Starring: Chadwick Boseman, Harrison Ford

The story of Jackie Robinson is one of the most significant stories in terms of cultural impact in the history of our country. He transcended baseball, sports, and the ignorant views of the time. It stands to reason that there should be a film worthy of telling that story to the masses who may only know general vagaries about it. 42 is not that film.

To be fair, this was an uphill battle from the start. There was so much to tell, so much struggle, and triumph, that it was a daunting task to accomplish in a mere 2 hours. Excuses aside, 42 does an injustice to what Jackie Robinson was and what he stood for. The sheer historical significance of who he was automatically makes this film stirring and emotional, but the film itself lends absolutely nothing to the equation.

First things first – the baseball scenes were atrocious. Anyone who calls this a baseball movie should go back to enjoying the rousing baseball skills of Brendan Fraser in The Scout. For starters, we never see the guy who is supposed to be Jackie Robinson swing the bat, or actually throw a ball. To rub salt in the wound, Robinson was one of the smoothest baserunners in history, yet the guy playing him looked like the awkward kid in gym class trying just hard enough to get a passing grade. I can’t stress how much this takes away from the film and no amount of clever editing truly fixes it. This is why Kevin Costner and Charlie Sheen are in every baseball movie ever made…they can actually look the part when they set foot on the diamond.

To top it all off, we are made to believe that Branch Rickey basically picked Jackie Robinson out of a stack of files of black ballplayers and that it had nothing to do with how good he truly was. They make it seem like he was interchangeable and it is downright offensive to imply so.

Once I came to grips with this not being a baseball film, I was able to turn my attention elsewhere. The pacing of the film was terrible, with random hits by Robinson strung together and spliced between speeches by Branch Rickey, and an awkward chronological recital of certain events. There were a few extremely uncomfortable scenes with streams and rants of racial slurs, but aside from those, the film was tame and a bit “Disney-ish”.

Capturing the true bigotry Robinson had to endure was a seemingly impossible task. Sure it was prevalent in the film, but my guess was that it was much, much worse. It also neglected to focus on the hell that Robinson’s wife had to endure, showing her more as his support as opposed to her experiencing it right along with him.

Now for the good…Harrison Ford is as good in his role as Branch Rickey as he was in any film he’s been in. Yes, the Star Wars nerds can mock me for saying that, and the Indiana Jones fans will scoff at the notion. Simply put, Harrison Ford should be nominated for an Oscar for his performance in 42. Putting together such a noteworthy performance is a good thing, but when you have a relative unknown in Chadwick Boseman (Robinson) next to you, it takes the focus away from him. This is why I felt like Branch Rickey was portrayed as a much larger focus of this film, taking away from everything Robinson had to endure.

Major League Baseball is taking scores of kids to see this film so they can impart the heritage of the game so they know about Robinson’s legacy and what he meant to the game and our society. It’s a noble idea, however, they’d be better off giving those kids a book about Robinson since I worry they won’t truly appreciate him if this film is all they will know. I know I didn’t live through that time so it may be harder for me to connect, but I would think people that did would want better than 42 provided.

There are some movie genres that don’t fit into any of the traditional labels. Sometimes it’s just not enough to call a film a “drama”, “comedy”, or “thriller”. While some would think “gambling” films are more about the subject matter rather than being its own genre, they couldn’t be more wrong. Gambling films deserve their own category in and of itself.

They are the perfect combination of drama, comedy, suspense, thriller, and action. They are character pieces with nail-biting suspense that portray the self-destructive inner psyche mentality better than most other films could ever dream of. We usually don’t even know who to root for if it’s done correctly. Much like you wouldn’t just call a sports film one of those bland characterizations suitable for only the latest “Tom Cruise is a [cocky] contract killer from the future” film, you shouldn’t try to stick these films into one of those boxes. And unlike it’s closest likeness, the sports film, watching the losers is usually more fun than watching the winners.

It was only prudent for The Movie Mind to put together a ranking for the best of this class. Don’t look for Two for the Money here, this list is only for the best of the best. [cue snide Matthew McConaughey remark] Now being rolled out like a two-way yo for the dealer:

The Movie Mind’s Best Gambling Movies of All-Time

15) California Split (1974)

Sometimes the influence of your partner in crime, or gambling, in this case, it what matters most. California Split has a mix of Tijuana, Reno, card games, races and casinos to land the ultimate round-tripper of the gambling world. These two lucky losers live on the edge and each push each other deeper in their own way. It’s a little known film but stands the test of time as a great one to watch if you’re looking to scratch that itch.

http://youtu.be/IzZ_ANWL_yM

14) Let it Ride (1989)

Richard Dreyfuss goes on a hot-streak at the horse tracks that people only dream about. Dreyfuss is the epitome of the racetrack regular. He likes booze and smokes like a chimney but the only thing he likes better is a hot tip on a pony that is a sure thing. Let it Ride is a worthy film to bear the gold standard of the ultimate bettors’ mindset.

http://youtu.be/cVnbiYHCb1A

13) Hard Eight (1996)

A box office flop, Hard Eight is an unheralded diamond in the rough with a stellar cast. Paul Thomas Anderson’s first film, he assembles John C. Reilly, Gwyneth Paltrow, Samuel L. Jackson, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Philip Baker Hall. Are you freakin kidding me?

The young down on his luck gambler gets taken under the wing of an older pro who teaches him how to be a pro. Mix in a good love story and some underhanded dealings and you’ve got the recipe for a winner.

http://youtu.be/N5m6FrFsi8Y

12) Vegas Vacation (1997)

This is the most hysterical look at what it’s like to be caught by the gambling bug. There is no better character to illustrate it and make you cry from laughing then the one and only Clark W. Griswold. Clark basically forgets his family even exists just to go after that big win.

