Penultimate Breaking Bad Thoughts

I've been meaning to do a Breaking Bad post for quite some time, so I figure now's the change to at least give it a shot.  Here are what my predictions are for tonight's episode.

• Jesse is likely in for a great deal more hurt than anyone could have expected for.
• Marie gives a copy of Jesse's confession to the DEA, in an attempt to not only try and bring Walt to justice, but to also try and help find Hank.  This will likely end badly for her.
• Uncle Jesse's band of Neo Nazi's, realizing that the word is out in regards to their shenanigans out in the desert, target Walt's family for murder in retaliation.
• Saul, likely realizing what is happening with Walt's family, seeks out the now relocated Heisenberg to try and get him to do right by his family, one last time.
• Walt, realizing what he has done, makes the journey back to Albuquerque, to have burnt coffee, rubbery pancakes and a size of machinegun at the Denny's on Central.
• Lydia still friendzones Todd
• Huell still hasn't moved from his sofa.

I'll post a recap of how I did tomorrow.  Now for the episode!

My 9/11: A Retrospective

The Twin Towers always seemed impossible.

From the moment I first saw them back in the Spring of 1996, to the moment that they were blocked from view by other members of the New York skyline, they always appeared to be impossible.  How could something so huge and so enormous be possible?  My teenaged mind marveled at the achievement on display there, the show of man's ingenuity and creativity.  That would be the last time I thought of the Twin towers, for a little over five years.  I look back at it now and wish I had just enjoyed the moment more.  Especially with what would come.

Six years later, I was attending class at the University of Texas-El Paso, sitting in my Mechanics I class.  At the time, I still had vast hopes and dreams of becoming an engineer, not knowing in a year's time I would abandoned the pursuit altogether and begin my long, arduous journey that would culminate in my receiving my degree years later.  But that is a story for another day.  At the time, I was still very much interested in the pursuit of an engineering degree, and still very much trying to pay attention.

And that's when I started to notice something was wrong.

The door was open to the classroom, as at the time, the Classroom Building at UTEP (yes, it really was, and I believe still is called the Classroom Building) didn't have the greatest circulation, and so the door had to be left open, otherwise the room would begin to get stuffy fairly quickly.  And it was through this open door that I saw people in a hurry.  Granted, people normally would be rushing through, trying to get to some class or another.  But there was something different about this hurry.  It was frantic, hurried, chaotic.  I imagine it was probably the closest that I will ever be to actually seeing what people fleeing from a zombie hoard would be.  These people were running, no, sprinting towards the direction of one of the labs.  And what became a trickle would eventually become a gradual flood.

This was the first class that began that day in UTEP, which was about seven o'clock, if I so recall.  Those of us that went to the class had only heard a casual mention of a plane hitting the World Trade Center, but hadn't assumed anything about it, just a terrible accident.  It was the early days of text messaging and internet on phones, but that wouldn't have mattered anyway, as phone reception in the Classroom building was so terrible that phones would naturally get switched to roaming.  As a result, we had absolutely no idea of what was happening.  We weren't aware that outside, the world was changing, and the world was darkening.

Slowly, I began to see a different story of person intermingled with the frantic student: a listless one, who seemed to be slowly shambling towards some location or another, with the frantic stream of students parting around him like water.  The faces were different, but the expression was the same.  Shocked.  Horrified.  Numb.  

I quickly knew that once class let out, once the bubble of the classroom had burst at the sound of the bell, I had to get to a computer.  I needed to get someplace where I could find what was happening.  The engineering lab was just around the corner.  Once my instructor let us out, I ran towards it, becoming a part of the mob that was not running to class, but to try and get information. I rushed inside the lab to find the front desk, where there typically was some overly perky, attractive female engineering student that would check in your ID, deserted.  I turned into the main lab room, and saw that the projector TV, which we never knew we even had, was set up.  

Displayed, on the side of the wall, was hell.  

I won't rehash my thoughts about what I saw.  We've seen the collapse over and over again, repeated in a never ending killer loop as lives were ended in a maelstrom of fire, hate and ash.  We all know what we saw. and were made to see it multiple times.  It doesn't make it less terrible.

And that's when that same shocked, numb haze, settled over me.  

I sat in Computer Lab 2, popped in a CD, Gorillaz, and began to research what had happened.  The CD had a scratch on it, and for that reason, the only song that it seemed to plan with any sort of consistency was the song Tomorrow Comes Today.  It was entirely appropriate for that day, as I looked back on Yahoo!'s now frantic updates as far as what was happening.  I have never been a big news junkie, and yet I devoured everything that was being updated.  I had to know what was going to.  What the hell was going on?

Though we take it for granted that wealth of knowledge of what occured that day, I cannot explain just how utterly chaotic it was in those first few hours to find out what was happening.  Were we being invaded?  Where there other attacks (and tragically, there were)?  What places were next?  And which planes still flying above were still thought to be suspect? What was going to happen?  Where was it going to happen?  I stayed there for close to four hours, and left just slightly the wiser.  It would remain that way for several days, as facts slowly started to trickle in, and events began to be constructed.  But I cannot nearly begin to explain just how helpless and uninformed I felt, even as it seemed the entire world was changing.

Even though El Paso, Texas is as far away from New York, New York as could be, the border itself changed dramatically.  Planes were grounded, and those planes already airborne, heading to other destinations, suddenly found themselves in a strange place, and nowhere near home.  The border, that artery that connects the two sister cities of El Paso and Juarez, Mexico, was shut down, stranding people from their families.  Federal buildings were closed and placed under lock down, and Fort Bliss was suddenly on high alert.  Overnight, my city, which takes a lot of abuse for being boring, or being regarded as somewhat of a backwater, became almost like an armed camp, as every place went on high alert.  This was not my hometown that I was used to, and even for days afterward, I remember seeing a lot more police cars on the road, and the roads being a lot less traveled, as people stayed in.

Along the way to my next class, I remember seeing something else.  UTEP is a very multi-national university.  Quite often, because it is located on the border, it's thought that it was strictly a very Latin American institution, as there are students there from Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil.  But there are also European students, African students, and yes, Middle Eastern students.

And, in the middle of the corridor, I saw something that stuck with me.  It was a shouting match between two groups of students: one middle eastern, another American, both restraining themselves as much as they could, as professors and later, a campus security guard, attempted to break up the confrontation..  Profanity, rhetoric, and all other sorts of terrible, violent words were being exchanged.  It was enough to snap me out of my fog, long enough to ask a question from one of the members of the crowd next to me.

"What the hell happened?"

"The Arab students were cheering on the attackers, and the other guys are threatening to kick their asses."

I left, my faith in humanity even lower than it was earlier that morning.

Indeed, a lot about that day was surreal, from the way professors were ignored as they attempted to lecture, to the crowds standing in the student union, watching the TV's, the pool tables and other amusements located within ignored.  For the moment, they were unimportant.  

I remember coming home, and just watching the news, watching the destruction, over and over again.  It was horror on an endless loop, seeing the collapse, especially as more amateur footage came in, and news networks decided to air it, showing different angles, different perspectives, different prisms in which we were viewing the lives of thousands being snuffed out.  I remember hugging my parents, my sister and brother a little harder than usual, as I was glad, just glad that my family was together, even as half a continent away, more families were being torn apart.

I've heard different people say that in two years or so, high schools will have the first generation of children that have no first hand memory of 9/11.  I would argue that that generation has already arrived, for this reason.  My younger brother was six at the time.  Far too little to perhaps comprehend that people had died, that people could be so evil to want to turn pieces of our daily lives into weapons, into deathtraps, into tombs.  How could you explain that?  Could you explain that? 

My parents did what any normal parent would have done, and that was to try and protect their son.  As a result, my brother was largely kept in his room when the news was on in the den, watching my anime collection, and happy as a clam by doing so.  And, for a time, he remained untouched, unmoved, unaffected by the outside world.  I imagine many other parents did the same thing.  I don't blame them, nor judge them.  

