I was in the driveway this morning washing my wife's car when I was reminded of a particular scene from Cool Hand Luke. Those who have seen the movie know the scene I am talking about. Anyway, when I went in to eat lunch, I turned the channel, and what movie should be on? That's right, Cool Hand Luke. Particularly what scene was it on? You guessed it, the car wash scene. If that wasn't a sign to blog, I don't know what is?
So the topic for this blog is a top 5 list of the best prison movies. I kept the list to (mostly) recent movies and all whose plots take place in domestic prisons, not POW stuff. Therefore you won't see Victory or The Great Escape, though those are both great movies. It's no surprise that Cool Hand Luke made the list. Enjoy, and feel free to comment.
1. The Shawshank Redemption- The only movie that bested the book that preceded it. No disrespect to Steven King for he wrote the novella first, but the additions made to that first person narrative put this great story at the top of the list. And it is the story that makes it. Innocent man framed for the murder of his wife and her lover spends nineteen years in prison, yet has a secret life that nobody knows about, leading him "through 500 yards of s***-smelling foulness that I can't even imagine," to the other side where he is not only redemed, but takes down the real crooks, the warden and his hench man. As always, Morgan Freeman is brilliant, taking a seat only to Timothy Robbins who was actually the second choice to play Andy Dufresne (they wanted Tom Hanks- as great as Tom Hanks is, can you imagine him playing Andy as well as Robbins? I can't.) "Remember Red, hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies." Steven King is all about poetic justice, and from that standpoint, this movie is...perfect.
2. Cool Hand Luke- Wow, how I wanted to put this movie at #1 on my list, but the Shawshank's story is better. Any movie starring Paul Newman deserves respect, and other than Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, this may be Newman's best role. A man who won't lay down, won't be tamed. To borrow a title from Maya Angelou, "I know why the caged bird sings." Between the ditch full of dirt and Luke's 50 eggs, this movie is classic. It is full of famous quotes. "Sometimes nothing can be a real cool hand." "Anything so innocent and built like that just gotta be named Lucille." Guns and Roses even used the following quote in one of their songs: "What we got here is failure to communicate." Maybe that's what knocked this movie down into the #2 spot.
3. Escape from Alcatraz- Notice how all these great movies have one thing in common? A great actor in the lead role. Clint Eastwood. That should be enough, but I will say a bit more. It wasn't his best role or performance, but the fact that this is based on a true story makes it interesting. The scene where the warden sees the chrysanthemum on the adjacent island and crushes it in his hands with that scowl of defeat, it's a beautiful thing. "Some men are destined to never leave Alcatraz...alive." Ha, yeah right!
4. The Green Mile- Another of Steven King's works. The story of John Coffey whose initials JC and his sacrificial death incidentally mimic that of Jesus Christ. I'm not one for sci-fi stuff, but the scene where John Coffey takes the cancer from the warden's wife and gives it to the little weasel prison guard who in turn shoots Wild Bill and ends up in the mental institution to which he was about to be transferred... what a web of poetic justice...and strange besides. When King was writing the book, he actually didn't know if Coffey would be executed in the end or escape. I wish he had chosen escape, but we all knew that Coffey had to die.
5. Ernest Goes to Jail- Just joking. It feels wrong to put another movie on this list with the four heavyweights from above, but if I had to, I would choose The Rock. Though Nicholas Cage really, excessively overacts in this film, it does have Sean Connery and Ed Harris and a few good lines. "I'd take pleasure in guttin' you, boy!" "Hey honey, do you want to know who shot JFK?"
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Monday, June 6, 2011
Joplin
By mid-morning I figured out the source of the overwhelmingly foul stench: dead birds.
This was trip number two into the "war zone" and I would like to say that I had been desensitized to what I was witnessing, but that just isn't true. Everywhere I looked, I saw either total devastation or craziness. Earlier when we topped a hill on the way to 26th street, the vehicle full of church members became dead silent. About two miles into the total devastation, one of the members of our crew finally said, "I knew it was going to be bad, but there is no way I could have prepared myself for this. That pretty much summed up what we were all thinking.
Saturday, nineteen of us from the churches of Christ in Ponca City took a caravan to Joplin, MO to help out in any way we could. We worked through the church of Christ on 26th and Connecticut which is just 100 yards from the area of total devastation that is about a mile wide and six miles long. Since the church building sustained some roof damage, they converted it into a disaster relief area. Ed Hoggett, an elder there, and Richard Chambers, the preacher are heading up one of many relief efforst in the city that sees slow progress. One family at a time. I took our crew to the eastern side of the affected area and spent all day cleaning up just one yard. I made plenty of observations though.
There were plenty of crazy situations. One house (I use the word "house", but it was nothing more than a pile of rubble) had nothing standing but the shower. On the shower head hung a shower caddy with shampoo and conditioner still in place.
At one house we worked at, we found a mason jar full of hot cocoa, marshmallows and such with Christmas ribbon still attached to the lid. It was perfectly intact in some rubble that was once a shed and now resembled a pile of match sticks. We were told that the jar came from the kitchen.
