In defense of Hunter S Thompson

  I read the numbers on the film adaptation of Hunter S Thompson's "Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas" and I wondered how it could've been so universally ignored upon its release in the year 1995.  After all, Johnny Depp was playing Thompson and Terry Gilliam was co writing and directing.  I figured that the critics, savage as they were, were once again failing to understand the fantasia like world of one Terry Gilliam.  And now, as I watch the film adaptation of the book I so loved, I understand why the film version failed and I understand why all of the people who enjoyed the book version of Fear and Loathing were up in arms about Terry Gilliam's attempt at recreating a literary Picasso.  For starters, the film is wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to begin.  Johnny Depp, gifted as he is, seems to be playing up the very caricature of Hunter S Thompson that Thompson tried to desperately to disconnect himself from.  It's almost heartbreaking to see a great literary presence like Hunter S Thompson reduced to nothing more than debauchery and buffoonery on screen.  Was Depp actually listening to Thompson during all their years of friendship when he said, on countless occasions, that Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas was a playfully exaggerated take on what everyone expected him to be?  I read a few blurbs on writer director Terry Gilliam's frantic scramble to get Fear and Loathing the film financed and then scripted.  Apparently, Gilliam and one of his main co writers, Tony Gilroy, banged out an adaptation of Hunter S Thompson's beloved novel in less than a week.  Watching the film, it seems like Gilliam and his writers, in their haste, failed to take heed of one critical element that makes the book so understated and so brilliant; it's the fact that Thompson's alter ego is forever wearing a poker face.  No matter the level of chaos he creates, Thompson's alter ego remains oblivious to it all with nothing more than a shrug.  To shine a light on the debauchery of Hunter S Thompson's alter ego is to reduce the book to nothing more than an overbearing parody.  Watching Gilliam's film adaptation of Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas, I couldn't help but wonder if Gilliam was laughing with Thompson or laughing at him. The most disappointing thing is that Hollywood made another Hunter S Thompson novel, The Rum Diary, into a film and committed the same mistake that Gilliam did in terms of needlessly turning up the volume on the material.  Again, Johnny Depp was playing the caricature of Thompson and not the man himself  I think I'm even more up in arms about The Rum Diary because that novel is NOT Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas.  It makes you wonder if anyone in Hollywood has actually read or even truly grasps what Thompson's work was all about.  In death, he has been franchised and or pigeon holed by Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas; the very novel that brought him to our attention in the first place.

The Path Of Tebow

     Personally I don't care about Tim Tebow.  To me, he is a Closeau like figure that succeeds in spite of his own ineptitude.  No matter how hard John Elway tries to get rid of Jacques Closeau, er, Tim Tebow, something strangely Pink Panther esque happens.  If Tebow is anything, he is a maddening paradigm for football purists everywhere.  He has difficulty throwing the football and making reads but yet, he won a playoff game.  Maybe my indifference towards Tebow is based more on his over exuberant declarations of faith more than anything.  Tebow wins a playoff game... he thanks God.  I was actually surprised that he didn't thank god for allowing him to enjoy Super Bowl week.  Under reported was the fact that Tebow was walking around Indy like a wide eyed kid just weeks after getting his head handed to him by Belichick and the Patriots.  My hope is two fold.  I hope that Tebow actually BECOMES a quarterback.  Not just a quarterback.  A LEGITIMATE quarterback.  If he could actually bring anything to his given position, perhaps the anti Tebow sentiment wouldn't be as fierce as it is now.  If he could become a QB perhaps his declarations of faith would be treated by me with subtle eye rolls and not full on vomiting attacks.  So either two things will happen with young Mister Tebow.  Either John Elway will actually turn him into a quarterback or...... the Belichicks of the world will correctly identify Tebows' QB related deficiencies and he will be shown the door by the NFL.  And then Tim can go back to the happy happy moral superiority of Christianity behind closed doors and the rest of us can exhale.  Either that or the curtain will be pulled back and Tebow will be exposed as a moral hypocrite.  How many times have you seen men of god tumble like Humpty Dumpty from the heights of religious sanctity?  I have no doubt that Tebow will be one of them.  For starters, he likes the limelight and that is the shortest path to temptation.  Not even a so called man of God is immune to the trappings of fame.  So that's what I'm waiting for I guess.  I'm waiting for Tebow to be exposed as a runner with a limited quarterback IQ or I'm waiting for him to sin.  Can you imagine if Christianity's ultimate PR machine goes astray?  Oh, what a delicious moment that would be.  Now if you'll excuse me... it's time for some Tebowing.