I will, however, judge my University.  I would learn years later from one of my professors that UTEP, not long after the attacks had occurred, issued a email to all their staff, requesting them to not discuss at all the current events, and proceed like nothing had happened.  Do not discuss what is happening outside.  Just conduct business as usual.  I imagine that the University wanted to avoid problems, namely between students, but I also imagine that they probably felt that the professors weren't qualified for that type of discussion.  So why bother?  All of my engineering professors certainly did so, which is a shame.  But again, I cannot blame them, as they probably felt,  inadequate, I suppose, to talk about such events.  I would learn, years later, that there were plenty of professors that chose to ignore the email, and try and have a discussion with their classes.  There were no riots or problems or assaults that resulted from those talks.  I do not blame my professors for not talking, or wishing to discuss what happened.  But I will never forget that my University, an institution for higher learning, a place which prides itself on being a place where ideas and events are meant to be discussed, interpreted, and cultivated, instead shrank from the chance to do so, and instead chose to ignore it.  But please, buy season tickets to see our latest terrible football team.

Things would remain surreal for the next few days, as life seemed to be in a standstill.  Federal buildings were closed.  Emergency staff volunteered to go assist in New York, as well as Washington.  Blood banks were flooded with people, as were charities with generous donations for those in need.  People, for a brief period in time, stopped calling themselves liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, ethnicity-American, or what have you.  For a time, what divided us didn't matter.  What politics we had didn't matter.  What we thought of one other, what prejudices we had towards one another, what grudges, what petty arguments, what dark thoughts we might have had for each other, didn't matter.  We were just one people who were trying to help those in need, trying to help our fellow man in whatever way we could, however small. We were just Americans. 

In the years following the fall of the towers, I have seen a lot more death on TV, as more men have tried to use evil and death to try and spread their own messages and agenda, only to have said messages and agenda to be lost by their methods.  I have seen a lot of my generation, and other generations, go overseas to fight enemy threats, both justified and non-justified.  I have seen a lot of my generation, and other generations lose countless men and women, who had it not been for the selfish actions of a few men, perhaps could have made an huge positive impact in our world had evens maybe been different.  

And yet, though I've seen ample evidence of man's evil, that has paled in comparison to the evidence I've seen of man's goodness.  Even though we see so much evidence of death, of destruction, we have even more images of people trying to help their fellow men, people running into the inferno, to save people they didn't know, and yet to them, it was like trying to save a brother, a sister, a father, a mother, a child.  We have seen courage, of strength, of passion, which far outweighs the evil that was committed, and will always continue to do so.

On 9/11, I saw what humanity at it's worst could be.  I also saw that humanity, at it's best, would always overcome it.  And it's something I try to remember, and tell people whenever I can.  Humanity is a good thing, a beautiful thing, and though it may be capable of some truly awful things, there is always enough goodness to overcome that.  We just need to remember that, believe in that, and have faith in that.  

Always believe in our goodness.  I will continue to do so.

The Blackwing Pearl: A Blackwing of a different color.

The original Eberhard Faber Blackwing 602 continues to entrance people, even almost two decades after the final pencil shipped off of the line in 1998 or so.  Lots of ink, both digital and literal, have been spilled extolling the virtues of what is regarded to be the greatest pencil ever created.  Fan pages exist, dedicated to the original pencil.  The rare Blackwing sighting in the wilds of eBay commands bidding wars, provided it begins at a reasonable price.  I even have firsthand evidence of this fascination, as my review of the Palomino Blackwing 602 is now the most popular piece of writing that I have ever written.

It's not hard to see why from an aesthetic point of view.  It's an attractive pencil, with it's distinct replaceable eraser design, dark line, and rather classy looking stamping on the sides of the pencil.  It looks good in the hands of an artist, and even lends itself well to being used as a prop, as evidenced by it's use on camera in the AMC series Mad Men.

California Cedar, since buying the rights, name and history of the Blackwing, and resurrecting it under their Palomino brand, has done some good work in trying recreate a classic.  However, they have attempted to take what was already a classic and attempt to improve on what was already regarded to be a good thing.  Their original Blackwing, more of a homage to the original is a fine pencil, though still not up the the standards of the original (too dark, supposedly).  Their version of the legendary 602, a fine pencil, is close enough to the original that most, though not all, of it's original fans, have acknowledged it to be close enough to the original that they've adopted it as a replacement.  However, Palomino now has added a new Blackwing to the fray, the Pearl, which should make some new fans of the legendary pencil, while again sparking up the debate as to how close it is to the original.

First, let's get the obvious monkey in the room out of the way.  This is in no way an attempt to try and replicate the original Blackwing, but more of an attempt to try and further the new Blackwing Brand.  As such, if you're looking to see if this particular Blackwing is another try at replicating the original, I'd advise you to refer to my earlier Blackwing 602 review.  However, if you are looking to see if this is a quality writing instrument, and how it performs, then by all means, keep reading.

The Pearl is meant to serve more as a sort of middle ground, an attempt to combine the darkness of the standard Palomino Blackwing, while keeping the firmness of the 602.  As such, this can be looked at more as a middle ground of the two.  Aesthetically, it's a lovely pencil.  It's semi-glossy white finish is very attractive to look at, and the choice of using simply flat black for the wording on the shaft is a solid choice.  The finish itself looks quite nice, and very much like a pearl, but it also makes the pencil feel somewhat different, as well.  It's hard to describe it, but it feels like you are able to keep a better grip on the pencil, to unelegantly put it.  I'm not kidding, if you try and hold onto the 602 and the Pearl with all the pressure you

can muster, and then try and slide the pencil out, you're going to hold onto the Pearl a lot longer than the 602.  The distinctive Blackwing ferrule is still here in all it's glory, although I do think that in this instance, they should have issued the pencil with a pink eraser, rather than a black one.  Still, it's a sweet looking pencil, and an added bonus is that the wording on the pencil doesn't wear off as quickly as the gold lettering on the 602.

However, the key question here, and it's the bottom line of how any pencil performs, is how does the thing write?  Well, in the case of the Pearl, it performs very well.  Like the resurrected 602, this pencil also has a really smooth line, with very little of the "scratchiness", or lack of a better term, that is seen with traditional pencils.  It's even smoother than that of the new 602, which is kinda hard to believe considering how easy that pencil would write.  However, when compared to the 602, the Pearl produces a much darker line.  Many websites, such as Jetpens and Amazon, describe the Pearl as a sort of halfway point between the original Palomino Blackwing and the 602.  As far as where I would pinpoint this on the lead grade scale, if the 602 was meant to be a 4B, I would probably peg this around the 6B range, which makes me entirely curious as how the regular Palomino Blackwing writes (I don't have a box, but I might pick up a box of them if I've exhausted enough of my pencil stock by Christmas.)

However, the Pearl does have it's faults. For starters, I took a Pearl with me to work to serve as my standard work pencil for a week.  While it does produce an incredibly smooth line, because it is of a softer lead grade, it does have the annoying tendency to lose it's point quicker than the standard Number 2 (HB).  As such, though it does produce a nice line, and is rather easy on the land, it does mean that this probably isn't the pencil for you if you want to have a standard everyday work pencil.  However, it does lend itself very nicely to sketching, as I have found out one evening at a livedraw event, I guess if you were composing music, or even jotting down something simply and quick, like a song lyric or two, the Pearl would work well in that instance.  Another problem that is had with this pencil is that it does have some smearing issues.  While the smearing isn't quite as bad as some other pencils I have used, smearing is still a problem if you are trying to use it for journal writing or for any sort of lengthy lyrical composition.  Finally, as with all darker leaded pencils, you do have some ghosting issues if you are trying to erase the Pearl's leaded imprint, although it's not too much of an issue if you have a lighter touch than most (such as I).

