indie; see what I care.

5. Ben Folds, Songs for Silverman
Of the five albums, this is surely the most mainstream, but Folds has really never - and, divested of the Five, likely will never - found major commercial success. His first LP in nearly four years, Silverman finds Ben at his reflective best, including a tribute to the late Elliott Smith. Nearly as essential as the LP itself are the three EPs that preceded its release, each of them representing one sphere of the Folds oeuvre. Speed Graphic presents a look at relationship-related angst ("Protection," "Wandering," "Give Judy My Notice"); Sunny 16 offers a socially-conscious side ("There's Always Someone Cooler than You," "You've Got to Learn to Live with What You Are," "All You Can Eat"); Super D offers up a more humorous side (an amusing cover of the Darkness' "Get Your Hands Off My Woman," "Rent a Cop"). Each is as strong as the last, but in different ways. Silverman itself features what may be Folds' best solo song yet in "Landed," a wonderfully-performed tune that comes as half apology and half kiss-off to a manipulative ex.
Most vital tracks: "Landed," "Late," "Bastard"

4. The Reindeer Section, Son of Evil Reindeer
The second album from the side project brainchild of Snow Patrol frontman Gary Lightbody, Son of Evil Reindeer marks a halfway point between the second and third albums of his main group, When It's All Over We Still Have to Clear Up and 2004's superb Final Straw. Sounding quieter and more stripped-down than the lusher Final Straw, Son of Evil Reindeer nonetheless sounds more polished and more melodic than When It's All Over. Drawing in Scottish musicians of all stripes (including members of such diverse groups as Belle and Sebastian, Mogwai, and Arab Strap), Lightbody nonetheless turns in an album that is not just impressively cohesive but impressively light as well.
Most vital tracks: "Budapest," "Your Sweet Voice," "Where I Fall," "You are My Joy"

3. The Long Winters, When I Pretend to Fall
With a new EP out now and a new LP due later this year, the Long Winters are not going away anytime soon, but that's no reason to ignore their previous effort. A combination of several musical styles in one, When I Pretend to Fall features standard-sounding indie rock numbers but goes in more of a pop direction on some, while also offering hints of psychedelia ("Blanket Hog"), folk ("Cinnamon"), and even traditional dirge ("Bride and Bridle," in the tradition of songs like "Gallows Pole"). The various angles hang together well, however, and frontman John Roderick's voice is amazingly adaptable.
Most vital tracks: "Blue Diamonds," "Bride and Bridle," "Prom Night at Hater High"

2. Idlewild, The Remote Part
I was drawn to Idlewild after finding out that frontman Roddy Woomble had been one of the members of the Reindeer Section for their second album. Frequently referred to as the "Scottish R.E.M.," I don't think this is a fair description of the band; Woomble occasionally sounds a little like Stipe, but otherwise there seems to be at best a minimal resemblance. (To be fair, I am not the most familiar with R.E.M.'s full canon, but none of their hits are as hard-rock as Remote Part cuts like "A Modern Way of Letting Go" and "Out of Routine.") Woomble seems like he might take his lyrical stylings a bit too heavily at times; the Scottish poet Edwin Morgan reads a poem called "Scottish Fiction" over the final track, and one gets the sense that Woomble and company consider their lyrics on par with poetry, which is stretching it in most cases. Still, the music is not to be argued with; Idlewild put together a strong musical effort on this one, with great riffs in most songs and almost unanimously wonderful choruses that pull together even the most obtuse of the faux-poetry.
Most vital tracks: "You Held the World in Your Arms," "Tell Me Ten Words," "Live in a Hiding Place," "American English"

