No Country for Old Men - 7.0

No Country for Old Men, the newest Coen brother production, is a throwback to their early filmmaking days, a suspense-filled thriller reminiscent of Blood Simple. It tells the story of a regular guy (Josh Brolin) who finds a bunch of money in a small Texas town (presided over by sheriff Tommy Lee Jones) and then is hunted by a maniacal killer (Javier Bardem) in search of said money. From cinematography to sound to editing, the film is impeccably put together with every single scene and every single shot serving its purpose. The dialogue is also outstanding - realistic, clever, and articulate at times, without being too verbose. And the acting is also superb, with the three leads all turning in fantastic performances. Tommy Lee Jones and Bardem seem to be receiving most of the accolades but Josh Brolin more than held his own in what really was the lead role in the film. Technically, this is close to a perfect movie. So those are the good things...all very important of course but in my opinion No Country suffered because it was almost too polished and well-put together. I admire and appreciate the skill of the Coen brothers but where's the heart? Tommy Lee Jones' character provides some, Josh Brolin's wife a little more, but it just didn't quite do it for me in this completely subjective, unquantifiable area. I guess the best way I could put it is like this: this movie did so well to build so much suspense but I still never found myself really caring what happened to the main characters, which I wouldn't say defeats the purpose of building suspense but perhaps at least dampens it. My other quasi-problem was the ending. Not to spoil too much but lets just say the ending doesn't provide a whole lot of closure. I normally am a fan of open-ended endings (like Pan's Labryinth for example, was the fantasy world real or just her imagination?) but Jeremy made a legitimate point regarding No Country. He argued that the way the Coens ended the movie was a cop-out because they had written themselves into a corner and couldn't think of a way to provide a satisfactory conclusion. I'm not sure I agree with this or not, right now I'm kind of torn. My guess is I probably won't have a strong opinion one way or another until I watch this movie again (and honestly, I could easily see this movie gaining a lot from a 2nd viewing, I'm afraid I may have missed some of the subtleties). Oscar Outlook No Country for Old Men with its rave reviews (96% on rottentomatoes) is obviously a huge Oscar contender. It looks like a good bet to at least get nominations for Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay and Supporting Actor for Bardem. I personally think both Brolin (lead actor) and Tommy Lee Jones (supporting) gave Oscar-worthy performances and will be in the mix for nominations but there will be so much competition out there, it'll be tougher for them to find a spot than Bardem in the flashier role as the crazed killer. Basically, No Country looks like a good bet for nominations in several big categories but the tougher question is, does it have a chance to win any of these? For Best Picture, my thinking is that if both NCFOM and There Will Be Blood are nominated, they will split the vote of those looking for a technically brilliant, superbly acted independent drama and that some other 'bigger' movie will sweep through and take the prize (Atonement? The Kite Runner?). I think that NCFOM has a better shot at director, especially since the overall quality of the film could very well be seen as almost entirely a product of the influence of the Coens. It also has a great shot at supporting actor, it'll be interesting to see how the competition shakes out but it looks like Bardem is currently the front-runner. Adapted screenplay will be a really tough category, with a bunch of the other big overall contenders providing competition (There Will Be Blood, Atonement, The Kite Runner, and American Gangster could be the other four nominees) so it's really hard to say. But a movie like this is definitely more likely to get rewarded for screenplay than picture. Predictions Best Picture Nomination Best Director Win - I'm waffling on this one because I haven't seen many of the other big contenders but I'm thinking the Coens will be only the second ever pair (I think this is right) to share best director (this also happened with West Side Story). Best Supporting Actor Nomination for Bardem - could easily win but I'm guessing (and really it is just a guess) that he won't Best Adapted Screenplay Win - the Coens get two wins, I feel much more confident about this prediction than the directing one.

