2013-14 NHL Realignment

After much debate between the players and the league, the NHL is realigning the league. It probably about time to do so since the NHL is the last major sports league to get the geography right. To be fair other leagues have had geographical issues when it comes to the divisions. For example the Atlanta Braves played in the National League West from 1969 to 1993. The Falcons, also of Atlanta played in the NFC West (sense a pattern here with Atlanta yet?) from 1970 to 2001.

One of the reasons why the realignment issue came to light was because the Atlanta Thrashers (see what I mean), who played in the Southeast Division, moved to Winnipeg, Manitoba (to reclaim the Winnipeg Jets mantle, a team that moved to Arizona to become the Phoenix Coyotes in 1997 after coming into the NHL from the WHA in 1980) which is nowhere near the Southeastern portion of the United States. On a side note, the Thrashers were the 2nd NHL franchise to get awarded to Atlanta, the Flames started playing in 1973 then bolted for Calgary after the 1980 season. Twenty years later the NHL decided it was a good idea to give Atlanta another shot at the NHL because two decades had passed and it should work right? Not so much, the Thrashers lasted 11 underwhelming seasons and 1 playoff appearance before bolting to Western Canada (another pattern emerges). So the league had to do something about the ridiculous travel issues that having the Jets in the Southeastern Division held.

So this is what they came up with for realignment....

Basically, Columbus and Detroit get moved from the Western Conference into the Eastern. If you've noticed that the once symmetrical conferences are now a bit lopsided, then you're very astute. Instead of two 15 team conferences, we've got a 14 team and 16 team conference. This is nothing new as MLB had 16 National League teams for a few years before moving the Houston Astros to the American League West for the 2013 season.

Here's the geographical theory of the new realigned divisions...

As you can see, Detroit moving to the Eastern Conference tips the balance of power to the East. A tough pill for hockey fans to swallow was the loss of the Wings/Hawks rivalry. Instead of meeting six times a year, they will now only meet twice a year. Is Detroit/Chicago a great Original Six rivalry? Sure it is but let us allow history to be the judge. Chicago won their first Stanley Cup in 1934 by defeating the Red Wings. After 23 years of Cup futility, the Blackhawks beat Detroit in 1961 (Chicago wouldn't win another Cup until 2010 while Detroit would drink from Lord Stanley's chalice four times in those 49 years). From 1926 to 1967 the NHL was only six teams, in that time Chicago and Detroit played each other for the Stanley Cup a total of two times. Once in 1934 and again in 1961, both Chicago victories. During that time the Blackhawks went to the finals six times and were crowned champions three times (1938 being the other). Detroit on the other hand, played in 13 Stanley Cup finals with seven titles.

As history will show, the bulk of the championships were won by the Montreal Canadiens (the Habs more less dominated the NHL from 1926 to 1979). You can even go as far as saying that the top tier of the Original Six was Montreal, Toronto and Detroit with Chicago, New York and Boston being the also-rans. Make no mistake, Detroit and Chicago have a good rivalry but I wouldn't put it up there with the Yankees and the Red Sox (it should be noted that any rivalry is only as good as its participants, if both teams stink, is it still a rivalry?). Hawks fans had to watch the Wings be the "Yankees of the NHL" from 1996-2009 while the Hawks languished in mediocrity and by mediocrity I mean they made the playoffs once between 1998 and 2008. Both teams didn't do much during the time the NHL expanded between 1967-1996. The Hawks did manage to get to the Finals in 1971 and 1992, both losses but the Wings were just bad making the playoffs three times from 1967-1983. I'd like to note that the NHL was a 21 team league from 1981 to 1993 and they still sent 16 teams to the playoffs. It wasn't that hard. A lot of lousy teams got in.

The problems that I can see (as well as others) will come during the playoffs. In 1974 the NHL had enough teams to go to a four division format (here's its history below)...

 As noted before from 1981-1991 the NHL had 21 teams and 16 of them made the playoffs, 4 teams per division. In the Wales Conference, the Adams Division playoff winner played the Patrick Division winner. In the Campbell Conference, the Norris and Smythe division winners faced off. The point is, the same teams played each other every year, that's why things were changed around when the next wave of expansion hit in the 1990's. Since I'm from Connecticut I can say that that in the Adams Division, the Bruins, Canadiens were always in the playoffs (they never missed it, look it up) with either the Sabres, Whalers or Nordiques rounding it out. So the Bruins and Canadiens usually met in the Adams Division finals (except of course in 1986 when the Whalers took the Canadiens to seven games in the conference final, the highlight of their existence from 1979-1997).

The new playoff format will consist of the top 3 finishers in each division followed by the next 2 teams with the most points. So you could have 5 teams from one division and 3 from another which does reward a better regular season (unlike the format format from '81-'91). But you have the possibility to see the same match ups year after year.

Make no mistake the realignment makes sense. However, all the big market team (except Chicago) are in the East. Los Angeles is not a great hockey area despite the Kings winning the Cup in 2012 and it didn't help that there were rumors that the team was going to move to Seattle. The rivalries are kind of there in the West but not too many people outside of the cities involved know about them (or care?). Things should be all right as long as there's no labor disputes to muck things up.

Thank you for your time and as always your thoughts & comments are welcome.

DJ B-Clear's Summer Movie Preview - June

May starts off the Summer blockbuster season. June may not have the big hitters like Iron Man 3 or Star Trek Into Darkness but there are some interesting features to say the least. Shall we?

