Vic Sage

While watching, I also wondered about why they tried to escape from under the falling ship by moving straight instead of sideways. to be sure, its not the only or first film in which this happens. But it drives me crazy whenever i see it. "MAKE A RIGHT!", i yell. But the characters resist my declamations. Except here, the dragon tattoo girl actually DOES roll to the right and out of the path of the falling ship, so clearly its a concept that exists in their universe, which makes Ms. Theron's decision to cling to parallelism even more inexplicable.

for an earlier discussion of Ridley's work, including discussion of a "planned Alien prequel", go here: http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=7590

if you didn't like it that much, why'd you give it an "8"?

His recent power surge has moved him up to the middle of the pack based on OPS; his defense is still bottom-of-the-barrel. I hope they use his recent productivity as an opportunity to sell high.

i would appreciate it if Sir Ridley just stopped making movies. This was as big, stupid, and stupifyingly pointless as any movie i've ever seen from him, and that's saying quite a bit. The film's horrific elements are ones he's used before; nothing new or innovative there. The theological/philosophical musings are banal, half-baked inanities. The characters are largely ignored, which is ok, cuz most of the performances suck anyway. Noomi Rapace (so good as the original girl with the dragon tattoo) does the best she can as the "true believer" (believer of what? who knows), but when she starts running all over the place immediately after having emergency stomach surgery, things get just too ridiculous (didn't anybody working on this film realize that surgically severed stomach muscles tend to be a hindrance to locomotion?). Guy Pearce is wasted under a ton of LITTLE BIG MAN age makeup (they could have cast his orthopedist in the role, for all it would've mattered). Charlize Theron is doing entirely too many "evil blonde ice queen" roles. And Charlize, take a tip from Noomi... when something huge, long and relatively narrow is falling straight down on top of you in a line, don't run straight ahead; just make a left. or a right. either way. And what is the guy from the WIRE doing here, talking about Stephen Stills' accordian? And if you were a scientist who was too scared to stay in the presence of a dead alien, so much so that you and another chicken scientist decided to walk back to the ship without waiting for the others in the party, and then you and your chicken buddy get stuck in the alien underground to wait out a storm, would you really go up to an alien worm/snake/serpent thingy rising up out of alien black goo and go "cootchy coo" while trying to pet it? REALLY? Ridley, your narrative sense was always borderline non-existent, but you've gone completely round the bend, without even visual innovation to distract us. You ain't great, Scott. Go back to commercials for the BBC and leave us the hell alone.

Hairston's platoon differential is substantial and based on an extensive career-long sample size. And, at his age, it ain't going to change. So, I wouldn't start him against RHers, especially when we've got a talented young LHed OFer whose upside is still to be determined sitting on the bench. And Cedeno is a defensive sub, not someone you sit your starting 2bman to play, especially when said 2bman is coming off a 2hr/4rbi game.

well, if you bring back 2 middle infielders while currently carrying 4, yeah, you're gonna have a MI glut. They sent down Valdespin, right? So that still leaves Murphy/Turner at 2b and Tejada/Cedeno at SS, leaving the solid play of Quintanilla on the outside, looking in. Frankly, i'd rather carry him over Murphy at this point, but i don't think that'll happen.

I was a little surprised come 1980 that the Krane wasn't given a long look by some AL team. He was only 35 and he was lefthanded. But there were probably business reasons for Ed to stay in New York and it wasn't like he hadn't put a lot into playing ball already. I doubt his career ended because of his NY ties and resulting unwillingness to relocate. It was more likely because he sucked. He always sucked. and at that point he was old and he sucked. The only team he had any value for was the Mets, as an "original Met" and mascot. And when he had used that up, he was done. It's blasphemy to say so, i know, but there you are.

Lefty Specialist wrote: Not only that-she can kick your ass, and for good measure she can blow up your house in a dozen different ways... be still my heart. oh, and Jewel Staite. She's got a Jewel Staite quality, too.

