The real face of Jesus from History Channel - are we sure?

I am not a theologian. This is not a religious blog. Taking both into account, let's not lose our minds on this.

History Channel presented what Jesus might look like based on the Shroud of Turin. The final image matches up very well with the popular image promoted by the Catholic Church.



But is that accurate?

I don't think so. Jesus was a Jew, specifically a Hebrew. Add to that the general location of Hebrews of that time, and their origins - Egypt and Northern Africa - and the image that is most logical is not an Eurocentric man. His skin would be darker, his hair more curly, and a completely different nose.

In the Bible, as I was taught some 40 years ago by Roman Catholics, Jesus had hair of wool and skin of bronze. The older the Bible you read, the more the description is descriptive of a non-European - possibly and African or Arab. Some of the earliest images of Jesus, from Ancient Rome, depict an image of him with VERY similar features to an African or Black man.

So why is it so important for Jesus to be White? Or depicted so often as a blonde or brown haired, blue eyed, very Anglo White male? In fact why did the image become that?

Chrisitianity was long centered in Italy. It's spread flowed through the Roman Empire, first and predominantly, to Europe. Like most thigs over time, cultures incorporate the past into their own view to better accept them. Not unlike the way that Rome has so many oblisks and other pagan or Egyptian symbolisms incorporated into its artworks.

Thus it makes sense that as Europe grew and Chrisitianity expanded, the image of Jesus morphed. As Western culture came to dominate the world, those same images proliferated. Thus today, some would say not only is Jesus White, so is God. Which is a silly statement, as God would be beyond all of that. In fact, the Bible states (I am paraphrasing here) that Moses could not look unto God, and HE had to take the form of a burning bush just so Moses could see him and live.

The thing that really cemented the image of Jesus as a White man had to be the advent of technology and film. Movies like the 10 Commandments and The Greatest Story Ever Told blazed an image of Egyptians, Middle Easterners, and everyone associated with the Bible as White. Which is a joke. (Not that they weren't good movies)

Elizabeth Taylor looked as much like Cleopatra as Yul Bryner likely looked like Pharoh Rameses or Max Von Syndow looked like Jesus.

So how does the image from the Shroud of Turin look so White according to History Channel? Well the image was based on a program. That program was created by men. Those men grew up in a world of images and movies promoting a White Jesus for millenia. They might not have had an intention to do so, but such lifelong subliminal messages work their way into everything. I mean, from the imprint of a shroud, how is it possible to get a skin tone?

Of course none of us were alive when Jesus was. So I could be wrong. But logic, and several controversial passages from older Bibles, states that a darker skinned, far more curly haired, ethnically far from European Jesus is the most honest depiction.


**Please check out Alchemy at World of VASS and World of Vass as well as our other sponsors. Your support keeps this blog alive, and is appreciated.**

LL Cool J - the elusive Black Republican?

Could you imagine that? Well obviously someone at Fox News media department did. Because he included an image of James Todd Smith, along with Jack Welch, and a Congressional Medal of Honor winner, in a promotional ad for an upcoming Sarah Palin special. How did they not see a problem coming?



When I saw the commercial last night, I really was shocked. Shocked that a Black celebrity would make public an affiliation with a Conservative view, or heaven forbid Fox News. I was also proud to see someone take a stand and remind everyone (Black people too) that African Americans are not cookie cutters, and some of us don't agree with Rev. Sharpton, President Obama, Democrats, and Liberals that just want to take care of us since we can't do it ourselves.

But that didn't last long. It seems that the inclusion of LL Cool J is inaccurate. The interview clip shown was from 2008, though I think Smith would like to still be considered a person who has overcome adversity - just not a Conservative or Republican one. So the commercial is being ammended to not include LL Cool J.

It's not the first time that any network has done such cut and paste work for a promotional commercial. It's been done over the years by EVERY news and media organization except possibly C-SPAN. But when a Black person is shown as a Republican, or Conservative, well that's just blasphemy. Because the universe would end if it were to happen.

"Popular conservative blogger Allahpundit tweaked liberals who accuse Tea Party supporters of racist sympathies, saying they'll be "shocked to find the alleged Grand Dragon of the tea-party movement making chitchat with a hip-hop legend."

Is this really such a big deal? It really shouldn't be. Is race really that important to what is supposed to be a show about real ordinary Americans doing the extraordinary? But it is. Because LL Cool J is Black, and therefore cannot be seen as a Conservative. It would end his career.

But the outrage, from a few seconds of positive imagery (as inaccurate as it was), seems to be a telling commentary. What it is saying will undoubtedly alter depending on the politics of the viewer, but if you step back and look objectively the message seems to be rather bleak - and it's not about the media comopany.

You almost feel bad for Uma Thurman

When Uma Thurman was picked to star in the comedy/drama Motherhood, you know that producers and the movie studio expected her name to draw fans. When the plot was written you know that the target audience was women. What no one knew, was that the film would be rejected by everyone - worldwide.

I have heard of bad films, every actor has a few, but this may have set a record. Seriously, this film is so bad that 12 people in England came out to see the priemere. It made a grand total of $130 (not a typo) it's opening weekend in the UK this past weekend. There are films made by students, appearing in a single theatre, without a single known actor, filled with bad writing and worse acting, that made more money last weekend.

In America, you might have missed the opening of the film. It wasn't in theaters long in 2009. It made all of $93,000 to date stateside. So far, with 5 more countries to preimere in, it has made a global total of $700,000. Which doesn't cover the cost of the posters most likely.

So you have to wonder how this film could have been so bad. What actively kept people away.

"Entertainment Weekly" speculates that "Motherhood"'s failure could be blamed on Thurman's dyed, bright-red hair..."

Yeah, red hair. That did it. Or, just maybe, it might have been reviews and word of mouth like this

"The problem I personally had with the movie is that I can't seem to categorize it. It's not a comedy, it's not a drama, it's not a love story, and it's definitely not a family movie. The only thing that comes to my mind is that it's perhaps a movie made for mothers who probably won't find to watch it, but if they do, it will make them feel better for a day or two...

Motherhood is extremely disappointing as a movie, especially if you weren't born with an uterus; instead of trying to diminish the fact that some mothers are indeed a little psycho, it creates even a bigger gap between the men and the women, between the fathers and the mothers."

No matter the reason, I think that Uma Thurman just may have set a record in Hollywood for an established international star. What a dubious honor indeed.

Erykah Badu - you can't miss her

I have just seen the video for Erykah Badu's latest music video Window Seat, from her 5th album New Amerykah Part Two (Return of the Ankh). It definitely demands a replay.

The song itself is melodic and relaxing. It speaks of escape and freedom. It's a song that can clearly stand on it's own as well as draw new fans besides reward old fans of Badu.

But it's the music video that will gain the most attention.



Of course there will be some, mostly men, that will watch the video over and over again. That is the voyeuristic nature the music video lends itself to. That alone could cause enough controversy, reminiscent of Maddona in her heyday.

But it is the symbolic representation of the assassination of JFK that will, and is, causing the most attention. It's something that just doesn't quite match the song. I'm not completely sure why she matched this video to the music.

The theme is evolution. Evolving past the petty hatreds and close-minded thoughts that lead to violence in all forms. I get that. The first clue is the obvious "EVOLVING" we see prominently on her back.

I believe that her stripping is symbolic as well. Shedding the societal confines that limit us all to specific categories and reactions. In embracing her natural beauty and naked form, Erykah Badu is freeing herself from being defined by stereotypes and categories. It is that self-awareness and freedom that strikes fear into others, causing them to strike out at her.

When Badu lays on the ground, I can't tell exactly what the word is on the ground. It looks like GAPX or GARX. If I could understand that I might understand more fully the message the music video is trying to convey.

**I have found out the word is "groupthink" - a term meaning that people will all act alike for fear of being ostracized. Similar in a way to mob mentality I believe. Which makes more sense of the video and confirms the message of growing beyond the restrictions and limitiations set by society.**

Still in looking at the video in whole, I still find it jarring compared to the lyrics. It still is not a mesh of visual and musical. It does accomplish what it sets out to do, and dramatically. But I'm not sure the message will be clear to so many that will be offended by the reference to JFK, nudity, and I can hear N.O.W. proclaiming it glorifies violence against women.

But perhaps these are the very things that it means to clash with? Perhaps thats why the lyrics state

"I just want a chance to fly"

**Please show your support and check out Alchemy at World of VASS and our other sponsors. Your support helps keep this blog alive.**

The real king of all mosters please stand up

If you are into the giant monster movies that dominated the 70's and early 80's (in Japan at least) they you know that King Kong is the undisputed king of monsters. He fought Godzilla, among other monsters, and won - but the real battle is with the hearts and minds of audiences. That battle has only one winner, and it is Godzilla.

Since 1954, Gozilla has rampaged across Japan so many times that one would be surprised they have any buildings standing. The construction industry should be the number one industry in the country according to the movies and destruction (second would be rocketry, though it never has any effect). Yet in Japan, everyone loves Godzilla. And in America too. He even as a star on the Walk of Fame.

America loved the big scaly atomic beast so much that we tried to do what we do with all great foreign films, we usurped it. Yes there was an American version of Godzilla. It was a plodding, ignorant, weak beast. It was so unappealing that fans were screaming for the real Godzilla to re-appear. And he did.

But America was not done. Though a fan failure and critically panned, the American Godzilla movie made $380 million - which only goes to show how much of a superstar the fictional character is. Legendary Films decided to try and give it another go.

Rumors have been flying, but it is now official. 2012 will be the year that Godzilla comes back once again. This time with the blessing of Toho Company Ltd, we will get a King of Monsters that fans will enjoy.

"Our plans are to produce the Godzilla that we, as fans, would want to see. We intend to do justice to those essential elements that have allowed this character to remain as pop-culturally relevant for as long as it has." - Thomas Tull, chairman and CEO of Legendary Pictures

Hopefully this means that we will get a Godzilla that is around 300 feet tall, gray possibly with a green tint, probably about 60,000 tons, with atomic heat blasts, massive regeneration, and looks like the oddest dinosaur ever imagined. A repeat of the failure from New York will not be appreciated.

Legendary Pictures should do a great job though. Batman Begins was a great revisioning of the series. Clash of the Titans looks to also be stunning visually.

I hope that they bring back Mechagodzilla too. Now that would be a fight. And at 56 years old, I still would bet on Godzilla.

Stanley Howse just might be a coward

Not familiar with the name Stanley Howse? How about Flesh-N-Bone? They are one in the same, with Flesh-N-Bone being the stage name for Howse.

Now if you have not heard, Howse was arrested on Sunday for a warrant from 1998. It was at that time that he allegedly struck his mother in the head, with a gun, leaving a 2 inch gash.

