Vic Sage

maybe the fish HR sculpture has them freaked out.

"never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel". Even when a reviewer is wrong, or wrong-headed, nobody ever looks good arguing with them, especially if they are personally involved in the thing being critiqued. Even if folks don't like the critic, or even generally agree that the critic is wrong in this case, you just end up looking petty, self-interested, vain, etc. It's a no-win scenario.

i understand the roster problem (though you mentioned some obvious workarounds), and if Cedeno's return is imminent, it probably doesn't matter much. I just think there is no good BASEBALL reason for using guys like Turner or Valdespin at SS, even short term, when there is a way to get an experienced SS like Quints onto the active roster without losing anybody (e.g., Beato to 60day dl), and if Cedeno isn't really ready to come back just yet, they should get Quints up as soon as possible.

well, it all made sense in my head.

who did i used to say that about? CF? 13? Somebody... i forget. God, i've been on this board a long time.

Quintanilla was a 1st round pick by Oakland, who has had a very good minor league career as a SS. He has not been productive in various opportunities with the Rockies, but at 31, having another good AAA season, seems absolutely the person best suited to fill the slot if Rube goes on the DL. I'm not sanguine about using Valdespin there, with his much more limited experience at the position and his long-term potential at other positions. I don't think there is much doubt that Quints is a steadier fielder, and he's even put up a better career OPS in the minors, and while it's entirely possible that Quints may ultimately prove to be no more than a AAAA-type player, I don't get the rationale for Valdy being anointed the likely replacement, since he's never proven anything.

yes, its easier to believe that this is somehow juice-related (in the absence of any evidence that it was injury-related), then for fans and media to accept, even for a moment, that random shit happens in baseball, like the rest of our existence, and that in any given sampling of outcomes, there is a range of random occurrences that are simply inexplicable. People HATE having to deal with a random universe that is related to, you know, mathematics. That's why we invented religion in the first place. We are hardwired for pattern recognition, and if there is no pattern, we invent one.

if Scarlett Johannsen's Black Widow was any hotter, she'd just burst into flames, like a distaff Johnny Storm. The movie takes a while to get going, but once it does, it doesn't stop. It builds its momentum by allowing each character to develop over the first hour, as you come to see them as individuals with their own motivations, and then the bumpy coming together is more believable. Its got a kind of wonderful sense of humor, without losing the dignity with which it treats the genre and the characters. It references the comics and the prior movies without getting lost in festishistic detail. It shorthands their backstories, yet somehow doesn't give them short shrift. It finds its iconic moments, yet develops a fresh take on the characters and allows them to grow. And then it lets it all fly over the last half-hour, delivering straight action movie thrills. It even sets up a sequel without feeling that it cheated, or is somehow incomplete.

go climb a tree. a big one. with loose root structure and rotting limbs, and a hornet's nest, and a pissed off mountain lion.

i've accepted Joss Whedon as my personal savior.

yes, it would make a great a video game, i suppose. Just not a movie with enough characterization for me to give a shit. The only way an AVENGERS movie could even work is that they've made 5 movies already, over a 4 year period, just to establish these few characters sufficiently, so the characterizations can be shorthanded in the screen time they'll each have to share in a single story. Now just stick the rest of the marvel universe into one movie, all fighting each other, with none of the additional characters having been established, and you have... yes, a video game. And i use the term pejoratively.

no it wasn't and no it wouldn't.

"Conan, what is best in life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women." conan the musical:

