I took notice a while back that my post count had been creeping closer and closer to 100 blog posts, and I decided I'd use my 100th post to look back on some of the more important events in my life over the last two and a half years. There's a lot to look at, that's for sure.
I lived by myself for the first time ever in my life when I had lived in Virginia. I gotta say, it was quite an experience. I always had either friends or family to come home to after work, but living on my own was eerily quiet at times. It forced me to grow up quite a bit, mainly to teach me how to keep a fairly clean house, keep a budget, and how to cook. I actually like cooking now, and I really dislike throwing a frozen pizza in the oven, barring laziness.
There are two other very important events in my life during my time in Virginia that I can't avoid talking about, those being my period of unemployment and my parents splitting for good. The really tough part was that both events happened within a week of each other, which piled the stress on big time. I can at least put a positive spin on my unemployment because it made me appreciate my friends and family in all sorts of new ways. That was the time when I had to call in every favor I had in the book, and pray that one of those favors would pay off. Fortunately it did, and that leads me to my next highlight.
My new job is just awesome. I've wanted to work for the federal government going all the way back to my days in college, and I don't have to worry about being squeezed like I was at my old job. It also led to me moving back to my old stomping grounds in Baltimore, so I could be around my closest friends, my family, and my niece a whole lot more. My niece in particular is this glowing beam of sunshine who just makes everyone around her smile. I went to visit my sister a couple weeks ago, and my niece is walking around the house, looking for new ways to get into trouble. She even likes to play a version of hide and seek by tucking herself inside a storage cabinet at the base of my sister's dining room table. She's a real blessing.
There's one more important event that I dare not omit talking about. My girlfriend is someone really, really special. I'm holding off talking about her and our history until we get to the six month mark, but that's mostly out of superstition. We have a very long history going back 11 years (!!!!), and it's one of those stories that make my friends and family laugh when I tell them how we had first met. Don't worry though; that post will be coming down the pipeline in due time.
I don't want to say anything terribly cliche like how I'm older and wiser than I was even two and a half years ago, but I know I'm not the same person. I used to be a welcome mat and allow others walk all over top of me, and while I'm still fairly passive I'm not lacking in backbone as I used to be. Getting well into your thirties will do that I suppose, but that's a benefit. Overall, I have matured as an adult, and I don't feel like I sacrificed much of any fun like I did during most of my twenties.
So here's to the next 100 posts. May they be filled with as much random thinking, nonsense, humor, and hopefully some deep thought as my previous 100 posts were.
Friday, June 29, 2012
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Nearly a Statistic
I had brunch with my mom on Sunday since we hadn't seen each other since right before my girlfriend and I had left for the Caymans over Memorial Day weekend. It gave us a chance to catch up on everything we've been up to in the last few weeks, and I got to tell her in more detail about everything Kim and I had done while we were away. I also gave her the small gift I picked up for her while I was in the Caymans, and tallying up good son points are always a good thing.
(Incidentally, we had briefly talked about everything that I had talked about in my last post, but I stopped her short of filling me in on her side of the story. The less I knew, the better.)
While we were having brunch my mom dropped a bombshell on me: in February, my aunt went in for her normal mammogram checkup, and doctors found something abnormal in her breast. They ran more tests, and they confirmed a malignant tumor in my aunt. In short, she had breast cancer.
Before I go any further, here's the good news: my aunt has already met with a specialist and had surgery to remove the tumor. The doctors caught the cancer early enough when it was only starting to show, and the surgery was fairly standard. She's expected to make a full recovery and will be following up with her doctor for future checkups to make sure nothing comes back.
When my mom told me the bare facts before getting into all the details, my mind immediately jumped in a number of different directions. How are her kids - my cousins - handling it? How many people did she tell? How serious is it? When is she meeting with a specialist? Can surgery eliminate all the cancer?
My mom quickly filled me in on everything. My aunt chose to only tell a few people in the family because she, understandably, didn't want to keep telling the same story and answering the same questions over and over. Instead, she went ahead with meeting with the specialist, and once her surgery was scheduled, she told the rest of her and my mom's siblings.
Like I said, the surgery was successful and my aunt is on the road to recovery. The truth remains that she is now a breast cancer survivor, which is the good side of the statistic. It could have gone another direction, and I could be writing a post about how my aunt is fighting for her life right now.
Every Mother's Day, my mom and I have gotten together to go to a baseball game together. We've had this tradition for years, and the great thing is that the weather is generally perfect for a game. What's really awesome about Mother's Day baseball is that the players use pink bats and wear pink gloves to show support for breast cancer research. It's a great cause, one that I am now personally invested in. My mom and I did out regular day at Camden Yards in May, but next year we'll have a whole new reason to go and show our support.