Across the street was the remains of a house. Roof was gone. All walls were gone except for the coat closet, which just happened to be where the family hid for cover.
Just to contrast that, the house we were working at across the street from the coat closet had only lost their roof. Fifty yards away was a house that was beautiful: nicely manicured lawn, flower beds, no problems whatsoever. Then next to it, total destruction again. I don't know if that is amazing or lucky. Or both.
The craziest one of all was a softball. We found a softball in the backyard that was impaled by a piece of wood an inch wide and three inches long. Imagine the force necessary to impale a piece of wood into a softball!
It's easy to see God at work in Joplin right now. There are thousands upon thousands of volunteers in town every day helping in any way they can. We were to see a couple dozen Salvation Army volunteers walking our neighborhood passing out water. One man from Lancaster Pennsylvania who owned a flooring business had loaded his van down with cases of water and was passing them out to anybody who was thirsty. We met a group of college students in the Campus Crusade for Christ from Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas who were staying in Branson. They drove in to help and happened upon us. We put them to work. We had heard of some looting going on, but I really think that such horrible people were few and far between.
One thing I noticed was that the tree trunks that were still standing all seemed to have Spanish moss all over them. Upon closer inspection it was shredded insulation clinging to whatever was left standing, including all structures. The comedian Ron White once quipped about tornadoes, "It's not that the wind blows, it's what it blows!" I came away convinced that I would never survive the debris in the air.
I am also convinced that a tornado is nothing more than a very big coffee grinder. It takes anything and grinds it up. I spent two hours raking ground up shingles, ground up trees, ground up construction materials, and ground up "things" I couldn't identify in the front yard. It was while raking that I noticed the aforementioned stench. I thought that maybe the owners had dogs, but then I started raking up birds, parts of birds, squirrels, you name it. My biggest fear was that I would lift up a knocked down privacy fence and find a human body. Thankfully God spared me that horror.
Words just can't describe what the beautiful town of Joplin has become, but my words can describe what needs to be done. Joplin is going to need volunteers helping for a long time. We're not talking weeks, but months and years just to clean up the debris, much less start the rebuilding process.
My wife is fond of saying, "If you get to feeling sorry for yourself, go help somebody." Amazingly I didn't see Joplinites feeling sorry for themselves, but picking themselves up, dusting themselves off, and helping each other. If you are wanting to volunteer your time or money, get in contact with me on facebook, or comment on this post and I will point you in the right direction. We need to show the world that we aren't a selfish people but are in this thing together.
This was trip number two into the "war zone" and I would like to say that I had been desensitized to what I was witnessing, but that just isn't true. Everywhere I looked, I saw either total devastation or craziness. Earlier when we topped a hill on the way to 26th street, the vehicle full of church members became dead silent. About two miles into the total devastation, one of the members of our crew finally said, "I knew it was going to be bad, but there is no way I could have prepared myself for this. That pretty much summed up what we were all thinking.
Saturday, nineteen of us from the churches of Christ in Ponca City took a caravan to Joplin, MO to help out in any way we could. We worked through the church of Christ on 26th and Connecticut which is just 100 yards from the area of total devastation that is about a mile wide and six miles long. Since the church building sustained some roof damage, they converted it into a disaster relief area. Ed Hoggett, an elder there, and Richard Chambers, the preacher are heading up one of many relief efforst in the city that sees slow progress. One family at a time. I took our crew to the eastern side of the affected area and spent all day cleaning up just one yard. I made plenty of observations though.
There were plenty of crazy situations. One house (I use the word "house", but it was nothing more than a pile of rubble) had nothing standing but the shower. On the shower head hung a shower caddy with shampoo and conditioner still in place.
At one house we worked at, we found a mason jar full of hot cocoa, marshmallows and such with Christmas ribbon still attached to the lid. It was perfectly intact in some rubble that was once a shed and now resembled a pile of match sticks. We were told that the jar came from the kitchen.
Across the street was the remains of a house. Roof was gone. All walls were gone except for the coat closet, which just happened to be where the family hid for cover.
Just to contrast that, the house we were working at across the street from the coat closet had only lost their roof. Fifty yards away was a house that was beautiful: nicely manicured lawn, flower beds, no problems whatsoever. Then next to it, total destruction again. I don't know if that is amazing or lucky. Or both.
The craziest one of all was a softball. We found a softball in the backyard that was impaled by a piece of wood an inch wide and three inches long. Imagine the force necessary to impale a piece of wood into a softball!
It's easy to see God at work in Joplin right now. There are thousands upon thousands of volunteers in town every day helping in any way they can. We were to see a couple dozen Salvation Army volunteers walking our neighborhood passing out water. One man from Lancaster Pennsylvania who owned a flooring business had loaded his van down with cases of water and was passing them out to anybody who was thirsty. We met a group of college students in the Campus Crusade for Christ from Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas who were staying in Branson. They drove in to help and happened upon us. We put them to work. We had heard of some looting going on, but I really think that such horrible people were few and far between.
