In the movie business, a film’s revenues are king, and in many cases, the first weekend is the measure by which a film sinks or swims. Almost every weekend, there is some new movie that comes out trying to hit the jackpot. This week’s entry is Street Kings, a movie that I might have been interested in due to the fact that the film is an adaptation of a James Ellroy novel, with Ellroy also receiving credit for contributing to the screenplay. I love James Elroy’s books: his novels American Tabloid and The Cold Six Thousand are among my all time favorites, with dialogue written like stilettos. And I would see films made from Ellroy novels despite being uneven: L.A. Confidential was great; The Black Dahlia was far from it. Anyway, I would probably have been very interested in Street Kings, except for the fact that it stars Keanu Reeves.
For decades, Reeves has been one of the worst actors in major films, but for some reason, Hollywood thought that he could “open” films. His biggest hits were the ones that succeeded despite Reeves wooden acting: The Matrix and Speed. In fact, it took one of my best friends to almost drag me before I would see The Matrix, just because of Reeves. Why, you ask? Other than Tom Cruise (I’ll get to this loony in a future blog, I promise), Reeves had the worst acting chops of anyone, but he still kept getting hired. Ever since coming on the scene in Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, he has used his somewhat dense, befuddled look in movies that could have used a better actor. He over-emoted when it was wrong to do so, and looked like a retard the rest of the time.
Just when it looked like Keanu (which reportedly means “cool breeze over the mountains” in Hawaiian, but should eventually be translated into “shitty actor” in English), he got The Matrix. It was interesting and deep and violent. I loved it, even though the franchise collapsed under its own weight in the final two films. Then, they tried to cast him in a small part in a romantic comedy, and I say that it was the worst performance by a human being in film history. The film was 2003’s Something’s Gotta Give, an unabashed star vehicle for aged vets Jack Nicholson and Dianne Keaton to do romantic comedy and play against Jack’s notorious playboy image. Reeves played a much younger doctor who formed the romantic triangle for Keaton and Nicholson. But Reeves was completely vapid. He not only exuded no personality; he didn’t exude a pulse. Plants out-acted him. He was worse than wooden; he was comatose. He looked disinterested. You couldn’t believe that he was a serious threat to Nicholson; Jack looked like he could have kicked his ass at any moment. This was a far cry from superhero Neo.
So, I had hoped that we had just about seen the last of Reeves. He didn’t help a disastrous Constantine, a comic character who is supposed to look like Sting, but Reeves didn’t look like the character: he wasn’t nearly cool enough, world-weary enough, or sarcastic enough to pull it off. The movie bombed. Then came A Scanner Darkly a real life/animated film of a James K. Dick sci-fi novel. It also died. Another pairing with Speed co-star Sandra Bullock called The Lake House never caught fire (or should have caught fire and burned to the ground). So, I was hoping that the studio executives had finally seen that Keanu Reeves’ 15 minutes were long over.
But, here comes the 43-year-old trying again. The press has not been good, with the reviewers split, and I guess we’ll see how the weekend “numbers” tally up. But let’s hope that they are terrible, and Keanu will go back to that Hawaiian island and disappear; allowed on camera only for Bill and Ted 3.

I was out of work for 13½ months and it sucked. I hadn’t been jobless since high school, and I went nuts trying to find another job. Ever since then, I have tried to be very careful in calling for someone to be fired, even in the big money world of sports; even though coaches eventually get rehired, players get signed by other teams, and we aren’t going to be taking donations for the multimillionaires in any event. However, there are times when someone is aching to have their desk emptied and told to go away. Today’s candidate is Northwestern University Men’s Basketball Head Coach Bill Carmody. He needs to be unemployed; NOW! Today (I believe) is supposed to be the first day on the job for NU’s new Athletic Director Jim Phillips, and he shouldn’t let his new desk get too warm before he gives Carmody the heave-ho!
If you have read some of the earlier blogs, you know that I haven’t paid much attention to basketball for some time, but I am also a Northwestern alum and fan, and would pay more attention if the basketball team didn’t suck so badly. This year’s team played at a horrendous .258 winning percentage; this percentage plummets to an abysmal .053 as the Wildcats went 1-18 in Big Ten play. What’s worse is that the ‘Cats posted such a horrible record in a year in which the Big Ten as a conference was not very good at all. They conference fielded only four teams in the NCAA Tournament this season unlike the usual seven or eight teams that compete in a normal season. Yes, Ohio State won the NIT tournament this year, but by any measure, this was a lackluster year in the conference, and the Wildcats were the worst of the worst.