From Uncle Eddie enlightening Clark to the secrets of the off-the-strip Vegas buffet, to Nick Pappagiorgio; Wayne Newton to Wallace Shawn (the dealer who loves to mock Griswold; there is no end to the unforgettable scenes and journey through Vegas, Griswold style!

http://youtu.be/YDh0WKyKCR0

11) Bookies (2003)

Sometime after Roseanne and before The Big Bang Theory, Johnny Galecki was a college kid putting together a small-time bookmaking business. This little known and underrated film takes idea that every sports bettor has had to start their own book and plays it out with a few college kids.

We see the highs of the life when the money rolls in big, and the challenges of making it big when they rub the local crime bosses the wrong way. They respect the guys’ initiative but don’t lick their own pockets thinning out. There’s a decent little twist at the end that keeps the film interesting throughout.

http://youtu.be/k-rRx5ePVX4

10) The Cincinnati Kid (1965)

I’m no shill for the oldies, but The Cincinnati Kid belongs on this list despite its long ago lineage. Steve McQueen was, and is, the ultimate hustler and ladies’ man. He’s the young slick poker player long before Mike McDermott came around. He doesn’t have the same baggage, but he is a poker-protégé but he’s still got to beat the best to prove it. It’s fun watching the oldies to see how vastly different things are, while also realizing how the game itself is still about cards, betting, and bluffing.

http://youtu.be/VQcPFpHLGGY

9) The Sting (1973)

This film would have been ranked higher, but it’s more about a grand con then it truly is about gambling. Nonetheless, it’s a damn good movie. Paul Newman, Robert Redford, and Robert Shaw make a stellar team and with 7 Oscars (including Best Picture) on its resume, it’s hard to disagree.

http://youtu.be/773E6GPll3A

8) Casino (1995)

Let’s call it as it is…this film is a classic mob movie. Even though it’s not truly focused on gambling or the gambling mindset at its core, it still portrays it through the mindset of those in charge.

Another Scorsese classic with a stacked cast, we see the underbelly of the burgeoning Vegas-scene when it run entirely by the mafia and greased politicians.

http://youtu.be/ZN6mp2NjMhs

7) The Hustler (1961)

Paul Newman vs. Jackie Gleason. Fast Eddie Felson vs. Minnesota Fats. Felson’s immense talent vs. his own bravado and self-destruction. Newman is amazing in this oldie but goodie as the cocky know-it-all.

It may be a little dated, but it’s still got legs. Any good gambling flick has a great lead character with a strong internal conflict. This movie’s got it in spades. Newman is the ultimate talent who finds a way to be a loser. This laid the path for the follow-up to it 25 years later when The Color of Money came out.

http://youtu.be/jtnLUaGdXpI

6) Croupier (1998)

It’s rare for a gambling film to be shown from the perspective of the dealer, and not the player. We see how completely unglamorous it looks from their point of view when you see it every day, over and over. The monotony, the losers. If it sounds painful to watch, it’s just the opposite.

Clive Owen is a writer who takes a job as a dealer/croupier in a casino to make some money. Even the ones who watch the squares day in day out aren’t immune to the lure of the big payday. I’m not a huge fan of the British film genre, but this one is done right and has all the elements you look for in a great gambling movie.

http://youtu.be/O5qk4ybjWTc

5) The Color of Money (1986)

I might get burned at the stake for putting this ahead of its precursor, The Hustler, but this is a sensational film. Part gamble, part hustle, some sports, and all character driven since we never really know who is using who.

Maybe it’s that this version has an older, wiser, Paul Newman (still as Fast Eddie Felson) mentoring the young, brash, cocky Tom Cruise. Fast Eddie sees himself in Vincent (Cruise’ character) which is why he takes him under his wing to show him the finer points of hustling. But the overly cocky Cruise (surprise there) thinks he knows best. This is Cruise at his psycho Scientologist best, and along with some kickass cameos by a young Forest Whitaker and John Turtorro, it’s one of the best. As Fast Eddie told us all, “Money won is twice as sweet as money earned.”

http://youtu.be/ZrjSqK7xPLE

4) The Cooler (2003)

The film is named after William H. Macy’s character who is actually employed by the casino to cool down tables when they get too hot. Who would have thought that it paid to be a loser at the casino? Apparently it doesn’t, it only pays to be THE ultimate loser.

In a cruel twist of fate, Macy’s character loses his frozen touch when he gets a new love interest (Maria Bello) who also happens to be tied in to the casino owner (Alec Baldwin). The Cooler tends to be more about luck than gambling at times, but no other film does a better job of illustrating the full spectrum of being the ultimate loser, to having everything turn to gold.

http://youtu.be/HQiYT_AdGdU

3) The Gambler (1974)

James Caan is Alex Freed, a professor who gambles as much for the thrill of the loss as he does for the win. This is one of Caan’s best roles, and that’s saying a lot when you’re talking about the man who played Sonny Corleone.

A lot of films have aimed to be a great introspective into the mind of the gambler while also being a gripping mob flick. Not many have succeeded, but The Gambler is the gold standard.

Caan’s character, Freed, is truly hooked on sitting on the edge of each bet, knowing that he will keep digging himself deeper and deeper with each loss without any other way to climb out of it other than what got him there: to bet it all. He said it best when he explained, “I’m not going to lose it. I’m going to gamble it.”

http://youtu.be/7-jeWvB6xXo

2) Owning Mahoney (2003)

Based on a true story, Philip Seymour-Hoffman puts in what I believe is one of his greatest performances ever. This film set the standard for capturing the true obsession of the gambler, as opposed to many others that take the viewpoint of the gambler who is only out to strike it rich. Small-time Canadian banker Dan Mahowny was truly in it for the thrill of the chase.

