0-16

So the Detroit Lions have made history, but not in a good way. By finishing the season without a win, not even a tie, they have become the poster boys for futility. The fact that they "were in" a lot of these games doesn't really amount to much. The only other team that was as pitiful was the 1976 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. But they only lost 14 games. Of course the inevitable happened this morning.

I don't think they had this in mind when they started their 75th anniversary season.
Good thing they have the Red Wings.

Charlie Brown's Parents Arrested

It's about time. The heathens.

Funny stuff, eh?

WKRP in Cincinnati - For Real!

One of my favorite all-time sitcoms was WKRP in Cincinnati that ran from 1978-1982 on CBS. In fact I have Season 1 on DVD (the crappy replaced music version) and am waiting impatiently for Season #2.

I loved everything from the spaced-out antics of Dr. Johnny Fever and Les Nessman's mystery injuries (he would turn up on every episode with a bandage or guaze somewhere on body, even to herb Tarlic's white belt and shoes. Of course, there was also the natural beauty of Jan Smithers. Anybody elese would probably say Loni Anderson, Jan was the one for me.


Now, there appears to be an actual WKRP in the city of Cincinnati. Why it has taken this long for someone to jump on the notoriety of this hit show (at least in syndication) is a noodle-scratcher. I guess it has to do with Mary Tyler Moore Productions (MTM) and CBS having the copywrite and all that, but seriously, has no one else even thought about this?

Then again, I still remember when a restaurant in Winnipeg, Canada that appealed to high-school kids and employed waitresses on roller-skates named "Arnold's" was informed by the attorneys of ABC television they had to cease and desist all likenesses and trademarks of the Happy Days hangout. True story.

This is Too Cool

My first-ever, first favourite wrestler when I was probably about nine or ten, was The Masked Superstar. I watched the Superstar beat up a many jobbers on my weekly Saturday evening American Wrestling Association (AWA)
Strangely enough, he was made a legitimate bruiser (and a pretty sucessful one, too) and not a jabroni, which considering his gimmick...

Here's an interview

I can't remember anyone he wrestled, nor do I remember when the last mach I saw him in. I just remember wanting him to keep hurting that other guy in the who mouthed off about him in an interview, just off a few yards from the ring, before the match.

Well, they ALL paid the piper let me tell ya. Anyways, I don't remember when he left the AWA, but all that torment throughout the years, all the sleepless nights wondering what ever became of my favourite anti-hero-was over when I saw "The Super Machine". By the way, this was not too long after "Bobby The Brain"Heenan had Andre the Giant suspended from the World Wrestling Federation (yes, at one time they were enemies, remember?) but, the machines, claiming they weren't who they obviosly were weren't fooling the Brain, or me-not for one second.



They said back then that it could have been Andre or the Giant Baba. But C'mon, it HAD to be Andre. Look at the way he lumbers, and the SOUND OF HIS VOICE for Pete's sake.

Anyways, then in the late 80s came...DEMOLITION!



But as for the Madman of Mystery, the Hooded Assassin, the...nah, I just made those up...

Video here, here and here.

And an interview way back with Bobby Heenan as his manager (I had no idea)



And just when you think he's gone again...He's back, and he's a CHAMPION!
(Actually this was the reason for this whole post. I found this website and just started this ramble for the Superstar)

I finally met the Superstar in 2007 at a Legends reunion autograph signing. It was a day before WrestleMania XXIII in Detroit. He was there with his old demolition tag team partner, Smash. Other stars present were: Tito Santana, The Iron Shiek, Hacksaw Jim Duggan and Superfly Jimmy Snuka. I didn't seek anyone else's autograph. The only one that mattered that day was the Superstar's.

So, WOO HOO! Long FREAKIN' live the reign of the only FREAKIN' dude with a hood that EVER FREAKIN' mattered, The Masked FREAKIN' Superstar!!



Yay Bill E.

The Wrestler

Ok. Finally a crtically acclaimed, legitimate movie about the sport that I love. Mickey Rourke may have a comeback on his hands, as well as a Oscar nomination about the trials and tribulations of a ex-professional wrestler tryong to make a comeback.
I don't want to give anything away, which is a safe bet, since I don't know anything about it, but from what I've gathered it sounds like a real homage of a life of a wrestler outside the sport, and if the trailor is any indication, the "backstage" or "behind the curtain" element to the film is pretty dead on. The way the "boys" interact and show their love for their craft and each other.

As I've worked (and continue to work on a part-time basis) for a couple of independent wrestling companies, I have seen the comraderie close up. It very much is a close, tight-knit family.
Plus the always hot Marisa Tomei is in it (Homer drool)

From www.firstshowing.net:


The Wrestler may go on to win some Oscars and you'll want to see it as soon as you can. Every quote in this trailer is accurate. It is certainly "tender, gripping" and "remarkable" and unquestionably a phenomenal achievement for both Mickey Rourke and Darren Aronofsky. Even if you don't like wrestling, you need to watch this. The Wrestler is less about the sport and more about the lonely life of one wrestler. And it is as endearing as it is entertaining - a truly phenomenal bit of cinematic bliss.



The Wrestler is both directed and produced by visionary filmmaker Darren Aronofsky, of Pi, Requiem for a Dream, and The Fountain previously, with a script written by Robert D. Siegel, of only The Onion Movie previously. The film first premiered at the Venice Film Festival and Toronto Film Festival and was quickly picked up by Fox Searchlight for distribution. The Wrestler will hit very limited theaters starting on December 17th before expanding wider throughout January. Don't miss this - you will love it!

Star Trek:The Next, Next Generation

So Star Trek is making a comeback. And although I'm more of a Star Wars fan than Star Trek (have you seen those Trekkies, they're just weird) but I have kept up with the Star Trek universe whenever possible, not counting the many, many adventure novels about the crew of the (original) Enterprise, but I have seen all the movies (I cannot mention the ST movies without mentioning Christopher Lloyd. Best. Klingon. Ever.)

I still think the original t.v. show is vastly superior in many ways. Obviously, the updated special effects and the character of Data is the fodder for an argument of The New Generation being the superior brand, and it's a toss-up as to who is the better captain; Picard or Kirk. Picard is more intellectual (not so much "smarter") but Kirk is more wily and obviously gets more chicks-even the green ones. Now as for the debate as to who would I rather be commanded by when the captain is off the bridge, it's no contest; Spock punks Riker.