Now I don't know the situation that surrounded this incident, but I am pretty sure that Flesh-N-Bone wasn't in a fight for his life. If he was, I'm pretty sure he would have gone to the police and cleared up the incident. If he was innocent, or had an excuse, he would have used any number of lawyers from his music company to deal with this situation. I could be wrong.

Thus if the charges are correct, it makes Howse a coward. Only a lowly self-important and wholly miserable imitation of a man would strike his own mother, in my opinion. The fact that a gun was involved makes it even more abominable, and him even less of a man if accurate.

I tend to believe this might be the case even more when you consider how Flesh-N-Bone got caught. Reportedly he was pulling a crowd onto the stage, once he noticed police, so he could run and hide in the confusion. Another act of a coward. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime as an old saying goes.

Now I could need to apologize to Howse. He might just be innocent. Then again, he is an ex-con, having done 8 years for another offense with a gun. Brilliant he is not.

The truely saddest part has to be that there are kids out there that want to be just like this apparent loser. They want to emulate his style and mannerism, in hopes of becoming a star entertainer and making a lot of money. But the price just seems to high.

The money and fame will never replace family or a mother. Even if she is a bad mother, she gave him birth. And a man that can't respect his own mother, likely can't respect any woman, I imagine. Thus that man can't even respect himself (another likely reason for his prior trip to jail).

Money can't buy respect. Jail is not the birthplace of success nor a goal to be attained. But it is the place that thugs seem to yearn to be in.

I am reminded of a quote.

"A fool and his money are soon parted."

Going to jail and acts of criminality are foolish. Plus it's a great way to end a promising career. Ask I'd say Tupac or Biggie, but you can't since they are dead.

Do I have any shred of respect for Flesh-N-Bone? None, if the charges are accurate. I can't imagine how anyone could.

Ricky Martin - another moment without importance

The news is out, Ricky Martin is gay. Is anyone surprised? More importantly, who cares?

I'm not commenting on the ability of Ricky Martin. He is an established singer, and an entertainer with a fan following he has earned. He has had several hit songs, and likely will have several more.

But what does his sexuality have to do with anything? At what point does his musical talents mix with his sexual preferences? How does any of this affect listening to his songs?

The fact is, unless you are of the limited mental capacity that believes listening to the music of a gay person makes you gay, Martin has not changed. His music has not changed.

I am just so tired of the circus that the major media places on the bedding antics of entertainers. This one is dating that one. This one might be gay/lesbian. Another is having marital problems. Are fans so desperate to diminish the talents of some people that they need to find ways to tear them down? Is the media that desparate for advertising dollars that they need to tear down or tarnish a celebrity to make money?

Honestly, I could live the rest of my life and never hear about the bedroom preferences and daliances of another entertainer ever again. It adds nothing to what they can do, or my ability to enjoy it.

I place one caveat to this. When it comes to committing a crime. Celebrities like R Kelly and Roman Polanski, who are criminals that have preyed upon children deserve - and demand - to be ostracized. Part and parcel with their punishments should be the very public dissolution of their entertainment careers. I have neither pity nor remorse for those that prey upon the innocent.

Thus Ricky Martin is gay, Mo'nique believes in some form of open marriage, Sandra Bullock has a marital problem just like Tiger Woods. So what. That's their lives, not mine. Until the day that I am involved directly with the situation I don't really care. Because I will or will not support their future entertainment efforts based on the quality of what they present, not what they do and with whom behind closed doors.

Anything less diminishes those that choose to judge and not those being judged.

Poetry night

Poetry is an art that is often considered an old-fashioned idea. Something that belongs in the era of the Middle Ages, or to the turn of the 20th century. But such a view would be incorrect.

Every Thursday in Binghamton, New York, at the Belmar Bar and on various days in cities actross the nation there are poetry nights. Open mike events where new and established writers gather to share their thoughts and emotions with those that are interested. It's more than a fad, it's a trend that has been growing and surging among those in college as well as regular older adults as well.

Recently I was at the Belmar Bar in Binghamton to listen to the poets at the open mike. Some of those that stepped up to the mike were part of the Binghamton University Poetry Slam, others were just students, and still more were just fans. Overall it was an interesting night of styles and forms of poetry and presentation that brought new meaning to what many think is poetry and/or how it might sound.

I have already presented one poet, Khamal, who read one of my more popular poems - I Rejoice In Me. But there were more than a dozen other poets at the Belmar Bar that Thursday night. I present a couple of those artists for your consideration.

[I note that the low lighting, for the mood, made it difficult to get clear video. Please bare with me on that and hear how and what was said.]

Justin


Khamal


Jimmy


There were many others that were equally as good as the above. I hope to have a chance to present them as well in the future. More importantly, let your inner voice sound out.

If you have a poem you would like to share, come down after 9pm on Thursday to the Belmar (if you are in Binghamton or the surrounding area). Or het on Youtube, or just write. Poetry deserves to live with your voice, and it will if you let it.


**Remember to check out Alchemy at World of VASS and our other sponsors. Your support helps keep this blog alive.**

Kevin Broadus has a common problem

College basketball is a staple of many small communities. It drives regional, and national, competitions and has been known to start more than one bar brawl. But is college basketball racial?

That is the question consuming Binghamton New York right now. Because Kevin Broadus of the Binghamton University men's basketball team remains on suspension for what has been called a 2nd rate NCAA violation - one that is claimed no other coach has been similarly disciplined for. Broadus also happens to be the only African American head coach, and has filed a racial discrimination complaint against Binghamton University.

Some might not see this as a big deal. Others will note that the suspension has been going on now for 6 months, and really was over a minor infraction. Yet others will see the fact that the Greater Binghamton area is comprised of about 4% minorities, and is hardly considered an area of diversity in understanding or anything else.

For me the issue goes far broader. It's not just about the lack of minorites as head coaches (in college and professional sports), it includes the lack of ownership of African Americans and other people of color in major sports teams. It includes the overwhelming emphasis people of color have been led to have about pursuing sports careers and little else. It's about the virtual non-existence of people of color in positions of authority and prominence. It's about the media's blind eye to almost any but the most negative issues regarding people of color. It's about the racial divide in America continuing to be as problematic as ever before.

"In fact I was trated differently by further having the respondents [Binghamton University] hire, for $1 million, an outside entity to allegedly survey the Binghamton Atletic Department when in fact, the direction of the survey ended up being an investigation mostly into myself, other minority coaches, and other minority professors who were percieved to be my friends soley because of our color and ethnic status." - The complaint as filed by Kevin Broadus

Imagine other coaches having their friends and colleagues investigated because of the color of their skin. Say a similar investigation was made on Jews, or Evangelists, or smokers. Would you say that was outrageous? Or would you say, as some have in Binghamton, that he is just overreacting?

Try to understand why there are no African American owners of teams in major sports. Consider that there is a massive disproportion of minority head coaches across the country. Then step away from sports and consider the same overwhelming disproportions in the entertainment industry, politics, business ownership and executive status, ect. When you think of this in that context can you really say its just an anomoly? That out of the more than 30 million African American population, out of the well qualified former players and wealthy successes, barely any hold positions of leadership?

You can take this argument to almost any aspect of life. Police departments, politics, business, just look around. Ask the question why there is such a disparity, and why in almost every occassion any infraction is so severely responded to when people of color are involved. IE. Tiger Woods was not the first, nor last, celebrity to have a daliance in his marriage, but I don't see the outrage and media spectacle being the same with Sarah Bullock's husband.

Perhaps I'm on a bit of a tangent. It may not be as clear as I wish this to be said. It's not because the issue is so small, but because it is so large. It is so common most don't look at it, willfully or not.

Does Kevin Broadus deserve the treatment he is getting? Maybe not. Is it due to his race? Possibly.

But the real question that is never asked is why this problem, and moreso its true causation if racially based, is never addressed though it occurs nationally in every aspect of life?

Poetry reading: I Rejoice In Me

I will be presenting videos by the Binghamton University Poetry Slam team shortly, but I wanted to start off with a bonus I had from the reading at the Belmar bar. After the Slam had finished, Khamal [pronounced KHA-mal] took the opportunity to read one of my favorite poems that I wrote a few years back.

Some of you may have already read my poem I Rejoice In Me on my poetry section of this blog. For others this will be the first time. I hope you all enjoy it, as I think Khamal's reading is very close to the thoughts I had as I wrote it.



I realize that the lighting is not optimal. The Poetry Slam was lit a bit darker to add to the atmosphere of the event. But while visually it may not have the impact, the words are the most important I believe.

For those interested in learning more about the poetry slam, or interested in taking part, you can come down to the Belmar Bar in Binghamton NY on Thursday after 9pm. Most nights are open mike and everyone is welcome to read their poems. It is a very first time reader friendly poetry reading, often with guest poets from across the country and other colleges.

Exchange Bar & Grill - the stock market comes to the nightlife

There is nothing like the New York City nightlife. It's 24 hours (if you know where to go) of something always happening, with people from everywhere you can imagine. It's lively, and most of the time fun. But it is equally expensive, whether you live there or just vist.

Like every issue in NYC there is always an alternative. Often quite innovative. This next idea just struck me as one of the more unusual.

Imagine this. Let's say you like Budweisers, and Guiness, and say Becks. But you are a bit low on cash. Now imagine that you can go out, and bid on your beer. By that i mean that if everyone in the bar that night is buying say Coors Lite, your beer will be cheaper. Possibly by as much as $2. So instead of $6 it will only cost you $4. Sound like a deal?

How about bar food. You love hot wings, and chicken fingers. They too are based on market prices. So if everyone is out for cheese fries, you can be in luck and have your food at a cheaper price.

Mind you that the more popular items will be more expensive to the exact opposite of the popular items. The deal works on 2 levels, the popular stuff will cost a bit more because it's good. The cheaper stuff will cost a bit less because it to is good, but not in at the moment.

This concept is the core of a new bar called the Exchange Bar & Grill. The bar will be opening on April 1st. You can find it in Grammercy Park in Manhattan.

Will this be a great idea? Will it catch on, or even be successful? I can't say. I haven't been there yet. But considering NYC is the center of the U.S. stock markets, plus the penchant of New Yorkers for something new and innovative, I think it's worth a nite out to see how it all works.

If anyone is in the City and at the bar on the 1st, I would love to hear your thoughts and any photos/video you can provide.

Akon: "violence is never the answer"

Akon is some kind of special. Probably akin to special ed. It would explain his duplicitous nature. Let me clarify.

Akon has a song called Sexy Chick. In the video, which had no problem ripping off the concept from The Hangover (so much for originality), he is "performing" while a host of bikini-clad women gyrate to his song. At one point the women are dancing in front of a statue of Buddha.

Now here is the controversy and the duplicity.

The women dancing in front of the Buddha in that particular attire (or lack thereof) is an offense to Buddhists. In Sri Lanka it's such a big deal that the government there denied him a visa to the country. This of course impedes his ability to perform a concert in that country. In addition people in that country are protesting and throwing rocks at the offices of his promoter.