Carmody has proved to be a poor recruiter despite his 2003-2004 Coach of the Year honor and reputation as an offensive innovator. Northwestern has gone 103 and 136 in seven years under Carmody and his teams have posted an anemic .275 overall winning percentage in Big Ten play. To me, it goes back to philosophy. For a very long time, I believed that for NU to stay in the Big Ten, they should model themselves on Duke. Both schools are small; both have very high academic standards; both play in big time college conferences against schools that are 4-10 times larger than they are. Of course, Duke is a basketball powerhouse, but they generally field mediocre football teams. In the 1980s and early 1990s, I thought that this is what NU should do, simply because of numbers. One or two stud recruits a year and you have a consistent program. You don’t have to recruit 100 top flight athletes a year like in football.
Gary Barnett proved me wrong, showing that NU can field a competitive football team. But the basketball team has languished: from Bill Foster who was obviously too old to do the job. Then they brought in the late Ricky Birdsong. He was wacky, but really, probably not the man to do it. Then in came Carmody, fresh from Princeton where he learned at the feet of the master of the slow down offence, Pete Carroll. Unfortunately, with the introduction of the 30-second clock, you won’t see a small school shock a major power by scoring in the 40s anymore.
Moreover, NU has consistently not attracted black basketball players. I don’t know why. They have always had great success in football; and there were a number of good black basketball players at NU in the 1970s and early 1980s. However, over the past 15 years or so, NU’s has coordinated its efforts in recruiting Europeans. Now, I have nothing against European players, but in the rugged Big Ten, NU too often gets out-muscled, and the players they get cannot get themselves open without running screens and posts. Meanwhile, you see Duke and Notre Dame and other schools with academic standards similar to NU being able to compete in similar situations.
Here has where Carmody has been the worst. NU just doesn’t have the talent of the other schools and he has tried to rely on fancy schemes to win games, but it is obvious that it hasn’t worked. I’m sure that Carmody is a decent guy; there have been no major scandals under his watch and players graduate, which is the ultimate goal. But, let’s be honest, wins and losses are the main measure for a coach, from high school on up, and Carmody’s teams haven’t won. And he should now pay the price.

One of my major problems with religions of all types is almost each one’s claim to be the ONLY way to be spiritual; the only way to know God or a Supreme Being (or beings). Wars have, and one could say are being fought over the manner in which one follows God. Millions have died, are dying, and will suffer because they have different views of spirituality than someone else. In many ways, Christianity is the worst offender in terms of trying to “convert” others to their beliefs all the while being the greatest of hypocrites by breaking every rule that they want everyone else to follow. I grew up in the Methodist Church and I have seen some of the most un-Christian acts being performed by the same people who set themselves up as the most righteous.
I, for one, am sick of it. I recently read “God’s Problem – How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question–Why We Suffer” by Bart D. Ehrman. Mr Ehrman is a religion professor and Biblical scholar at the University of North Carolina, and former minister who has studied the Bible examining the writers’ views on suffering and has come out giving up his Christian faith. I have not given up on God (yet), but I have said for many years that I have fewer problems with God than I have with religion, which is why I attend no church, and generally avoid religious discussion. I don’t know who’s right: the Catholics, the Protestants, the Jews, The Buddhists, the Atheists, the Agnostics? I don’t know, and I guess we won’t receive a final answer until we die.
I believe that any philosophy that preaches compassion and love for one another is a good thing to follow. I personally don’t need the “carrot and stick” of a heaven to do what I think is right. I try to live honorably, and if there’s a God and a Heaven, I’ll be there. If I come up short, so be it. If there’s nothing, at least I believe that my being here on this sphere of existence has been a positive thing for the world. Religion acts to divide and split people, and that is never a good thing.
The latest offense comes from an African-American Illinois representative, who was, rightly, called out on Keith Olbermann’s show the other night as the “Worst Person in the World.” Rob Sherman is a local atheist activist who has led the fight against the silly, useless law that allows a moment of silence at the beginning of the school day in Illinois public schools. The moment of silence, which teachers believe is ludicrous, and is insulting to many of us, is obviously an attempt to bring prayer into the public schools; and something that has been prohibited under the separation of church and state legal precedents for decades.
The Illinois House of Representatives’ State Government Administration Committee is re-considering the law and this week, Mr. Sherman was testifying before this committee Wednesday afternoon, when Rep. Monique Davis (D-Chicago) interrupted him saying “What you have to spew and spread is extremely dangerous . . . it’s dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists!” “This is the Land of Lincoln where people believe in God,” Davis said. “Get out of that seat . . . You have no right to be here! We believe in something. You believe in destroying! You believe in destroying what this state was built upon.”” Fortunately, Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn reported the incident, writing on his blog that “Davis’ repellent, un-American outburst received no attention whatsoever.””
