Monday Night Football

It not being baseball season anymore, I figure I should write one obligatory football post. Don’t worry, though, I’ll probably still throw in a bunch of baseball references because that’s just the way I roll. In actuality, this post is more about announcers than football because most announcers in all sports are terrible. The issue at hand is: why the hell do Monday Night Football announcers treat Monday Night Football records like they actually mean something?

Everyone likes to that his or her moment is significant even when it’s an anomaly in a small sample size. Baseball (there it is) announcers love to do this. “David Eckstein is batting .415 with runners in scoring position and 2 outs after the 7^th inning with a 2-2 count. I wouldn’t want anyone else up in this situation, and that includes A-Rod, Pujols, Babe Ruth, and God.” But the difference is, I don’t think anyone actually believes that that stat is in any way meaningful. On Monday Night Football, they keep their own stats that are separate from the games played on Sundays by the rest of the league, like there is some atmospheric condition that makes playing football on Monday an entirely different experience.

ESPN.com has a database of every MNF winner AND notes about those games. “Hey, basketball, I only care about who won every game played on Thursday’s in your history, so if you could get them to me… What? No! The rest of the games don’t matter. I just want to know who has the record for most rebounds on a Thursday.” It’s ridiculous to treat MNF like it’s special. It’s nice that the teams get to play a game without the distraction of other games, but that’s about it.

Does it really matter that Bo Jackson has the MNF rushing record of 221 yards when Adrian Peterson’s NFL record of 296 yards shatters that? Of course not. In fact, you could argue that single game records don’t really mean anything at all. Sure, some great players have set some of these records, but so have some mediocre players. To return to baseball, the list of players who have hit four homeruns in one game includes: Lou Gehrig, Willie Mays, and Mike Schmidt. It also includes Mark Whiten, Shawn Green, and some guy named Pat Seerey. Does that mean all of these guys are of equal skill. I think we all understand that sustainable performance is what matters. So why does MNF insist on treating itself as separate from normal football operations? The same players don’t even play from week to week. It’s all just fun with small sample sizes, which, truth be told, isn’t really all that fun.

My New Favorite Video

Some of you may have seen this posted on my Facebook page, but I'm not done with it yet. There is so much to love and I can't bottle it in. If you haven't seen it yet, watch it before reading. It's short and incredible.

I think what makes it work completely is the costume. The tight, black spandex makes it look like he should be in front of a black backdrop and just a floating pumpkin head, but he's not. He's this absurd, pumpkin-headed, leotarded, human-handed freak. That the pumpkin mask maintains the same stoned and content expression throughout the dance, regardless of energy, and is slightly too small for the guy's head just makes it that much better.

The dramatic strains we all recognize as the intro the the Ghostbusters theme accompanied by the ever-spreading limbs builds amazing tension as to what he's going to do when the song kicks in and it doesn't disappoint. Pumpkinhead (really Pumpkinface) breaks out in this astounding Andy Kaufman-esque dance. The slight lack of coordination makes it all the more endearing. I'd be happy to watch him do this for the whole video, but no. He has other things in store for us. He busts out the tornado, which reminds me of the Steve Buscemi SNL sketch where he's in court and breaks out the same move (I may be the only person reminded of this sketch).

I can't really describe my feelings about his dance when the lyrics come in. It's like this giant, fat, graceless snake decided to dance. Epic. And holy god! "Who ya gonna call?" Pumpkinhead shrugs... "Ghostbusters!" I never thought that the shouting of "Ghostbusters" needed any miming to go along with it, but I know now that it was missing a crucial element: air punching.

The rest of the video is essentially epileptic dancing with a little vogue-ing and some Egyptian moves. A special shout out to the moments before the first, "I ain't afraid of no ghosts" (is Ray Parker Jr. saying he is afraid of ghosts?). I don't know what Pumpkinhead is doing, but he is really into it. I say good for him.

There are other videos featuring what appears to be a different Pumpkin-headed individual, on for Christmas and one for Valentine's Day (featuring "Don't Stop Believing"... had hit the mute button for that one). Those aren't nearly as good, save for the ridiculousness of associating a Jack-o-lantern with those holidays, which actually is pretty amusing. The Halloween video is perfection. Now someone give this guy a TV show!

Some Thoughts on Baseball Payrolls

One of the biggest complaints people have about baseball (aside from the somewhat non-issue, in my opinion, of steroids) is the discrepancy between the haves and the have-nots. In light of the recent New York Yankees World Series victory (I still haven’t see footage of them winning, so I could be wrong about this), I looked up the league payrolls as I had several questions I wanted to answer.