All of this has affected the 'entertainer'. He has stated

"I myself am a spiritual man, so I can understand why they are offended," the singer added. "But violence is never the answer and I am disheartened."

Spiritual? What spirituality appreciates objectifying women, and being so oblivious to other religions that a roughly 10-foot symbol of a major world religion is ignored? Seriously the statue of Buddha in question is 10-feet at least, and a centerpiece of the area most of the video takes place in. How did he miss it? Especially if he is so spiritual and understanding? Or did the money he hoped the video would make him block out that spirituality?

And as to his comment about violence, this is Akon right? The same guy that took a 15 year old kid from the middle of a crowd of fans onto his stage, and then threw the kid off the stage. The video of that event was a major component in his trial, that he plead guilty to.

So it seems that violence is the answer, IF it's done by Akon.

I'm not a Buddhist, nor spiritual. But at least I'm not a hypocrit that's trying to say anything in order to make another buck.

Odds on World Cup in South Africa

There is still a bit of time to go, but the world is getting ready. On June 11th, the World Cup will begin. Television sets across the globe will fixate on just one thought. Who will win?

Bookmakers are already paying attention. Like everyone else they are trying to figure out exactly who will be the best in the world for the next 4 years. It just doesn't get bigger in sports.

Now while my personal favorites are Argentina, Brazil, and Germany the odds are not in my favor. For my fellow Americans that prefer Team USA things look even worse (though we should get through the first round, barely). Even England is looking a bit less like a contender than usual according to the odds.

SPAIN
+400
BRAZIL
+425
ENGLAND
+500
ARGENTINA
+850
GERMANY
+1100
NETHERLANDS
+1200
ITALY
+1000
FRANCE
+1250
PORTUGAL
+1550
IVORY COAST
+2000
CHILE
+3500
GHANA
+5000
SERBIA
+5000
PARAGUAY
+4500
USA
+6000
CAMEROON
+6500
DENMARK
+9000
MEXICO
+7000
SOUTH AFRICA
+9500
URUGUAY
+8000
NIGERIA
+8500
AUSTRALIA
+9000
GREECE
+9500
SWITZERLAND
+10000
SLOVENIA
+12500
JAPAN
+15000
SLOVAKIA
+15000
SOUTH KOREA
+20000
ALGERIA
+20000
HONDURAS
+22500
NORTH KOREA
+25000
NEW ZEALAND
+50000

[The +/- Indicates the Return on the Wager. The percentage is the likelihood that response will occur. For Example: Betting on the candidate least likely to win would earn the most amount of money, should that happen.]

It is nice to see America in the middle of the pack though. I wouldn't take the bet with an expectation to win, but $10 could turn into a tidy sum if the U.S.A. could win. Then again I think Europe would implode and South America would riot if we did. Which would be almost as much fun to see because of that kind of win.

I still say it's Argentina or Germany to win. Brazil can never be discounted though. Spain on the other hand is overrated in my opinion. But how do you feel? Which team is your favorite?

** I want to thank Bookmaker.com for providing me with the odds for all the teams in the World Cup.

Robert Culp - 1930 to 2010

Robert Culp passed away yesterday at the age of 79. he lived a long life and had a great career in movies and television. But some younger readers might not be familiar with who he is.

Culp was in more than 8 films, including playing the President in Pelican Breif starring Denzel Washington, but is probably best known for his work on televsion. He had roles on Everyone Love Raymond, Columbo, The Outer Limits (the great episode Demon with a Glass Hand) and The Greatest American Hero, even doing voice work for Robot Chicken.

But the single biggest role he is known for, and the television show that earned him 3 Emmy nominations, was in 1965 - 1968. It was called I Spy )and had nothing to do with the mockery of the movie with Eddie Murphy of the same name based loosely on the show).

I Spy was a significant show because of 1 special person, and the meaning the show conveyed. The show was about 2 American spys, who had the cover of professional tennis player and his trainer. Culp was the tennis star, the trainer was Bill Cosby.

This was the program that seriously launched Cosby on a national basis. It was also the first time that a Black actor was the co-star of a television series, while never once being a caricature. It was groundbreaking television at a time when the country was still trying to decide if African Americans could enter a diner by the front door, or ride on a bus in the front seats.

I liked Robert Culp in his role on the Greatest American Hero. I think Demon With A Glass Hand was great television. But more than anything else, I respect him for taking a stand, breaking a ridiculous standard in Hollywood at the time, and risking his career to be in a television show with a Black man on equal footing. It may not sound like much now, with actors like Denzel and Will Smith. But at the time it was unheard of. Without it, there would not be a Will Smith and Fresh Prince of Bel Aire or any other show with a Black lead.





Robert Culp was an accomplished actor with a career that spanned 50 years. He was a civil rights activist. And he was a father of 4. For all those reasons I am sorry to know he has died. I give my condolences to his friends as they must have so many more reasons to be sad at his passing.

Odds for who will win the Masters

These days everyone is strapped for cash. We all are looking for ways to pick up just a bit more to help pay the bills. And with the upcoming Masters ready to start on April 8th, many are trying the friendly local betting pool to try to do it with.

But for those with a serious interest in trying to win along with their favorite duffer, there are serious odds out there. I was able to get the exact odds on the Masters from bookmaker expert Mickey Richardson, CEO of Bookmaker.com and his team.

Here are the standings:

TIGER WOODS
+350
PHIL MICKELSON
+750
PADRAIG HARRINGTON
+1400
ERNIE ELS
+1600
STEVE STRICKER
+1600
LEE WESTWOOD
+2200
PAUL CASEY
+2250
RETIEF GOOSEN
+2500
GEOFF OGILVY
+2500
JIM FURYK
+2500
RORY MCILROY
+2800
VIJAY SINGH
+3000
CAMILO VILLEGAS
+2500
DUSTIN JOHNSON
+3300
MARTIN KAYMER
+3300
IAN POULTER
+2800
HUNTER MAHAN
+3300
ANTHONY KIM
+4000
ZACH JOHNSON
+4000
SERGIO GARCIA
+4000
ROSS FISHER
+4500
HENRIK STENSON
+4500
ANGEL CABRERA
+4200
SEAN OHAIR
+5000
NICK WATNEY
+5000
JUSTIN ROSE
+6000
LUKE DONALD
+6000
CHARL SCHWARTZEL
+5000
ROBERT KARLSSON
+6000
MIKE WEIR
+6000
ADAM SCOTT
+6600
TIM CLARK
+6000
STEWART CINK
+6000
KJ CHOI
+6000
ROBERT ALLENBY
+6600
THE FIELD (ALL OTHER PLAYERS)
+175

What the numbers mean is that the lower the score the lower the amount you would win. Or in other words, Tiger Woods remains the favorite (outside the feild) and Robert Allenby is a crazy longshot.

This should help the pros and the amatuers who will have a bit more than just their pride in their favorite player on the line during the Masters.

I think that Tiger will do it again. Not just because he is that damn good but because he has a point to prove. That all the media hype and attention have nothing to do with his ability.

if he does, watch out. he will stomp all over the PGA just like he did after going pro. And all the sponsors will be back with more cash than ever.

But who do you think will win?

You haven't heard about this

Ok, at least I don't think you have heard about this. I just learned of it myself.

Chessboxing. Any idea what it is? Well yes the name does give it away, but I mean have you seen it? Did you know it's a world sport? That it's been around for 7 years now? I surely didn't until yesterday. And it is growing quickly. But let me explain what this is.

"Chessboxers go through alternating four-minute long rounds of chess and three-minute boxing rounds with a one-minute break in between. A maximum total of 11 rounds are fought out—six rounds of chess and five rounds of boxing. The fight begins with a round of chess. Each player has a respite of 12 minutes during the game of chess, which means the maximum duration of the whole chess game is 24 minutes. A K.O. or checkmate can lead to an early win, and the fight can also be cut short if a player exceeds the chess time limit or the referee decides the fight has to be aborted. If the game of chess ends with a tie, it is settled with the points earned in the boxing rounds. If the boxing fight ends with a tie, the player who had black on the chessboard wins."

Well those are the basic rules in a nutshell. Still not quite sure what to think? Maybe you think this is for wimps and a silly European idea? Would you tell Lennox Lewis that to his face?



I'm not saying this is a stunning new sport that everyone should get involved with. But I like the concept. I like the opposing disciplines being combined. And given time to really catch on and mature, well imagine a fight between say Muhammad Ali (a great thinking boxer) and maybe a buffed up Bobby Fisher. Well maybe not that match up but you get the idea.

At the least, chess boxing is far more attractive, physically demanding, and intellectually rewarding than cup stacking or eating hot dogs. Which would you be more proud of, you or your kid being the world hot dog eating champ, or the chessboxing champ? Plus anyone that wanted to make fun of the sport would quickly find that there are no pushovers in it.

The more I think of it, the more I admire the concept. From what I can tell a recent match in London went quite well



Well, now that you know we will see if America will jump into this, or if it may become another sport like soccer and the World Cup that the rest of the world dominates and we avoid because we cant win.

Spy Hunter - is it finally going to happen?

For some time now word has been floating around that the old video game Spy Hunter was planned to be made into a movie. The original game dates back to the 80's, and was a coin-op, on the Atari and NES game systems. For those that have never seen it here is a video



It was later updated to a more modern version featuring the voice (and image) of Duane "The Rock" Johnson



In fact, in 2005ish there was talk of The Rock starring in the movie based on the game at the time. It was expected that John Woo would direct, which made fans drool. But the deal fell through due to money.

The idea was kept alive though when Paul W.S. Anderson, of the Soldier, Death Race, and Resident Evil series fame, was attached to the concept. Which might have also been good, though he also made Mortal Kombat.

Now things look like they are moving forward. Chad St. John has been writing a script for the film version for Warner Bros. They now own the rights, along with all of the Midway games rights.

St. John is known for nothing yet, but he will be the writer responsible for the Sgt. Rock movie (comic book to movie conversion), Outland (remake sci-fi), and Motor City (action). It's a wide range, but who knows if any will be good or what his best genre is.

Still I could see this movie being really good, a kind of Jason Bourne on wheels, or miserable, Knight Rider as a motion picture.

The concept so far is that the Spy Hunter is a merc that goes after rogue spies and removes them. It could work really well. I wonder who they might get to direct and be the lead? And suggestions?

Keep this on your radar. Expect more information in early 2011, possibly late this year.

Bleach: the movie

Ok, I'm not talking about a movie dedicated to Clorox. If you thought that, you are not a fan of anime or manga. But if you are a fan you are definitely a bit happier.

For those that don't know, Bleach is an anime (an adult cartoon essentially) based on a 15 year old that gets mixed up with the spirit world and protecting regular people from the bad spirits. It's got elements of samurai, cowboy western philosophy, comedy, drama, and of course complete fantasy all mixed together. It has a huge cast of characters, yet the series (showing on Saturdays on Cartoon Network's Adult Swim) plays out like a soap opera, so it's not too difficult for new viewers to catch up. The show is wildly popular.

