![[a case of the blog]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SY-CjpYjN_U/VF0vl6CNPjI/AAAAAAAAEOo/kQO_lGphFIs/s1600/newblogheader19.gif)
I don’t recall ever being so simultaneously compelled yet disappointed with a single episode of Smallville. I was honestly engaged throughout, and I thought the flashback plot device was handled wonderfully. Yet when the episode ended, I was severely disappointed. I daresay that it left me dissatisfied with the series as whole.
http://primetimepulse.com/2009/01/31/smallville-episode-8-13-review/
Saturday, January 31, 2009
A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 8-13
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
A Case of the.... Lost - Episode 5-3
I just want to remind everybody to send me their thoughts, theories, and observations (either by e-mail or by visiting my blog) about tonight’s episode for my Lost: Revisited column, which will be posted next Tuesday. Remember – no spoilers!
Speaking of my Lost: Revisited column, one topic I discussed was my fascination with how certain characters are impacting by the island time jump (as in, their present day body and consciousness travels through time along with the island), while other characters are not. Specifically, it seems (for lack of a better word) inconsistent. Sure, Oceanic survivors like Locke, Sawyer, Rose, and Bernard are affected, but the tail-end survivors that ended up joining the Others were not (remember, all of the Others that Locke was with had vanished). So why was Juliet impacted, while the rest of the Others weren’t? And why were the freighter folks, for that matter?
Anyway, one of my blog readers asked if we know for sure that the Others aren’t impacted by the time jump (since Alpert seemed aware that it was happening), but I think that this episode solidly confirmed that they are not.
Now, onto tonight’s episode (click the "Read More" link):
Discovering that Penny was pregnant – and later seeing Desmond with his son – was one of those rare genuinely sweet, happy moments that this show often deprives us of. I also appreciated the island-story tease. That being said, we’ve also waited so long for them to be happy that it was a bit unsettling seeing such tension between them.
I must say, it’s pretty remarkable that, despite everything they’ve gone through, Daniel is still rocking that tie. Bravo to him. I also loved how Miles immediately assigned Daniel as their leader the first sign that they were in danger.
When we first saw the soldiers, and they were evidently being led by a woman, my first thought was: This is Rousseau’s doomed science club! Then I realized she didn’t have a French accent. I must say, though, that the explosions that killed the two Red Shirts looked suspiciously like the Smoke Monster.
The revelation that the Others all speak Latin was pretty awesome. I also love it when Juliet teases Sawyer about the inner workings of the Others. One thing to consider, though: Juliet clearly does know a lot more about the Others than she’s thus far revealed to her new friends. The question is, why hasn’t she told them about anything? She’s repeatedly killed Others in order to protect the Oceanic crew, so there’s really no question about where her allegiances lie.
Of course, the REAL revelation of the episode was that Charles Widmore was originally a young and cocky Other, an underling to Richard Alpert. Alpert is an increasingly intriguing character. Even if you look beyond his whole ageless thing, I find it interesting that he was far more modern looking during this episode than he was when he first met Ben. I also really enjoyed Alpert’s discussion with Locke, which was very telling. In my Lost: Revisited column, I noted that perhaps the survivors going back in time has a direct impact on the drama they later experience. We got a glimpse of that this episode, as we learned that Alpert’s frequent visits and attempted recruitment of Locke throughout his life were actually suggested by Locke himself (kinda like how Fry is his own grandfather on Futurama).
In closing….I may go as far as to say that I enjoyed this episode even more than the two part premiere. It was actually THAT good. I think one of Lost’s greatest strengths is that it doesn’t feel the need to include every single character into every episode (unlike, say, Heroes). Anyway, remember to send me your thoughts on tonight’s episode!
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
A Case of the.... Lost - Episodes 5-1 & 5-2 Revisited
Welcome to Lost: Revisited, where I take a closer look at the previous week’s episode of Lost and respond to e-mails and blog comments that have come my way.
Click the "Read More" link for the full column.
Let’s start with an e-mail from longtime reader, Dan:
Do you think Ben had Jack get the paternity test ordered? That way, he would get custody of Aaron, since he's his relative, and he could make a deal with Kate to get her to come back to the island.
This is an interesting theory, and not one that I had considered. That being said, I don’t think this is the case. Jack is undoubtedly a flawed hero, but I honestly don’t see him doing that to Kate. What’s that old expression? “You get more flies with honey than vinegar.” I just don’t see him threatening Kate in order to get her to do something for him. I do believe that he truly loves Kate, and he loves Aaron, and I just don’t see him doing that to either of them, even if it’s for the “greater good.”
Besides which, it doesn’t really add up timeline-wise. Jack had just discovered that Ben wasn’t on the island. I don’t think Ben would able to convince Jack to go through with this, find a lawyer, and sic them on Kate in such a short amount of time. Along with that, Jack still believes in continuing with this lie, and involving lawyers only risks uncovering the truth.
But it’s an interesting theory nonetheless.
Speaking of Kate, when you sit down and think about it, it’s interesting that she’s really the only member of the Oceanic Six that has adjusted to home life. Jack became an addict, Sun became consumed with vengeance and hatred, Sayid became a cold blooded killer, Hurley seemingly lost his mind, and then there’s Kate. Sure, she’s living a lie – perhaps more so than anybody else – yet she’s adjusted. Adding depth to this observation, consider that Kate had more reason than anybody else (excluding perhaps Locke) to NOT want to return home.
The next comment comes from my blog:
Just speculating here, but maybe the invisible stuff only applies if you don't go on that "special course" that has to be calculated? So the freighter people and the Dharma groups followed the course and thus can see the island, but had they just flown over it they wouldn't have seen anything? I'm guessing but that may be it. And perhaps the second island is considered "part" of the first island.
What confuses me is if the island moved in space as well as time (which I think we were led to believe, and you'd think would have to be the case if the island just totally disappeared from view...unless a full island is appearing on top of the same island in the past...), then what's with stuff like Eko's brother still crashing? And if it's only moving through time then...how the hell does that work? I'm thoroughly confused but in that good, Lost way.
It is my assumption that the island is moving in time and space. Yes, the Nigerian plane still crashed, but who is to say that the island wasn’t in another location when that happened? Actually, I think it’s entirely possible that these time flashes aren’t arbitrary. Perhaps they’re occurring at moments in time that the island has moved.
Then again, maybe the island is merely “stuck” in time, and it won’t reappear until this apparent time vortex (or whatever you want to call it) is resolved.
This question actually brings me to the first matter I want to discuss. I’m curious as to why certain people were affected by the time jumps, but others weren’t. For example, Sawyer, Locke, Bernard, and Rose were among the Oceanic survivors that transported through time along with the island. Yet the Oceanic tailies survivors who had joined the Others had vanished. For that matter, Juliet – who is technically an Other – was impacted by the time jump, while the rest of the Others were not (I am, of course, excluding Alpert from all of this, because we don’t know what his deal is). Likewise, Daniel, Charlotte, and Miles were affected, most likely due to their close proximity to the Oceanic survivors. Yet, once again, the Others vanished, despite their physical closeness to Locke and the tailie survivors. I’m interested in seeing what the determining factor was with who jumps with the island, and who vanishes. It can’t simply be “if you were already on the island when the Oceanic plane crashed, you don’t jump through time with the island,” otherwise Juliet would have vanished. And it can’t be “only Oceanic people jump” because not only did the tailies vanish, but the freighter folk remained intact. I really hope that this gets examined.
I’d also like to discuss one theory discussed on the Entertainment Weekly website, regarding Daniel’s appearance with the Dharma Initiative. Since we already knew that Daniel was tinkering with time travel, I had naturally assumed that this either occurred before he ended up on the island (when he was still mastering his craft) or after he got off of it (perhaps going back in time in order to prevent a catastrophe). The columnist there provides a far more interesting explanation, however: Perhaps Daniel, Miles, Charlotte, Sawyer, Juliet, and everybody else continues going through time, ultimately ending up in the early days of the Dharma Initiative. And what if they actually play a significant role in creating the drama that their future selves had to endure? Even more interesting: Is it possible that a young Ben, upon first coming to the island, actually meets these castaways as they travel through time?
And speaking of time travel, I have to wonder something: Should Desmond have recognized Daniel when he encountered him outside the hatch? In “The Constant,” a pre-island Desmond meets Daniel. Does this not change the past, since Desmond wasn’t physically traveling to the past, but rather consciously?
Another matter to ponder: Why, exactly, does Sun want to kill Ben? Why does she blame him for Jin’s death? Her motivation isn’t entirely clear. We, the viewers, know that Ben WAS responsible (at least partially so) for the freighter explosion, but she doesn’t know that. For all she knows, the freighter folk came up with that scheme, and they fall under the direction of Widmore, the very man she’s making a deal with.
