Michael Phelps does three things in life: Swim, eat, and sleep. I was reading an article in The Guardian today on his amazing carb and protein heavy diet of 12,000 calories per day. It was amusing and the comments were stupid as usual. It's still amazing that he can put away six times as much food as the average male and two times as much as Lance Armstrong. The link is below:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/food/2008/08/michael_phelps_really_big_brea.html
I was discussing this with a friend yesterday, and we both agreed that the media has ODed on Michael Phelps. Phelpsmania is everywhere. Even without Phelps, the US men's team is exceptionally talented. With the exception of Brendan Hansen, who has had a disappointing year, the rest of the field is exceptionally talented. Although swimming is an individual sport, there's a deep camaderie among the US team that's especially touching. If Michael Phelps didn't exist, his close friend and competitor Ryan Lochte would undoubtedly be the best swimmer in the world and have a larger slew of medals (he already has a generous sized pile) to his name. Apparently Phelps will only take off his earphones in the ready room for one person, Ryan Lochte. Lochte also says that he's gotten Phelps to loosen up outside of the pool (the time left over after 6+ hours of swimming in a day, massive eating, and sleep is unclear).
Still, it's inspiring to see swimmers (even Phelps) as people outside of the pool. Part of the reason is because swimming is a huge college sport in the US and powerhouses such as the University of Texas, Florida, and Auburn churn out top competitors in the sport. The University of Texas story is also pretty darned awesome. Brendan Hansen, Aaron Peirsol, and Ian Crocker are Longhorns. All were part of the winning 4 by 100 Medley relay in Athens, which set a world record. Ironically, Brendan Hansen was beaten in the 200 Breaststroke in the US trials by his teammates, Scott Spann and Eric Shanteau. To make the story even more dramatic, Eric Shanteau revealed that he had testicular cancer but still managed to swim in Beijing.
Although I'm a huge Aaron Peirsol fan, I have to say that Ryan Lochte does deserve some of my admiration for not being afraid to go against Peirsol in the 200 back and Phelps in the 200 IM. At the US trials, Michael Phelps dropped the 200 back in favor of concentrating solely on the 200 IM. He thought that the talent pool in the backstroke was considerable and he had a better shot in the IM. I would be amazed if Lochte beat Peirsol in the 200 back and Phelps in the 200 IM with only a thirty minute interval between the two races. Like most others, I think that Lochte has a good chance of beating Peirsol in the backstroke (They share the world record), but won't have the energy to really be a factor against Phelps. Racing against the best backstroker in the world in his event and the best all-around swimmer in his means that Lochte has to give 120% in both races. I just hope he doesn't kill himself while doing it.
I can't watch the 200 back final because it's just way too intense for me. I'm rooting so heavily for Peirsol that I'm going to be absolutely distraught if he loses (I'm getting a funny feeling that Lochte's going to beat him). Still, even if Lochte beats him, Peirsol will have his gold from the 100 back, a silver in the 200 back, and most probably a gold in the 4 by 100 Medley relay. It will probably be Peirsol's last Olympics. As Ian Thorpe showed us, it's good to quit while you're ahead. Phelps has stated that he would like to swim in London 2012, but won't ever attempt his punishing quest for eight golds again. He said that he was old at 23 and wouldn't train competitively until February of next year.
It's just amazing how young these athletes are. What do they do when their careers end at 25 or 26? Knowing that you peaked and there's still 60 more years to go, what goals do you set? What do you look forward to? How do you go from such a disciplined schedule to nothing at all? I hear that Ian Thorpe is interested in starting his own clothing label. Success can be fleeting, but oh so sweet while it lasts.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Views of the Olympics
Like the UN, the Olympics are an expression of a beautiful idea and a tribute to some of our higher ideals. Unlike the UN, the Olympics come much closer to the goal. Granted, the Beijing 2008 Olympics were almost doomed before its start by sheer politics, something that often derails the best of efforts. China kicked back with an astonishingly well-crafted and beautiful program during the opening ceremonies that stunned viewers in its scope and vision. It's easy to forget China's vast millenia of history, but we were all reminded that morning.
The parade of nations is always so poignant, even if it is long (and grows longer every four years). It drives home the point that we're so different, yet the same. The great thing about sports is that it's the purest form of natural talent. There may not be respect for one another's country, but there's always respect for someone running or swimming beside you. It's just amazing to see athletes from over 200 nations and over 80 heads of state gathered in one place celebrating human achievement.