But anyways, I digress ( a lot)
With the release of the new film on May 8 of next year entitled simply, Star Trek, we get to see a prequel of the original 60s television series , with a young Enterprise crew played by a fresh new crop of young actors, including Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, Run Fatboy Run) as Mongomery "Scotty" Scott-yay!

Also, as this article reveals from the U.K's Mail One, we find out Uhura (played by the ultra sexy Zoe Saldana) and Kirk (Chris Pine) get it on! Bet you didn't see that one coming. But are you surprised, as I said, Kirk always gets the chicks. I hate guys who can seemingly do that on a whim (only because I can't)



Just by reading this article alone, you get the feeling that Kirk is somewhat of a brazen douche bag early on, and he and Spock actually get into a fight. Obviously that is worked out judging by their endearing friendship throughout their ensuing careers and lives, especially in Spock's "death" scene in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, my favourite ST movie so far (love that Ricardo Montalban)

It's being dubbed as the "most action-packed Star Trek yet," and as the following trailer shows, that seems to be pretty accurate.







Rounding out the cast is Zachary Quinto as Mr. Spock, John Cho (Harold & Kumar fame) as Hikaru Sulu, Anton Yelchin as Pavel Chekov, Karl Urban (Lord of the Rings) as Leonard "Bones" McCoy, Winona Ryder (looking extremely hot) as Spock's human mother, Amanda Grayson and Eric Bana (Troy) as Romulan villian, Nero. (What, no Klingons?) Watch for a cameo from original cast member, Leonard Nimoy as the "older" Spock.

Director, J.J. Abrams says that he tried to find a cameo role for William Shatner, but "didn't want the script to 'shove him in because that would be a disaster."

I think this one may just be...MONEY!

Paul McCartney Hints at “Mythical” Beatles Track Release

If this turns out to be true, talk about cool. I mean who in their right mind doesn't like The Beatles and wouldn't drool with anticipation for a "new" track?
How many people stood in line to pick up 1996's release of Anthology?

I myself was in Fab Four heaven when I got mine. Although I was a bit miffed about waiting Then of course I, along with everyone else, had to wait until 2000 for the Anthology book to be released.

Will this be an actual new release or just another re-release such as a number of "alternate" versions of singles from Anthology and McCartney's re-release of Let it Be, entitled Let it Be-Naked. No diifference really, except the strings were taken out of The Long and Winding Road and the George Harrison solo on the title track was switched to John Lennon's

We'll see...if it's even true.

Get Fuzzy

So lately I've discovered a comic strip called "Get Fuzzy." I just found it one day in my local Saturday funnies and I've been addicted ever since. It's about this wise-cracking Siamese cat named Bucky, his pal, the kinda dim, Satchel the Pootch and their "master" (which is debateable-especially if anyone of you out there have a cat) Rob.


Bucky just kills me. He's so arogant and self-centered (like I said, he's a cat) and Satchel is quite careful not to upset him for fear of Bucky's sinister reprisals. But once in a while he gets Bucky, leaving him frustrated, wondering how this dim dog got the better of him. But overall, Bucky controls most of the situations (at least he thinks he does) leaving Satchel, Rob and Rob's friends scrathing their heads-but from a distance.

A Second NHL Team in Toronto?

If this turns out to be true, it will most certainly tick me off. Why? Well, first off Winnipeg and Quebec lose their teams to American cities and there are some other, perfectly good Canadian cities just clamoring for "big league" entertainment.
The city of Hamilton have been begging for a NHL team since it hosted the infamous 1987 Canada Cup. That request has been continually blocked by the NHL Board of Governors, particularly the Toronto Maple Leafs and Buffalo Sabres.
Regina has been (kind of) wanting one since the St. Louis Blues were a hair from moving north to-believe it or not-Saskatoon.

Halifax has also shown some interest (I personally would like to see a team out on the east coast) and the aforementioned city of Winnipeg has a state-of-the-art arena that is only six or seven years old. I mean, the AHL team that inhabits that building now continually draws more people than some southern NHL franchises. Why there aren't more teams in Canada astounds me.
Yeah, I know, it's the politics and the tax burdens. But I think mainly it's the short-sightedness and incompetence of Gary Bettman, who should have been out of there years ago.

So as for another team in Toronto? I say nyet!

The Dark Knight

O.k. I realize I'm posting on this very, very late. I saw this masterpiece on opening night. Actually it was during the midnight showing, so of course the theatre was packed.

Let me start off by saying that Heath Ledger is guaren-dam-teed to win the Best Supporting Oscar for this, postumously of course.

Ledger in the role of The Joker was, in one word, brilliant. He deserves all the awards and adulation that he recieves for this. Even for ones he doesn't. His role as the Batman's arch-nemesis was the best EVER! With all due respect to Jack Nicholson's performance in 1989 (which was a different role, different movie, different time) no one can ever compare to the Ledger performance.

From the make-up (awesome) the voice, the laugh and everything in between, I can never read another Batman comic and not think of Ledger ever again.

If Ledger had not passed on, I could have gladly and easily watched a Christian Bale/Heath Ledger marathon of follow-up movies. Just those two going at it and I'd be more than satisfied. This movie was the most true to any comic-based characters ever and for evermore. That includes Spiderman, Superman, and the X-Men.

Another great performance was that of Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent/Two-Face. In his portrayal, we got to witness the transformation of a good man's turn to evil in the face (no pun intended) 0f lost love. Gary Oldman as Detective/Commissioner Gordon was excellent as well. But then again, he always is.

Maggie Gyllenhaal was a throw away. The producers should have tried harder to sign Katie Holmes for a reprisal of Rachel Dawes. Apparently she wasn't interested this time around. I'll bet she's kicking herself now, seeing that the world-wide gross for The Dark Knight is currently at $991,822,235 and counting, and sits and #4 all-time, according to the Internet Movie Database.

The only real downfall of this film was the voice of Christian Bale's Batman. It was disappointing to say the least, if not down right goofy.

I would say this movie should also win an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. Jonathan Nolan and Christopher Nolan should be Hollywood's new golden boys.

