the machine

Thinking about it, having Slater, Gabriel, Otunga, McGillicutty, Husky and Mason is a good thing. It'll be interesting to see what happens to them as singles competitors in Universe mode.

I hope they feud with D'Lo for the European title.

I'm at least curious about this iteration but it's funny how much of what they're saying is "hey it's like that game you liked from 8 years ago."

Ugh this argument is stupid.

More movies to recommend:

Gone Baby Gone. The Town got some positive attention this past year, but it's only the 2nd best Ben Affleck directed movie set in South Boston.

Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is another great film that works on more than one level, and it's shot by Roger Deakins, longtime Coen Bros collaborator, so it isn't a surprise that it looks great.

And there's beyond countless examples of movies that don't look great on paper that are great. Movies are stories told via moving pictures, which works differently then passively reading something.

Yeah at the time Johns' work on Avengers didn't wow me, although I enjoyed "Red Zone," but looking back it was far and away better then what was coming. I don't like to just hate on Bendis or any creator out of hand, as I think he has done some good work, but his Avengers comics are by and large not good. He either doesn't get or doesn't care about how to give everyone a unique voice and/or role, and his long-term stories end up being really dull and padded for trades. Secret Invasion was such a bad idea with such terrible execution it's hard to believe Marvel okayed it.

Lynch doing mindfuck for the sake of mindfuck is Inland Empire - a film that even as an enormous Lynch fan I just can't defend.

Completely agreed. I didn't get Mulholland Drive the first time I saw it, but it's not incomprehensible, just something that makes far more sense on a second viewing. For more evidence about how much Lynch just loves referencing old cinema while taking it apart, check out his comedies, which in general are not great, but are at least different from most comedies. Wild at Heart is Nicolas Cage as an Elvis-obsessed man in love and contains several allusions to the Wizard of Oz of all things.

Just re-read Busiek's run on Avengers from the late 90's to 2002: it holds up really well as some great "Avengers" comics (more proof that good stories aren't magically made bad later). I liked how Busiek was able to "put over" (to use the wrestling term) new names on what was at the time a top selling title: he created Triathlon and Silverclaw, and helped build up Justice and Firestar. He also showed a solid character arc for Hank Pym and Wasp, building on Wasp's run as chairperson in the 80's. His run gets accused sometimes of being too "retro" because it does have some connections to the book from the 1970's (like, for instance, the same artist). But it built on other stories without reading like a term paper and told some great stories in the meantime. The Kang War story in particular I remember not liking because the art gets inconsistent after Alan Davis leaves after a very brief run, and it just seemed to go on and on. But re-reading it, it's easily the best Kang storyline out there because it tells a great story without depending on time loopholes or deus ex machinas from cosmic beings: it was just the Avengers responding to a global catastrophe and winning a war against a villain with near unlimited resources.

It stinks that a few years later the book was handed off to an atrociously bad writer, and then to someone who was disinterested in writing "Avengers" comics. Between the two of them they managed to undo a lot of forward progress for a lot of these characters, regressing Hank Pym, turning Scarlet Witch into a psychotic, over-powered thing, making Wasp a flighty moron, and then forming a new team that consisted of the biggest names in the company and some Claremont characters with nostalgia value. But that doesn't make the stories Busiek wrote any worse: it just kind of makes reading them a little more bittersweet when he takes great pains to establish a character like Scarlet Witch as a strong, independent leader.

My favorites list is basically "movies I could watch a million times"

1. Memento

2. The Princess Bride

3. The Big Lebowski

4. Chinatown

4. The Room (I've seen it too many times to not include it)

5. Children of Men

6. The Shining

7. Throne of Blood

8. The Fall

9. Suspiria

10. Lawrence of Arabia

Honorable Mentions

* In Bruges

* Beauty and the Beast

* every Chris Nolan movie except Insomnia and Following

* Transformers: The animated movie (childhood favorite)

* every Kubrick movie except Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut

* every other Coen brothers movie

* City of God

* The Third Man

* Vertigo

* about half a dozen Scorsece movies, especially Taxi Driver

* Once Upon a Time in the West/Sergio Leone's work pre-OUATI America

I think some of the movies in the Honorable Mentions category are objectively better then, say, The Room, but I don't love them quite as much.