So, all in all, would I recommend the Blackwing Pearl?   Yeah, I would.  Despite it's shortcomings, it is a very good pencil.  However, like the majority of the Blackwing line in general, it is more of a niche product than something that you would be able to use on a daily basis.  It has it's uses.  As an art pencil, it rocks, and it's got style in spades.  However, it is a limited product in terms of a daily use pencil, and for that reason alone I would advise you to buy the 602 if you absolutely have to have a Blackwing as a daily use pencil.

The Dixon Ticonderoga Black Pencil

A few weeks back, before my internship and real life took over my free time, I posted my thoughts regarding the Palomino Blackwing Pencil.  It was intended to be a one shot posting regarding what was a over-hyped  though above average pencil that had garnered it's own cult of personality and followers around it.  I had expected it to have a cursory, but low amount of page visits and views, and have it fall by the wayside as far as interest went.

Well, it turns out, you people are incredible passionate about your writing instruments, and loved it.  As of right now, it's become one of this blog's more popular postings.  Who knew that people have such opinions and curiosity over their writing instruments?  With that, I though I'd review another pencil that had attracted my attention, also because it claimed to be the world's best pencil.  I'll explain more in a bit.

Having been in the field for my teaching certification, I've always found that at least one student will need a pencil to do their work.  I have no qualms with lending out a pencil, and 90% of the time, students will return it.  However, it's those 10% of the time that make me hesitant on lending out an expensive pencil.  As such, I looked into acquiring a pencil that was both elegant, wrote well, and yet was inexpensive enough that in the instance that I did lose it, I wouldn't be too upset on it being gone.  As such, it was when I was at a Office Depot that I stumbled upon this instrument.

The Ticonderoga Pencil is perhaps one of the more available pencils out there in the market place, and can be had at any office supply store or big box store that may be near you.  It proudly proclaims itself, as part of it's marketing slogan, as "The World's Best Pencil."  And it's that slogan right there that caught my attention.  This proclamation is similar to the reputation given to the Blackwing, which has the overly inflated reputation as being the World's Best Pencil.  Unlike the Blackwing, this reputation for the Ticonderoga is solely given by the company itself, Dixon.  That's kind of odd, as reputations are earned, not marketed, but if who knows, perhaps this pencil might be able to back up it's bluster.  Maybe it's the Floyd Mayweather of Pencils, a lot of bluster, but with plenty of bite to back it up.

Onto the pencil itself.  The pencil I received was a Ticonderoga Black, which is, like the Blackwing, a very aesthetically pleasing pencil.  It's capped off by a metallic green bracket at the end, which holds a black eraser.  However, if you want to go old school, the Ticonderoga is also available in the classic yellow with a pink eraser at the end.  It proudly bears it's name in silver inlay along the shaft of the pencil, and overall gives you the impression that you are indeed about to embark on a luxurious  but fantastic voyage of penmanship fun.  It's made from cedar, and that cedar itself is non-rainforest harvested, making this an ecologically friendly pencil, if you're into that, as well as being coated with a antimicrobial substance called Microban, which inhibits the growth of bacteria on a pencil.  This actually isn't a bad idea, as pencils get passed around among students more than coasters at a bar.  This thing has more features than a old Chevorlet Chevette, and is probably available at the same price as one too.

But the important question is, how does the "World's Best Pencil perform?"  Well, it all depends from your perspective.  It works fairly well, with that familiar, slightly satisfying scratchy sound and feel that usually comes from the use of Number 2 Pencils.  However, it does produce a nice, dark line that can be, with pressure, made lighter or darker.  It does have some good use when writing, and is actually isn't bad for sketching, as I found out during my conference period, when my mentor instructor was in a meeting and I had nothing else better to do.  So all in all, it's useful for multiple purposes, kind of like duct tape, or Michael Young, back when he was in a super utility role for the Rangers.

As compared to the other claimant for World's Best Pencil, though, it does fall a bit short.  The Blackwing does offer a bit of a smoother, more pleasant drawing experience, and the Blackwing does produce a darker line than the Ticonderoga.  Plus, the Blackwing never proclaimed itself as the world's best pencil.  It was given that title by a zealous public, which gives it slightly more of a claim to that title than the Dixon, which gave it to itself.    While the Ticonderoga is a very good pencil, it's not the greatest pencil I've ever used, nor one that I'll go out of my way to purchase.   However, for the price, between $3 and $5 dollars american, . and the writing quality, which while not a religious experience, is still very good, you can't beat it.  Is this something that I wouldn't mind using?  Not at all, as I do use it every day.  But is it a preferred weapon of choice for creative/artistic/writing purposes?  Not really, as there are a few other pencils that I prefer and will elaborate on next time.

The Myth And Reality Of The Palomino Blackwing 602

As a guy that loves to draw, one of the benefits is that people give me a variety of artistic gifts for Christmas and birthdays. One of these is examples is a lot of different drawing pencil sets, which I have begun using at home, if only at first to get rid of them. However, there are some great pencils out there that are exceptional to sketch with, my two particular favorites being Staedtler and Tombow.

However, lurking in the corners of the internet, I continued to hear one word repeated over and over again. Similar in myth and legend to the sword Excalibur, the word I continued to hear was Blackwing. As in the discontinued Eberhard Faber Blackwing pencil. It’s renowned for being able to produce a dark line with very little effort, thanks to the addition of wax to the pencil. Granted, this isn't a unique approach among pencils. I believe the Sanford Turquoise pencil works along the same principle, and it’s a piece of shit. But this pencil was used by all sorts of people, notably artists, writers, and newspaper reporters. Two of the bigger known names associated with the Blackwing were Chuck Jones and John Steinbeck. It’s regarded to be the best pencil ever made.

So when Eberhard Faber decided to cease production of the pencil in 1998, there was a push by Blackwing devotees to get the company to reconsider. Eberhard Faber declined, and the Blackwing went extinct. People immediately went out and bought all the Blackwings that they could find, and boxes of the original Blackwings on eBay are known to go for premium prices. However, the California Cedar Corporation recognized a need, and decided to create a similar pencil to the Blackwing. More or less replicating the original design, CCC released their new Blackwing under their Palomino brand, to great fanfare. Despite those who immediately took to the new design, others said that it was still too soft and dark to truly be similar to the original Blackwing. So, CCC released another variant, the Blackwing 602. This is regarded to be close enough to the original that many of those that had great affection for the original finally accepted it, although there do remain a hardcore zealot camp of the pencil aficionado group that still regard it as shit. Picky fucking bastards.

I normally wouldn't have spent money on this type of product, because the mark up for nostalgia is about twenty bucks per box. However, I did have an Amazon.com gift card that was burning a hole in my pocket, and didn't have anything else I was going to purchase outside of a book. On an idle hunch, I looked up the Blackwing on Amazon, and sure enough, there was an after Christmas sale, plus free shipping, that dropped the price dramatically. With that in mind, I went ahead and pulled the trigger.

The Blackwing 602 is a very aesthetically striking pencil. It’s gunmetal grey, with gold leaf on the shaft of the pencil, naming the pencil on one side, and proudly proclaiming that its “HALF THE PRESSURE, TWICE THE SPEED” on the other side. It also has the signature wide pencil eraser at the end, which allows for one to be able to replace the eraser when it becomes dull. It’s this replaceable eraser design, and specifically it’s clips that hold the eraser to the eraser harness, that doomed the original Blackwing, since the machine that stamped out the harnesses broke, and the pencil wasn't commercially lucrative enough to repair. The pencil eraser actually works pretty well, and you can buy replacement erasers in black, pink, orange, and blue. However, the huge downside to this eraser design is that it means that it is incompatible with a pencil extender, which many artists use because, well lets face it, pencils are a bit expensive at a dollar to dollar fifty a pop. This makes the Blackwing, at a certain point, useless, or just uncomfortable to use.