(Incidentally, we had briefly talked about everything that I had talked about in my last post, but I stopped her short of filling me in on her side of the story. The less I knew, the better.)
While we were having brunch my mom dropped a bombshell on me: in February, my aunt went in for her normal mammogram checkup, and doctors found something abnormal in her breast. They ran more tests, and they confirmed a malignant tumor in my aunt. In short, she had breast cancer.
Before I go any further, here's the good news: my aunt has already met with a specialist and had surgery to remove the tumor. The doctors caught the cancer early enough when it was only starting to show, and the surgery was fairly standard. She's expected to make a full recovery and will be following up with her doctor for future checkups to make sure nothing comes back.
When my mom told me the bare facts before getting into all the details, my mind immediately jumped in a number of different directions. How are her kids - my cousins - handling it? How many people did she tell? How serious is it? When is she meeting with a specialist? Can surgery eliminate all the cancer?
My mom quickly filled me in on everything. My aunt chose to only tell a few people in the family because she, understandably, didn't want to keep telling the same story and answering the same questions over and over. Instead, she went ahead with meeting with the specialist, and once her surgery was scheduled, she told the rest of her and my mom's siblings.
Like I said, the surgery was successful and my aunt is on the road to recovery. The truth remains that she is now a breast cancer survivor, which is the good side of the statistic. It could have gone another direction, and I could be writing a post about how my aunt is fighting for her life right now.
Every Mother's Day, my mom and I have gotten together to go to a baseball game together. We've had this tradition for years, and the great thing is that the weather is generally perfect for a game. What's really awesome about Mother's Day baseball is that the players use pink bats and wear pink gloves to show support for breast cancer research. It's a great cause, one that I am now personally invested in. My mom and I did out regular day at Camden Yards in May, but next year we'll have a whole new reason to go and show our support.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
A Rock and a Hard Place
I've purposely avoided writing about my parents' divorce on here for several reasons, namely that most people who read this blog don't know either of my parents personally, so they won't have any kind of context to their relationship. Aside from a couple comments made in passing here and there, I doubt any reader would have even known my parents were divorcing anyway. Still, it's a major change in my family and our collective lifestyles, so it bears worth discussing.
I won't bother talking about the entire history of my parents and their issues since that goes back nearly three years ago. The major stuff anyone would need to know is that they separated in April last year, and it hasn't been a very pleasant split. I was living in Virginia at the time, so I was somewhat blessed to be living apart from them both and didn't have to deal with either of them very often.
Most of my information at first came from one or both of my sisters. They were both very upset at both my parents for different reasons, and chose to limit talking to either of them as a result. I don't blame them for making their choices, but I always found it very difficult to follow their suit. However, it was equally tough for me to speak to either of my parents, knowing my sisters didn't want to speak to either of them. Essentially I was caught in the middle of the entire mess, and I didn't know who to take at face value for the most part on either side.
The storm kept brewing once I allowed myself to be messenger between my parents a couple times. My dad called me asking for favors to pass messages off to my mom, and even though I was extremely uncomfortable with being the messenger boy, I told her what my dad had asked me to say. Both times I had agreed to call my mom on my dad's behalf resulted in incredibly awkward conversations, and I had to put my foot down with my dad to tell him I wouldn't be willing to play messenger anymore. He didn't like it much since he only saw it as making a phone call, but he didn't understand how I was putting myself at risk in getting involved in their divorce proceedings.
Fast forward to this morning. My dad sent me a text a little after 4:00 this morning (?!?!!??!) asking me to call him because of an urgent matter. I had made plans to have dinner with him this evening for Father's Day, but he had abruptly cancelled those plans yesterday, after supposedly being upset by a conversation he had with two people regarding my mom (I don't know any details beyond that, and frankly I don't think I want to know). Now, he had a new favor for me in light of yesterday's confrontation: he had a check for my mom, but he didn't want to see her, so he had asked me to deliver it. I immediately thought back to playing messenger for him in the past with my mom, and how uncomfortable I felt from delivering those messages. Still, I agreed to deliver the check.
Then I discussed the whole thing with my girlfriend. She's been through a divorce in the past, so she had plenty of insight into the situation. Her advice was right in line with my gut feeling on the subject, that I shouldn't have to be the one to deliver the check, regardless of what my dad says. I'd be putting myself at risk if I delivered the check and something went wrong with it, not to mention there was no guarantee what I was delivering was in fact a check to begin with.