There are also a lot of people predicting that Miles was the baby at the beginning of the premiere (with Dr. Candle). This reminds me of when people were first predicting that Christian is Claire’s father, because he was arguing with an Australian woman. Most people argued, “Not all Australian people are related.” I’m tempted to make a similar argument here….that just because we saw an Asian baby in the past doesn’t mean that he/she later grows up to be one of the Asian leads. Then again, Christian DID end up being Claire’s father, so what do I know?
Anyway, that’s it for me tonight. Remember: This column is only as good and entertaining as the e-mails I receive – so don’t hesitate to drop me a line!!! Visit my blog or send me an e-mail!
Read more!
Click the "Read More" link for the full column.
Let’s start with an e-mail from longtime reader, Dan:
Do you think Ben had Jack get the paternity test ordered? That way, he would get custody of Aaron, since he's his relative, and he could make a deal with Kate to get her to come back to the island.
This is an interesting theory, and not one that I had considered. That being said, I don’t think this is the case. Jack is undoubtedly a flawed hero, but I honestly don’t see him doing that to Kate. What’s that old expression? “You get more flies with honey than vinegar.” I just don’t see him threatening Kate in order to get her to do something for him. I do believe that he truly loves Kate, and he loves Aaron, and I just don’t see him doing that to either of them, even if it’s for the “greater good.”
Besides which, it doesn’t really add up timeline-wise. Jack had just discovered that Ben wasn’t on the island. I don’t think Ben would able to convince Jack to go through with this, find a lawyer, and sic them on Kate in such a short amount of time. Along with that, Jack still believes in continuing with this lie, and involving lawyers only risks uncovering the truth.
But it’s an interesting theory nonetheless.
Speaking of Kate, when you sit down and think about it, it’s interesting that she’s really the only member of the Oceanic Six that has adjusted to home life. Jack became an addict, Sun became consumed with vengeance and hatred, Sayid became a cold blooded killer, Hurley seemingly lost his mind, and then there’s Kate. Sure, she’s living a lie – perhaps more so than anybody else – yet she’s adjusted. Adding depth to this observation, consider that Kate had more reason than anybody else (excluding perhaps Locke) to NOT want to return home.
The next comment comes from my blog:
Just speculating here, but maybe the invisible stuff only applies if you don't go on that "special course" that has to be calculated? So the freighter people and the Dharma groups followed the course and thus can see the island, but had they just flown over it they wouldn't have seen anything? I'm guessing but that may be it. And perhaps the second island is considered "part" of the first island.
What confuses me is if the island moved in space as well as time (which I think we were led to believe, and you'd think would have to be the case if the island just totally disappeared from view...unless a full island is appearing on top of the same island in the past...), then what's with stuff like Eko's brother still crashing? And if it's only moving through time then...how the hell does that work? I'm thoroughly confused but in that good, Lost way.
It is my assumption that the island is moving in time and space. Yes, the Nigerian plane still crashed, but who is to say that the island wasn’t in another location when that happened? Actually, I think it’s entirely possible that these time flashes aren’t arbitrary. Perhaps they’re occurring at moments in time that the island has moved.
Then again, maybe the island is merely “stuck” in time, and it won’t reappear until this apparent time vortex (or whatever you want to call it) is resolved.
This question actually brings me to the first matter I want to discuss. I’m curious as to why certain people were affected by the time jumps, but others weren’t. For example, Sawyer, Locke, Bernard, and Rose were among the Oceanic survivors that transported through time along with the island. Yet the Oceanic tailies survivors who had joined the Others had vanished. For that matter, Juliet – who is technically an Other – was impacted by the time jump, while the rest of the Others were not (I am, of course, excluding Alpert from all of this, because we don’t know what his deal is). Likewise, Daniel, Charlotte, and Miles were affected, most likely due to their close proximity to the Oceanic survivors. Yet, once again, the Others vanished, despite their physical closeness to Locke and the tailie survivors. I’m interested in seeing what the determining factor was with who jumps with the island, and who vanishes. It can’t simply be “if you were already on the island when the Oceanic plane crashed, you don’t jump through time with the island,” otherwise Juliet would have vanished. And it can’t be “only Oceanic people jump” because not only did the tailies vanish, but the freighter folk remained intact. I really hope that this gets examined.
I’d also like to discuss one theory discussed on the Entertainment Weekly website, regarding Daniel’s appearance with the Dharma Initiative. Since we already knew that Daniel was tinkering with time travel, I had naturally assumed that this either occurred before he ended up on the island (when he was still mastering his craft) or after he got off of it (perhaps going back in time in order to prevent a catastrophe). The columnist there provides a far more interesting explanation, however: Perhaps Daniel, Miles, Charlotte, Sawyer, Juliet, and everybody else continues going through time, ultimately ending up in the early days of the Dharma Initiative. And what if they actually play a significant role in creating the drama that their future selves had to endure? Even more interesting: Is it possible that a young Ben, upon first coming to the island, actually meets these castaways as they travel through time?
And speaking of time travel, I have to wonder something: Should Desmond have recognized Daniel when he encountered him outside the hatch? In “The Constant,” a pre-island Desmond meets Daniel. Does this not change the past, since Desmond wasn’t physically traveling to the past, but rather consciously?
Another matter to ponder: Why, exactly, does Sun want to kill Ben? Why does she blame him for Jin’s death? Her motivation isn’t entirely clear. We, the viewers, know that Ben WAS responsible (at least partially so) for the freighter explosion, but she doesn’t know that. For all she knows, the freighter folk came up with that scheme, and they fall under the direction of Widmore, the very man she’s making a deal with.
There are also a lot of people predicting that Miles was the baby at the beginning of the premiere (with Dr. Candle). This reminds me of when people were first predicting that Christian is Claire’s father, because he was arguing with an Australian woman. Most people argued, “Not all Australian people are related.” I’m tempted to make a similar argument here….that just because we saw an Asian baby in the past doesn’t mean that he/she later grows up to be one of the Asian leads. Then again, Christian DID end up being Claire’s father, so what do I know?
Anyway, that’s it for me tonight. Remember: This column is only as good and entertaining as the e-mails I receive – so don’t hesitate to drop me a line!!! Visit my blog or send me an e-mail!
A Case of the.... 24 - Episode 7-6
Yes! Only a few episodes in and we get a reasonable explanation for how (and why) Tony’s death was faked. Turns out Robocop was the inside man all along (how he foresaw getting captured by CTU and held captive in the same room as a recovering Tony with a high dose of hyoscine-pentothal readily available remains unclear, however).
http://primetimepulse.com/2009/01/27/24-episode-7-6-review/
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Top Ten Cases: Favorite Royal Rumbles
So the Royal Rumble is tomorrow, and to commemorate the big event I thought I would rank my ten favorite Rumbles, ever. The Royal Rumble, in and of itself, is probably my favorite Pay-Per-View after WrestleMania. Ironically, I did attend one Rumble, and it turned out to probably be my least favorite in modern history (2000). For the period between, say, 1996 and 2003, the winner of the Royal Rumble was completely predictable (and yes, there are exceptions). It got to the point that you almost had to wonder if they should discontinue the stipulation that you get a WrestleMania title shot. That being said, the past few years they've done a wonderful job of surprising us with some unexpected winners. And as I always say, this is a ranking of my "favorite" Rumbles, not the best ones.
For what it's worth, here are my predictions for this year's event: Beth Phoenix retains against Melina (a Women's Title match at the Royal Rumble?), Jack Swagger retains the ECW Championship against Matt Hardy, John Cena retains the World Championship against JBL (sorry, but I just don't see JBL vs. Michaels for the World Heavyweight Championship headlining WrestleMania -- even if it is in Texas), and Edge defeats Jeff Hardy for the WWE Championship when Christian makes his triumphant return and helps his "brother" win the gold. As far as the Rumble itself, that's really, really tough. I normally would have guessed that they're doing Triple H vs. Edge and John Cena vs. Randy Orton for WrestleMania, leading me to believe either H or Orton will win. But after what happened on Raw, who knows what they have planned for Orton. So, if I were a betting man, I think I'd go with Triple H (yawn). But I do have to give WWE credit, because the past several years they've come up with some pretty cool endings. One possibility is Michaels entering the Rumble, winning it, and JBL demanding that he give up his spot so that he can get yet another shot at Cena. Or Undertaker winning and challenging Cena for the title (although doing the "Streak vs. Title" storyline three years in a row might be a bit much). There really are a lot of fun possibilities. Oh, and even if it's just lip service (and trust me, it would be only that), I do hope the announcers remind the viewers that the winner can also challenge for the ECW Championship at WrestleMania.
Click the "Read More" link for the list.
10. 1999 (Winner: Vince McMahon)
The reason I'm including this Rumble on my last is because it was really the first time in which the match itself was made into a storyline. However, the reason why I can't possibly rank it any higher is because what is supposed to be perhaps the biggest moment in the careers of 30 individuals took a massive backseat to a single storyline. And because of that, you just knew that either Austin or McMahon would win. And if by some miracle they didn't, they'd be playing the starring role in the ending (and not the actual winner). I also have to take off a few points because they didn't take full advantage of the bounty storyline. For those of you who don't remember, McMahon put a bounty on Austin, offering a great deal of money (I believe $10,000) to whoever could eliminate him. They did have a few Superstars make an attempt, but nowhere near as many should have. That being said, it was an interesting Rumble, with Austin and McMahon starting out, both leaving for the vast majority of the match, and then returning for the end.