One thing I noticed was that the tree trunks that were still standing all seemed to have Spanish moss all over them. Upon closer inspection it was shredded insulation clinging to whatever was left standing, including all structures. The comedian Ron White once quipped about tornadoes, "It's not that the wind blows, it's what it blows!" I came away convinced that I would never survive the debris in the air.
I am also convinced that a tornado is nothing more than a very big coffee grinder. It takes anything and grinds it up. I spent two hours raking ground up shingles, ground up trees, ground up construction materials, and ground up "things" I couldn't identify in the front yard. It was while raking that I noticed the aforementioned stench. I thought that maybe the owners had dogs, but then I started raking up birds, parts of birds, squirrels, you name it. My biggest fear was that I would lift up a knocked down privacy fence and find a human body. Thankfully God spared me that horror.
Words just can't describe what the beautiful town of Joplin has become, but my words can describe what needs to be done. Joplin is going to need volunteers helping for a long time. We're not talking weeks, but months and years just to clean up the debris, much less start the rebuilding process.
My wife is fond of saying, "If you get to feeling sorry for yourself, go help somebody." Amazingly I didn't see Joplinites feeling sorry for themselves, but picking themselves up, dusting themselves off, and helping each other. If you are wanting to volunteer your time or money, get in contact with me on facebook, or comment on this post and I will point you in the right direction. We need to show the world that we aren't a selfish people but are in this thing together.
Monday, March 21, 2011
March Sadness
Every year after the first weekend of the NCAA tournament I write up a second-chance bracket of the Sweet 16 teams and create a competition amongst my friends. I do this because inevitably every year my original 64 (65, 68) team bracket is busted after the first two rounds. Case in point, this year my first bracket on ESPN.com is currently ranked in the 15th percentile! Egads! It doesn't matter that I was depending on that $10,000 grand prize. Instead, my wife is presently in the 99th percentile! At one point she had picked 19 of the first 20 games right!
Just how did she get there? For example, she chose to pick St. John's opponent because St. John's sounded like wart removal medicine. Why did she pick West Virginia in the first round? Because the state of West Virginia looks like a frog jumping into water!
Now don't get the wrong idea. She knows a lot more about college basketball than she lets on. ESPN is on nearly every moment the television is on, so if she is in the room, she's absorbing information. She reads the newspaper. She has conversations with me about basketball that result in me talking about 90% of the time (hence she's listening, taking notes.) She's a sponge.
That she is doing so well doesn't surprise me at all. That I am biting the big one is quite frankly... sad.
So every year I fill out at least five brackets. Here's my strategy (at the end I will be asking for yours!)
Bracket #1
This is my bracket that never does well because it is my original, first-instinct, emotional picks. At this point I have looked over the tournament field maybe once, twice at most and I pick the teams I think should win each match up based on criteria I have collected over the year, like watching St. John's take out the entire Big East during a January stretch. Yeah, that one worked out really well. I don't do much research when it comes to match ups. As I said before, this bracket is currently ranked in the 15th percentile.
Bracket #2
This is nearly identical to my first bracket, but I go out on a limb by picking some first round upsets that I didn't think of the first time. I do a little more research here, and end up convincing myself that I know something that nobody else does. Apparently I knew a little bit here because this bracket is currently in the 37th percentile. Still pathetic.
Bracket #3
This is my wacky bracket. In my first two brackets I have chosen my final four very carefully and not deviated one little bit. This bracket is different. I may keep one, possibly two of my final four picks, but I like to go on a limb and choose a few dark horses to make the final four. I'm not talking George Mason in '05-like dark horses, but maybe a four or a five seed. Think Arizona in 1997 (a four seed that took out maybe the best Kansas squad ever assembled and went on to win the whole thing. Darn that Mike Bibby!) Currently this one is my best bracket, ranked in the 88th percentile, but I moronically chose Purdue to beat Kansas, so it will be dropping sharply!
Bracket #4
This bracket is my "I'm so tired of spending time doing brackets, so I am just going to click randomly and see how it comes out" bracket. I do make sure I put the for-sure wins in there, but the rest is just a crap shoot. This year it came up snake eyes. That's right; I'm in the 11th percentile.
Bracket #5
Bracket #5 is different from the first four brackets. The first four I take care of in one exhaustive day. This one I wait a few days to fill out. I listen to all the experts give their commentary, I study match ups, trying to see the whole thing through new eyes, like re-reading a book that you put on a book shelf ten years ago when you only have a vague memory of what it is about. Other than my first bracket, this is the one I have the most faith in. I don't know why. My percentile isn't even worth mentioning.
I have heard of other methods. For example, one of my sister's brackets is a mascot competition! For example, The Penn State Nitney Lions had no problem with the Temple Owls. How cool is that? Kentucky Wildcats v. Princeton Tigers would be a push. The funny thing is that she says that it works better than legitimate picks. By the way what the heck is a Tar Heel?
So, since I am so inept at my picks, what is your sure-fire method? Feel free to share!
Just how did she get there? For example, she chose to pick St. John's opponent because St. John's sounded like wart removal medicine. Why did she pick West Virginia in the first round? Because the state of West Virginia looks like a frog jumping into water!