The follow-up conversation with my dad loomed over my head for the next couple hours. I eventually called him and told him straight up that I wasn't going to deliver the check. Suffice to say, he didn't like hearing that. He tried explaining that it was a simple task and it shouldn't matter, but I told him how it would put me in a potentially risky situation. It led to a pretty big argument, ending only because he eventually hung up on me.
Here's my dilemma: I don't want to be dragged in between my parents anymore than I already have, knowing that each of them would pit me against the other in the process. Ironically, in order to avoid being the bad guy, I have to be the bad guy with them by backing off. On top of all that, I still want to try having a relationship with each of them going forward; they're still my parents after all. Yet, I can't really talk to either of them without the conversation at some point turning into a bitch session about the other.
I know the easy answer is their divorce is between them and they're being the real bad guys by pinning me against each other. My sisters were smart to back off completely from the get go, but I still tried keeping active relationships with them both. Bottom line is drawing a line in the sand with the two of them is easier said than done. I don't like the idea of taking a hard line with either of them since that could make having a relationship that much more difficult later on. I can only hope that if that's what I have to ultimately do, they'll both realize why in the end, and once these hard times are in the past, we can all collectively move forward.
Of course, I'm probably being more than a little naive.
I won't bother talking about the entire history of my parents and their issues since that goes back nearly three years ago. The major stuff anyone would need to know is that they separated in April last year, and it hasn't been a very pleasant split. I was living in Virginia at the time, so I was somewhat blessed to be living apart from them both and didn't have to deal with either of them very often.
Most of my information at first came from one or both of my sisters. They were both very upset at both my parents for different reasons, and chose to limit talking to either of them as a result. I don't blame them for making their choices, but I always found it very difficult to follow their suit. However, it was equally tough for me to speak to either of my parents, knowing my sisters didn't want to speak to either of them. Essentially I was caught in the middle of the entire mess, and I didn't know who to take at face value for the most part on either side.
The storm kept brewing once I allowed myself to be messenger between my parents a couple times. My dad called me asking for favors to pass messages off to my mom, and even though I was extremely uncomfortable with being the messenger boy, I told her what my dad had asked me to say. Both times I had agreed to call my mom on my dad's behalf resulted in incredibly awkward conversations, and I had to put my foot down with my dad to tell him I wouldn't be willing to play messenger anymore. He didn't like it much since he only saw it as making a phone call, but he didn't understand how I was putting myself at risk in getting involved in their divorce proceedings.
Fast forward to this morning. My dad sent me a text a little after 4:00 this morning (?!?!!??!) asking me to call him because of an urgent matter. I had made plans to have dinner with him this evening for Father's Day, but he had abruptly cancelled those plans yesterday, after supposedly being upset by a conversation he had with two people regarding my mom (I don't know any details beyond that, and frankly I don't think I want to know). Now, he had a new favor for me in light of yesterday's confrontation: he had a check for my mom, but he didn't want to see her, so he had asked me to deliver it. I immediately thought back to playing messenger for him in the past with my mom, and how uncomfortable I felt from delivering those messages. Still, I agreed to deliver the check.
Then I discussed the whole thing with my girlfriend. She's been through a divorce in the past, so she had plenty of insight into the situation. Her advice was right in line with my gut feeling on the subject, that I shouldn't have to be the one to deliver the check, regardless of what my dad says. I'd be putting myself at risk if I delivered the check and something went wrong with it, not to mention there was no guarantee what I was delivering was in fact a check to begin with.
The follow-up conversation with my dad loomed over my head for the next couple hours. I eventually called him and told him straight up that I wasn't going to deliver the check. Suffice to say, he didn't like hearing that. He tried explaining that it was a simple task and it shouldn't matter, but I told him how it would put me in a potentially risky situation. It led to a pretty big argument, ending only because he eventually hung up on me.
Here's my dilemma: I don't want to be dragged in between my parents anymore than I already have, knowing that each of them would pit me against the other in the process. Ironically, in order to avoid being the bad guy, I have to be the bad guy with them by backing off. On top of all that, I still want to try having a relationship with each of them going forward; they're still my parents after all. Yet, I can't really talk to either of them without the conversation at some point turning into a bitch session about the other.
I know the easy answer is their divorce is between them and they're being the real bad guys by pinning me against each other. My sisters were smart to back off completely from the get go, but I still tried keeping active relationships with them both. Bottom line is drawing a line in the sand with the two of them is easier said than done. I don't like the idea of taking a hard line with either of them since that could make having a relationship that much more difficult later on. I can only hope that if that's what I have to ultimately do, they'll both realize why in the end, and once these hard times are in the past, we can all collectively move forward.