9. 1991 (Winner: Hulk Hogan)
I'm placing this particular Rumble here because it was the first one I ever remember watching live on Pay-Per-View. And as a huge Hulkamaniac, it was incredible seeing the Immortal One walk away the winner, especially after shockingly seeing the dastardly Sgt. Slaughter dethrone the Ultimate Warrior as WWE Champion.
8. 1994 (Winners: Bret Hart & Lex Luger)
You really can't exclude this Rumble for historic reasons, as for the first time ever, two competitors won the match (a similar situation would happen 11 years later, but by accident). It was a fun little story, too, with the odds on favorite Luger against the scrappy, underdog, injured Bret Hart fighting the good fight.
7. 2007 (Winner: The Undertaker)
This was one of the most star-studded Rumbles in recent memory, with guys like Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Edge, and Randy Orton all conceivable winners. That's one of the best parts of the brand extension: With two (or even three) World titles to choose from, it's not an absolute foregone conclusion as to who will win. Along with that, with Triple H out of the picture due to injury, both of World title situations were exceptionally unclear. In the end there was Michaels and The Undertaker, and these two tore the house down in a series of moves and exchanges that really kept you guessing. 'Taker ended up winning, putting to end the dubious distinction where the #30 competitor had never won the Rumble.
6. 1997 (Winner: Stone Cold Steve Austin)
This Rumble really set the stage for the Attitude Era, paving the way for Austin's anti-hero, rebellious character and Bret Hart's overall distaste for what the wrestling industry had degenerated into. It had an innovative ending, with Stone Cold getting eliminated without any of the referees witnessing it, resulting in him re-entering the ring and eliminating the rest of the competitors. It also had Mick Foley appearing in the Rumble three times, under each of his identities (Cactus Jack, Mankind, and Dude Love). Of course, this also led to arguably the most disliked WrestleMania main events ever, so there ya' go.
5. 2008 (Winner: John Cena)
In the age of the Internet, there are rarely ever any genuine surprises left in this wacky sport. At best, we know somebody will return or debut, we're just not entirely sure about the "when" or "how." This Rumble was the rare exception: When John Cena returned as the surprise 30th entrant (just a couple months after tearing his pec), it was a truly shocking moment. The crowd's reaction was great, as was Triple H's. The final few moments were great as well, as you couldn't be quite sure which of these two mega-stars would be victorious.
I would be doing a disservice if I also didn't mention the great side story with Shawn Michaels and the Undertaker. The previous year they were the final two competitors. This year they were the first two. Throughout the entire Rumble, Michaels would allow 'Taker to eliminate somebody, and then he'd sneak up behind him and try to throw him over the top rope. This continued for about a half an hour, mostly going unnoticed, until it finally worked. Of course, Michaels was so caught up in the moment that he ended up getting eliminated as well.
4. 2001 (Winner: Stone Cold Steve Austin)
Despite the fact that it falls into that period of "Completely Predictable Winner," this was a pretty fun Rumble, actually. And it actually has very little to do with the person who won. On the contrary, Kane was the MVP of this particular year's match. Not only was he the last person to be eliminated, but he also lasted nearly an hour -- I think the exact number is 54 minutes, 49 seconds -- and set a record for most eliminations in a single Rumble match (11). The match was also set up into different "themed" sections, all of which Kane took part in and concluded (by eliminating everybody). There was a "comedy" part, with characters like the Honky Tonk Man. Then there was a "Hardcore" part, where pretty much all the guys in the Hardcore division beat the crap out of each other with weapons. And of course, Drew Carrey was a participant. And truth be told, it's unfair of me to say the winner was completely predictable. Angle was the WWE Champion at the time, but you knew they were planning on doing Rock vs. Austin for the title. That meant either of those two could win, allowing the other to win the title before Mania.
3. 1992 (Winner: Ric Flair)
Undoubtedly the most prestigious Royal Rumble in history, as the 30 competitors were fighting for the industry's grandest price: The WWE Championship. There was plenty of star power, including Hulk Hogan, The Undertaker, Randy Savage, Sid, and the eventual winner, Ric Flair. If I'm not mistaken, this was the first time a heel won the Rumble (was Big John Studd a heel when he won in 1989). Not only that, but Flair set a new record for time spent in the match itself. I also think it's fair to say that this was the first Rumble that really set in motion the Road to WrestleMania.
2. 2004 (Winner: Lord Voldemort)
Much like my #1 pick (spoiler alert!), this Rumble did a wonderful job of showing that you can win even if you draw the unenviable first spot and catapulting a midcarder to the main event scene. This storyline was handled rather magnificently, with Smackdown's General Manager Paul Heyman doing whatever he can to prevent Chris Benoit from facing Brock Lesnar, the WWE Champion. In order to do this, they had him enter the match at #1. Benoit overcame the odds and survived until the very end. He then went on to challenge Raw's champion, Triple H, at WrestleMania. He finally won the big one that night, and celebrated in the ring, in a genuinely emotional moment, with his wife and son (awk-ward....) This Royal Rumble also set the precedent that you don't have to necessarily fight your brand's World Champion if you win Rumble (a plot device they had particular fun with the following year when Evolution imploded).
1. 1995 (Winner: Shawn Michaels)
I'm sure many people find it odd that my favorite Rumble of all time is the one that is likely the most critically panned in the event's history. And I suppose the criticism is justified. It's the shortest of all the Rumbles, with the participants entering every minute instead of the typical two minutes or 90 seconds. As such, the match itself was barely over a half hour. The caliber of Superstars, in hindsight, wasn't exactly up to par either. But for the longest time before and after this Rumble, the winner was completely telegraphed. I mean, with the WWE Title match stipulation attached, you could pretty much determine who they wanted to face the champion. This seemed like the first time that the WWE actually got behind a midcarder with potential and had him win the Rumble out of nowhere in order to catapult him into the main event. And I loved the overall story of this particular Rumble: Two men started (Shawn Michaels and British Bulldog), and everytime the ring would clear, these two would SOMEHOW be left standing. They even ended up being the last two competitors in the damn thing. And the ending was brilliant, with Shawn Michaels getting thrown over the top rope and hanging with every thread of his being as one foot hit the ground. The Bulldog was declared the winner, but Michaels ran back in and knocked him off the turnbuckle, eliminating him. Replays would show that only one of HBK's feet actually hit the floor, really giving some meaning behind that often mentioned "both feet must touch the floor" stipulation. The Rumble set a lot of precedences: Just because you draw #1 doesn't necessarily mean you're a dead man and you better make damn sure that both of your opponent's feet hit the ground when you throw them over the top rope.
Read more!
For what it's worth, here are my predictions for this year's event: Beth Phoenix retains against Melina (a Women's Title match at the Royal Rumble?), Jack Swagger retains the ECW Championship against Matt Hardy, John Cena retains the World Championship against JBL (sorry, but I just don't see JBL vs. Michaels for the World Heavyweight Championship headlining WrestleMania -- even if it is in Texas), and Edge defeats Jeff Hardy for the WWE Championship when Christian makes his triumphant return and helps his "brother" win the gold. As far as the Rumble itself, that's really, really tough. I normally would have guessed that they're doing Triple H vs. Edge and John Cena vs. Randy Orton for WrestleMania, leading me to believe either H or Orton will win. But after what happened on Raw, who knows what they have planned for Orton. So, if I were a betting man, I think I'd go with Triple H (yawn). But I do have to give WWE credit, because the past several years they've come up with some pretty cool endings. One possibility is Michaels entering the Rumble, winning it, and JBL demanding that he give up his spot so that he can get yet another shot at Cena. Or Undertaker winning and challenging Cena for the title (although doing the "Streak vs. Title" storyline three years in a row might be a bit much). There really are a lot of fun possibilities. Oh, and even if it's just lip service (and trust me, it would be only that), I do hope the announcers remind the viewers that the winner can also challenge for the ECW Championship at WrestleMania.
Click the "Read More" link for the list.
10. 1999 (Winner: Vince McMahon)
The reason I'm including this Rumble on my last is because it was really the first time in which the match itself was made into a storyline. However, the reason why I can't possibly rank it any higher is because what is supposed to be perhaps the biggest moment in the careers of 30 individuals took a massive backseat to a single storyline. And because of that, you just knew that either Austin or McMahon would win. And if by some miracle they didn't, they'd be playing the starring role in the ending (and not the actual winner). I also have to take off a few points because they didn't take full advantage of the bounty storyline. For those of you who don't remember, McMahon put a bounty on Austin, offering a great deal of money (I believe $10,000) to whoever could eliminate him. They did have a few Superstars make an attempt, but nowhere near as many should have. That being said, it was an interesting Rumble, with Austin and McMahon starting out, both leaving for the vast majority of the match, and then returning for the end.