Ahnold's Oeuvre: Hercules in New York (1969) - Ahnold's debut is one of the worst films ever made! Stay Hungry (1976) - He redeems himself in this, a 70s art film of sorts directed by Bob Rafelson, with Jeff Bridges and Sally Field. He got positive reviews that enabled him to launch an acting career. Pumping Iron (1977) - lauded documentary on weighlifting; Ahnold confirms his star potential. Conan the Barbarian (1982) - Hollywood's resident Zen Fascist John Milius directed and co-authored (with Oliver Stone) Ahnold's iconic launch into international super-stardom; the film launched the "sword & sorcery" sub-genre. Conan the Destroyer (1984) - this more comical sequel nearly buried the genre. The Terminator (1984) - from anti-hero to outright villain, Ahnold as a murderous robot was type-casting in this brilliant SF actioner from James Cameron. Red Sonja (1985) - A supporting role in a terrible S&S Conan spinoff. Commando (1985) - surprisingly solid contemporary actioner; Ahnold is a retired black ops guy going in and destroying a dictator's regime to save his daughter. Raw Deal (1986) - a lesser actioner; Ahnold as a sheriff going undercover for the FBI. Predator (1987) - Best since TERMINATOR; Ahnold vs a sport-killing Alien in the jungle. The Running Man (1987) - Disappointing dystopian SF with Ahnold as wrongly convicted man trying to survive death by "TV execution gauntlet". He's not convincing as an "everyman". Red Heat (1988) - Buddy cop movie with Jim Belushi, with filmmaker Walter Hill already on a career slide. Need i go on? Twins (1988) - After much success as action hero, Ahnold goes the comedy route with Danny Devito, directed by Ivan Reitman. A hit, but pretty lame. Total Recall (1990) - Now THIS is more like it; edgy filmmaker Paul Verhoeven adapts a classic Phillip K. Dick short story with Ahnold kicking ass on Mars. Kindergarten Cop (1990) - another stupid comedy with Ivan Reitman ("It's not a toomah") Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) - Ahnold is back, this time as the good robot, in Cameron's terrific sequel. Last Action Hero (1993) - Ahnold attempts to spoof his action hero persona in a action/fantasy/comedy mashup of ideas that doesn't even work the slightest little bit. True Lies (1994) - Cameron is back in this fun, sexy actioner with Ahnold as a superspy married to Jamie Lee Curtis. Junior (1994) - Ahnold's "trilogy of terror" concludes with this 3rd Reitman comedy, again with DeVito. Eraser (1996) - ties with RAW DEAL as the worst of his contemporary cop action movies. Jingle All the Way (1996) - family holiday comedy too painful to endure. Batman & Robin (1997) - Ahnold plays Mr. Freeze as a comical villain in the worst BATMAN film since the 1940s serials. End of Days (1999) - Ahnold vs Satan at the end of the millenium. Horror/action from Peter Hyams is at least trying for something, despite falling woefully short. Ahnold dies for the only time (other than as a terminator) on film. The 6th Day (2000) - Ahnold vs clones; SF actioner doesn't make a lick of sense and flops accordingly. Collateral Damage (2002) - Ahnold goes after Columbian terrorists who killed his family, continuing the crapfest since TRUE LIES. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003) - Cameron didn't direct this one, but Ahnold came back for Chapter 3, an underrated SF/actioner with high degree of Clair Danes content! Ahnold then became governor of CA, in one of his worst performances to date. But after cameos in Stallone's EXPENDABLES movies, he's now got 3 new movies scheduled for release in the next 1-2 years. So it's just like he said: "I'll be back." top 10 (in order): TERMINATOR CONAN THE BARBARIAN TERMINATOR 2 TOTAL RECALL TERMINATOR 3 TRUE LIES PREDATOR STAY HUNGRY PUMPING IRON COMMANDO

god no.

i guess this is good news, sort of... in an "at least he ain't Schwinden or Batista" kind of way.

yeah, i got lost somewhere in the midst of a mixed and particularly vile and inapt metaphor. I knew i could count on you, though, to jump into the breach... or whatever. sorry, i just can't get that Doug Flynn "dog porno" out of my head.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: ...But the Triangle is a mess because the businesses there built on unimproved land. And those who have moved since this thing started weren't forced to but got pretty sweet offers to set up in nicer dumps in College Point. Agreed, but the city shouldn't then be able to turn around and condemn the property because THEY THEMSELVES failed to ever improve the land. And businesses that get sweet offers and move is how this SHOULD work. they shouldn't be extorted by Sterling, saying "either sell it to me at a low price, or the city will condemn it, pay you the minimum per acre value for this neighborhood, and give it to me for a buck cuz i'm a developer that owns their ass and they just want more tax money for the area anyway."

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I promise to give it up when he stops blowing leads. blow this. He's been our best SP for the last 2+ seasons, and has had exactly 1 bad outing this year (out of 5 starts),, beating division rivals ATL, PHI and MIA so far. Whatever your problem is with Mr. Dickey, he ain't the problem. so please remove your cock from his ass and find a new horse to ride in on. or something.

can such laws trump the Supreme Court decision? no, but the SC has given wide latitude to the states to decide for themselves what a valid "public use" is, and some states have taken them up on it by limiting ED. are those laws "toothless"? We'll see, but in theory no more than any other state laws not otherwise in conflict with federal law.

