Centerfield

Petco is terrific. Another of these new ballparks that makes game-watching an incredible experience. We sat along the left field line and had a perfect view of the action (it's astonishing to me that it took 100 years for architects to start angling the seats toward the pitcher's mound). We walked around the field and there doesn't seem to be a bad seat in the house. Beautiful views of the Coronado Bridge remind you a bit of PNC. Where to Stay: the park is in downtown San Diego. If you can stay in the Gaslamp District, it's an easy walk. Area is terrific. We were there when the Dodgers were in town, so it was overrun with LA people, but it's lively and fun. Before the Game: Get there early. Go visit the park/picnic area. It's great for kids. Plenty of room to throw a ball around before the game. My son brought his glove, but I wish I had brought mine and a ball. How often can you play catch at an MLB game? There is a mini-baseball field where kids play wiffle ball, a picnic area, and lots of other fun activities for the kids. Highly recommend checking it out. Check out the Tony Gwynn statue and practice talking in his voice. What we ate: Hodad's. It's a burger joint famous in San Diego. I guess it's kinda like their version of Shake Shack. It was ok. Got the bacon burger. The bacon was too crunchy for my taste, but worth trying. The garlic fries were pretty good. What we drank: Iron Fist IPA. Pretty good. Might have drank a few of these. Had another local brew as well but can't remember what it was. One thing that is strange about the Padres. They have been so fluid with their colors that it has really diluted the spirit of comraderie between their fans. It's striking when you see waves of LA fans wearing Dodger blue. Meanwhile SD fans wear brown and yellow, navy and silver, navy and orange, camo, desert camo, and brown and orange. Pick a color SD, then stick with it. My daughter is collecting those ice cream helmets from every stadium we visit. The helmet of choice was brown and yellow.

Vic Sage wrote: He loved KING KONG, and while he appreciated ALIEN for its filmmaking, he doesn't like horror movies and the discomfort it causes him is not a feeling he likes to have. Which i generally feel, too, but i just find the design and direction of ALIEN to be extraordinary, so it really transcends the horror elements. It's been playing recently so I flipped to it after Robles gave up the HR last night. It really stands the test of time. I forgot how lighthearted everyone is at the dinner scene just before the alien explodes out of Kane. And the way they were able to portray the crew as just regular working people. So good. And even after you've seen it many times, it's still terrifying. Less so than watching Robles try to navigate a second inning of work, but still terrifying.

Terrific list. And I don't have the words to describe how cool of a thing this is to do with your son. I'm motivated to go through that list and fill in the gaps myself. Also feel like I should go back and re-watch some of them. I remember having watched Double Indemnity and Vertigo but remember almost nothing about the films. Has he seen Gone With the Wind? Or was it one of those you thought he didn't like? It may be a bit played out but is a must for anyone interested in classic cinema.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It appears that it's not just the costume that makes Gal Gadot look so good: It's not just the costume, but it doesn't hurt.

I feel like I should disclose that I'm mainly participating in this discussion so I can come back and look at the GG picture again.

Vic Sage wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Joel Schumacher has recently openly apologized for Batman Forever, including the nipple pouches. Yeah, it stunk, but I didn't find it particularly worse than the other three movies from that serial. And your inability to discern any qualitative difference between BATMAN FOREVER and BATMAN (89), or even BATMAN RETURNS, is why you are the lone voice of dissent in this WONDER WOMAN lovefest. What's the third movie that I'm missing? I wonder if I watched the third one. I liked Batman '89 a lot. Batman Returns was a big step back, but still better than Batman Forever. At least BR had Michelle Pfeiffer.

That picture of Gal Gadot is even more stunning than the first. And the first was pretty stunning.

Edgy MD wrote: Also, the stilted accents of the denizens of Paradise Island made for unintentional hilarity. Loved the accents. I get why it doesn't work for everyone, but I thought it added a lot to the characters. Was it done because Gal speaks with an accent and everyone had to match? Was wondering about that. If you're going to nitpick, you could go the route of "Why do the Germans speak to each other in broken English rather than their native German?" But why would you during such a great ride.