Now don't get the wrong idea. She knows a lot more about college basketball than she lets on. ESPN is on nearly every moment the television is on, so if she is in the room, she's absorbing information. She reads the newspaper. She has conversations with me about basketball that result in me talking about 90% of the time (hence she's listening, taking notes.) She's a sponge.
That she is doing so well doesn't surprise me at all. That I am biting the big one is quite frankly... sad.
So every year I fill out at least five brackets. Here's my strategy (at the end I will be asking for yours!)
Bracket #1
This is my bracket that never does well because it is my original, first-instinct, emotional picks. At this point I have looked over the tournament field maybe once, twice at most and I pick the teams I think should win each match up based on criteria I have collected over the year, like watching St. John's take out the entire Big East during a January stretch. Yeah, that one worked out really well. I don't do much research when it comes to match ups. As I said before, this bracket is currently ranked in the 15th percentile.
Bracket #2
This is nearly identical to my first bracket, but I go out on a limb by picking some first round upsets that I didn't think of the first time. I do a little more research here, and end up convincing myself that I know something that nobody else does. Apparently I knew a little bit here because this bracket is currently in the 37th percentile. Still pathetic.
Bracket #3
This is my wacky bracket. In my first two brackets I have chosen my final four very carefully and not deviated one little bit. This bracket is different. I may keep one, possibly two of my final four picks, but I like to go on a limb and choose a few dark horses to make the final four. I'm not talking George Mason in '05-like dark horses, but maybe a four or a five seed. Think Arizona in 1997 (a four seed that took out maybe the best Kansas squad ever assembled and went on to win the whole thing. Darn that Mike Bibby!) Currently this one is my best bracket, ranked in the 88th percentile, but I moronically chose Purdue to beat Kansas, so it will be dropping sharply!
Bracket #4
This bracket is my "I'm so tired of spending time doing brackets, so I am just going to click randomly and see how it comes out" bracket. I do make sure I put the for-sure wins in there, but the rest is just a crap shoot. This year it came up snake eyes. That's right; I'm in the 11th percentile.
Bracket #5
Bracket #5 is different from the first four brackets. The first four I take care of in one exhaustive day. This one I wait a few days to fill out. I listen to all the experts give their commentary, I study match ups, trying to see the whole thing through new eyes, like re-reading a book that you put on a book shelf ten years ago when you only have a vague memory of what it is about. Other than my first bracket, this is the one I have the most faith in. I don't know why. My percentile isn't even worth mentioning.
I have heard of other methods. For example, one of my sister's brackets is a mascot competition! For example, The Penn State Nitney Lions had no problem with the Temple Owls. How cool is that? Kentucky Wildcats v. Princeton Tigers would be a push. The funny thing is that she says that it works better than legitimate picks. By the way what the heck is a Tar Heel?
So, since I am so inept at my picks, what is your sure-fire method? Feel free to share!
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Rocky
A little over a year ago, the sixth Rocky movie, titled Rocky Balboa, came to the big screen, supposedly the one that closes out the series. It got me to wondering which Rocky movie was the best? Which was the worst? Which one could we live without? Which one was just plain horrible? Amongst sports movies, Rocky is a lovable character not just because of his seemingly unflawed, modest outlook on life, but we always root for the underdog. It got me to thinking, how great is the sport of boxing? You can be an absolute nobody from nowhere (Buster Douglas) and win the greatest title of the world with one punch.
In honor of AMC's tribute to the Rocky movies this week, and with apologies to Clint Eastwood and the whole Spaghetti Western genre, I have compiled a list in descending order. Enjoy, and as always, feel free to debate.
6. Rocky V
The Good: Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Depressing scenerio, depressing plot. This was supposed to be the conclusion to the Rocky series. Instead it left a bad taste in the fans' mouths and prompted the writers to think, "Dang, now we have to come up with another one!"
The Bad: Street fighting? Really? Rocky is a man of the streets, but this seeming conclusion was far beneath his dignity. It was just an old guy beating up a young punk.
The Ugly: Tommy Gunn, or whatever the young punk's name was (I've only seen this once, and I refuse to see it again, kind of like Napoleon Dynamite,) was about the weakest villan ever, but not as ugly as the Johnny Cochran/Don King wannabe promoter. That was just sad.
5. Rocky III
The Good: Rocky deals with the loss of his long time trainer/manager. The tears falls, Rocky fights his inner turmoil, and comes out on top.
The Bad: Rocky’s rematch with Clubber Lang lasts only three weak rounds of punch-drunk ecstasy. It was as if the writers got to a certain point and said, “Man, this is lasting too long. Let’s just have him knock Clubber out now.”
The Ugly: Mr. T. Has any other actor ever been this type casted? He wasn’t playing Clubber Lang. He was playing himself. This said, I am a fan of Mr. T. Close 2nd place: Rocky and Apollo's awkward man hugs (before there were rules to how men hug) as they bounce in the surf after Rocky beat Apollo in a sprint down the beach, signifying thus that Rocky now had all the skills he needed to take out Mr. T...er Clubber Lang.