An instant classic. It deserved and lived up to every bit of anticipation and hype it created, and then some.

By the way,
"Why so serious?"

Maurice "Mad Dog" Vachon

So I'm at work doing graveyard shift security at the hospital as I have been doing for the last seven months, then word comes along that a legend of the sport of professional wrestling is in rehab in the hospital (for his amputeed leg) just two floors up.
Well, I had absolutely no idea that Maurice "Mad Dog" Vachon, the man himself was just above me in a bed resting. Wow!

So my partner and I (he made the arrangements with the nursing staff) went to visit him, making sure that he had his breakfast and we weren't disturbing him (I didn't want to be a total mark) and what a class act this guy is. I mean I know I supposed to hate this guy, but he was so cool! A legend in my midst-CROIKY!!

We talked about wrestling (of course) Montreal (where I was born, but not raised) his family and the fact that my sister used to hang out with his daughter when they were in grade school (I don't know if it was his daughter or Luna Vachon) and just people in general.

Eternal Rants

A friend of mine has a MySpace page that speaks to the truth about, well everything that buffoons do to tick her off.
It is quite entertaining, thus the reason it is posted here.

But fair warning: There is a lot of gratuitous language.

Enjoy. And try to keep a straight face, and not let your favourite drink come out of your nose.

Yeah. She's not exactly a people person is she? She's really not that mean. Actually, she's quite cool. But just like "normal"people, she just has absolutely no paitence for ignoramaces.

Harvey Korman...R.I.P.

Another great comedic mind has left us. When I was in my pre-pubescent years, my earliest comedic memories were of The Carol Burnett Show, which was a ahead-of-its-time skit & variety show on CBS from 1967-1978 that had me in stitches every week.

The star of the show was of course the hilarious Carol Burnett herself, who I believe is the second greatest female comedian after only Lucille Ball, but the on-screen antics of Korman and his partner, the legendary Tim Conway is what truly stole the show.
With the benefit of live television, the "gag-reel" of sorts, was the best part of the show. Every week, every fan of the show waited with baited breath to see when Conway would make Korman flub his lines, then mischievously watch as Korman tried to regain his composure.
However, that was next to impossible when Korman would at times just bust a gut laughing-mouth wide open and holding his stomach and everything.
That was, without a doubt the best part of the show.

Any cog that was taken out of that machine would have caused a domino effect and ultimately audience loyalty would have taken a nose-dive, I'm sure. That includes every one from Korman and Conway to Steve Lawerence and Vickie Lawerence (no relation, I believe)
By the way, did you know that Vickie Lawrence joined the cast right out of high school?

Korman was known for not only the Carol Burnett Show, but for various other comedies as well.

i.e.

Herbie Goes Bananas-1980
The Pink Panther Strikes Again-1976
Blazing Saddles-1974
History of the World Pt.1-1981
First Family-1980
The Star Wars Holiday Special-1978
Dracula: dead and Loving It-1995
Radioland Murders-1994

Put the NHL Back in Winnipeg

Since I was nine years old I have lived and died with the Winnipeg Jets of the National Hockey League (and was quite aware of their former success, i.e three AVCO Cup championships of the 1970s in the old World Hockey Association)
Although, admittedly, they were at mediocre best throughout their tenure in the NHL between 1979-1996 (when the facist politics of the league at the time ripped the team-as well as Jets fans hearts out of the city) making it to the second round of the Stanley Cup playoffs only twice (both times defeating the Calgary Flames only to be humbled-again and again-by the mighty Edmonton Oilers) they were the thing to do in Winnipeg in the winter months-which were usually between September and late May. Can you imagine Winnipeg in the winter without professional hockey?

To answer that, the hockey powers that be saw fit to buy the Minnesota Moose of the International Hockey League, rename them the Manitoba Moose (the farm team of the not-too-well-liked Vancouver Canucks) and try to keep pro hockey in the Peg strong as ever. But, although the people of the city are supporting the Moose (just like they supported the Jets, thst wasn't the problem-as I said, politics were) it isn't the NHL.

So, from here, I'd like to post a few other opinions (i.e. other's columns from various sources) onthe subject.


Before you get to those, however, check out this great website dedicated to the Jets, by a Winnipegger and a huge Jets fans, Darren Ford, entitled, JetsOwner.com with a better background and/or history. Plus WinnipegJetsOnline.com, curtiswalker.com (Jets memorial page) and dilawri.com/sites/jetstribute.com (weird name for a tribute site, but cool none the less) and winnipegjetslegends.blogspot.com plus a cool WHA site and one more Jets site ah, make that two.

That's just to name a few. And if you're interested in the Jets draft history, look no futher than here.

But of course, none of these will bring my precious Jetas back; only vision, a salary cap (which we now have) a new, committed owner and a new commissioner will do that.

In the meantime, check out this column about the best hockey team ever to live and their chances of returning to Winnipeg.
Mar 04, 2007 -Cohara

As the dust continues to settle in the post-lockout NHL, it is becoming more and more clear that the league, while it can survive in its current state, would be much better suited following either contraction or relocation. It is VERY unlikely that we will see contraction any time soon in the NHL, but the possibly of relocation is intriguing. Teams like the Florida Panthers and the Nashville Predators will seemingly never draw major crowds. It may appear that Gary Bettman deserves credit for saving for the NHL and I believe he does; the only problem is, is that Gary Bettman is the reason the NHL needed saving in the first place. The overexpansion of the 90's is what put the NHL into pre-lockout mess that it was in. Markets that never should've been considered for NHL teams, were not only considered but granted organizations. I understand that cities like Phoenix and Nashville have strong fanbases, but they are not hockey markets and those fanbases are barely, if at all, enough to fully support an NHL team.

The NHL took teams out of hockey markets in Winnipeg, Minnesota, Hartford and Quebec, not because these cities couldn't support teams, but because these cities couldn't support teams that couldn't win. In the new era of the salary cap, all of these cities, with the right amenities, could support NHL teams. The argument that the NHL can never be a top professional league is fundamentally flawed. The belief is that, if the league can't contend with the NFL, NBA, and MLB in America, it simply is a failure. Well, simply put, the league can survive without the U.S. In Canada, the league is as strong as ever, with support to put even an another team in Ontario. In hockey areas, like MInnesota, and the Northeast, the NHL is also as strong as ever. Unfortunately, the success of the NHL is based on the success of teams in markets like Florida, Nashville, Phoenix, Carolina, and other markets that most likely never should have been given teams in the first place. There's still plenty of to correct these mistakes, but it's up to a current regime, in Gary Bettman and friends, that aren't very likely to admit they made an enormous mistake in overexpansion.