1. Steve Burns, Songs for Dust Mites
After he was the Blue's Clues guy, but before he disappeared off the face of the earth, Steve Burns put together a brief - and hopefully just stagnant at the moment - career as a musician. The album he released with help from the Flaming Lips, Songs for Dust Mites, was regrettably largely ignored; many people seemed insistent on not taking him seriously because of Blue's Clues, and the rest didn't listen in the first place. It's too bad, because the album is really very solid indeed. Burns opens with "Mighty Little Man," a sturdy rocker that could have held its own on the radio, before following with more stripped-down, quiet-indie-pop tunes like "What I Do on Saturday," "Maintain," and "> 1." The anthemic rock returns later with tracks like "Troposphere" and "A Song for Dustmites," and a few other sounds creep in like the more experimental hush-rock of "Stick Around." Ultimately, Dust Mites might have done better if Burns could have settled on a single style, but since when are most people that picky? He combines things fairly well here, and I don't think there's a true clunker anywhere on the album, a more than impressive feat for a guy who is still known best for his polo shirt. This is one we definitely need more people to hear and buy (you can't even get any of the tracks via iTunes, a shocking oversight); I know from the concert I attended that Burns has more music worth getting out there, but Dust Mites' sales being what they were, we may never hear any of it.
Most vital tracks: "Mighty Little Man," "Troposphere," "A Song for Dustmites"

Monstrous in the Midway

Between the ages of about 13 and 20, I was heavily into sports, but in situations where there was a very distinct outcome I wanted, I couldn't watch the games. Crazily superstitious, I fled the room late in close contests, thinking that my presence in front of the television was causing, say, the Utah Jazz to beat the Bulls. It was this superstition that allowed me to miss Steve Kerr's game-winning jumper in 1997 (I would run back into the room upon hearing my dad yell), and I'm pretty sure Jordan's shot the following year as well. I couldn't watch in 1998 when the Cubs played the Braves in the playoffs (though they lost all three games anyway), and couldn't take the Devils' playoff appearances either (though in 2000 I was in Atlanta when they won and missed the game entirely). I would do the same thing in the NCAA tournament when I was really hoping for an upset.

About the same time that the Cubs were making their run at the division in 2003, I decided that these childhood superstitions were pretty ridiculous. As many as 2,000 miles from the action (in the case of 1998's Game Six), I was certainly not affecting the outcome. How could I be? So I started watching everything where I had a real stake, in playoff situations, anyway. (So far that's only involved the 2003 NLDS and NLCS, today's Bears game, and various NCAA tournament games, plus that time I listened to the entirety of Man City's Carling Cup game against Doncaster.) My rationale was this: my presence was not affecting the game. I mean, what - I leave the room and the players suddenly go, "Flax is gone! Time to start trying to win!" That's just silly. And at the same time, how could I appreciate the winning if I didn't actually see it? It's like losing your virginity through a hole in a wall, then later finding out it was with the girl you had a crush on. Sure, maybe you enjoy it in retrospect, but does it really feel the same? (Note: This ridiculous simile brought to you by the Bill Simmons School of Sports Journalism.)

To me, it seemed like no contest. If I were going to consider myself a true sports fan, I had to be able to sit down and watch when my teams were playing in tough spots. Otherwise, not only could I not claim as strong a tie to the winning, but I couldn't even claim as strong a tie to the team in general (because if you flee when they're losing, what does that say about you? It's like being a bandwagon fan except for the part where you start rooting for the Yankees). So during the 2003 playoffs, I sat down and watched everything. Every pitch, except for one game that I think I was a little late for (but I still only missed an out or two). And for a series and a half, it worked. The Cubs held off the Braves in five and took a 3-1 lead on the Marlins.

Then, of course, it all came crashing down. The me of old would have fled the room at some point in that infamous eighth inning; the new me watched until the final pitch of the ninth had been thrown, and did the same thing for Game Seven. And you know what? It SUCKED. But there was something inside me that said I was at least a true Cubs fan now. My dad had suffered through 1969 and 1984; I was alive for the latter but far too young to understand it or remember. Finally, I had earned some of the pain.

But that didn't make it any less annoying. And the problem was, the hits kept on coming. Any time I sat down to watch a potential upset in the NCAA tournament, it seemed like it would fail to happen. In 2004, two full regions had the top eight seeds win on day one; the only double-digit winners were Pacific and Manhattan, two "upsets" so obvious I had picked them both, and Nevada (of course beating Michigan State, still my #1 team in the tournament since Northwestern is not likely ever to earn a bid). This, of course, was the year where I had decided to sit down and watch all day on Thursday and Friday. Coincidence? Probably. I saw the end of Bucknell's win over Kansas last year, the very end of Vermont over Syracuse (ruined by CBS' refusal to cut, however), West Virginia taking down Wake. Still, the NCAA tournament is the least of my concerns on this count. And of course, readers of my soccer blog (of whom there are none) will know the disaster that became of Man City/Doncaster.