American Gangster - 7.5

Ridley Scott's latest represents a return to form of sorts, his first really good film since Gladiator, in my opinion. While Blackhawk Down and Matchstick Men were both decent, The Kingdom and A Very Good Year were out and out flops, so it was nice to see such an accomplished filmmaker not disappoint this time around. American Gangster tells the story of Frank Lucas, a savvy 'businessman' who rises to the top of the New York City drug trade in the '70s. Denzel Washington gives an outstanding, Oscar-worthy performance as Lucas, while Russell Crowe is more than capable as his foil, the cop attempting to bring Lucas down. While the two do not interact at all until the last 20 minutes, it is their 'relationship' that is the driving force behind the movie. Scott and the screenwriters take care to not present the story in black and white, with charismatic good cops trying to be bring down the evil bad guys. In fact, they essentially do the reverse, emphasizing the good aspects of Lucas - he is a family man, extremely intelligent, humble, likable, and principled in his own way. On the other hand, Crowe is one of the few honest cops in the whole movie, but he also carries a holier than thou attitude, which is especially off-putting considering he is a womanizer who neglects his ex-wife and son. These well-developed characters, not to mention the outstanding actors portraying them, set up an intriguing dynamic in the film that confuses the viewer as to who they should be 'rooting' for. As such, Denzel's Lucas is one of the better anti-heroes I can remember. This movie also succeeds because of a flawless production that seems to authentically recreate its '70s NY setting (well at least for as far as I can tell). However, though it's quite a good movie, a few problems hold this film back from true greatness. For one, all that detail, layer upon layer, seems to take a little bit away from the main story. For example, Cuba Gooding's character, Nicky Barnes, seems to be haphazardly thrown into the story without a real purpose. Apparently, in real life, Barnes was one of Lucas' biggest rivals in the NY drug trade, but in the film, he seems to just be tossed in there - I actually had no idea he was a rival of Lucas after watching the movie, I thought he worked for him. The few scenes with Joe Louis feel the same way, like they were just put in there so Joe Louis would be in the movie. Partly because of this, the films other weakness, its pacing, suffers. The middle half of this movie was great, riveting stuff, but the exposition and the conclusion both dragged a bit. Even so, I'm really splitting hairs here. While American Gangster wasn't The Godfather or Goodfellas (what is?), like The Departed it's another great throwback gangster movie made by serious filmmakers and actors. Oscar Outlook Since Oscar season is now really heating up and pretty much every new movie I see for the next 4 or 5 months will be an awards contender, I'm going to starting giving my extremely speculative (and relatively uninformed) opinion on what the Oscar chances are for said film. I'll include predictions for nominations and wins that will no doubt make me look like an idiot a few months from now. American Gangster, with its strong opening weekend and warm reception looks like a very good bet for at least Best Picture and Best Actor nominations (for Denzel). If not for Daniel Day-Lewis' apparent powerhouse performance in There Will Be Blood, I would say Denzel was the current frontrunner in the Best Actor race. As it is, it looks like he (and everyone else) is going to be a big underdog against DDL. I will be shocked if this movie isn't nominated for Best Picture, but I'll also be pretty surprised if it wins. With The Departed winning last year, I'm guessing the Academy doesn't go with back to back gangster movies for the big prize. In my opinion, its best chance for a major award is Ridley Scott for director. He's never won an Oscar and could receive a lifetime achievement award of sorts this time around. It helps that he has several snubs that look really bad in hindsight on his resume, including not even getting a nomination for Alien or Blade Runner. It is rare for a director to win without his movie taking Best Picture but it would be fitting in this case since Steven Soderbergh won Best Director in 2000 when Ridley Scott's film Gladiator took Best Picture. One thing that I think will ultimately work against Scott in this area is that two of Scott's biggest competitors could be the Coen brothers (No Country for Old Men) and Sidney Lumet (Before the Devil Knows Your Dead). These, of course, are also revered directors who have also never won Best Director so those voters looking to give out a lifetime achievement award could end up splitting their vote. Ruby Dee is also getting hyped for a Best Supporting Actress nomination but she had such a minor role, I'm guessing she ends up getting left out. Russell Crowe could conceivably end up with a supporting nod also (though he could be considered a lead) but I'm guessing he won't. A screenplay nomination is likely (I think it'll be up for adapted though I'm not positive). Predictions Best Picture nomination Best Actor nomination for Denzel Best Director nomination for Scott (though I think he has a good chance, I don't think he'll win) Best Adapted Screenplay nomination