However, I'm dancing around the main issue at hand, the one that is most important among all of this pencil worship: how does it write? Well, very well, thank you. It's a very smooth pencil, one that barely offers you any resistance or friction, similar to what you get in the softest of leads. With minimal pressure, you get a nice, darkish line, similar to a HB or B lead, and with more pressure, you can get some really nice, smooth dark lines probably in the 3 or 4B range. It really is a fine writing instrument, and for this reason, I can see why so many artists and writers loved it. Plus, the lead is pretty firm, and doesn't dull very easily, a complaint I've heard about the standard Blackwing. I like this, actually.  I like it a lot.

Do I like it enough to pay the full price for it?

No.

Let's backtrack a bit.  It's a very expensive pencil.  I calculated the average cost of the pencil, with the full price of each box, plus shipping.  You're going to roughly pay about $2 per Blackwing if you are going to be a regular user.  That's a pretty steep price for what is a good, but not transcendent sketching experience.  Plus, this is still a pretty niche pencil, which means you are more than likely not going to find it in your local art supply store.  You're going to have to get it from a third party seller like Amazon or JetPens.  For about .50 cents less, and a lot more convenience, you'd get somewhat similar results from a Staedtler F Lead Pencil, or a Pentel Ebony.  The experience isn't worth the extra coin and work.

More importantly, there's this.  Tools can only go so far.  Granted, there is a difference between spending a good deal of cash on something cheap and actually getting a quality product at a good price.  But what makes the tool most effective is the person using it, not the tool.  You can't teach skill.  Using a Blackwing won't make you into Steinbeck or Chuck Jones.  I've seen people do absolutely beautiful artwork with nothing more than a Number Two pencil.  The Blackwing does add a bit of ease and smoothness into your drawing experience, but it doesn't replace the actual skill of the person wielding it.  I'll probably use up this box of Blackwings over the year, and will do so with great pleasure.  I think even the stub of the pencil that I can't use, plus the unique eraser (it'll be intact, as I rarely use the erasers on pencils) will look pretty sweet in a fedora.  But I'll probably never buy a box again, unless circumstances like what happened occur once again.

But I I have one final thought to those that might decry this Blackwing as still inferior to the original.  Just use this new one.  Regardless of whether or not it is a true successor to the original, outside of a garage or estate sale (and I look, trust me) or a eBay auction, the original has gone the way of Tasmanian Tiger.  You more than likely won't ever find the original ever again, barring Eberhard Faber suddenly deciding to reverse course and market this as a limited edition premium pencil, which will likely be more expensive.  Plus, I'm willing to gamble that much of the opinion about the original Blackwing is merely perception, as if a way of maintaining the cult status of what was a beloved, but unappreciated pencil, whose disappearance and mythology has only increased as our memories fade and the feel of the original disappears from our hands.  If you must have a Blackwing in your paws while you create, than at least give what is out there a chance.

Sources

• Fortune Magazine's Blackwing Article
• The Blackwing Pages
• Pencilpedia's Blackwing Article

Flick Review: Gangster Squad

Gangster Squad

Starring:  Josh Brolin, Sean Penn, Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Robert Patrick

Gangster Squad was one of the movies I was most jazzed about seeing this year, although it was originally supposed to be released last year, but due to the violence in the film and the fact that it was originally going to be released in September, only a few weeks after the Aurora shootings, the film got bumped into January of this year.  This is unfortunate, as I do believe that the postponement will likely hurt it's overall box office total, especially with many of the nominated films for the Academy Awards seeing a bit of an uptake in interest.  However, it's a really good, fun film that you should probably go see if you get a chance.

Gangster Squad takes place in post-World War II Los Angeles, where east coast mobster Mickey Cohen (a real life mobster, btw), has managed to consolidate all of the vice trade in the city, and has enough crooked police and judges in his pocket to protect his empire.  Now, Cohen seeks to break away from the Chicago Outfit, and create his own mob empire on the pacific coast.  Determined to stop the mobster before he completely takes over Los Angeles, the chief of police tasks Sgt. John O'Mara, a war veteran and an honest cop, to put together a task force with the sole purpose of destroying Cohen's operation, though doing it outside of the law.  The task force, dubbing themselves the Gangster Squad, hit Cohen hard, destroying illegal gambling operations, prostitution rings, and causing mayhem to the mobster's bottom line.  As Cohen prepares for his boldest plan to ensure a steady stream of income and power to cement his hold on Los Angeles for good, the Gangster Squad has both be able to stop the mobster for good, while trying to protect their themselves and their loved ones from Cohen's retribution.

The movie is visually striking, with director Ruben Fleischer (who also directed Zombieland and 30 Minutes Or Less) making use of the a variety of objects, props, and wardrobe to make the movie feel authentic. Many of the buildings from 1940’s Los Angeles are still in existence to this day, and are still in their original form, allowing the on location areas to look genuine instead of like they were shooting in front of a blue screen. The wardrobe department did a bang up job on this film, matching many of the styles, both in terms of men and women, for the outfits, hair, and accessories. Even the advertising for some of the products is authentic, down to the Pepsi bottles and the Schlitz beer packaging.

The two main principles of the film are Mickey Cohen, played by Sean Penn, and John O'Mara, played by Josh Brolin.  We'll start with the bigger name in Penn, who looks like this film was probably a blast for him.  He plays up the role of Cohen very well, making him absolutely loathsome, starting with the beginning of the film, to establish your dislike from him and them expand on it, like an everwidening circle of hate.  He's sinister, calculating, and funny as hell when he goes off on a tear.  I like him.  Penn should play more villains more often.  He's great at it.  As for Brolin, he's a very likable character, almost the complete opposite of Penn, which is probably the biggest problem for his character.  He's too good, too devoted to the law, too much of an ideal cop.  Brolin's O'Mara is very much a throwback to the classic lawman characters of the old school gangster flicks, and he gets overshadowed by both Penn and Ryan Gosling, who steals the show.  Gosling's character, Jerry Wotters, is much more fun and realistic, showing a sense of humor and jadedness to his job, but also maintaining an overall dedication to a noble cause, and a willingness to fight for it when needed.  He's charming, debonair, a drunk, lecherous, and overall just kick ass.  Very much like myself.  The other big name in the film, Emma Stone, is lovely in this film, but she is very much just window dressing for the film, looking gorgeous as a damsel in distress with enough endearing, corny dialogue to make you take notice.  This is a shame, as Stone herself is capable of playing much more than this, but for this film, she's sadly just another pretty face.

The rest of the cast is great too.  The rest of the Gangster Squad is made up of Robert Patrick, playing Max Kennard, the old veteran of the group who is also hilarious and near unrecognizable in his makeup.  Giovanni Ribsi is excellent as Conwell Keeler, the groups tech expert and their moral compass, while Anthony Mackie and Michael Pena round out the squad, adding muscle and some great one liners.  Overall, it's a great mix of characters, and they all play off each other very well.

So, in the end, is the movie worth seeing?   Well, that depends.  If you are looking for something that is meant to be Oscar worthy, then no, you probably shouldn't.  It's not a great film, but it is a very good one.  If you're looking for something fun, both in terms of entertainment and in terms of watching some really good actors have a ball on screen, then by all means, go see it.  It's a great homage to the classic gangster films, with a modern twist to it.  It's good fun, and worth your Hamilton for your ticket.

Fifteen Movies In 2013 That I'm Jazzed About

As a movie buff, I have a ton of flicks that usually catch my interest, in a passing sense.  However, there are very few films that I really get absolutely jazzed up to go see.  Usually, this starts with a trailer, although there are a great deal of movie sites and magazines that also direct me to a film that I might decide to watch.  With that said, there was a list of 15 movies that I was really psyched up to go see this year, and here are my thoughts about each one, from what I've seen on the trailers or researched on the internet.  Hope you are entertained.

Gangster Squad

The first movie I was psyched up over was Gangster Squad, which has a great top billing, with Josh Brolin, Sean Penn, Ryan Gosling, and Emma Ston, among others.  It's the story of a secret police unit that is formed to take on L.A. Gangster Mickey Cohen, and their efforts to bring him to justice.  The movie looks great, with a prohibition gangster type feel (even though it's set just after World War II).  The wardrobe looks phenomenal, and it looks have have enough cleverly cheesy dialogue and action to keep one entertained. This movie is already out, and will be seeing it this weekend.  Yeah-ya!

