Posts Tagged ‘Sports’

How Bad Can It Be?: Fightstarters

The point of a column like this is not to be a consumer guide, or to give “thumbs up”/”thumbs down” to the latest media product (which is just as well since Ebert owns the whole thumbs-up thing and could sue the pants off me for copping his gimmick). I’m trying to engage some of the ideas underpinning popular culture — notions of authenticity, influence, presentation, expectation — and kick them around to see how they fall. I’m trying, in short, to start a conversation.

And sometimes I’m trying to start an argument. It falls to the critic sometimes to assume a contrarian stance, either by default or by design. The aim is not simply to be disagreeable, not to reflexively oppose received wisdom, but to take nothing for granted. By taking an opinion that “everybody knows” is wrong, you put your interlocutor in the position of defending the view that “everybody knows” is right, and examining why it’s right. And that’s how you get at deeper truths.

And so, in the spirit of the pursuit of knowledge (and also in the pursuit of pissing people off, why isn’t particularly helpful but which can be a whole lotta fun), here are my fightstarters — a selection of my contrarian, heretical, or just plan Wrong ideas about pop culture. You may disagree: in fact, that’s kind of the point.

(more…)

How Bad Can It Be?: Toward a New Jock-Rock Canon

The calendar may define it as March 21, but any baseball fan knows that Opening Day is the real first day of Spring. With a new season just kicking into gear, it’s time to consider the relationship of sports and music. There’s more pop music in the stadiums than ever these days. The problem is, it’s all the same ten songs. Every player seems to enter to Faith No More’s “Epic,” or “Sweet Home Alabama,” or, for the adventurous, the Chemical Brothers’ “Galvanize.” Closing pitchers have their own playlist, and it’s similarly tried-and-true. Even relatively new songs like “Battle Without Honor or Humanity” and “Shipping Up to Boston” have been played nearly into the ground. In short, stadium music is in a rut.

Now, my usual brief with How Bad Can It Be? is to look at pop culture and ask, “Why?” Today, though, in a break with tradition, I’m getting proactive. Why can’t the music in America’s ballparks be fresh and fun? Why can’t stadium crowds get roused by the inherent excitement of the music, rather than by the Pavlovian response of hearing “Enter Sandman” for the eight billionth time? There’s a ton of great music out there can get the fans up and pumped; all that’s needed is the will to buck tradition and try something new.

(more…)

10 Things to Love/Hate about the World Baseball Classic

Tonight Japan and Korea will face off in a grudge match at Dodger Stadium – having already split four games over the last two weeks — in the finale of the second World Baseball Classic.

Or hadn’t you noticed?

You are, of course, forgiven if you hadn’t. Heck, Saturday night on Channel 4 here in L.A. – the city that’s hosting the final two rounds! – the WBC’s first semifinal game didn’t even rate a mention on the 11 p.m. news, shunted aside by extensive coverage of UCLA’s humiliating exit from the NCAA basketball tournament and quick glimpses at the Dodgers’ and Angels’ spring-training action. (Never mind that Angels fans might have wanted to know that the club’s newest high-priced acquisition, outfielder Bobby Abreu, dropped an easy first-inning fly ball that opened the door for Korea’s 10-2 rout of his Venezuela team.)

Personally, I can barely control my excitement about tonight’s final, which I’ll be watching from the same seat (hard against Dodger Stadium’s left-field foul pole) from which I saw the two semifinals. These WBC games offer an entirely different experience from your basic Major League Baseball matchup – and not just because the Koreans and Japanese play a slap-hitting, hustling, slick-fielding version of the game from which Americans have lost all contact during the Steroids Era. Even World Series games can’t offer the same type of baseball nirvana – all-star talent on the field, and intensely passionate, eminently joyful (and thrillingly multicultural) fans in the stands – that has been on display this weekend in Chavez Ravine.

Yet the WBC remains at (or off) the edge of our sporting radar screen, for numerous reasons. Scheduled during a month dominated by wall-to-wall college basketball coverage – a month when, for most of the country, baseball is still thought of as a month away unless you’re lucky/obsessive enough to travel to Florida or Arizona – the tournament has difficulty attracting media interest. And most of the attention it does receive deals with ancillary issues that reflect poorly on the players and the event, rather than focusing on the games themselves.

Granted, the WBC is still riding on training wheels in this second go-round, but so far the event is as frustrating as it is exciting. There’s plenty to love, and plenty to hate as well. To wit:

HATE: The timing. March is a problematic month in which to play games that mean something – not just because of weather (most of the nation is still inhospitable to outdoor activity, limiting the tournament to friendlier climates or … yeccchhhh! … domes), but because this is the time when ballplayers traditionally are shaking off the winter rust and recapturing their timing at the plate, not diving for an up-the-middle grounder with national pride at stake. MLB commissioner Bud Selig says the WBC is in March to stay, but it absolutely needs to move — either to a midsummer fortnight when MLB takes a break (as the NHL does for hockey’s World Cup and the Olympics), or, preferably, to November. Sure, in the latter case the tournament would still be limited to southern cities, but at least the players would be in shape, the eyes of the sporting world would still be on baseball … and, most important, the sport’s owners might not have such a cow over potential injuries (see below). (more…)

The Top 10 Techniques that Hollywood Learned from the NFL

Every great football game, at its heart, is like an action movie. Once you cut out the commercials and halftime, they’re both about the same length. They both build along the same story arc. Depending on your home city (or which side you happened to gamble money on), each game has a protagonist – a burly male hero – with a few trusted allies that faces down an black-hearted maniac and his band of unforgivable, faceless thugs.

Hollywood has made dozens of football movies in recent history. Every year at the studios churn out least one football film – and some years will see as many as four or five football stories committed to celluloid. With Hollywood’s recent love of biopics, it’s safe to assume that more than a few famous players will see their lives and careers dramatized on the big screen. And few things satisfy an audience like the rags to riches story of a league doormat surging to the championship. But as much as the studios love to bank on an underdog story to fill out their quarterly income statements, few football films have actually managed to appeal to more than a niche market. And fewer still have managed to garner any kind of critical acclaim.

But Hollywood has learned that even if pure football can’t deliver box office rewards, the game of football is exciting to watch. And the techniques used by football players can be used to deliver some terrific sequences. This countdown takes a look at some classic techniques used in football and how Hollywood has managed to capture the essence of what makes it so very entertaining to watch – and used this to enhance their own unique stories.

Follow me through the hole to see the top ten techniques that Hollywood has learned from the NFL…

(more…)