June 7th

• The Internship: Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson team-up once more in what looks to be an obvious attempt to rekindle the magic from The Wedding Crashers. The premise here is that they lose their sales jobs but Vaughn manages to con their way into an internship with Google. Lots of inappropriate humor and hackneyed jokes that are recycled from similar films. I've seen the trailer a few times and I didn't think it was that funny.
• The Purge: Written and directed by James DeMonaco, the United States is riding a wave of prosperity. Unemployment and crime are almost non-existent due in part because the government allows for a 12 hour period beginning at midnight of June 7th to allow citizens to do as they wish with no repercussions. For this period, all crime (mostly violent) is legal. The night brings us to the home of the Sandin's. When the alarm sounds they lockdown their home and settle in for the long night. A stranger being hunted gets to the house and pleads to be let in. The father, Ethan Hawke, warns not to let him in but his kids don't listen. The stranger, Edwin Hodge, is thankful but the people after him are determined to kill him and they decide to include the Sandin's in the process. The trailer looks interesting and this could be worth seeing.
• Much Ado About Nothing: Joss Whedon directs and updates this Shakespeare classic with a modern twist.
• Passion: The legendary Brian De Palma directs this sexually charged thriller with Rachel McAdams and Noomi Rapace. From the trailer I was able to deduce that McAdams is a high powered executive with a taste for the weird and Rapace is her assistant or whatever who gets entangled into the weirdness of McAdams personal life. DePalma hasn't directed a film since 2007 and this film is his 5th since 2000 and the reviews of those films were mixed at best and that's why I'm hesitant about the film. I don't particularly care much for McAdams either. There's enough red flags here that one should be tread lightly around this title.
• Wish You Were Here: An Australian thriller starring Joel Edgerton as half of one couple who travel to a remote island off Cambodia with another couple. So that's 4 people who vacation together but only 3 come back under mysterious circumstances. Suspicions mount as Edgerton's world starts to crumble. Drugs are implied here but there's a lot of mystery within the trailer. This looks like it might be worth seeing as Edgerton's star is on the rise and sometimes foreign thrillers are better than American ones.
• Violet & Daisy: Writer and director Geoffrey Fletcher brings us a black comedy about a pair of female teenage assassins (Alexis Bledel and Saoirse Ronan) who think they're taking an easy job but get more than they bargained for from their target (I think it's James Gandolfini). The trailer has a lot of imagery that may not make sense and there's a little Thelma & Louis between Bledel & Ronan but what you need to know about the film is that it was made in 2011 and is now seeing the light of day. That usually means bad things. However, the film gets a 7/10 based on the 407 users who rated the film on IMBD.com. So it could be worth seeing since Fletcher has a solid past and Ronan has been excellent in her short career.
• Syrup:This looks like its a satirical look at marketing and consumerism in America. "Syrup" denotes some sort of beverage that a new ad exec has come up with a marketing plan to sell an "image." The product doesn't matter, it's the image people want. From the trailer there's some sexual tension/innuendo between the good looking cast. I suspect there's a possibility of some sort catharsis that makes some cast members realize what jerks they are. Looks to be a bit like 2009's The Joneses with the social commentary.

June 12th

• This Is the End: Ensemble comedic cast that includes the likes of Jonah Hill, Seth Rogen, Danny McBride and Craig Robinson. Everyone plays themselves as the apocalypse hits Hollywood. The trailer shows possible aliens/monsters but not zombies or robots (rest assured that's how its going to go down) and how celebrities will handle the new world order or what's left of it. There's a few scenes where they "survivors" make fun of their former dead pals (I think Hill & Rogen take a few shots at Michael Cera), Emma Watson has a cameo where she beats up the group and steals their food and there's a particularly funny scene where Robinson is drinking his own urine from a chilled martini glass. A lot of potential for laughs here but I'm not sure I'm in to this type of film seeing how I've hit middle age. Though, in the right scenario this could be fun.

June 14th

• Man of Steel: An all-star cast that includes Amy Adams, Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner, Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne and hunky Henry Cavill as Superman. You've also got General Zod and his lackeys doing bad things and it's directed by badass director Zack Snyder. The trailers for this film look very cool and rest assured I will be waiting in line for this.
• The Bling Ring: The latest directorial effort from Sofia Coppola, deals with the actual true events of a group Beverly Hills 902010ers who are so bored with their privileged lives they decide to rob celebrity homes (in real life they apparently they knocked over Paris Hilton's place more than once). Coppola has done some very good work in the past and I've enjoyed her work but this looks like something that's been done before. The perps (all good looking) all want to live a "celebrity lifestyle" but don't want to put the work in (you know with acting or being an heiress) so they turn to crime. There appears to be a little social commentary when Emma Watson talks to the press after a day at the courthouse.
• Berberian Sound Studio: Toby Jones plays an British sound engineer brought into work on an Italian horror film and starts a slow descent into madness as the film starts to get a little to real. Directed by Peter Strickland. The trailer looks pretty creepy and this could be worth a look.
• Vehicle 19: Paul Walker (apparently his character was on vacation from the Fast and the Furious franchise) finds himself in need of a rental car (most likely South Africa but it's just a guess) but gets a little more than he bargains for when "he gets the wrong rental car scenario", the one with an unconscious, tied-up girl in the trunk (played by Naima McLean in a plot directly from The Transporter) who just could be a witness or a reporter that knows about widespread government corruption. Walker, who's done nothing wrong, finds himself chased by police and manages to drive around at high speeds without ever stopping for gas. Based on the trailer I saw this doesn't look to be too original.

June 21st

• Monsters University: Mike Wazowski and  James P. Sullivan return in this  2001 Monsters, Inc. prequel that tells the story of when the 2 pals first met.
• World War Z: Based on Max Brook's book World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War, Brad Pitt has to save humanity from the Zombie Apocalypse (it's coming, make no mistake!). I am not familiar with the book but the trailer looks really cool. Which means I will be standing in a long line.
• Maniac: Elijah Wood stars in this remake of the 1980 cult film of the same name. Wood plays Frank, a guy with some social issues who's stalking and killing women. The 1980 version was a low budget splatter film and the trailer suggests that this will be a little more surreal. Wood being an evil guy is interesting.

June 28th

• The Heat: Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy star in the outdated plot theme of the straightlaced uptight cop (Bullock) teaming up with the unconventional slob of a cop (McCarthy) to solve an unsolvable crime. Bullock gets to play the Benjamin Bratt role from Miss Congeniality and McCarthy plays the Bullock role from the same film (prior to Bullock being "made over" by Michael Caine of course). Here's another film that's plagued by a lack of originality.
• White House Down: This film follows the same pretext (by same I mean almost exactly frame by frame) as Olympus Has Fallen, released earlier this year to mediocre reviews and ticket sales (at best). In this particular version the President is played by Jamie Foxx (he must owe someone a favor) and the dude who saves the day is super stud Channing Tatum.
• Byzantium: Saoirse Ronan and Gemma Arterton star as 200 year old vampires who are seeking refuge from the past. But when you're undead & immortal, the "past walks with you (it's a line from the movie)." Directed by Neil Jordan and brought to us by the same group that gave us Interview with a Vampire. The trailer gives you a lot of blood imagery, period piece shots and a good amount of pasty skinned people. Now I'm a bit worn out by the steady stream of vampire films (mostly the ridiculous Twilight saga) so at best I'm non-committal to seeing but in reality I probably won't. That's not to say that this could be an interesting film. The trailer did a nice job of making it appear interesting but that what a trailer does.
• I'm So Excited!: Directed by Pedro Almodóvar, comes a comedy about a whacky flight crew trying to make sure the passengers are comfortable on their doomed flight. Almodovar has done excellent work in the past and if you've seen his films before this will most likely be worth seeing if you can find it in your town.