Today's Bears game had to be the icing on the cake, however. Before I even had a chance to sit down, the Panthers had scored, and though the Bears offense was shockingly effective once Grossman settled down, they never managed to catch up. The defense, so highly touted, looked absolutely miserable. Apparently someone replaced most of the Bears team with players from Northwestern today; it was that bad of a display. 434 yards allowed on offense; 29 points (more than any game except the Vikings loss in Week 17, which shouldn't count); 244 offensive yards to Steve Smith (in other words, more than half the Panthers' output). Continuing a trend started against Green Bay in Week 16, the defense couldn't tackle worth a damn, and had the Panther D not given away so many penalties, the offense probably would have struggled more than it did. The only turnover the Bears got (Urlacher's INT) was not converted, and they erased much of the momentum gained from their late TD in the first half by allowing the Panthers to quickly drive back into field goal range. Had the score been just 13-7 at the half and the Bears opened the second with a scoring drive (as they did), maybe things would have gone differently. (By which I mean, the Bears would only have lost 26-21, since it didn't seem like they were capable of stopping Carolina either way.)

I didn't see every last second of the game, but certainly I saw the vast majority of it, carrying on a conversation with my dad the whole time via IM that consisted mostly of grousing about the defense's horrible play and celebrating the occasional good play. Grossman finished 17-for-41, which is not good at all, but this wasn't helped by his starting 2-for-9 in the first quarter; the 15-for-32 after that is much more serviceable. Berrian looked amazing, also; still, there seemed to be far too much throwing, especially early (27 rushes and 41 pass attempts, from this team? Even playing from behind in the second half, that's odd). If this team can add a little more speed (and talent in general) in the secondary, they should be looking pretty good next year (of course, this assumes that Grossman can stay healthy, knock heavily on wood), especially since the rest of the division is solidly mediocre in general.

So once again I actually watched as one of my teams went to the mat in a big spot, and once again I have absolutely nothing to show for it. I don't think I can go back now, though - the losses hurt, but there has to be a light at the end of one of the tunnels eventually, doesn't there? And at least I'm earning my sports fan stripes to a degree - I always hate people who root for perennial winners, after all, whether they have a good reason or not (though of course it's much worse if they're the "I started following college basketball in the early 1990s, so I decided to root for Duke because they were winning" type rather than the "I grew up in the Bronx" or "I went to Notre Dame" type). As I've said before in this space, I think you can only truly appreciate the winning if you have some experience with the losing first. (Just like how I only got to see the Devils win after I suffered through the '94 playoffs.) Maybe that's where the karma comes in. Hopefully suffering through disappointing losses (and further disappointing seasons) by the Cubs and Bears eventually leads to something good. But for now... it sucks.

A tall glass of Haterade

I was talking with my boss today about college basketball (he's a huge Villanova fan, as his father went there and he grew up in Philly), and it occurred to me as something of an aside that pretty much all of my most hated teams were taken from a very specific time - the mid-to-late 90s. I guess this makes sense, as it was around that time that I started to really follow sports. I don't remember very much about the Bulls' first three championships, for example. (To be fair, I wasn't even eleven years old when Paxson knocked down the three. By comparison, when Jordan returned to the league I was going into eighth grade and at exactly the right point in terms of both awareness and who I was hanging out with to be excited about it.) The later three, much much more.

But let's take a look at the teams I hate the most in each sport. I can pretty much cite to you the exact moments, let alone years, that generated each one.

