Advanced Statistics Made Easier (Sort of).

July 30, 2010 by 6 Comments

Joe Morgan hates nerds.

It’s funny that Joe Morgan is on the cover of Baseball for Dummies.  Joe Morgan is an idiot, but Joe Morgan is a Hall of Famer.  Joe Morgan doesn’t believe in advanced statistics, citing the fact that he played the game as to why he is right.  This sort of faulty logic is common amongst many retired players that were probably too scared to use cell phones and the internet.  Go take a nap, Joe, your warm milk will be ready shortly.

Editor’s Note: I was going to make this one giant post, but droning on and on for close to 2,000 words is becoming less and less attractive.  Instead, this will be part 1 of a 4 part series.  It will also make me look like I blog a lot more than I actually do.  So, there’s that.

I’ve been kicking around the idea of writing about advanced baseball statistics for a while now.  The other day, Hilson mentioned something about it, so I figured now would be as good a time as any.  As a disclaimer, note that in no way do I consider myself versed on all things related to sabermetrics.  I am not a sabermetrician, and I don’t pretend to be one.  What I’m about to cover isn’t some super complex, difficult to understand math equation; rather, I’m attempting to put these formulas and statistics into terms the casual fan can understand.  If you’re knowledgeable in the area of sabermetrics, this isn’t for you.  My fear is that instead of finding this helpful, my dear readers will look at this as verbose and uninteresting.  That is not my intent, and I apologize beforehand if it turns out that way.

Having said all of that, sabermetrics aren’t as scary as they seem.  I’ll admit, when I first took the plunge into the world of advanced statistics, I was terrified.  First, I’m about as good at math as Ben Roethlisberger is at not raping chicks.  Sabermetrics involves a lot of math and funky equations.  For the purpose of this blog post, however, don’t worry about said equations.  All I’m attempting to do is make it so my girlfriend better understands me when I ramble on about why Franklin Gutierrez is more than just a sexy, sexy man (although, he is pretty easy on the eyes).  Also, Geoff, reading this will make you far less stupid.

Pure Sex.

There are a myriad of statistics to look at, but I’ll focus on the four that I believe are the most important.  None of these stats are perfect, and none should be looked at as an end-all when evaluating players.  With that in mind, the first stat we’ll examine is WAR.

WAR stands for Wins Above Replacement, and is by far the easiest stat to understand.  People may not understand slugging percentage, but even my 9-year-old knows that winning is important.  A replacement level player is not a league average player.  This is an important distinction to make.  A league average player is worth ~2 wins per season, while a replacement level player is worth zero.  Every team has replacement players.  Think of them as the guys who do well enough in AAA to get called up, and then basically ride the bench.  The baseball blogosphere refers to these guys as AAAA players.  If you’re a Seattle fan and follow the Mariners at all, think Mike Carp.  Is he going to kill you if he fills in for a week or two?  Probably not.  Is he the long term answer at his position though?  Not likely.  Braves fans, think of 2009 Garrett Anderson.  He was actually worse than replacement level (his WAR was negative, at -0.9).  It’s nice being able to quantify with numbers what your eyes see.  Watching Anderson was probably excruciatingly painful as a fan, but instead of saying things like “God he’s awful”, we can say, “God he’s worse than replacement level” and “I legitimately believe I could help this club more”.  For (Devil) Rays fans, think Delmon Young circa 2007.  He posted a WAR of 0.1 that year, and somehow turned into Matt Garza (and Jason Bartlett).

As an aside, I just covered the favorite teams of both SC authors, Bryan Holt and Robbie Hilson.  The bromance gets stronger by the day.

If you’re interested in reading about WAR in greater detail, there are far better places in which to do so.  Beyond the Boxscore, a part of the fantastic SB Nation, has a ridiculously well written piece (if you don’t care about length).  Also, Tom Tango, who might actually have a higher IQ than Walter Bishop (Fringe references!), breaks it down over at his blog.  Both are extremely interesting and thought-provoking reads.  I would also suggest bookmarking FanGraphs, as it is basically the mecca of all baseball stat sites.