Mahowny’s story ultimately led to one of the only times all Atlantic City casino were mandated to be shut down. That’s right, this quiet, reserved, Canadian dude who made around $30k per year at his banker job was the reason every AC casino was ordered to shut down. Mahaowny was asked what the most exciting part about gambling was, to which he responded, “Winning”. What was the next most exciting part? “Losing.” You can’t find a better lead character for one of the most gripping gambling stories ever told.

http://youtu.be/Hw-EYWlbyow

1) Rounders (1998)

“You tricked me. Check check check.” The Movie Mind may get flack for naming Rounders the best gambling movie of All-Time, but just like I believe Rocky IV ended the Cold War, Rounders spawned an entire poker-craze where squares everywhere aimed to be the next Mike McDermott. Unfortunately for them, 99% of players out there today are more like Worm.

The cast and script are absolutely amazing. I feel like all of the phenomenal actors all put in one of their best performances in this movie, from Damon, to Norton, Malkovich, Turturro…hell, I even remember acting legend Martin Landau for his role as Abe Petrovsky, the wise sage trying to steer McDermott right.

The film still lives on today as every internet poker player, every $2-$4 no-limit casino player, every red-blooded American looking to scratch that itch with some internet gaming at a site like FoxyBingo.com, dreamt about staring down Johnny Chan and re-raising him until he laid them down.

http://youtu.be/qv2C_m0D-gY

Scouting, interviewing, analyzing 40-times and pouring over game-tape is overrated. Teams would save a lot of time and money if they drafted players based on how bad-ass their names are. Based on the track record of many teams’ draft picks, they’d be better off picking players based off how the name on the back of their jerseys look. Here is a list of the Best Player Names in the 2013 NFL Draft:

BEST MOVIE/TV CHARACTER NAMES

Bacarri Rambo, S (Georgia)

“Nothing is over! Nothing! You just don’t turn it off! It wasn’t my war! You asked me, I didn’t ask you! And I did what I had to do to win!”

There will be no better sight on an NFL field next season than seeing RAMBO written across the back of a jersey.

D.J. Swearinger, S (South Carolina)

I’m not sure if any of you are Deadwood fans, but all I can see when I hear the name of the South Carolina safety is an image of the HBO outlaw Al Swearengen.

Dalton Freeman, C (Clemson)

Coming straight out of Roadhouse, James Dalton, I mean, Dalton Freeman, is one mullet shy of being a kick-ass bouncer of the Double Deuce. “I want you to be nice until it’s time to not be nice.”

MOST CONTROVERSIAL NAMES

Omoregie Uzzi, G (Georgia Tech)

I can hear the chants now, “More Uzzi…More Uzzi!!” There won’t be any other player with a more divided fan base. Gun rights enthusiasts will buy his jersey, while gun control advocates will picket in front of his locker. Let the games begin.

Robbie Rouse, RB (Fresno State)

Some locker room is going to get a little crazier when the dude that’s a walking Rebel Rouser walks in. Robbie Rouse could double as a Golden Gloves champ or a street fighter ready to throw down at ay sign of trouble.

BEST BAND NAMES

Steele Jantz, QB (Iowa State)

Now on tour with the 1980’s Hair-Band Revival, “Steele Jantz”! His entrance music into every NFL stadium should be walking out with Axel Rose hair and playing some face-melting riff for the crowd.  

Ezekiel “Ziggy” Ansah, DE (BYU)

Yah mon…don’t let ‘em fool ya! Ziggy Ansah could have fit as one of Bob Marley’s Wailers, but instead will be rolling QB’s every Sunday.

Blaize Foltz, G (TCU)

Blaize better damn well be faster than his 5.3 second 40-yard dash time at his recent pro-day, otherwise he may be the next hot new hip-hop artist name a little sooner than I thought. His name is tailor-made to go platinum.  

Darius Slay, CB (Mississippi State)

Try finding me a guy who could potentially come up with a more interesting new music sound then by using his own names. I would pay big bucks to see some mix of Hootie’s Darius Rucker and Slayer.

YOU COULDN’T MAKE THESE UP

Stansly Maponga, DE (TCU)

What do you get when you cross Stanley and Sylvester? Stansly, naturally. Throw in a Maponga for good measure.

Colton Chapple, QB (Harvard)

Would you expect a guy with the name of Colton Chapple to be anything else other than a quarterback from Harvard? Well, maybe a hedge fund manager or trust fund baby driving his dad’s Benz out to the Hamptons for the weekend. I’m sure he’ll be doing that too after a brief detour through a couple NFL camps.

Uzoma Nwachukwu, WR (Texas A&M)

Naga…na-ga…not gonna work here anymore!

CELEBRITY LIKENESSES

Jordan Dangerfield, FS (Towson)

Dangerfield has an uphill battle ahead of him making it in the NFL from a small school, and as you can imagine, he gets no respect.

Shaq Wilson, OLB (South Carolina)

Not quite the same size or build as Mr. O’Neal, but there is a new Shaq in town. Now if he can somehow manage to produce a crappy movie as an oversized genie and a thousand Gold Bond commercials, he’ll be in good shape.

Jamoris Slaughter, SS (Notre Dame)

If he was a military man we would indeed have another Sargeant Slaughter on our hands.

Jawanza Starling, S (USC)

Hello, Clarice. Agent Starling may have had a husband all along we didn’t know about that went by the name Jawanza.