If it were up to me, I would most likely combine the Coyotes and Panthers, and move them back to Winnipeg. I would move the Nashville Predators into Quebec, finally I would return the Carolina Hurricanes back to Hartford. I would leave it at that for the time being, then re-evaluate the success of the league. I understand that not all teams are going to be successful on the ice every year (and that does reflect in off the ice success), but the league can at least give every organization a fair shot at off ice success.

WrestleMania...Not So Much

It is supposed to be the Super Bowl of professional wrestling. The night when all the feuds that accumulate throughout the year are supposed to come to a head and be solved and over with so that the wrestlers can move on to their next one.
To describe this year's event in one word would be disappointment.

I'm sure anyone who witnessed this year's card live would probably disagree, as I would about last year's, since I was there and although that wasn't the best WrestleMania either (they're supposed to get better every year, with better surprises and/or "swerves") it was my first, therefore it was cool and exciting and worth every penny.

But watching it on Pay Per View this year (which cost an outlandish $54 and change-my share being $20 and if you wanted to see it in High Definition it ran you an extra $10) left me, oh, I don't know...unfulfilled. It's not that the matches weren't any good (then again, maybe some of them were) it's just that there wasn't any excitement. Maybe I've just been spoiled throughout the years with a great wrestling product that is WrestleMania or maybe some of the magic has worn off from my childhood since I've been "involved" with the industry working (read volunteering) for a handful of independent promotions, but this years event was par at best.

At least this year, Ric Flair was involved in a match on the card and not just in a dark match. That still dumbfounds me how Vince McMahon could put one of the greatest workers in the history of the sport in a dark match instead of in a important match in the biggest event of the year. Thankfully, McMahon saw the error of his ways in that one and put Flair in a spotlight match with Shawn Michaels, losing to the Heartbreak Kid in a retirement match (which they billed as a "Career Threatening" match which kind of makes you wonder if this is just a temporary "retirement" for Flair (as is the majority of that particular stipulation) or if, given his age, it really is the end of the Nature Boy's in-ring career.
This year, they chose to put an ECW #1 contenders battle royal (the winner to face champion, Chavo Guerrero later on the card) as the misplaced dark match.

But again this year, there was no tag team title match. I know McMahon has never been big on tag teams, but no title defenses at WrestleMania for two straight years?
Also, you had both the Intercontinental and United States champions (Chris Jericho and MVP, respectively) not defending their titles, but instead were involved in a ladder match (which was the best match of the night, if not the Flair-Michaels one)
But that was potentially two Savage-Steamboat-type matches that could have stolen the show (depending on who their opponents were) that was just ditched. Neither of them won, so I guess they were just added for star-power. By the way, the winner of that match, CM Punk, was one of my six winners I picked for the night. That's six matches out of eight (I thought Chavo was going to weasel his way into somehow retaining his title & I could have sworn that Triple H was going to win his 6th WWE championship and his 11th world title overall) I know, there were actually nine matches, but do Maria and Ashley v.s. Melina & Beth Phoenix (who along with Victoria are the only capable women wrestlers in the company) constitute a real match?

Of course there were some good highlight reel matches, such as the aforementioned "Money in the Bank" ladder match, Michaels-Flair, Cena-Triple H-Orton (who, by the way was only the second heel champion to successfully retain his title at WrestleMania) and Undertaker-Edge (which should have been the 2nd main event behind the WWE championship match)

It just wasn't WrestleMania. As a friend of mine said last night,
"This wasn't WrestleMania caliber, it was more of a Summer Slam caliber."
True dat.

If you go back and read my very first entry of this blog, it was about last year's WrestleMania. Compare the difference of excitement between that entry and this one and you'll see that, much like the difference between the real Diesel and Razor Ramon and the stupid "fake" ones, it just wasn't the same. While your at it, compare this year's WrestleMania to the last 23 (especially the first six) and see if you don't agree.

With the outdoor venue of the Citrus Bowl, thank goodness it didn't rain during the show. How would that have turned out?

Star Wars...According to a Three-Year-Old

One word. Adorable. I guess YouTube is good for some things.

On Further Inspection...

After checking out some of the games for the PlayStation 2 game console, (Hey, I know I'm behind the times-I had the PS 1 for about 10 years don't cha know. I'm slowly moving forward) I've discovered that the rating systems on these games are indeed there for a reason. I've played a couple of games in the Grand Theft Auto series and with all the swearing, sexuality and violence in them, you'd figure that you couldn't get much vulgar than those.
Well, hold on there. If you think parents and/or guardians were up in arms about those, you should see what's in store in for the kiddies (should they decide to forgo the warnings on the package) in the Scarface: The World is Yours game by Vivendi Games/Radical Entertainment.

The game-play itself is very much like the GTA games in that it's a first-person shooter-type and you can pull people out of there cars for a jacking and you have to go on missions to complete the re-building of your cocaine empire. Here is a review from GameSpot.com. I don't whole-heartedly agree with their assertions. I mean, how could you possibly make a sequel, even in game form, if you don't re-write the ending to have the main character survive. In any case, it's a little more adult-oriented than GTA, I believe even a little more so than Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. I'm wondering if the new GTA due out next month will rival Scarface in pure adult-orientated entertainment. That's not to say it's like adult-film entertainment (which of course I have no idea what they're like-Nyuk-Nyuk)

Anyways, the point is, I always thought that although these ratings were on these games for a reason, I never really assumed they would be accurate to the point of actually keeping young children from being exposed to this type of vulgarity, even fun vulgarity. I mean, I can understand why parents wouldn't want their kids, after playing this and other games like it, to run around the house or school saying, "I'm Tony Montana, you f***'n cock-a-roach! Die mother-f***er!!"
Yeah, probably not a good idea. Of course, most of these parents don't really have a clue what their kids are playing half the time anyways.

Oh yeah, Scarface: The World is Yours, cool game. Kinda trippy.