Of course, I'm probably being more than a little naive.
Monday, May 21, 2012
Where No Straight Man Has Gone Before
The Lady in My Life has been reading the Fifty Shades of Grey book series lately. She's about halfway through the second book and is completely hooked on them. She's even encouraged me to give them a read because of how...intense (?)...they are. I know the books are extremely popular with women readers right now, and almost every woman I know has at least started reading them (if not finished them) or wants to check them out.
So last night, I cracked open the first book in the series to see what the fuss was about. I read about 60 or so pages before calling it a night. I didn't get to any of the "good stuff" so to speak, but I got far enough to meet the main characters and the general sense of why the books were popular. I might even continue reading the first book to finish what I started, despite how it's clearly written for women audiences.
Now I have to say that it's refreshing that while Fifty Shades is certainly about romance and relationships, it isn't the childish tripe that is Twilight. I couldn't tolerate even the commercials for the movies in the Twilight series, and I certainly never got the appeal behind them. A teen vampire and a teen werewolf bicker over the love of a human girl? So what? What's at stake?
There are issues I have with Fifty Shades, but they aren't anything quite like what I have with Twilight. I think my biggest issue is the sheer amount of time the lead character Anastasia ogles over Christian Grey. From the moment she lays eyes on Grey, she is immediately drawn to his physical attractiveness, and from that point she daydreams about him and lusts after him constantly. I know she's around 22, and that kind of behavior isn't that uncommon for a 22 year old woman, but COME ON. After about 30 pages of reading paragraph after paragraph over how much she can't stop thinking about him or lusting after him, I found myself wanting to scream, "OKAY, I GET IT! SHE HAS THE HOTS FOR HIM! MOVE ON!"
The inherent flaw, if you will, with my issue is that I also know her emotional state is very central to the story itself. From her first meeting with Christian Grey, it was very clear every response, facial reaction, and gesture on Grey's part was designed to intimidate and control Anastasia. I guess I wish subtlety was used more instead of putting Anastasia's thoughts in bold-faced capital letters so the reader has little to figure out. Not to get too far off on another tangent, but it's the same problem I have with Dan Brown; his lack of subtle hints kill any chance for tension or surprise in his novels. He has no faith in the reader's ability to remember details early on in his books, so he has to spell everything out in order for the payoff later on.
In any case, I'm not trying say Fifty Shades is bad. I still have a feeling I'll be more satisfied reading Game of Thrones while I lay out on the beach this weekend.
So last night, I cracked open the first book in the series to see what the fuss was about. I read about 60 or so pages before calling it a night. I didn't get to any of the "good stuff" so to speak, but I got far enough to meet the main characters and the general sense of why the books were popular. I might even continue reading the first book to finish what I started, despite how it's clearly written for women audiences.
Now I have to say that it's refreshing that while Fifty Shades is certainly about romance and relationships, it isn't the childish tripe that is Twilight. I couldn't tolerate even the commercials for the movies in the Twilight series, and I certainly never got the appeal behind them. A teen vampire and a teen werewolf bicker over the love of a human girl? So what? What's at stake?
There are issues I have with Fifty Shades, but they aren't anything quite like what I have with Twilight. I think my biggest issue is the sheer amount of time the lead character Anastasia ogles over Christian Grey. From the moment she lays eyes on Grey, she is immediately drawn to his physical attractiveness, and from that point she daydreams about him and lusts after him constantly. I know she's around 22, and that kind of behavior isn't that uncommon for a 22 year old woman, but COME ON. After about 30 pages of reading paragraph after paragraph over how much she can't stop thinking about him or lusting after him, I found myself wanting to scream, "OKAY, I GET IT! SHE HAS THE HOTS FOR HIM! MOVE ON!"
The inherent flaw, if you will, with my issue is that I also know her emotional state is very central to the story itself. From her first meeting with Christian Grey, it was very clear every response, facial reaction, and gesture on Grey's part was designed to intimidate and control Anastasia. I guess I wish subtlety was used more instead of putting Anastasia's thoughts in bold-faced capital letters so the reader has little to figure out. Not to get too far off on another tangent, but it's the same problem I have with Dan Brown; his lack of subtle hints kill any chance for tension or surprise in his novels. He has no faith in the reader's ability to remember details early on in his books, so he has to spell everything out in order for the payoff later on.
In any case, I'm not trying say Fifty Shades is bad. I still have a feeling I'll be more satisfied reading Game of Thrones while I lay out on the beach this weekend.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Are You Reading This, Verizon?