Warm Bodies

What can only be described as girl meets boy-zombie, I'm really jazzed about this film.  We have very few zombie comedies that work, with Shawn of the Dead and Zombieland being the only two that come to mind so far.  And the trailer looks funny, so hey, why not?

Pacific Rim

This definetely appeals to the Sci-Fi nut inside me.  Pacific Rim deals with Aliens that have somehow managed to come to Earth, via what appears to a dimensional crack in the middle of the Pacific.  To combat this, the nations of Earth create several giant sized robots to combat the menace, with each one remotely controlled by pilots in a VR simulator.  This movie looks great, and is a bit of an homage to the giant monster movies of the past, made famous by Toho.  It also looks almost like a direct copy of the anime series, Neon Genesis Evangelion, only with the robots resembling the ones from Robot Joxx, and not the biomechanical machines from the series.  Will that deter me from seeing the film?  Hell no! 

Man Of Steel

I'm not the biggest Superman fan in the world, although I do respect his place in comics history, and do love some of the stories that he does appear in with Batman at times.  However, I will admit that I loved the original Superman film, which a good superhero film and was the standard by which such films were made until the release of the original Batman film with Michael Keaton.  However, the character itself has been in a bit of a rut since the original Reeves films were made, and that franchise itself went south once Richard Donner was unceremoniously axed from the second film.  Even the most modern entry, Superman Returns, tried to continue the Reeves' films storyline, to no avail.  This new film with Henry Cavill in the iconic blue and red tights, looks quite good, and plays to the strengths of the character: a near godlike figure with the humility of a saint and the desire to do good tries to make the best use of his gifts in the world.  There hasn't been much in the form of details about the plot leaked out, which makes us have to continue to guess as to what the film is about, but so far, it looks like the Man of Steel will be getting the proper film treatment that he deserved.

Star Trek Into Darkness

The new Star Trek franchise, directed by J.J. Abrams, did something that not many people ever thought could be done with the franchise:  reinvent it, and yet keep the essence of the original intact.  Rather than have it serve as an epilogue for a T.V. series, Abrams instead took the series in a new direction, making it it's own standalone universe that makes it relatively fresh, but also familiar.  The casting is spot on, and each cast member makes sure to pay homage to their predecessor, while doing their own thing.  This new film looks dark, with the potential for it to be nearly as epic as the original second Star Trek film, The Wrath Of Kahn.  Details are still sketch, but so far it looks like Trekkies were right to keep the faith.

Oz The Great And Powerful

I'm surprised that we haven't had a sequel or prequel to the Wizard of Oz sooner, with the only real contender to this being Return To Oz back in 1985.  However, while that movie is regarded to be an unofficial sequel, and also frightening and nightmare inducing, this new entry by Sam Raimi looks to be an actual prequel to the original 1939 Film that is regarded to be one of the greatest films ever made.  James Franco is in the flick as the aforementioned Oz, and overall, it looks to be a visual feast, with enough references to the original film to make a fan like myself happy.  I might actually pay to see this one in 3D.

Iron Man 3

I'm not going to lie, aside from Scarlett Johansson, I was very disappointed with Iron Man 2.  The heart and humor that made the original film so enjoyable were gone in this one, and it seemed that the film's purpose was less based on continuing the story of the character as opposed to further setting up the Avengers film that was coming down the pipeline.  Now that the Avengers has come and gone, the franchise appears to be going back to the personal approach of the first film, with more focus on Tony Stark, the man inside the machine, and his own desire to move from what he was to what Stark really wants to be.  The trailers look good, although I'm not a fan of the newest armor.  But we'll see. 

The Lone Ranger

I was a big fan of the Lone Ranger, and have longed to see a modern take on the Ranger to this day.  I partially got this with Dynamite Entertainment's Lone Ranger comic book series, which is one of the best comics available on the market to this day.  Gone is the lily white sensibilities of the original radio and TV programs, and instead we get a realistic, harsh look at what the west really was, as well as how a figure like The Ranger and Tonto would have survived in it.  This new film, however, looks to be a compromise between the two, with a darker Ranger, but one not completely given over to the harshness of what the west was.  Armie Hammer looks good as the Ranger, and Johnny Depp looks absolutely insane as Tonto, although I'm loving the look, to be honest.  This film has been pushed back several times, but it looks like it's coming out guns blazing in the summer.  Can't wait.

World War Z

World War Z, based on the book by the same name, comes out near my birthday, and I'm stoked for it.  While I'll be beginning the year with a zombie film, this is the main course that I've been waiting for.  Brad Pitt will be playing Gerry Lane, who is traveling the world to try and find the cure or at the very least, the answer, to a zombie pandemic that is sweeping the world.  I'm currently reading the book right now, and I'm loving it so far.  As such, I'm hoping that this film will meet the challenge of at least coming close to it. 

Despicable Me 2

I loved the original film, which was smart, funny, and had enough sarcasm and cruelty in it to appeal to my rather warped sense of humor.  I haven't seen much for this film, but you better believe I'll be in line to get my share of Gru and the minions once again.

47 Ronin

When I took a course on the History of East Asia, one of the stories that I did read as part of the assignment was the story of the 47 Ronin.  It was a story about how a band of 47 loyal samurai waited and plotted to avenge the death and honor of their master, after three years and much plotting.  There is going to be some liberties taken with the story, as it will center around the story of Kai, a half Japanese, half British warrior, played by Keanu Reeves, rather than the traditional story based on Kuranosuke Oishi.  This has the potential to be a epic movie if it is done correctly, and with a great deal of care and attention to detail.  It also can be a beautiful movie to look at, if the standard shown by The Last Samurai is followed.  Appropriately, as the 47 Ronin story is usually told around that time, it will be released on Christmas Day.  You're damn right I'm going to be there for it.

Sin City:  A Dame To Kill For 

I loved the original Sin City, as it was perhaps one of the only films based on a comic book to come absolutely the closest with it's original source material.  Robert Rodriguez (when not making absolutely shitty kids films) was a student of the original content, and the result of this intense attention to detail and Rodriguez' own knack for creating beautiful violence.  This film has been pushed back several times, but rumor has it that it's finally going to start shooting soon, and that it should be in our hot little hands in the fall.  I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but I'm also not going to get my hopes up.  Rodriguez and Co. have done this before.

The Hunger Games:  Catching Fire

I wasn't the greatest fan of the Hunger Games, and Suzanne Collins' writing style makes me want to dig my eyes out of my skull with a spoon, but the film itself was entertaining enough to make me interested in the sequel.  I'm interested in the concept, in which the surviving contestants from each district are forced to team up and take each other on, and look forward to seeing how the remaining characters from the first film progress from what was an unanticipated ending to the games in the first film. 

Note:  No idea if this is what the poster will be.  Goddamn Internet.

300:  Rise Of An Empire

 The prequel to the film 300, this new entry will instead focus on Themistocles and Artemisia, who took on Xerxes, from the first film, at the Battle of Salamis.  Wikipedia also speculates that the Battle of Marathon may also play a part, which will be cool.  However, this new 300 will also delve into Xerxes' backstory, and explain how he became King.  Not much of the cast from the first film will be returning, but the early production stills and videos on the web make this flick look pretty sweet.  It's very much a man movie, although I suspect that, much as the first, plenty of women will be there for the male eye candy as well.  August is gonna rock.

The Hobbit:  The Desolation Of Smaug

My 2012 ended with a viewing of the first part of The Hobbit, so it's only fitting that 2013 will likely end with the next part of the trilogy.  Anyhoo, I'm looking forward to this, not just to see what some memorable characters such as Smaug, Beorn, as well as seeing how the Battle of Five Armies is depicted, but also seeing how Peter Jackson takes his new emphasis on the rise of the Necromancer in this next portion of the book, which apparently will have a larger role in the events of the film.  It should be a fun ride.