 

Star Trek Into Darkness

The long awaited and hotly discussed sequel to the 2009 franchise reboot. I should start off by saying that we all have to remember that the Star Trek universe as we know it has been retconned. Everything Kirk & the crew of the Enterprise did in the The Original Series and the 6 films is erased. The time paradox theme changed the course of things at least until the next retcon. I decided to keep this separate from the entire 2013 film list since Star Trek and I go back a long way. First and foremost I am a Kirk guy. With all due respect to Captain Jean-Luc Picard, who's a great star ship Captain with a great crew. Picard is level headed, smart and quite dashing but Kirk is my guy. I also firmly believe that Spock blows away Riker as 1st Officer. Plus I never really got into the Star Trek: The Next Generation. Just to make sure it sinks in, the Star Trek universe has changed so try not to make comparisons like, "Kirk never did that against..." or "Nimoy never showed emotion the way Quinto does." It was tough for me not to make comparisons but I got over it and you have to judge the film by it's own merits.

In the opening scene the Enterprise and crew are saving a primitive civilization from a gruesome volcanic destruction. In doing so Kirk violates the Prime Directive, the most sacred commandment in Starfleet!, but gets away with a verbal chiding from Admiral Pike. On a side note because of the retcon Kirk has only had a few years of training. Whereas Shatner's Kirk had 14 years of training before getting a command. Spock kind of rats Kirk out and Kirk is bothered by it but Spock can't lie! What did he expect? There's also a lovers spat between Spock & Uhura that I thought was a bit much especially since they're relationship isn't really expanding on in this film but some of it was amusing.

Enter Benedict Cumberbatch, the shadowy villain who gets a Starfleet intelligence officer to blow-up an installation in London.  Let's cut to the chase, Cumberbatch is Khan Noonien Singh (but with a different accent from Ricardo Montalban's version, whatever). The genetically altered human from the Eugenics Wars of the late 20th Century. Khan is found floating in space (remember the "Space Seed" episode doesn't happen in the new Star Trek Universe) and is unfrozen by Admiral Marcus to have him develop new weapons of mass destruction (can you see where this is headed?) for the Federation despite the fact that he's from the 20th Century and everything is taking place in the 22nd century. I guess since Khan is from a war ravaged time, he must have some insight into some cool killing devices that the hippies of the 22nd century haven't thought of. Needless to say Khan is unhappy with situation Marcus has him in (Marcus holds the unfrozen bodies of his followers as hostages) and Khan plans to assassinate him. The attempt fails, Khan flees into Klingon territory and Kirk is dispatched by Marcus to kill Khan (be advised, Khan's identity hasn't been revealed at this point but unless you've been living in a cave for the months prior to the film's release, you had to know something was up) at any cost with 78 "special" photon torpedoes (ironically the same number as Khan's followers). Kirk and Spock argue about the morality of the orders...kill the alleged assassin and risk an interstellar war by violating the Klingon Neutral Zone instead of bringing him to justice (here's where the train I mentioned earlier is heading...a direct Bush/Cheney correlation. BOOM!).

During this time we also get to meet the lovely scientist and daughter to the war mongering Admiral Marcus, Dr. Carol Marcus...

Suffice to say she catches Kirk's eye almost immediately (not sure why she had to undress in one scene but who am I to counter such crucial plot lines) and she helps Kirk try to get her father to back off from destroying the Enterprise after Khan revealed the Admirals plan of provoking a war with the Klingons (more Bush/Cheney!).

So now Kirk has to enter into an unholy alliance with Khan in order to save the crew of the Enterprise (which his impulsiveness has led them into a trap by Admiral Marcus). Kirk by now understands that Khan will betray him and put him and the crew back in jeopardy once gets what he wants. Despite being "intellectually superior," Khan gets outsmarted by Spock (given but Spock gives props to Kirk for the plan). Skip a bit and Khan is defeated but not killed (sort of a permanent Guantanamo Bay theory) and it appears that a war with the Klingons has been avoided despite the fact that the Enterprise did commit an act of war by violating the Neutral Zone, firing upon Klingon warships and killing Klingon soldiers.

The movie itself is a fun ride. The CGI and special effects are pretty amazing and the story is good. It's not great (its got a lot of wholes but they're minor to me) but its good. Since there's a lot going on anyway, you almost don't mind or at least I didn't. Some of the main plot points of the film are borrowed heavily from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. In the original film, Spock saves the Enterprise from the destructive power of the Genesis Wave...

This time around, Abrams decides to switch Spock and Kirk. That's right, Abrams kills Kirk (same way too, shot by shot remake of the original scene). So you get Spock (showing emotion that he didn't show for his dead mother!) delivering this classic Shatner line....

But hold on! Kirk may be "dead" but as luck would have it, Bones with the aid of Dr. Marcus is able synthesize a cure for death from Khan's genetically altered blood (Bones is able to figure out that Khan's blood has curative powers when he injects it into a dead Tribble and brings it back to life). In order to get it, Uhura has to beam down to make sure a highly emotional and very violent Spock doesn't kill Khan with his bare hands (he wasn't this pissed when Nero destroyed Vuclan).

Abrams is trying to develop the Kirk/Spock relationship (more or less leaving Bones as the 3rd wheel). In the original series it was always Kirk, Spock & McCoy. The trio was already a tight group. Sure McCoy had his issues with Spock but they both respected each other and either one of them would sacrifice himself for the other. This is the main issue I have with the film, the chemistry between Kirk and Spock is uneven. Spock snitches out Kirk in the beginning and Kirk says, "never trust a Vulcan." Kirk has the knowledge of knowing what great pals he and Spock will become thanks to hanging out with Nimoy/Spock in the first film. Kirk is clearly trying to force it as if he's forgetting that Spock is Vulcan and just isn't into that kind of stuff. There's even a scene where Spock consults his future self for advice on what went down with Khan in the 1982 film (once again I'm not sold on the whole time paradox plot and I'm lukewarm at best with future Spock and current Spock living in the same time stream). How present day Spock even knew it would be a good idea to consult future Spock left me scratching my head but it's science fiction so I just keep those things to myself.

Kirk also seems to have a pretty unique relationship with Scotty as well. It's different from the original series since Kirk and Scotty met on the ice planet (leaving people to wonder why an engineering super-genius like Scotty is doing stranded on a distant Federation outpost) and became fast friends. I found it a bit weird that Kirk has a better relationship with Scotty than he does with Spock. Though to be fair, Scotty does quit (something James Doohan's character would never do. He respected Kirk and would lay his life down for him but he loved the Enterprise!) and it put Kirk in a tough spot (to say nothing of the joy that overcame Chekov when Kirk informed him that he'd be promoted to Chief Engineer and that he needed to get a "red shirt," the international sign of death in the Star Trek Universe) but he does come back after Kirk apologizes and say he was right.