There's a lot of blog types out there, and one of the most popular is the whining and bitching blog. The writer is upset over something and feels the need to vent about the subject. Sometimes it's a legit reason, like some political or social cause the author supports. Others it's something much more mundane like paying too much for a pizza. I've done a little of both, with the former written a long time ago and the latter being much more recent.
My latest gripe is somewhere in between. Yesterday, Verizon announced news to completely do away with its old unlimited data plans for its smartphones, and shift any customers still on those plans to its tiered data plans. I got my first smartphone in January 2010, and I had upgraded to a new one this past December. I got an unlimited data plan along with my first smartphone, and I was able to keep it with my current phone. Now, according to this latest news, whenever I upgrade again I will be forced to dump that unlimited plan and switch to tiered or shared data.
I should confess that part of the reason that I am upset over this is because I am a heavy data plan user. I know that the vast majority of smartphone users don't go over 2 GB of data every month, but I tend to go over between listening to the radio online or watching YouTube videos. Sure, I can (and do) switch over to Wi-Fi networks when they're available, but I should only have to give up my current data plan if I really want to. It's nonsense to force me into choosing a new something just because it's convenient for the other party.
I'd actually have less of a problem with this if Verizon came out and said something like, "Our 4G network is being overloaded with heavy data usage, and as such we are no longer able to sustain unlimited data usage on our phones." But no, their CFO actually said it's much more about moving those customers onto tiered and shared plans so Verizon can charge either A.) excess fees for those who go over their monthly alloted amounts of data, similar to exceeding monthly minute plans for talking, or B.) higher rates for larger amounts of data for customers.
Of course, there's also the fact that Verizon now also charges its customers a $30 activation fee whenever someone buys a new phone. They also dumped their "New Every Two" discount, so in addition to paying full price for a new phone and an extra $30 activation fee, I will be capped on the amount of data I can use on my phone every month. Verizon had also tried adding online bill pay fees for those who didn't permit automatic drafting from a checking account to pay for each month's bill, but fortunately there was enough customer backlash that killed that plan.
Verizon, like any major corporation, has a responsibility to its shareholders and investors more than anyone else. The company has to show how it's going to continue increasing its revenue every year and why they think it'll work. They have no reason to show their customers any sign of loyalty, even someone like me who's been with them for 14 years now. They also know they're the big boy on the block, and other companies like AT&T or Sprint can't come close to the level of technology or access Verizon provides.
So what option does that leave someone like me with?
I don't think there's any real answer to that question. I could go to Sprint, provided they still offer unlimited data when my Verizon contract ends next fall. But I know what I'd be getting myself into there, and it's unlikely leaving Verizon will help me much. And one customer leaving Verizon won't even be a drop in the pool, considering they have nearly 100 million customers.
I do know one thing: I will be writing a formal letter of complaint to Verizon about this topic. They may simply discard it in the trash, but I have a right to voice my displeasure. I don't often get this upset over something like a cell phone, but considering how Verizon has systematically made changes to upset their customers, something has to be done.
My latest gripe is somewhere in between. Yesterday, Verizon announced news to completely do away with its old unlimited data plans for its smartphones, and shift any customers still on those plans to its tiered data plans. I got my first smartphone in January 2010, and I had upgraded to a new one this past December. I got an unlimited data plan along with my first smartphone, and I was able to keep it with my current phone. Now, according to this latest news, whenever I upgrade again I will be forced to dump that unlimited plan and switch to tiered or shared data.
I should confess that part of the reason that I am upset over this is because I am a heavy data plan user. I know that the vast majority of smartphone users don't go over 2 GB of data every month, but I tend to go over between listening to the radio online or watching YouTube videos. Sure, I can (and do) switch over to Wi-Fi networks when they're available, but I should only have to give up my current data plan if I really want to. It's nonsense to force me into choosing a new something just because it's convenient for the other party.
I'd actually have less of a problem with this if Verizon came out and said something like, "Our 4G network is being overloaded with heavy data usage, and as such we are no longer able to sustain unlimited data usage on our phones." But no, their CFO actually said it's much more about moving those customers onto tiered and shared plans so Verizon can charge either A.) excess fees for those who go over their monthly alloted amounts of data, similar to exceeding monthly minute plans for talking, or B.) higher rates for larger amounts of data for customers.
Of course, there's also the fact that Verizon now also charges its customers a $30 activation fee whenever someone buys a new phone. They also dumped their "New Every Two" discount, so in addition to paying full price for a new phone and an extra $30 activation fee, I will be capped on the amount of data I can use on my phone every month. Verizon had also tried adding online bill pay fees for those who didn't permit automatic drafting from a checking account to pay for each month's bill, but fortunately there was enough customer backlash that killed that plan.