metsguyinmichigan wrote: I have no problem with replacing the Iron Triangle as long as they are properly compensated. The city as a whole benefits greatly by having that area cleaned up. And I think the mall is step 1, with other things to follow. yeah, and i have no problem with replacing your home with a cool roller coaster. Ya know it ain't hard to get along with SOMEbody else's troubles, they don't make ya lose any sleep at night, just as long as fate is out there, busting somebody else's bubbles, everything's gonna be alright, and everything is gonna be alright. Yes, the city would probably do better financially, and on that basis, it will probably be upheld legally (that's why a state law is going to be necessary). And i'm sure it's just a coincidence that Sterling will be the major beneficiary of that change, right? And i'm sure that a bunch of small businesses should be ended so that Sterling can pocket those profits, right? You want to characterize these businesses as eyesores conducting illegal activity but that's an accusation unsupported by any particular facts, because, were it true, the police could shut those places down WITHOUT "E.D." so its just rumor and reputation, because its a poorly maintained area... and guess who has poorly maintained the property? NYC, that's who. So they fail to maintain roads, sewers, lighting, and then turn around and condemn it and hand it over to private corp for a mall. And you're COOL WITH THAT because you don't like the way it looks and would prefer a Best Buy and a TGIFriday's?

I have very very little sympathy for the shop owners there amongst the wild dogs and whatever rackets they're running. that's no more relevant than sympathy for nazis is necessary to defend the 1st Amendment. It's about a principle to limit governmental intervention in private rights.

as much as i'd like a nice place to go for a reasonably priced beer and/or decent meal in the CitiField area, before and after games, i don't think i have a "right" to it over the interests of property and business owners currently there. Seizing neighboring property so the Mets can build a mall is an abuse of govtl power. The exercise of "eminent domain" should be a last-ditch strategy for creation of necessary civic works (roads and railways, utilities, public safety), not a first strategy to seize private property and sell it to other private interests (or provide undue leverage to force the sale) to improve shopping options in an area. In addition, extending the principles of "E.D." to such an extent will result in unjust enrichment for businesses with govt'l contacts (i.e., lobbying money) and is a practice highly susceptible to corruption. If this "appropriation" gets approved, i'd support a new state law similar to that passed in other states which have narrowed this power to only such civic works as are absolutely necessary.

god, that looks awful. anyway, back to the AVENGERS. a theater near me is doing a Marvel Movie-thon the day before it opens: the 5 marvel movies that lead up to it, all in one day, for $35 (including the 3-D versions of the last few). So the "canon" consists of IRON MAN (May/2008) - Robert Downey totally owns this excellent adaptation; Jeff Bridges is a second rate villain, but Favreau's direction is slick and surprisingly strong in characterization, and all the updates to to Tony Stark and his origin are faithful in tone and spirit. Paltrow and Terrence Howard are strong in support. *** 1/2 THE INCREDIBLE HULK (June/2008) - Zak Penn scripted this sequel (sort of) to the earlier failed adaptation, this time with the excellent Edward Norton as Bruce (not David) Banner. Not a great movie, but an ok version of the "hulk smash" iteration of the creature, and superior to other incarnations of the character to that point. [note: this is the only one of the films without the Nick Fury coda, featuring Tony Stark instead (on edit: thanks Ben), and Banner is played by a different actor in the AVENGERS movie {mark ruffalo}, so some may not necessarily consider it part of the series] ** 1/2 IRON MAN 2 (May / 2010) - Downey's reprisal is not up to the original. Though Mickey Roarke is an excellent villain, Cheadle makes a much less impressive Rhodey/War Machine than Howard. Scarlett Johanssen, though awful in civvies, makes a great Black Widow. Overall, though, the story is lame and Favreau is more interested in making stuff blow up and so the film doesn't work nearly as well. ** THOR (May / 2011) - Kenneth Branagh brings some Shakespearean style to the Marvel version of the Norse myth. Chris Hemsworth is totally believable as the arrogant warrior humbled by his father; Hopkins as Odin is practically type-casting. But Natalie Portman continues to unimpress and, as a result, most of the stuff on Earth is unconvincing, but Asgard works great. Loki's big mechanical monster at the end is a BIG letdown, and the Warriors 3 are wasted, but overall the film works well enough. [Note: the film introduces Jeremy Renner as HAWKEYE] ** 1/2 CAPTAIN AMERICA (July / 2011) - director Joe Johnston ably mixes an authentic vintage feel with a square-jawed heroism that is knowing and appreciative, without condescension, irony or parody, an approach he previously demonstrated with the under-appreciated ROCKETEER movie. Chris Evans hits all the right notes, and even the abrupt ending, leading in to the upcoming AVENGERS movie didn't diminish the movie *** 1/2

you wanna see a movie about a Russian chick? Try Natasha Romanoff, the Black Widow.