Does Winning an Oscar Make You Stupid?

I mean, really. Is it a prerequisite or something? I can't believe how delusional these people are. I guess it's the "in" thing to do nowadays. Ah well, what do you want? She's French.

Jeff Healy R.I.P.

I never was really a fan of Jeff Healy. But you have to respect the fact that a blind man could wale on a guitar like he did, especially with his unorthodox style of playing. I saw him once at a fairground attraction, just out of curiosity's sake, to be honest, and I was quite impressed and entertained. That alone, I believe, made him an original. Just imagine the obstacles he had to overcome. Plus his song "Angel Eyes", beauty.

They Should Have Won

Since it's Oscar season, I thought I'd put down my thoughts as to who I believe should have won an Academy Award in the past, but didn't for one lame reason or another. Basically, who I believe got royally jipped.
In most of these cases, it's a real shame that these people didn't win and to me its quite amazing that they're not bitter about it, at least not in public.

These are in no particular order.

-Best Picture (1977) Star Wars

This is the one that irks me the most. Being that I am a proud Star Wars geek and have been since I was six years old, it would probably explain my complete (but not unwarranted) bias for this pick.

Consider this:

-It was the most popular movie that summer (and continues to be one of the most popular of all time) and continues to resonate in popular culture. For example, if anyone is really smart, they're often referred to as "Yoda", right? Or if someone does something kind of freaky, or is really lucky at something, you're invariably going hear that that person has "used the force". Those homages (including the recent one by Seth McFarlane's Family Guy, entitled "Blue Harvest" the original production name of Return of the Jedi) continue to this day. You can even still see them in today's movies.

-It made the most money in history up to that point. Even today if you factor in inflation, number of screens available and seating capacity, it still ranks at #2 all-time ($460 million) just behind 1997's Titanic ($600 million) and ahead of 2002's Shrek 2 ($437 million) if you can believe that.

-It changed the way movies are made forever, thanks to George Lucas and Industrial Light and Magic (ILM)

Of course I realize this is all hindsight, but without that company there is no Lord of the Rings, there is no Abyss, there is no Terminator series and any other movie that blew your mind with effects-driven story lines. Do I even have to mention Pixar?

Look, Annie Hall, which took home the statue that year, was a decent flick and I have no problem with Woody Allen winning Best Director, which Lucas was nominated for; but did Annie Hall have lines around the block for months at a time? I may have been only six, but I still remember. Not only that, I don't seem to remember hearing anything about Annie Hall's audience standing and cheering at the end of that movie, nationwide, I might add.
It simply wasn't as good as the movie from that galaxy far, far away.

-Best Picture (1990) Goodfellas

Thankfully, Joe Pesci did win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for his portrayal of the violent, short-tempered, Tommy (a similar role he would later reprise in Casino)
But this movie was clearly a more entertaining film than eventual winner, Dances with Wolves, starring Kevin Costner. Although that itself was a film I enjoyed (even if it was historically inaccurate)

Even mob boss, John Gotti, said it was the most accurate portrayal of the underworld that he had ever seen. That's not too surprising, considering that the writer of the book (Wiseguys) that the screenplay was based on, was in the life since he was a teenager and met Gotti once or twice himself.

-Best Actor (1962) Peter O'Toole

How can a film that wins Best Picture not reward the actor that carried it. O'Toole was in almost every scene, literally. I speak of course of Lawrence of Arabia. As of this writing, O'Toole has been nominated eight times and is 0-8.

Of course, there are those of you out there that will say, "He did win an Oscar!"
Yes he did, a lifetime achievement award. The Academy saw fit to award him for his awesome body of work in 2003, on which he commented,
"I'm being rewarded for my lifetime of work. I must be close to death."

But the Academy has yet to recognize him for any individual role he most certainly deserves; probably more than any other actor alive today. Speaking of which, I do believe last year's nomination for Venus will be his last, as much as it pains me to say that. I mean the guy was born in 1932. You realize that makes him 76 years old? Tick..tick.
But seriously, can anyone explain to me why this guy hasn't brought home the gold? Even once?

We're talking about the guy who played T.E. Lawrence for God's sake! Not to mention his unforgettable performances in Beckett (1964)What's New Pussycat (1965) The Night of the Generals (1967) The Lion in Winter (1968) Zulu Dawn (1969) The Stuntman (1980) My Favourite Year (1982) and in 1981's two-part television mini-series, Masada, in which he was also robbed of an Emmy Award.

-Best Supporting Actor (1983) Ian McDiarmid

Here's another Star Wars role that went totally unnoticed by the Academy. Jack Nicholson took home the statue that year for Terms of Endearment, while McDiarmid wasn't even nominated for his portrayal of the draconian Emperor Palpatine in Return of the Jedi. Again, one of the highest grossing movies of that year and his performance was the best in the film.

Look, I really don't expect any Star Wars role to win an Oscar (although Alec Guiness was nominated in 1977 for Best Supporting Actor for his role of Obi Wan Kenobi, as was George Lucas for Best Director) but McDiarmid was really creepy and cool in the movie and at least a nomination would have been nice. Just watch it and pay attention to the evil oozing out of that character.

-Best Actor (2002) Daniel Day-Lewis

If you haven't seen Gangs of New York, do yourself a favour and do so. Day-Lewis as William Cutting (aka Bill the Butcher) is outstanding. Even Leonardo DiCaprio is good in this one. I don't think I can say the same for Cameron Diaz, she was par at best. I honestly don't remember if Day-Lewis was nominated for this film. He must have been, the Academy can't be that blind can they? Well, actually, yes they can; read Peter O'Toole above.

-Best Director (1990, 1995, 2004, 2005) Martin Scorsese

Yes, four years he was robbed of the prize that was oh, so rightfully his. When Scorsese finally won his Best Director Oscar in 2007 for The Departed, he was finally recognized for his lifetime of work that started in 1970 with Street Scenes, but he should have won for his earlier works like Goodfellas, Casino, Gangs of New York and The Aviator. This guy is the best director going today (in my opinion, just that much better-at least lately-than Steven Spielberg) These four movies were excellent and Scorsese was at least recognized for his work and nominated for them, but as I've said, he should have won. To be honest, Kevin Costner's win for Best Director in 1990 for Dances with Wolves was deserved, but again, Goodfellas was the better picture.