USA 1, South Africa 0

Here are some player ratings from today's underwhelming friendly. Since most of our players were pretty bad, I'm also going to include what I think/hope their long-term projection for involvement with the national team is (ie will they around for the World Cup in 2010). Starters: Tim Howard - 7.0 - made one good save, had nothing else to do. Projection - Clearly our #1. Steve Cherundolo - 7.5 - man of the match, solid defensively and got forward to score a nice goal (surprisingly strong finish from a fullback). It was telling that South Africa's winger on Cherundolo's side, Delron Buckley (a very capable player who gets regular playing time with Borussia Dortmund) had pretty much no impact on the game whatsoever. Projection - obviously locked in as our starting right back going forward. Carlos Bocanegra - 7.0 - looked good, it was telling that the defense looked exponentially shakier in the 2nd half after Boca and Cherundolo had been subbed out. I stand by my theory that Boca is good against the weaker teams but mainly due to lack of speed will struggle against the best teams (more evidence of this when he gave away a PK against Liverpool a few weeks ago, though Fulham did hold Liverpool scoreless for 80 minutes at Anfield, so maybe it isn't the greatest example). Projection - right now he is our defensive anchor and clearly has a spot in the starting lineup for any match that means anything. Oguchi Onyewu - 6.0 - he was fine, pretty much same old - big, intimidating presence in the middle of the defense but overly physical at times. Projection - I like him and think he steps up when challenged by a good center forward but it'll be interesting to see if he maintains his starting spot throughout qualifying and heading up to the next World Cup. If Cory Gibbs ever gets healthy, he could challenge for it, but other than that, I don't think there are too many legit threats on the horizon. Heath Pearce - 4.0 - I thought he played well against Brazil but was thoroughly underwhelmed today. He was so so defensively (though Pienaar coming down his wing is a pretty tough matchup) and gave away possession by just booting the ball forward countless times. Can see how he lost his spot for Hansa Rostock, who I think are actually converting him to a winger right now. Projection - him being made a winger by his club is not good nows for his future since left back is probably our most wide open starting position whereas we've got enough depth on the wings to send arguably our best one up top to play forward (Dempsey). My guess is he'll be in and out of the lineup throughout qualifying but at best will be a backup by the time the World Cup rolls around. Benny Feilhaber - 4.0 - also a pretty pedestrian performance from Benny. Looked out of sync and didn't really do anything of note. Projection - I do not like him playing on the wing, he is not dynamic at all. I thought he was at his best during the Gold Cup playing in the center of the midfield and breaking down the opposing defense with his passing. He's a good passer and a good enough ball-winner, he belongs in the middle imo, though we do have a glut of central midfielders right now, especially with Michael Bradley's seemingly guaranteed place in the lineup. Not getting much playing time for Derby County, one of the worst Premiership sides ever, is not a good sign for Feilhaber's future. I still think he'll be in the picture for WC10 but he doesn't look like a sure thing to be in the first 11 any longer. DaMarcus Beasley - 3.0 - lower grade for him than either Pearce or Feilhaber because I expect more. He was pretty garbage though he did do some decent defensive work. He actually could've easily had a goal but he didn't finish the one chance he had on the long through ball (sent by Dempsey I believe) and Adu never looked up when he hit it horribly wide instead of squaring it to Beasley for the easy goal. Projection - obviously a starter. Maurice Edu - 7.0 - after a shaky start he played quite well tonight. He was an aggressive ball-winner in the midfield and while his distribution was shaky at times, it wasn't hopeless either. He also made a very nice play to set up the goal, carrying the ball forward well before hitting a perfectly placed (and just as importantly, timed) through ball to Cherundolo. Projection - for the immediate future, I would still certainly place him behind Mastroeni as the starting holding midfielder. But Mastro is 31 and Edu is 21, so I think there's a legitimate chance that Edu could be one of our starting central midfielders by 2010. He's not quite the defensive, ball-winning dynamo that Mastro is but looks to have more potential offensively (it should also be noted that with a Bradley/Edu partnership in the midfield, it isn't as set who is the attacking midfielder and who is the defensive one as it is with say Mastro and Donovan). While this might be wishful thinking, Edu looks like he has a chance to develop into a true all-purpose midfielder in the mold of Patrick Vieira or Michael Essien. If he's ever half as good as either of those guys, I'll be thrilled. Michael Bradley - 3.0 - it seems I change my opinion of Bradley every time I watch him play. I thought he was excellent in the last few games but today I thought he was pretty horrible. In particular, he showed absolutely no creativity when he had possession of the ball - I would