The Olympics aren't perfect, and certainly doesn't solve anything. Countries still get invaded, nuclear weapons exist, etc. But as long as something fundamental exists that ties people together, we'll survive.
Instead of preparing for office hours, I've spent all of my time drooling over the swimming events. I did see the monumental 4 by 100 relay, and it was beyond spectacular. To put it bluntly, it was a superhuman effort that embodies some of the best in teamwork. His team needed the win, and Lezak rose mightily to the occasion and more. His determination was spectacular, his performance Herculean. The great thing about sports is that it's so primal (you only had to look at his teammates screaming like hyenas) and pushes people to really go beyond their best. It also embodies the beauty of what people can accomplish together.
Then again, people also do shit things when they're together like plotting to take over the world and creating misery for others. Everything's give and take. Also, for every professional athlete, there are ten idiots (not that professional athletes are known to be terribly smart in general). I was reading a BBC article on whether or not Michael Phelps was the greatest Olympian of all time. Of course, the comment board was resounding with nays. The Brits feel that the greatest Olympian is the Brit Steven Redgrave, who won five gold medals in rowing in five consecutive Olympics. Honestly, I don't know if Michael Phelps can be considered the greatest Olympian ever. It's clearly a case of comparing apples to oranges. However, as with any open forum, most of the comments were ridiculous.
First, it was clear that very few people knew anything about swimming. Those were the smart people. Then other people complained about the number of events in swimming and suggested that Carl Lewis could have won more medals if track had created events such as running backwards and flapping your arms as quickly as possible. Frankly, the comparison to swimming is just a bit insulting, even if I am a bit biased as an ex-swimmer. Other dumb comments suggested that Phelps wasn't a worthy Olympic champion because so few people access to swimming facilities. This old school Olympic games aficionado suggested that if you threw everyone in the pool, someone would beat Phelps and further implied that running was the only true sport since everyone could do it. Right...and your national hero Steven Redgrave's sport rowing would certainly be disqualified since it's a lot more exclusive, expensive, and equipment heavy than swimming.
Clearly, it's popular to spout loads of bull on which you know nothing of and sound like a complete idiot. I should try to open my mouth before I formulate reasonable arguments in the future. However terrible most of the British comments were, the American comments were even worse by comparison. A quarter of the comments gloated on France's utter humiliation in the 4 by 100, especially after their incendiary boasts the day before, and three quarters of the comments blasted France for not entering the Iraq war on the side of the Americans. I love how the average American is so ignorant, close-minded, and thinks of everything in terms of politics.
The Olympics are already rife with politics and scandal. For heavens sake, the point is trying to minimize the ill-will and politicking that goes on, not fan the flames. We have enough of it in the real world. Every four years, we try to celebrate human achievement, sportsmanship, and the very best that individuals have to offer. It's a pity that people and countries (ahem, Iran) can't put aside their differences for a few short weeks and see the Olympics for what it should be: pure talent and inspiration.
On a lighter note, the message boards are also full of comments on the runway show that the 200+ nations provided for us. There were mixed comments but admiration for the US team's natty Ralph Lauren attire (sans the logo and the cap). Some people accused the team of being too commercial and not ethnic enough. Personally, I'll pass on the wigs and the stockings. Someone also commented on the Chinese team's terrible yellow and red outfits as egg and tomato soup, which doesn't go well with the team's skin color. I did think that was hilarious. I did like the Chinese women marching before the men, though. Communism does have a few virtues. In all, the Olympics remind us all of our great potential and by the same token, our great mediocrity.
The parade of nations is always so poignant, even if it is long (and grows longer every four years). It drives home the point that we're so different, yet the same. The great thing about sports is that it's the purest form of natural talent. There may not be respect for one another's country, but there's always respect for someone running or swimming beside you. It's just amazing to see athletes from over 200 nations and over 80 heads of state gathered in one place celebrating human achievement.
The Olympics aren't perfect, and certainly doesn't solve anything. Countries still get invaded, nuclear weapons exist, etc. But as long as something fundamental exists that ties people together, we'll survive.
Instead of preparing for office hours, I've spent all of my time drooling over the swimming events. I did see the monumental 4 by 100 relay, and it was beyond spectacular. To put it bluntly, it was a superhuman effort that embodies some of the best in teamwork. His team needed the win, and Lezak rose mightily to the occasion and more. His determination was spectacular, his performance Herculean. The great thing about sports is that it's so primal (you only had to look at his teammates screaming like hyenas) and pushes people to really go beyond their best. It also embodies the beauty of what people can accomplish together.
