Benjamin Grimm

Unless he makes the 2009 starting rotation.

This is stirring memories of a young Doc Gooden. I'm trying to remember, but can't: How aware were we of Doc in 1983? We all followed Strawberry's ascent through the farm system, but Gooden got here so quickly I can't remember when we first saw him coming.

FYI, I've found that the minor league stats on BaseballAmerica.com are much more complete than those on minorleaguebaseball.com. Not that the numbers themselves are inaccurate, but the MiLB site hasn't always been listing all of the players on each team.

How do you pronounce his name? Does it rhyme with "spoons" or "buns"?

I'm finding that I, and my son, are definitely in the minority regarding this film. Just about everyone else I encounter has nothing but praise for Wall-E. For whatever reason, this movie just didn't push my button. Maybe it was the sparse dialog. Maybe I just can't connect to a robot lead character. Maybe they were trying too hard to make me like that pathetic little robot. (That last reason is why I didn't click with The Fox and the Hound, It seemed to me that they were telling me to care about the lead characters instead of showing me why I should. Everyone else sees The Fox and the Hound as adorable and heartbreaking, but it left me entirely cold. I could see some good in Wall-E, a clever premise, a few good scenes, and great animation. But I totally despised The Fox and the Hound.)

Cars was okay. (I have no opinion on Larry one way or the other.) So was Ratatouille. They haven't had a movie that I really enjoyed since The Incredibles. Wall-E had its moments, but they were too few and far between. This is a movie I'll never sit through again. I went with my wife, my two kids, and my daughter's friend. My wife thought it was cute. My son, 11, was as bored as I was. My daughter, 7, liked it. Her friend, 9, said it was the "longest movie I ever saw." This is the first Pixar movie that failed to be better than The Bee Movie.

I think it was a dud. For the first time, Pixar has struck out.

I had him in the UMDB as "Charles Doyle" but that's been remedied.

Strangely enough, I've never seen Smallville. Of the series Vic ranked, these are the ones I remember having watched, and my order of preference: 1) Adventures of Superman (1952-1958) 2) Flash (1990-91) 3) Lois & Clark (1993-97) 4) Wonder Woman (1976-1979) 5) Incredible Hulk (1978-1982) 6) Batman (1966-1968) 7) Shazam! (1974-76)

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: It was a joke that Shazam wasn't actually the name of the superhero, but Captain Marvel. And it was very dumb that they had different actors playing Shazam and his alter-ego. In the comics, Billy Batson is a kid, a paperboy, whose alter-ego is the big grown-up superhero Captain Marvel. If they stayed true to that, then they'd pretty much have to have two actors. I don't remember, though, was Billy Batson a kid in that series?

I remember them too. That show may belong in a different category, since it was a Saturday morning kids show, and wasn't made for prime time.

I'll spend my week watching Flash. That, for me, was the most enjoyable show on the list.

How old is he? I imagine he's 21 or 22...

I despised the 2003 version. Maybe I would have liked (or at least, hated it less) it if I didn't care about the comic book character, but I do and Ang Lee's movie was a big swing and a miss. He didn't get the character right at all, and the story had the wrong feel. You can't make a movie like that and not respect the source material.

See what I mean about how silly he looks?

I gave it 2 stars. I watched it for a while, out of loyalty and affection for the character, but it didn't hold my interest and I bailed on it long before it went off the air. The Hulk looked silly. He didn't talk. He just stood there and growled and threw things. (At least, that's how I remember it.) I know that there are a bunch of people who love the Hulk because of this series, but I already had my own notions about the character and this series didn't live up to them. I was asked to rate it in relation to other action shows, which is why I gave it the two stars. Had I been asked to rate it compared to the comic books, I would have given it one star.

I really enjoyed it. (Gave it 3 stars.) Much better than I was expecting; I was afraid it would be another disaster like the 2003 movie was. I was never a fan of the TV series; I didn't recognize the theme song. (If I was going to incorporate a Hulk theme song, I would have gone with the "Doc Bruce Banner..." them from the 1960's cartoon, like they did in Iron Man.) The clip from Courtship of Eddie's Father was a very nice touch, though. The closing battle was too much like a Japanese monster movie for my tastes. And the CGI Hulk didn't look as realistic as I would have liked but, again, better than I had expected from the few clips I had seen. (I would have CGI'ed the Thing in Fantastic Four and, if possible, used a real actor for the Hulk, although he'd certainly have to be computer-enhanced in some way.) The film did nicely capture the feel of the comics from the Herb Trimpe days, the mags I read as a kid. I think that they're going to have to tinker with the character a bit if he's going to be a member of the big screen Avengers. The 60's Hulk who was in the first few issues of that title was more of a social misfit type than a raging beast. There's no way that this movie Hulk will sit around a conference room table with Thor and Iron Man and the Wasp. It was a good movie. A fun movie. So far, anyway, Marvel Studios has done right by their characters in the two films that they've made. My initially rock-bottom hopes for Thor (due in 2010) have been raised a bit.

I was going to post a poll about Havens, asking where we'd like him to be five years from now. Choices would have been: Mets second baseman Mets catcher Mets shortstop (that's for the Jose haters) in another organization (meaning he was traded for an established player) Me, I'd lean towards second base. I'd like our next catcher to be somebody who was born to the position. (And no, I don't really know what I mean by that.)

I remember when I was in, I think, fifth grade (which would have been around 1973) a lot of my friends were really into Speed Racer but it never did anything for me. I was more of a Flintstones guy. I did see the show a few times, but remember nothing about it other than the theme song. I don't even know who Racer X is.

Iron Man 2 has already been announced by Marvel Studios. It opens on April 30, 2010. Thor will open just over a month later.

Triple Dee wrote: One of the criticisms of Iron Man that I forgot to make in my initial review was that the violence was really toned down. I'm skeptical whether the franchise will live to a 3rd film, if Favreau continues with this approach. Having seen the movie, I now suspect that you're taking the piss here. Oh, and by the way, I thoroughly enjoyed Iron Man. Moves right to the top of the list of Marvel movies. (And when you go, don't leave before the credits end. There's one additional scene at the very very end.)

Just dropped by the theater and picked up my tickets for tonight's showing. Look for me at the 7 p.m. show. I'll have rings on my fingers and bells on my toes.

I haven't seen any of the Planet of the Apes sequels since I was a kid, but I agree that Escape was the best of them and Beneath was the worst.

I don't have high hopes for an Avengers movie either. It would be monumentally difficult to mix Iron Man, Thor, and the Hulk (plus Ant Man, Captain America and the Wasp) on screen without it looking very silly. But that's another story. I don't mind villains being killed off in the movies. You have to keep Dr. Octopus alive in the comics because there are forty or fifty years worth of stories to tell. But at most there will be maybe five or six Spider-Man movies; they won't need to go back to Doc Ock again. (And if they reboot the Spidey series twenty years from now, then can once again reuse Doc Ock anyway.) I didn't like how they piled on the villains in Spider-Man 3. I don't know if it's a lack of confidence in Sandman or Venom. It may be partly that, but I think it's largely from a desire to get more characters to merchandise. And that's even worse, because it drives the storytelling in a way that's counterproductive. Favreau seems to have a plan. I think he'll take the Iron Man franchise in a good direction. My hunch is that Iron Man 3, if it gets that far, will be the best superhero movie to have a 3 in the title.