guess he didn't even look upfield at least half the time he received the ball, instead opting to either play it square or backwards (with the next player inevitably, hopelessly, launching it long). This was even worse because South Africa wasn't exactly applying tons of pressure in the midfield so several times, he had time and room to turn and try to make a more positive play. The thing is, I'm not sure if this is Bradley or simply the way he is told to play by daddy. I've never actually seen a Heerenveen game but right now they're sitting at 4th in the Dutch league and Bradley has scored 5 goals in 13 matches, so it seems he gets forward while playing for his club. Of all the US players, Bradley is the one who confuses me most. Projection - not taking into consideration that his dad is the coach, even if he's been somewhat inconsistent, Bradley has shown a lot playing for the US this year, and he's still only 20. Like Edu, he seems to have the tools to develop into an all-purpose midfielder. A few months ago it looked like it'd be a tandem of Bradley and Feilhaber going forward but now it looks like Bradley and Edu could be the future. It's exciting because if they keep playing together, develop chemistry over the next 3 years while they also develop as players (in particular offensively), they could be a really good pair by 2010. I would still like to see more Ricardo Clark (I don't follow MLS at all but I did see he received a 9 game suspension for a violent foul, which is discouraging, but from what I've seen of him with the national team, he could have a future) and with Bradley, Edu, Feilhaber, and Clark (ages 20, 21, 22, and 24), if they all continue to develop, we should be set at this position for the foreseeable future. Freddy Adu - 5.0 - I won't be too harsh on Adu since the service into him sucked ass for the most part. He had a couple nice touches and runs but was too selfish when he was through on goal (and simply made a poor attempt at a finish) and as Jeremy pointed out to me earlier today was basically the opposite of Bradley. Whereas Bradley was always playing the ball backwards, Adu was too aggressive, always looking to make the killer pass and in the process needlessly gave away possession (mostly with through balls to the goalie) several times. While this is far from the optimal way to play the game, there is something to be said for this over Bradley's approach. I mean, if Adu plays 10 hopeful balls forward and 9 roll right to the keeper but just 1 of them sets up a goal, he's done well. Unfortunately, none of his balls even set up a chance on goal today. Projection - he seems to finally (I say finally partly in jest because the dude is still only 18) be growing as a player and fulfilling some of his potential. He has done well at Benfica recently, scoring several goals in their league cup (where they rest first team players and let the younger guys play) and even breaking into the first team as an often used late sub (coming on in champions league matches and scoring a late winner in a league game). It really seems like, after a few years of stagnation, Adu is growing into a potential star, and if his growth continues, he has a great shot to be heavily involved in the WC qualifying and in South Africa '10. What I'm curious is where he'll end up playing. Forward, winger, or central midfield/withdrawn forward are the three options I see. I would say withdrawn forward but Landon has that position locked down for the US, so it'll be interesting to see where Adu ends up. Clint Dempsey - 5.5 - did next to nothing as a 'striker' (though he did almost score a true goal scorer's goal when he snuck in and got a touch on Mokoena's header back to his keeper) but looked good when dropped back into the midfield and gained possession (like when he sent a great through ball to Adu). Not Clint's best day but he wasn't horrible either. Projection - obviously will be involved in one way or another but the question is at what position? He's definitely best in the midfield but we need forwards right now. Hopefully, we can find a real solution to our striker problem because playing Dempsey as a forward not only gives us a relatively ineffective striker but also deprives us of our most dangerous midfielder (outside of Donovan I guess). Subs: Jon Spector - 6.0 - of the subs, he looked the best defensively. Did give away possession on occasion but who didn't in the 2nd half? Our best 'possession' was probably stringing together 3 consecutive passes before 'passing' it long to South Africa's keeper. Projection - he's young (21) and gets some playing time at a competitive club (West Ham). The thing is, he's stuck behind Cherundolo at right back, so if he becomes a regular over the next 3 years, it'll have to be at another position. He is versatile so he would be a valuable bench player on a World Cup roster (I think he could play in the center of the defense and even played as a defensive midfielder his last game for West Ham) but I doubt he'll be a starter unless he gets a serious look at left back. Brad Guzan - 6.0 - I paid exponentially more attention to him when the announcers mentioned Arsenal had scouts watching him (I guess they want someone else around besides Almunia and Fabianski with Lehmann possibly leaving). While he didn't have a whole lot to do, he looked solid back there and was noticeably vocal, which is a