I’ve always enjoyed looking at numbers and lists more than reading entire articles.  With that in mind, here are the top 10 players from 2009 (since WAR is cumulative, not projective) according to their WAR (final WAR in parenthesis):

  1. Zack Greinke, KC (9.4)
  2. Albert Pujols, StL (8.7)
  3. Ben Zobrist, TB (8.3)
  4. Tim Lincecum, SF (8.2)
  5. Justin Verlander, DET (8.2)
  6. Joe Mauer, MIN (8.0)
  7. Chase Utley, PHI (7.6)
  8. Derek Jeter, NYY (7.4)
  9. Roy Halladay, TOR (7.3)
  10. Hanley Ramirez, FLA (7.2)

Basically what this means is, over the course of an entire season, Albert Pujols is almost 9 wins better than someone like Mike Carp.  So if he got hurt and St. Louis used a replacement level player in his absence, they’d win 9 less games over the course of an entire year.  That’s a lot of games attributed to a single player.  The great thing about WAR is it also factors in things like defense and base running.  Offensive statistics are nice, but WAR looks at the entire package and lets you know just how valuable a player really is.

What’s cool about this list is that 4 of the top 6 players on it have the post-season hardware to back it up.  Greinke was #1 in WAR last year and took home the AL Cy Young.  Pujols was #2, and took home the NL MVP.  Lincecum was #4, and took home the NL Cy Young.  Mauer was #6, and took home the AL MVP.  With the exception of Zobrist, you knew all of these players were elite.  Instead of judging them by All-Star appearances or Home Runs, we can look at their WAR and say how valuable they all were.

Now, again, WAR is by no means a flawless stat.  Although, for judging a players true value, it’s the best measure currently at our disposal.  I hope I’ve shed some light on a seemingly complicated matter.  I’m not expecting all of you to start citing career WAR for players like WSU alum John Olerud (62.4, Go Cougs!).  However, when debating how good Player A is compared to Player B, you can now use what is — more or less — the most complete statistical measure available.  WAR is your friend; use it wisely.

Filed under Sports. Tagged with , , , , , ,

Top 25: Part Deux.

July 29, 2010 by 1 Comment

I think I’m ready to start this.  I’ve gone over the list more times than I can count, and I’ve made a bunch of changes.  Kelly was on my laptop the other night, and I told her not to look at the super secret, super inconspicuous file on my desktop entitled “Top 25“.  I’m guessing she flipped me off and looked anyway.  Well, I’ve completely changed the list since then, so HA!  That’s what you get for snooping, Kelly.

Before we begin our backwards countdown, I thought I’d recognize the 5 bubble teams that didn’t quite make the tournament.  These 5 movies were on the cusp of being included, but were just edged out.  I still enjoy them thoroughly, though, and felt they deserved some love.

As a reminder, this is not a list of the best movies I have ever seen.  Having to deal with ranking movies on a scale of 1-10 is kind of a chore.  Not to mention, I have a few movies on here that the critics didn’t like.  I also have a few movies that I know weren’t great from a cinematic standpoint, but love them just the same.  So keep that in mind whilst perusing my (second) attempt at a Top 25.

Onward!

Read more of this post

Filed under Talking Pictures. Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Dexter Season 5 Trailer.

July 26, 2010 by 1 Comment

WARNING, IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN SEASONS 1-4, DO NOT WATCH THIS TRAILER.

You’ve been warned.

For those who are up-to-date on all things Dexter? Holy fucking shit.

Filed under Random. Tagged with , ,

Night @ the Movies.

July 25, 2010 by Leave a comment

I’ve been hearing great things about this movie for a while, and figured it was time to finally decide for myself.  The awards circuit certainly loved Jeff Bridges‘ performance, as he virtually swept the Best Actor award for his role as past-his-prime Country music star, Bad Blake.

The story isn’t anything super original.  We’ve seen this before in a myriad of other movies.  Washed up former star has a drinking/drug habit, sleeps with random chicks all the time, until he eventually falls in love and chooses to clean his act up and get sober.  The movie itself isn’t exceptional in any one area; rather, it’s merely solid-to-pretty-well-done.  This movie won’t make you say wow very much, but I found myself still enjoying it regardless.