So with that said, 2013 is looking to be a pretty sweet movie season, and my expectations are sky high so far.  I'm hoping that I'll catch enough intriguing indie films that will make the movie going experience to be a rewarding one, and that I'll get what I pay for.

Flick Review: Django Unchained

Django Unchaimed (2012)

Directed By:  Quentin Tarentino
Starring:  Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L. Jackson, Kerry Washington, Walton Goggins, Quentin Tarentino

Django Unchained is a movie I've been wanting to see since I saw the bootleg footage of the trailer from San Diego ComicCon.   Being a fan of Tarentino in general, I probably would have seen it anyhow, but I'm also a huge fan of the western genre, which goes back to my childhood.  As such, I made sure to see this flick within a week of it's released.  I had high hopes for it entering the theater.  It did not disappoint.

Django Unchained follows the story of Django (Foxx), a slave who is rescued by a German Bounty Hunter named Dr. King Schultz (Waltz), He reveals that that he freed Django because he can identify a gang that he is hunting, the Brittle Brothers, due to their prior work as overseers at Django’s former plantation. Schultz, who is opposed to slavery personally, comes to an agreement with his new charge; in exchange for his assistance, Schultz will give Django his freedom. The two successfully find their quarry, during which Schultz hears the sad tale of how Django was separated from his wife, Broomhilda (Hilde).  Moved by the story, the two strike an accord; in exchange for Django continuing his working arrangement with Schultz throughout the winter, the two will combine forces in locating Hilde’s current whereabouts.  After a search in the auction records, the duo find that Hilde has been sold to Calvin Candie (DiCaprio), a charming, but loathsome figure who owns one of the largest and heavily fortified plantations in the South.  With the stakes raised, the two must find a way not only to rescue Hilde, but also find a way to ensure that her freedom will be both permanent, and legal, as well as ensuring that they all live to tell the tale.

Just as he did in Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds, Tarentino pays homage to a genre film in his own manner, the spaghetti western this time around. It’s very much the same as the Clint Eastwood films I remember watching as a kid, from the panoramic and at times desolate environments, the slightly dramatic, slightly cheesy instrumental music, and even down to the ludicrous and slightly hysterical opening scene theme. Some of the music is original, although I did detect the theme from the Clint Eastwood flick, Two Mules For Sister Sara in the film as well.

There is some wonderful dialogue in the film, with plenty of witty back and fourth, incredibly quotable lines, and some wonderfully comedic and dramatic sequences.  It's this complexity and thought that is placed into the writing that is the ultimate hallmark of a Quentin Tarentino flick.  You're guarantee to hear or see something new or unique, and crafted to perfection.

The movie is beautifully shot.  There are some wonderful snow and mountain scenes, and the action sequences are pure Tarentino, filled with bloody, beautiful chaotic action.   The costumes are near accurate for the times, and rather tasteful for the most part (I love Jamie Foxx's hat, and and looking for a similar one as we speak).  The film isn't completely historically accurate, but the movie is a work of fiction, and thus this isn't a major problem.

There are a host of memorable and wonderful characters in the film, but for the sake of simplicity, I’ll only be covering the major players in the film. We’ll start with Jamie Foxx, who plays Django. Apparently, from what I’ve read, Foxx was not the first choice for the role, as Tarentino wanted Will Smith at first to play the lead. However, after viewing the film, and some thought, I think the right actor was casted for the role. Both Foxx and Smith are excellent actors, but Foxx is able to inject a certain menace and humor to the role that I don’t think Smith would have been able to. Foxx is able to come off as slightly arrogant and haughty at a point of the film when his character is incognito. Smith, in my opinion, wouldn’t have been able to do that, as his characters are at best incredibly likable or sorrowful, almost messianic figures. Christoph Waltz returns to Tarentino’s works as Schultz, who is a complete 180 from Waltz’s previous Tarentino role of Hans Landa from Inglorious Basterds. Like Landa, Schultz is a charming, humorous energetic individual who commands your attention when he is on screen. Unlike Landa, Schultz is a kind hearted man with a strong sense of moral justice, which we see from his first encounter with Django to his eventual role in the mission to Candyland. As he did with Landa, Waltz takes the role and knocks it out of the park.

DiCaprio is the role of a villain for one of the few times in his career, and suffice to say, he absolutely rocks it.  DiCaprio looks every bit the part of the Southern Dandy that his character is, but combines this with an almost loathsome charisma and a overbearing smarmy sort of arrogance that makes you almost root for his demise.  And the funny thing is, he's far from the most evil character in the movie.  That goes to Samuel L. Jackson, who plays Candie's head slave, Stephen.  He is so obnoxious, so calculating, and embodied with a unpleasantness that progresses to being outright loathsome by the end of the film that you wish that he would suffer the most excruciating demise possible for him in the depths of Tarentino's mental chamber of horrors.  It takes a great actor to play great villains, and both do it perfectly.

All in all, Django Unchained was worth the wait since I saw that first grainy trailer.  It's arguably Tarentino's second best film (Inglorious Basterds remains my all time favorite), and it definitely holds up to multiple viewings, from what I've heard.  I'd advise you to see it, and if necessary, see it alone if you have to.  It's good enough to withstand the shame of seeing a flick alone.  After the first five minutes, you won't care that you did.

2013 Baseball Hall Of Fame Ballot Thoughts

I love baseball.

Unlike most of my family, who love football and basketball, respectively, I tended to fall more towards the spectrum of baseball.  I enjoy the game, the strategy that is employed, the scouting and evaluation side of it, and just the fact that I can go to a ballpark, watch a game, and have a conversation with a relative of friend while watching the game.  When I first began blogging, it was primarily as a sports blogger, which I maintained for almost three years before finally giving it up a couple of years ago.

However, one thing I did do, and this goes back to my first blog post, is keep track of the baseball hall of fame voting.  It was my first time ever offering an analysis on a subject, and since then, I've kept up the tradition of posting my thoughts on the ballot, as well as trying to guess who might make it.   So, in that vein, here are my thoughts about the ballot, starting with the fuckers that shouldn't be on the ballot.


Todd Walker (INF), Jose Mesa (RHP), and Roberto Hernandez (RHP) - LOLZ!   Average to fringe contributors, but really, why are they even on here?  It just gives people the opportunity to chuckle for a moment before moving onto the next name.

Tim Raines (DH) - No.  Raines really is a guy that should be in the Hall of Fame.  He was a prodigous hitter, and was probably the second best leadoff man behind Ricky Henderson, who is already in the Hall of Fame.  He was an underrated stolen base thief, a skill that often goes unnoticed by those who analyze his game.  However, Raines' early drug use, as well as the fact that he was mostly a Designated Hitter, are what hurt his candidacy among some voters, even though advanced metrics do show that his performance does rank among many players who are already in the Hall.  It's unfortunate, but I doubt that he'll ever get in, barring a massive change amongst the voters.

Jeff Bagwell (1B) and Craig Biggio (2B/OF/C) - Not This Time, and Strong Possibility.  The original Killer B's, and for almost two decades, the faces of the Houston Astros, both players are well regarded as good people, great players, and likely Hall of Famers.  However, both are going to have some roadblocks along the way.  For Bagwell, it's that there are rumors that he might might have tried the juice at some point in his career, as well as the fact that he didn't reach 500 dingers in his career.  In the case of the former, I'm sure that you'll find rumors about everyone, but in the later, it's important to know that Bagwell played in one of the most home run suppressive parks in the Astrodome, where homers went to die.  As for Biggio, while he does have 3000 hits, it's the end of his career, which people saw as him holding on simply to reach that milestone, that hurts him, although I think the juice stigma on some guys will help his cause.  Still, both will likely get in in time, although I hope that they get in together, much as they did throughout their careers.