9. 1991 (Winner: Hulk Hogan)
I'm placing this particular Rumble here because it was the first one I ever remember watching live on Pay-Per-View. And as a huge Hulkamaniac, it was incredible seeing the Immortal One walk away the winner, especially after shockingly seeing the dastardly Sgt. Slaughter dethrone the Ultimate Warrior as WWE Champion.
8. 1994 (Winners: Bret Hart & Lex Luger)
You really can't exclude this Rumble for historic reasons, as for the first time ever, two competitors won the match (a similar situation would happen 11 years later, but by accident). It was a fun little story, too, with the odds on favorite Luger against the scrappy, underdog, injured Bret Hart fighting the good fight.
7. 2007 (Winner: The Undertaker)
This was one of the most star-studded Rumbles in recent memory, with guys like Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Edge, and Randy Orton all conceivable winners. That's one of the best parts of the brand extension: With two (or even three) World titles to choose from, it's not an absolute foregone conclusion as to who will win. Along with that, with Triple H out of the picture due to injury, both of World title situations were exceptionally unclear. In the end there was Michaels and The Undertaker, and these two tore the house down in a series of moves and exchanges that really kept you guessing. 'Taker ended up winning, putting to end the dubious distinction where the #30 competitor had never won the Rumble.
6. 1997 (Winner: Stone Cold Steve Austin)
This Rumble really set the stage for the Attitude Era, paving the way for Austin's anti-hero, rebellious character and Bret Hart's overall distaste for what the wrestling industry had degenerated into. It had an innovative ending, with Stone Cold getting eliminated without any of the referees witnessing it, resulting in him re-entering the ring and eliminating the rest of the competitors. It also had Mick Foley appearing in the Rumble three times, under each of his identities (Cactus Jack, Mankind, and Dude Love). Of course, this also led to arguably the most disliked WrestleMania main events ever, so there ya' go.
5. 2008 (Winner: John Cena)
In the age of the Internet, there are rarely ever any genuine surprises left in this wacky sport. At best, we know somebody will return or debut, we're just not entirely sure about the "when" or "how." This Rumble was the rare exception: When John Cena returned as the surprise 30th entrant (just a couple months after tearing his pec), it was a truly shocking moment. The crowd's reaction was great, as was Triple H's. The final few moments were great as well, as you couldn't be quite sure which of these two mega-stars would be victorious.
I would be doing a disservice if I also didn't mention the great side story with Shawn Michaels and the Undertaker. The previous year they were the final two competitors. This year they were the first two. Throughout the entire Rumble, Michaels would allow 'Taker to eliminate somebody, and then he'd sneak up behind him and try to throw him over the top rope. This continued for about a half an hour, mostly going unnoticed, until it finally worked. Of course, Michaels was so caught up in the moment that he ended up getting eliminated as well.
4. 2001 (Winner: Stone Cold Steve Austin)
Despite the fact that it falls into that period of "Completely Predictable Winner," this was a pretty fun Rumble, actually. And it actually has very little to do with the person who won. On the contrary, Kane was the MVP of this particular year's match. Not only was he the last person to be eliminated, but he also lasted nearly an hour -- I think the exact number is 54 minutes, 49 seconds -- and set a record for most eliminations in a single Rumble match (11). The match was also set up into different "themed" sections, all of which Kane took part in and concluded (by eliminating everybody). There was a "comedy" part, with characters like the Honky Tonk Man. Then there was a "Hardcore" part, where pretty much all the guys in the Hardcore division beat the crap out of each other with weapons. And of course, Drew Carrey was a participant. And truth be told, it's unfair of me to say the winner was completely predictable. Angle was the WWE Champion at the time, but you knew they were planning on doing Rock vs. Austin for the title. That meant either of those two could win, allowing the other to win the title before Mania.
3. 1992 (Winner: Ric Flair)
Undoubtedly the most prestigious Royal Rumble in history, as the 30 competitors were fighting for the industry's grandest price: The WWE Championship. There was plenty of star power, including Hulk Hogan, The Undertaker, Randy Savage, Sid, and the eventual winner, Ric Flair. If I'm not mistaken, this was the first time a heel won the Rumble (was Big John Studd a heel when he won in 1989). Not only that, but Flair set a new record for time spent in the match itself. I also think it's fair to say that this was the first Rumble that really set in motion the Road to WrestleMania.
2. 2004 (Winner: Lord Voldemort)
Much like my #1 pick (spoiler alert!), this Rumble did a wonderful job of showing that you can win even if you draw the unenviable first spot and catapulting a midcarder to the main event scene. This storyline was handled rather magnificently, with Smackdown's General Manager Paul Heyman doing whatever he can to prevent Chris Benoit from facing Brock Lesnar, the WWE Champion. In order to do this, they had him enter the match at #1. Benoit overcame the odds and survived until the very end. He then went on to challenge Raw's champion, Triple H, at WrestleMania. He finally won the big one that night, and celebrated in the ring, in a genuinely emotional moment, with his wife and son (awk-ward....) This Royal Rumble also set the precedent that you don't have to necessarily fight your brand's World Champion if you win Rumble (a plot device they had particular fun with the following year when Evolution imploded).
1. 1995 (Winner: Shawn Michaels)
I'm sure many people find it odd that my favorite Rumble of all time is the one that is likely the most critically panned in the event's history. And I suppose the criticism is justified. It's the shortest of all the Rumbles, with the participants entering every minute instead of the typical two minutes or 90 seconds. As such, the match itself was barely over a half hour. The caliber of Superstars, in hindsight, wasn't exactly up to par either. But for the longest time before and after this Rumble, the winner was completely telegraphed. I mean, with the WWE Title match stipulation attached, you could pretty much determine who they wanted to face the champion. This seemed like the first time that the WWE actually got behind a midcarder with potential and had him win the Rumble out of nowhere in order to catapult him into the main event. And I loved the overall story of this particular Rumble: Two men started (Shawn Michaels and British Bulldog), and everytime the ring would clear, these two would SOMEHOW be left standing. They even ended up being the last two competitors in the damn thing. And the ending was brilliant, with Shawn Michaels getting thrown over the top rope and hanging with every thread of his being as one foot hit the ground. The Bulldog was declared the winner, but Michaels ran back in and knocked him off the turnbuckle, eliminating him. Replays would show that only one of HBK's feet actually hit the floor, really giving some meaning behind that often mentioned "both feet must touch the floor" stipulation. The Rumble set a lot of precedences: Just because you draw #1 doesn't necessarily mean you're a dead man and you better make damn sure that both of your opponent's feet hit the ground when you throw them over the top rope.
Friday, January 23, 2009
A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 8-12
While I can’t really decide how I feel about Clark and Chloe’s conversation, the fact that this series is simply unwilling to let go of the Clark/Lana relationship drives me made. The past few years of Smallville have been phenomenal, except for two issues in which the writers are relentlessly stubborn about: Clark being in love with Lana, and Clark’s inability to fly. It’s gotten to the point that I can’t even remember how I could have possibly rooted for them. They had made so much progress with the budding relationship between Clark and Lois, yet they very possibly set themselves back to square one by immediately having him fall back in love with Lana the second she returned. It didn’t even appear as if he was conflicted. I mean, he had to be REMINDED about Lois. And I hated, hated, hated the fact that they kissed.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
A Case of the.... Lost - Episodes 5-1 & 5-2
I normally wait for PrimeTimePulse to post my columns before linking them on my blog, in order to give their website the hits, but I've decided to give Lost a special exception. So, therefore, you can now check out my blog Wednesday nights for my IMMEDIATE Lost thoughts.
So this season, my Lost columns are going to be handled differently. More specifically, you’re going to get a double-dosage. My first column will be posted Wednesday night/Thursday morning. This column will be a pretty straight forward initial reaction to the episode that had just aired. As such, observations will probably be pretty obvious, and mythology interpretations will be somewhat limited. The second part of my column will be posted the following Tuesday night/Wednesday morning. I’ll spend the week taking in the episode that had aired earlier in the week and pick apart the various theories that have circulated. I’ll also respond to e-mails and blog comments that readers have hopefully sent me. So – hint, hint – SEND ME YOUR COMMENTS!!!! But PLEASE, I avoid spoilers like the plague, so basically if it hasn’t happened yet and doesn’t appear in the next week’s preview, don’t tell me.
So coming into its fifth season, I daresay that this year’s premiere is the most anticipated one yet. I think it’s also fair to say that this episode is coming off the heels of perhaps the series’ most critically acclaimed season (and yes, that includes the first season). And similar to last year’s premiere, the previous season’s finale promised to completely alter the classic formula that had made Lost so special to begin with. How will they handle their two story arcs when they are presumably occurring on different timelines (with those left behind living in 2005, and the Oceanic Six three years later)? Or did the island “move” to the future when it vanished?