Personally I could sorta see where Matzat was going with his huge rant against Marvel... mostly that serials are pretty hit and miss, because you have several different writers and artists over the lifespan of said comic.

I like reading more concise comics, or comics that at least have an ending planned out from the conception. I don't have the time to read a story that goes on forever, when I could read an incredible graphic novel over the course of a fortnight or so. Scott Pilgrim, Maus, Waltz with Bashir, Alan Moore, Bone etc. There is a beginning, a middle and an end, leading to an emotional payoff for reading the book.

I understand that Marvel have written some amazing comic books recently (aka Runaways, Daredevil and many others) but, because Marvel is too scared to kill a cash cow, you never see a total conclusion just "End of Series 1". Notice how many Marvel heroes have been killed off? Noticed that it only took a few months until they were back? The only emotional payoff you get is at the end of a storyline, but of course, you transition from one storyline to another without it really being able to sink in.

From that logic it's easy to be cynical about Marvel, especially from a comic book fans point of view. I have only a finite amount of time and money, so I can't buy 40 volumes of Amazing Spiderman just so I don't miss out on anything. It makes sense for me to buy a complete graphic novel (or one in a series of ten) because I can complete it and move onto the next one.

I guess I just view comics as books, rather than a different medium altogether :/

I totally get what you're saying and you're right in some respects. Ever since Marvel was sold the first time in the late 1960's, they have been a media franchise that also sells comic books. That's when you saw the slightly slowed aging process stop entirely and Marvel comics start distancing themselves from real world connections. It also saw Spider-Man and others turned into a brand, which tends to outright get in the way of good stories.

Not only that, there's some good stuff out there, like Moore's now mostly defunct ABC line and Busiek's Astro City that try to keep that same spirit of early Marvel but disconnected from conservative marketplace-based decisions.

That said, Matzat's incoherent rant ignored the fact that Marvel can and has produced some really good stuff in the past few years, and that a good story is a good story, no matter what comes after. Alias is a quality crime/mystery comic, and as lame as I think it is that bendis brought his Jessica Drew fanfiction into the mainstream universe and made her an Avenger, it doesn't suddenly make Alias a bad comic.

You can disagree with my assessment of the upcoming draft, but if the league's GMs thought there was a lot of talent to be had next year they wouldn't be trading away unprotected lottery picks for guys like Mo Williams.

Or they don't know what the new CBA is going to say and they want to make sure they have expiring deals to clear up cap room for the future. A lot of these contracts are relics of a bygone age: Baron Davis was making 14 million dollars a year to be a below average point guard. You're in a far better position moving forward to evaluate talent that's actually played in the league through free agency when you aren't spending 1/4 of your cap room on Elton Brand or Baron Davis or whoever, and that's worth giving up draft picks to most teams. Besides, do the Clippers really need even more young talent? They already have Gordon, Aminu, Bledsoe, Griffin, Jordon, and Willie Warren at age 22 or younger.

I think the Clippers are trying to free up cap room for a Chris Paul or Williams, since they have cap room while the guys listed above are still on their rookie contracts. That's more a commentary on how screwed up contracts were 3-4 years ago than an indicator that this year's draft is no good.

Even if Green picks up his scoring it's a great deal for the Thunder, who absolutely cannot be an NBA championship caliber team with Nenad Kristic as their starting center. Green's a good athletic 6th man type for the Celtics, but he's undersized as a starting 4. He should be a good add for the Celtics though.

I don't know about it being a 2 player draft, and I certainly don't know about those two players being Sullinger and Kanter. Terrance Jones is a 6'9 former point guard, Perry Jones is a very good offensive player who plays 3-4 at 6'11 and is probably going to get "is he the next Durant" type buzz, and then Williams and Irving (if he declares) are a couple of very good point guards.

Also it's not as if Wall, Griffin, and Landry Fields are the only rookies doing anything this year. DeMarcus Cousins has been in the starting lineup for the Kings and has looked solid, and Monroe from the Pistons has looked pretty good.