Then again, people also do shit things when they're together like plotting to take over the world and creating misery for others. Everything's give and take. Also, for every professional athlete, there are ten idiots (not that professional athletes are known to be terribly smart in general). I was reading a BBC article on whether or not Michael Phelps was the greatest Olympian of all time. Of course, the comment board was resounding with nays. The Brits feel that the greatest Olympian is the Brit Steven Redgrave, who won five gold medals in rowing in five consecutive Olympics. Honestly, I don't know if Michael Phelps can be considered the greatest Olympian ever. It's clearly a case of comparing apples to oranges. However, as with any open forum, most of the comments were ridiculous.
First, it was clear that very few people knew anything about swimming. Those were the smart people. Then other people complained about the number of events in swimming and suggested that Carl Lewis could have won more medals if track had created events such as running backwards and flapping your arms as quickly as possible. Frankly, the comparison to swimming is just a bit insulting, even if I am a bit biased as an ex-swimmer. Other dumb comments suggested that Phelps wasn't a worthy Olympic champion because so few people access to swimming facilities. This old school Olympic games aficionado suggested that if you threw everyone in the pool, someone would beat Phelps and further implied that running was the only true sport since everyone could do it. Right...and your national hero Steven Redgrave's sport rowing would certainly be disqualified since it's a lot more exclusive, expensive, and equipment heavy than swimming.
Clearly, it's popular to spout loads of bull on which you know nothing of and sound like a complete idiot. I should try to open my mouth before I formulate reasonable arguments in the future. However terrible most of the British comments were, the American comments were even worse by comparison. A quarter of the comments gloated on France's utter humiliation in the 4 by 100, especially after their incendiary boasts the day before, and three quarters of the comments blasted France for not entering the Iraq war on the side of the Americans. I love how the average American is so ignorant, close-minded, and thinks of everything in terms of politics.
The Olympics are already rife with politics and scandal. For heavens sake, the point is trying to minimize the ill-will and politicking that goes on, not fan the flames. We have enough of it in the real world. Every four years, we try to celebrate human achievement, sportsmanship, and the very best that individuals have to offer. It's a pity that people and countries (ahem, Iran) can't put aside their differences for a few short weeks and see the Olympics for what it should be: pure talent and inspiration.
On a lighter note, the message boards are also full of comments on the runway show that the 200+ nations provided for us. There were mixed comments but admiration for the US team's natty Ralph Lauren attire (sans the logo and the cap). Some people accused the team of being too commercial and not ethnic enough. Personally, I'll pass on the wigs and the stockings. Someone also commented on the Chinese team's terrible yellow and red outfits as egg and tomato soup, which doesn't go well with the team's skin color. I did think that was hilarious. I did like the Chinese women marching before the men, though. Communism does have a few virtues. In all, the Olympics remind us all of our great potential and by the same token, our great mediocrity.
Tuesday, August 05, 2008
the poet novelist Vikram Seth
An Equal Music reads like a classical work of music. It's compact, lyrical, and precise. I've always had great regard for poet/novelists, one of my favorites being Hermann Hesse. The great thing about having a poet write a novel is that it's going to be of high quality. The diction is astounding, and the flow and structure is generally impeccable. Because the poet is forced to pack so much meaning in so few words, the novelist automatically carries that sense of importance into his work as well.
Vikram Seth's work is well-crafted and beautiful until the last movement where he and his character implodes in an orgy of sentiment and excess. Up until that point, the tempo is well established and much like his main character Michael, Seth is giving a virtuoso performance. Although with an understanding that the book is from Michael, the extremely talented but delicate and unstable musician's point of view, having the book degenerate exactly when Michael does is not very gratifying to the reader. The last part of the book rambles and loses much of its focus. One thing I will say is that Herman Hesse, even more so than Vikram Seth, does ramble and repeat himself in quite a few of his prolific works. However, everything excluding these trouble spots are divine.
Although some reviewers call Michael selfish and a completely unsympathetic character, I don't think that's the case. He's clearly bipolar, as are all of the other musicians in the book. They don't become world-class at their craft by acting normal. Imagine how difficult it is to be normal when your entire life is devoted so completely to one thing and it defines you. One point that Seth makes is that Michael cannot separate his life from his music. All of his emotions and identity are intertwined with music and lost when his music is lost.