This woman should be censured by the Illinois House, but she won’t be. She should be drummed out of office on her ass, but she won’t be; in fact, she probably gained supporters as a result of her comment. But, God’s current 15 minutes are almost up. Conservative groups no longer wield the political power they once did; and most of the recent increase in religious interest and books has been on account of fright after 9/11. this has been the lever that the Republican Party has been using to hookwink the country to keep themselves in power while they pillage the Treasury and leave the great majority of the people in worse shape.
The backlash has come. The atheist books have been published and have had their time on the best seller lists as well. And I’m tired of them as well. If someone wants to believe in God, let them. At the same time, thinking people should be able to hold whatever thought they wish. And that is what makes Representative Davis’ comments so scary; she wants to eliminate thought. That is wrong. In this more complex world, we need more thinking, not less. It is this type of anti-intellectual movement that is so dangerous! The lack of thought is what’s dangerous. Of course, I think that everyone should think like I do, but they don’t, and it doesn’t change my opinion or threaten my intellect to have others disagree with me. It’s too bad that Representative Davis’ beliefs are so shallow and weak that anyone else’s thoughts should be eliminated. She sounds like Bill O’Reilly or Ann Coulter.

As we speak, Americans are showing their outrage to the Chinese government by protesting the Olympic flame that is to wind its way through the country on its way back to Beijing in time for this summer’s games. The protests are as a result of the government’s crackdown on Tibetan protestors who want their freedom from the oppressive Communist government.
This is perfectly acceptable to me as long as the protestors don’t forget that among the human rights abuses that the world should be outraged about is China’s support of the genocide in Darfur because they government provides oil to the mainland Chinese. It seems sometimes that the Mia Farrow is the only one who is holding the Chinese’s collective feet to the fire because of Africa. Ms. Farrow did get Steven Spielberg to drop out as documentary filmmaker for the Games before the Tibet protests began/made the worldwide media.
But there is a broader question here, and it is one that hits home to those of us who live in the Chicago area – is the time where the Olympics were important past? This is a crucial point before Chicago gets the right to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on a venture that never recoups its money, despite what Mayor Daley says. The Olympics were a vital way of bringing the best athletes of the world together back when there was an Iron Curtain and a Cold War. The only way for the very best athletes in the world to compete against one another was through the Olympics when travel was limited. In addition, it was a way to promote the peaceful coexistence between nations.
Now, however, we have the Internet, You Tube, e-mail, and MySpace. The world really is much closer than ever before. And besides, the Soviet Union no longer exists; so we don’t need to wait four years to see the best athletes from around the world. Already Cuban baseball players do tours of the U.S. The NHL is truly a worldwide league, with the best Russian and Eastern European players already showcasing their skills on North American rinks every night.
And there is the issue of international unity. Have the Olympics really created more amity between peoples? I would say, not only haven’t they not created goodwill, but they have pushed the world’s peoples further apart by sponsoring nationalism in the guise of sport. Have any wars been averted by allowing the athletic competition to dictate disagreements? In fact, the Olympics have created a huge, worldwide target for terrorists and wackos of every stripe to try and bring their grievances to the world. The modern Olympics got off to a poor start by having one of the earliest Olympiads in Munich Germany in 1936 in an attempt to be used as a propaganda tool by the Nazis. They were far from the first. You know the litany: the Arab terrorists in Munich in 1972; the Russian-less 1976 Olympics; not to be outdone, the Americans boycotted the 1980 Moscow games; the bombing in Atlanta in 1990. It is just one big megaphone to the world.
No, ladies and gentlemen, the Olympics are about the true universal factor: money. To the IOC, the organization that “owns” the Olympics, their coffers have been filled to overflowing for decades, mostly as a result of the efforts of the late IOC chief Avery Brundidge. The under-the-table payments, gifts, college scholarships to Olympic officials’ children were the way to get your city picked for an Olympiad. While the IOC reportedly has cleaned up its act over the years (especially after the prosecution of some of the members of the Atlanta Olympic Committee), I cringe to think of what invisible money is flowing in various directions to bring Daley’s folly to Chicago in 2016. Money is made by the builders and developers who build the elaborate venues; maybe the corporate sponsors can justify their outlays for advertising, but I have a feeling the real gain is difficult to measure or quantify. But the cities themselves don’t generally make money, and even the television networks, who historically used the Olympics as a “brass ring” (no pun intended) to propel an entire network’s schedule, lose money on the deal these days.