Verizon, like any major corporation, has a responsibility to its shareholders and investors more than anyone else. The company has to show how it's going to continue increasing its revenue every year and why they think it'll work. They have no reason to show their customers any sign of loyalty, even someone like me who's been with them for 14 years now. They also know they're the big boy on the block, and other companies like AT&T or Sprint can't come close to the level of technology or access Verizon provides.
So what option does that leave someone like me with?
I don't think there's any real answer to that question. I could go to Sprint, provided they still offer unlimited data when my Verizon contract ends next fall. But I know what I'd be getting myself into there, and it's unlikely leaving Verizon will help me much. And one customer leaving Verizon won't even be a drop in the pool, considering they have nearly 100 million customers.
I do know one thing: I will be writing a formal letter of complaint to Verizon about this topic. They may simply discard it in the trash, but I have a right to voice my displeasure. I don't often get this upset over something like a cell phone, but considering how Verizon has systematically made changes to upset their customers, something has to be done.
Monday, May 7, 2012
Movie Review: The Avengers
Simply put, The Avengers is my new favorite film EVER. Sorry, Braveheart; you've been dethroned.
I'm not sure what I could possibly say about this film that hasn't been said dozens of times since it's been released Friday. I'll give it a shot, though.
The plot: Loki - the villain from last year's Thor - has been searching for a mysterious object called the Tesseract Cube. He's figured out it's on Earth and has assembled an army to track it down. The cube will give him a limitless source of power, one that he will use to conquer our planet. He manages to steal it away from S.H.I.E.L.D., run by Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson). Fury knows how powerful the cube is, so he has to figure out a way to stop Loki and get the cube back.
Fury quickly decides to put together a team of superheroes to find Loki. He uses what's left of S.H.I.E.L.D. to round up a group of pre-selected men for this team. They track down Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, and Steve Rogers, and also work on finding Thor. It's clear this motley crew doesn't jive from the moment they all meet one another. Round ups like this sequence have been used time and again in movies, but this situation is somewhat unique since we've already seen all four of these guys in action on their own. That's actually a positive about the film because we care about these characters already, instead of meeting them some or all of them for the first time at this point and trying to care about them later.
One of the other great things about this film is that while the audience can sit in awe over these guys interacting and fighting alongside one another, the film itself isn't in awe of them for the most part. When I saw Star Wars: Episode One in theaters for the first time, I went in expecting to be in awe over seeing the Jedi in action, fighting with the Force and their lightsabers. The problem was that the film was in awe over the same things, and so the characters and story were all constructed to suit those special effects. The films all sufffered as a result.
Such is not a problem with The Avengers. Sure, it's great to see Iron Man and Captain America argue with one another about whose ego is more important, but there's an actual pay off to everything in the final battle sequence. It'd be incredibly easy for one or more characters to be overshadowed by the other heroes, but they all get roughly equal amounts of screen time throughout the film.
That brings me to one character in particular in this film: Bruce Banner. The previous incarnations of Banner and the Hulk certainly were built over the inner struggle between the two sides of Banner's personality. Here we get to see not only the Hulk truly rampage over everything in its path, but also how Banner can simultaneously focus its anger. Up until now, Banner has been focused on ridding himself of the Hulk from him; and while he still lives in fear of his version of Mr. Hyde at the beginning of The Avengers, he actually gets to contribute more to the plot of the film prior to turning into the Hulk in its climax.
Speaking of the climactic battle, it's the kind of balls-to-the-wall action sequence that has to be seen several times. Iron Man blasts serpent machines out of the sky. Hawkeye picks off baddies flying through the air with his bow and arrow. Captain America and Black Widow lead the ground assault. Thor bashes things left and right with his hammer. And the Hulk...my God, the HULK.
The other great thing about this film is its ability to juggle the drama and tension with comedy. There are points even during the battle sequence that are priceless, ones that had me clapping while laughing. I'm sure I'll love those moments the second time around even though I know they're coming.
I hope by the time you've gotten to this point of the review that you've stopped reading and ordered tickets for your own Avengers experience. If you haven't, then I beg you to do so. It's the rare film experience that's worth not only a big screen viewing, but multiple viewings. Enjoy.
I'm not sure what I could possibly say about this film that hasn't been said dozens of times since it's been released Friday. I'll give it a shot, though.