Baseball: The Yankees, and this will never change. In the earlier part of my life I hated the Mets, because my dad hated the Mets as a residual bitterness from 1969. When Edgar Martinez roped the double into the left field corner in Game Five at the Kingdome in the 1995 ALDS to beat the Yankees, however, I remember vividly jumping up and down on my bed (I had been listening to the game on the radio in my room because it was after midnight Eastern), and my dad even came down the hall to celebrate the news. The odd thing is, at the time, the Yankees had never been in the playoffs in my lifetime. How I knew so instinctively to hate them I'm not sure - certainly I was aware that they had a ton of historical success, and I've never loved that, but it was probably more a knee-jerk "New York sucks" type of thing. Needless to say, next year was the Jeffrey Maier incident in Game One of the ALCS - and since the Orioles were a team we pulled for slightly more than casually (my dad having developed an interest in them during his time in Baltimore, and their AL status making conflict of interest in a Cubs game all but impossible, since interleague play did not then exist), that pushed the Yankees over the edge. I remember watching the final outs of the sixth game of the '96 Series at a Halloween party with grim disgust. I can even tell you who caught the final out - Charlie Hayes. How many non-Yankee fans can do that? But that was certainly the year. If I had to pick the specific moment, it was probably Maier. That little bastard.

Football: This is the only one where it's different now. Right now I would say I hate the Packers most of all, whereas in the mid-90s it would have been the Cowboys (this was definitely due mostly to their winning, the obnoxious "America's Team" claim, and all the bandwagon friends I had). With the Packers, I actually rooted for them in the Super Bowl I attended (though, I will be honest, probably mostly because I expected them to win, which they of course did, or perhaps to deflect the bragging of NJ Dave, who, it must be said, had absolutely no reason to be a Packers fan) - nowadays, though, I can't stand them. Brett Favre is adulated by the media to a sickening degree, especially now that he really does suck. (29 interceptions this year! Just six shy of the post-merger record. And he's won just two of his last eight playoff games, dating back nearly a decade at this point. I respect what he's done over the years, but seriously, everyone just shut up about him already.) So why the change? Well, the Cowboys sucked for a few years, which made hating them a bit more boring (though that hasn't stopped me with other teams, but my hate for the Cowboys was never quite as personal as some others); meanwhile, the Bears play the Packers two times every year and win those games quite infrequently (last sweep before 2005: 1991; even in the 13-3 year of 2001, two of the three losses were to the goddamn Packers). Thus, hate.

Basketball: The Knicks. If this one has waned it's only because the rivalry was driven by those Knicks teams of the mid-90s that somehow had themselves convinced they were better than the Bulls, even though they could never beat them when Jordan was playing (and it still took a phantom foul call in 1994 to do it). I also knew a lot of Knicks fans in middle school and high school, and they were even more obnoxious than players like Ewing and Starks, because they actually bragged about the Knicks even though they never won anything. They reveled in the 104-72 win in 1996, which is understandable... except that it was the Bulls', what, sixth loss of the season? That was the 72-10 year, of course, and started the second three-peat. Meanwhile, even though the Bulls have been at best mediocre since 1999, the Knicks have done little more in that time aside from their preposterous Finals run in '99, and if they didn't have a great coach in Larry Brown, this current team would probably be even worse than it is. But since the Bulls are no longer the dominant force in the league, and I no longer know any Knicks fans, it's hard to care that much. Still, I always root against them. The Lakers, during their period of dominance, probably surpassed the Knicks, but I really just hate Bryant; the team as a whole I don't care quite as much about.

Hockey: The Rangers. Easily. And I can point to the exact moment here: Stephane Matteau's wraparound in Game Seven of the 1994 Eastern Conference Finals, a moment so traumatic in my nascent sports-obsessed years that I still refuse to watch footage of it or listen to the call. (Some ESPN countdown featured that goal - I think it was "Best Game Sevens of the Last 25 Years" - and when I saw that that game was coming, I had to change the channel and come back when I was certain I had missed it. There isn't another play in sports I feel as strongly about, though there are a few others I refuse to watch - the Maier takeaway, the "great play" toss that Jeter made against the A's [P.S. Giambi was safe], the Bartman deflection, Aaron Boone's homer in the 2003 ALCS, and one more we'll see shortly.) I already didn't like the Rangers, as a Devils fan, but the head-to-head confrontation and bitter loss (the Devils had been up 3-2, and then Messier guaranteed a Game Six win) really cinched it. The Devils won the Cup the following year and twice more since, and the Rangers missed the playoffs every year between 1998 and now, though annoyingly they still found the time to knock off the top-seed Devils in the second round in 1997. (I maintain that we got screwed by the refs in that series.) So I got over it to some degree... but I did revel in the Rangers' crappiness, while their "return to form" this year bugs me.