Basically, the bar has been set pretty damn high – did it live up to expectations? Click the "Read More" link for my thoughts on the premiere...
I’ll answer that question with another question: Did you not see that freakin’ opening? Geez, more happened before the “LOST” graphic began slowly spiraling towards us than does in an entire episode of an ordinary television show. Anyway, here are my initial observations:
I loved how the episode kicked off in typical Lost fashion: With a faceless but familiar character waking up and beginning what is sure to be an unordinary day in a very ordinary way. I must admit that I was pretty shocked when I discovered we were following Dr. Candle (that’s what I’m calling him for the time being), and for a moment I considered the possibility that he was nothing but an actor portraying the role of a doctor (in yet another mindfu….trick played by the Dharma Initiative). But it seems he’s legit. Oh, and Daniel appearing in the cave? Awesome.
And while the record/turntable analogy went a bit over my head, I loved its connection to the opening scene with Dr. Candle, whose morning dealt with both a skipping record and time travel in potential turmoil.
The trippy time traveling island strengthens the belief that I, and many others, have long argued: That the whispers in the jungle are actually “echoes” of people from the past/future who are living on the island concurrently. Although I did have to do a double take when Sawyer asked Daniel who he is. Had these two really not met yet up until that point? That’s surprising. It’s a bit like Heroes where, unless I’m mistaken, Nathan and Sylar are yet to meet.
While I admit that I’ve always rooted for Kate to end up with Jack, I will concede that she’s got great chemistry and passion with Sawyer. That being said, since the end of last season, I have honestly felt like Sawyer’s best chemistry is with some of the other female characters. I thought his brief interaction with Claire just before she mysteriously disappeared had real potential. And the budding relationship between him and Juliet throughout the premiere was phenomenal.
After all the luxuries they had experienced, between the various hatches and the barracks, it was pretty fun seeing the survivors having to resort back to their wilderness survival skills. I also enjoyed the fact that their supposed skills had completely degenerated because of those luxuries they had grown so accustomed to. And I was about to name this Neal character “Paulo Version 2.0” when he was suddenly killed. Oh wait….
I couldn’t help but shake my head when Locke started climbing the tree towards the Nigerian plane. I mean, does he not remember what happened to Boone? As a side note, I loved Alpert’s “What goes around comes around” comment when Locke told him that he was shot by Ethan (although, in fairness, it was Charlie who did the deed). When Alpert gave Locke his compass with the instructions to show it to him at a time where he won’t recognize Locke, I immediately thought of that test from last season, when Alpert told a young Locke to pick an item from the table. I had to do a bit research to confirm my suspicions, and yes indeed a compass was one of the items.
Last year I found the odd couple of Hurley and Sawyer living together hilarious. This year, it was the motel sharing duo of Jack and Ben that I found strangely humorous. Part of me wishes we had seen more of their wacky hijinx.
I love the fact that there was a photograph of Jack and Aaron in Kate’s house. I also like how when push comes to shove, he’s still the first person she turns to (or considers turning to) when she’s in trouble.
I was surprised that there was so much tension between Hurley and Sayid when they made the decision to lie about what happened after the crash, considering that it was Hurley who embraced Sayid and welcomed him into his family when the Oceanic Six made their first public appearance. Speaking of Sayid, those darts really knocked him the F out, didn’t they?
By the way, you could really sympathize with Hurley’s plight. He checks himself into a mental institution, escapes, and is accused of a triple homicide. And there was an explanation for it, but he can’t explain what happened because that story is even crazier.
Dark Sun scares the crap out of me, and I mean that in a good way. Her passive aggressive way of guilt tripping her for Jin’s death, only to say that she doesn’t blame her and then asking how Jack is moments later was absolutely brilliant stuff. Her tone of voice and speaking pattern, as well as her facial expressions, were absolutely perfect.
Oh, and you just KNEW the hooded chick was going to be the old woman from “Flashes Before Your Eyes.” And what are the chances that she’s Daniel’s mom too?
There was one thing I found interesting, though, and it aired during the pre-show recap. One of the creators stated that the island is, for some reason, invisible to the outside world, and that it can’t be viewed if somebody flies over it. Has this been established? I mean, there’s obviously some crazy stuff going on with that place, but I don’t recall this tidbit ever being hinted at. When Jack, Sawyer, and Kate were being held captive by The Others on another island, the Lost island was still visible. And Dharma (or whoever) was able to drop that food onto the island. Plus the freighter folk were able to parachute there and land their helicopter numerous times.
There was one thing that sucked about the Lost premiere, I have to admit. And that was being forced to sit through several Grey’s Anatomy commercials. Goodness gracious that was rough.
That’s it for me this week. Check my next Lost column next week, just before the new episode. Be sure to send me your thoughts, predictions, and theories (again, NO SPOILERS!) so that I can include them in the next edition.
Read more!
So this season, my Lost columns are going to be handled differently. More specifically, you’re going to get a double-dosage. My first column will be posted Wednesday night/Thursday morning. This column will be a pretty straight forward initial reaction to the episode that had just aired. As such, observations will probably be pretty obvious, and mythology interpretations will be somewhat limited. The second part of my column will be posted the following Tuesday night/Wednesday morning. I’ll spend the week taking in the episode that had aired earlier in the week and pick apart the various theories that have circulated. I’ll also respond to e-mails and blog comments that readers have hopefully sent me. So – hint, hint – SEND ME YOUR COMMENTS!!!! But PLEASE, I avoid spoilers like the plague, so basically if it hasn’t happened yet and doesn’t appear in the next week’s preview, don’t tell me.
So coming into its fifth season, I daresay that this year’s premiere is the most anticipated one yet. I think it’s also fair to say that this episode is coming off the heels of perhaps the series’ most critically acclaimed season (and yes, that includes the first season). And similar to last year’s premiere, the previous season’s finale promised to completely alter the classic formula that had made Lost so special to begin with. How will they handle their two story arcs when they are presumably occurring on different timelines (with those left behind living in 2005, and the Oceanic Six three years later)? Or did the island “move” to the future when it vanished?
Basically, the bar has been set pretty damn high – did it live up to expectations? Click the "Read More" link for my thoughts on the premiere...
I’ll answer that question with another question: Did you not see that freakin’ opening? Geez, more happened before the “LOST” graphic began slowly spiraling towards us than does in an entire episode of an ordinary television show. Anyway, here are my initial observations:
I loved how the episode kicked off in typical Lost fashion: With a faceless but familiar character waking up and beginning what is sure to be an unordinary day in a very ordinary way. I must admit that I was pretty shocked when I discovered we were following Dr. Candle (that’s what I’m calling him for the time being), and for a moment I considered the possibility that he was nothing but an actor portraying the role of a doctor (in yet another mindfu….trick played by the Dharma Initiative). But it seems he’s legit. Oh, and Daniel appearing in the cave? Awesome.
And while the record/turntable analogy went a bit over my head, I loved its connection to the opening scene with Dr. Candle, whose morning dealt with both a skipping record and time travel in potential turmoil.
The trippy time traveling island strengthens the belief that I, and many others, have long argued: That the whispers in the jungle are actually “echoes” of people from the past/future who are living on the island concurrently. Although I did have to do a double take when Sawyer asked Daniel who he is. Had these two really not met yet up until that point? That’s surprising. It’s a bit like Heroes where, unless I’m mistaken, Nathan and Sylar are yet to meet.
While I admit that I’ve always rooted for Kate to end up with Jack, I will concede that she’s got great chemistry and passion with Sawyer. That being said, since the end of last season, I have honestly felt like Sawyer’s best chemistry is with some of the other female characters. I thought his brief interaction with Claire just before she mysteriously disappeared had real potential. And the budding relationship between him and Juliet throughout the premiere was phenomenal.
After all the luxuries they had experienced, between the various hatches and the barracks, it was pretty fun seeing the survivors having to resort back to their wilderness survival skills. I also enjoyed the fact that their supposed skills had completely degenerated because of those luxuries they had grown so accustomed to. And I was about to name this Neal character “Paulo Version 2.0” when he was suddenly killed. Oh wait….
I couldn’t help but shake my head when Locke started climbing the tree towards the Nigerian plane. I mean, does he not remember what happened to Boone? As a side note, I loved Alpert’s “What goes around comes around” comment when Locke told him that he was shot by Ethan (although, in fairness, it was Charlie who did the deed). When Alpert gave Locke his compass with the instructions to show it to him at a time where he won’t recognize Locke, I immediately thought of that test from last season, when Alpert told a young Locke to pick an item from the table. I had to do a bit research to confirm my suspicions, and yes indeed a compass was one of the items.
Last year I found the odd couple of Hurley and Sawyer living together hilarious. This year, it was the motel sharing duo of Jack and Ben that I found strangely humorous. Part of me wishes we had seen more of their wacky hijinx.
I love the fact that there was a photograph of Jack and Aaron in Kate’s house. I also like how when push comes to shove, he’s still the first person she turns to (or considers turning to) when she’s in trouble.