Part of the popularity comes from the inner battles many of the main characters go through. Most notably is the struggle of the lead Ichigo Kurosaki. Not only must he battle the various bad guys of the series, but he is in a constant battle with his own inner demon. An inner power that constantly tries to consume him, and is a danger to anyone in its reach when it gets unleashed.

So popular is the show that there is no lack of fan made videos celebrating each character and many of the story arcs. Here is an example of much of the above, specifically the inner demon partially released.



So now that you have a taste of what all the fuss is about, imagine this kind of a story in a movie theater. I can't wait. It has the inner journey, the desire and challenges of being a hero, the damsel(s) in distress, the epic battles of good and evil, and cool effects. If you like action, you enjoy drama, what else are you looking for?

Now here is the kicker. This won't be an anime movie. It is planned as a live action film. That means people doing what the cartoon has shown. The CGI technology exists, so it is possible. If this is done right the fights will be spectacular. If it's done wrong this will be Dragonball: Evolution.

Bleach the movie will be fantastic, as long as the Hollywood machine does not decide to turn this into a GI Joe movie. If they water down the material, go for the kids and make it a long Saturday morning cartoon made live they will lose their investment. But if they just let it be what it is, an adult movie with serious and at times humorous themes originating in an unusual (for Americans) format, it will do well.

Which movie will be made? Well, we will see soon enough.

Will Captain America stand up

In a time of turmoil the nation has always looked for a hero. George Washington might well have been the first. There is Lincoln and FDR. JFK falls into that group. But it is a group not limited to Presidents, nor even real people.

Think of Dr. Martin Luther King on a march. There is walking on the moon with Neil Armstrong. Of course there is Muhammad Ali and Bruce Lee in all their splendor. There is flying around with Superman and fighting crime with Batman. And no less iconic is good old Uncle Sam. Right next to this visage of American spirit is Captain America.

Captain America is critical, as I have mentioned before. For generations born after the strife and rebellion of the 60's, the loss of confidence in Government of the 70's, and the now near constant disappointments in Presidents since then Captain America is the only real image of America as strong, just, and fighting the good fight.

Given the year of partisan political fighting, the sneaky and shady deals, the redefining of "Change", and the seperation of people along political ideologies, the nation needs to find a central good to believe in. As I have waited to see who would be picked, the importance of this character, and movie, has grown.

Who finally came to envision this one mythic comic book character? Chris Evans. You know, the guy who played the Human Torch in the AWFUL Fantastic Four movies. Are you impressed?

I'm not sure either. Was he good as the Human Torch? Well in comparison to everyone else in those films, sure. But the films and every other character was a pitiful waste of time. Hard not to look good in the midst of garbage.

If you saw my preview for the movie The Losers, you will also see Evans. It's basically a rip-off of the A-Team, but it looks decent. Evans has a geekish character in the movie as well. The preview does nothing to instill confidence in me that he can pull off Captain America. Which scares me.

The only think worse than losing faith in something, is to have faith in it and watch that be shredded in front of you. A real world example for a growing number of people is how President Obama has gone from a man above petty partisan politics, to one that is mired in extreme partisan politics.

Maybe I have been writing too much about the Health Care Reform and the mid-term elections of late. Then again, maybe I really just want to see an image of America that is good and pure and something pretty much everyone can agree on.

I want Evans to do well in this role. I want to enjoy him as Captain America. But I have to be honest that I'm afraid the best thing in the movie could be the acting from Hugo Weaving (Agent Smith from the Matrix series) as the Red Skull (a nazi super spy, and the ultimate Captain America enemy). That is a scary thought.

Why are Democrats voting yes on Health Care Reform?

As found at VASS

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Harry Reid, Rep. Kucinich, Senator Gillibrand, oh the list could go on and on. What reason do they all have in common to vote yes?



It seems that not much has changed since 1940.

If you can't laugh you'll wind up crying.

Willis and Foxx are Kane & Lynch

So what do you get when you take a video game, 2 a-list celebrities, and decide to make a movie? Well you can either have a great movie (probably Prince of Persia), a good movie (Resident Evil, Hitman, Max Payne), or you can have crap (BloodRayne, Super Mario Brothers, Double Dragon, ect).

In this case the video game is Kane & Lynch. If you aren't familiar with the game it can be summed up by this video.



Yep, this is a game all about the massive kills, explosions, and mayhem that can be done with a modern video game system. And like most video games these days there is a solid backstory, character development, and solid graphics.

The one thing the game does not have are any real heroes. Both lead characters are scum. Neither is honorable, justified, or innocent. Which makes the copious amounts of violence understandable, as no hero would inflict this kind of pain on innocents.

Now take that and imagine this on the big screen. It's just not possible. Especially when you consider that Kane will be played by Bruce Willis, and Lynch is reported to be Jamie Foxx.

I'm not saying either actor is incapable, because they can definitely act. It's that the characters, as they exist, are just too violent and despicable for movie theaters. Willis and Foxx have also built up reputations as playing good guys, or at least the most good person in a movie of very grey characters. The roles of Kane & Lynch will dent those on-screen images. Which might be a reason for the actors to take the roles.

Still I see massive rewriting in the film version. I expect that at least Kane, possible also Lynch, will be toned down. The characters will be made less homicidal, and given a heroic cause for the mayhem they will create. Possibly even a bit of redemption too. Which could destroy the feel of the movie, or could cause viewers to cheer on the leads. It all depends on the writing.

And writing is something that Hollywood has been skimping on these days.

Whichever way the film goes, it will be interesting to see how it all comes together. Plus watching Willis and Foxx in an action movie sounds fun. Like the match up of Willis and Damon Wayans in the Last Boyscout (a good film by the way), but with a lot more action.

Figure it will be 1 - 2 years before the film is out. Until then, you can play Kane & Lynch 2 (out in August) and just imagine the film to come.

Who is Bombshell McGee?

I personally don't care about the rumors or scandal surrounding this woman. I believe strongly in the fact that whatever did or did not happen to Sandra Bullock's marriage is a personal matter and they shoudl be left alone.

Seperate of that I was interested in what this reportedly tattoed woman and fetish model looked like. Does she deserve the name 'Bombshell'? How good is her modeling?

Well there isn't much to go on. The best I could find was this video



Honestly not nearly as interesting as the name implies. I'm bored with this, and I have to ask - Now that you know who this woman is (and even if you didn't), what difference in your life does the scandal make?

The future of reality television

Everyone loves reality television right? American Idol, Survivor, Bad Girls Club, even the Housewives of wherever and the rest of their ilk continue to dominate the programming of virtually every network on television today. But you know that at some point soon (which will not be soon enough for me) there will come a ratings slump. Then what will the television execs do?

Movies have already looked at the craze for "reality" television. They have pondered the pro's and con's of the idea. They have considered the ineviable decline in interest and the subsequent efforts to spice up the programs to keep the eyeballs on theiur shows. The ultimate result, according to movies, is



or maybe an idea from 1975



Still not quite right?



I know. Not possible. That's just sci-fi movie fantasy. It could never happen.

Except that in France, 64 people on a "reality" television show gave a 'contestant' electric shocks until he 'died'.



Are you sure we are still that far away from the movies?

Television Show Review: Justified

Well this new show doesn't waste time. Right from the start we are thrust into a situation that defines the lead, Marshal Raylan Givens. He is a slow-burning all or nothing lawman that is a quickdraw that the old west would have immortalized.

Of course that same ability, penchant really, to take down the bad guy permanently leads our hero into hot water. So hot that he is forced to leave his position in Miami and sent back to the Kentucky backwoods that were his home. Obviously he is no fan of going back to his hometown, but less of a fan of being unemployed (I imagine the Obama Stimulus doesn't help the U.S. Marshals either).



Once back he learns that an old friend took a bad turn, becoming a neo-nazi and more than willing to burn, blow-up, kill or otherwise create havok in his desire to get money. The story at this point becomes somewhat predictable.



Timothy Olyphant plays Marshal Givens. He is not far from his character in Live Free or Die Hard, in that he is determined and smooth in his actions. His character is somewhat of a minimalist, a man of few words and generally low key. Even so he gives off a clear indication of having no remorse for those he kills in the line of duty, and having a very strong sense of honor (giving certain criminals the option of leaving town before he comes after them).

Overall the character is likeable. Olyphant makes him believeable, but also quite predictable. There are no surprises in the character. But that might be the fault of the writers or director. Still the acting is better than average.

For the first episode everyone else is in the background. Obviously there will be the recurring character of his former best friend Boyd (Walton Goggins). Boyd seems to have saved the life of Givens back when the 2 were 19 and working in a coal mine. A guess, but it seems likely.

The co-workers of Marshal Givens are barely seen, though we know that one is a sniper of some skill. There is a Black woman who is competent and very serious. Plus a boss who is a great match for Givens in that he doesn't care much how things get done, as long as they get done. All of these things may change once we get to see more of these characters than the 2 minutes of screentime in the opening episode.

None of that matters really. The key to any television show is how it makes you feel after watching it. Did you enjoy it? Was it worth seeing again? Is there anything that caught your attention?

As for how it makes you feel, Justified hasn't really given the viewer much to go on. You like Marshal Givens. You can see potential in some of the characters around him. But you just aren't sure what you think about it.

What did catch the attention is the attraction of an old friend who once had a crush on Givens. She killed her abusive husband with a shotgun while he was eating dinner. She has made it clear she still likes Givens. And I would not want to be the man that pisses this woman off. Which you know Givens will do at some point.

Watching the show you just get the feeling that like it's rustic surroundings, it has meat but you are wondering where the potatoers are. There just is something missing, and you can't quite place your finger on it. Maybe it was the speed in which Boyd was introduced and then removed - at least for a while. Maybe its the way all the characters have immediate connections to Givens that we never got to see develop. Maybe it's because the defining purpose of this drama has yet to be revealed.

That may be it. Marshal Givens needs something to drive him, and thus the viewer as well. If we get to see that in the next episode or 2 this could become a very intersting show. If we don't, the show will likely not make it another season.

King of Pop, now and forever?

Michael Jackson was many things to many people. A great musician, a troubled man, a businessman with the ability to make hoards of money, and a man who could spend money as fast as he made it. All are true, to varying degrees, but one thing may stand out above them all. He is still the King of Pop.

After all only a king could pull off what the Jackson estate is doing. Sony has now inked a deal of no less than $200 million, potentially $250 million, over 7 years with the Jackson estate. While that would not make the top 10 list of LIVING entertainers (actors in particular) it does make the top 20 I believe.

In fact this deal raises Michael Jackson from the top 3 position on the Forbes highest paid dead celebrity list, to almost assuredly 1st. With $90 million already made, plus the proceeds from This Is It, and now the Sony deal I would imagine he tops $350 million. Probably by quite a bit.