College football: Nebraska. Notre Dame is really, really close, but again - the Domers haven't been title contenders since before I started paying attention, while the Huskers won three titles right in that period. The last of them, the split with Michigan in '97, is the one that I really remember because they wouldn't have gotten there without the kickball to Matt Davison on the last play against Missouri. Totally illegal, obvious kicking motion - but of course none of the refs saw it. Nebraska wasn't helped by their ridiculous appearance in the title game in the 2001 season, though thankfully Miami drilled them.

College basketball: Kentucky. And this one is obvious. Titles in 1996 and 1998; finals appearance in 1997; obnoxious, we-should-win-every-year fanbase (see also: Notre Dame) that is more annoying for Ashley Judd's involvement, not less; coach who started his startlingly ugly son at point guard; beneficiary of biased officiating in any close game. Fortunately, they too have been mediocre (at least comparatively so) recently, and no threat to win it all. I'm no fan of Duke or Carolina either, but even if Duke were the #1 team in the nation and Kentucky were 0-20, I'd rather Duke won.

So as not to make this completely one-sided, my question is this: everyone has (or I think should have) one team in a given sport that they hate above all others. Which are these teams for you, and can you recall specific things that pointed you there, or did you just seem to end up feeling that way over the years?

Hopefully not deja vu all over again

Five reasons I'm exceedingly nervous for this Sunday's Bears tilt with the Panthers:

1. Carolina is battle-tested. Much of this team was around when the Panthers made the Super Bowl, oh, all of two years ago (and very nearly won it - for all the Patriots "dynasty," their three wins have been by a total of nine points, while only two of the last eleven non-Patriot wins were decided by that much or less). By comparison, this Bears team is fairly untested, and those Bears who do remain from the 2001 team... well, the less said about that team's playoff fate, the better. The Bears do have Muhsin Muhammad, a former Panther who had 140 receiving yards and a touchdown in Super Bowl XXXVIII, but still.

2. Carolina has a more explosive offense. Which the Bears well know, since Steve Smith caught 14 - fourteen! - passes for 169 yards on November 20. DeShaun Foster has rushed for 150+ yards in his last two games. Jake Delhomme may not be Peyton Manning, but he's solid, tested, and confident. All that said, the Bears held Foster to 41 yards in November (on just 9 carries) and the Panthers managed just a single field goal, and then in the fourth quarter. Still, we can't necessarily assume that will be repeated.

3. Rex Grossman, playoff newbie. Shit, starting newbie. I was as glad as anyone to see Grossman replace Orton, but the fact remains that the Bears don't have any more experience with Grossman at the helm, just some more talent. With that in mind...

4. Carolina has a pretty decent defense too, you know. They did just blank the Giants, in New Jersey, after all, and that's a slightly better offense than these Bears have. And Julius Peppers is not to be taken lightly with his 10.5 sacks.

5. It's not supposed to be that cold. To be honest, the one team I really did not want to face in the NFC coming into Soldier this weekend was Carolina, which of course means we got them. I was hoping for another really cold night like December 18 (the 16-3 win over Atlanta), but it looks like we're stuck with high 30s.

I still have confidence in this Bears defense, but it hasn't played that well since the Atlanta game (four picks at Lambeau - who doesn't pick Favre four times these days? I'm more concerned with the atrocious tackling in that one) while Carolina is on something of a roll. I guess that's reason #6. 20 points, maybe as few as 17, should win this game. But can the Bears get all the way there? I'll be watching, anyway, but like the Sun Bowl, it's possible I will end up stomping off in disgust. I just hope not.