good trait in a keeper. Huge minus in my eyes - he was annoying the fuck out of me with his time wasting (for christ's sake, it's a goddamn friendly!!! just punt the ball and get on with the game). How shocking that he plays for the Mexican MLS team (Chivas USA). Projection - looks to have a good chance at our #2 keeper spot. Keller should be out of the picture by 2010, so now it looks like it's between Guzan and Hahnemann, and I must say Hahnemann has never impressed me a whole lot. Dan Califf - 2.0 - he was pretty dreadful, probably the worst player in what was a godawful 2nd half performance. Projection - hopefully we won't ever have to rely on him in an important game. Jonathan Bornstein - no rating - only played the last 5 minutes so no rating. Projection - figures to have the inside track at left back after solid performances over the summer unless something has changed that I'm not aware of (poor play in MLS? Like I said, I don't follow it). Sacha Kljestan - 2.0 - he was pretty damn bad too, several bad touches, no positive influence that I recall. Projection - don't know enough about him to say. He is only 22 so that's a positive. Jozy Altidore - no rating - no rating because he had like 1 touch on the ball. He did win several headers (though he didn't really direct them well and there was really no one up top to direct them to even if he was more precise) and made one good run that was overlooked by Edu I believe. Projection - rumors that Real Madrid are interested in him as a long-term replacement for Ruud van Nistelrooy. It would be pretty awesome if they did bring him in in January, especially if he got even a little bit of playing time (substitute appearance here, Copa Del Rey start there). If RVN taught him some of his goal-poaching tricks, it'd be all the better. I hope from here on out, unless it's because he's heavily involved in club duty (whether it be at Real or some other European club that grabs him in the winter transfer window), he's involved in every friendly just to incorporate him into the national team picture. I don't want to get too optimistic but he could be the answer to our striker problem. Other players who I figure could be important leading up to the next World Cup: Landon Donovan - wish he'd move to Europe but whatever, he's still our best player. Danny Szetela - another promising youngster who made his first appearance for Racing this past week in the Copa Del Rey. Eddie Johnson - will be interesting to see if he ends up moving to Europe in the next month. Supposedly, there's a good chance he will. I still haven't given up on him as a potential starting forward. Cory Gibbs - I've always really liked him. Mobile, good speed, but he hasn't played in forever. If he returns to what he was before injury, he at the worst, is great depth behind Bocanegra and Onyewu, and could possibly challenge for a starting spot. But at this point, that seems like a long shot. Marvell Wynne - I have absolutely no idea how he did for Toronto FC in the MLS this past season (other than that he got a lot of playing time) but I've had my eye on him since he looked great in the U17 world cup 4 or 5 years ago. Maybe the answer at left back? I really need to watch more MLS... Bobby Convey - I've always been a big fan... if he gets healthy, he should challenge for a starting wing spot and if nothing else, he'll be a great sub to use if we need more offense. While there are other old standbys who could have a role to play like Twellman, Ching, Ralston, Conrad, and (god I hope not) Josh Woolf, I'm not nearly as excited about any of them as the guys above. Anyways, while the performance today was poor, the future for the US looks bright. Howard, Bocanegra, Cherundolo, Onyewu, Dempsey, Donovan, and Beasley all are solid players in their prime while guys like Bradley, Edu, Johnson, Feilhaber, and Convey are young and should keep improving. What's really exciting are the Adus, Altidores, Wynees, and Szetelas, who haven't done anything yet for the national team but could have a big impact over the next 3 years. We should have absolutely no trouble qualifying (though if this group of players was in Europe, South America, or Africa, that would be another story entirely) and if given a non-impossible draw (like last World Cup), we should at least make the 2nd round. I also think we could easily better our performance from South Korea '02, though probably not our quarterfinal result (people forget now, but a lot of things fell our way in that cup, getting a weak host nation as our seed, Portugal overlooking us 1st game, losing to Poland but still advancing, drawing Mexico instead of Italy in the 2nd round). We're moving in the right direction, if Altidore and Adu can provide that attacking cutting edge we've never had, we could reach a new level... On a side note, unfortunately, Mexico's prospects are looking better than ever as well. They have numerous players in the Champions League right now (though they are concentrated at only a few clubs, PSV, Stuttgart, and Barcelona) and have a potential superstar striking combo with Giovanni dos Santos (only 18 and getting playing time this year at Barcelona) and Carlos Vela (also 18, playing on loan at Osasuna right now but probably on his way back to Arsenal at some point). We've been dominating them in recent years but it looks like we'll have to really step up to continue it.