Cumberbatch plays Khan much differently than Montalban (Montalban and Shatner never had a scene together). Montalban's Khan is more Shakespearean,

whereas Cumberbatch's version is more of a Batman villain as we get to see his superior physical strength when he dispatches a Klingon patrol with ease. Plus, Cumberbatch doesn't monologue the way Montalban did and is quicker to violence (though we never see it, it is referenced that Montalban "went mad" and slit the throats of the crew of Regula 1), as seen when he brutally murdered Adm. Marcus and coldly broke the leg of Carol in the process. All in all both actors did a great job on the character.

This was a solid film. It was full of action and a lot of fun. The story was good but not great and the dialogue was really good. I may even see it again. As always your comments are welcome. Thank you for your time.

A few words about the Brooklyn Nets

Over the weekend the plucky, Derrick Rose-less Chicago Bulls were able to defeat the Brooklyn Nets in game 7, advancing to the Eastern Conference Semi-Finals and a the honor of most likely getting brushed aside by the powerful Miami Heat.

During the regular season, the Nets in their first year in the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, went 49-33, up from 22-44 during the last years strike shortened season and locked in the 4th seed for the playoffs. The Bulls (again without former league MVP Derrick Rose, look for more on him later) fought and clawed their way to a 45-37 record and  the 5th seed. The Nets were lead by a pair of max-contract stars in Deron Williams and Joe Johnson. Without Rose the Bulls were led by Luol Deng (2013 salary $13.3 million) and Carlos Boozer ($15 million for 2013). The Nets have a team salary of $87.6 million and the Bulls have a team salary of $74.8 million. for the 2012-13 season. Both teams are over the salary cap and are paying luxury taxes.

The thing that I noticed the most watching this series (as a new Chicago resident I feel I must at least know what's going on sportswise) is that the Nets had the Bulls outgunned from the get go. After a decisive win in game 1, the Bulls won the next 3 including a thrilling 142-134 triple over time victory in game 4. After Williams had lit up the Bulls for 22 points and 7 assists, Kirk Hinrich (who's four years younger than Williams, makes 4 times less and is not as talented as Williams) locked Williams down defensively and held him to 8 points on 1-9 shooting and 10 assists. The Bulls let up 106 points in game 1 and really put the defensive clamps on the Nets in game 2 which led to a 90-82 win. It was more of the same for Williams in game 3, he was 5-14 from the field, finished with 18 points and 4 assists. Hinrich once again befuddled him defensively as the Bulls won 79-76.

In game 1 Joe Johnson was 7-13 from the field, 2-5 from 3 and finished with 16 points (a solid performance but nothing spectacular). When the Bulls amped up the D in games 2 & 3, Johnson shot terribly (game 2: 6-18 from the field and 3-7 from 3, game 3: 6-14 from the field and 1-4 from 3). To be fair Johnson was diagnosed with Plantar Fasciitis before the series but much to his credit he gave it a go and played with pain. The only issue I have with it was that the Bulls were depleted after game 4. Deng was out (Deng was so sick he had to have a spinal tap and practically had to be restrained from trying to make the team charter back to Brooklyn), Hinrich was out, Noah played the entire series on one leg essentially and Nate Robinson had the flu and was seen throwing up. Robinson & Noah still managed to elevate their games whereas Johnson did not (during the regular season Johnson shot 42.3% from th4 field, 37.5% from 3 to the tune of 16.3 ppg, his lowest output since the 2002-3 season, his first as a starter. In the playoffs he shot 41.7% from the field 25.6% from 3 and averaged 14.9 pppg. His stats got worse!). His injury does greatly affect his play but other guys were able to overcome their injuries.

In the epic game 4 triple overtime thriller, Williams scored 32 points (11-25 fg/5-11 3pt-fg) with 10 assists. Hinrich had 18 points (a much more efficient 7-12 from the field) and 14 assists. Williams was still outplayed by Hinrich and Joe Johnson finished with 22 points (9-20 fg) but seldom went to the line as he settled for jump shots all game. Nate Robinson had a huge game with 34 points (14-23 from the field). In game 5 with no Hinrich in his jock, Williams was able to get 23 points and 10 assists (Robinson couldn't guard Williams). Johnson in 39 minutes had 11 points in the 110-91 Nets win. In a closely contested game 6, the Nets prevailed 95-92 despite a underwhelming game from Johnson (17 points on 7-13 field goals, 1-3 3-pointers) and 17 points and 11 assists from Williams.

Which brings us to game 7. The Nets at home in front of a capacity crowd, the Bulls barely able to field a team and the momentum of having won the last 2 games of the series (in the NBA teams seldom come back from 3-1 down but if it was going to happen, this was the time).  The Bulls built a 17 point halftime lead and managed to hold off the Nets to win the series. The Bulls got huge games from Marco Belinelli (24 points) and Joakim Noah (24 points 14 rebounds). Johnson was all but useless with 6 points (2-14 field goals) but Williams arguably had his best game since game 1 with 24 points and 7 assists but it wasn't enough.

Watching the game it seemed that the Nets just didn't want it as much as the Bulls. The commentators said that more than once during the series. Granted, the Nets pushed the series to a seventh game did it really need to go that far? They didn't lay down and die after a dramatic game 4 (the Nets came back from a big deficit only to lose the lead and then overtime) so they deserve credit for that...I guess. Their play at times was uninspired. It was as if they were saying, "even if we win, we get Miami in the next round so who cares?" Their uninspired play begins with their high priced "superstars." Williams kind of wilted away when Hinrich put the clamps on him and even after Hinrich went out, Williams never really took over like great players do. Johnson was hurt but still logged a lot of minutes. The thing is Noah had Plantar Fasciitis as well but that didn't stop him.The Bulls played with more heart. The team lost Rose in the playoffs over a year ago and they've yet to lay down and die.

The Nets look like a team satisfied with mediocrity. Williams and Johnson didn't show me much. Williams poor attitude forced legendary Jazz Coach Jerry Sloan to call it quits 54 games into the 2010-11 season because he no longer wanted to deal with Williams, though Sloan never won a title (lost to Jordan's Bulls twice) he did coach 2 hall of famers in Karl Malone and John Stockton so he must've been doing something right (Williams was traded not soon after, so the Jazz just wanted to get rid of him). The Nets fired Avery Johnson 28 games into this season and as of Monday 6 May, PJ Carlesimo was relieved of his interim coaching duties. That's 4 coaches in the last 3 seasons if you're counting. 

It looks like the Nets are slowly becoming another Knicks. As in a team that's got talent but not really not that good, led by an overpriced "super star" and capable of lackluster play except without the ridiculousness of an owner like James Dolan (stay tuned for my opinions on Melo, I feel he's got it coming).

DJ B-Clear's May Movie Preview

May officially opens the Summer Blockbuster season and it opens with a BANG! to say the least. Let's jump in...