My first inquiry was into the payrolls of all the teams that made the playoffs this year. It turns out that five of the teams are in the top nine for spending: the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Angels, the Phillies, and the Dodgers. We were a one game playoff away from six of the eight spots being in the top nine in payroll. The Championship Series didn’t feature any team with a payroll below $100 million. Clearly, money plays a very important part of success in baseball. Sure, small market teams get a shot every now and then, like last year with the Rays, but the odds of them repeating their runs is pretty low.

Of course, it isn’t enough to have money to spend. The Mets and the Cubs (2^nd and 3^rd in payroll, respectively) showed us that you have to be moderately well run for success. The Twins and the A’s have shown us that a well run small market team can succeed to some degree, though neither have made it to the World Series in the past 15-20 years. Just making the playoffs is little consolation. The A’s are particularly unlucky because they lost whatever edge they had when the Moneyball philosophy was adopted by the big market teams.

Large market teams won seven of the last ten World Series with the Red Sox and Yankees repeating.

Now, this next part of my discussion is going to seem like Yankees bashing, and in a way, it is. I’m a Red Sox fan, so it really can’t come across any other way. Using the Red Sox-Yankees rivalry and the fact that these are probably to two most-hated teams in baseball, I’m going to put on a little math lesson (the Sox are 4^th in payroll this year, but I don’t want to use the Cubs or Mets because they shit the bed so badly this year).

The payroll difference between the Yankees and Red Sox is roughly $80 million dollars. The payroll difference between the Red Sox and team with the lowest payroll, the Marlins, is roughly $85 million. The Marlins are also the lowest payroll by about $7 million. There are 25 teams between the Marlins and Red Sox and two between the Yankees and Red Sox.

What does this tell us? As discussed above, there is a huge gap in the amount of success with large market teams and small market teams. The Red Sox may be an “evil” large market team that has the ability to sign any high-priced free agent (and they are), but compared to the Yankees, they are just another small market team. I’m not saying this to gain sympathy from teams the legitimately struggle to compete, but to illustrate any Yankees success should be viewed through this lens. Yes, they have great players, most of whom deserve to be revered in their sport, but the success is hollow. They should never NOT win the World Series. Or at least make it there. It’s also why the schadenfreude is so great when they fail.

There are a few counterpoints I should address before wrapping up. I have to acknowledge that the value of a dollar lessons the higher the payrolls go, so the difference between the Yankees and Red Sox isn’t quite as pronounced as the difference between the Red Sox and Marlins. The numbers just aren’t as cut-and-dry as one would assume. Also, the lack of success for small to medium market success isn’t just a matter of the money they spend, but also a matter of the money they don’t spend. Some owners are stingy, though they can afford more. They don’t see that hiring better office people or spending more on talent could bring in more revenue. But we only have the product we see, so that’s what we have to go on.

So, congrats to the Yankees and all their fans. You won the World Series with a $200 million dollar payroll. It must feel good (dammit, I know it does…).

Irrational Fear of Horror Movies

I used to be terrified to walk down the horror movie aisle at Blockbuster video. This may come as a surprise to those who know me as a horror movie obsessive, but it’s true. Unfortunately, the sports bloopers tapes shared space with the horror films, so there were times that I couldn’t avoid the section altogether. I’d find any excuse to avert my eyes, but it didn’t work. I’m still mildly scarred by the box cover of The Dead Next Door and Night of the Demons. This fear was responsible for one of my most terrifying dreams in which my bedroom was stocked with horror movies (I definitely remember Hellraiser being among the collection, and as my eyes pan across them from across the room, I see a man at the end of the row who turns around and looks at me. His face oozing and dripping flesh and I can see the exposed bone. It’s one of two times in my life that I woke up in the cliché, “sit straight up panting and sweating” manner that is so often depicted in TV and movies. Fortunately, I later discovered that I was not the only one afraid of the horror section.
A few years after I got over my fear of horror movies and had a few of the classics under my belt, I’d still freak myself out at night trying to sleep. I convinced myself that the central air in my room sounded exactly like the breathing heard from Michael Myers in Halloween. This fear is responsible for why I don’t yell at characters for being stupid when going off alone because I did all sorts of solo investigating into dark corners of my room (and house, in general). The mind would rather believe it’s nothing than accept that there is a killer in the house.
Probably the most ridiculous fear regarding horror movies is that what you saw in the movie is going to happen to you, but only after you see the movie. It’s almost absurd how irrational this fear is. Millions of people watch these movies and only a very few ended up getting hacked to death or haunted in the ensuing hours, and generally due to forces unrelated to the movie. While this hasn’t happened to me in years, I’m embarrassed to admit that years is actually three years and doubly embarrassed to admit that the culprit was pretty terrible The Grudge 2: Grudgier (subtitle may or may not be accurate). If there is one the Grudge movies do well, though, is creating creepy as hell ghosts. The day after I saw the movie, my job took me to upstate New York where I was alone in a hotel room. The unfamiliarity of the situation and bizarre sounds of the room freaked me out. I got about four hours of sleep max that night.