I was surprised that there was so much tension between Hurley and Sayid when they made the decision to lie about what happened after the crash, considering that it was Hurley who embraced Sayid and welcomed him into his family when the Oceanic Six made their first public appearance. Speaking of Sayid, those darts really knocked him the F out, didn’t they?
By the way, you could really sympathize with Hurley’s plight. He checks himself into a mental institution, escapes, and is accused of a triple homicide. And there was an explanation for it, but he can’t explain what happened because that story is even crazier.
Dark Sun scares the crap out of me, and I mean that in a good way. Her passive aggressive way of guilt tripping her for Jin’s death, only to say that she doesn’t blame her and then asking how Jack is moments later was absolutely brilliant stuff. Her tone of voice and speaking pattern, as well as her facial expressions, were absolutely perfect.
Oh, and you just KNEW the hooded chick was going to be the old woman from “Flashes Before Your Eyes.” And what are the chances that she’s Daniel’s mom too?
There was one thing I found interesting, though, and it aired during the pre-show recap. One of the creators stated that the island is, for some reason, invisible to the outside world, and that it can’t be viewed if somebody flies over it. Has this been established? I mean, there’s obviously some crazy stuff going on with that place, but I don’t recall this tidbit ever being hinted at. When Jack, Sawyer, and Kate were being held captive by The Others on another island, the Lost island was still visible. And Dharma (or whoever) was able to drop that food onto the island. Plus the freighter folk were able to parachute there and land their helicopter numerous times.
There was one thing that sucked about the Lost premiere, I have to admit. And that was being forced to sit through several Grey’s Anatomy commercials. Goodness gracious that was rough.
That’s it for me this week. Check my next Lost column next week, just before the new episode. Be sure to send me your thoughts, predictions, and theories (again, NO SPOILERS!) so that I can include them in the next edition.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Thank God I'm a man!
What do you think of when somebody asks, "Lets go for a drink"?
Women.....they are a crazy breed.....
Read more!A Case of the.... 24 - Episode 7-5
There was a lot about this episode of 24 that reminded me of the series’ first season. First we had Jack kidnapping his female cohort and pretending to execute her in order to achieve a “greater good,” as determined by the very people that Jack is attempting to stop. The pacing of the season is also a lot steadier. Season six was lauded for starting off with a bang. When the story began, we were already in the midst of a series of terrorist attacks. Within a few episodes, a nuclear bomb went off. While this seemed like a pleasant change of pace at first, it quickly became obvious that they had screwed the proverbial pooch. This season is reminiscent of the show’s glory years, where CTU didn’t have magic abilities where they could instantaneously pull up any information at the click of a mouse. So far, bravo!
http://primetimepulse.com/2009/01/20/24-episode-7-5-review/
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Top Ten Cases: 2009 WWE Hall of Fame predictions
I was originally going to save this for right before the Royal Rumble, because that's when the "Road to WrestleMania" begins and as such, the 2009 Hall of Fame class will likely be introduced shortly. However, they've already announced Stone Cold, so I figured I should jump on it now before any other names are announced. So, without further adieu, here is my prediction for who will be inducted this year. Of course, there are certain parameters that must be adhered to. For one, you have to consider who is in good graces with the company. That means "legendary" personalities that are associated with rival organizations, like Jim Cornette for example, aren't going to make the cut this year. Along with that, in order to keep the mood light, the number of deceased inductees will probably be limited to two. Past years have to be considered as well, meaning that at least one female and at least one non-wrestler will be inducted as well. Additionally, the class typically includes one tag team. Finally, there will probably only be three or four "huge name" inductees.Click the "Read More" link for the full list.
10. Cowboy Bill Watts
Inducted by: He wants Jim Ross, but I'm saving him for a later induction. So how about somebody like Hacksaw Jim Duggan or Shawn Michaels?
Alright, this one is a cheat. Apparently he's already revealed that he's being inducted. This works out for me, though, because I could only come up with nine other names anyway.
9. Miss Elizabeth
Inducted by: ??
Accepted by: ??
She's so far detached from anybody associated with the company that I had a really difficult time determining who should induct her, and who should accept on her behalf. I'm trying to think of a legitimately classy woman, but I'm coming up short here. Somebody like Mickie James or even a returning Trish Stratus wouldn't be entirely appropriate, because they're not the type of woman that Elizabeth paved the road for. Maybe George Steel? Or Dusty Rhodes?
The next question is, who accepts for her? Her family is an option, of course. But since none of them would be recognizable, would they be suitable? I don't imagine them inviting Lex Luger because, for one, I don't think he's on the best terms with the company. And secondly, they pretty much went as far as to blame him for her death during that WWE Confidential piece. I considered Stephanie McMahon, because she represents a strong, successful, independent woman. Except Elizabeth, for all her fair qualities, was never strong or independent. And Stephanie was often portrayed as a slut. She's the first lady of professional wrestling, and she surely belongs in the Hall.
8. Howard Finkel
Inducted by: Lillian Garcia
This has long been a mystery to me. Why is this man not in the Hall of Fame already? First off, he's the creator of the "WrestleMania" moniker. He's also been a part of virtually every major moment of the company ("when we think back to those historic title wins, how often do we hear Howard Finkel's voice saying, "And NEW WWE Champion"?) and he's been employed by the company for, what, nearly thirty consecutive years? It baffles me that he hasn't been inducted yet, and the silver anniversary of the event he named seems like as good a time as any.
7. Honky Tonk Man
Inducted by: Jimmy Hart, if he's on good terms with WWE. If not, Jerry Lawler (and yes, I know they don't particularly like each other, despite being cousins). Or hell, even Santino Marella.
Hey, he's the longest running Intercontinental Champion of all time -- that's gotta warrant him a spot in the Hall, right? As best as I can tell, he's on good terms with the company, even recently appearing at last year's Cyber Sunday. He's a classic name from the 80's and he's recognizable to the current legion of fans. Seems like the perfect fit to me.
6. Million Dollar Man Ted DiBiase
Inducted by: Ted DiBiase (Jr.)
For the life of me, I don't know why this guy hasn't been inducted yet. Not only was he a big time player during his day, but he's clearly influenced a number of significant Superstars in this day and age, most notably former WWE Champion JBL and his own son. He's still over and recognized by current fans, which is a big plus, I would think. Considering that he's still on good terms with the company -- he may even be employed in some capacity -- I figured this would be a gimme for the past few years now.
Also, it's somewhat awkward when you've got Randy Orton, Cody Rhodes, Manu, and Sim Snuka all referring to their Hall of Famer dads, and then have Ted DiBiase simply refer to his father as a "Legend."
5. The British Bulldog Davey Boy Smith
Inducted by: Bret Hart is the easy suggestion, but since he's apparently "done with wrestling," he may not be available (besides which, he may be holding out for Owen's eventual/hopeful induction). Other possibilities are Jim or Natalya Neidhart (because of the family connection), or perhaps even William Regal: Two Brits who are both multi-time Intercontinental, European, and Tag Team Champions. Chris Jericho is another possibility, if they decide to go the Stu Hart-route.
Accepted by: DH Smith
I considered making this the classic tag team The British Bulldogs, but between Davey Boy being dead and Dynamite being crippled, I figured the company would want to distance themselves with a double whammy of tragedy. Besides which, Dynamite seems like a pretty negative guy who has burned bridges on a professional and personal level with everybody he's ever known, so I don't see WWE going out of their way to honor him.
Along with that, inducting Davey Boy would be a good way to catapult the career of his son, DH Smith. This would also act as a prelude for having DH join Randy Orton's faction, Legacy, if that's the direction they plan on going.
4. Ron Simmons
Inducted by: JBL
Why shouldn't he be? He's the first, if I'm not mistaken, African American World Heavyweight Champion in the history of wrestling. That alone should warrant him a spot. He's also a multiple-time World Tag Team Champion, and he still plays a supporting role on WWE's various television programs. Hell, they even named a Slammy Award after his catch phrase! His legitimate athletic achievements (mostly in football) have also kept his name circulating through the news the past few years. JBL is, of course, the perfect person to induct him for this prestigious honor.
Of course, now that he's been released, this seems unlikely.
3. Ricky SteamboatInducted by: Ric Flair
Yet another one that makes me scratch my head. He's an absolute legend, fulfilling great success in both WWE and WCW. He's recognized for having one of the greatest WrestleMania matches of all time. He's a former Intercontinental Champion. And, unless I'm wrong, he's currently employed with the company. The ONLY thing that I foresee stopping this is that, I believe, there are some legal issues over his "Dragon" moniker. Nevertheless, he's appeared on television numerous times in the past year, so I imagine that they can get around that somehow. Ric Flair is the ideal person to induct him, provided his relationship with WWE isn't sour at the moment.