Bonnes Années

Just so you know, I wrote this after midnight and then deliberately set the date back to January 9 - Alma's and my second anniversary. (Drew, you can just stop reading right now.)

Two years. It's amazing how long that sounds thinking about it, and yet I'm always as excited to see her as I was on January 9, 2004, when we had dinner at Corner Bakery in Evanston (which isn't even there anymore!) and then saw Cold Mountain. Neither of those events was particularly scintillating in and of itself (I think I gave the film a B-, which was probably "just below average" in those grade-inflating days), but the important thing is who was with me - and who still is with me. I couldn't have known at the time that Alma would turn out to be completely perfect for me, and she told me later that I was initially just supposed to be a shorter-term, feet-wetting excursion into post-college dating (heh heh heh, gotcha, baby!)... but here we are, two years from that relatively inauspicious day, and I love her more all the time.

Baby, you're all I could ever have asked for; I love you more than anything in the world. Thanks for two wonderful years, and here's to dozens more.

(We now return you to your regularly-scheduled non-sappiness.)

I got the idea when I noticed the refrigerator was cold

For those of you who haven't bothered to add it up yourself, Nemo is the winner of the Bowl Challenge. Final standings:

1. Nemo (18-10)
2. Stan (17-11)
3. Dad (15-13, 66)
4. Craig (15-13, 63)
5. Flax (15-13, 58)
6. Drew (14-14, 77)
7. Tyler (14-14, 86)
8. Jan (13-15)
9. Rudnik (11-17)

Randomly, Drew was closest on tiebreaker points for the second year in a row, with 77 next to the actual Rose total of 79. In other not-really-interesting-unless-you're-me stats, this is the first time in six Bowl Challenges that the winner was not someone from my freshman year suite in Hinman (Marc won it twice, followed by Ric, then me, and then Drew). These website pools are like the World Cup - it seems like the same few people keep winning. Of eleven total pools to this point - five basketball and six football - four different people have been repeat winners (Tyler's won twice in basketball, Marc won twice in football, and Nemo and I have now won one each), with only Drew, Ric, and Craig holding a mere one title each. Strange.

So I've been enjoying the iPod quite a bit, which anyone who gets their Flax news from anywhere besides this site will doubtlessly already know. I now have 2,235 tracks in my iTunes, and of those, I think a mere 71 - that's just 3% - don't have an album art picture, and that's because they didn't come from an album (movie dialogues, TV show theme songs, and a few random things whose origins I don't know). Yes, I went through and added all the pictures myself; iTunes does some of them automatically, but (a) when you burn tracks yourself, it doesn't show up right away, and I'm impatient, and (b) there's very little way of knowing which ones it will do for you and which it won't. This meant looking up album names and art for all the random MP3s I have that I didn't just burn off my own CDs (though my CDs account for the majority of the tracks). This took me all week, though of course I was only doing it at night. Anyway, it's done now, and I get to see the little pictures (which I absolutely love seeing, like a total dork, which is why I spent so much time on the artwork) on the iPod screen for just about everything.

I also love the "last played" feature, and the fact that it syncs to include both iTunes and iPod plays. I'm using this to keep my eyes out for the "Last Guy to Get a Hit" award (fans of Jayson Stark's columns on ESPN.com should get that one) - i.e., the last track that gets played on shuffle mode. It's interesting to note that while the majority of songs have still not been played at all, five tracks have already been played three times each - "The Battle for Straight Time" by A.C. Newman, the Beatles' "Tomorrow Never Knows," "Dave Passes Out" from James Newton Howard's score for Dave, "Doctor Worm" by They Might Be Giants, and Concerto No. 1 BWV 1046 in F Major, I. Allegro from my dual CD set of Bach's Brandenburg Concertos. Random! I'll be sure to keep you updated on the "Last Guy to Get a Hit" award, as though you care. But of course with 5.7 days worth of music in the iTunes and only about ten hours' worth ever likely to be played in a consecutive shuffle run, it's quite possible that it will be months before we have a winner, or even a few finalists.