The Unbearable Lightness Of Lin

   I think I owe young Jeremy Lin an apology.  I don't think my indifference towards him is based solely on his personality.  It's not like he's Tebow, pointing skyward and blowing the trumpet of his beloved Christianity every few minutes.  I'd like Tebow a lot more if he would simply take a breath and shut up.  But bare in mind, these are the writings of an atheist who views Christianity as a high and mighty sect of do gooders who simply don't know when to quit.  But back to mister Jeremy Lin.  I'm not bothered by the media coverage of his rather herculean efforts on the basketball court.  I'm just going to wait it out until Carmelo Anthony comes back and Lin doesn't see the basketball again.  Lin will go back to the bench, Melo will be Melo, and the Knicks will be the bloated basketball blob they've been for the past decade or so.  Maybe my indifference towards Lin spawns from being a jealous midwesterner.  Being in Chicago, all I hear is New York this and New York that.  The Garden is the greatest basketball venue in the world.  The Knicks fans are the most knowledgeable fans in basketball.  And now the headlines are filled with slobbering East coast media types throwing rose pedals at young Jeremy Lin.  Maybe I've reached my breaking point in terms of my midwestern inferiority complex and Jeremy Lin is paying the price for it.  Or maybe I just don't give a damn about the Knicks or the Yankees or anything New York related.  Maybe my indifference towards Jeremy Lin is because he's not one of my tribe from a Chicago team.  Perhaps it's the idea that ESPN gives forty seconds to my Bulls and almost five minutes to Lin and the Knicks.  FYI... the Knicks are the eighth seed in basketballs Eastern conference and the Bulls, forty seconds and all, are the number one seed.  But that doesn't matter because ESPN can't resist slobbering all over anything that's either Boston or New York based.  Gosh darn it, I don't think that the four letter network features either the Red Sox or Yankees in my home market enough.  I wouldn't be surprised if ESPN devoted an hour before a nationally televised Knicks game to the origins of the mystical MSG.  By the way, this is the same network that devoted an hour of programming to the origins of Fenway Park.  Yuck.  But this is the life of a Chicagoan I guess.  I have to travel to NYC to get my Broadway on.  I have to travel to Madison Square Garden to become basketball smart.  Perhaps I'm not bright enough to appreciate the essence of a Jeremy Lin because I live in Chicago.