So, who should the Olympic be for in the 21st Century? The Olympics remain meaningful to athletes toiling in the sports that do not have a broad worldwide following, and that’s what they should be reduced to. No more hockey, or baseball, or tennis. One could even make an argument for eliminating track and field, but while they do get exposure, track and field really can’t be removed from the Olympics – too traditional. Even including track and field, that leaves weightlifting and swimming and diving and all of the athletes who can’t look forward to lucrative contracts from professional leagues. Get rid of boxing: professional boxing exists and besides, Olympic boxing with its points system and head gear turns the most brutal sport into Soul Train: too subjective. That argument would also eliminate figure skating, but like track and field, it’s a sport that is too ingrained in the history of the Olympics to be dropped.
Also, this would reduce the cost of the games by billions, making them more palatable for cities to want to host them. Less money, less hype, and the attention that is being leveled on the games are pointed at the athletes who don’t get their names in the sports pages every day.
So, give ‘em hell protesters. The Chinese government has been able to hold onto power for decades despite worldwide scrutiny and disfavor. (Anyone remember Tianamen Square?) If this is the last of the 20th Century style Olympics, let the political message be one of more rights for Tibet; more rights for the Chinese people; try to get the Chinese to intervene to stop the genocide in Darfur. I thoroughly support the message that you are sending to the Chinese government. Because we may be dancing on the carcass of the “Olympics” as they exist today.

My wife is Chinese, which is a great thing. Her culture is very different from the Anglo-Saxon world; the history is fascinating; and since her parents are still alive, they are able to provide this history to our daughter and their other grandchildren. In addition, I have learned to appreciate real Chinese food. The Indignant Wife (a good name left over from one of my earlier sites) is a great cook and she knows how to cook many dishes, Asian and other. I have learned that what we Americans know as “Chinese food” is about as authentic as AstroTurf. So, in our 10 years together, I’ve eaten things that I never thought I would eat, much less like.
That said, the Indignant Wife is addicted to cooking shows, home improvement programs, and the like. Generally, these shows bore the living hell out of me, but we have learned about some interesting restaurants on the Food Channel. (It should be noted that Rachel Ray is annoying and no one is happier than I that her 15 minutes of fame seem to be coming to an end.) My wife current favorite show however, is on the Travel channel: Bizarre Foods with Andrew Zimmern. Mr. Zimmern, a bald, short, heavy set, average looking guy, is a native New Yorker, chef, writer and TV personality who, on his show, travels around the world eating some of the strangest food in the world: bugs; plants that people should probably avoid; and parts of animals that you couldn’t get me anywhere near – brains, bull testicles, feet, heads, etc. The show is one of my wife favorites because it features two of her favorite things: food, and travel to exotic locations.
Last night, we saw a show in which Mr. Zimmern found something that not even he could eat; a fruit loved by my wife and mother-in-law that I don’t like to have in the house, car, or anywhere upwind from me. This fruit is named durian, and chances are you won’t find it in your normal supermarket. But if you have an Asian food store, I’m sure that it is there. Durian is grown in Southeast Asia and is about the size and shape of a football, but the husk has thorns on the outside. To eat it, one would cut open the husk and eat the inside, which has the consistency of custard. Now, this doesn’t sound particularly horrible, does it? However, the durian has a unique odor, which I think smells like industrial grade nuclear waste (or what I imagine industrial grade sludge smells like). This stuff just plain stinks, and it wouldn’t be so bad except the smell is very strong and permeates everywhere. (The Wikipedia entry for durian quotes travel and food writer Richard Sterling who said: “its odor is best described as pig-shit, turpentine and onions, garnished with a gym sock.) Once, the Indignant Wife wanted me to get her a durian smoothie, but the smell so dominated the small space inside our car that I opened the window for air despite the fact that the temperature was below zero outside.
So I felt fully vindicated that this man, who I’ve seen eat things that humans just shouldn’t eat under any circumstances, spit out sections of the durian he had just eaten, and he wasn’t somewhere far away and exotic – he was in Manhattan’s Chinatown. Unfortunately, the show may have put the idea of a durian smoothie in my wife’s mind for the near future. Fortunately for me, now that it is getting warm out, she can go buy the smelly thing and she can eat it outside; far away from me; downwind.

Could someone please take the gun from his cold dead hand now?

These two people have never been seen together in the same place. NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman and Sesame Street’s The Count. Note the resemblance. Are they the same person? You be the judge!