Lee Smith (RHP) - No.  Smith was the all time saves leader, but this was seen as more of a product of Smith's exceptionally long career than any sort of dominance.  With some truly exceptional closers coming up on the horizon in Trevor Hoffman and Mariano Rivera, it's safe to say Smith is kinda screwed.

Allen Trammel (SS) - No, and this is a shame.  Trammel was an offensive shortstop who had the misfortune of playing right before a revolution in the way shortstops hit and defended arrived in the league with the arrival of Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Nomar Garciaparra, Miguel Tejada, and others.  As such, the change in the position from one of defense to offense made his numbers look quite pedestrian in comparison, although the position has now turned back to one of defensive value rather than offense.  Such a change of philosophy will come too late from Trammel, who will likely never be enshrined ever.

Jack Morris (RHP) - NO!  NO!  HELL NO!!! Morris is probably one of the more divisive Hall Of Fame candidates out there. Those against him call him an average pitcher, a compiler, someone who was a workhorse, but never dominant. Those for him call him an ace on winning teams, a man that pitched to the score and battled to get the win. The truth might be in between, but trends more to the former, rather than the later. Morris was one of the most durable pitchers in his generation, but looking back at his more advanced stats, Morris only was much better than the league average pitcher in six of his 18 seasons, and was below average for four. Morris was rarely among the league leaders in strikeouts, and his command for much of his career was average at best. And while many will lionize Morris for willing to take the ball and be willing to pitch until he ended up the winning pitcher, that isn't a measure of dominance, but rather remarkable durability. Ultimately, what really is the only factor that gets so many people willing to throw their support behind Morris is Game Seven of the 1991 World Series, which is regarded as one of the best games ever played. It’s only because of that one singular event that so many sports writers are so willing to support Morris. And that’s fine. But ultimately, it’s misguided.  Morris might squeak in this year, as there appears to be quite a bit of animosity toward many of the steroid era players, but I doubt it.  But I've been wrong before.  He'd easily be, based on the stats alone, one of the worst ever inductees to make it into the Hall of Fame (Jim Rice is also up there.)

Edgar Martinez (DH) - No.  Much like Tim Raines, Martinez is also going to be stigmized by the fact that he was a DH for most of his career, and didn't play the position.  It's unfortunate, because Martinez was really good, and would be a borderline candidate if he were a left fielder or first baseman, rather than just strictly a DH.

Rafael Palmeiro (1B/3B) - Not A Chance In Hell.  Palmeiro is one of the only members to be in the 3000 hit club and 500 homer club, and the only one that will never get enshrined.  He was arguably one of my favorite players growing up, and seeing him go to the Orioles after he played for my favorite team, the Texas Rangers, killed me as a kid.  However, Palmeiro's candidacy went down the tubes when he 1) made his infamous statement to Congress and 2) became the first high profile player ever to be caught under the new steroid testing policy.  People haven't forgotten, and judging by how long he's been on the ballot, I don't think anyone ever will.

Dale Murphy (OF) - No.  Murphy had a nice enough peak during which he was one of the better outfielders in baseball, but nothing certainly worthy of Hall of Fame consideration.

Bernie Williams (OF) - No.   Williams was part of the core four Yankees that came up in the farm system during their dynasty period in the mid to late 90's (along with Derek Jeter, Andy Pettitte, and Mariano Rivera), and was the first of the four to retire.  He was a solid player for a time, but wasn't a great one by any means.  His also didn't have much of a decline period, as his production, ability to play center field, and durability jumped out the Empire State Building once he turned 34.  Still, it's a great career, and one that might get him enshrined in Monument Park, but not anywhere else.

Fred McGriff (OF) - No, and it's a shame.  The Crime Dog was a exceptional hitter in his time, hitting for power and showing exceptional patience at the plate.  The biggest reason why McGriff hasn't been inducted, and it's a stupid one, is that he didn't reach the 500 home run plateau, which is kind of the standard for hitters, much like 3000 strikeouts and/or 300 wins is for pitchers.  It's more likely than not that McGriff will fall of the ballot, which is a crying shame.

Barry Bonds (OF) and Roger Clemens (RHP) - Not this time.  The two biggest names of steroid era likely won't get into the Hall right off the bat, as many will refuse to vote for them out of principle.  That's stupid, and the Hall of Fame will be incomplete without the era's greatest hitter and it's greatest pitcher in it.  They'll make it in time, as I do believe public opinion will soften over time, but the hardline stance that some writers have over the use of PED's, as well as the fact that both were/are colossal pricks will hurt their causes in the short term.

Mike Piazza (C) - Yes.  One of the greatest catchers in Baseball History, Piazza hit for power, was a capable defender, and was generally an asset to the teams that he played for.   He might have held on for a bit too long, and his career does have the usual steroid rumblings, as much of the era's best players do, but there is no reason why he shouldn't be in.

Curt Schilling (RHP) - Not this time.  Schilling was one of the more dominant pitchers in the late 90's, early aught's, although it did take him sometime to turn his talents into production.  He was one of the biggest big game pitchers of all time, and the owner of one of the more memorable post-season moments of all time, Schilling will probably make it into the Hall of Fame in time, provided he doesn't get tossed into the can for the shenanigans with his video game company first.

Kenny Lofton (OF) - No.  Kenny Lofton was sort of like the Shasta version of Ricky Henderson.  Both were speedy outfielders who got on base and functioned as above average leadoff men.  Both had some pop in their otherwise tiny frames, although Henderson had a slight edge on him.  However, Lofton wasn't quite as effective as he began to lose his speed, and towards the end of his career, he was miscast as a starter when it was obvious he needed to be a bench player.  Good player, but not hall worthy.

Sammy Sosa & Mark McGwire (OF) - Not a chance in hell.  Sosa and McGwire will forever be linked by the '98 Home Run Chase, which saw McGwire hit 70, breaking Roger Maris' long standing home run record.  However, they'll also both be linked as the poster children of the steroid era.

Steve Finley (CF) - No.  A very good player, who was a solid lead off man, and a excellent centerfielder for some time.  However, his peak years were good, but not great, and both the beginning and the end of his career weren't exactly pretty.  So, no.

Don Mattingley (1B) - No.  Mattingley's career can essentially be told in two parts.  From 1982-1989, Mattingley was often the lone bright spot of some truly wretched Yankees squads, which George Steinbrenner micromanaged into the ground before his temporary banishment from baseball allowed then general manager Gene Michael to rebuild the franchise in time for their mid to late 90's dominance.  If any grade school kid was asked who his favorite player was in the 80's, more often than not it would be Mattingley.  However, after '89, Mattingley's back would betray him, and the result was that Donnie Baseball would be robbed of much of his power and durability for the remainder of his career, which ended in '95, after his one and only appearance in the post-season.  Mattingley isn't a Hall of Famer, but his lingering on the ballot is as much a testament to his continued popularity as it is a dreaming of what could have been.

Julio Franco (INF) - No.  A solid contributor for a long time, and he certainly had one of the longest careers ever to be enjoyed.  But the only way Franco will be enshrined in the Hall of Fame is as a medical exhibit.

Reggie Sanders (OF) - No.  Sanders was an average player, hit for some power, got on base at times, but never did anything exceptionally well.  He was far from a star, but he had some very good years where he was an asset for some squads, in particular the 2001 Diamondbacks team that won the championship in such  dramatic fashion.

Jeff Cirillo (3B) - LOLZ, No.  Cirillo had a couple of good years, but overall was an average third baseman.  They shouldn't have even listed him, but I suspect he'll get one or two pity votes.

Larry Walker (OF) - No.  Walker is a borderline guy, but his late career injury woes are combined with a discounting of his numbers due to the fact he played much of his career in Colorado.  I figure him to get more consideration in a few years.

Ryan Klesko (INF) - No.  Klesko was a useful enough player in his time, and had some burn as a guy who could hit for some power and fake a number of positions on the field.  However, he was nothing special and played for a bit too long than he should have, although the fact major league teams were willing to throw money at him longer after his usefulness ended shouldn't be held against him.