May 3rd

• Iron Man 3: There isn't much that needs to be said other than "see this film!" The trailers that I've seen make me want to see this film even more.
• The Iceman: Based on the life of Mafia hitman Richard Kuklinsk, a stone cold killer and family man. Directed by Ariel Vromen, the film boasts a very good cast that includes Michael Shannon in the lead, Winona Ryder as his wife, James Franco, Chris Evans, Ray Liotta and David Schwimmer in supporting roles. The trailer looks gritty and in a fair world Shannon would be a perennial Oscar nominee. The down side is that Killing The Softly was supposed to be a really good film but people stayed away in droves. I'm not that familiar with Vromen's work but it might be worth taking a chance on this feature.
• What Maisie Knew: The 3rd "modern" re-telling of an 1897 Henry James novel. This version stars Julianne Moore as the pop singer mother and Steve Coogan as the English writer (or something) father who are divorced and vie for the affections of their young daughter, Onata Aprile. Throw in a new twist where Maisie enjoys hanging out with her mom's boy-toy (Alexander Skarsgård) and you've got a hybrid of Kramer v. Kramer and an episode of  Law & Order: Special Victims Unit which I didn't feel like finding the name of. Given it's probably gut-wrenching but the plot is definitely not original.
• Generation Um...: Keanu Reeves is a glum New Yorker who steals a video camera on whim and begins to tape the 2 twenty something babes (Adelaide Clemens - the blonde & Bojana Novakovic - the brunette, funny how that always seems to work out like that) who just happen to be very comfortable with their sexuality. Though I'm not sure why Neo is so glum, at least from the trailer, when he hangs around with 2 nubile hotties where it's pretty much implied that sex amongst the 3 is a given. The trailer gave me a Sex, Lies & Videotape kind of feel with a combination of 1997's Two Girls and a Guy (the hot blonde, hot brunette and the dude they're sleeping with unknowingly). I also got a feeling that Keanu is doing some soul searching which is why he steals the camera in the first place. I'm gonna pass on this.
• The Happy House: Directed by a guy I've never heard of (D.W. Young) with a resume of films I've neither heard of nor seen before comes a tale of some NYC hipsters who venture into the country and meet up with weird, quirky inhabitants of the B&B. One of whom may or may not be a serial killer. Honestly I thought the trailer was stupid.

May 1oth 

• The Great Gatsby: One of the few required reading books that I read in high school (and I hated reading) that I actually still refer to (sorry Le Morte D'Arthur) comes back to the big screen. Baz Luhrmann directs an all-star cast in this retelling of F. Scott Fitzgerald's classic work. The preview is fun to watch as Luhrmann put a lot of color into the sets so they seem to jump out at you. I will be seeing this film.
• Aftershock: Nicolás López directs a film about the breakdown of society after the 2010 8.8 earthquake in Chile. Eli Roth co-wrote and stars as an American in Chile looking to score chicks. The earthquake hits and everything turns into bloody chaos. The trailer gave me the impression that things go bad and get very gory so be advised. I'm sure there are people who would be interested in this sort of thing but I don't think it's for me.
• Erased: Philipp Stölzl directs Aaron Eckhart, Olga Kurylenko and others in the international conspiracy/spy thriller. It basically looks like The Bourne Films accept Eckhart is a little older and has a daughter in tow.
• Java Heat: A "seen it before" action film directed by Conor Allyn with Mickey Rourke as the villain. So it takes place in Indonesia, involves terrorist blowing stuff up, an American with enhanced martial arts skills and weapons knowledge and a kidnapped princess. At least there's a team of Muslim detectives who aren't bad guys which is refreshing. This kind of looks direct to DVD. At least Mickey Rourke is working.
• Peeples: Craig Robinson is marrying Kerry Washington and he heads out to the Hamptons to meet her parents,  David Alan Grier and S. Epatha Merkerson. Tyler Perry's latest release looks a lot like Meet the Parents. Everything Robinson does to ingratiate himself to Grier & Merkerson backfires in a big way.
• No One Lives: A relatively unknown cast in a horror film where a young couple stop in a small town in the middle of nowhere (when does anything good ever happen in this scenario?). There are taken captive by a group of townies, who rob and kill people kind of like 1997's Breakdown. The problem here is that the couple are not exactly the meek tourist type. The male of the couple survives and turns the table on his captors. It doesn't look like they stand a chance. It gets bloody.
• And Now A Word From Our Sponsor: Bruce Greenwood plays a marketing/advertising tycoon who disappears and when he shows back up he only talks in ad slogans. Former 90s indie film darling Parker Posey, plays the goody two-shoes who tries to find out what happened while the board of his company tries to have him declared incompetent so they can run the business. Looks suspiciously like a cross between Regarding Henry and Crazy People. It looks like a satirical look out how we Americans are driven by consumerism.

May 17th

• Star Trek: Into Darkness: Same as Iron Man 3, "see this film!" Kirk, Spock and the possibility of Khan. What else do you need?
• Frances Ha: Greta Gerwig stars in this Noah Baumbach directed film about a young Manhattanite who doesn't have any viable means of income but is a "free spirit" with friends who's archetype only seem to exist in films about New York City. The trailer is almost incomprehensible as Gerwig drops hipsterisms and gallivants through the city. According to the synopsis she's "following her dreams, even as their possible reality dwindles." This is a film that I suspect New Yorkers would like but most people would have a hard time relating to. Baumbach has done some excellent work in the past but it's never really been mainstream by any stretch.
• The English Teacher: Julianne Moore stars as, you guessed it, an English teacher from a small town who helps an old student who's a playwright down on his luck. The help comes on the form of her getting his play produced, on this high school level, and of course sleeping with him. The school's administration is a little uptight about the play's subject matter but Nathan Lane is there to help her out. Of course when things get weird with her former student, his hunky, doctor father, played by Greg Kinnear, is there to make things more interesting. I think she also gets jealous when she catches her old student in the arms of a young co-ed. Based on the trailer this looks real predictable. I will pass on this title.
• Black Rock: A trio of hotties, led by Kate Bosworth, decide its a good idea to rekindle their friendship at a remote island Maine which just happened to be their childhood getaway. Naturally their not alone. Let me make one thing clear...Nothing good ever, I mean ever, happens when people aged 18-34 go into the woods. Death awaits those usually in the form of a large, indestructible man with sharp objects. Or in this case, 3 similarly aged dudes who hold a grudge or something and decide to make the ladies disappear. The point is, the woods are not safe.