Bad Blake (Bridges) is doing his version of what Mickey Rourke did in The Wrestler.  A once loved star has been regulated to playing gigs that he wouldn’t have touched with a 10 foot pole in his past life.  Bad (awesome name, by the way) starts out in a small town playing at a bowling alley.  He wallows in his own self-pity, and drowns his sorrows in a fictional brand of whiskey.  After successfully sleeping with the crypt keeper an old lady from the bar, he gets in his beat-to-hell ’78 Suburban named Betsy and makes the drive to Santa Fe, NM.

While in Santa Fe, he plays a 2 night gig at a local bar.  There, he meets a reporter who wishes to do a human interest piece on the former star.  Jeanie (Maggie Gyllenhaal) catches Blake’s eye, predictably, and he winds up granting her a follow-up interview.  Whiskey whiskey whiskey sex sex sex.

Gyllenhaal is a bit of a conundrum.  Sometimes, she’s really attractive.

Other times, she looks like Sloth from the Goonies.  It’s maddening, really.

A few “Wait, they’re in this movie?” performances from Colin Farrell and Robert Duvall help make the movie what it is; a certainly-good-but-probably-overhyped movie.  Bridges does a great job, but I’m not sure it was Oscar worthy.  I mean, don’t get me wrong, he did a great job, but nothing about the performance made me think, “Wow, he needs an Oscar for this.”  Perhaps it’s because the last two movies we got from Netflix were There Will Be Blood and Gangs of New York, so watching Daniel Day-Lewis commit cinematic rape as Daniel Plainview and then Bill the Butcher may have ruined it for me.

I’d be doing this review a disservice if I didn’t mention the soundtrack.  If it weren’t for the music in this movie, I wouldn’t have enjoyed it as much as I did.  Crazy Heart had possibly the best soundtrack I’ve ever heard from a non-musical.  I’m not a huge Country fan, but Jeff Bridges and Colin Farrell do an amazing job.  Bridges actually released a CD a few years ago, so he’s actually musically inclined.  Farrell surprised the shit out of me, because usually, he’s a giant bag of douche.  He played Blake’s protegé who is now uber famous, Tommy Sweet.  They sing a duet and I’ve had it stuck in my head since Friday night.  It’s the first time since watching Across the Universe that I’ve downloaded the soundtrack after watching a movie.  Really great stuff.

I’d recommend watching this movie solely on the soundtrack.  Bridges’ performance certainly doesn’t hurt, and the movie is well made.  As long as you temper your expectations and don’t go in thinking you’re seeing the best movie of the year, you’ll be fine.

8 out of 10.

Filed under Talking Pictures. Tagged with , , ,

Night @ the Movies.

July 22, 2010 by 8 Comments

At first blush, you have all the ingredients for a fantastic movie.  Denzel Washington in the lead, Gary Oldman as the villain, and Mila Kunis as the eye-candy, all taking place in a post-apocalyptic world.  The Book of Eli should have been great, and at the very least still enjoyable.  Alas, it was dreadful.

I love Denzel.  Just love him.  He’s been my favorite actor for a very long time (although, Leonardo DiCaprio might be overtaking the #1 spot, with Edward Norton, Robert Downey Jr., and Tom Hanks rounding out the Top 5) but I can’t give him a pass for this.  I really wanted to like this movie, but the entire time I kept waiting for it to suck less.  Never really happened.

Eli (Washington) is sent on a mission from “a voice inside his head” to carry the last Bible in existence across America.  He knows not where his path leads, just that he must travel West.  He runs into many travelers along the way, and he apparently knows some sweet ass karate.  He carries a giant machete, and can definitely take care of himself.

Eventually, he stumbles into a town (really?) of survivors, led by a man named Carnegie (Oldman).  Water is more valuable than anything expectantly, but hey, they still have booze and batteries for your iPod.  Seriously.  Eli carries around an iPod and charges it with a mini generator.  Because, you know, 30 years after the nuclear holocaust that causes 95% of the people in the world to die, I want to make sure I can listen to T-Pain and Lady GaGa.