Vic Sage wrote: Its love story was touching, its humor was good enough to keep it from being too somber (unlike most DC movies), and its action was brilliantly executed. Please, sir, may i have some... more? The love story on many levels. Between the Queen and Diana, between the Queen and Robin Wright's character, between WW and Chris Pine, between WW and humanity, and even the camraderie between Chris Pine and his band of misfits. The story had so much heart.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: It's just too bad that the actress playing Wonder Woman was so damn unattractive. I almost feel bad mentioning it because the movie is so much more than just a hot girl running around in a superhero costume, but wow. Absolutely stunning. I feel like the word "beautiful" applies to very few actresses today, but definitely is appropriate here.

Anyone see this yet? Wow. Terrific.

Frayed Knot wrote: On the subject of his ranking, I'm not trying to pull a Woody Allen here and claim that 90% of life is just showing up, but the idea of marking down Loney because you think that others who weren't actually on the team would have done better if they were isn't exactly the idea of this thing. These other maybe/possible names might have tallied more than 26 XBHs if given 300+ ABs but they weren't and so taking it out on Loney based on that reasoning is silly. And while I certainly have no issue if he's slotted behind guys like Flores and Kelly Johnson, I'm just having a heard time seeing the logic in him either off lists entirely or at the very bottom in back of likes of Ty Kelly and Brandon Nimmo. Well, for me it was more that even guys that were on the team would have been more effective, but the point is well taken. I looked back at my list. While I don't have Ty Kelly, I ranked Nimmo as the 19th best, which seems kinda silly. And although I do think that the bad defense works against Loney, it's hard to justify ranking Nimmo, and Lagares, and d'Arnaud, and Reynolds and De Aza higher...especially when all of them failed to hit as well as Loney. Yeah, I may have whiffed on Loney. I think I to re-work my list. Is there a deadline to this?

Frayed Knot wrote: - Loney off, or at the very bottom of, several evaluations. As I mentioned elsewhere, no other player was as wildly over the map as Loney - top half of some lists, not listed at all on several others. And while he was certainly a comedown from Duda, he was still the starting 1st baseman for four months and not a bad one (fair to below average maybe, but not terrible). 350 AB guys usually have to be pretty terrible to get left off entirely and it's certainly odd to see him and his 703 OPS behind Ty Kelly and even lower OPS w/just 58 ABs. I was down on Loney, and was considering leaving him out altogether, but he just had so many AB's and he did hit 9 HR's. But in the end those HR's were really all he did (kinda symbolic of the whole offense in 2016). His OPS of .703 from a 1B is terrible. Like Ceetar said, KJ was the better choice there. He had a reputation of being hitter-ish, even if he didn't have a lot of power. That ended up not being the case at all. But the biggest disappointment was his defense. I don't know that I have seen scouting reports be that wrong. Just complete head scratchers at times. Not know what balls to go for. Getting caught way off the bag. He played 1B like a coordinated guy who just converted from another position. I probably am projecting some ill will on him since I wanted him out of the lineup down the stretch run (Play Bruce at 1B, start Conforto). And I realize that's not really his fault, but whatever. Bye Loney.

My list: 30. SYNDERGAARD 29. CESPEDES 28. CABRERA 27. DEGROM 26. COLON 25. WALKER 24. MATZ 23. GRANDERSON 22. REED 21. FAMILIA 20. LUGO 19. GSELLMAN 18. FLORES 17. ROBLES 16. REYES 15. BLEVINS 14. CONFORTO 13. TJ RIVERA 12. R. RIVERA 11. JOHNSON 10. NIMMO 9. LAGARES 8. d'ARNAUD 7. REYNOLDS 6. DE AZA 5. HARVEY 4. DUDA 3. SALAS 2. SMOKER 1. LONEY

I had heard that the story line was a bit muddled and that the battle scenes lack an obvious purpose/goal. There was a lot of planet hopping in the early parts, and if you start thinking too much about the plot some holes start to open up. But, overall, a great movie, at least for me. It has a crew of heroes that you rally around, a fearsome and intimidating enemy, and stands alone on it's own as a compelling story. And like Vic says, it portrayed war. People die, even good guys, and in the end, there is pain even amidst victory. I think it's grittier than the original trilogy, and even more so than the Force Awakens. The prequel trilogy is a joke. A cartoon. And not even worth comparing to this.