May 24th

• Fast and the Furious 6: Yes, it's the 6th installment of the franchise. It's now almost annoying as the 37 Saw films. Enough already.
• The Hangover Part III: The "wolf pack" returns to Vegas (and apparently blow it up according to a trailer) to bring the franchise to an end in the place where it all began. The 2nd installment wasn't bad but it wasn't nearly as good as the first but I will take this one in as I'm curious to see how director Todd Phillips ends it.
• Before Midnight: Ethan Hawke and  Julie Delpy return in this 3rd installment of Richard Linklater's "Before" series. All 3 share a writing credit as Hawke & Delpy get together for the 3rd time in nearly 20 years. I suspect there will be more of the same from the 1st 2 films except everyone's older.
• Epic:Animated release from Twentieth Century Fox Animation featuring the voice talents of Amanda Seyfried, Jason Sudeikis, Colin Farrell, Christoph Waltz and a few other A-Listers. It's about a teenage girl who gets shrunk down to insect size and meets up with the tiny people that defend the forest from evil. Admittedly the trailer looks pretty but but this is probably for the under 14 demographic. 

May 31st

• After Earth: Set in the future, Will Smith and his son go back to Earth, crash land and find the old big blue marble a dangerous place for humans. Apparently Smith is getting long in the tooth to save Earth so now he needs the assistance of his son. There's some cool stuff going on in the preview but I'm not sure if I'm ready to see Will Smith needing help saving Earth. The trailer doesn't fill you in on why Earth needed to be abandon (in Oblivion it was a war with aliens that left the planet uninhabitable despite victory) but it's science fiction I'm not that concerned. I will wait to see what kind of buzz this film generates before making a commitment.
• Now You See Me: Louis Leterrier directs a slid cast that includes Morgan Freeman, Isla Fisher, Mark Ruffalo, Woody Harrelson, Jesse Eisenberg and Michael Caine in a heist film involving magic. Eisenberg, Harrelson & Fisher are magicians doing a show in Vegas but manage to rob a bank 5000 miles away during the show. Freeman narrates over parts of the trailer with a sense of they gang is planning something big. Leterrier's prior films have plenty of action but substance is sometimes lacking. To me this film is 50/50 in terms of being a good thriller/action film or just a subpar thriller/action film.
• Shadow Dancer: Set in 1990s Belfast, Clive Owen plays an MI5 operative who tries to get Andrea Riseborough (she's making the rounds in 2013!) to inform on her family, all members of the IRA, in order to avoid a 25 year jail sentence. Gillian Anderson makes an appearance as Owen's heartless, results driven boss. This looks real interesting. A very dark thriller directed by James Marsh.
• The East: Brit Marling is a private investigator who goes undercover to infiltrate an Eco-terrorist organization that's been wrecking havoc on corporate overlords. As she gets accepted by her new pals, she starts to fall for the hunky stud leader, Alexander Skarsgård and beings to think that maybe these guys aren't that evil. This looks kind of cool as I am a fan of films that look into the country's corporate conspiracies. A good cast that includes Ellen Page and Patricia Clarkson doesn't hurt either. Though the prospect of the of the cop falling for the quarry she's after is a bit predictable but it might be worth a look.

DJ B-Clear's April Movie Preview

Some of the films that will be coming out this month. April has a tendency to be a staging ground for the Summer Blockbuster season. Back in 1999, The Matrix had an April release and was a sensational box office smash. Let's have a look...

April 5th

• The Brass Teapot: Directed by Ramaa Mosley, this films stars Juno Temple and Michael Angarano as two down on their luck lovers looking to escape their nowhere lives. They stumble across a brass teapot (hence the title of the film) which is actually an ancient magical Hebrew artifact that can make you rich when the owner is caused physical pain. The opreview has the couple enduring assaults, car crashes and other assorted beat downs while the pot produces cash like the Federal Reserve. Eventually a team of Hasidic Jews (or what I am to believe are Hasidic Jews) are dispatched to retrieve the artifact as the couple are using it recklessly. I liked Juno Temple in Killer Joe last year but I'm not too sure about this one. It got a low rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
• 6 Souls: This film was originally released internationally in 2010 under the name Shelter and by internationally I mean not in the U.S. So it sat on the shelves for 3 years before getting a U.S. release date and a new title. This is usually enough for me to steer clear of a film. It stars Julianne Moore as a forensic psychologist who is treating a patient with multiple personalities, enter Jonathan Rhys Meyers. Moore comes to find out that Meyer's personalities are in fat murder victims which sets her on a quest to find out the truth. Which as we know in this genre of film can lead to bad things.
• The Company You Keep: Robert Redford returns to the directors chair to helm a film about a fledgling investigative reporter (Shia LaBeouf) trying to get a scoop on the events of a bank robbery gone wrong 30 years ago in which one of the suspects, Susan Sarandon, was finally arrested. Sarandon's arrest starts a chain of events that lead us to Redford an accomplice of the crime, an unexpected result of the robbery was the death of a cop, who's now a lawyer single father who's been living under a false identity for over 30 years. LaBeouf uses his skills to uncover his identity and try to find him, which of course turns into a big manhunt. Redford is a very good director with a keen eye for detail. I'm on record as not being a big LaBeouf fan but he does have talent and this looks like a really interesting film.
•  Simon Killer: Brady Corbet stars as Simon an American college student in Paris just looking to have a good time (translation: score French babes). He stumbles into a seedy club (what other kinds are there in Paris?) and meets up with the sultry Victoria (she's a prostitute and all French prostitutes are sultry. It's a per-requisite), played by Mati Diop. Simon falls for Victoria and the town hatch a blackmail scheme that gets them more than they bargained for, or did it? Director Antonio Campos looks to put a lot of twists & turns together in this thriller (based on the trailers). I'm not sure how wide a release this will get but it might be worth checking out.
• Evil Dead (2013): A remake of the 1981 cult classic directed by Sam Raimi and starring Bruce Campbell. The film is directed by Fede Alvarez and Raimi is getting a producer's credit as the story gets a reboot with updated characters and modern story. Not sure what kind of role the Necronomicon plays but early indications are its still pretty creepy. Normally I would question why remake a film that got it right 30 years ago but I'm a closeted Evil Dead fan so I will make an effort to see this film. During the day of course.
• Trance: Danny Boyle directs this caper thriller with an all-star cast that consists of James McAvoy, Rosario Dawson and Vincent Cassel. Thankfully the trailer doesn't reveal much but it does pique your interest. McAvoy plays a fine art auctioneer who steals a Goya painting but a blow to the head causes a flare up of CRS disease (Can't Remember Shit). Cassel enlists the aid of hypnotist Dawson to attempt to unlock the location of the stolen goods. What we get is a trip through McAvoy's subconscious where things are a bit murky. Boyle is an excellent director who is probably up there in the "must see" category. I've got to find a way to see this film.
  