The plot: Loki - the villain from last year's Thor - has been searching for a mysterious object called the Tesseract Cube. He's figured out it's on Earth and has assembled an army to track it down. The cube will give him a limitless source of power, one that he will use to conquer our planet. He manages to steal it away from S.H.I.E.L.D., run by Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson). Fury knows how powerful the cube is, so he has to figure out a way to stop Loki and get the cube back.
Fury quickly decides to put together a team of superheroes to find Loki. He uses what's left of S.H.I.E.L.D. to round up a group of pre-selected men for this team. They track down Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, and Steve Rogers, and also work on finding Thor. It's clear this motley crew doesn't jive from the moment they all meet one another. Round ups like this sequence have been used time and again in movies, but this situation is somewhat unique since we've already seen all four of these guys in action on their own. That's actually a positive about the film because we care about these characters already, instead of meeting them some or all of them for the first time at this point and trying to care about them later.
One of the other great things about this film is that while the audience can sit in awe over these guys interacting and fighting alongside one another, the film itself isn't in awe of them for the most part. When I saw Star Wars: Episode One in theaters for the first time, I went in expecting to be in awe over seeing the Jedi in action, fighting with the Force and their lightsabers. The problem was that the film was in awe over the same things, and so the characters and story were all constructed to suit those special effects. The films all sufffered as a result.
Such is not a problem with The Avengers. Sure, it's great to see Iron Man and Captain America argue with one another about whose ego is more important, but there's an actual pay off to everything in the final battle sequence. It'd be incredibly easy for one or more characters to be overshadowed by the other heroes, but they all get roughly equal amounts of screen time throughout the film.
That brings me to one character in particular in this film: Bruce Banner. The previous incarnations of Banner and the Hulk certainly were built over the inner struggle between the two sides of Banner's personality. Here we get to see not only the Hulk truly rampage over everything in its path, but also how Banner can simultaneously focus its anger. Up until now, Banner has been focused on ridding himself of the Hulk from him; and while he still lives in fear of his version of Mr. Hyde at the beginning of The Avengers, he actually gets to contribute more to the plot of the film prior to turning into the Hulk in its climax.
Speaking of the climactic battle, it's the kind of balls-to-the-wall action sequence that has to be seen several times. Iron Man blasts serpent machines out of the sky. Hawkeye picks off baddies flying through the air with his bow and arrow. Captain America and Black Widow lead the ground assault. Thor bashes things left and right with his hammer. And the Hulk...my God, the HULK.
The other great thing about this film is its ability to juggle the drama and tension with comedy. There are points even during the battle sequence that are priceless, ones that had me clapping while laughing. I'm sure I'll love those moments the second time around even though I know they're coming.
I hope by the time you've gotten to this point of the review that you've stopped reading and ordered tickets for your own Avengers experience. If you haven't, then I beg you to do so. It's the rare film experience that's worth not only a big screen viewing, but multiple viewings. Enjoy.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Will the Real Sarah Phillips Please Stand Up...That Is, If She Exists
If you've been reading my blog for a while, first let me both thank you and express my sympathies. I'm humbled that anyone would read my blog for any period of time, but even I look in bewilderment on some of my older posts on here. Did I really write that stuff?
Anyway, if you've read my blog regularly you would know I enjoy a weird, juicy news story when one pops up. I think I found the strangest and most convoluted story I've read in a long, long time today.
The highlights are that ESPN had hired a 22-year-old woman as a freelance writer and discuss betting on various sporting events. She's apparently fresh out of college from the University of Oregon and somehow gained notoriety in a remarkably short period of time. ESPN sought her out to write on their Playbook page, but over a period of time evidence started piling up suggesting this woman had concealed her true identity and lied about her background. As more people came forward with their experiences with this young woman, ESPN ultimately decided to sever ties with her.
This is undoubtedly one of the most bizarre stories I've ever read. First, I'm kinda surprised that ESPN would actually want to recruit anyone to write about sports gambling and advise readers on what are the hot bets to make. Seems a little hypocritical to me, given how each of the four major sports have worked hard to prevent their players and other employees from gambling. But hey, that's just me.
The idea that a 22-year-old adult could be so well versed in gambling is quite staggering to me, given that the legal gambling age is 21. Maybe I'm naive, but how could anyone so young make the kinds of connections and have the knowledge to not only make smart bets on sports, but write a blog regularly about it? I turn 33 later this year, and I've never gambled in my life. Part of me wants to just to say I did, but I couldn't fathom plunking down $1000 on a regular basis betting on various games and events. But this is a girl fresh out of college! Where does she have this kind of cash laying around? And she's clearly not a newbie at this at all, so she's had access to the money and the bookies to be betting for years. Something isn't right here.