Carnegie’s goons chase after Eli when they realize he is in possession of “The Book”.  Carnegie is a collector of books, and is convinced with the words written in the Bible, he can gain power over all the weak minds.  Basically what religion does today.

The problem with this scenario, however, is they chased him in their caravan of giant SUVs covered in metal plating.  So, these vehicles survived the apocalypse, and then lasted 30 years?  Where exactly did the gas come from?  Perhaps a Shell station survived as well?  Look, I don’t claim to be an expert on post-apocalyptic scenarios.  However, there are so many things in this movie that completely didn’t work.  Let’s examine them via bullet points:

  • Solara (Kunis) is really hot.  Her eyebrows are perfectly plucked, her hair is perfectly cut and shiny, and she looks like an actress playing a role.  If the apocalypse did happen, 30 years later, the women wouldn’t look like that.  Water would be scarce, and soap even moreso.  People would be worried more about survival than keeping up their appearances.
  • Carnegie has someone shave him.  While I understand that this is a power move, in a world in which water is the ultimate resource, he’s wasting it to shave?  This is at least forgivable, because from a sociological perspective, he is the clear alpha male in this shanty town.  Every other male has a giant, disgusting beard, and Carnegie is clean-shaven.
  • The aforementioned iPod.  This completely took me out of the movie.  Kelly kept getting mad at me, trying to explain things like a parent explains things to a child.  I just don’t buy the “well, people would hoard things” explanation for why, THIRTY YEARS LATER, they have gasoline, and why he has a generator strictly for his fucking iPod.  Later in the movie, Eli goes on this rant about how people threw away things that people would kill for now, and about how they prioritized their lives the wrong way, focusing too much on material possessions.  And then he risked his life to make sure his generator was charged so he could listen to his fucking iPod.  Right.  Way to stick to your morals, Creasy Bear.
  • In the very beginning of the movie, he’s wearing a gas-mask.  At no other point in the movie is this even mentioned, let alone used again.  So, why the hell was he using his gas mask?  Was he in a pocket of radiation and needed it?  If so, killing a cat for food probably wasn’t the best idea.  I mean, if you’re worried about radiation poisoning, killing an animal that walks around in it, and then eating it, probably isn’t the way to avoid it.

This movie did a lot wrong.  Perhaps Denzel has reached the point in his illustrious career where being the lead in a psuedo-action movie is something he can no longer accomplish.  The Denzel of 10 years ago, sure, no problem.  Denzel wasn’t really the problem in this movie, as the acting wasn’t the letdown (although it was nothing to write home about, either).

The movie wasn’t a complete failure, as the cinematography was excellent.  The bland, dull colors of a desert wasteland were on-point, and there were many shots of Denzel’s silhouette against a bright backdrop that were masterful.  However, the big giant “twist” at the end wasn’t explained and just seems way too far-fetched.  Perhaps watching the movie again would make me more of a believer, but to be completely honest, I have zero desire to ever sit through this movie again.  Watch it at your own risk.

5 out of 10.

Filed under Talking Pictures. Tagged with , , , ,

Top 25, part 2?

July 21, 2010 by 3 Comments

Back by popular demand.  I already spent roughly 2 months covering my Top 25 movies, and since I did such a piss poor job, I figured I’d give it another go.  This time, however, with only the movies I left out.  Sort of a Top 25 reboot, if you will.

By now, you’re probably wondering why I have the movie poster to D2: The Mighty Ducks.  Well, obviously because that movie is the gold standard by which all other movies are judged.  I mean, when you ask a random stranger on the street, “What is the best movie of all time?” without hesitation, you get D2 every time.  No one says The Godfather, or Casablanca, or even Gone With the Wind.  Nope, it’s the Mighty Ducks 2.  Yes, I enjoyed the original and even the 3rd installment had its moments, but by far, the best movie of the trilogy was #2.  I mean, c’mon.  The Junior Goodwill Games?  The Bash Brothers?  Iceland as the villains?  The Trinidad & Tobago team with Tye Dye uniforms?  THE KNUCKLEPUCK?!  It’s the clear winner.  And if you don’t think so, you’re a Cake Eater.