I love how Seth portrays the successful musician's life. He gets the balance (or imbalance) of the characters very well. The interaction between Michael and his quartetmates are vivid and just a joy to read. I'd have to say that I didn't care for the Michael-Julia romantic relationship so much, even though it is the base of this novel. The thing is, I find Julia very hard to sympathize with as a character. She's just as selfish as Michael, if even more so. Michael's more extreme, but Julia's not exactly well-balanced herself.
The only thing I can say about Seth is that his writing is perhaps a bit too clever. He's very good at his craft, but the novel is almost impossible to get through without some rudimentary background in music (Not that a music-hater would actually pick up this novel). Seth clearly thinks about every word carefully and places it just so in his novel. The main shocker in this novel is done well and neatly. The only thing I didn't enjoy about this singularly good piece of work is a vague sense of elitism, or Seth thumbing his nose at people who aren't up to his musical standards. Other than that, structuring the first part of the book more loosely or the last part more tightly would have created a truly wonderful book.
It would seem that Vikram Seth wrote this book partially for himself and his own love of music. I completely support that and appreciate all of the heavy research that undoubtedly went into this project. Just by the care that he put into the words, you get a sense of how important music is for him. It's always been a bit of an obsession of mine, but I love artists who really respect what they do and put in bucketloads of effort. I look forward to reading Seth's gargantuan work, A Suitable Boy, sometime in the future.
Vikram Seth's work is well-crafted and beautiful until the last movement where he and his character implodes in an orgy of sentiment and excess. Up until that point, the tempo is well established and much like his main character Michael, Seth is giving a virtuoso performance. Although with an understanding that the book is from Michael, the extremely talented but delicate and unstable musician's point of view, having the book degenerate exactly when Michael does is not very gratifying to the reader. The last part of the book rambles and loses much of its focus. One thing I will say is that Herman Hesse, even more so than Vikram Seth, does ramble and repeat himself in quite a few of his prolific works. However, everything excluding these trouble spots are divine.
Although some reviewers call Michael selfish and a completely unsympathetic character, I don't think that's the case. He's clearly bipolar, as are all of the other musicians in the book. They don't become world-class at their craft by acting normal. Imagine how difficult it is to be normal when your entire life is devoted so completely to one thing and it defines you. One point that Seth makes is that Michael cannot separate his life from his music. All of his emotions and identity are intertwined with music and lost when his music is lost.
I love how Seth portrays the successful musician's life. He gets the balance (or imbalance) of the characters very well. The interaction between Michael and his quartetmates are vivid and just a joy to read. I'd have to say that I didn't care for the Michael-Julia romantic relationship so much, even though it is the base of this novel. The thing is, I find Julia very hard to sympathize with as a character. She's just as selfish as Michael, if even more so. Michael's more extreme, but Julia's not exactly well-balanced herself.
The only thing I can say about Seth is that his writing is perhaps a bit too clever. He's very good at his craft, but the novel is almost impossible to get through without some rudimentary background in music (Not that a music-hater would actually pick up this novel). Seth clearly thinks about every word carefully and places it just so in his novel. The main shocker in this novel is done well and neatly. The only thing I didn't enjoy about this singularly good piece of work is a vague sense of elitism, or Seth thumbing his nose at people who aren't up to his musical standards. Other than that, structuring the first part of the book more loosely or the last part more tightly would have created a truly wonderful book.
It would seem that Vikram Seth wrote this book partially for himself and his own love of music. I completely support that and appreciate all of the heavy research that undoubtedly went into this project. Just by the care that he put into the words, you get a sense of how important music is for him. It's always been a bit of an obsession of mine, but I love artists who really respect what they do and put in bucketloads of effort. I look forward to reading Seth's gargantuan work, A Suitable Boy, sometime in the future.
baleheads
Question: "Are you a Balehead?"
Answer: "What's a Balehead?"
Sadly enough, fans of Christian Bale refer to themselves as baleheads. It's a really strange token of appreciation and slightly off-putting. For me, the word 'balehead' somehow conjures up the word 'buckethead', which implies a random man standing in the middle of an open field with a bucket over his head. Despite the ugly fan-name, Christian Bale is a very talented actor with superhuman levels of intensity and dedication. It doesn't hurt that his face looks perpetually gaunt. Despite all of his talent, my real affection lies in the way that he never smiles in any of his movies (except when he's insane) and has a cute albeit sometimes annoying lishp.