Elvis by comparison only had $55 million. Tupac, Biggie, and other notable dead singers that continued to have records published after their deaths don't even make the list.

Hell, this deal for the Jackson estate is so big even living celebrities are taking a back seat. Jay-Z only got $120 million. Maddona had $120 million. This doesn't even touch on the music library rights that the Jackson estate owns, worth roughly $2 billion (which includes rights to songs of Elvis and the Beatles among others).

When you add it all up, it really does become clear that Michael Jackson is (even after death), and for a long time to come will be, the King of Pop.

Tiger returns!

The fears of the PGA have been swayed. Tiger Woods has announced a return to golf competition at the Masters at Augusta this year. With the return of the king, golf will retain all the gains he has created for them.

Ok, more seriously, Woods being back in golf does mean a return of television ratings and thus more money for the PGA and all the players. That's just a fact. The biggest fear the PGA had was the retirement of Woods or an extended leave. That now being releieved, well the gravy is back.

Woods stated so far

"The Masters is where I won my first major and I view this tournament with great respect. After a long and necessary time away from the game, I feel like I'm ready to start my season at Augusta.

The major championships have always been a special focus in my career and, as a professional, I think Augusta is where I need to be, even though it's been a while since I last played."

So Woods is going to go for another jacket. And if he gets it, he can shut up the guaranteed comments from commentators about how it all has affected his game, ect.

But you have to imagine that the time off, the problems with his family, the media attention (negative that is), all of it has to have some effect on him. He may play golf at the peak of mortal ability, but he isn't superhuman.

So how might Tiger Woods do at the Masters? He could miss the cut completely. Which would drive a huge number of tabloid specualtions about the state of his marriage and his sponsorship deals. He could come in the middle of the pack. Which would result in much of the same, with more focus on his sponsors and a bit of sympathy from some sportswriters. Or Tiger could rally hard, maybe even lead all the way, and win again.

That would be spectacular. Ratings for golf would skyrocket again. Sponsors would flock back to Woods. The top pros would be intimidated like never before, worse than when Tiger first showed up and beat them all almost without trying.

What are the odds of that happening? Who knows. When Tiger Woods wants to win, he does and by as much as he wants. So the question is does Tiger really want to play now, or does he just want to keep up appearances?

All answers will come on April 8th.

Jeff Bridges is NOT John Wayne

They just had to do it. They just couldn't leave it alone. Hollywood is going for broke and about to ruin a great film because someone thinks they can do it better than the original.

It's a trip on the revisionist wave that is modern Hollywood. This time around we are going to be treated to a "new" look at John Wayne's oscar winning performance in True Grit. Likely the film is being redone because most younger movie audiences have never seen the original, which fans of Wayne love. You can include me in the latter.

The original film was released in 1969, based on the novel of the same name from 1968. It featured Wayne, Glen Campbell, and Kim Darby. The basic premise goes, a drifter kills a father in the old 1880 west. His daughter goes to hire a marshal to gain revenge by bringing the man to justice (a trial). The daughter is highly religious and very sheltered. She also is stubborn.

She hires a notorious Marshal by the name of Rooster Cogburn (John Wayne), known for catching criminals as often as killing them. Along the way they meet up with a Texas Ranger after the same man (and the reward for him).

In attempting to capture the fugitive, who has joined a vicious band of outlaws, Maggie learns the meaning of 'true grit' and comes to respect Cogburn despite his flaws (an alcoholic and constant use of profanity).

It's a good film, the following video clip may give you an idea of how the film went. (Yes, that is a very young Robert Duvall)


But the new version, set to come out in December of 2010, won't be the same story. This time the story will be from the view of Maggie. It will depict a far different view of Cogburn (as played by Jeff Bridges) and the Ranger (to be Matt Damon). It will seek to convey a moral message, and be far more funny at points.

In essence it will ruin the film. Because Bridges is a good actor, but he does not convey the charisma or character of Wayne. Nor does he resemble an image of a world-weary wilderness hardened cowboy.

The same can be said of Matt Damon. he can do action, and drama. He is talented. But he does not convey an image of the old west. Perhaps makeup and the proper scenery can change that view. But I doubt it.

The bottom line is why are they remaking the film? Why must modern directors and movie studios insist on trying to remake classics with the thought that they can do it better? Because they never do. Not in the revisioned Psycho, or Halloween, or Hills Have Eyes, or Speed Racer, or I Am Legened, or Pink Panther, ect. Perhaps lighting strikes once in every 100 tries, like with The Fly, but it is so rare as to not be worth the attempt.

Classics aren't there to be "improved upon". Let's just enjoy them for what they are.

Movie Preview: The Expendables

Sometimes a movie is just what you expect it to be. With the Expendables the promise is action, explosions, and a few snappy lines. I see no reason for the film to fail to deliver on all 3.

This is an action movie first and foremost. It's a combination of the stars of the 80's and the latest action movies. Stallone, Lungdren, Rourke, Statham, Li, and Austin. What a combination of testosterone, with enough bullets and explosiuons to level a mid-sized city. Which is pretty much the plan of the film.

The plot is simple enough. A group of mostly older mecenaries is hired to take out a South American dictator. Along the way they get double crossed by former associates, and have to fight to survive. Cliche but it works.

If you were going to see this film with the hope of understanding the greater meaning film can bring to the inhumanity of war and combat, wrong film.



The fight scenes look good (and they should since Stone Cold Austin would up fracturing Slyvester Stallone's neck in their fight scene). Obviously the stars of this film all will get their moment to show off their particular talents and style. But we can also see that plenty of money was spent to ensure the battles would look huge and devastating. Because in an action film there is no such thing as overkill.

Plus there looks to be more than a few well timed and funny one-liners and situational jokes. Likely there will be other attempts that will fail, but as long as the writers didn't try to fill every scene with a hoped for catchy phrase (Like in Running Man with the Governator) it should work more often than not.

Also keep an eye out for the rest of the 80's stars. Which includes Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis. Forest Whitaker had a role written for him, but had to drop out, initially to be replaced by 50 Cent (the thought sends a chill down my spine), and ultimately filled by Terry Crews who should fill in well. Jean-Claude Van Damme, Steven Seagal, and Kurt Russell all turned down roles in the film. Which is a shame as they really would have completed the mix of 80's to current action film stars.

This won't win Oscars, or likely any award other than from Spike TV or MTV. But this will almost certainly be one of the biggest money makers of the year. The real question is who out of the entire cast will have the best fight scene? My money goes on Jason Statham. Best one liner will almost definitely go to Stallone - it is his movie after all.


**Spoiler Alert**
Not everyone on the team will survive (Li and Crews are the likely victims). But there is already talk that those who do, will be in a sequel. Seagal and Russell might make it yet.

Once a bad guy...

As the 4th season of Eureka appraches its start, life does not look like it will be improving for Sheriff Carter. Matter of fact, things are getting worse by the hour.

For those that are not yet fans of this science fiction comedy, located on the otherwise unwatchable SyFy Channel, I will recap a bit.

Sheriff Carter (Colin Ferguson) is the better than average good natured former Fed, that watches over the town of Eureka. The town is an ultra-secret think tank for the greatest minds in America. They have AI, fully functional green energy technology, basically the next closest thing to Star Trek techology on the planet. The townspeople also have a penchant for nearly destroying the planet via plagues, meteor storms, climate manipulation, mini suns and so much mmore. Thankfully Sheriff Carter, the dumbest man in town, comes to the rescue generally with common sense answers that the eggheads never consider.

Along the way Carter has the joy of raising his teenage daughter (Jordan Hinson), which any parent will state is as difficult as trying to avert a planetary collision. Add to that the difficulty of getting a date.

Carter's first love (Allison - Salli Richardson-Whitfield) interest wound up getting back with her ex-husband, who has only grudging respect for Carter. The ex (Stark - Ed Quinn) winds up dying saving the planet - try to compete with that - on his wedding day after he and Allison had become pregnant. Talk about hurdles to jump. Then his next love interest just disappeared from the storyline. His 3rd (Jaime Ray Newman) just left the show on a trip to Australia for years unknown.

All of this, comically done to near perfection, might be the best of times for Carter. Because in season 4 Baltar is coming to town.



James Callis, known for his great portrayal as Gaius Baltar in the revisioned mess that was battlestar Galactica, has joined the cast of Eureka. Already we have been made aware that his character is no ray of sunshine.

Callis will be Dr. Grant. Now given that Callis is loved as the devious, maniacal, virtually unrepentant, self-absorbed scientific genius that led to the murder of virtually all humanity in Galactica, what do you think his character will be like in Eureka? You bet he will be up to no good, and quickly will be a thorn in the side of Sheriff Carter.

This is especially true since the writers are once again going to focus Carter on being with Allison. But Dr. Grant is a ladies man with eyes on her as well.

The best part of all of this is that Callis is continuing on as a bad guy. He did a wonderful job of being compelling yet unlikeable. The kind of villian you just have to watch even as you hope he get killed off. Few actors get such a character to play and even less can do it right. Callis nails it with a penache akin to Vincent Price.

Will season 4 of Eureka be the best yet? That remains to be seen. Though having a character we love to hate, and a love triangle where we know the couple we want to see work out, makes for enjoyable television more often than not.

Open marriages - the new Hollywood trend?

The great thing about being up so late and working is that sometimes you run across news that you missed. In this case I noticed an item that really caught my attention.

Over the years I have heard Black women, and women in general for that matter, complain that there just aren't any good men left. That they can't find a solid relationship. That there isn't anyone worth keeping.

In Hollywood the situation is like the normal issues on crack. Celebrities seem to get engaged, married, and divorced like a ride on a merry-go-round. Often a soap opera will have characters with more fidelity. But Oscar winner Mo'Nique has never had that problem.

Mo'Nique has been married for 25 years. The secret of keeping her marriage?

"Let me say this: I have not had sex outside my marriage with Sidney...Could Sid have sex outside of his marriage with me? Yes. That's not a deal-breaker. That's not something that would make us say, 'Pack your things and let's end the marriage.'"

As often as Hollywood starts trends, as much as women try to copy the looks and actions of actresses, as much as Black women support African American actresses, I don't see this gaining favor.

Then again, it might.

A poll that went with this revelation stated that 18% of women thought the concept of an open marriage was the key to a better relationship. Given that the divorce rate currently exceeds the rate of people getting married, open marriages might not be that odd a concept. Still I can't imagine most women being ok with this.

The younger generation has accepted lots of ideas that I don't agree with or grew up with. They have sex sooner, consider oral sex non-sexual (or at least not a big deal). They are more prone to use drugs, have multiple partners, and to try - if not be - bisexual. I'm not making a moral statement, just an observation.

Given all that, and the fact that now a celebrity has endorsed open marriages, will this become the new trend?