The Roar Of A Disillusioned Ex Catholic

  So I'm on the train heading home from work and I'm reading Steve Huntley's column in the Sun Times.  Huntley, who in my view, will never be mistaken for an Obama supporter took the president to task for pushing a federal law that requires Catholic Hospitals, Charities, and Universities to provide all employees with health insurance that includes coverage for contraception, sterilization, and the morning after birth control pill.  Huntley accused the president of waging a war on the Constitution and basically undermining the mission
of the Catholic Church and everything it stands for.  I have a news flash for Mister Huntley and the Catholic Church.  This isn't a matter of constitutional rights.  No, it's a matter of common sense.  Whether the Catholic Church wants to admit it or not, we're living in the age of HIV and AIDS.  Encouraging the flock not to wear condoms is just plain lunacy when there's an incurable disease out there decimating people from all walks of life.  Quick question for Mister Huntley and the Catholic Church?  What is one of the risk factors for HIV/AIDS?  Anyone? Anyone?  The answer is... (drumroll) having sex without....(wait for it) contraceptives.  Then again, why doesn't this backlash surprise me.  I was a Catholic once and then I grew up and I realized what a bizarre ideology I had been bred into.  In my view, Catholicism is an OZ like utopia where mortal men take a vow and are expected to fore sake all of the wants and desires that make them human so they can serve the church without fail.  Love thy neighbor but if that neighbor is gay or lesbian, they have to go down the block to a separate place of worship.  Hell, I was pretty much labeled as a black sheep of my own faith because I had sex before marriage.  Good thing I ignored the thematic ruling on contraceptives; otherwise, I would've brought a child into the world before I was ready.  Look, just because I'm a disillusioned Catholic doesn't mean that I'm declaring war on Catholicism as a whole.  It wasn't my bag and it made my head hurt, being a Catholic, but that's me.  There are those who will agree that Obama overstepped his bounds by forcing all Catholic entities to act in violation of their doctrine.  But what if that doctrine is misguided and archaic?  What if that doctrine isn't exactly a perfect fit for some rather unsettling times on the fornication front?  Whether the Catholic Church wants to admit it or not, there are many people like me out there.  People who, though they were bred to believe in certain commandments, will ultimately stray for the sake of both practicality and free will.  In the eyes of the Catholic Church, I committed a sin.  In my view, I made a choice and then I acted responsibly.  Obama isn't the bad guy here, I don't care what Steve Huntley or the Catholic Church says.  Obama made a choice and that choice is about responsibility and common sense, and ultimately, public safety.  The Catholic Church was or is unwilling to think in these terms so Obama simply gave them a much needed reality check.

And the Oscar goes to.. Bridesmaids?

  To me, Oscar night is a celebration of groundbreaking, non popcorn flicks.  It's a chance for smaller film makers to actually gain a fleeting moment of recognition after being overlooked by the vast majority of film goers during the given year.  Yet, this year, Bridesmaids is a best picture nominee.  Yes folks, Judd Apatow may actually pick up an Oscar before he learns how to both pace and edit his films.  Note to Mister Apatow, Funny People was a wee bit too looooooooong.  Now I thought that it was a tad bit over rated but wouldn't a film like Shame have better benefited from a best picture nomination instead of Bridesmaids?  Films like Shame are the lifeblood of whatever is left of indie cinema, if indie cinema even exists anymore.  I'm sure the positive buzz for Bridesmaids isn't much ado about nothing but does it deserve a best picture nomination?  In my world, no.  To me, nominating Bridesmaids for best picture is a slap in the face to indie pioneers like the late Adrienne Shelley and Hal Hartley.  The Academy wouldn't give these artists or their films the time of day but they let a throw away flick like Bridesmaids into the clubhouse?  Darren Aronofsky's masterpiece, Requiem For A Dream, gets ignored but the Academy nominates a little known liberal soap boxer called Margin Call?  Smaller film makers have a hard enough time finding an audience for their films and now the Academy wants to stack the deck even further by letting films like Bridemaids into the Oscar race.  I actually want to see Bridesmaids win the best picture Oscar so the Academy is forced to justify this potential cinematic tragedy.  What's next, Adam Sandler gets a best picture nomination next year for a Happy Gilmour sequel?  Why did the Academy stop by nominating by Bridesmaids?  Why didn't they nominate Michael Bay for best director for Transformers 3?  I say, next year, the Academy should nominate The Grey for best picture.  Heck, why not throw an Oscar nod towards Alvin and The Chipmunks?  Heck, I think that the Academy may be on to something.  Out with the important films.  Be gone indie film makers.  If Bridesmaids can make it as an Oscar contender, why not The Three Stooges film or the upcoming Fast and Furious 6.  Heck, Vin Diesel might be right; he deserves a best actor nomination.  In fact, I'm asking the Academy to revoke George Clooneys' best actor nomination so that Vin Diesel can finally get his just desserts on Hollywood's biggest night.  If the Academy is going to dilute everything that the Oscar stands for, they might as well not mess around with it.  The way things are going, I'm surprised that the Academy didn't nominate Transformers 3 instead of The Descendants for best picture.  You know that things are upside down in the land of Oscar when people can campaign for Seth Rogen for best supporting actor in 50/50 without being laughed out of town.  Ask yourself, is Seth Rogen your measuring stick of acting achievement?  Ask yourself, is Melissa McCarthy your measuring stick of acting achievement?  Not in my world folks, not in world.