FOR GOOD MEASURE

Tyron Laughinghouse, WR (St. Augustine’s)

I’m pretty sure he will have the last laugh if he starts cashing NFL checks.

Vinston Painter, T (Virginia Tech)

Is he a French artist from the Roaring 20’s or a 300 lb. lineman looking to maul in the NFL?

Avis Commack, CB (Akron)

Looking for a place to rent a car? Head over to the Avis in Commack, Long Island.

If You Like This You Should Watch: Blades of Glory
Better Than: Dinner for Schmucks
Worse Than: The Campaign

Starring: Steve Carell, Steve Buscemi, Jim Carrey, Alan Arkin

Don’t show up to The Incredible Burt Wonderstone looking to get intellectually stimulated. If you do, you are sure to be disappointed. If you do go catch it at the theater, it would be the perfect release from a hard work-week when you are mentally exhausted and just need some mindless release. So when I call The Incredible Burt Wonderstone the ultimate “do-it-to-me” movie, that’s not an insult. It’s also not insulting to call it stupid, because it is. It also just happens to be freakin hilarious. While it won’t be a classic by any means, it will be one that I do feel gets better and better each time you watch it.

I’m putting this film solidly in the Blades of Glory and The Campaign category: underrated stupid-comedies that grow on you over time and produce some excellent laughs. In fact, even before seeing this film, I say striking resemblances to Will Ferrell’s Blades of Glory from the costumes to the straight-guy sidekick to the cocky and idiotic lead character that ends up having a heart of gold. Basically if you wanted to compare how Steve Carrell measure up to Will Ferrell as the lead in a very similar film, watch The Incredible Burt Wonderstone and Blades of Glory and you’ll find out. In the eyes of The Movie Mind, there’s a clear winner and that is Ferrell.

This is about as good of a cast you can up with to work together on a stupid-funny comedy film. As a matter of fact, it was so good, that Steve Carell could have been called the “weakest link”. Now don’t get me wrong, I think that Carell is a comedic genius and I love watching him in anything. However, he basically plays The Office’s Michael Scott as a magician. For some reason, I never feel like that character translates over to the film genre all that well. Nonetheless, he is still pretty damn funny. The difference is, many of the others are even funnier.

The guy that invented the stupid-comedy genre showed up in full force, and Jim Carrey was on his game. He stole the show as the new-age “magician” and mockery of Criss Angel. Carell and his sidekick, Steve Buscemi, play the role of aging Vegas magician icons Siegfried and Roy. The new crop of fans flock elsewhere to witness the new-age “stunts” like when Carrey’s character pulls a dollar bill out of his face or sleeps on hot coals. He was the perfect fit for this roleand really stole every scene he was in, a nice reprieve from his usual leading position. Throw in some nice appearances by Jay Mohr and Alan Arkin and you’ve got a very well-rounded comedic cast.

There is a bit of a lull in the middle of the film when Carell’s character, Burt Wonderstone, falls from grace, but it picks back up for a solid, albeit predictable, ending. All in all there are worse things to be doing then watching a comedy where you know what you’re going to get. I’m in for The Incredible Burt Wonderstone and you should be too.

Submitted 2-8-13

Interesting Cameo Appearance: James Gandolfini (aka type-casted and fish-out-of-water in a comedy role, Tony Saprano, legendary HBO crime boss of The Sopranos) as Doug Munny, Vegas hotelier and boss of Burt Wonderstone’s show in his hotel’s theater. He plays a mockery likely of Steve Wynn, even going so far as to show him opening his new hotel called, “The Doug”.

Memorable Quotes:
Bully: Listen to me, Burt. Nobody likes you. Nobody will ever like you.

Young Rance Holloway: Everyone loves a magician and they’ll love you too.

Doug Munny: Your ticket sales suck.

Burt Wonderstone: [laughs] What? Who is that guy?

Doug Munny: Steve Gray, they are calling him the future of magic.

Television Announcer: For 12 long days he’s held his urine.

Richard Wolffe: What is going through your mind?

Steve Gray: I really have to pee, Richard.

Doug Munny: You need to do something fresh!

Burt Wonderstone: I suppose I could hold my poop.

Burt Wonderstone: That guy’s a magician? He doesn’t even have a costume!

Jane: You’re gonna wear that? Are you ridiculous? It’s velvet. Take it off, Burt.

The Movie Mind Quiz #7

Please enter your answers in the comments section and then you can highlight the missing text after each question for the answers (answers will only display when you highlight them with your cursor), Good luck!

Q: In The Hangover, what does Stu (Ed Helms) tell his girlfriend Melissa he is doing with the guys instead of going to Vegas for Doug’s bachelor party? A: He tells her they are going on a wine tasting tour in Napa Valley

Q: What are the fake names John & Jeremy (Vaughn & Wilson) use to get into the Indian wedding and Irish wedding in Wedding Crashers? A: Sanjay Collins & Chuck Vindaloo; Seamus O’Toole & Bobby O’Shea.