One more quick story. So the iPod comes with these ear-bud headphones. I wore them on Tuesday (the first use of the iPod) and wasn't a fan; they hurt my ears a little, I felt like I was constantly adjusting them, they would come loose too easily. So on Wednesday I used my Target gift card from Aunt Joan and bought some headphones that hang over the back of the ear instead of jamming into the canal. But soon I found that my ears were really hurting. The headphones were cutting into the back of the ears like crazy. I would try to adjust them, but it didn't seem to help much.

Then yesterday I noticed that the headphones were, well, sort of shaped like ears - the plastic piece that holds them onto the ear, that is. And I also noticed that I had been wearing them completely wrong. Picture an ear, and now rotate it 90 degrees until it's horizontal. That's how I was trying to wear the things, hanging them off the top or something, when in fact you are, of course, supposed to wear them vertically so that the plastic actually fits around the ear in the way it's shaped to do.

So yes, I'm an idiot. Naturally, they feel much better now - once the parts of my ears that were rubbed raw by the old way heal up, there probably won't be any pain to speak of. Although does it tell you I'm a little iPod-addicted when I won't stop listening to it even when doing so is causing me (granted, relatively mild) physical pain?

Happy New Year, unless you live in Samoa

It's officially 2006 in Chicago. If I were a better-organized film critic, I could give you my top and bottom ten of the year in film 2005, but since I'm not, you'll probably see those sometime in the spring. (Or if it's like last year, you'll never see the top ten at all. I flaked out a bit on that one, didn't I?)

Instead, some New Year's resolutions, some comments on the upcoming year in film, a brief look back, and some celebrities who just need to go the hell away already. What's a new year without a little negativity?

Item One: Personal New Year's Resolutions

1. Lose some weight/get back into shape. I still haven't ever hit 200 pounds, but I've been teetering dangerously close to the edge for some time now. Various half-assed "plans" to get to a gym, or obtain some piece of home exercise equipment, or whatever have fallen through, due in part to apathy, in part to cost, and in part to lack of feasibility. However, I have concocted a plan to start running again, as I did in the summer of 2002. A few reasons for this. One, running turned out to be very effective at the time (I lost 15-20 pounds in only a couple months - granted, I also went to the gym during that time, but it didn't cost me anything). Two, gym memberships are crazy expensive around here - the Y would be fairly cheap, but it's not that close. Running is, of course, free. Three, I do live right by the lakefront - there isn't a track around here that I know of offhand, but there are mile markers on the path out by the lake, and that sort of thing. That's a more interesting run than a track, anyway, even if it's slightly rougher on the knees.

Of course, it's a matter of getting into running shape. As my dad notes, the only way you can really do that is actually by running... but I'm going to start (while it's still far too cold out to run) with some strength-building exercises for the knees and back, and hopefully that helps.

2. I don't think there is a #2. I'll let you know if I think of anything else later.

Item 2: Brief 2005 Wrap-Up

The Good: I finally got a job and managed to hold it for a while - sure, for the time being it's still through the temp agency, but better than sitting at home every day unsure of how to go about looking for work, right?

The Bad: The computer going down right at Christmas time was impressively obnoxious, enough to take the top personal spot for the year.

The Ugly: The continuing campaign by ESPN's intensely irritating Scoop Jackson to simultaneously bash/mock Cubs fans and then demand that they worship the White Sox. In his wrapup of the year, Jackson finds time not only to whine that the Sox were not on the cover of Sports Illustrated the week after winning the World Series (conveniently ignoring the fact that the Sox were both on the cover after winning the second game and that they were on the cover, just not the main cover story, the issue after the Series finished), but also to state that "the slight was indicative of the way the media (and the North Side of Chicago) treated the Sox all along their improbable, impossible ride."

First of all, just because a team hasn't won a World Series in a long time does not make a title run "improbable" or "impossible" just because. They led their division wire-to-wire, won more games than any other team in the AL, and lost just one game in the playoffs. Did this really seem like a wild ride?

Second of all, I've been over this whole "who started it" thing already. It's as true now as when I said it then. Why would you think I should be rooting for the Sox? Why would you want me to? And why won't you just shut up about it already?