To be completely honest, when I began my Top 25 countdown last year, I put very little thought into it.  I actually didn’t even write out the list until about the 18th or 19th movie.  For some stupid reason, I decided to just wing it from the start.  Not really sure why, as I forgot to put in a bunch of movies.  This time it will be better, and more thought out.

So stay tuned, because like Molly Ringwald, this time, I’m playing for keeps.

(I honestly have no idea what that last sentence means.)

Here’s a list of my previous Top 25, so don’t get all pissed when movies like The Dark Knight, Saving Private Ryan, and Gone Baby Gone aren’t in my new Top 25.

  1. The Dark Knight
  2. Man on Fire
  3. Saving Private Ryan
  4. Lord of the Rings Trilogy
  5. Gone Baby Gone
  6. Iron Man
  7. The Bourne Trilogy
  8. Remember the Titans
  9. V for Vendetta
  10. Forrest Gump
  11. Rounders
  12. Grandma’s Boy
  13. Casino Royale
  14. Transformers
  15. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
  16. Sin City
  17. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
  18. Mr. Brooks
  19. Equilibrium
  20. 300
  21. The Departed
  22. Van Wilder
  23. Ocean’s 11
  24. Lars and the Real Girl
  25. Tropic Thunder

See?  That list wasn’t good until like the 15th movie or so.  I’m kind of ashamed.  Redemption is just around the corner…

Filed under Talking Pictures.

Inception: A Largely Moot Review (via Sports Casualties)

July 19, 2010 by 2 Comments

Sometimes, I really hate having a blog. People tell me it sucks (which, hey, it probably does) but I’m averaging like 35 hits a day, so either Kelly is not actually working and just driving up my hit counter or a select few actually enjoy reading my blog. Either way, sometimes I don’t feel like blogging because it’s a chore. Other times, I can’t wait to let my fingers pound away at the keyboard. After watching “Inception”, I wanted to tell the world how amazing it was. I feel like I did a pretty good job, and then I go read SportsCasualties. Dammit, Hilson. Everytime I like to think I’ve written something insightful and witty, I read his blog.

One of us is a Journalism major. The other is a Sociology major. Read mine, and then read his. It’s pretty clear which is which.

Alas, I feel like he said a lot of things I wanted to say but didn’t, and hey, I’m all about sending page views his way. So go read his review of Inception, because it was pretty spot on.

Inception: A Largely Moot Review No spoilers. There are surprise endings, there are surprise endings, and then there's Christopher Nolan's brainbender "Inception," which has one final twist, yes, but after 2 1/2 hours of finely orchestrated, backdoor dream-weaving, really shouldn't come as any surprise. The whole damn movie is a twist. You should've expected nothing less. "Inception" works on a premise that could've been boiled down to summer blockbuster cliches and belief-suspe … Read More

via Sports Casualties

Filed under Random.

Christopher Nolan is a God Damned Genius.

July 18, 2010 by 10 Comments

I’ve literally been staring blankly at my laptop screen for the last hour, unable to formulate any attempt at a review of Christopher Nolan‘s newest masterpiece, Inception.

My buddy Ruther went to see it opening night, and sent me a text that said something like “OMG OMG INCEPTION IS SO EFFING AMAZERING!! AHHH!!!”  Yeah.  That’s basically how I felt.  I asked him not to ruin anything for me, and he said, “I’m not sure I could if I tried.”

Usually, I am really bad at reviewing movies without giving stuff away.  I know why it was good or why it was bad, but I wind up giving up an important part of the story in the process.  This movie, however, I’m actually not sure I could ruin for you.  Seriously.  I still don’t think I fully comprehend anything that happened at any point in the movie.  Not that I’m some halfwit who doesn’t understand how movies work, or that the plot was uber complicated and difficult to follow.  The movie blew my mind into a bajillion pieces — perhaps literally — and to be completely honest, I’m not entirely sure that I’m not in a dream right now.  I need a top, dammit.