Q: What musician portrayed the high-school band audition judge who rejects Marty McFly’s band as they perform the short instrumental hard-rock version of his own song in Back to the Future? BONUS: What is the name of Marty McFly’s band? A: Huey Lewis; BONUS: The Pinheads

Q: Finish the quote from Tombstone by Doc Holliday (Val Kilmer): “I’m your________”  A: I’m your huckleberry…

Q: What is the name of the team that Shane Falco (played by Keanu Reeves, not recent KC Chiefs QB Tyler Palko) plays for in The Replacements? A: The Washington Sentinels

Q: What reality TV show did Michael Weaver (aka Local Officer Smy from Super Troopers) recently star in? HINT: His character’s name was “Randy, The A-Hole”. A: The Joe Schmo Show

Q: What actor/actress was in the following three films: Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Lucky Number Slevin, The Dark Knight? A: Morgan Freeman

Q: Name the movie, actor, and character’s name who is responsible for the following quote: “It is a fashion, a way of life inspired by the very homeless, the vagrants, the crack whores that make this wonderful city so unique.” A: Zoolander, Will Ferrell, Jacobim Mugatu

Q: Which one of the following Adam Sandler films did Rob Schneider NOT have a part in: Jack and Jill, You Don’t Mess with the Zohan, The Longest Yard, I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry, Mr. Deeds, 50 First Dates, The Wedding Singer, Big Daddy, The Waterboy, Little Nicky? A: The Wedding Singer

Q: What does Clark Griswold invent in National Lampoon’s Vegas Vacation, to earn a large bonus which pays for him and his family to take the trip out to Veags? A: He invented a long life food preservative

If You Like This You Should Watch:  Space Cowboys
Better Than: Summer Catch
Worse Than:  Gran Torino, Million Dollar Baby

Starring: Clint Eastwood, Amy Adams, Justin Timberlake

Say you took the scene from Moneyball where the old scouts are arguing with Billy Beane over how their tried and true methods supplant the new-age saber-metrics and turned it into a 2-hour film. Presto! You’ve got Trouble with the Curve. The only difference is, the old scouts still prove to be useful and the story doesn’t end with the A’s being knocked out of the ALCS yet again. [Yankees fan chuckling] Now I wouldn’t complain about watching a film about on baseball and the scouting process, but let’s be real here, this film has as much to do with baseball as Charlie Sheen does with celibacy. Once “JTSmooth” Timberlake shows his mug onscreen, the last thing this film is about is baseball. Without Clint Eastwood the film is a total bust and the reincarnation of Freddie Prinze in Summer Catch. Thankfully, Clint is [still] the best in the biz and with Amy Adams behind him, the movie ends up being a decent watch.

Not to get all baseball snob on you, but indulge me here for a minute. There were more holes in this script than there are in A-Rod’s postseason swing. There were so many muffed storylines that are supposed to be crucial to the plot, they are hard to overlook. On top of that, it sure seemed like lazy writing in a number of instances which is disappointing because this movie could have been really good. A couple of these may be spoilers so please avert your eyes if you must.

One of the most basic ways to tell how much thought was put into the writing is by looking at the character names. Some of them ended up perfect: Clint Eastwood as the grizzled old scout, “Gus”. His daughter, “Mickey”, named after his favorite player Mickey Mantle. So far so good, right? Then you get to Justin Timberlake who plays a new scout aiming for a job in the booth. He used to be a big-time prospect when he was a pitcher they called “The Flame”. Cause he threw hard, get it? Real creative, I know. Now you may not think that’s a big deal but they stopped calling hard-throwing pitchers “The Flame” in 1955. Wasn’t there a single baseball consultant on the set here?

That doesn’t scratch the surface of one of the biggest issues of all. I put on my GM hat and try to figure out why in the world a team would fire a scout because they advised them against taking a certain player, only to be pissed that the team right after them picked the guy they passed on. Isn’t that the point of scouting? Boston would not care that the Braves drafted big Bo Gentry after they ended up passing on him one pick earlier. Did they really think the supposed sure #1 pick would last until the next time they picked? That doesn’t add up. Naturally, it was the fastest way to create strife between JT and Amy Adams’ characters to set up a big reunion at the end. If you’re surprised by that, don’t bother watching.

My tolerance boiled over after the film spent so much time on a fruitless storyline, much like a dangling participle that would’ve gotten you a D on your Grammar test. What was the point of developing the personality of the big prospect (Bo Gentry) to portray him as the spoiled entitled future big star? Where was Gus’ analysis of the kid as a diva with a big league ego and no humility? I just think this was an open loop in the story that made no sense and could have been used to close the story. Wouldn’t an old school scout be more concerned with a player’s attitude and desire whereas the “computer” scouts aren’t privy to that information?

At its core, you have a nice father-daughter relationship struggle outlined in this film. The baseball is minimal and not even necessarily critical to the plot. I really feel like with this cast, between Eastwood and Adams, with a solid performance by John Goodman, it should have been much better. Maybe I’m being harsh since I went in looking at it as a baseball movie, but even as your standard drama-fare it doesn’t live up to what we’d expect from Clint and his supporting cast.
Submitted 2-8-13

Interesting Cameo Appearance:  John Goodman (aka the underrated larger than life Walter Sobchak from The Big Lebowski, star of King Ralph, and Dan Conner from Roseanne) as Pete Klein, the Director of College Scouting for the Braves that is still loyal to Clint Eastwood’s character Gus.

Memorable Quotes:
Gus: Anybody who uses computers doesn’t know a damn thing about this game.

Pete Klein: Have you thought about what you’ll do when your contract is up?
Gus: Sure, sign another one for more money.

Gus: You don’t know anything about scouting.
Johnny: Don’t tell them that.

Gus: You shouldn’t be in a place like this.
Mickey: You used to sneak me into places worse than this.

Gus: Now get out of here before I have a heart attack trying to kill you.

Gus: I know I’m as blind as a slab of concrete, but I’m not helpless. I’ll put a bullet in my head when that happens.
Mickey: That’s comforting.

Johnny: So, what’s Mickey short for? Michelle?
Mickey: Mickey is short for Mickey. As in Mickey Mantle, my father’s favorite player.
Johnny: Aha. Lucky it wasn’t Yogi Berra.

Johnny: I remember him saying he had a daughter in college. Yep. He would say that she was smarter than me and him put together. That’s why when I met you, obviously, I thought Gus had another daughter.