UNC-Davidson

Jeremy's post about the UNC-Davidson game inspired me to write out some thoughts from yesterday's UNC game in Charlotte. While we certainly didn't play great, Davidson is definitely a quality team (probably 2nd or 3rd best out of conference team we'll play this year behind Louisville and maybe UK or Ohio St) and we essentially played the 1st half with no contribution from our 2nd best player (Tywon) and the 2nd half with no contribution from our best player (Tyler). Those 2 will certainly play way better than they did last night almost every game (I'd be willing to bet this will be one of Ty's 2 or 3 worst games of the season, if not his worst) and that'll make a big difference. I also expect more from Deon, though not nearly as much as some others. Lasting things to worry about from this game imo: 1. getting the ball into the post - we couldn't do it consistently against a solid team and when we did, both Tyler and Deon were terrible passing out of the double team. One thing I noticed last year and again last night is that QT is by far our best player at feeding the post and Danny is unbelievably bad at it. 2. interior/help defense - Brandan was not a great defender but he was a shotblocker, something we do not have right now. Tyler and Deon are completely worthless in this area (Tyler in particular doesn't even challenge shots because he's worried about getting into foul trouble), so when our perimeter defenders got beat, it was an easy layup more often than not. Hopefully Danny and Stepheson can help with this throughout the year and that Deon is better at it than he looked last night (he did lead that under-19 USA team in blocks over the summer...the performance that it seems has led to much of the hype surrounding him as a capable replacement for Brandan). Surprisingly Encouraging things: 1. Danny at the 4 - if Deon doesn't live up to the hype, we'll see a lot of this throughout the year. Assuming we're not playing a team with 2 legit post scorers (and I can't imagine we'll play a whole lot of teams that have these), Danny is a serviceable rebounder/defender as a 4 (and an upgrade as a help defender over Deon) and adds a lot by giving us another 3 point shooter (think Jawad/Marvin playing the 4 in '05) and a great free throw shooter at the end of games. He's going to be very important this year. 2. Wayne, Wayne, Wayne - best game he's ever played. Made big shots at the end, scored in a lot of different ways. His game reminds me of Joe Forte, good enough 3 point shooter, great pull-up game and willing to go all the way to the basket. People forgot how good Forte was, but if Wayne can be as good this year as Forte was his freshmen year (soph year, Forte averaged like 22 ppg), we have a great shot at the championship. 3. QT/Bobby - QT was solid as the backup point and Bobby looked healthy and confident playing the 2 (he did a good job defending Curry, as did Marcus) and also looked better at the point than he did last year. Playing Bobby at the 2 is an extremely smart move by Roy imo and sets up a great rotation with set roles for everyone (huge contrast from last year). Ty, Wayne, Marcus, Deon, Tyler starting...QT is the backup point, Bobby is the backup 2/3rd point, Danny will jump around between 3 and 4, Alex is the 3rd true big man. 4. We won a legitimately close game that could have gone either way in the final 2 minutes. We lost these more than we won them last season... I actually went to the game in Charlotte and it was a good time. The Bobcats arena is very nice and the atmosphere was quite good with very impressive support for Davidson in about half the lower level for their 'home game' and the rest being UNC fans. Though we didn't play especially well, I was thrilled to get out of there with a win. I'll be very interested to see how Davidson does against Duke, State, and UCLA to see just how quality a win this was.