Peter Graves - the mission is sadly over

It's sad to have to mention that actor Peter Graves has died today. The news has just gone over the news, he was 83 - four days before his 84th birthday.

For my younger readers, you might only recall Peter Graves as Colonel John Camden on the WB Network TV series 7th Heaven, or perhaps as the odd but funny airline pilot Captain Clarence Oveur from the Airplane! spoof movies. Some who are a bit older, or anyone that has had the chance to see the original television series Mission: Impossible (which the Tom Cruise films are very loosely based on), will remember Graves as Mr. Jim Phelps. But fans of older classic films might also recall his serious and strong performance in the film Stalag 17, as the German undercover spy Price.

Peter Graves was more than just an actor. He served in the Air Force, went to the University of Minnesota, and was a member of Phi Kappa Psi. He was a husband to his wife, Joan Endress, for 60 years (a number most people today have trouble reaching in months of a marriage). He was also the father of 3 children.

But the thing the general populace knew Graves for was his acting. Whether on the big screen or small, he was a mainstay for decades. Like very few in Hollywood, Graves was in 70 movies and televisions shows throughout his 52 year career (his most recent role was in 2003).

He was the well recognized voice of Biography on A&E, to the point of his parody of his Biography work in the film Men in Black II, hosting an exposé television show. It was that humor that likely garnered his roles in Airplane!

One thing he was not known for was any part of the Mission Impossible movies made by Tom Cruise. Like every surviving member of the cast, Graves had no desire to be a part of the revisioned film portrayal of the famous television show. It was rumored that Graves did not want to appear in a version of Mission: Impossible that made the Phelps character a villain.

Along the path of Peter Graves career he was nominated for Emmy's and Golden Globes, winning a Golden Globe Award in 1971 and an Emmy in 1997.

Here are some videos of the man.







My condolences to his family and friends.

5 black piano keys, a rich history and sound

A friends sent me a link that I found really remarkable, and I want to share it with you.

The thing about the video you will see (which I first viewed at http://pjcockrell.wordpress.com/2007/11/22/amazing-grace-just-the-black-notes) is that I doubt most are aware of spiritual songs created by African Americans during and after Slavery in the U.S. Sure many have heard of these songs, especially those in the South or the highly religious (and occassionally a movie or 2), but I doubt that most can name the songs let alone their composers. Or that White spiritual songs were based on the same style as the 'negro' spirituals.

Even sadder is the thought that I am sure that not one classroom outside of the few college courses on the subject ever discuss any aspect of the 5 black notes, pentatonic scale or 'slave scale'. Never once in a history class, not once in a history book, is there mention of the musical abilities of slaves - nor more importantly any other achievement of African Americans until well into the 20th Century. Yet reality differs from history in that there are many things that slaves created besides the foundations, buildings, roads, and agricultural trade that gave birth to and nurtured America. So many in fact that without them the America of today could not exist.

Still it is amazing to hear, to learn, of how much was made of something so simple by people denied so much.

The Spring collection from Alchemy of England

Yes it has just arrived! The latest additions to the Alchemy of England collection available at Alchemy at World of VASS.

The latest collection features the Rose of Passion collection




In addition you can also find new T-shirts, pendants, rings, and a great new tankard too.

Here is a quick preview of some of the new items


You can only find it at Alchemy at World of VASS

Movie Preview: The Joneses

Ok, I have to give it to whoever came up with this idea. Hollywood loves liberal values. They hate almost anything not ultra-green, liberal, or anti-patriotic. There are exceptions, but they are rare these days. There have been numerous films depicting all the above, and every one of them has failed miserably. But that might change with this film.

The Joneses is a salute to the corporate greed that Hollywood hates with a burining passion (which is funny as they are a mega-corporate industry). Corporations are so desperate for your money, and so evil, that commercials on television, radio, magazines, video games, and on DVD's just isn't good enough any more. Now it's time to go direct. [funnily enough the movie is a big commerical itself]

The Joneses are a stealth marketing team. A fictional family set up to grab the attention of every family around them. They have it all. Cars, clothes, whatever widget and gadget you could ever want. And they are more than willing to let you know they have it. Just so everyone else will buy it to.



The film is dependant on the fact that you accept the concept of 'I want what they have'. A pretty easy concept to sell. If everyone thinks your grass is greener, they will want it more than their own.

The drama of the story, because a movie based on just corporate greed is hard to sell, is what about the people in this fake family? How can they deal with the stress of being the center of attention based on just what they have and not who they are?

David Duchovny looks to be likeable and the key shred of decency in this corporate swindle machine. Demi Moore is the cold-hearted "management", who only cares about the bottom line and keeps Duchony at arms distance.

The questions of the movie are simple. Can 4 people who pretend to be a family be a family? Can they deal with the pressures and difficulty of getting along, while coercing everyone around them to buy buy buy? What happens if they rally together, but the sales drop?

Generally this looks like a mediocre movie. Not the best or worst of the year, nor any year. But it has a gimmick. It looks slick and has lots of toys. Hollywood is banking on your desire to see the toys, and get a feel of the "good life", so they can swindle you out of your money while telling you how bad OTHER corporations are.

I just love the 2-faced nature of the film.

Oh, and by the way. The "good life", the people worth selling to and pretty much the only apparent people on the planet are White. Other than 1 (apparently) gay Black character - stereotypically a hairdresser - there isn't another person of color in a speaking role that I am aware of or that I saw in the credits of the film. I guess Hollywood thinks people of color are too busy watching music videos, getting high, and going to jail to be successful enough to be characters in the film, or to even afford a ticket to see it. Just an observation of mine.

Tron Legacy - update

Technology can be beautiful.

In one of those rare occassions, Tron Legacy is taking everything that CGI can create and using it to make a stunning visual tour de force. My initial reservations are being eroded as I see more of what is coming in this movie. Here is the latest movie trailer, and you can see what I mean.



Visually this looks like a movie that even the Academy Awards dislike of sci-fi movies will overcome. That still leaves a plot which we know little about. There will be action, and from the looks of the latest trailer there will be plenty.

But the visual impact of the movie is breathtaking. This may be one of the rare sequels that you just have to see. Never fear, more trailers will come before the release, so keep an eye out.

Corey Haim, dead at 38 - a waste

Death and taxes are the 2 things we all know are coming for us all (even certain politicians). None of us know when our final moments will come, but we hope for that time to be long away.

Drug users don't really fit into that category. The nature of what they are addicted to shortens their lives, and limits the quality of the life they do get to have. Sadly Corey Haim was an example of how short life can become and how wasted the opportunities become.

I don't mean to pick on Haim. But perhaps in his death a lesson to others can be found.

Haim was on a fast track to stardom in his youth. He was well known, a teen heartthrob. He was in popular and good films. His acting abilities were solid and growing. He had a path wide open for his future. And then he became addicted to drugs.

Ultimately the drug addiction took his life. But along the way it destroyed his career, taking him from making movies like Lost Boys, to Snowboard Academy, to being without work and bankrupt. The drugs also strained, let's be honest it broke friendships and business relationships.

But when he was able to steer clear of the drugs, the talent and inner Haim won back many friends. He was able to get work again, in major movies like Crank: High Voltage and The Pick Up (to be relesaed in 2010), because people wanted to help him. But the addiction never let him go. It finally killed him today, along with his chance at a comeback and to the dismay of friends.

Right now there are tens of thousands, maybe millions listening to a rap song glorifying drugs. There are countless movies and music videos promoting drug use as "normal" or "harmless". There are movements across the country trying to get some or all drugs to be legalized. In each case the effects of drugs on people like Haim, Amy Winehouse, and millions of regular people are glossed over.

Corey Haim didn't win any Oscars. He was not the greatest actor ever. But he might have been, we will never know now. He died at 38, an age far to young for anyone to end their life at. He leaves behind a legacy that includes several very good films, the television show The 2 Corey's which gave a glimpse at the difficulties drugs create and his attempt at redemption, and friends.

He has also left us a sad reminder that life is too precious to throw away with drugs.

My condolences to his family and friends.

Lindsey Lohan is the milkaholic

By now I am sure everyone has seen the latest in the line of commercials for E*Trade featuring the E*Trade Baby. First seen during the Super Bowl, it has become a popular commercial. In fact too popular for one Hollywood starlet.



Lindsey Lohan has just sued E*Trade for $100 million dollars, claiming that the commercial is based on her life. In addition Lohan believes that just the mere mention of her first name is enough to register in the minds of the public her image.

Personally I believe Lohan should be given another drug test to find out what she is on this time. Seriously, the E*Trade commercial is about her? Because the baby in the commercial has the same first name, which happens to be a popular name for women. Get real.

Yes it is true that the baby Lindsey is accused of being a "milkaholic", as well as being unscupulous enough to steal the boyfriend of another woman. And I can see the correllation to Lohan in that she is known for her drug addictions, alcohol abuse, and less than honorable actions in relation to Aaron Carter, back in 2001. Then again, most recently Lohan has been connected to being bi-curious or a lesbian due to her former relationship with Samantha Ronson, which ended in 2009.

So is the baby in the E*Trade commercial enough of a loser to evoke images of Lohan and her career? Honestly, not until Lohan opened her mouth. But forevermore the joke will not only be the style of the television commercial, but the fallen star of Lindsey Lohan.

Perhaps that is the point though. Lohan hasn't been in the tabloids in a while. Her last car crash was in 2007, about the last time that anyone paid attention to her drug and alcohol abuse issues. She has made 4 forgetable, if completely unseen, films since 2007. Her celebrity today is more akin to a has-been than a current star. And as they say, "No publicity is the only bad publicity in Hollywood".

Obviously the lawsuit will fail. Not only because there appears to be no direct connection to Lohan, but because Lohan is not interesting, talented, or even infamous enough to be known by a single name - except perhaps as lush or druggie or untalented by the particularly cruel.

Time and again the younger crop of entertainers are willing to do and be associated with anything that will place their sorry faces in front of cameras and tabloid pages. The longer such actions go on the more sad and pathetic the acts of desperation appear. This is no exception.

Lindsey Lohan does not deserve $100 million for anything, the least of which is an association of her name to anything with talent, innovation, and even a spark of creativity. If anything, E*Trade should sue her for marring the image of their television commercials with her.

Movie Preview: Harry Brown

Since the 70's there has been a growing need in each decade to have someone stand up to the bad guys. There was Dirty Harry, and Death Wish, and Die Hard, ect. But what was there recently? What movie gave us a regular sane person that stood up, where in reality people just close their eyes?

Michael Caine has the answer, as the titular Harry Brown. Harry Brown will make many older viewers think instantly of Death Wish.

An older man, long past prime, becomes the justice that so many of us hope for and don't see coming. Brown is an old British combat vet (not sure of which war, but post WWII) living a modest life in an apartment building, and an old friend. The area he lives in now is assaulted by gangs and drugs. The youth of today are rampaging towards their own destruction and willing to take everything and everyone with them.