Woody Williams (RHP) - Awww, Hell No!  Woody Williams had a long career, that's for certain, and was useful for a period of time from 1997 to 2004 as a guy who could eat up innings in the back end of your starting rotation.  But let's be honest: he wasn't a dominant pitcher, and much of his success was the result of pitching not only in the National League, but also behind some great outfield defense and spacious ballparks. The amount of homers he gave up each year alone would were enough to make a case for an All Star spot if they were somehow collected into a single humanoid construct.   So yeah, I'd have to vote a big no on him.

Rondell White (OF/DH) - No.  His brightest years were with the Expos, a team that no longer exists, before he spend much of the aught's watching his career decay into a crawling, pitiful mess, much like the zombie that Rick Grimes first meets in The Walking Dead.

Aaron Sele (RHP) - Ha Ha!  Nope! Sele's continued employment in baseball was due to two factors: A) he could pitch a ton of innings and B) he could pitch marginally well enough to avoid throwing up on himself. The highlight of his career was probably winning a World Series in 2002 with the Angels.  The bad news is that he was hurt, and thus never got to pitch for them.

Sandy Alomar Jr. (C) - No.  Sandy was an excellent defensive catcher who mostly was a backup, although he did at times have some periods as the full time starter.  Great guy to have on a team, and is generally on the short list of guys who will become a future manager.  But, no.

Royce Clayton (SS) - No.  A very good defensive shortstop, but not really much of a hitter or anything more than a average regular or stopgap option.  Clayton did play for a good long time, but he's probably know more for his appearance in the film Moneyball than for his playing career.

Jeff Conine (OF/1B) - One of the first real players to be identified with the Florida Marlins, (indeed, his nickname was Mr. Marlin) Conine wasn't anything really special.  He hit for a high average and had some pop, but wasn't anything special.

Mike Stanton (LHP) - Nope.  Stanton was probably best known as serving as a part of the set up corp to Mariano Rivera during the Yankee dynasty, but he enjoyed a good, long career in his time.  Set up men don't make the Hall of Fame, however, but Stanton can take solace in the fact that he has some nice championship jewelry (although 1999 is gaudy as hell), and the fact that he does have a steady gig on MLB Network Radio.

Flick Review: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

The Hobbit:  An Unexpected Journey (2013)

The Lord Of The Rings, when it first came out several years ago, was rather revolutionary at the time.  It took source material that was regarded to be difficult to adapt as a live action film, and was able to turn it into a film that not only appealed to the fans of the books, but also to a mainstream audience.  It catapulted several stars, such as Orlando Bloom and Viggo Morenstein, into stardom, won a bunch of awards, including Best Picture for Return Of The King, and made billions of dollars in merchandise and movie sales.  The entire trilogy is regarded to be a modern masterpiece.  But for some of the fans of the original Tolkien novels, the films felt incomplete, because of the omission of the first book, and the prequel of the series, The Hobbit.  It seemed odd to have Bilbo's story, how he got the ring, as well as some of the references made to in during the series, to not be told.  However, these fears were abated when Peter Jackson did announce that he did intend to eventually turn the book into a film.  I just didn't expect the book to be stretched into a trilogy.

The story follows Frodo Baggins' (who makes a cameo in the film) uncle Bilbo, a hobbit who has led an rather quiet life until he encounters the wizard Gandalf The Grey.  Almost unexpectedly, Bilbo finds that he has been enlisted by the wizard into the quest to reclaim the lost Dwarven Kingdom of Erebor, which fell to the dragon Smaug years ago.  Although he initially refuses to participate, Bilbo has a change of heart and joins the company of thirteen dwarves, led by Thorin Oakenshield, the heir to Erebor's throne. The journey is filled with danger, as the company encounters Orcs, Wargs, Goblins, as well as the presence of some dark power rising in the woods, as they attempt to make their way back to the Lonely Mountain to challenge Smaug.  Also, something else lies in the journey, waiting for Bilbo to find it:  a mysterious object that will affect not just Bilbo's life, but also the fate of all of Middle-Earth itself...

For the sake of full disclosure, The Hobbit was actually my favorite of the LOTR series. I enjoyed the characters more, it's entire narrative was contained in a single volume, and had enough visuals to make it a feast for the imagination. The biggest fear I had, going into the film, was what the film makers decided to do in order to extend the narrative. At the most, I thought the Hobbit could be extended into two movies, but not three. As with the Lord Of The Rings, Jackson remedies this by using some of the other supplementary material that exists to help flesh out the story, as well as pursue some of the other plotlines that exist in the original novel.  The most notable of this is the presence of the Necromancer, which was only mentioned in a few passages in the original book, but in the film is now turned into a very real and imminent danger.

Jackson also takes time to tell some backstory as well, going into the story of how the Dwarves were expelled from their homeland, as well as the source of their dislike of the Elves, which is evident at times in the relationship between Gimli and Legolas in Lord Of The Rings.  There are also some other sequences made in order to tie this trilogy in with that of The Lord Of The Rings films.  All of these additions are nice, and do serve a purpose to explain the story.  However, they do tend to drag, which when combined with The Hobbit's own slow start, does result in the film being a bit slow in the beginning.

The visuals in the film, as all LOTR's films, are stunning.  There are some beautiful panoramic shots of the New Zealand countryside.  Rivendale, the Elventown close to the Misty Mountains, returns in all of it's dreamy, ethereal majesty, and a couple of new settings, the Goblin caves as well as Erebor itself, also look absolutely stunning.  Other memorable sequences from the books, such as Bilbo's encounter with Golem, the Dwarves' frantic escape from the Goblins, and finally, the rescue by the Eagles, are all brilliantly done, much as we have come to expect from Jackson's prior work on Tolkien.

The cast is exceptional, also as we have come to expect.  Martin Freeman, who is famous for his wonderful portrayal of Dr. Watson from the BBC Sherlock series, is Bilbo.  Much as his Watson, Freeman's Bilbo comes off as likable, although prone to the occasional awkward outburst.  He's brave, loyal, and has a noble quality to him that makes you take an instant admiration and liking to him.  These are qualities that were similar to the qualities that the four hobbits had in the prior film series, except all rolled into one.  However, Bilbo's character is not strictly contained to the book, as Jackson has Bilbo choosing to be a much more active agent in his fate, as opposed to the book, where he was at first kind of just along for the ride.  This, along with other changes to the narrative that Jackson has added, show Bilbo as being With this change, there result in other additions to the narrative, give Freeman a chance to show Bilbo at his best, and he does so wonderfully.

The dwarf company replaces the Fellowship in this trilogy, and the casting is fairly dead on.  Richard Armitage plays Thorin, who is every bit as serious, noble, stubborn and unyielding as he was in the novel.  Ken Stott plays Balin, who was probably my favorite dwarf of the novel, although he's much older in this movie than he was in my memory.  Other notable dwarves are Fili (Aidan Turner), who will likely be this film's bit of eye candy, much as Legolas was in the prior film, while James Nesbitt plays Bofur, who has a small role, but somewhat fun role as an early friend to Bilbo.  I'm sure all of the other dwarves will have greater roles in time, but at the moment, the movie merely sets up the new universe, while also trying to introduce multiple new characters at one pop.

Returning the series are Ian McKellen, Hugo Weaving, Cathe Blantchett, and Christopher Lee, as Gandalf the Grey, Elrond, Lady Galadriel, and Sarumon, respectively.  Gandalf is what we expect at this point, an advisor to the dwarves, as well as a protector to the hobbits in the journey.  Unlike the Gandalf in the Rings trilogy, this Gandalf is much more of brawler, due to his powers not yet achieving the strength that they would in the later films.  Sarumon and Galadriel are in the film to possibly set up the future conflict with the Necromancer, as well as serve as another tie-in to the prior trilogy, while Elrond's role in the book was minor, but important.

In closing, the first Hobbit film is a great film, and one that you should see.  It does take a while to get started, and it is overly long in some places, but all in all, it's a movie worth the price of the ticket.