Now that he's on my list, I
a) Watch a bunch of his movies indiscriminately (Maybe not the one with fire-breathing dragons)
b) Read as many online interviews as possible.
a is rather difficult as I will eventually hit a boring movie or movie #7 and lose all of my interest. b is easy since the ratio of articles to original source material is about 10:1, which leaves me with about 3 pages total.
It's a bit sad that celebrities complain about the lack of privacy, but how can you expect the paparazzi not to hound you when your face is projected on thousands of screens every year? Also, people (like me) want to know where the talent comes from. At least, I want to read interviews and look for the bits of genius that translate into a superb analysis of some facet of human behavior. Generally, I like to read interviews rather than watch them, although this isn't quite a problem for Christian Bale, who mainly stays in character (at least in accent) for most of his interviews. Written interviews are generally better because they're heavily edited. I'd rather not see the actor looking and acting entirely like a monkey on Ellen or Oprah. Yes. Art is art and life is life. However, it's hard for me to ever see Kristin Bell in the same light again after seeing her giggle and ditz her way through several face-to-face interviews that were covered with several brightly layered coats of fakeness. Hmmm...I would love to see Christian Bale and Kristen Bell in a movie together (their names sound eerily similar), although given that Christian Bale would probably rather die than appear in a comedy, the chances are virtually nil.
From Christian Bale's interviews, it's clear that he's as serious in person as in his characters. For his roles, he pushes the envelope both mentally and physically. Just a few things I wouldn't do for my job: Eat maggots, fight snakes, lose 60 lbs, gain 60 lbs, etc. I would: stand on top of very tall buildings and jump out of helicopters. He's not the only dedicated actor in Hollywood, but perhaps one of the most extreme. It doesn't hurt that he also sounds semi-intelligent and looks hunky with a face so sharp that it could probably saw through metal. I joked that he's eternally serious because his cheekbones are so sharp that smiling is impossible. All of the fun aside, he's turned out very good performances in American Psycho, Batman Begins, Rescue Dawn, and just about everything else he's been in. Even in movies that suck, Christian Bale pulls through with his singlemindedness.
Sometimes his performances are a bit heavy even for the movie at hand, but he's clearly talented. What impresses me is how young he is and the immense quality and quantity of his work, although underrated until the pivotal Batman series. Even in The Empire of the Sun, Christian Bale did an amazing job at thirteen in a very difficult role. His acting is fully on par with Leonardo DiCaprio's virtuoso turn in What's Eating Gilbert Grape. What differentiates Christian Bale in his roles is that sometimes his characters are really frightening because there isn't any sense of lightness or redemption in them. With Clive Owen and other actors who stray towards darker characters, there's always the quintissential humor to humanize the person and make him not so frightening. Christian Bale gives his characters a rich inner life but not always humanity.
Conclusion: I think I'm a balehead?
Answer: "What's a Balehead?"
Sadly enough, fans of Christian Bale refer to themselves as baleheads. It's a really strange token of appreciation and slightly off-putting. For me, the word 'balehead' somehow conjures up the word 'buckethead', which implies a random man standing in the middle of an open field with a bucket over his head. Despite the ugly fan-name, Christian Bale is a very talented actor with superhuman levels of intensity and dedication. It doesn't hurt that his face looks perpetually gaunt. Despite all of his talent, my real affection lies in the way that he never smiles in any of his movies (except when he's insane) and has a cute albeit sometimes annoying lishp.
Now that he's on my list, I
a) Watch a bunch of his movies indiscriminately (Maybe not the one with fire-breathing dragons)
b) Read as many online interviews as possible.
a is rather difficult as I will eventually hit a boring movie or movie #7 and lose all of my interest. b is easy since the ratio of articles to original source material is about 10:1, which leaves me with about 3 pages total.
It's a bit sad that celebrities complain about the lack of privacy, but how can you expect the paparazzi not to hound you when your face is projected on thousands of screens every year? Also, people (like me) want to know where the talent comes from. At least, I want to read interviews and look for the bits of genius that translate into a superb analysis of some facet of human behavior. Generally, I like to read interviews rather than watch them, although this isn't quite a problem for Christian Bale, who mainly stays in character (at least in accent) for most of his interviews. Written interviews are generally better because they're heavily edited. I'd rather not see the actor looking and acting entirely like a monkey on Ellen or Oprah. Yes. Art is art and life is life. However, it's hard for me to ever see Kristin Bell in the same light again after seeing her giggle and ditz her way through several face-to-face interviews that were covered with several brightly layered coats of fakeness. Hmmm...I would love to see Christian Bale and Kristen Bell in a movie together (their names sound eerily similar), although given that Christian Bale would probably rather die than appear in a comedy, the chances are virtually nil.