Harry like everyone else just ignores the violence. Until it hits home in the form of the brutal death of his long-time friend. That's when this old Royal Marine gets out his .45 and gets to work on serving ultimate justice.



The concept worked in the 70's and 80's for Charles Bronson. It matched the growing fear some of the older adults had in watching kids go wild, and the legal system fail to keep up. In 2010, globally it would seem, things have gotten no better.

Michael Caine is a great actor. Even in the worst of films he raises the bar of those around him. This looks to be far from the worst, though not his best. Still you can feel his anger and frustration, as a reflection of the reality of modern day.

Films like this aren't action films, they are social commentaries. Visualizations of the reality of the day as seen by eyes made wise by living more than 2 decades. But most of the audience this film will have likely will not notice the commentary. They will be looking for the violence.

The question in this film is if it can justify the violence enacted. Are the vigillante acts equal to the danger? Is the legal system so corrupt and broken that this solution is best? Can this be worth the consequences?

Harry Brown: I don't reckon you've got long. Seen that before. Gut wound. The slug's probably torn right through your liver. Mate of mine in Ulster got caught in sniper fire. Bullet blew his inside out. He screamed for a good 10 minutes. We couldn't send a medic in, the section was too hot. So we all took cover... and watched him die. I've never told that... to anyone... you should've called an ambulance... for the girl...

I take this cerebral approch to the film because the first Death Wish asked these things. Given Michael Caine's overall reputation I would expect the film would address these issues. Which means it can entertain, and yet have a message. An uncommon combination in an era of movies that choose one or the other.

Perhaps the biggest question on the success of this film )in America) is if the public still agrees with the violent answer to rampant drugs and gangs. In 1974, in America, crime was at incredibly high levels. Today, the very same crimes are the promotions of rap music videos and rappers. Drug use is glorified, in some States legalized. The proliferation of violence merely for the ability to put it on Youtube is escalating. All troubling signs of a vortex of youth wasted in the most stupid of ways.

Ultimately Harry Brown should do well in theaters. But how well it does with the gravy train of movies, those 18 - 30, will determing if another rash of copycats follows for the next decade or not.

Oh, here is one of the songs from the soundtrack of the film

Who actually saw the Oscar movies?

Here is a question I always ask myself about the films that actually win an Oscar each year. Who saw them? Honestly, how many people went to see whatever film won?

It's a question you really never see anyone ask. In fact most avoid that completely. Because Oscars are about what the movie industry and critics think, not the public. If people knew how many (or perhaps few) went to see these films they might have a slightly different view of the Oscars. More akin to a thought, 'The snobs are putting up thier noses at what the masses consider worthwhile.' That doesn't mean that the choices by the Oscar members is wrong (all the time), but it does make it interesting when you put it in perspective.

So let's presume that a national price for a movie ticket is $10. A nice easy number to work with, even if it isn't accurate. How many people have seen the top winning films?

Well let's start at the top. Avatar, which I felt is an over-rated hypefest, has made $720 million. So that's 72 million people, almost 25% of the population. Not bad. (Ranked #1 for the year 2009)

Up - 293 mill (Ranked #5) - 29 million people
The Blind Side - 250 mill (Ranked #8) - 25 million people
Inglourious Basterds - 120 mill (Ranked #25) - 12 million people
Precious - 47 mill (Ranked #65) - 4.7 million people
Crazy Heart - 29 mill (Ranked #95) - 2.9 million people
Hurt Locker - 14.7 mill (Did not rank in the top 100, won best picture) - 1.47 million people

Well that all sounds rather respecatble doesn't it? Well lets look at the top ticket sale films of the year.

We know Avatar got #1
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen - $402 million - 40 million people - Ranked #2* (won top Razzie Awards)
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince - $301 million - 30 million people - Ranked #3
The Twilight Saga: New Moon - $296 million - 29 million people - Ranked #4
Up was already covered
The Hangover - $277 million - 27 million people - Ranked #6 - surprise hit
Star Trek - $257 million - 25 million people - Ranked #7
The Blind Side already mentioned
Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel - $216 million - 21 million people - Ranked #9
Sherlock Holmes - $206 million - 20 million people - Ranked #10

So the top 7 Oscar movies (including the number 1 in the nation) had a total of 147 million people. Without the number one film, which is usually the case, 75.1 million people.

The top 7 movies, excluding any film with an Oscar, 192 million.

So comparing in every way you would like, Hollywood believes it makes movies that are crap for the masses but puts money in their pockets, and rewards movies that joe average isn't ... smart enough? to crude to understand?

Who knows. But I thought it was interesting to notice that on average Oscar movies are seen half as often by the public.

2010 Razzie winners

It's now official. The winners of the worst that Hollywood offered in 2009 have been identified and given their Razzie honors they richly deserved.

The list of movies should not be a surprise to most. Some of the top money films of 2009 filled the lists and the only real shock is that people flocked to the films in the first place.

Starting things off is one of the films I really hated and a source of controversy

Worst Picture – Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Worst Director – Michael Bay, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

This beat out my pick of Land of the Lost. Still, I did mention

I reviewed it, and still am amazed that people paid money for this crap. Then again people bought pet rocks too."

Worst Actor – All Three Jonas Brothers, Jonas Brothers: The 3-D Concert Experience

Enough said there. Though I still think the hatch job Steve Martin did on Pink Panther 2 would have killed Peter Sellers if he wasn't dead already.

Worst Actress – Sandra Bullock, All About Steve

What were the odds of Bullock taking both a Razzie and an Oscar in the same year? I thought she would be a close runner up, but I admit I was again wrong.

Worst Supporting Actor – Billy Ray Cyrus, Hannah Montana: The Movie

Worst Supporting Actress – Sienna Miller, G.I. Joe

Worst Screen Couple – Sandra Bullock and Bradley Cooper, All About Steve

Worst Remake Rip-Off Sequel – Land of the Lost

Did you really think this bomb of a movie wouldn't win some Razzie? I picked GI Joe in part because I thought Land of the Lost would win the worst picture award. Neither was worth the time to see, or the film it was made with.

Worst Pictures of the Decade – Battlefield Earth

Definitely a bad movie. But there were so many more that deserved this title even more. Still of the horrendous choices J-lo has to feel a bit better that she missed this award.

Worst Actor of the Decade – Eddie Murphy

Honestly I disagree with this. Given his last several films belong on Pluto along with the film of the same name. But the man has talent. Even in his horrible films he plays multiple roles, and usually at least 1 or 2 are decently done. And his work in Dreamgirls really should have raised him up a notch on the competition.

I stand by picking Mike Meyers for destroying the legacy of Dr. Suess.

Worst Actress of the Decade – Paris Hilton

While I gave this to Mariah Carey, there is no question that even her acting does have more talent than Hilton - barely. But Hilton has a lot of money. You would think she would have paid to ensure she didn't win. Then again, maybe she paid to make sure she did, since this will be the only award she ever wins based on her "talent".

Well I didn't do so well this year overall. I missed quite a few film predictions, though several matched my previews, reviews, and special mentions. I don't feel bad though. When it comes to this low on the scale of entertainment, they are all mired in muck.

Cooking on Sunday

It was a quiet Sunday and I decided to make a quick easy meal. Just something I've worked on before and a few friends wanted to know how I created. So I figured I'd show a bit of my culinary skills.

The following is a video of me preparing my Lemon Butter Chicken. It's not hard to make and tastes great.



I hope my video helps, because I can't give any better descriptions. I have no idea about measurements or portions. I cook by eye and taste.

Give it a try, and tell me what you think of it.

OK GO does it again

You may not know the name of the band OK GO, you may not recall their songs, but you do know their videos.



The music is middle of the road at best. But the innovation of the band, the manner in which they have made simple but eyecatching music videos makes them stand out. Their no cut, constant action timed to their song flow is a standout amongst the industry and really a treat.

Their latest music video, to the song And This To Shall Pass, is again an example of what entertainment is about. If you haven't seen it, or even if you have, check out the video now.



OK Go should take a bow. That is impressive.

Sean Penn and Haiti

Sean Penn is a quality actor, and politically the kind of American I would expect from a B-grade spy movie about communist sleeper agents. He has long put himself on the forefront of criticism for his views, his socialist preferences, and his blatant love fests with unsavory leaders like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro.

But given those facts, there is no question that in regard to Haiti and the relief efforts Penn has been putting his XX where his mouth is. He has directly brought doctors (11), water filters, donated huge sums of money, and actively helped to save lives of those buried in rubble. He has directly done what many entertainers only speak about from afar.

I started to search through various posts and news articles on Penn and his activities in Haiti because of the most recent comments by Penn about the efforts of the American military in Haiti. Penn has uncharacteristically stated that

We have worked very closely with Colonel Mike Foster and Sergeant Keith Horn (ph), who have been -- who are truly exceptional men in the 82nd Airborne. And it has -- it has been such an experience working with these people."

"JENKINS [partner of Penn in his Haiti specific charity]: Because I -- in Bosnia, I associated the army with killing. And in my life, they came too late, because I lost everything.

But when I got to Haiti and I've seen what the American Army has done, all I can say is God bless America and the American Army, because they work so hard. And the only sense of order that is there, I think it's them. And they are trying so hard to help, to distribute, to do anything they can to help these people."

"PENN:I would like to tell all my lefty friends out there, these guys are doing an amazing job and they're doing it with the greatest intentions in heart and in conjunction with all of the other organizations. It's a -- and it is an amazing amount of cooperation."

Talk about shock. The only problem I have with these comments by Penn is that it took this sad crisis in Haiti for him to open his eyes and notice the great good the American military does everyday.

But somewhere it seems someone is upset with Penn. Why? I have no idea. Who? I don't know because I can't find it. I imagine it has to be some of the very same far-left wackos that Penn normally rubs shoulders with. But his response to those critics on this issue in Haiti is the very same Sean Penn that we expect to hear about

"...the outspoken actor says he hopes any cynic who dismisses his efforts as a star turn will "die screaming of rectal cancer."

It's extreme all right. And at the moment I don't care as long as Penn continues to help the people of Haiti.

But if I gave myself a moment to look at this situation, I might suggest to Penn the fickle nature of what I presume is the extreme far-left when anyone does anything they don't like. Which includes those that they normally support, as Penn has now found out.

Stepping away from that, I applaud Penn (I can't believe I'm saying that) for what he has done and continues to do in Haiti. I love celebrities that give to those in need and use thier star power to provide for those that most need it. Penn deserves the positive attention he has earned, and I hope this just brings more help for the people of Haiti.

Burn Notice - season 3 end

Well there is no question that a bunch of the loose endsa are getting sown up for the television show Burn Notice. The season ending episode was not a huge cliff hanger. It wasn't even a great episode. But it was very ominous.