Marathon Pictures

Marathon pics here.

Marathon

So Jeremy and I did the Outer Banks marathon today, with my Dad, Alexa, and Jon all doing a half. I ended up finishing the full in 3:53. 3:45 would've been nice but whatever, at about mile 20 I stopped caring about my time and just wanted to finish. At this point, I'm just really happy it's over with...

iPhone

So I got an iPhone for my birthday - so far, so good. It's pretty incredible - the network is slow when there's no wifi but it's still usable... and that's pretty much my comprehensive list of 'complaints' at this point. The best thing is, I'm pretty sure there's a bunch of cool features I haven't figured out how to use yet.

Obama

So Jeremy's post about the Obama rally more or less covers my feelings on it. While Obama is certainly inexperienced and probably naive, he is an inspiring candidate who seems to have real moral convictions. Also, I think his inexperience could easily be offset by him surrounding himself with intelligent advisors (ala Bill Clinton), who unlike the current incumbent in the oval office, will be willing to listen to both sides of an argument and not see everything as black and white. While I do agree with Jeremy that it would be nice to hear more specific policy suggestions, at this point, I would not a view a vote for Obama as voting against the other guy (like I do my vote for John Kerry), instead I would actually be excited to support a presidential candidate. And for the record, the same holds true in my eyes for John Edwards, who I think I might actually prefer a little bit to Obama. But either one (or especially an Obama/Edwards ticket or vice versa) would be a huge step in the right direction for America.

Transformers - 6.0

Transformers is pretty typical of the Michael Bay, summer blockbuster, watch everything blow-up genre - it was shockingly directed by who else but the one and only Michael Bay. While much of it is pretty standard fare, including bad acting, nonsensical plot transitions, and terrible dialogue, I did find Transformers more entertaining than many of the other blockbusters that were released this summer like Spiderman 3, Die Hard 4, and Pirates 3 because it didn't have that same been there, done that feel to it. In fact, I was extremely impressed by the special effects in Transformers (and this was watching it on DVD not in the theater mind you) as the actual transformers rarely seemed clunky or out of place while interacting with humans. I was pretty skeptical that a transformer movie could work on this level, so well done special effect mavens. Bottom line, in what was an extremely weak summer season, Transformers was probably the most entertaining action blockbuster out there besides the new Bourne and Harry Potter movies - not the highest of praise but when it comes to Michael Bay, better than a lot of the other crap put out there status actually places it in a pretty lofty place in his filmography. note - sorry for all the Michael Bay hate, he is what he is and really isn't all that bad. It's just that I read a suggestion that he could do a better job making this new war film called The Few than Michael Mann, which obviously is one of the more ludicrous things every written (or said) - I mean what's next, demanding that Spielberg turn over the reigns of the new Indiana Jones movie to Brett Ratner? Anyways, that's what put me in an even more anti-Michael Bay mood than usual.