4. Rocky Balboa (Rocky VI)
The Good: This movie meant that Rocky V wasn’t the end of the series. Other than that, the way Rocky exits the ring before the decision is given (in favor of his opponent,) shows in a slightly poetic way that it’s not the end result that matters, but how he fought the match. He shows heart, something the champ could never have. After all these movies, he’s still the underdog, he's still his own person, and that’s a beautiful thing.
The Bad: His wife is dead and his son is a mess.
The Ugly: Rocky is waiting tables for a living? He should have owned the meat packing business from Rocky I so he could tenderize a few more sides of beef. That would have been nostalgic. I could never grow bored of watching a man punch meat.
3. Rocky II
The Good: Seems to be the logical way for the series to end; Apollo Creed’s pride is too damaged after their first fight that he has to give Rocky another challenge. Rocky accepts despite the fact that his heart is in the right place (with his wife in the hospital.) Pride goeth before the fall.
The Bad: The rematch. It goes in the same fashion as the first fight, but they both fall to the canvas. He who gets up first is the winner. I see their attempt at drama, but it just doesn’t work for me. Rocky II very easily could have fallen to #5, but it’s only slightly more original than III and VI so it gets the nod.
The Ugly: The first 1/3 of the movie. Rocky’s romance with Adrian is awkward. His jacket with the tiger on the back is worse than ugly. It’s fugly. Besides this, his endorsement scenes are beneath human dignity.
2. Rocky IV
The Good: The steroid-filled, iron-plated Soviet beast, Ivan Drago. East verses West. Precipice of the Cold War. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Who will shoot the nukes first, us or the Russians? What does it matter because as we learned from another great eighties movie, War Games, we would all end up dead. Rocky takes this knowledge and changes the world for the better. “If I can change, and you can change, everybody can change!”
The Bad: The steroid-filled, iron-plated Soviet beast, Ivan Drago. Talk about a great villan!!! This “the bad” is great for the movie, unlike the previous four movies. After Drago kills Apollo Creed in an exhibition match, everyone in the movie theatre is ready to gang jump him!
The Ugly: The steroid-filled, iron-plated Soviet beast, Ivan Drago’s wife. Yikes! Is it me, or was she the lead singer for the Eurythmics?
1. Rocky I
The Good: The original. The Oscar winner. Absolute nobody from nowhere takes the World Champion to the brink of defeat. Mixed in with this is a beautiful love story of two kids in poverty-stricken Philly. American Realism at its best.
The Bad: Apollo Creed’s intentions. Even when he is giving this "nobody" his chance of a lifetime, it’s only purpose is to feed Apollo’s huge ego. Great example of pride at its worst.
The Ugly: Rocky drinks the six raw eggs just before he starts training, without so much as grimacing! Honestly, was there no such thing as salmonella back then?
In honor of AMC's tribute to the Rocky movies this week, and with apologies to Clint Eastwood and the whole Spaghetti Western genre, I have compiled a list in descending order. Enjoy, and as always, feel free to debate.
6. Rocky V
The Good: Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Depressing scenerio, depressing plot. This was supposed to be the conclusion to the Rocky series. Instead it left a bad taste in the fans' mouths and prompted the writers to think, "Dang, now we have to come up with another one!"
The Bad: Street fighting? Really? Rocky is a man of the streets, but this seeming conclusion was far beneath his dignity. It was just an old guy beating up a young punk.
The Ugly: Tommy Gunn, or whatever the young punk's name was (I've only seen this once, and I refuse to see it again, kind of like Napoleon Dynamite,) was about the weakest villan ever, but not as ugly as the Johnny Cochran/Don King wannabe promoter. That was just sad.
5. Rocky III
The Good: Rocky deals with the loss of his long time trainer/manager. The tears falls, Rocky fights his inner turmoil, and comes out on top.
The Bad: Rocky’s rematch with Clubber Lang lasts only three weak rounds of punch-drunk ecstasy. It was as if the writers got to a certain point and said, “Man, this is lasting too long. Let’s just have him knock Clubber out now.”
The Ugly: Mr. T. Has any other actor ever been this type casted? He wasn’t playing Clubber Lang. He was playing himself. This said, I am a fan of Mr. T. Close 2nd place: Rocky and Apollo's awkward man hugs (before there were rules to how men hug) as they bounce in the surf after Rocky beat Apollo in a sprint down the beach, signifying thus that Rocky now had all the skills he needed to take out Mr. T...er Clubber Lang.
4. Rocky Balboa (Rocky VI)
The Good: This movie meant that Rocky V wasn’t the end of the series. Other than that, the way Rocky exits the ring before the decision is given (in favor of his opponent,) shows in a slightly poetic way that it’s not the end result that matters, but how he fought the match. He shows heart, something the champ could never have. After all these movies, he’s still the underdog, he's still his own person, and that’s a beautiful thing.
The Bad: His wife is dead and his son is a mess.
The Ugly: Rocky is waiting tables for a living? He should have owned the meat packing business from Rocky I so he could tenderize a few more sides of beef. That would have been nostalgic. I could never grow bored of watching a man punch meat.
