Filthy Hobbitses

Peter Jackson's The Hobbit opened this weekend. For me, The Hobbit was not one of those movies that I was dying to see and would stay up late to see it on opening night (Prometheus). Don't get me wrong, I was totally pumped to see it, but it would normally be a movie I wait until a day off and see. One thing totally changed that. They were showing the first 9 minutes of Star Trek: Into Darkness on December 14th only, months before the movie is released. That was enough for me. I was there at 11pm Friday night to watch in IMAX 3D.

I have 3 comments about the night. First, Star Trek. I have never seen a resurrected franchise kick so much ass. The most recent film is absolutely unbelievable. Contrary to prior Trek films, every character is fully developed and has one or more uniquely heroic moments. This is a cast that is more fun to watch than any before. The new movie looks amazing, and who are they kidding. It's Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!!!

Second, The Hobbit itself. In a nutshell, satisfying. You knew when PJ decided to stretch this 350 page book into three 3-hour films that there would be added layers, and the raucous adventure that the book was would be a bit more plodding, and ominous. That's exactly the case here. I remember first reading The Hobbit. I think the first 40 pages are spent in Bilbo's house. BORING! The movie is the same. Although not boring, this movie takes a while to get going. I guess my biggest complaint is the similarity to TFOTR movie. Slow start in Hobbiton, trip to Rivendell, dangerous mountain pass, and Goblin halls = Moria. The movie was great fun, but the Smaug teases were cruel. Bring on the dragon! I suspect the next 2 will be absolutely awe-inspiring.

Finally, I was fortunate to have one of the few IMAX 3D theaters projecting the movie at 48 fps. Throughout the history of film, movies were shot and projected at 24 fps. This is the first feature film to shoot at 48 fps. There are tons of debates online about the pros and cons of 48 fps. On the pro side, they say double the frames reduces blur, creates a lifelike picture and improves 3D. On the con side, they say it looks like video or not a film. I'm gonna be honest. Not a big deal. I am a radiologist, so my eyes are my career. Did 48 fps eliminate blur? No. In mega action scenes with thousands of orcs chasing the dwarves through the caverns with panning cameras, I still saw plenty of blur. Was the 3D better? Yes. Much of the film is rather dark, and the 3D normally would suffer. Not at 48 fps. It was a pretty picture. As for "the look", give me a break. This whole cinophile argument that it "doesn't look like a film" is a joke. Film is an outdated convention. When you go for a hike and look at a waterfall with your own eyes, do you see film grain? Of course not. So why would it be a bad thing to eliminate film grain and make movies more lifelike? It's not. This is like audiophiles clinging to their LPs, mechanics holding onto their 60's muscle cars or IT morons clinging to Windows XP. Not once did I think what I was watching looked like a cheap TV show or soap opera. Technology evolves, and in this case for the better. Movies are being shot digitally, and we need to readjust our brains to enjoy the higher quality we are now privileged to enjoy.

Go see it. It's a fun movie.

Reds Update

I know most of us have been focusing on NCAA football and the end of the Fantasy Football season, so it might come as a surprise that there's been some news from the Cincinnati Reds organization.  The Reds have completed a few trades, some minor, one a bit bigger, in the last few days and have made some pitching changes:

• Re-signed Jonathan Broxton (Closer) for three (3) years
• Assigned Aroldis Chapman to the starting rotation
• In a 3-team trade, obtained Shin Soo Choo (RF) and Jason Donald (IF)
• In the same deal, got rid of Drew Stubbs and Didi Gregorious
• Re-signed Ryan Ludwick to a 2-year deal
• Reportedly signed Jack Hannahan (IF)

These signings go a long way to shoring up some difficult spots in the Reds roster.  The biggest problem for the Reds in 2012 was the lead-off spot in the batting order.  Drew Stubbs typically held down this spot, but his OBP was .277 - the worst of any Reds regular hitter in 2012.  Choo will likely be replacing Stubbs in center field next year, which, while a slight drop-off in defense, is a HUGE gain in offense.  Choo batted .310 and had a .389 OBP from the lead-off spot in 2012 for a pretty bad Indians team.   Overall, he hit .273 with 16 HRs and 21 SBs - so he's got a little pop to his bat and will also steal a base or two throughout the year.  He's also a lefty hitter, so if he hits lead-off, it plays into Dusty's L-R-L-R batting order, since you know Votto (a lefty) will be hitting third).  He may play a little worse defense than Stubbs did, but let's face it, most balls over his head are going out of GABP, so I'm not too concerned.  Besides, pitchers need to pitch better.