The first thing people will inevitably do is compare this to The Dark Knight.  They shouldn’t.  It’s not fair to either movie to walk in with comparisons or expectations.  If you go to the movie and listen to people that say it’s better than The Dark Knight, you’ll wind up devaluing one or both of the films.  That’s a travesty.  The Dark Knight was its own movie, and it was amazing.  It was a different genre, and a different set of ideas from Nolan.  Inception is more along the Memento lines, and I would urge you to just simply clear your mind and watch it as if it were an independent film which you knew nothing about.  When you compare it to other films, you wind up liking one of the films less because it either didn’t live up to your own lofty, unrealistic expectations, or because you now like another movie more.

So don’t compare it to The Dark Knight.  It’s not The Dark Knight.  It’s not Batman Begins, or Memento, or The Prestige, or Insomnia.  It’s Inception.  It is a movie that will stand alone, and will one day have movies compared to it.

The first thing you notice is the cast.  Great, great cast.  Leonardo DiCaprio plays our hero (or anti-hero, as it were) Cobb.  Cobb specializes in sub-conscious extraction.  Basically, he goes into your dreams, and steals your secrets.  With the help of one of my favorite actors that no one knows about, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, he is hired to do something that is close to impossible; instead of extraction, taking an idea, they are talking about inception, planting an idea.  The problem with this is, the subject will always know subconsciously that the idea is not theirs.  Try this:

Whatever you do, do not think of the color blue.

You just thought about the color blue.  See, it’s not really your idea.  It was my idea planted into your subconscious, and your subconscious realizes that the idea isn’t original.  Therefore, it doesn’t stick or feel valid.  At least in theory, inception is impossible.  Unless you’re Cobb, because you’re a bad ass who plays by his own rules.

Arthur (Gordon-Levitt) is Cobb’s partner and he absolutely stole the show.  It wasn’t his groundbreaking performance or anything, because he’s always been good (check out 500 Days of Summer), but his zero-gravity hallway fight scene was literally worth the price of admission alone.

That scene might actually be the coolest thing I’ve ever seen.  And I’ve seen 2 Girls, 1 Cup.

Seriously though.  It sounds kinda lame or contrived, but I would honestly have loved the movie if the entire thing sucked but it still had this scene.  That good.  I felt like a 14-year-old at the Twilight premiere.  I was laughing and giggling to myself saying “Oh my god, oh my god, this is so awesome.”  Kelly was moving seats to get away from me.  Still, I was that impressed.  Also, for the record, I’m totally Team Edward.


Marion Cotillard plays Cobb’s wife, Mal.  Cotillard won the Oscar for Best Actress for her role in La Vie en Rose, and was awesome as John Dillinger’s main squeeze in last summer’s Public Enemies.  She’s super hot and super crazy in her role, and she should be commended for how brilliantly she fared.  I actually don’t think she was crazy.  Rather, I feel like she’s the only sane person in a crazy world.

She also has a nice rack.  So, there’s that.

The one gripe I have isn’t even really a gripe.  Ellen Page played Ariadne, and she did fine.  She didn’t almost ruin the movie like Katie Holmes did in Batman Begins.  She played a character with a large role, without really a large role.  I know that doesn’t make sense, but if you’ve seen the movie, you’ll understand.  The only thing I might have changed is recasting her role with someone else.  It’s more because I’ll always associate her with Juno, and less to do with her acting chops.  Again, no slight to Page.  She did a good job in her role.  Nothing Oscar worthy, but she didn’t make me angry she got the role, either.  She just seemed a little out-of-place in the sea of fantastic, critically-acclaimed actors like DiCaprio, Gordon-Levitt, Cotillard, Ken Wantanabe, Cillian Murphy, and Michael Caine.

Very rarely do I think a movie needed zero improvements.  I feel like no matter how well done a movie is, there is something that could have been tweaked or changed to make it a little better.  I literally would change nothing about this movie.  Not a single thing.  It was the perfect movie.  And I’m just worried about the sheer amount of money I’ll spend going back to the theaters to see it over and over again.

“Dreams feel real while we’re in them. It’s only when we wake up that we realize something was actually strange.”

10 out of 10.

Filed under Talking Pictures. Tagged with , , , , ,

Marvel cuts ties with Edward Norton.

July 15, 2010 by 7 Comments

For some stupid reason, the big wigs at Marvel Studios have decided they don’t like making good movies anymore.  Marvel and Edward Norton have gone their separate ways, meaning the next installment of The Hulk and the upcoming Avengers movies will star someone else.