3. Rocky II
The Good: Seems to be the logical way for the series to end; Apollo Creed’s pride is too damaged after their first fight that he has to give Rocky another challenge. Rocky accepts despite the fact that his heart is in the right place (with his wife in the hospital.) Pride goeth before the fall.
The Bad: The rematch. It goes in the same fashion as the first fight, but they both fall to the canvas. He who gets up first is the winner. I see their attempt at drama, but it just doesn’t work for me. Rocky II very easily could have fallen to #5, but it’s only slightly more original than III and VI so it gets the nod.
The Ugly: The first 1/3 of the movie. Rocky’s romance with Adrian is awkward. His jacket with the tiger on the back is worse than ugly. It’s fugly. Besides this, his endorsement scenes are beneath human dignity.
2. Rocky IV
The Good: The steroid-filled, iron-plated Soviet beast, Ivan Drago. East verses West. Precipice of the Cold War. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Who will shoot the nukes first, us or the Russians? What does it matter because as we learned from another great eighties movie, War Games, we would all end up dead. Rocky takes this knowledge and changes the world for the better. “If I can change, and you can change, everybody can change!”
The Bad: The steroid-filled, iron-plated Soviet beast, Ivan Drago. Talk about a great villan!!! This “the bad” is great for the movie, unlike the previous four movies. After Drago kills Apollo Creed in an exhibition match, everyone in the movie theatre is ready to gang jump him!
The Ugly: The steroid-filled, iron-plated Soviet beast, Ivan Drago’s wife. Yikes! Is it me, or was she the lead singer for the Eurythmics?
1. Rocky I
The Good: The original. The Oscar winner. Absolute nobody from nowhere takes the World Champion to the brink of defeat. Mixed in with this is a beautiful love story of two kids in poverty-stricken Philly. American Realism at its best.
The Bad: Apollo Creed’s intentions. Even when he is giving this "nobody" his chance of a lifetime, it’s only purpose is to feed Apollo’s huge ego. Great example of pride at its worst.
The Ugly: Rocky drinks the six raw eggs just before he starts training, without so much as grimacing! Honestly, was there no such thing as salmonella back then?
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Snow Day
Here's the scenerio: a blizzard has blown through the area leaving schools and businesses shut down. Temperatures are in the single digits with wind chills well into the negatives. A family is stuck inside, sick of watching tv, sick of surfing facebook, very bored.
What is your favorite snow day activity?
What is your favorite snow day activity?
Friday, January 28, 2011
The Beatles
"My theory is that when it comes to important subjects, there are only two ways a person can answer. Which way they chose, tells you who that person is. For instance, there are only two kinds of people in the world, Beatles people and Elvis people. Now Beatles people can like Elvis and Elvis people can like the Beatles, but nobody likes them both equally. Somewhere you have to make a choice. And that choice, tells you who you are." Mia Wallace, from Pulp Fiction
I was raised as neither a Beatles person nor an Elvis person, but I came to know Elvis first in college. From his Rockabilly start in Tennessee all the way to his best song, "Suspicious Minds" the famous quote about Elvis Presley sums it up well. "Before anyone did anything, Elvis did everything." In late 2000 I took a trip to Memphis and, of course, visited Graceland. If I didn't love his music before that trip, I instantly came to my senses. That is why it was so hard for me to come around to the Beatles.
The truth is, I have long held a grudge against the Beatles. Their popularity in the States was undeniable, and I suppose I blamed them for being British, but when I learned that one of them quipped that they were more popular than Jesus Christ, I was instantly turned off. That, and I couldn't stand their hair at any point in their American maturation. Beatles songs aired on the radio and recognizing them, I would switch the station. Somehow though I came to recognize that their music held something that I believe hasn't been duplicated since. Whereas Elvis had his "sound" the Beatles seemed to be dynamic, creative, dare I say, influential. For these reasons I hated them all the more.
Then last year in a cruel trick of fate, my planning period was changed from sixth period (last period of the day) to second period. Teach one class, chill for an hour, then teach four more classes. It was a horrible schedule, but it did produce one interesting side note. When nine o'clock rolled around and my students exited the classroom, I would turn my radio on to the local oldies station in the hopes that they would play some Elvis, Purkle Harem, Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, or something else worthy of my time. But every morning they played what they called a "Beatles Break," two Beatles songs back to back. Too busy grading essays to get up and change the station, I would let the Beatles play on and saw that their musical creativity was in fact brilliant. Elvis might have had a hand in inventing Rock and Roll, but the Beatles took it to the extreme.
The haunting guitar riff in "Something" made me drift off into a daydream. The violins in "Eleanor Rigby" stirred my imagination. "Hey Jude" had me singing along. "Naaaaaa, naaa, naaa, na, na, na, naaaaaa. Na, na, na, naaaaa. Hey Jude!"
So in a moment of weakness last month when I should have been looking for a new Christmas CD, I grabbed a Beatles best of CD. It's been hard to take it out of the CD player since.
So am I a Beatles person or an Elvis person? I like them both now.
After much hard thought, I have decided I am... a Johnny Cash person.
As always, feel free to weigh in.