2. Macho Man Randy Savage
Inducted by: Honestly, the perfect person to induct him would be Hulk Hogan. But with his volatile relationships with both WWE and Savage, that seems like a long shot. I'm tempted to suggest Stephanie McMahon, if only for the wink, wink, nudge, nudge shout out to those incessant (and outlandish) Internet rumors.
Yeah yeah, there's no chance in hell, I know. And considering he'd be playing second fiddle to Steve Austin, it's entirely possible that he wouldn't even accept if they did offer it to him. But quite honestly, nobody deserves this honor more than Savage. The fact that it's 20 years after the last time he headlined WrestleMania is icing on the cake.
1. Stone Cold Steve AustinInducted by: Jim Ross
I swear, I had him on my list before the announcement was made....
Anyway, in the past few years Jerry Lawler, Jim Ross, and Ric Flair have been inducted, essentially changing the rules and telling us that you don't have to be some legend from the 70's and 80's in order to be inducted into the Hall of Fame. Indeed, you can actually be somebody who is still active.
Of course, Stone Cold certainly belongs in the Hall of Fame. He's undoubtedly one of the two biggest names in the history of wrestling, and a significant reason for the resurgence and survival of the only wrestling company essentially left in the game. I see one of his best friends Jim Ross inducting him.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
A Case of the.... Smallville - Episode 8-11
It's a bird!! It's a plane!!!! It's the Hudson River!!!!!
Too soon?
Smallville is back after a lengthy hiatus. What is up with CW (or is it PIX now? When did that happen?) It’s got to be pretty risky having all of your shows go on a two or three month hiatus, right?
Now, it has been a while since I’ve seen the last Smallville episode, but how did Lana go from having a severe leg injury to walking around in high heels?
http://primetimepulse.com/2009/01/15/smallville-episode-8-11-review/
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Those helpful folks at Walgreens
So I'm reading an article on AOL.com that rates the best and worst chain stores, based on customer service. Walgreens wasn't included, but after my experience yesterday I'm beginning to think it should have been.
I was feeling congested and thought I might be fighting a cold, so I decided to go buy some cough drops. As I stared at the wide selection, I noticed that the most desirable flavors had "Non-Mentholated" written across the top. I had no idea what this meant as it relates to its overall effectiveness (do I want it to be mentholated? Is that good?) so I went to three individual employees -- including the PHARMACIST -- to ask them what "non-mentholated" means. I shit you not, but literally all three of them answered with, and I quote, "there's no menthol."
Gee, you think? I mean, I don't know, perhaps it was a really stupid question, but surely a pharmacist would be used to ridiculous questions, and would know to give an answer with as much information as possible. Sheesh. I just found it funny that all three of them answered the exact same way. Incidentally, when I asked a handful of people at work if they knew what it meant, those that did instinctively answered by telling me something informative about non-mentholated vs. mentholated cough drops.
Read more!
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Fox cancels Prison Break
http://www.tvguide.com/News/Prison-Break-final-1001583.aspx
Honestly, as long as they're able to finish the series with an appropriate ending, I think this is a good thing. If they keep the show going any longer and refuse to write off certain unethical characters, they run the risk of making the characters we're supposed to root for irredeemable.
To me, Prison Break has reached its natural end. Michael and his crew have essentially made a legitimate agreement with the government and they finally have the means to take down the Company. Most of our questions have been answered, and virtually every character has achieved their acts of revenge.
So no, I am not completely saddened by this news. But I do think its contingent that the show be allowed to end appropriately. Have Michael and Lincoln earn their freedom, with no strings attached. Reunite Lincoln with his son and girlfriend. Destroy the Company. Permanently lock up or kill T-Bag. Have Michael and Sarah sail off into the sunset. Don't just end it abruptly.
Monday, January 12, 2009
A Case of the.... 24 - 2 Night, 4 Hour Premiere Event
Let me just say this: Jack and Agent Walker is soooooooo much better than Jack and Chase.
Anyway, I was thoroughly impressed with the first two episodes of this season. It had a wonderful feeling of freshness. Between the new location, the new presidential administration, a new federal bureau to deal with, and an overall new cast of characters, this seemed like dramatic departure from last season. And that’s a very good thing.
A Case of the.... 24 - Episodes 7-1 & 7-2:
A Case of the.... 24 - Episodes 7-3 & 7-4:
Read more!
Saturday, January 10, 2009
A Case of the.... 24 - Countdown to Season Seven
This weekend marks the return of 24, a series which, coincidentally, hasn’t had a season premiere in 24 months. Last season was severely panned by fans, critics, and even those involved with the popular show – for good reason – but thankfully much of the bad taste left in people’s mouths were washed away by November’s very exciting and enthralling 24: Redemption. I know I fall into that camp.
While I typically steer clear of entertainment columns revolving shows I want to avoid spoilers for, one thing that did disappointment me, however, was that, evidently, Jack is back to his own self by the end of the two day, four hour premiere event. I can’t help but sigh a bit because of that. Every few seasons, the writers come up with a really clever and believable character flaw that could impact Jack’s ability to do his job effectively. Season four had him addicted to drugs. Even better was season six, which had him hesitant to torture his prisoners after being on the receiving end of some brutal treatment for nearly two years. However, in both cases, this plot point was disregarded within the first few episodes, and completely forgotten by the end of the season.
One of my favorite aspects of 24: Redemption was that Jack, the ultimate patriot, had become a spurned and beaten man, essentially betrayed for the country he had sacrificed his life for countless times. So for Jack to return to his heroic, patriotic ways within four hours is a bit disappointing. But to paraphrase a famous expression, you can take the man 
out of the country, but not the country out of the man.
out of the country, but not the country out of the man.Anyway, this pre-season column is actually going to focus on another troublesome aspect of this season: the return of one of my favorite characters, Tony Almeida. I was originally hesitant to write such an article, because I worried that it would spoil his return for some people who were unaware. However, his return his being used in the commercials that air on television, so at this point you must be under a rock not to know.
It’s not so much that I’m against him returning. Like I said, he’s one of my favorite characters. I’m even going into the premiere with an open mind, seeing what possible explanation they have for how he survived and lived undetected for all these years. And while I’m skeptical about how somebody could go from attempting to protect innocent civilians all his life, to suddenly re-emerging as somebody who is terrorizing those same people, I’m willing to see how that plays out as well.
No, my big problem with his return is how everybody – the writers, producers, the network, stars, etc. – are saying that it’s okay for Tony to come back, and that he wasn’t “really dead,” because they never showed the silent ticking clock following his “death scene.” Please. Forget the fact that he was clearly shown dying, and that he was repeatedly referred to as dead by several characters throughout the following seasons.
I really wish they had just said, “We intended on having him remain dead, but this great story possibility came up and we decided to bring him back. But don’t worry, you’ll appreciate our explanation.” Come clean and admit your mistake. Why open yourself up to the constant second guessing that will now occur. The silent death clock was a subtle, classy, touching way to pay tribute to a fallen character. Are they now going to do it for every time a character that might possibly be considered “major” dies? That will only dilute its importance and symbolism. And I can just imagine the onslaught of people saying “no, that person isn’t dead….the clock was ticking!” whenever some arbitrary character is killed.
It just seems like they’re opening themselves up to a lot of unnecessary second guessing. Sometimes the best thing to is just admit that you initially made the wrong decision, but that you’re going to rectify it in a logical manner. Coming up with some lame eleventh hour excuse about how you never intended on him REALLY being dead just makes me nervous about what they’ve got up their sleeves this year. Especially after the parody that was season six.
Read more!
Friday, January 9, 2009
The King of fast food advertising
I have to admit that I rarely eat fast food, and when I do I'm partial to Wendy's (in my opinion, the absolute best fast food franchise by a rather large margin). But that being said, for the past year or so, the promotional campaigns produced by Burger King have been absolutely brilliant. I'm part of the marketing department at the company I work for, so I have a special appreciation for these ideas that really look outside the box. And Burger King has done that in absolute spades.
This began last year when they aired two promotions that utilized the hidden camera technique. One commercial showed customers receiving competitors' burgers instead of the Whopper (like the Big Mac, for example). The other had customers believing that the Whopper has been discontinued altogether.
Just recently, they began showing the Whopper Virgin campaign. While the title is a bit racy, the idea was pretty brilliant: Bring a Whopper and a Big Mac to an area that has never tried a hamburger and see which one they prefer in a blind taste test.
Now, my absolute favorite one, is shown above. If you delete ten friends on Facebook, you get a free Whopper. And the best part of all? It shows up on your profile that you sacrificed these people for a Whopper!
Bravo to you, Burger King, for some damn clever advertising.
Although I have to admit that the commercials in which the Whopper is an emotionally abusive father disturb me greatly....
Read more!
Thursday, January 8, 2009
The Office - Primatech Paper - Episode One
This year I want to make it a point to post more exclusive videos, and the first one of 2009 is a pretty fun re-imagining. Envision, if you will, the premise of The Office, except instead of featuring the Dunder Mifflin staff, it's all about those zany characters at Primatech Paper. Enjoy!