Edgy MD wrote: How much of a downer is that? Han, after all the character growth he supposedly went through, is hanging on as a septuagenarian smuggler? And Chewie is happy to be along for the same going-nowhere ride decades in, still looking for that one big score that can really save their necks? Without even their cool ship to brag about. Well, when you swear a life-debt and all, sometimes your guy makes bad decisions. I'm sure Chewie made his feelings clear. He did as much when Han initially abandoned the attack on the first Death Star. I don't think Han went back to being who he was in ANH (answering ESS, not Edgy). He originally smuggled to find fortune. He's now smuggling to escape pain. Like I said before, taking our proud hero who was a general at the end of Episode 6, and bringing him back not as a dignified leader, but as a septuagenarian smuggler was a risk. In my opinion. But Vic is right. A lot of this comes down to how much you minded them telling the same story again. And yes, it is almost exactly the same story. If you hated it, it brought down the movie a lot. If you didn't mind it, then you could appreciate the other parts which were, in my opinion, done well. So let's see where they take the story from here. If the main plot of the second movie is repeated attempts to escape the FO with the Falcon's malfunctions being a plot tool, and then capped off by a big reveal of family ties, then I think more will start falling in line with Vic.

I loved it. Saw it twice and loved it even more the second time. I grew up loving Star Wars. And after the prequels, I guess my bar is really low. I was praying it did not suck. And it didn't. Much to my delight. Other than that, I liked: 1. It respected the first three movies. Didn't ruin any of them. 2. Better acting than any other Star Wars movie. 3. Daisy Riddle is a star. Tough, vulnerable, funny, compelling. You can't take her eyes off of her whenever she is on the screen. And it's not just because she's easy on the eyes. Even the way she eats her green meal on Jakku is compelling. If you asked me before the movie, who is worthy of taking over the Falcon, I would have said no one. Never. Impossible. But when she did it, it was seamless. When she called that lightsaber, it made you want to stand up and cheer. 4. Great dynamic between the three new stars (Rey, Po, Finn). 5. The moments between Leia and Han are really touching. All this time, I wondered how they would handle that. Having them be estranged was a huge risk, but it worked out well. When they are standing there soaking in what the other looks like after all these years, the audience is feeling it too. Sure, there were parts I didn't like. The similarities to the first movie, obviously. (I like how they were like "It's no just like blowing up the Death Star. It's at least THREE TIMES BIGGER!") StarKiller base wasn't as significant in the story line as the Death Star was in the first, so it blowing up didn't feel as monumental. (so, yes, even when they copied, they didn't do it as well) And I am still not sold about Han Solo dying. It kinda seemed like the easy way to give the movie and the new villain some depth. But we'll see how they play this out.

I think I numbered mine backwards. 1. deGrom 2. Harvey 3. Granderson 4. Murphy 5. Familia 6. Duda 7. Cespedes 8. Syndergaard 9. Colon 10. Conforto 11. Flores 12. Niese 13. d'Arnaud 14. Wright 15. Tejada 16. Johnson 17. Uribe 18. Matz 19. Clippard 20. Lagares 21. Cuddyer 22. Plawecki 23. Robles 24. Reed 25. Gilmartin 26. C. Torres 27. Verrett 28. Gee 29. Nieuwenhuis 30. Goeddel

Maybe we create another thread, with spoilers, for folks who have seen the movie and want to discuss?

I've managed to stay strong. Only a few more weeks to go. I am hoping I can be completely in the dark about plot etc. when I watch the movie. Just bought tickets for that Sunday.

I seem to be having issues with the embed code for this video. Can someone smarter help me? http://geekologie.com/2014/05/wife-gets-husband-millennium-falcon-for.php

[youtube:2gf7ijvs][/youtube:2gf7ijvs]

I thought wicked stepmom was kinda hot.

What's with the killing of the moms? My wife and I caught this on TV one night and thought "Oh maybe we should get this for the boy." Quickly nixed it after the violent death of Mama Dino.

"Cookie Robots, not Boogie Robots. Why are you so old?"