Fortunately, horror movies don’t really get under my skin anymore. I’ve probably watched more in the past three years than the rest of my life combined. Maybe I’m just desensitized or I’ve gotten used to the conventions. It’s probably more related to my increased knowledge in how movies are made that lessons the impact. There is still one lingering fright in my life. About once a month, I have a dream that always has different subject matter, but features a familiar character: Freddy Krueger. They never fail to scare me and I always have trouble going back to sleep, but I take consolation that since I haven’t woken up dead yet, either it is just a dream or Freddy isn’t interested in killing me. I can live with either.

A New Rule for Sport Fans

With the World Series underway, I feel now is an appropriate time to address a topic that’s been on my mind for a while, now. Fans are only allowed to take credit for championships during times that they were actually fans of the team and actively rooting and living the season with them. Cub fans don’t go around saying, “at least we won the World Series in 1908!” That’s no consolation because they weren’t around to experience the excitement.

I’ll admit right out of the gate that this springs from the Yankees return to the World Series and having friends who are fans of them. Don’t get me wrong, though. Having my roots in Pennsylvania, I experienced this phenomenon with the recent success of the Pittsburgh Steelers (“One for the thumb”), as well. There is never a time that it isn’t annoying, regardless of the team.

Yankee fans are calling for their 27^th title, but how many people are still alive that were fans for all of them? And you can call it sour grapes if you want (I am a Red Sox fan, after all), but even if you look at the past fifteen years the Yankees still have the most titles. They still have bragging rights! But if I run into an 8-year old Yankees fan, you better believe I’m going to dangle his title-less existence over his or her head while I flaunt my two championships. It’s just the way it’s gotta be.

Fans really view themselves as a part of the team. If this is true (and there is a strong argument that they are more a part of the team than the actual players), then they shouldn’t get the glory of the team from before they signed on. If I joined the Red Sox now, they aren’t going to give me a ring for 2007. The best part of this new rule is that it rewards longtime fandom. You can’t just hop on a bandwagon and the longer you root, the more title chances you get.

It’s time to stop living in the past.

But because I was alive for this (and yes, I see the irony with the prior sentence):

Paranormal Activity

Much has been made of Paranormal Activity’s similarity to The Blair Witch Project, what with the low-budget, (mostly) hand-held look. Even the marketing is comparable, letting word-of-mouth and a unique, audience-assisted distribution technique driving interest. Clearly, it’s worked. The film grossed $9.1 million in its first week showing in less than 200 theaters. As it’s expanded, the numbers have shot up to the top of the box office. I finally got around to seeing it and with all the good I’ve been hearing about it, my expectations were pretty high.

The first thing I noticed was that, aside from aesthetic, Paranormal Activity owes a lot more to the 1981 demon haunting story starring Barbara Hershey than it did to Blair Witch (I highly recommend checking out The Entity, but watch it with a group. I’ll tantalize you with a four-word description: heavy metal demon rape). Also, since I saw Drag Me to Hell earlier this year, I couldn’t shake the similarities even though Paranormal Activity was made earlier. It’s not fair, but I couldn’t help it. Fortunately, the films have completely different approaches to similar material, so it didn’t feel I’d already seen the movie this year.

Now, maybe I watch too many horror movies (and I probably do), but by the time stuff really started to happen in Paranormal Activity, I was completely bored and restless. I appreciate that the film took its time building up the suspense and the different emotional states the characters went through, but I simply didn’t care for the characters. I blame part of this on myself. I get intensely uncomfortable watching those cutesy moments of relationships depicted. The times where people act silly and playful with each other but they are the only ones who would find what they are doing amusing. I know I do it, too, but I don’t want anyone to have to see it. This is how the characters are introduced to the audience, though, so instead of caring for them, I disconnected.
My other issue that I have to cop to is that I don’t like watching irrational fighting. Sure, you could say all fighting is irrational, but what I mean is I don’t like watching a problem that can easily be solved become a huge deal because one party is being stubborn. In the case of Paranormal Activity, the girlfriend (Katie) repeatedly asks her boyfriend (Micah) to turn the camera and increasingly gets upset. Of course, if the boyfriend stops filming, then there is not movie, so he has to continue. I’m certain most people will overlook this, and probably should, but it really bugs me. The genre of the horror mockumentary is filled with contrived reasons to continue filming beyond the point that is reasonably acceptable. Generally, it’s dealt with by having a character say, “Film everything!” Here, it’s done to seemingly antagonize a freaked out girlfriend for no reason (same deal with the Ouiji board. Again, all of this fighting and stupidity takes me out of the intended experience of the movie.