Kari Wuhrer is too over-the-hill, but Carrie Nation gets to stay? OK! Kari Byron from Mythbusters would love to play. oh my. She's got that Claire Danes / Alyson Hannigan [on edit: and Jewel Staite] Irish girl-next-door thing going on. I'm in love.

the Mets do have a pretty good RH power bat on the bench... it's just that he's busy starting in LF these days. There is no reason we should be carrying both Q and Cedeno, whose skill sets are almost identical. One needs to go in exchange for a bat.

G-Fafif wrote: Extending the All-Time Team into the All-Time Roster. you missed Wayne Garrett for the bench.

I had conflated in my memory the accident that cut off the tips of his fingers with the boating accident; i was surprised to read and be reminded that they were in fact separate incidents. Memory is such an odd creature, squirming in the shadowy recesses of your mind.

gosh darn it to heck... 2 shellackins' and our walkin' papers. Not the way a cinderelly team is so supposed to be treated!

This is pretty close to the results of our own exercises on this topic, no? Yeah for Cleon over the Little Rock **********.

Facing ten Yanqui batters over the weekend and retiring four of them certainly didn't help his cause. that would make him the ace of our pen.

Boomer Bay Bashes Hellickson!

That Terry has come to realize he has no reliable relievers so he might as well mix and match is fine. But I'll believe things are changing when a manager finally hands the ball to his best reliever in a late-inning high leverage situation that isn't defined by whether its a save situation or not.

Vic Sage wrote: what do we think is the cause of Murphy's loss of pop... is it: * An undisclosed injury? * A different offensive approach? * A lack of focus due to defensive position change? * A random statistical anomaly? * He's off the`roids? * Other?__________________

what do we think is the cause of Murphy's loss of pop... is it: * An undisclosed injury? * A different offensive approach? * A lack of focus due to defensive position change? * A random statistical anomaly? * He's off the`roids? * Other?__________________

Regardless of expectations (which are entirely subjective), a 2bman with a 91 OPS+ and below average defense is not a player that a team (or its fanbase) should be happy, or even satisfied, with. The only regular 2bmen in the NL with a lower OPS than Murphy's current .684 is Galvis (.617) who is only playing in Philly because of Utley's injury, and Weeks (.598), who is having a disastrous year in Milwaukee, but who was a 1st round pick (#2 overall), and who, after showing early promise, had a breakout year in 2010, and a decent 2011, buying himself more time to fail this year. Unless Muffy starts showing some pop -- and soon! -- i'd say he's utterly replaceable. Until then, he's showing me that he is what i always thought he was -- a useful super-sub, out of position as a starter.

Terry said something sensible in today's DNews. When being asked about the bullpen, he made it clear that the only person who has a role is Francisco, and everybody else's role "is to get the guy out standing in the batter's box". Here here!... Except the Francisco thing, but you gotta start somewhere.

I wrote about this some yesterday. http://www.ceetar.com/optimisticmetsfan/2012/06/12/run-differential-and-the-mets/ The Mets are now +10 swapping Acosta for a 2011 version of Acosta. 53:39 over the last 11 games has them at what should be a .637 winning percentage, or 7-4 when they're actually 5-6. swapping out Acosta (which I do to make the point that Acosta will not continue giving up runs at the rate that he did by virtue of either improving or not being here) gives the Mets a Pythagorean record of 32-30 which is actually only one game worse than the 33-29 they're at. but you don't get to swap him out for a mythical Acosta from the past; you get to swap him out for the Schwinden (12.86 era) and Elvin Ramirez (10.80 era) that replaced him. There's always a guy at the back of the pen who sucks, on every team with a negative run differential. that doesn't mean much to me.

dems my boys, baby! go [crossout:k9hwav9v]Patriots[/crossout:k9hwav9v]... damn... SEAWOLVES!

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: We completely suck and deserved to lose. this