Okay, so these movies may not even be in theaters by now, but I don't want to just ignore them. And, if anyone really wants my opinion before renting or buying the DVDs, it'll be here.
What surprised me about This Is 40, the sort-of-sequel to "Knocked Up" focusing on the married couple Pete and Debbie (Paul Rudd, Leslie Mann), was how much bickering they did. Between their own issues, business problems and dealing with their children and parents, there were times when I was wishing there was more comedy and less drama. A nice amount of shirtless Paul Rudd, though, and there's the cameo with current (Scott Hartnell, now-retired Ian Laperriere) and former (James van Riemsdyk, Matt Carle) Flyers in a bar with Mann and Megan Fox. My grade: B-minus.
I started out really liking Promised Land, the film about natural-gas "fracking," with Matt Damon and Frances McDormand trying to get farmers to sign mineral-rights leases to drill on their land. Then an environmental advocate (John Krasinski) hits town and Damon's character is so completely flustered by this development it rang extremely false. And the big twist near the end was just stupid. My grade: C-plus.
I'd compare Parental Guidance to "The Guilt Trip" in that it's a somewhat safe and predictable comedy, in which a long-married couple (Billy Crystal, Bette Midler), called upon to hop on a plane and mind the grandkids for a week, have difficulty with how their daughter and son-in-law are raising the children. But the baseball subplot (Crystal's an announcer needing a new job) helped, the ending made me cry a little (whether I'm just easily manipulated by films or I'm getting mushy in my advancing age is yet to be determined) and Crystal and Midler have old-pro charm. My grade: B.
If you read only one blog full of ranting and raving about sports (local and otherwise), movies, TV shows, miscellaneous pop culture, life and other assorted flotsam and jetsam, make it this one!
Showing posts with label Scott Hartnell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scott Hartnell. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Why An Earthquake Should Bring Down Xfinity Live
A few weeks ago I bought a ticket to Wednesday night's Phillies game. I wasn't planning to go originally, even though they were giving the t-shirt pictured to all fans 15 and over. Then I read that the Phils set up their starting rotation so that Roy Halladay was pitching that night. In the previous two years I haven't seen him pitch once in person. I've only been to a few games the last couple of years but every time I went someone else pitched. So I got a ticket.(I almost didn't go because my mom passed away the day before, but I spoke to one of my brothers and he said she wouldn't want me to waste the ticket, which I sort of felt myself, and it wasn't as if I was missing the funeral or needed for anything else related to it.)
I figured I could check out what has come to be known as Xfinity Live. (Officially the title ends with an exclamation point but I refuse to use it.) When plans to tear down the Spectrum were first announced, it was known as Philly Live, and was quite ambitious. A shopping/dining/entertainment experience, perhaps even a hotel, was planned. Although I hate that the Spectrum had to go (I'd have liked to see them build around it somehow), the idea sounded really exciting.
It became less exciting when the project was delayed and scaled back due to the economic meltdown.
Then they decided that it would be given the same bizarre made-up name that Comcast came up with for its cable, internet and phone services because the name "Comcast" had such a poor reputation.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
You Can Play, But How About Simmonds?
Needless to say, I'm pleased about the You Can Play project, with its simple yet clear message encouraging equality for LGBT athletes: "If you can play, you can play." It's spearheaded by Flyers scout Patrick Burke, powerfully carrying on his brother Brendan's legacy. The fact that two Flyers (at least so far), Claude Giroux and Scott Hartnell, have taken part in the initial public-service announcement (see below) is even better.
(Hartnell's comments to the Philadelphia Daily News, by the way: "It was a no-brainer...we live in a diverse country. It's not a white man's sport. There's all sorts of nationalities in our sport. We encourage everyone to play. It's a great sport. Everyone has fun with it, especially when you're a kid. It's not just about sport, but you learn a lot of things about real life and becoming a team.")