Since Paranormal Activity is deliberate, and I’m essentially alienated from the film, there’s a lot of down time in which to grow restless. The mystery is enough to drive the story initially, though. It’s creepy to see the minor things that start out the incident, but again, it’s always the same set piece slightly tweaked each time, so even that got a little dull. The film telegraphs every moment of potential scares by having a low drone start just before something happens. Sure, it may build suspense, but it doesn’t really get under your skin like a subtler approach would.

Quick aside: we’re meant to believe that the police gave this footage to the filmmaker to edit together. For all intents and purposes, the events of the film are real. Yet, the filmmaker decided to add this score to every paranormal event. How exploitative is that? Instead of presenting things as they happened, the director is saying, “Hey… check THIS out.” End aside.

It’s not that Paranormal Activity is bad. Hell, the only other people at my screening applauded after it ended. And I don’t think my expectations had anything to do with my disappointment. In the end, it probably is that I’ve seen too many horror movies. I’ve seen the material before and I’ve seen it done much better. If you want to see a horror mockumentary that really gets under your skin, be sure to catch Lake Mungo when it eventually gets released. In terms of tone, the films are quite similar, but the suspense is done very differently.

At the Concession Stand

Throughout my high school years, also known as the years I should have been working so I’d have varied job experiences to call back to when I need to instead of being lazy, I rejected the idea of working in a movie theater. The hours sucked, it could get incredibly busy, and you had to deal with all sorts of obnoxious people. In short, I was above the job (much like I was above working at Blockbuster). In retrospect, high school was the perfect time to work at a theater. It would have given me valuable experience in the field that I want to pursue and what did I care what my classmates thought?

Now, I’m working in two theaters and assisting a coworker’s (directorial) stage debut. Essentially, I’m doing the job I thought I was too good for, but I’m doing it for free and over ten years later. I can’t help but think I made a mistake somewhere along the line. The consolation is that the places I’m working at now aren’t part of a giant corporation, but are small and locally run. In the case of the Hollywood Theater, it’s not for profit, so that’s nice.

However, I was reminded of some aspects of human nature I’d forgotten about upon entry into this new world. Things that laid dormant in the two plus years since I left Neato Burrito. I’d forgotten how incredibly lazy and stupid people are, in general. I don’t think they are like this all the time, just when they leave the house and have to talk to people.

I don’t know how much time we spend at counters to order food, be it fast food or a roadside trailer or a concession stand, but it’s enough that we should have learned by now how to approach this scenario. I can’t believe how many people make it to the counter without having a decision made. It’s not like the theaters in which I’m working have all sorts of other options like nachos, slushies, and other such stuff. We have candy, popcorn, and drinks all in plain view. To make matters worse, there’s a not insignificant number of people when asked, “what size popcorn would you like?” respond with, “what sizes do you have?” You’re not in a Starbucks, buddy. It’s small, medium, or large, the same measurements nearly everything else in the world uses.

The longer you are in line, the less excuse you have for not knowing what you want. There’s plenty of time to prepare for this (and I know this territory has been covered extensively by comedians, but it’s a whole different thing to live it regularly). I can understand approaching the counter and having to think a little, but even then, stand back and let others jump in so you don’t hold things up. And as a side note, don’t give me your trash to throw out. It’s a movie theater. There are trashcans everywhere.

But working at the concession stand isn’t so bad. The most obnoxious thing is cleaning up the theater after the crowd leaves. It’s like people lose all concept of cleaning up after themselves. It’s the ultimate in irony that people complain about theaters having sticky floors when the only reason the floors get sticky is because they make a mess of it all. Spilling popcorn is going to happen, because for some reason, popcorn is nearly impossible to handle if you pick up more than one piece at a time (seriously, it’s like it has an aversion to being eaten). But I’m legitimately shocked at how many half full (what can I say? I’m an optimist) bags of popcorn and bottles of soda that get left behind. Why even by concessions? Surely you’ve learned to gauge how hungry/thirsty you are at this point. And since we only serve bottles of soda at the Hollywood, why not take it with you? It has a lid for a reason.

I know that people don’t like to hold their trash longer than necessary (hence why people litter), but is it really so hard to pick up your wrappers and napkins (oh god, the PILES of napkins just lying around is astounding. It’s like they grow on trees or something) and such? I’ll clean up the popcorn and spilled M&Ms, after all, I need something to do, but I don’t have that much room in my little sweeper thing.

It’s not really such a big deal and I’m kind of a curmudgeon anyway, but I’m trying to think or what other places people go that they just leave trash behind. I think it’s just something people do when they go to be entertained. Some people describe going to the movies so they can “turn their mind off” for a few hours. That has never seemed so appropriate to me as it does now.