As the episode starts we get a recap of the start of the series. We get a refresher in who caused Michael Westen (Jeffrey Donovan) to be in Miami. We see how everything has been a long trip ever deeper into the web that "Management" has woven.

Honestly I didn't find Simon, the main bad guy that was orchestrating events from afar for the season, to be all that impressive. He might have been a murderer, but so have several of the people on this show. Possibly even Westen himself.

What was interesting was how little we saw of Fiona (Gabrielle Anwar) and Sam (Bruce Campbell). Their roles were minor, almost side thoughts. True they did provide a critical bit of help through the episode, but they were just in the shadows and not really working with Michael. They were more like employees. Which is a dark forboding thing to notice.

Michael's mother, Maddie (Sharon Gless), on the other hand was quite prominent. She was the other side of the Westen personality. The side we have grown so interested in watching. She held out, resisting the pressure of the oppresive world of operatives to hold out hope and believe in the right thing.

That's what this episode was. A battle of what is right, and what is effective. Michael has to choose. And that was the choice he never truly made turning down Management the first time.

The first time was about the selfish interests of Westen. His misguided belief that he could just start over, back where he left off. His denial that he had to make a choice, because ultimately life is black and white not shades of gray.

3 times in this episode Westen had the chance to change his course. He could have taken a different path. He could have made a choice to do the right thing. But each time he did what was effective.

I surmised at the begining of this season, and a couple of seasons ago, that Westen was being set up. That the time off was really just a training exercise. A way for Management to mold and corrupt Westen so that he could ultimately embrace their offer. Slowly he changed, and finally too them up on the offer.

Thus we are left with a bigger cliff hanger than previously, without all the excitement and explosions. Michael Westen has isolated himself in the heart of Management. His friends have been pushed aside. His mother abandonded. He is walking the path that ultimately leads to the very people he struggled with in the beginning.

The last battle for Westen, and I think the last season for the series, will be the battle that he has with himself. He has gone too far to ever become a spy like he was before the burn notice. He no longer has the unconditional support of friends and family he once had. All that is left are the missions from Management, and the means by which he acheives them. Given time, the nature of the work is sure to eat at his soul.

I didn't like the way this episode ended the season. I do like the way that the story arc has finally beenset to close. I'm hoping that next season will be filled with this biggest battle. But you can see how all the actors are getting tired with their roles. The writers are running out of fresh places to go. This needs to lead to the season where either a monster is set loose, or is killed.

And somehow, either way, I don't think Michael Westen survives.

Movie Preview: Brooklyn's Finest

The last time that I was speaking about Wesley Snipes, the Government had just quietly lost it's attempt to railroad him to jail. Since the debacle, many have wondered if Snipes' carrer would ever have the chance to flourish again. That question may be answered in Brooklyn's Finest.

Brooklyn's Finest is the latest film by director Antoine Fuqua. The film is a gritty and somewhat realistic view of the "ghettofabulous" lifestyle, from the perspective of the police. It takes place in and around some of the worst, most drug-ridden projects in New York City (filmed in part in Brownsville and the Van Dyke Houses).

The focus of the film are 3 police officers. One, Richard Gere, is on his way out to retirement after a career that was just mediocre. Another, Ethan Hawke, is facing the struggle of providing for his family and trying to ensure they never have to endure the hardships he encounters every day. The 3rd officer, Don Cheadle, is a successful undercover officer that has been dabbling in the shadow far too long to be clear where his loyalties ultimately lie. Wesley Snipes rounds out this top notch cast as a notorious drug dealer Caz, who is a friend of Cheadle's Tango character.



In many ways this film is a continuation of what we saw in Spike Lee's New Jack City. It is the result of the progression of drugs and criminal life after decades of abuse and general lack of enforcement. It is the less glamorous, far more violent and real look at the toll drugs and criminals have on themselves, the police that pursue them, and the people that are caught in the malestrom of these two forces.

A question might be asked how good the film is. Wesley Snipes has long been removed to the direct to DVD sector of Hollywood. Gere hasn't had a major hit in decades. Hawke has never seemed to live up to the expactations that continue to surround him. Even Fuqua has not revisited the universal acclaim of Training Day.

But I think the answer is that most of the cast have not had the chance to really shine. Snipes was long ago stereotyped into action based roles, and then almost outcast as a result of the Government. Cheadle has only once been given the opportunity to step out into the lead of a film. Often he is deprived of the time to showcase his abilities. The same can be said of Hawke. And Gere has finally hit an age for male actors where most are found to be uninteresting and unappealing to young viewers, though their talent has not faded.



Looking at the movie trailer the feeling that this film will be a powerful drama is inescapable. Still there is no question that an excellent editor can make the worst movie look incredible. But when I consider the fact that in addition to the trailer, there is such a rich cast - who all took pay cuts so the film could be made at the modest $25 million budget - and that director Fuqua is back to a subject and theme that he has been most successful at, I come to a conclusion that this may be a sleeper hit.

Characters will take their paths to conclusions you may not expect in this film. The outcome may not be as obvious as it first seems. But the journey that each of these actors take us on looks as if it will make the 140 mintues fly.

Bill O'Reilly addresses Minister Louis Farrakhan

What's the difference between Louis Farrakhan and any media supported Black "leader"?

Nothing.

It's not a joke. There is no punchline. The fact is that I don't see a difference. Whether it's Rev. Sharpton, or Rev. Jackson, or Minister Farrakhan the net result is the same. An individual that owes their success to the division of people in this nation solely on the basis of skin color.

It's not a job that I would imagine anyone would be proud of. Yet the media ensures that when this highly selected group of men speak, their words are promoted (intentionally or not) across the nation. What may be even worse is that most of the time these individuals are speaking about situations and issues that are real concerns for African Americans - minus the rheotoric and bias they instill to the issue at hand.

Last night Bill O'Reilly address part of a recent speech by Minister Farrakhan



I agree that the comments highlighted are hate-speech. They feed off of the worst fears and prejudices in America. But I don't think O'Reilly and many Americans get it.

O'Reilly and others get stuck on the hate-speech, the over-the-top presentation being made for the explicit purpose of providing Minister Farrakhan (in this case) coverage in the media. They miss, and deafen their ears to the kernel of truth at the core of the comments.

I'm not excusing Farrakhan. But there is a fear in the nation among African Americans that President Obama will be assassinated. That fear has existed long before President Obama ever considered running for the Presidency. If ever there is another Black President (which I doubt, sadly) the fear will be there as well, though to a lesser degree - if President Obama exits the Presidency unscathed.

I think that many misrepresent the source of the danger to the President. The first thought obviously goes to a neo-nazi or similar fanatic. But to call such a person an example of the generic right-wing of America is about as accurate as when I'm told I look like Richard Pryor. Still that does not mean that a segment of America, likely some part of the 47% (Democrats, Republicans, and Independants) that voted against President Obama, hates the President on a basis as crude and deranged as the color of his skin.

So it is not like the assassinations of Lincoln or JFK. There is a component in the attempts on his life (so far) that is derived solely in race. Were an assassination to succeed it would be more than a political attack, it would be a call to return America to a not so distant past that most want to forget willfully.

Like most, of any color or race, in America the issue of racism is something no one wants to address. Thus it is mocked, and isolated, and rebuffed. But it is also mislabeled - which is perhaps the greater problem. When President Carter, and President Clinton, attacked those that had legitimate issues with the politics of President Obama, calling them racists, they only fanned the flames of the problem. They in fact gave credence to the fears that Farrakhan uses to support his power base. To the detriment of the nation.

There is no way that Bill O'Reilly, or anyone, can come to understand the issues that face people of color in America in 5 minutes. To even try to do so only creates more anger. Because misunderstanding and confusion cannot help but be created in such a short time frame, no matter the good intetions. This is even worse when the intricate and persistent issues still dominant in America are not allowed to be exposed, as O'Reilly did when cutting off Leo Terrell. Given the fact that the purpose of the segment was not to address all the issues of people of color face, nor the causes of fears based on race (true or not).

One thing though is very clear. America has not entered a post-racial period. Racial issues still dog America as much as they did 6 months ago, as they did 6 years ago, as they did 6 decades ago, as they do 6 minutes from now. For all the interconnectivity of the internet, the immediacy of cable news, the presence of the first Black President, America has not moved forward - just sideways.

Minister Farrakhan is no worse than any other "Black leader" promoted in the media. He may be more extreme, more honest, or if you choose to believe him more accurate. But in essence he is just as much a minstrel and opportunist as the others. Highlighting this in 5 minutes or less segments does not disrupt his actitivies, it enhances them.

Rather I think he should be either ignored, or exposed fully to the world in full. Only then can he be seen for what his is, just as the other Black "leaders" are.

Movie Preview: Repo Men

If flattery is the highest form of compliment, then Hollywood gives more compliments than a politician trying toget funds to get re-elected. But Hollywood is usually a bit less blatant in its compliments than the upcoming film Repo Men is.

Repo Men is the rip off of 2 film predominantly. Logan's Run and Repo! the Genetic Opera. You might have heard of Logan's Run but I doubt you heard of Repo!

The plot is basic. Our hero is running from the bad guys. In this case he is a former repo man - in a world where augmenting the body is a life-saving and profitable business, those that don't pay lose whatever was replaced. Repo men are the guys that collect on the bad debt. Remy (Jude Law) and his partner Jake (Forest Whitaker) are the best at collections. Remy winds up getting an augment, and failing to pay becomes next on the list for collection.

You've seen this movie in Logan's Run, as the former pair of friends now are at odds with each other. You saw a take on the idea in Running Man, as the oppressive authority forces a hero to rise up and the people to join him.

What you didn't see is how it works in a world like this. That's where Repo! comes in.



Given that Repo! had Paris Hilton in it, and it's a musical. 2 great reasons you never saw the film. But ti doesn't make Repo Men any more original. Still the question is if it is a good movie.



Well the film looks better than Repo! which says a lot. Plus it does NOT have Paris Hilton in it, which is a HUGE statement for it's quality.

Forest Whitaker is a great actor. He has been in more than a few great films. So to see him in this adds credibility to the film, and an assurance that it's not a complete waste of time.

Jude Law is also a solid actor and more than capable of a film of this nature. So again this is a plus for the film.

The fact that it copies some of the more time honored ideas in Hollywood, friends as rivals, futuristic drama, decent helpings of actions and new gadgets, helps.

This is yet another non-Oscar worthy film. Which means that someone besides the Oscar community will see it. It will likely give action and sci-fi fans what they are looking for. Some ladies (possibly men too I suppose) will get their fix of Law, and the afrocentric crowd gets Whitaker in a lead support role. It's got almost something for everyone.

I would see this in a theater. It's likely better than most of the films coming out for the 2010 summer blockbuster season. And considering the repercussions of the recession, this will be one of the few films of any note for most of the year. Though it won't be the last rip-off film, it is far from the worst.