Momma....... don't let your babies grow up to be Cub fans....

  Don't take my Cub card, I'm not resigning from the Union or jumping ship in anyway.  Rather, this is a letter to the all parents whose newest arrivals will soon be bundled up in Cubbie blue.  Don't do it.  Don't subject the newest addition to your family to the misery of Cubdom.  I've only been a Cub fan for 23 years and I've already experienced enough hell and heartbreak to last a lifetime.  Me?  Heck. what about the older generation of Cubs fans?  What about the ones who had to experience the gut wrenching collapse in 1969.  For those of you who are too young to remember, The Cubs were ten and a half games up in the division in September and blew every bit of that lead to an upstart franchise known as the New York Mets.  This is the nature of Cubdom in a nutshell.  It's a spooky place where black cats run past the collective psyche of a tortured fan base every summer and sometimes, in October.  Hell, a black cat actually ran past poor Ron Santo as he stood in the on deck during a fateful night at old Shea Stadium way back in 1969.  For all of us younger Cub fans, our 1969 moment occurred on two October nights in the year 2003.  Can you imagine watching the team that you love blow a trip to the World Series in just 48 grueling hours?  You can if you're a Cub fan.  And if you're a Cub fan those moments in both 1969 and 2003 hurt as much as they did in real time.  I won't even mention 1984, we've all seen the footage of the ball dribbling between Leon Durhams legs.  We've all cursed the footage of Steve Garvey circling the bases at Jack Murphy Stadium after his walk off homer in game four of the NLCS.  I'm sure Steve Garvey is a decent fellow, but I want to pummel him every time I see him running the bases with his fist in the air.  Garvey, you son of a....... For me, I still can't watch that foul pop sailing towards Bartman without those feelings of loss and or deflation bubbling to the surface.  New parents, this is what you're about to inflict on your newborn son or your newborn daughter.  Does any child need to be inducted into this misery?  Yes I know that Tom Ricketts earned a few style points and a few inches of renewed rope by hiring Theo Epstein.  But is Theo immune to the perils of  Cubdom?  Didn't we celebrate the arrival of Lou Piniella and Dusty Baker once upon a time?  They were baseball men too and they thought they were brave enough to look Cubdom in its mystical blue eye and break the curse or the spell or whatever the heck we call it.  I worry that Theo, like Dusty and Lou, will ultimately turn to dust.  I worry that Theo will ultimately turn into a defenseless blob of baseball stupid just like Lou and Dusty did.  Look at Lou Piniellas' last few years if you think I'm overstating.  I beg of you, future parents, don't do this to your kids.  Don't make them go through this hell.  And in case the national media is wondering; we take the heartbreaks of 69, 84, and 03 to heart because success is a fleeting thing to a Cub fan.  We don't get many Octobers around here and we don't get many chances to complete for Baseballs holy grail.  The Cubs are not the Yankees, they don't fall down the mountain and start climbing upward again.  This is where this so called pressure comes from; the very same pressure that turned Dusty Baker in a bitter self deluded lush.  The same pressure that turned Uncle Lou into a burned out, babbling hunk of ineptitude.  For us Cub fans, it's Everest or bust.  That's how we've been bred.  To a Cub fan, success is sort of like the mythical Keyser Soze in The Usual Suspects.  Sometimes it's here and then poof.... it's gone.  It's not that I don't want the next generation of Cub nation to join the rank and file on Clark and Addison every summer, I do.  If you parents are intent on dressing your little ones in Cub gear and taking them to Mesa and then to Wrigley a few times a year, let me make one suggestion; a good psychiatrist.  Welcome aboard.