From Christian Bale's interviews, it's clear that he's as serious in person as in his characters. For his roles, he pushes the envelope both mentally and physically. Just a few things I wouldn't do for my job: Eat maggots, fight snakes, lose 60 lbs, gain 60 lbs, etc. I would: stand on top of very tall buildings and jump out of helicopters. He's not the only dedicated actor in Hollywood, but perhaps one of the most extreme. It doesn't hurt that he also sounds semi-intelligent and looks hunky with a face so sharp that it could probably saw through metal. I joked that he's eternally serious because his cheekbones are so sharp that smiling is impossible. All of the fun aside, he's turned out very good performances in American Psycho, Batman Begins, Rescue Dawn, and just about everything else he's been in. Even in movies that suck, Christian Bale pulls through with his singlemindedness.
Sometimes his performances are a bit heavy even for the movie at hand, but he's clearly talented. What impresses me is how young he is and the immense quality and quantity of his work, although underrated until the pivotal Batman series. Even in The Empire of the Sun, Christian Bale did an amazing job at thirteen in a very difficult role. His acting is fully on par with Leonardo DiCaprio's virtuoso turn in What's Eating Gilbert Grape. What differentiates Christian Bale in his roles is that sometimes his characters are really frightening because there isn't any sense of lightness or redemption in them. With Clive Owen and other actors who stray towards darker characters, there's always the quintissential humor to humanize the person and make him not so frightening. Christian Bale gives his characters a rich inner life but not always humanity.
Conclusion: I think I'm a balehead?
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Variations on Coldplay: Globes
I don't really have good photos from this section of the show, but the concept is way cool.
Viva La Coldplay
OMG. OMG. OMG. OMG. The absolute best concert that I have ever been to. Beautifully and seamlessly organized with tens of thousands of screaming and swaying fans. A single heartbeat... A la Coldplay.
This is the first act before Coldplay. I'm convinced that they were chosen because they sound just like a less charismatic, watered down version of the real thing.
This is the first act before Coldplay. I'm convinced that they were chosen because they sound just like a less charismatic, watered down version of the real thing.
Some creative license here. Or just wobbly hands.
The second act before Coldplay. And I have no idea whatsoever why they happened to be picked. I'm not sure if there was a third act. I took a breather in the middle of this one.
And finally, what we've all been waiting for:
Drumroll, please.
Drumroll, please.
Unarguably the best shot of the night. Rock on, Chris!
And he does, without fail.
Damn, you are both just so fine.
I learned something today. I can shriek like a rabid groupie.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
seeing green
Today, I took half a day off from my busy schedule of not doing much to watch The Incredible Hulk with a friend from high school. First, we went to a diner for lunch, where we were the only patrons under 50 and our combined ages were about 20 years less than the mean. You've gotta love small towns. Actually, it freaks the hell out of me because so many people live their entire lives here in this 10 square mile space and never leave. Just thinking about it makes me claustrophobic.
After lunch, we headed to a very small theater in a newly developed area. I think that the complex has been around for three years. Over the rare summer or winter break when I'm feeling less antisocial than usual, I meet my high school friends at this amazing coffee shop called Brewed Awakenings a few feet away from the theater. It absolutely has the best chocolate and coffee drinks with real whipped cream. The light, non-sweet kind with a hint of richness.
Actually, I wanted to watch Wanted, and google told me that it would be showing today. However, disaster struck when we arrived and the fifteen year old boy selling tickets told me that it wouldn't be out until tomorrow. Now that the summer blockbuster season is over saturated with superhero movies, I've lost a lot of my enthusiasm. It's hard to explain, but I hold some sort of a grudge against superheroes, especially ones with genetic mutations. X-Men is the only exception. After Iron Man, I knew that The Incredible Hulk would be a letdown.
Ed Norton is one of my favorite actors, so I wasn't exactly averse to watching him lumber around as a big green thing for two hours. However, this movie just reminded me of why I don't enjoy superhero movies in the first place. The problem is not that the characters are fantastically unreal. The real issue is that we have green people fifteen feet tall barreling across a college campus and people swinging on buildings in downtown Manhattan via silk strings. I just can't reconcile the idea of the paranormal inhabiting the normal. It would be all right if they were on Mars or another galaxy, but this is just insane. I know that the entire point of superheroes is to inhabit our world and inhabit it well, but it drives me crazy.