April 12th 

 

• 42: Academy Award Winner Brian Helgeland directs this Jackie Robinson biopic. Spike Lee was rumored to try and brings Robinson's life to the big screen for years but could never get funding. Chadwick Boseman stars as the iconic Robinson and Harrison Ford plays Branch Rickey, the man who brought Robinson into Major League Baseball 1947 and breaking the color barrier. The film deals with the trials and tribulations of Robinson's first season as the only Black player in the MLB. Helgeland is a standout director, very capable of telling a phenomenal story. My only hesitation is the Robinson lead such a heroic life in those days that it would seem that his actions don't need to be "Hollywood-ized." Plus there seems to be a modern hip-hop soundtrack for the film which is understandable since there aren't that many moviegoers around who can identify with a 1940's type soundtrack. However, Robinson is such an amazing figure that it shouldn't matter about the soundtrack.
• To The Wonder: The latest film from legendary director Terrence Malick stars (fresh off his Oscar win for Argo), Olga Kurylenko, Rachel McAdams and Javier Bardem. Affleck is in Paris and falls for single mother Kurylenko. They have a whirlwind romance and Affleck has Kurylenko and her daughter move with him to Oklahoma where he's an environmental inspector (lets be honest, going from Paris to Oklahoma is not a good decision and I've had a lot of laughs in OKC). At first the relationship is great but after awhile things cool down. Affleck drifts towards former lover McAdams and Kurylenko meets ups with Bardem who's a priest in a local parish (wtf?). The trailer gives you nothing so what I just described is a combination of different synopsis. This being a Malick film I will see it but be advised...Malick is not for everyone and I suspect there will be plot points that will fly right over my head much like 2011's Tree of Life.
• Disconnect: Jason Bateman plays a concerned parent (in a rare non-sarcastic father figure role) in an ensemble cast about the dangers of internet. The ensemble cast includes the likes of Paula Patton, Hope Davis, Alexander Skarsgård and Andrea Riseborough in this drama/thriller directed by Henry Alex Rubin. The different characters have their different stories and the internet is the device that ties everyone together. The trailer is very interesting and I will be keeping my eye out for this as I enjoy films where the unrelated characters are all tied together a la Robert Altman.
• It's a Disaster: This film is set in suburbia during a couples brunch. Julia Stiles brings new boyfriend, David Cross, to her friend's place for a couples brunch but oblivious to the guests, a dirty bomb was set-off and impending doom is on its way. A black comedy where the guest will air their grievances with each other in a "we're all gonna die anyway so what does it matter" attitude. The trailer gives you pieces of scenes that appear humorous but they could've cut it that way. David Cross is funny as the "fish out of water" new boyfriend put in an unthinkable situation. Writer/director Todd Berger, has several screenwriting credits and has directed 3 feature films but most are titles that I've never heard of. Very independent film so it may not get a wide release or even a lengthy one. If you want to see this film then you may have to hunt for it.
• Into the White: A WWII period piece that stars Harry Potter sidekick Rupert Grint. Shotdown over a Norwegian wilderness the crew members from a downed German bomber and an RAF aircraft meet up at a cabin under brutal winter conditions. Supplies are low and the crews try to survive despite the fact the their countries are at war. Lots of "cabin fever" type suspense while the German crew tries to treat the Brits as POWs since they have the numbers and the gun.
• Which Way Is the Front Line from Here? The Life and Times of Tim Hetherington: This film is a documentary about the work of photojournalist/director Tim Hetherington. Hetherington spent most of his career in hot spots like Sierra Leone, Libya and the Korangal Valley or places most people would avoid like the plague. I mention this film because Hetherington and Sebastian Junger brought us the 2010 documentary Restrepo. Hetherington was killed by mortar fire in Libya about 6 months after the release of Restrepo. It would be worth watching to see the story of someone who fearlessly looked to bring the lives of those living/working in conditions most of us couldn't imagine.

April 19th

• Scary Movie V: Just when you thought they milked every last cent out of this franchise, out comes another installment. I gave the 1st two films my time but they turn out the same tired jokes much like they turn out the same tired films that this franchise has spoofed for well over a decade. The spoof films no longer do it for me. Despite the fact that Charlie Sheen takes a shot to his nether region. Lindsey Lohan managed to film her scene with Sheen in between her court appearances and there's even a Honey Boo Boo reference. Complete dreck.
• Oblivion: There was a time when I felt pretty good about Earth's chances with Tom Cruise was the hero. Now...not so much. Joseph Kosinski directs a solid cast in this sc-fi thriller that takes place on Earth after an alien invasion forces an evacuation of the planet. Cruise is part drone repair team, his dispatcher is Andrea Riseborough, that keeps the scanning/attack drones working. However Tom is the nostalgic type with a curiosity streak. There isn't supposed to be human life on Earth but he runs into a group of underground dwellers led by Morgan Freeman. Freeman convinces Cruise that there are people still on Earth and that his corporate masters have been lying to him. Forcing Cruise to choose which side to fight for. The beautiful Olga Kurylenko shows up as a survivor in a life pod who naturally has a past with Cruise. This is Kosinki's first major feature, my faith in Cruise has been on the wane for some time and after Jack Reacher, I'm inclined to let this one slip through the cracks.
• jOBS: Is Ashton Kutcher really talented? Most of the characters he's played have all been some variation of Kelso from That 70's Show. Kutcher and Josh Gad Apple Co-founders Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak in this biopic about the iconic Apple founder. The film traces Jobs' early career from guy with a dream to corporate overlord. This is director Joshua Michael Stern's 3rd feature film and I've never heard of the other two. This could be a really good film but if I'm going to see it I want to see some buzz first. The release is a few weeks away and I haven't seen a whole lot of trailers for it. The trailer on Rotten Tomatoes is just a a clip from 1 scene. Perhaps there's something I missed about the film but I'm not holding my breath regardless of when it comes out.
• The Lords of Salem: The producers of Insidious and Paranormal Activity team up with writer/director Rob Zombie to bring a tale of weird, creepy evil. Zombie's wife Sheri, plays a DJ in Salem, MA who becomes the object of an evil cabal that look to set her up as a sacrifice to the dark lord himself but first they're amp up the insanity in her life. Fans of Zombie's films will probably dig this but I really haven't been into his films since The Devil's Rejects. It's Zombie so much as I just think I'm not into the genre. Who knows I may end up seeing it though.
• Love Sick Love: I couldn't find a trailer for this film in the usual spots but I've read it that it's a about two good looking serial daters who get together and it doesn't quite go they way one of them wants it. Dori, played by Katia Winter, gets together with Norman, played by Matthew Settle and takes him to a secluded cabin in order to experience all of the holidays in 1 horror filled weekend. Could be sick & twisted or just stupid. I will try to reserve judgement until I see a trailer.