I've been ambivalent about the Flyers this season because of the Wayne Simmonds preseason f-bomb incident. I do feel less ambivalent now, but I still can't entirely let go of it. The fact remains that after that game his stance was "you say things in the heat of battle" and the next day, on advice of -- well, who knows? NHL players' union? Team official? Agent? - he lied that he didn't saying it. The phony non-apology we often get in these situations would have been preferable to this. And it still bothers me that, at least for public consumption, Patrick Burke hasn't gone beyond what he was quoted as saying in the article I discussed in the above-linked post. I can understand why -- he works for the Flyers, after all -- but it still irks me.
Am I being too stubborn, or ridiculous? Is it too much to ask for Wayne Simmonds to at least be honest, if not contrite? Maybe at some point he should join the other players participating in the You Can Play videos. Maybe then I'd feel better.
(Hartnell's comments to the Philadelphia Daily News, by the way: "It was a no-brainer...we live in a diverse country. It's not a white man's sport. There's all sorts of nationalities in our sport. We encourage everyone to play. It's a great sport. Everyone has fun with it, especially when you're a kid. It's not just about sport, but you learn a lot of things about real life and becoming a team.")
I've been ambivalent about the Flyers this season because of the Wayne Simmonds preseason f-bomb incident. I do feel less ambivalent now, but I still can't entirely let go of it. The fact remains that after that game his stance was "you say things in the heat of battle" and the next day, on advice of -- well, who knows? NHL players' union? Team official? Agent? - he lied that he didn't saying it. The phony non-apology we often get in these situations would have been preferable to this. And it still bothers me that, at least for public consumption, Patrick Burke hasn't gone beyond what he was quoted as saying in the article I discussed in the above-linked post. I can understand why -- he works for the Flyers, after all -- but it still irks me.
Am I being too stubborn, or ridiculous? Is it too much to ask for Wayne Simmonds to at least be honest, if not contrite? Maybe at some point he should join the other players participating in the You Can Play videos. Maybe then I'd feel better.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Flyers Make History -- You Can't Make This Stuff Up
When it comes to sports, everybody -- athletes, coaches, fans, media -- likes to make predictions. Whether it's about a particular game or a playoff series or an entire season, people feel they know enough to project how things will go down. Often those predictions don't come true. Sometimes they do. And sometimes they come true in inexplicable fashion.
Case in point: the Philadelphia Flyers. Lots of people thought, prior to the season, that the Flyers were serious Stanley Cup contenders. The Hockey News outright predicted the Flyers would win the Cup. Sure enough, after tonight's 4-3 win over the Boston Bruins, winning their Eastern Conference semifinal series 4-3 after trailing 3-0, the Flyers still have a chance. But how they got to this point -- that's the inexplicable part.
The Flyers got off to a quick start and then fell into a morass of inconsistency that led to a coaching change. Injuries caused a goaltending carousel -- 7 different goalies dressed for a game, 5 of those 7 actually got into at least one game. They had to defeat the New York Rangers in the final game of the season just to get into the playoffs. After three periods and a five-minute overtime, they got that win in the shootout, where the Flyers have historically sucked.
Case in point: the Philadelphia Flyers. Lots of people thought, prior to the season, that the Flyers were serious Stanley Cup contenders. The Hockey News outright predicted the Flyers would win the Cup. Sure enough, after tonight's 4-3 win over the Boston Bruins, winning their Eastern Conference semifinal series 4-3 after trailing 3-0, the Flyers still have a chance. But how they got to this point -- that's the inexplicable part.
The Flyers got off to a quick start and then fell into a morass of inconsistency that led to a coaching change. Injuries caused a goaltending carousel -- 7 different goalies dressed for a game, 5 of those 7 actually got into at least one game. They had to defeat the New York Rangers in the final game of the season just to get into the playoffs. After three periods and a five-minute overtime, they got that win in the shootout, where the Flyers have historically sucked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