-Best Picture (1998) Saving Private Ryan

This is not only one of the best war movies of all time, it is one of the best movies, period.
It was nominated for Best Picture (as was Tom Hanks, deservedly for Best Actor, portraying "Ryan's" Capt. John Miller-which would have been his third in four years) but lost to all things, Shakespeare in Love. Are you kidding? Shakespeare in Love was about as entertaining as wet paint. Give me a break.

-Best Actor (2000) Tom Hanks

As well as being robbed in 1998 for Saving Private Ryan, Hanks should have won in 2000 for Castaway, which would, and should, have been (if I had my way) Hanks' fourth Best Actor win (if you include his two legitimate wins for Philadelphia and Forrest Gump and my picks of Saving Private Ryan and Castaway) He did most of his scenes with an inanimate object that almost had you believe that it was an actual person instead of a volleyball "named" Wilson, much like Mark Hamil did in 1980 when he sold a muppet named Yoda to the world in The Empire Strikes Back.

-Best Actor & Best Supporting Actor (1989, 1993 & 1995) Morgan Freeman

Although Freeman finally took home an Oscar in 2004 for Million Dollar Baby, he should have won multiple times before. The movies that immediately come to mind are: 1989's Driving Miss Daisy for Best Actor (in which Jessica Tandy won the Oscar for Best Actress) 1995's Seven, for Best Actor and 1994's The Shawshank Redemption for Best Supporting Actor. A case could also be made for Tim Robbins for Best Actor for Shawshank. Freeman is much like Gary Oldman (who is also on this list) in that they are both money in the bank in whatever role they are cast in.

-Best Supporting Actor (1997) Gary Oldman

If you've seen Air Force One starring Harrison Ford, and although it was not a great movie, good, not great, the same can't be said for Oldman who totally stole the limelight from Ford. Oldman's role as a Russian terrorist who's crew infiltrates "the world's most secure aircraft" to kidnap the president of the United States in exchange for a renegade hard-line communist general who is determined to re-ignite the Cold War. He should have gotten at least a nomination.

-Best Supporting Actor (1986) Willem Dafoe

First off, let it be known that for years I thought this guy's name was "William" But really, who didn't? Yeah right, liar.
Anywho, if you've seen Platoon (1986) you would have to agree that his portrayal of Sgt. Elias Grodin was simply awesome. Being the yin to Sgt. Bob Barnes' yang, played by Tom Berenger was the perfect foil for Dafoe. How could you not root for Grodin to simply put his M-16 to the temple of Barnes and do every soldier in the platoon a favour by getting rid of the murderous, psychotic sergeant?

-Best Supporting Actor (1977) Alec Guinness

Although he was rightfully nominated for his role as Ben "Obi Wan" Kenobi, a character whom Ewan McGregor has most adequately taken the mantle of and made it his own for a new generation of SW fans to enjoy for Episodes I-III, Guinness didn't win. The character is a cultural icon and Sir Alec is the reason for it. Guinness did win an Oscar for 1957's Bridge on the River Kwai, he deserved another for this role. If for no other reason than coining the phrase ,"May the force be with you"

-Best Picture (2001) The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

I remember being blown away at the successful adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's epic fantasy of Middle Earth when it finally hit the big screen (again, thanks to George Lucas and ILM)
I was really disappointed, but not surprised when in its place for Best Picture, the title, A Beautiful Mind was read aloud. Not surprised because the Academy in all their infinite wisdom never seem to tap either the movie that was the most financially successful or was the most popular.

Come 2002, the release year of The Two Towers, again not surprisingly, the musical Chicago wins Best Picture. This one really irked me, not only because Towers didn't win, but it lost to all things, a musical. Let me be clear on this-I HATE musicals. The only redeeming ones (and I don't know if they can even qualify as musicals since there's more action and/or comedy in them) are Phantom of the Paradise (1974) and The Blues Brothers (1980)

So Come 2003, except for Mystic River, which, in my opinion, was over-rated, with the exception of the justly awarded Tim Robbins for Best Supporting Actor; Rings wasn't really up against a strong field. It should have won in 2001, but I'm sure an inside deal was made with the Academy to award the last one since it was a forgone conclusion that it would be a trilogy.

On this note, if you've seen Clerks 2 (and you should, it's hysterical) why, when the character Randall was arguing with a Rings fan co-worker, as well as a customer, about what was the better trilogy, Lord of the Rings or Star Wars; who says that George Lucas "has never and will never win a [Best Director] Oscar, why didn't Randall mention (as I have twice mentioned already) if it wasn't for Lucas and ILM, there would be no Lord of the Rings, something that even Rings director, Peter Jackson acknowledges. There's one more thing that Randall was right about, there's only one "Return" and it's not of "The King", it's of "The Jedi".

-Best Actor (1985) Harrison Ford

This is the first and only time that I feel Ford deserved this award (or any for that matter; after all, as Peter Griffin says, he's "the only actor who's career wasn't destroyed by this [Star Wars] movie." I suppose a case could be made for his role as Indiana Jones in Raiders of the Lost Arc (that movie is also on this list later on)
His role as Detective John Book in Witness was very believable and likable. His shared scenes with his cast mates, from Kelly McGillis and Jan Rubes to a very young Lucas Haas was stellar. And for all you Paul Newman fans out there, even though he won for The Color of Money (1986) he didn't deserve it.

-Best Actor (1956, 1976) John Wayne

The Duke is a true Hollywood legend, icon, showstopper; he's of any status of mythic proportions you can think of, yet in all his 171 films (yes, 171) since 1926, he had only one Oscar to his credit. Why? Well, I could go into a rant about how much he was hated by Hollywood liberals, and he most certainly was, but I won't. Let's just say after 1968's The Green Berets, Hollywood did everything in its power to kill the image of the "all-American". He simply should have been awarded a Best Actor Oscar for The Searchers in his portrayal of Ethen Edwards, and for his last film, The Shootist. Not because it was his last film (which would be reason enough for a guy that was in the top 10 of box office receipts for 25 straight years) but because he deserved it. Both times.