Gus: What do you say now, jackass? That’s know as, trouble with the curve.

Sure, we certainly enjoy the game and watching the two hottest teams (notice I intentionally did not say the two “best” teams”) fight it out for the right to be called Super Bowl Champion.

But we also know that the lead up to (and many times during) the game can be so excruciatingly painful that we can’t tolerate it.

ESPN (aka TMZ Sports), the NFL Network, CBS, and every other network with an advertising rooting interest in the game feels the need to drum up innocuous storyline after storyline.

Each one is more trivial than the last. They want to jam it down the throats of casual football fans everywhere so that the ratings go up and their reach of ads they paid insane amounts of money for pay off.

Meanwhile, you and I, are left to fight through the weeds and find the actual reasons why this game will be interesting. This list isn’t about those reasons.

1)  The “Harbowl”, “Harbaugh Bowl”, “Brother Bowl”, “Superbaugh”,or any other annoying iteration of 2 Coaches with the Same Name

Stop me if you’ve heard this already, but the two coaches in this upcoming Super Bowl are brothers. Move over Lennay Kekua, this is some REAL news! If we can get ESPN’s cacophony of Max Headroom-esque talking heads out of our minds for a second, we’d realize that aside from having a pretty cool Thanksgiving dinner conversation for the Harbaugh family, who else gives a crap?

Is it neat to think that out of all the football coaches out there, two who are siblings end up in the biggest game and go head to head? Sure it is. So was the fact that an extra bag of pretzels fell out of the vending machine at work today but I don’t expect live news coverage interviewing every one of my family members about it either.

Let’s face it. If the two brothers did NOT have the name Harbaugh to begin with, it’s likely that neither would have had the opportunity to break through the tightknit/inbred community of NFL coaches anyway.  Let’s celebrate nepotism before we throw a parade for these guys.

2)  Ray Lewis: Love-Fest Farewell Tour for a Semi-Murderous Preacher

Do you think the Human Resources department at the Livestrong Foundation threw a “retirement” party with a cake and balloons when the disgraced former racer recused himself from the Foundation? Me neither. And all he did was cheat in some bike races, lie for a decade, and ruin a few people’s lives with lawsuits all the while attacking their character.

Mr. Lewis  on the other hand hid evidence from cops that were investigating a double murder that he was a suspect in, was convicted of obstruction of justice (largely because police couldn’t find crucial evidence to convict him of participating in the actual murders and he served up two others for the crime), lied about it for a decade, and acted sanctimonious ever since while those victims’ families are one family member short.

Lewis is unquestionably one of the greatest linebackers ever to play the game, even if he is somewhat of a liability on the field currently. As for his character, time sure must heal everything. I’m guessing the fond farewell tour for OJ Simpson and Rae Carruth won’t be far behind.

3)  The Fad of the Pistol or Read-Option Offense

Asking Bill Parcells about his feelings on the latest trends in NFL schemes is like checking with Dr. James Naismith on his thoughts about the Miami Heat’s position-less roster. The game has evolved so much so that fans of teams with coaching openings that cry for the return of John Gruden or Bill Cowher are as outdated as the Wing-T.

The NFL certainly has its share of fads thanks to the lack of creativity in the coaching retreads’ copycat philosophies. What seems to be forgotten is that this evolution was a long time coming. The pistol / read option offense is merely the next generation of an unstoppable offense. The best athletes on the field are suddenly the quarterbacks. It used to be the running backs during the ground and pound, or wide receivers / defensive ends during the resurgence of the pass. Now when an offense has a guy who is bigger than an outside linebacker, as fast as a safety, and can throw the ball, they have what’s called a match-up problem for opposing defenses.

Successful college teams have long since perfected the read-option and pistol offense so it was only a matter of time before NFL offenses adapted. In typical copycat fashion, NFL teams everywhere will follow suit. The difference is that for teams that don’t have a Kaepernick, Newton, or RGIII, it will be a fad. For those that attempt to draft and shape their teams to reflect the future, it’s here to stay.

4)  Is Joe Flacco Elite?

Forgive the obvious response, but doesn’t it depend on what you consider elite? We will be inundated with self-important shills like Phil Simms and smug unhappy little men like Merril Hoge waxing on for two weeks about whether or not Flacco now qualifies as an elite quarterback. Making a Super Bowl does not make a quarterback elite. Just ask fellow ESPN blowhard Trent Dilfer about that.

For the record, I think Flacco is a very good NFL quarterback. That doesn’t mean we should all get our panties in a bunch because he outplayed a 73 year-old Tom Brady. I consider elite to be someone you would take on your team over almost every other QB in the league. If you have Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, or Peyton Manning, you probably wouldn’t take anyone else over them. Same goes for Drew Brees and possibly Eli Manning. However, if you have Roethlisberger, Stafford, or Flacco, you would trade up for any of those other three guys in a heartbeat.

Many of you will probably disagree with my synopsis above and that’s fine. But just like common sense dictates you should never get into a bar fight with a guy who has cauliflower ear, common sense says we shouldn’t have some talking head schmucks jamming their definition of what a subjective classification like “elite” means.

5)  The Poor Alex Smith is a Victim Campaign (crosses over with the “Jim Harbaugh is a Genius for Benching him Camp”)

Here’s one take: Harbaugh made a gutsy move against popular opinion by benching a veteran quarterback playing perhaps his best football in his career in favor of an unproven unorthodox rookie. If the move blew up in Harbaugh’s face and Kaepernick fell flat on his face, he would take all of the heat. The safer route would have been to ride out Smith and see where he took you, knowing full well if he didn’t get to the Super Bowl he could turn over the future of the team to Kaepernick next season.