April 26th

• The Big Wedding: An ensemble cast too numerous to mention in a comedy that has a little Something's Got To Give and The Bird Cage. Bobby DeNiro plays the patriarch who's sleeping with Susan Sarandon the former best friend of his ex-wife, Diane Keaton. They're all gathered together for their adopted son's wedding. The adopted son (Ben Barnes) was given up by his Colombian mother but now she's coming back for the wedding and she's real religious. That means DeNiro & Keaton have to pretend they're married. Throw in Katherine Heigl and Topher Grace as siblings, Robin Williams as the priest and the laughs just spill forth. Sorry but I'm not buying it. The trailer possessed very little in originality. I will avoid this title.
• Pain & Gain: Michael Bay directs this comedic heist film starring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson as an ex-con and Mark Wahlberg as the "mastermind" of a kidnapping of a local gangster played by Tony Shalhoub. Johnson & Wahlberg are 2 weightlifters whose caper goes awry leading to the death of their victim. The premise of the film seems interesting and its a solid cast but it will boil down to whether or not you like Michael Bay. I'm on the fence about this one.
• Mud: In his 4th feature, writer/director Jeff Nichols, tells the story of Mud (Matthew McConaughey), a down on his luck guy living in an abandon boat that's in a tree (left there from Katrina maybe?). He's there for a reason and befriends 2 boys (Jacob Lofland & Tye Sheridan) who think he's a cool, far out dude. Let's just say that the boys are in for a letdown when they find out their hero is wanted for murder. Rounding out a very solid cast is Reese Witherspoon, Sam Shepard and Michael Shannon. The trailer is really interesting and McConaghey dropped a lot of weight to get Mud's look. I will try to see this film as I think McConaghey is very talented but seems to do cruddy films a lot. Though I can't help but sense that Mud is how Wooderson would turn out if things went bad for him.
• At Any Price: Normally a director of documentaries, Ramin Bahrani, oversees a strong cast in this father/son drama. Dennis Quaid plays the father, a farmer who buys up other farms or something to that effect and he's got a lot of land. Zac Efron plays the son who Quaid wants to pass on the farming heritage to. Efron being probably the best looking dude in the county wants nothing to do with the family trade and wants to race cars! It turns out that Quaid isn't so squeaky clean and Efron seems to be throwing stuff around during the trailer's emotional scenes in an effort to show how deep he is. It does look like Efron comes back to help his old man when things get tough but I suspect most people can see that coming. Not for me.
• The Reluctant Fundamentalist: Mira Nair directs an international thriller that sees Riz Ahmed, an Ivy League educated Pakistani, caught between his heritage and the country that made him a rich man (he's a financial genius). Then 9/11 happens and things begin to change as he gets "profiled" as a terrorist. The film boast a solid cast that includes Kiefer Sutherland, Liev Schreiber and Kate Hudson (I still hold out hope for her as she has talent but wastes it on stupid rom-coms). Nair has got an impressive resume as a very good director and solid storyteller. This could be worth watching.
• The Numbers Station: John Cusack and Malin Akerman star in a spy thriller about a broadcast code that sends secret agents on their mission. Cusack is the Jason Bourne type and he's sent to protect Akerman. Suffice to say things go wrong and the two are sent on the run avoiding assassination. The trailer for this is pretty cool but there's a lot of elements from 2012's Safehouse. This could be hit or miss perhaps even direct to DVD.

2012 Film rankings

Now that the Oscars are over, I have closed the booked on 2012 films. I managed to see 36 titles and quite frankly I feel that there was a much better quality in 2012 than in past years. So far so good, I'm in line with my quality over quantity theory. In 2012 I managed to stay away from a lot of bad films but I unfortunately still managed to catch a few, mostly because I had time to kill and the title may have seemed like a good idea or something like that. Here's the list:

Bad Films - not much endearing about this group. Usually there's nothing original and either not that fun if it's a comedy or not that exiting for an action film or just plain stupid.

36. Lockout
35. Casa Di Mi Padre
34. Chernobyl Diaries
33. Jack Reacher
32. Expendables 2
31. MiB3
30. Hunger Games

Films that aren't bad but weren't that good either - more lack of originality or too predictable to be a good film but it had some entertaining moments.

29. Seeking a Friend for the End of the Universe
28. Five Year Engagement - There some moments where Segel saves this from being a bad film.
27. Savages - Without Benicio Del Toro, this film probably falls into the bad film category.
26. Killing The Softly - The pre-release hype was just too big to overcome. It had its moments though.
25. Ted - Funny moments for sure but how about having it not be like a long episode of Family Guy.

Good Films - titles that were entertaining that had enough of a good story and good acting to keep it a rung higher but not enough to get it over the hump. Films I  would recommend to most people.

24. Cabin in the Woods - much like the Scream series it was a good film that poked fun at the genre.
23. Raid: Redemption
22. Safety Not Guaranteed
21. Dredd
20. Prometheus - the expectations were high because it was an Alien prequel. This could've been a really good science fiction film but I think the Alien (it probably wasn't complete enough) connection hurt it.
19. Killer Joe - Good to see McConaughey is a villain.
18. Looper
17. Silver Linings Playbook - as a film, it's not that great. It's a good film with standout performances but it's just a good film.

Really Good films - films that fall just a bit short of excellence for whatever reason but I would recommend to just about everyone.

16. The Amazing Spider-Man, in another year this could've been excellent but when you compare it to The Dark Knight Rises, it's no contest. I am looking forward to the next installments.
15. The Hobbitt - the next installments should be better not that this was bad by any standards.
14. End of Watch - which lead character dying was too predictable for me and that kept it out of the excellent category.
13. Lawless - replace Shia LeBeouf and perhaps this is an excellent film. He's talented but I find him annoying. Jessica Chastain is approaching what I refer to as "goddess" level.
12. Flight - Denzel, enough said. If Daniel Day-Lewis isn't in a film then Denzel wins Best Actor.
11. The Impossible - I thought this was a better film that Silver Linings Playbook with equally outstanding performances.

Excellent Films

10. The Avengers - I won't apologize for the greatness of the superhero films that came out this year.
9. Django Unchained
8. Life of Pi - there's a reason why Ang Lee got the Best Director Oscar.
7. Zero Dark Thirty
6. Headhunters - excellent Scandinavian film. It's the only foreign film I saw this year but man it was pulse pounding. If you don't like foreign films, get over it and see this film.
5. Moonrise Kingdom - Wes Anderson is a must see director.
4. Skyfall - best Bond film to date. End of discussion.
3. Argo
2. Lincoln
1. The Dark Knight Rises - honestly, this film was flawless! The revelation about Marion Cotillard's character threw me for such a loop that I wept because it so awesome. Nolan is a must see director! I can talk about this film for hours. It should have gotten a nomination for Best Picture or at least a screenplay nomination because the story was that awesome. Lincoln & Argo had history on their side. I can watch this film over & over again.