-Best Actor (1983) Al Pacino

Other than Peter O'Toole, this is probably the clearest evidence of highway robbery in Oscar history. Try and tell me with a straight face that Pacino didn't deserve an Oscar for Scarface? I mean, for the love of God, he wasn't even nominated. Cripes, man! What does a guy have to do to get some respect from Hollywood? Oh right, apparently it's play someone who is mentally disturbed (read Sean Penn in I am Sam and Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man)
Scarface, along with the aforementioned Goodfellas and The Godfather, is the crime movie among crime movies. Pacino's portrayal of Cuban exile-turned cocaine king-pin, Tony Montana is the bar actors of today only hope they can reach half the height of.

And like Peter O'Toole, he should have received his just deserts much earlier in his brilliant career (I speak of The Godfather (1972), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Serpico (1973) and possibly even Cruising (1980)
However, unlike O'Toole, Pacino did eventually take home a statuette. The irony is, at least in my opinion, I don't believe Pacino actually deserved the Oscar for the role he won it for, 1992's Scent of a Woman. Actually, I think his co-star, Chris O'Donnel had a better performance on the whole.

-Best Supporting Actor (1993) Val Kilmer

As Doc Holiday in Tombstone, Val Kilmer was brilliant. He was flamboyant, suave, endearing, reckless and full of scene-stealing bravado. He carried the film and undoubtedly stole the limelight from Kurt Russel. Some say Sam Elliot gave him a run for Kilmer's money, who himself gave more than a fine performance.

-Best Actor (2004) Billy Bob Thorton

You probably wouldn't think it, but Thorton gave the most realistic performance of Davy Crockett of anyone who portrayed the Congressman from Tennessee and Alamo hero, including John Wayne From what I know, I sincerely believe that's the way Crockett was, given the historical data on the man. Just for information's sake, and special notation, it should be pointed out that the late, great "Man in Black", Johnny Cash was a descendant of Crockett.

It's quite the shame that Jamie Foxx walked away with the Oscar for "imitating" the great Ray Charles and Thorton didn't for becoming Crockett. As for the death of Crockett, I believe the scene where he was swinging his rifle (Old Betsy) as the Mexican army broke through the wall, was the way he died, not as the film portrays as having him "executed" by stabbing from bayonet. I should also mention that this film should have won Best Picture that year. It's a shame that it didn't come out at it's original release date; around Christmas time, instead of the following April, making it too early a release for Oscar contention.

-Best Picture (1969) True Grit

As I mentioned, John Wayne should have won Best Actor Oscars for both The Searchers and True Grit. It is the latter that also should have won Best Picture for that year, instead of the eventual winner, Midnight Cowboy. True Grit was the antithesis of what a western should be. everything from costume, location, props and most of all, language. The dialect they spoke in this film is not only loyal to the book, is is loyal to history. The language in the film is how they talked back then, right down to the slang. "Fill yer hands, you son of a bitch!" My favourite line in the movie. By the way, check out a semi-young Robert Duvall in this one.
Did that guy ever have hair? One of the truly best films of all time.

-Best Actress (1969) Kim Darby

As goes Best Picture and Best Actor for True Grit, so goes the Best Actress Oscar. Well, it should have anyways. Darby most assuredly earned the Best Actress Oscar for True Grit. She was invaluable to this project as the confident, annoying and ultimately brave Maddie Ross. She hasn't done much since then, but then again she has already left her mark in cinema history. Sometimes it's like that. Some actors have to go their whole careers, nay their whole lives to leave their mark in Hollywood, others it just takes that one special role.

-Best Supporting Actor (1993) John Malkovich

If you've seen In the Line of Fire starring Clint Eastwood, you'll already know about the clear-cut spookiness of the character, Mitch Leary, the would-be presidential assassin, played brilliantly (as always) by John Malkovich. The way this guy can go from a cool, sophisticated intellectual type that you would probably enjoy talking about a variety of social issues with, perhaps right at your own dinner table, to a psychotic, callous killer at the drop of a hat. Exellent performance.

-Best Supporting Actor (1980) Frank Oz

O.k. I know you may either cringe or chuckle at this next one, but just hear me out. I sincerely believe that Frank Oz clearly deserved a Best Supporting Oscar for his performance as Yoda in The Empire Strikes Back. I know, I know, how could I justify a puppeteer (or in this case, a "muppeteer") for an Oscar? Easy. Oz created an iconic figure in cinema history and I really don't care if the character was made of rubber. He is a character that everybody knows, constantly is made reference of and is loved by most of the movie-going public. At least anyone over the age of 30 (and a lot under as well) and definitely by Star Wars fans. I understand that the producers of the original SW trilogy (including George Lucas himself) even tried to get a petition going to get Oz on the ballot. Unfortunately the Academy and their stupid rules would have none of it. Robbery, pure and simple.

-Best Supporting Actor (1993) & Best Actor (1997) Leonardo DiCaprio

Although there has been ties in Oscar history before (see 1932, Best Actor-Frederic March for Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde & Wallace Beery for The Champ; 1949, Best Documentary-A Chance to Live & So Much For So Little; 1986-Time is All You've Got & Down and Out in America; 1968, Best Actress-Katherine Hepburn for The Lion in Winter & Barbra Streisand for Funny Girl (like Streisand could ever compete with Hepburn) and since I've already listed John Malkovich as a personal winner for Best Actor in 1993, I guess another tie would be in order since I also feel DiCaprio should have won for his role as the mentally disturbed brother of Johhny Depp in What's Eating Gilbert Grape. In hindsight, perhaps DiCaprio also should have been nominated for his portrayal of Romeo in 1996's Romeo & Juliet with Claire Danes.

DiCaprio's other nod should have been a Best Actor award for Jack Dawson in 1997's Titanic. Tell me who didn't like this character? Just one question, though. Don't you think maybe Rose could have made room for Jack on the floating door at the end? What, there wasn't enough room?

-Best Actor (1988) Gene Hackman

Not much to say besides Hackman was great and he was robbed of an award for his role in Mississippi Burning. Another case can also be made for Willem Dafoe for Best Supporting Actor.

-Best Picture (1981) Raiders of the Lost Arc

Much like Star Wars and Jaws, this film had lines around the block literally for months. It had everything; suspense, action, romance, comedy-it was the best movie that year and if not the top earner, very, very close. Another case could be made for Harrison Ford for Best Actor, but I can understand why not. This George Lucas/Steven Spielberg collaboration was seen as a kids movie, being that it was made as a 1930's-style serial. But then again, that's what made it great, if not totally original, but hey, it worked.