Williams is an obvious upgrade at the PG spot, but the thing is this is only a "lol Nets" situation if they can't build around the team for next year. Williams' contract runs out in 2012, and if they are as mediocre as they've been, there's no doubt but that he'll bolt to join up with a team with size in need of point guard upgrades (wishful thinking that the Clippers could be in that position in a year from now, but I'm sure they'll screw it up somehow). But Williams makes the team more attractive for free agents because he is a top 5 PG and one of the leaders in the league in assists. I think the Nets felt like they had to make some move to show they weren't just going to accept being as bad as they've been.

Also Williams may not be able to beat 'Melo one on one, but there's no denying that he's been far more productive this season. Melo has looked like a low-rent Dirk Nowitzki this season: he scores a little more, but he also takes more shots and turns the ball over significantly more to do it. Both are mediocre defenders but Dirk plays a lot smarter. Maybe a fresh start would motivate 'Melo to improve, but as it stands now he sometimes shows up unmotivated and takes a lot of bad shots. I think Williams could end up being a far better fit, if the Nets are able to build something around him. But being the Nets, that's a pretty big "if."

Wow, what a huge shock. Great writer and a great guy. That really sucks.

I'm not big into anime, but I recently watched a couple of films by Satoshi Kon, a director who died last year at age 46. Anyway Millennium Actress and Paprika are beautiful, layered stories that make sense in one viewing but are more rewarding the more you see them. His work is really incredible and everyone should see it. I haven't seen Perfect Blue or his TV show, but I've heard good things about those, too.

Anything Terrence Malick has ever done, but start with the Thin Red Line and the New World. Absolutely beautiful stuff.

Children of Men: one of the best shot movies I've ever seen. The cinematography is absolutely incredible. It's a really good story, too.

Confessions of a Dangerous Mind: Good Night and Good Luck got more awards attention (and is also very good), but I preferred Clooney's directorial debut, a dark comedy about the creator of the gong show, based on an autobiography where he claimed to be a former CIA assassin. Sam Rockwell does an incredible job.

The Fall: Remember The Cell, the amazingly imaginative film limited by its actors and script? The Fall is Tarsem's second film, and while it's less mainstream, it's also more amazing. An absolutely beautiful movie that was filmed on location on about 5 continents rather than rely on CGI.

Echo the love for the Proposition, too. Amazing film.

Pretty mediocre episode of Community, but, as mentioned, that's still better than most shows. Amazing episode of 30 Rock though. Loved the whole Liz/Carol fight. "1-2-3- NEVER!"

Kevin Durant calls Bosh a "fake tough guy" after an altercation in the Heat win against the Thunder:

Link

"He’s on a good team now so he thinks he can talk a little bit. There are a lot of fake tough guys in this league and he’s one of them.”

Does Bosh even qualify as fake tough? He makes Dirk Nowitzki look tough. At least when Dirk got teeth in his arm he didn't say people should stop hustling so much.

I should probably know this, but before last year was there ever an animated movie in the Best Picture category AND best animated picture category (Up)? And what do you guys think of this situation? Is it fair to have the movies be in both categories?

Up, Toy Story 3 and Beauty and the Beast are the only 3 animated movies to ever be nominated for best picture, and Beauty and the Beast was nominated before the best Animated Feature Oscar existed. On my list of things the Oscars do that annoy me, it's not even on the list.

1. Inception

2. Black Swan

3. True Grit

4. The King's Speech

5. Shutter Island

6. Toy Story 3

7. The Town

8. The Social Network

9. The Kids are All Right (Until it gets kicked off by something from my other list)

10. Prince of Persia (holding the mindless action part of the list)

On my Queue/no comment yet:

The Ghost Writer

Winter's Bone

127 Hours

The Fighter

Blue Valentine

I guess he hasn't seen anything that makes him want to watch it. But that doesn't equal being able to judge whether it's worthy of its nominations or not.

Exactly. And we're talking about nominations, so I don't understand why he's coming in and saying he "doesn't see anything" in a movie he knows nothing about.

And yeah, I loved Black Swan too. One of my favorite two movies of the year.

Am I the only one who just doesn't see anything in Black Swan? I've only recently caught the adverts and just... meh. Out of the films in the list I believe I've only seen 2: Social Network in the cinema and Inception on DVD last week. Overall, I much preferred Social Network, but as a concept obviously Inception is a lot more 'flashy'. I hope that Social Network does take some awards, it was a great film and Jesse was great too. Is there an Oscar for soundtrack/score? I expect Reznor to pick that up.