Another man’s take could be that Harbaugh merely took the easy way out by playing the “hot hand” card and drew the ire of old school players and fans everywhere who still believe someone should never lose their job because of injury. These are the “woe is me – poor Alex Smith” campaign. Let’s remember Smith is in his 8^th NFL season as a former 1^st overall pick who initially had a $50 million rookie contract, followed by a one-year $5 million contract, and then the most recent 3-year $24 million contract. I don’t need a calculator to tell me that amounts to like, a lot of million (almost $80MM for the actuaries out there), all for a whopping 2 playoff games and a 53% playoff completion percentage. In other words, go find the world’s smallest violin for a guy who is one Ryan brother away from being Mark Sanchez.

New Year’s Resolution #1: Don’t find a franchise QB…find two of them

One bad first round pick could potentially set back a franchise a few seasons. They will be constantly chasing players and covering for that bad pick. In the case of missing on an early quarterback pick, the damage is even more severe. As we’ve seen recently, that is also the case with big name free-agent QB acquisitions. Yes Matt Cassel, I’m looking at you.

The main concern for all Chiefs’ fans (and likely Andy Reid) is that there is no “sure thing” in this year’s draft crop. No Luck, RGIII, Matt Ryan, Stafford…it’s a thin class to say the least. So does that mean the Chiefs should avoid drafting one like the plague? Absolutely not. I suppose that means they shouldn’t pick up a free agent. Wrong again. It’s time for KC to recognize just how important the QB position is in today’s NFL and double-down on it. It’s called hedging their bet.

You say Andy Reid wants to bring Vick with him? Fine. He better damn well back him up with a young QB that he also feels can lead this franchise in the future, or more likely when Vick goes down in week 6. Give me Geno and Vick for the right price with something to prove and let them battle it out for the starting spot and I’m a happy man. You prefer Matt Flynn perhaps? Well if you want to bet the future of the franchise coming off being led by a one-year wonder in Cassel, you better be prepared to be underwhelmed by the one-game wonder. If you sign Flynn at a steep discount from his Seattle price, you better also backup that plan with a Tyler Wilson or Landry Jones.

You may think this is a frivolous strategy for a team with a lot of holes. I think it’s a must. Andy Reid has a good track record of turning project late-round QB picks in trades for 2nd rounders (see AJ Feeley, Kevin Kolb). Worst case is that if one doesn’t pan out, we turn it into value in the future. I’m just not willing to be the future of this franchise on any one of these “maybe’s”.

New Year’s Resolution #2: Finish the cleanse and right the ship

Clark Hunt has made swift and firm moves when he fired Romeo Crennel immediately after the season and effectively castrated Scott Pioli in public shortly thereafter. He decided on the man he wanted to charge with turning his billion dollar business around and basically held him captive at an airport without allowing him to leave on the plane he was supposed to take for another coaching interview. That’s balls, man. It makes me wonder if there was some kind of Face Off situation where he and another owner pulled a Nick Cage/John Travolta and swapped faces so things could get done in KC. Whatever he did, I’m digging it. All that’s left is to take out the dude who did the face-swap surgery so that it can’t be reversed.

Now Clark can’t look back. No getting skittish and dwarfing into the background again which infuriated the fan base in the midst of a historically bad season. Clark needs to show the fans and his staff that he is the boss and the buck stops with him. So far he gets high marks but the offseason has just begun. Let’s see where he takes us before September.

New Year’s Resolution #3: Reconnect with the fan base

Kansas City fans are hands down the greatest fan base in professional football. I’m not even a local, and I can easily admit that. Lamar Hunt knew this when he saw these Midwestern fans become a part of his business, team, and franchise. Clark is taking more time to understand this than his dad. By allowing Scott Pioli to effectively shut off the team from the community altogether, he allowed this man to do far more damage to his franchise than a bad draft pick or two ever did.

So far Hunt has made the statement that ultimately he is the man accountable for the team. Not a GM, or coach, but the owner. That means the owner needs to make his team, coaches, and staff accessible to the media and fans again. No more Scott Pioli-induced muzzles. Let these players feel the passion this fan base has for them and the Arrowhead and they will return it in spades.

The Eric Winston’s of the team need to understand that he can’t alienate the fans like he did and expect support. Clark Hunt is starting to get the picture which is the first step. Now his job is to make sure that concern and focus on the fan base is understood across all levels of his organization. If this happens like it should, the passion, intensity, and lore of Arrowhead will be back and better than ever.

Starring: Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, Eddie Redmayne

The Movie Mind likes Broadway shows. As a matter of fact, I like them a lot. So my irritation stemming from this film has nothing to do with being too boorish to appreciate a good theater production. That being said, there’s a reason why Broadway shows are successful while films about them typically are not. Les Miserables is a fantastic Broadway show. It makes for an ok movie. If I’m going to sit through an “ok” movie, it better damn well not be almost 3-solid hours’ worth.

There’s actually a lot I can say about this film, surely enough to take up a full review as opposed to a Quick Hit. However, in protest of the disconcerting self-important trend in films these days of carrying on and on without knowing how to wrap-up a film in under 2-damn-hours like it should be, this is all you’ll get. I’m sure you are very broken up about it too.

To sum it up: the acting was incredible, sans Russell Crowe. He was basically the only guy in the film who sings like he was voted off the Miami auditions of Season 7’s American Idol. That’s usually not a major problem, unless of course the ENTIRE film is singing. I think there were three spoken words and even those had a little vibrato to them. The issue there is that he plays such a crucial role and really distracts from the other actors that are actually talented.