Monday, January 5, 2009
Hitman: My Life in the Cartoon World of Wrestling Book Review
So a while back I finished reading the very thorough Bret Hart autobiography, and I haven’t gotten around to reviewing it yet. Let me first say that I absolutely love wrestling biographies and, as one might expect, this one easily holds its own against some of my other favorites (including the first two Mick Foley books, Chris Jericho’s bio, and Edge’s book, to name a few). What makes Bret’s book unique is the fact that I found the childhood section of his book very engaging. Typically, I find that portion of the bio the weakest. In many cases, it can make or break the book (I was able to put down Steve Austin’s book and not return to it for over a year because his childhood stories bored me so much). Perhaps it’s because Bret’s young life revolved around wrestling and he was surrounding by characters we’re all so familiar with. I also commend the way you, as the reader, sorta dislike Stu during the childhood years, but come to truly appreciate and respect him during Bret’s adult years. Whatever it was, I can easily see why Bret didn’t want to cut anything out for the sake of making it shorter.
For that matter, the book didn’t feel nearly as long as it actually is. I was able to breeze through it, despite clocking in at nearly 600 pages. There were many nights where I was absolutely exhausted and had to wake up early, yet still couldn’t put it down. That, in itself, warrants a recommendation from me.
Click the "Read More" link for the complete book review.
That being said, I didn’t exactly see eye to eye with Bret on many issues. I’ll admit that I became very turned off by Bret Hart following the Montreal Incident, and maybe because of that, I’m a tad biased against him. Actually, Bret himself made a very interesting comment in his book. When it was suggested that his sister Diana turn against him for a wrestling storyline, Bret remarked that with Owen, Jim Neidhart, the British Bulldog, and his brother Bruce all already against him, people are going to start to believe that he’s a hard person to like. With that in mind, I find it interesting that virtually every single person who was at the top while Bret Hart was has personal issues with him. Isn’t it odd that Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, and Shawn Michaels ALL have issues with him? And based on what Bret said about him in his book, it doesn’t seem as if Kevin Nash is all too fond of him either. One might argue that it’s simply lonely at top, and that those names I just mentioned have a lot of issues with their peers as well (a fair point). It just strikes me that Bret has very deep rooted, personal issues with virtually every top name.
Along with that, I also found it odd that Bret Hart receives so much credit for paving the way for smaller wrestlers to become champion. People seem to completely disregard the fact that Bret is no smaller than Randy Savage or Ric Flair, who both held the World Championship numerous times before Bret was even considered a contender. You can throw Bob Backlund (who held the title some 15 years before Bret) on that list too, come to think of it. And you can’t even make the argument that Bret was fighting in a different, more muscle-bound era, because he won the title from Flair, who in turn had won it from Savage.
And while I know its human nature, Bret is awfully biased towards himself. First off, he’s very quick to bring up the fact that guys like Diesel, Shawn Michaels, and even Hulk Hogan (following WrestleMania IX) couldn’t draw as champions. Yet he completely ignores the fact that he didn’t draw money either. In fact, the only times he does bring up the lack of money being made while he was on top (in passing, of course) he blames it on the steroid trial or Vince’s outlandish, cartoonish storylines. With guys like Diesel and Shawn, the money sucked because they weren’t cutting it as champions. During his various reigns, it was because of outside factors.
Bret also goes on and on about how Dave Meltzer has no credibility whatsoever and that, unless you’ve actually set foot in the ring, you have no right to judge and rate matches (a statement Triple H and Lance Storm often make as well, which is perhaps the most idiotic logic ever), yet throughout the entire book he repeatedly quotes Meltzer’s praise of his work.
Along with that, Bret takes credit for virtually every major angle he’s participated in. While he hasn’t refused to job to people, he has had match results changed to ones that he believes makes “more sense” (which always seemed to benefit his character). He’s even changed match participants altogether. Yet when Shawn Michaels and Triple H sat in on booking committee meetings, they were dastardly evil-doers only looking out for their best interests.
I can also guarantee you that if Shawn Michaels and Triple H did what Bret did for the SummerSlam at Wembley Stadium, Bret would still be crying about it. Basically, Bret Hart was asked to drop the Intercontinental title to Shawn Michaels. Instead, Bret comes up with an idea that would see him dropping the belt to his brother-in-law instead (who would, in turn, lose it to Michaels) in the main event of the second biggest event of the year. For some reason, I don’t see Bret Hart vs. Shawn Michaels for the Intercontinental Championship closing SummerSlam. And by the way, what was supposed to be the lasting image of that match? Bret Hart shaking Davey Boy’s hand. And for that matter, what was supposed to be the lasting image of Bret Hart vs. Shawn Michaels for the WWF Championship at WrestleMania XXII? Bret Hart NOT shaking Shawn Michaels’ hand. Bret talks about how Michaels told the ref to tell him to get the hell out of the ring, yet I have to wonder what he was still doing there in the first place. Bret openly acknowledges that he was going to leave without shaking his hand, so the only reason he would still be in there was to make the moment about him, and not Shawn. But – for better or worse – the moment was Shawn’s. Bret likes to play the role of the martyr, but he’s in it for himself just as much as anybody else.
Then there’s the turmoil that occurred following Owen’s tragic death. He openly criticizes his sisters and Davey Boy Smith for not cooperating with Owen’s widow as it relates to her probable lawsuit with WWE because of the fact that they (or their husbands) work for the company. Yet at the beginning of the book, he is very critical of Bruce’s actions when it could put Bret’s job in danger.
Finally, people – mostly fans of Bret – like to claim that you KNOW this book has to be true, because Bret kept such copious notes of what happened to him on the road (completely ignoring the fact that, while dates may be accurate and the cast of characters may be true, this is still Bret’s perspective of what happened). Yet, there were more than a few factual errors that I found. First, Bret notes that the British Bulldog has a buzz cut before he had turned heel, and that – at the time – they considered pairing him with Lex Luger. He also claims that Bulldog turned heel by betraying Luger. This is all wrong. First and foremost, Bulldog turned on Diesel, not Luger. And he cut his hair AFTER Luger had left the company. I know this sounds minor, and I suppose it is, but it just shows that not all of the information he spews out is accurate.
I’m also a bit disappointed with how the book ended. As one might expect, things turned much darker following Owen’s death (and understandably so), but near the end of the story, I started to feel as if Bret had found peace in his life. While I have been critical of Bret, he’s undoubtedly experienced more pain and misery than anybody deserves. He’s a human being and deserves happiness, and I really started to think that he had found it. But what were the last words in his bio? A rant on how he could never, ever forgive Shawn Michaels and Triple H for what they had done to him. I find his unforgiving nature surprising. I mean, don’t get me wrong, I’d feel tremendously betrayed if somebody had done that to me. At the same time, he had been cheating on his wife (and the mother of his four children) throughout their entire marriage. And they weren’t just one night stands, he had mistresses that he cared deeply for. Let me ask you this: Which betrayal is worse? Cheating on your wife and the mother of your four children, or screwing over a co-worker who you didn’t even like to begin with?
Over a decade has passed since this incident. In that amount of time, two of Bret’s marriages have ended. He’s lost a brother and a brother-in-law. He suffered a career ending injury. I would think that, in the grand scheme of things, what Shawn Michaels and Triple H did to him one November night wouldn’t rest on his shoulders so much. He’s forgiven Earl Hebner (the referee who called for the bell) and essentially buried the hatchet with Vince (the man who ultimately made the decision to go through with the screw job), yet his hatred towards these two men persevere. I just wish the book ended on a more hopeful note.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Happy New Year!
I hope everybody had a fun and safe New Year's Eve. I've long felt that New Year's Eve is the most ridiculous "holiday" in existence (far worse than Valentine's Day). The entire reason for celebrating is the countdown to midnight (and chances are you only started partying at like 9:00 or 10:00), yet you continue drinking for an additional four hours. Meanwhile, bars use the night as an excuse to charge astronomical cover charges. But then again, we get a day or two off, so can I really complain that much?
Despite considering it a ridiculous holiday, I also can't help but reflect just a little. 2008 was most definitely a mixed bag for me. There were some extremely happy, joyous occasions -- the highlight being the birth of my nephew Ryan. Yet there were also some extremely sad moments, particularly my close friend taking his life. On the one hand, my nephew will bring me a lifetime of happiness while my friend's death is a pain that will fade over time. But can I really celebrate a year that saw the loss of a 26 year old with an exceptionally bright future?
Naturally, there's no "easy" answer to that question. But the fact remains that 2008 is gone, and 2009 is upon us. No matter how good or bad the previous year was for anybody, lets all hope that 2009 is even better. What can you, my Case Workers, expect from my blog in the coming year? For one, the return of Top Ten Cases! I will also be unveiling a clever and unique marketing campaign that will hopefully bring a lot more attention to A Case of the Blog.
We also have 24 and Lost (!!!!!) returning later this month. And that will, quite simply, rule the world.
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