Norton tweeted a link to his Facebook profile the other day and in a letter, had this to say to his fans:

Not only are they making a terrible decision in not keeping Norton, it seems they are dead set on making the worst decision possible.  Word out of Marvel now seems to be Mark Ruffalo is the favorite to replace him.  Really Marvel?  Mark Ruffalo?  That’s like saying, “No thanks rich parents, I don’t want that BMW you just bought me, I’d rather drive around in my Ford Focus.”

Norton never went on a publicity tour when The Incredible Hulk first came out, and apparently he was very displeased at how the movie was edited.  I still enjoyed the reboot thoroughly, and am thankful we can all forget about Eric Bana.  I mean, I think by now you know how I feel about Bana. No? Here’s a hint:

Anyways.  Norton probably wanted more control this time around, and Marvel said no.  Why?  Norton is amazing, and he took your crappy franchise and made it relevant.  No one was buying Eric Bana as The Hulk lunchboxes.  Guess who has Edward Norton as Bruce Banner underoos?  Yeah, this guy.  Norton made Hulk cool again.  And really Marvel, if you’re going to cave in to Samuel L. Jackson‘s demands as black Nick Fury, then how in the hell are you not going to give in to Norton?  Not only is Norton the far superior actor, but, c’mon, Sam Jackson as Nick Fury?  Was David Hasselhoff not available?

I still love Marvel for all the things they’ve done, be it great (Iron Man, X-Men) or not so great (Ghost Rider, Fantastic 4).  However, I’m seriously considering not watching The Avengers now.  It was bad enough you got Joss Whedon to direct, but now no Ed Norton?  What the hell, Marvel?  What the hell?

He’s smashing my hopes and dreams.

Filed under Random., Talking Pictures.

Stephanie Tanner is Addicted to Meth.

July 12, 2010 by 6 Comments

Everyone’s favorite middle child, Stephanie Tanner from Full House, recently released a tell-all book in which she reveals her addiction to meth.  What the fuck?

Seriously.  Jodie Sweetin turned out to be quite the Smokeshow, and I’m glad.  I mean, I never really liked DJ because she was the moral compass for that show (and she loves God way too much) and Michelle was way too young.  Aunt Becky had a little freak in her, but I always had a crush on Stephanie.  Perhaps because I too was the middle child, and I related.  Whatever the reason, Jodie was hurting for money, so she flew around the country talking to college kids about the dangers of drugs.  Awesomely, she was on a two-day coke bender when she visited Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to deliver a “Drugs are Bad, Mmmkay” speech.

Jodie Sweetin got boobs.  I don’t know why she drifted out of the limelight, aside from her lack of acting ability.  But her boobs are great.  I mean, I want to be friends with them.


Apparently smoking meth, then going to the bar and bumping lines of coke and popping E was a normal Thursday in the life of the former Stephanie Tanner.  How rude.

Is it gay that I actually want to read her book?  I mean, I feel like she’ll talk about getting all drugged up and having an orgy or something, and I can only imagine the goings ons when she hung out with the Olsen Twins.  Seriously, it’s only $10 at Amazon.

Seriously, how and when did all this drug abuse take place?  I went to bed pondering these questions, and even had a short conversation with a semi-lucid Kelly.

Did you know Stephanie Tanner from Full House was addicted to Meth?

Uh, yeah, I knew that.

What?  How?

It’s common knowledge.

Then she fell back asleep.  Common knowledge?  Really?  I think I just got pwned by my girlfriend who was like 80% asleep.  That’s super disheartening.  Not Jodie on Meth, that’s fine.  The fact that seemingly all of America knew, but I didn’t.  I mean, when Kyle Rancourt doesn’t know about something, how is he supposed to blog about it?

Yeah.  I don’t know either.

From now on, anytime there is a breaking news story, please, please send me an e-mail/text/Facebook message.  Something.  Anything.  Because when my half asleep girlfriend knows shit about drug addicted former child actors that I don’t, something is terribly, terribly wrong.

Filed under Random.

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 618 other followers