I was raised as neither a Beatles person nor an Elvis person, but I came to know Elvis first in college. From his Rockabilly start in Tennessee all the way to his best song, "Suspicious Minds" the famous quote about Elvis Presley sums it up well. "Before anyone did anything, Elvis did everything." In late 2000 I took a trip to Memphis and, of course, visited Graceland. If I didn't love his music before that trip, I instantly came to my senses. That is why it was so hard for me to come around to the Beatles.
The truth is, I have long held a grudge against the Beatles. Their popularity in the States was undeniable, and I suppose I blamed them for being British, but when I learned that one of them quipped that they were more popular than Jesus Christ, I was instantly turned off. That, and I couldn't stand their hair at any point in their American maturation. Beatles songs aired on the radio and recognizing them, I would switch the station. Somehow though I came to recognize that their music held something that I believe hasn't been duplicated since. Whereas Elvis had his "sound" the Beatles seemed to be dynamic, creative, dare I say, influential. For these reasons I hated them all the more.
Then last year in a cruel trick of fate, my planning period was changed from sixth period (last period of the day) to second period. Teach one class, chill for an hour, then teach four more classes. It was a horrible schedule, but it did produce one interesting side note. When nine o'clock rolled around and my students exited the classroom, I would turn my radio on to the local oldies station in the hopes that they would play some Elvis, Purkle Harem, Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, or something else worthy of my time. But every morning they played what they called a "Beatles Break," two Beatles songs back to back. Too busy grading essays to get up and change the station, I would let the Beatles play on and saw that their musical creativity was in fact brilliant. Elvis might have had a hand in inventing Rock and Roll, but the Beatles took it to the extreme.
The haunting guitar riff in "Something" made me drift off into a daydream. The violins in "Eleanor Rigby" stirred my imagination. "Hey Jude" had me singing along. "Naaaaaa, naaa, naaa, na, na, na, naaaaaa. Na, na, na, naaaaa. Hey Jude!"
So in a moment of weakness last month when I should have been looking for a new Christmas CD, I grabbed a Beatles best of CD. It's been hard to take it out of the CD player since.
So am I a Beatles person or an Elvis person? I like them both now.
After much hard thought, I have decided I am... a Johnny Cash person.
As always, feel free to weigh in.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Moral Education
I have been fuming all weekend long about the shootings of the eighteen innocent civilians by a young, deranged gunman. Investigators have been turning this kid's life upside down to determine whether he acted alone, what his reasons for this outburst were, whether there's some conspiracy. The reason I am fuming is because all of this could be prevented with a little common sense.
It's all summed up in one word: education. Education has been receiving a radical make over for quite some time now. Some of it is good, a lot of it is not. For example, for the last two years I have had to listen to a certain pedagogical "expert" during mandated seminars. His contention is that 1. homework should be abolished, 2. daily work should count for no percentage of a student's grade, and 3. the only thing that matters is how well a student does on a test. There are a few issues I need to take with this. Please be patient and I will get to the point I made in the first paragraph.
1. Homework- he claimed that homework was basically a waste of a student's time. I don't feel that way. Though I have largely eliminated homework, I still assign some because students need extra practice to master a concept. Fifty-five minute periods don't allow for as much learning time as is needed. Also, when a student is assigned homework, he must make a decision: learn the content or X Box. Too often X Box wins out, which is a problem unto its own. Students need to learn the value of hard work.
2. Formative v. Summative Assessments- I agree that the purpose of homework and other daily assignments are to "form" the student's mind, and tests, or summative assignments, grade what a student knows. The problem is that students will get away with anything they can. If there is no grade attached, they feel less value attached to the assignment and are more apt to hit the X Box. There's an obvious problem in this from a "teach them how to act in the real world" scenerio.
Then there's the idea that students should be allowed to retest as many times as they want until they "get it right." Essentially, that it doesn't matter if they master the information in September or May, but that they master the information before the end of the year so that they can promote to the next grade. If this is the case, then the final exam should be the only test that matters, right? I want to give students ample chances to learn the work, but this policy has created laziness. I have students ask me, "Can I retake this test?" before they even take it the first time! My dad always told me to do something right the first time. Many times a student wants to see the test and then try to remember where the answers went on the second try. What is this teaching them? How many bosses want a worker who doesn't want to do things right the first time? Education is a break from the real world, a chance to make mistakes and learn from mistakes, but at what point does education draw the line and say, "Enough is enough. Young man, it's time for you to mature?"
3. Teaching to the test- these four words were as bad as four-letter cuss words when I first entered the teaching profession over ten years ago. The idea is that some company makes a standardized test, the state adopts the test as the scale by which we mark achievement, then the students have to do well on it. The problem is that it all revolvs around money. Districts are told that "no child may be left behind" and hence all students have to score proficient or money will be taken away, and teachers and administrators will be fired. Those in charge of the districts then put the pressure on the teachers to make sure the students have all the information they need to do well on the test.
This puts teachers in a peculiar situation. Do they teach only the information that they know will be on the test, even if other skills should also be taught, or do they teach these other skills also and hope for the best? More and more everything else gets thrown out the window, and this includes moral education. Some refer to it as character education, and there's a difference.