There are many issues with this movie, but its main problem was the lack of consistency. It starts off dark and cerebral, then disintegrates into a gratuitous action movie and not a very good one at that. Pick one angle and stick with it. Unlike Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man, Ed Norton was a poor choice for the Hulk. The monster is so divorced from the man that we never quite believe that feeble Bruce Banner is one and the same with the mountain of green slime. I also don't think that superheroes are terribly angsty, or they at least should not be so introspective on the big screen. Iron Man was always a man, and Robert Downey Jr. brought a mix of levity and gravitas to the role. Ed Norton seemed so doleful in his role that I couldn't figure out where the energy came from when he transformed into the Hulk.
The script is nowhere near as clever as that of Iron man, and Betty Ross is not nearly as appealing as Pepper Potts (Imagine having either name!). The story was also choppy and didn't coalesce as well. The acting was passable, though not noteworthy by any means. Although there wasn't anything noteworthy about The Hulk, I can't say that it was bad either. At least it's much better than Fantastic Four, which has some of the most hilarious acting I've ever seen and a terrible script. Surprisingly, The Hulk wasn't visually appealing. With their vast experience in producing these types of movies, you'd think that the Hollywood people would have gotten the graphics down by now. The entire movie was entirely forgettable. Given that my favorite scene is where Tony Stark makes a cameo appearance, it's obvious that this movie fell far short of my expectations.
After lunch, we headed to a very small theater in a newly developed area. I think that the complex has been around for three years. Over the rare summer or winter break when I'm feeling less antisocial than usual, I meet my high school friends at this amazing coffee shop called Brewed Awakenings a few feet away from the theater. It absolutely has the best chocolate and coffee drinks with real whipped cream. The light, non-sweet kind with a hint of richness.
Actually, I wanted to watch Wanted, and google told me that it would be showing today. However, disaster struck when we arrived and the fifteen year old boy selling tickets told me that it wouldn't be out until tomorrow. Now that the summer blockbuster season is over saturated with superhero movies, I've lost a lot of my enthusiasm. It's hard to explain, but I hold some sort of a grudge against superheroes, especially ones with genetic mutations. X-Men is the only exception. After Iron Man, I knew that The Incredible Hulk would be a letdown.
Ed Norton is one of my favorite actors, so I wasn't exactly averse to watching him lumber around as a big green thing for two hours. However, this movie just reminded me of why I don't enjoy superhero movies in the first place. The problem is not that the characters are fantastically unreal. The real issue is that we have green people fifteen feet tall barreling across a college campus and people swinging on buildings in downtown Manhattan via silk strings. I just can't reconcile the idea of the paranormal inhabiting the normal. It would be all right if they were on Mars or another galaxy, but this is just insane. I know that the entire point of superheroes is to inhabit our world and inhabit it well, but it drives me crazy.
There are many issues with this movie, but its main problem was the lack of consistency. It starts off dark and cerebral, then disintegrates into a gratuitous action movie and not a very good one at that. Pick one angle and stick with it. Unlike Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man, Ed Norton was a poor choice for the Hulk. The monster is so divorced from the man that we never quite believe that feeble Bruce Banner is one and the same with the mountain of green slime. I also don't think that superheroes are terribly angsty, or they at least should not be so introspective on the big screen. Iron Man was always a man, and Robert Downey Jr. brought a mix of levity and gravitas to the role. Ed Norton seemed so doleful in his role that I couldn't figure out where the energy came from when he transformed into the Hulk.
The script is nowhere near as clever as that of Iron man, and Betty Ross is not nearly as appealing as Pepper Potts (Imagine having either name!). The story was also choppy and didn't coalesce as well. The acting was passable, though not noteworthy by any means. Although there wasn't anything noteworthy about The Hulk, I can't say that it was bad either. At least it's much better than Fantastic Four, which has some of the most hilarious acting I've ever seen and a terrible script. Surprisingly, The Hulk wasn't visually appealing. With their vast experience in producing these types of movies, you'd think that the Hollywood people would have gotten the graphics down by now. The entire movie was entirely forgettable. Given that my favorite scene is where Tony Stark makes a cameo appearance, it's obvious that this movie fell far short of my expectations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)