We all know Hugh Jackman is uber-talented, however, the stars of the film were the ones you’ve never heard of and likely never seen before. Eddie Redmayne (Marius), Samantha Barks (Eponine), and Amanda Seyfried (Cosette) were knock-your-socks off amazing. So much so I almost forgot I was sitting there for 1/8th of a day. Almost.

The story follows the play very closely. I know this because Mrs. Movie Mind knows every single word to every single tune in the play. Every. Single. One. So perhaps her point of view is much more valid then mine. She did say they added in a new song or two and did a much better job of explaining the actual story and plot than in the stage production.

From my point of view as a movie-goer, it certainly wasn’t the typical crap you’d see these days. It was well-made and interesting and beautifully shot, but the filmmakers get no credit for the writing because, well, they didn’t write it.

If Les Miserables makes a run back on Broadway in the near future, sign me up. Otherwise chalk this up to a self-indulgent should’ve stayed-on-the-stage rendition of what is actually a great story. Choosing Russell Crowe for such an important part of the story shows they were more concerned about box office numbers then doing the play justice.

It appears the driving force behind Goodell’s intentions all seem to be to make the game safer overall. Unless, that is, there is a financial component to it. While Goodell tries to legislate big hits out of the game, he flippantly ignores more potent potential player safety measures when they have a negative financial impact to the NFL.

He was pushing for an 18 game schedule because of the additional revenue it would bring in the league, yet ignoring the impact on players’ lives, careers, and bodies by putting them on the field 2 more weeks a year.

He also doesn’t seem to recognize (or care about) what I believe is the greatest risk to player safety in the NFL: Thursday night games. He is content with the increased revenue that another night of games brings in to the league, but has no concern for player safety in forcing them to play again on exactly 3 days’ rest. How does the body, and more importantly, head and brain, recover enough to play this violent game on short rest?

He has sown his decisions may be in the supposed best interests of the players, but only when they don’t affect the league coffers. Here are the Top Five Reason Roger Goodell is dead wrong for trying to ruin the NFL with eliminating the kickoff:

1)      The actual safety issue:

• If Goodell thinks that this is the only play in football when big, fast, strong men have a head start in running into each other at full speed then he is even less qualified to run this league than I originally thought. He thinks replacing the kickoff with an optional punt would solve the problem. He is sorely mistaken and here is why:
• On the kickoff, the coverage team that sprints downfield to tackle the ball carrier has a pretty good chance of getting blocked. The blockers fall back and attempt to form a wall (or crease) for the ball carrier. The blockers are always in front of the coverage team and in their direct field of vision as they try to block them. The coverage team tries to avoid them and then tackle the ball carrier.
• On a punt, it is much easier for the punt team to “shake” a blocker right at the line of scrimmage and then get a 40-50 yard head start downfield at the ball carrier who is all alone waiting on an island. What’s even worse, punt teams typically release at the line of scrimmage and peel back to one side of the field out of the field of vision of the coverage team only to reunite downfield with a highlight-reel blind-side decleater.

2)      Roger Goodell: Job-Killer

• Goodell also fails to recognize that by eliminating the kickoff he would be eliminating jobs. The fact of the matter is that there are plenty of guys in the league who made the team simply because of their ability to cover kicks and punts. For every NFL “special teamer”, there are hundreds of other college players with the same size, speed, and strength. So what sets them apart from those guys is their ability to have a blatant disregard for their bodies to run down full speed and hit someone as hard as they can. Do not underestimate this and assume all football players have this same mentality, they don’t. Some players see hitting as an inevitable part of the game while others see it as the sole focus of the game. The point is that eliminating the play does not eliminate the mentality of these players.

3)      The Big “Mo”

• How many times has a big kickoff return for a touchdown completely swung the momentum of the game, regardless of the actual score? There is unequivocally no single play in the entire sport of football that deflates a team like getting a kickoff returned for a TD on them. Your team may have just marched down the field with a stunning drive, eating up clock, owning the line of scrimmage, and punching in a huge touchdown. To come out 60 seconds after that and get those points returned right back at you without your defense even stepping onto the field is soul-crushing. No 4^th and 15 on the 30 yard-line for the kicking team can ever replace that feeling.

4)      Integrity of the Game

• If Goodell is successful in removing this crucial component of the sport, where does it end? Find me a commissioner in any sport that has exhibited greater control over the fundamental principles and rules than Roger Goodell. It’s impossible to find because it doesn’t exist. Yes, there’s a competition committee that these rule changes must pass through, but guess who is the one presenting the case to that committee? Mr. Goodell. Eliminating the kickoff is a completely fundamental change to the game itself. It’s akin to changing the force-out rule in baseball or making dunks worth 4 points in basketball. This is not a “tweak” in the rule but a complete overhaul of the way the game is played. This is not moving the kickoff up or back 5 yards as it has been done a few times, it’s removing the play altogether. If he is successful, the game will played very differently than it is today. Based on the current popularity of the sport, that doesn’t seem like a good thing to me.

5)      Element of Surprise

• Remember New Orleans’ onside kick recovery to start the 2^nd half of Super Bowl XLIV? DO you think that had anything to do with their eventual win over the Colts? They took a risk by making that call and it paid off. Do you think teams will have any element of surprise when they line up for 4^th and 15 and run a fake punt? This will be the punt return team’s primary concern. Not to mention you lose the field position battle because teams have a better chance starting from closer to midfield with a punt from the 30 yard line than a kickoff resulting in a probable touchback on the 20. Why do you think teams’ are penalized after giving up a safety by having to punt instead of kick off? The onside kick is one of the most exciting few seconds in sports because it still gives the team a chance for recovery and improbable comeback. That simply doesn’t compare to just another 4^th down try.