Donald and Hannahan will be utility infielders, with maybe a spell or two in the OF.  Votto, Phillips, Cozart, and Frazier will be holding down the infield next year.  I just hope that Rolen calls it a career, or that we don't re-sign him.  Dude is old.

Finally, re-signing Broxton is exciting because we have a proven closer and can move Chapman back to the rotation.  Chapman did solid work in the closer role last year, but he was also the best SP in spring training, and if he can hold that form throughout the season, Cueto, Chapman, Arroyo, Latos, and Bailey will be a fabulous rotation.  Since it's unlikely they all stay healthy, maybe we can keep Leake around - but I wouldn't be heartbroken if we got a couple of young prospects for him. 

My personal feelings are that Jocketty is improving the club with these moves.  I don't know how well Ludwick will do in 2013 - I see him being like Johnny Gomes in 2010 and 2011.  However, the addition of Choo and re-signing of Broxton are really good moves that allow this lineup to be much more consistent in terms of batting order and pitching order in late innings. 

Finally, I'd just like to say that it was time for Stubbs to go, and I'm glad he's gone.  Projected batting order for 2013:  Choo, Frazier, Votto, Phillips, Bruce, Ludwick, Cozart, Hanigan, Pitcher. 

We are stacked!

SEC Overrated - Redux

As a follow-up to Ian's post, I wanted to throw another shovel of dirt onto SEC superiority. I had quite an original thought that I wanted to share.

The SEC almost universally refuse to travel, and only rarely takes on a top out-of-conference opponent. As a result, their teams' schedules almost always include 8 conference games, 2 FCS games, 1 mid-major FBS game and sometimes a rivalry. So how are we to judge the might of such a conference?

Bowl games would be a good start. Since 1992, the SEC's record in Bowl games is 89-57. That's a .640 winning percentage. Not the picture of dominance when you look past the current BCS title streak. What this tells me is that the conference is woefully top-heavy.

Another way to judge? How about looking at the bottom half. When people talk about the weekly gauntlet, that should include ALL the SEC teams on the schedule. This year, the bottom 7 would be Miss State (4-4/8-4), Ole Miss (3-5/6-6), Missouri (2-6/5-7), Arkansas (2-6/4-8), Tennessee (1-7/5-7), Auburn (0-8/3-9) and Kentucky (0-8/2-10). So 5 teams are NOT Bowl eligible. Take a closer look. Kentucky's only wins were Kent State and Samford. Auburn beat LA-Monroe, NM State and Alabama A&M. Look at some of the other victories in this group. Bottom line, these 7 teams would STRUGGLE to win games in the MAC, or MWC.

Now here's my original thought. A constant critique of Notre Dame by idiotic SEC fans is that we would be the 7th best team in the SEC. Oh really? So let's do a mental exercise and see what happens when you take a Notre Dame team fresh off back to back 8-5 seasons, with a 3rd year coach and a redshirt freshman starting at QB and put them smack in the middle of the SEC in 2012. Wait a minute, WE DON'T HAVE TO IMAGINE THIS SCENARIO! This is almost EXACTLY the Texas A&M Aggies in 2012!!!

The Aggies are coming off of 9-4 and 7-6 records. Almost identical to ND. They have a 1st year coach, a disadvantage to ND. They also have a redshirt freshman QB. And how did they do? They went 10-2, lost 2 games to mighty Florida and LSU by a combined 8 points, upset the unbeatable Alabama in Tuscaloosa, got player of the year for the redshirt freshman QB and coach of the year for the 1st year coach.

If this doesn't expose the myth of SEC dominance, then I just can't argue with you anymore.

So the next time you hear some redneck hillbilly from SEC-country tell you ND would be the 7th best team in the SEC, bring up A&M and how they ROLLED through the mightly SEC in only their 1st season in the conference.