But it gets weirder. In reading more about the details of the mysterious Sarah Phillips and her history with ESPN, I found an article on Deadspin that digs deep into some of the individuals who had dealt with her over the years. I honestly don't understand half of what I had read, but from what I can gather, it sounds like she had scammed several people into giving her money in exchange for her "team" building websites for her victims (maybe that's how she scored so much money to use on gambling).
I realize that ESPN hires freelance writers all the time, as does any other news-reporting organization. As such, they wouldn't have ever met Phillips face to face in choosing to hire her since she's based out of Oregon. But what I find peculiar is the part about how very few photographs she had submitted resembled one another. Something like this shouldn't pass the smell test. Different hair colors is one thing, but half the faces in the collage of pictures of her posted on Deadspin don't look the slightest bit alike.
There are so many other areas of this story that mystify me. But for the sake of argument, let's say "Sarah Phillips" is in fact a false identity and this woman scammed both private citizens and ESPN. What legal penalties and consequences would she face? Since no one met her face to face, I don't see how the police could successfully track her down, especially since they don't have an accurate photograph of her appearance. Sure, the people she had scammed out of thousands of dollars have legit claims, but I don't see how she could be subpoenaed into court when no one knows her true identity (or if she's even a she, really).
I definitely intend on reading more about this story, should any additional details come out. ESPN will obviously avoid discussing it as much as possible, and considering the story is a small blip on most radars I imagine it'll be difficult to find updates on it. Still, I find it fascinating that such a con game could have gone on for so long and affect a company like ESPN.
Anyway, if you've read my blog regularly you would know I enjoy a weird, juicy news story when one pops up. I think I found the strangest and most convoluted story I've read in a long, long time today.
The highlights are that ESPN had hired a 22-year-old woman as a freelance writer and discuss betting on various sporting events. She's apparently fresh out of college from the University of Oregon and somehow gained notoriety in a remarkably short period of time. ESPN sought her out to write on their Playbook page, but over a period of time evidence started piling up suggesting this woman had concealed her true identity and lied about her background. As more people came forward with their experiences with this young woman, ESPN ultimately decided to sever ties with her.
This is undoubtedly one of the most bizarre stories I've ever read. First, I'm kinda surprised that ESPN would actually want to recruit anyone to write about sports gambling and advise readers on what are the hot bets to make. Seems a little hypocritical to me, given how each of the four major sports have worked hard to prevent their players and other employees from gambling. But hey, that's just me.
The idea that a 22-year-old adult could be so well versed in gambling is quite staggering to me, given that the legal gambling age is 21. Maybe I'm naive, but how could anyone so young make the kinds of connections and have the knowledge to not only make smart bets on sports, but write a blog regularly about it? I turn 33 later this year, and I've never gambled in my life. Part of me wants to just to say I did, but I couldn't fathom plunking down $1000 on a regular basis betting on various games and events. But this is a girl fresh out of college! Where does she have this kind of cash laying around? And she's clearly not a newbie at this at all, so she's had access to the money and the bookies to be betting for years. Something isn't right here.
But it gets weirder. In reading more about the details of the mysterious Sarah Phillips and her history with ESPN, I found an article on Deadspin that digs deep into some of the individuals who had dealt with her over the years. I honestly don't understand half of what I had read, but from what I can gather, it sounds like she had scammed several people into giving her money in exchange for her "team" building websites for her victims (maybe that's how she scored so much money to use on gambling).
I realize that ESPN hires freelance writers all the time, as does any other news-reporting organization. As such, they wouldn't have ever met Phillips face to face in choosing to hire her since she's based out of Oregon. But what I find peculiar is the part about how very few photographs she had submitted resembled one another. Something like this shouldn't pass the smell test. Different hair colors is one thing, but half the faces in the collage of pictures of her posted on Deadspin don't look the slightest bit alike.
There are so many other areas of this story that mystify me. But for the sake of argument, let's say "Sarah Phillips" is in fact a false identity and this woman scammed both private citizens and ESPN. What legal penalties and consequences would she face? Since no one met her face to face, I don't see how the police could successfully track her down, especially since they don't have an accurate photograph of her appearance. Sure, the people she had scammed out of thousands of dollars have legit claims, but I don't see how she could be subpoenaed into court when no one knows her true identity (or if she's even a she, really).
I definitely intend on reading more about this story, should any additional details come out. ESPN will obviously avoid discussing it as much as possible, and considering the story is a small blip on most radars I imagine it'll be difficult to find updates on it. Still, I find it fascinating that such a con game could have gone on for so long and affect a company like ESPN.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)