-Best Picture (1982) E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial

Although I have absolutely no problem with eventual winner, Gandhi, which was a magnificent film, maybe there should have been yet another tie. If the Academy gave its awards for the most popular or most commercially successful (which maybe they should, then the right movies may be awarded) E.T. would most assuredly be given consideration. Afterall, Hollywood does love Steven Spielberg; but apparently not enough at this point in time. Tell me you didn't ball your eyes out (especially if you were a kid when you first saw it) when E.T. "died". Yeah, right. Liar.

-Best Actor (1939, 1946, 1950) Jimmy Stewart

All of these roles deserved an Academy Award for Best Actor. Forget the fact that Stewart is my favourite "Golden Era of Hollywood" star, and this could be seen as biased (I'll save you the trouble, of course it is) From his portrayal of the obviously mentally disturbed, but lovable Elwood P. Dowd and his six-foot rabbit friend named Harvey. Or as the naive, but honorable Jefferson Smith in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (the lovely Jean Arthur was also highly noticable) along with the ever-lovable and honorable (that was just a re-occurring theme with Stewart) George Bailey in another Frank Capra classic, It's a Wonderful Life with the gorgeous Donna Reed. It is said that Stewart never really acted at all during his career. What you saw on screen was just Jimmy being Jimmy.

-Best Actor (1964) Christopher Plummer

Probably the best Canadian actor there ever was, Christopher Plummer undoubtedly deserved an Oscar for his portrayal of Commodus in The Fall of the Roman Empire.

-Best Actor (1966 for The Oscar..oddly enough) Best Supporting (1959 for Fall of the Roman Empire) Stephen Boyd

Actually, pretty much the whole cast of The Fall of the Roman Empire should be noted for this stellar picture, and still the best re-telling of the collapse of the world's first republic. Everyone from Alec Guinness, Christopher Plummer, Omar Shariff, even Sophia Loren...well not so much.

But Stephen Boyd as Livius is who stands out the most. Boyd died too early and it's a shame we didn't get to see what might have been. I'm sure he would have been involved in some real classics. Which brings me to the other Oscar he should have won, for The Oscar, oddly enough. He plays an arrogant, Hollywood elitist (gee, where could he have ever gotten the inspiration for that one) who's having a career crisis when he finds out that he's nominated for an Oscar. A really good tounge-in-cheek (although probably not so much, given todays "one drink and I have to go to rehab" crowd that permeates Tinseltown today) send-up of Hollywood.

-Best Picture (2007) American Gangster

I just saw this movie not three days ago and it's really cool. Normally it probably wouldn't deserve a Best Picture Oscar, except that this year's competition isn't really that great. This, and Michael Clayton (starring George Clooney, for whom a case could be made for a Best Actor nod in this one, which he was indeed nominated for this year) were the only films that I've seen that had any type of nominations going for it. (Gangster's Ruby Dee as Mama Lucas received a Best Supporting Actress nod) But overall, it is pretty awesome, and given the rest of the field this year, it was the best among them.

-Best Actor (2007) Denzel Washington

Much like Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman and a small handful of actors that are money in the bank whenever you see their name on a marquee, Washington never fails to please. He has won Oscars for Glory and Training Day (Best Supporting Actor and Best Actor, respectively) and should have won for this role as well, but sadly like most roles on this list that deserve recognition, he wasn't even nominated.


And just as a footnote: Why hasn't one of the most talented, underrated actors today, Christopher Lloyd ever been nominated? This guy is the epitome of range. A great villain (The Legend of the Lone Ranger, 1982; Who Framed Roger Rabbit, 1988 and Star Trek III, 1984-best Klingon, ever) comedian (the Back to the Future trilogy as Dr. "Doc" Emmet Brown, and of course who could forget his classic character, Jim Ignatowski from the sitcom, Taxi?)
If this guy doesn't win something soon, there is no justice.

Heath Ledger

O.k, I admit it was kind of shocking to hear about Heath Ledger, seeing that he was only 28 and all. I enjoyed all of his performances that I actually saw him in, even if the movie itself was lacking (read: The Brothers Grimm...horrible) And of course, the role he will probably will be synonymous with, Brokeback Mountain, which I haven't seen, nor do I plan to.
As of this writing, I haven't seen his earlier works like 10 Things I Hate About You, or Two Hands. I thoroughly enjoyed A Knight's Tale. Most people I know didn't, but I thought it was rather charming. He should have been nominated for an Oscar for his role of Sonny Grotowski in Monster's Ball (which I may cover in a new post coming soon to be entitled, "They Should Have Won", a list of performers and films that I feel were robbed of an Academy Award. Maybe I'll put the Ledger/Ball performance under the title of, "They Should Have at Least Been Nominated".

Ledger actually first caught my attention in The Patriot with Mel Gibson. A fine performance that might have actually overshadowed Gibson himself. The Four Feathers was another interesting film he was in, but I found it to be a little drawn out in some places, Ledger's performance not withstanding.

I've already heard comparisons to that of James Dean. James Dean? I mean Ledger's been dead for what, almost a week and they're insulting him already? James Dean was an under-actor who was over-rated. Don't give me this "Rebel without a Cause" gibberish. That movie made no money and he couldn't sell it. Trust me, his name alone on a marquee is not what sold tickets. Yeah, he had a credible catalogue of work when he was younger, but working a lot doesn't necessarily mean you're good at it. The only reason Giant sold was because of established stars, Rock Hudson and Elizabeth Taylor.

You have to know, that Ledger's last film, The Dark Knight, wherein he plays the phsycotic Joker (and from what I've heard and based on the trailers I've seen, it looks awesome) is going to be m-o-n-e-y. You put together the latest Batman movie and an recently departed actor's swansong...CHA_CHING!
But seriously, Ledger is going to blow people away with his portrayal of the Joker. I don't think you can fairly compare his to Jack Nicholson's, since they were in different eras and in two different styles of film. But I do believe Ledger's will be waaaaaay better.
It's a damn shame, from his growing body of work, it looked like Ledger's roles and performances were only going to get better.