If you haven't seen a movie, how are you qualified to see or not see anything in it?

And I think the Kids Are All Right gets its nominations because it has a high profile cast and is about a same sex couple. I liked the performances but I agree the writing wasn't all that great. Maybe it's just my love for Julianne Moore, but how does Bening get a nomination but Moore doesn't?

Yeah I kind of wish there was any chance for anything but Toy Story 3 to win, but I guess that's his consolation prize for having no chance at best picture. Not that it doesn't deserve to win, but good animated movies not made by Pixar do get released on a regular basis.

Also I like the old Paper Moon trick of Hailee getting nominated for "best supporting" actress. I guess it improves her chances to win since she's not up against Portman and Benning, but they might as well re-name the Oscar "Best Actress: Second Place."

Luckily Nolan already got his shitty movie out of the way with Inception!

And seriously, listen to Teej (why do I even need to type that?) Hathaway is a good actress, she will surprise you, try not to think of her as the chick from The Princess Diaries. And I don't get all the hate on Catwoman either, it'll be an interesting dynamic if they take the character where I assume they will, her the neutral shade of grey to Batman's ultimate good and the other villains' ultimate evil.

Wow, if Zero's taste on movies is this terrible, maybe Randy Orton is really the greatest entertainer in the history of the business.

Also didn't Hathaway play a sexy bad-ass in a major motion picture all the way back in 2008? The Rock was there, too. It's not as if there's no precedent and she's just done rom-coms for the past 8 years.

Yes, because her entire role in the film was a short stint with some CGI. Totally forgettable performance.

I made a joke because she wasn't in that movie. It's not funny if I explain it.

Are you thinking of Natalie Portman/Mila Kunis/Winona Ryder?

It's strange to me that after Black Swan people are worried about Hathaways acting abilities.

Yeah she was great as the CGI swan!

I like Hathaway, she's always funny on SNL and Rachel Getting Married was great. Hopefully they don't have her turning into some sort of cat...woman and just have her as some sort of femme fatale who robs people.

Yeah, see, stuff like this is why I don't buy into DiCarpios hype. Sure he's good, but people can seriously say this when guys like Gary Oldman, De Niro and so on and so forth are still making films? Yeah, he's a fine actor, but he's really not the second coming of Laurence Olivier that people seem to think he is.

DeNiro retired about 12 years ago. He now makes personal appearances in movies as "Robert DeNiro." I mean good for him that he's so famous that he doesn't have to act any more, but naming him as an actor above DiCaprio is just baffling, particularly since DeNiro got Scorsece in touch with DiCaprio. I mean DeNiro's major films this year were "Little Fockers" and "Machete." I mean don't get me wrong from Taxi Driver to Heat (20 years), he was phenomenal, but he's been playing parodies of his old characters since then. Maybe Nicholson would be a better example, as his sheer body of work goes on for about 4 decades and he's still performing at a much higher level.

But yeah, the fact that other good actors exist sure is proof that Leo's no good, right? I don't know that he's the best method guy or the best Shakespearian actor or whatever, but he's turned in a body of work in the past decade that stands up to anybody's in the business. Surely there's a middle ground between thinking he's Olivier and saying he's gotten a few lucky roles.

Everyone seems to think DiCaprio is suddenly a good actor just because he's taken a few good roles. Lets not get ahead of ourselves here, the guy has gotten BETTER, but by no means is he particularly that good yet.

I hope Inception doesn't win. I love Nolan, but man, it never managed to be more than entertaining for me. I hope Modern Family can pick up an award somewhere, the show isn't quite as good as Community, but it always manages to be at least entertaining, if not great.

DiCaprio has been operating at an incredibly high level since 2002. That's not "taking a few roles." He's been incredible for the past 8 years and has collaborated with Scorsece four times after being personally recommended by Robert DeNiro. Yeah, he's awards-worthy. Hell, he was awards-worthy 16 years ago in Gilbert Grape.

That said, if Colin Firth doesn't win best actor this year, somebody counted something wrong.