That's enough of that.

Item Three: A Look Ahead to the Year in Film

Kind of random, I guess, but we know me and movies.

Ten Films to Avoid Like the Plague
I can probably count the movies I'm currently anticipating on one hand. On the other hand, there are a number of movies to be wary of.

10. Manderlay
Because it comes from a director who, for all his faults, actually has some name recognition, I put this one lowest on the list. But if Dogville is anything to go by, Lars von Trier is not a fan of America, and since this one apparently involves "slavery in the 1930s South," I can only imagine. Maybe if he can actually focus his critique and make it intelligent this time... but I'm not holding my breath.

9. When a Stranger Calls/The Hills Have Eyes
I'm quite a ways from seeing every film released in 2005, but it hasn't been a great year for me so far. Maybe that's because it hasn't been a great year overall, and maybe that's because Hollywood is running out of ideas. If there isn't better proof of that than the various horror remakes - hey, I know, let's take the best movies from a genre that turns out so few of them and make them ten times worse! - I can't think of it. If The Amityville Horror and other films didn't already clue you in, here come two more.

8. Hostel/Saw III
Just what we need, more brainless gorefests. Rumor has it another Sin City is coming out too. I hope in that one, two heads get cut off and eaten by dogs! Gotta up that ante.

7. She's the Man
An updated version of Twelfth Night... starring Amanda Bynes! Uh, what? Alma's guess upon seeing the title was that this was a remake of Just One of the Guys, which would probably be better.

6. The Pink Panther
Steve Martin is funny, but this... will not be. Frankly, I'm not sure even Peter Sellers was that great in this role after the first movie or two, and we saw what happens when you try and cast someone else, Roberto Benigni. The trailer for this made me cry, as I recall.

5. The Shaggy Dog
Named after the first of a pair of Disney films even though it's really a remake of the second (that would be The Shaggy D.A., of course). Have you seen the trailer for this? Why is Tim Allen still getting work?

4. Big Momma's House 2
Enough said.

3. Garfield 2
Really enough said.

2. Scary Movie 4
Four movies in a series that was neither funny nor even remotely good from the word go? Terrific.

1. Madea's Family Reunion
Somehow Tyler Perry's narcissistic, unpleasant, overwrought film Diary of a Mad Black Woman made enough money to justify filming another of his plays. So we get more forehead-tapping "lessons," plus Perry in drag and a fatsuit vamping it up, and being neither enlightening nor funny. If you're actually anticipating the release of this one, then thanks for reading my blog, Mr. Perry.

Item Four and the Last: Celebrities Who Need to Go The Hell Away Already

In no order:

*The Simpson sisters: Jessica can't act; Ashlee can't sing. Jessica's career was prolonged by her marriage to Nick Lachey; maybe now that it's over her fame will dry up and blow away. Ashlee, at least, seems to have been reduced to a husk following the dual debacles at the Orange Bowl and on SNL. But as long as Jessica has coattails, Ashlee will never be totally gone.

*Paris Hilton: I've been sick of her ever since she showed up. Is there anything worse than someone who does absolutely nothing to be famous except turn up at parties? It's not like she's even that hot.

*Britney Spears and Kevin Federline: The latter in particular. I don't really care much about Spears one way or the other; at least she's sometimes attractive and has a shred of talent. Federline's goal in life seems to be to do as little as possible except knock up women more famous than he is, and then rap embarrassingly. The sooner they just get divorced already so he, at least, will go away, the better.

*Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes: Far too famous for us to ever get rid of them, sadly. Still, we can dream. Mission: Impossible 3 might be cool because J.J. Abrams is directing and Philip Seymour Hoffman is the bad guy, but Cruise gets more irritating by the second. Holmes just seems like she's been brainwashed. Really, Scientology as a whole needs to go away. Can you think of anything that makes an attractive actress stop being hot faster, besides turning 40? (Joke!)

So, that's pretty much it for the looks back and forward. I'm sure everyone got this far, right? I'll end by promising an upcoming review for Gymkata - that is one hilarious movie, let me tell you.