I can already hear some parents saying, "How dare you choose to place your own morals on my child! What gives you the right?" I understand this sentiment. I would not want another teacher pushing his set of values on my children. But there's a problem in this. Many of my students in the last dozen years have a home life in which their parents, say, are at the casino all night and sleep in all day. The most important duty a parent has is to his or her children- bringing them up to know right from wrong. When this strong parental figure is missing in a student's life, traditionally the church has picked up the slack. If all else failed, teachers took over.
Unfortunately those who believe that the Constitution of the United States is a living document have argued that the separation of church and state means keeping Christianity out of the classroom when our founding fathers didn't imply this at all. Character education trys to instill the concepts of love and peace in our students but fail miserably because love and peace are the cornerstones of Christ's ministry. Essentially you can't give someone something that you don't have. Education can't teach love if it doesn't know what love is. God is love.
Forsaking the church's role in education has led to a break down of the last line of moral defense. When we as educators look only to teach quadratic equations and pronouns, the students only receive these concepts, and not a primer in living life the right way.
What morals did the shooter possess? Who taught him right from wrong? Now I don't pretend to know the shooter's background, but I think I can safely assume that he is a product of our current system.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Why reinvent the wheel?
God help us.
It's all summed up in one word: education. Education has been receiving a radical make over for quite some time now. Some of it is good, a lot of it is not. For example, for the last two years I have had to listen to a certain pedagogical "expert" during mandated seminars. His contention is that 1. homework should be abolished, 2. daily work should count for no percentage of a student's grade, and 3. the only thing that matters is how well a student does on a test. There are a few issues I need to take with this. Please be patient and I will get to the point I made in the first paragraph.
1. Homework- he claimed that homework was basically a waste of a student's time. I don't feel that way. Though I have largely eliminated homework, I still assign some because students need extra practice to master a concept. Fifty-five minute periods don't allow for as much learning time as is needed. Also, when a student is assigned homework, he must make a decision: learn the content or X Box. Too often X Box wins out, which is a problem unto its own. Students need to learn the value of hard work.
2. Formative v. Summative Assessments- I agree that the purpose of homework and other daily assignments are to "form" the student's mind, and tests, or summative assignments, grade what a student knows. The problem is that students will get away with anything they can. If there is no grade attached, they feel less value attached to the assignment and are more apt to hit the X Box. There's an obvious problem in this from a "teach them how to act in the real world" scenerio.
Then there's the idea that students should be allowed to retest as many times as they want until they "get it right." Essentially, that it doesn't matter if they master the information in September or May, but that they master the information before the end of the year so that they can promote to the next grade. If this is the case, then the final exam should be the only test that matters, right? I want to give students ample chances to learn the work, but this policy has created laziness. I have students ask me, "Can I retake this test?" before they even take it the first time! My dad always told me to do something right the first time. Many times a student wants to see the test and then try to remember where the answers went on the second try. What is this teaching them? How many bosses want a worker who doesn't want to do things right the first time? Education is a break from the real world, a chance to make mistakes and learn from mistakes, but at what point does education draw the line and say, "Enough is enough. Young man, it's time for you to mature?"
3. Teaching to the test- these four words were as bad as four-letter cuss words when I first entered the teaching profession over ten years ago. The idea is that some company makes a standardized test, the state adopts the test as the scale by which we mark achievement, then the students have to do well on it. The problem is that it all revolvs around money. Districts are told that "no child may be left behind" and hence all students have to score proficient or money will be taken away, and teachers and administrators will be fired. Those in charge of the districts then put the pressure on the teachers to make sure the students have all the information they need to do well on the test.
This puts teachers in a peculiar situation. Do they teach only the information that they know will be on the test, even if other skills should also be taught, or do they teach these other skills also and hope for the best? More and more everything else gets thrown out the window, and this includes moral education. Some refer to it as character education, and there's a difference.
I can already hear some parents saying, "How dare you choose to place your own morals on my child! What gives you the right?" I understand this sentiment. I would not want another teacher pushing his set of values on my children. But there's a problem in this. Many of my students in the last dozen years have a home life in which their parents, say, are at the casino all night and sleep in all day. The most important duty a parent has is to his or her children- bringing them up to know right from wrong. When this strong parental figure is missing in a student's life, traditionally the church has picked up the slack. If all else failed, teachers took over.
Unfortunately those who believe that the Constitution of the United States is a living document have argued that the separation of church and state means keeping Christianity out of the classroom when our founding fathers didn't imply this at all. Character education trys to instill the concepts of love and peace in our students but fail miserably because love and peace are the cornerstones of Christ's ministry. Essentially you can't give someone something that you don't have. Education can't teach love if it doesn't know what love is. God is love.
Forsaking the church's role in education has led to a break down of the last line of moral defense. When we as educators look only to teach quadratic equations and pronouns, the students only receive these concepts, and not a primer in living life the right way.
What morals did the shooter possess? Who taught him right from wrong? Now I don't pretend to know the shooter's background, but I think I can safely assume that he is a product of our current system.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Why reinvent the wheel?
God help us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
