Sports: A Game Of Inches

Why "How I Met Your Mother" Is A Terrible Name For The Show

2012-01-29T22:26:00.000-06:00

Let me start off by saying I love CBS's show How I Met Your Mother. I've been on a HIMYM kick this weekend and probably have been watching every old episode on Netflix that I have never seen or have not seen in awhile. It's probably one of my all-time favorite television comedies. But the show has run its course and/or we need to fucking meet The Mother already.

The reason the show is poorly titled is because it sets up a premise it did not and does not need to. The whole premise of the show is Ted (slash Bob Saget) is telling his kids the story of how he and his wife met. Therefore, we have episode after episode and season after season of Ted explaining to his children how he met their mother. Think about this logically. Ask anyone how they met their significant other. Ask yourself how you met your significant other. It's a five minute story at most. Realistically, these kids (a.k.a. stock footage) would have walked out on this story four seasons ago.

The writers and creators of the show tried to extend the meeting of The Mother by explaining Ted's past relationships and how those relationships brought Ted in a place he needed to be in to where he could meet The Mother. This could make some sense. Still realistically kind of silly, but at least logical. However, at this point in the show's series, that ship has sailed.

The two relationships that are most important to Ted are Robin and Stella. Especially Stella. Leaving Ted at the alter was one of the most crushing experiences of his life. And Ted is madly in love with Robin but that relationship will never work out because the two just want different things out of life. Sure, Victoria telling Ted this in Season 7 was a good cue to the audience to hear this, but completely and utterly unnecessary.

After Ted dated Robin in Season 2 and Stella in Season 3 the show should have forced Ted to meet The Mother. We later learned that Ted meets The Mother at Barney's wedding and so the show the needed to put Barney at a place where he could not only be in a monogamous relationship but also willing to get married. It's extremely realistic to spend 7 or 8 seasons getting Barney to a place where he's willing to get married. It is extremely UNrealistic to put Ted in a similar situation. It was silly of the writers to have Ted meet his wife at a wedding and then it turns out to be a wedding that wasn't Marshall and Lilly's. Why did they choose that scenario for Ted to meet The Mother? He could have met her in any other way but they choose to make it a wedding and then choose not to make it Marshall and Lilly's. It just prolongs the inevitable and makes the audience furious when they don't need to be.
______________
SIDENOTE: As a man who is soon to be wed, how is Ted the best man in BOTH Barney and Marshall's wedding as opposed to their brothers? Maybe it makes sense for Ted to be the best man in Marshall's because Marshall has two brothers and so choosing Ted wouldn't upset either brother but Barney only has one brother. It's a dick move on Barney's part not to make James his best man and Marshall should have made one his brothers Best Man. My mom has two sisters and she still chose ONE of them to be her Maid Of Honor. Sorry. That is all.
______________

This brings me back to my point why "How I Met Your Mother" is a terrible name for the show. If the show only lasted four seasons or so then, yes, it's a fine name. Eventually by the 4th season we would meet The Mother and Ted's past relationships would make sense in his 2030 story. But since the show is going to at least last for eight seasons, if not more, it is a horrible name.

The reason the show works so well is because of the group dynamic. The show is just a reincarnation of Friends- and that show had a great name. The title of that show told you that it is just six friends hanging out and for 30 minutes every week you got to see a window into these characters lives. That's exactly how HIMYM is. You care deeply about these characters and enjoy how they interact with each other and the relationships they encounter.

But not only did HIMYM go on a tangent and give itself a name that really does not give the audience a good idea of what the show actually is, it gave it a name surrounding one of the "worst" characters of the show. Ted's character and storyline is probably the worst storyline of the series- no matter what the show's title is.

The best two characters on the show are Marshall and Barney. Some of the best episodes in the past two, terrible seasons of the show (A point I will get to later) are ones centering around Marshall and Barney- especially their relationship with their respected father.

Ted works the same way as J.D. did on Scrubs. He is the glue that holds everything together. You may not like the glue and really want to see everything the glue is sticking to, but you need the glue in order to see the other objects around it. It is because of him that he interacts with the rest of the other characters on the show and binds everyone and everything.

If the show had just some generic title, like Friends, then all of Ted's relationships do not matter, per se. In fact, the audience would care MORE about his later relationships. The show could work the exact same way except just take out the premise that Older Ted is telling his kids this story of how he met his wife. If Older Ted was just explaining to someone (hell, it could have been his kids) the story of his late 20's and early 30's and the fun and goofy things that happened in his life and we had the same plot lines then the show would still be growing strong in its later seasons. But it is not.

Part of the reason Season 7 was so bad was because of Ted's relationship with Zoey. If she is not The Mother then why do we care about this relationship? What's even more frustrating with these later seasons is that they are discounting everything they set up in the earlier seasons. Throughout the episodes where Ted is not in a relationship, the show alludes to how he met The Mother or how a particular event caused him to meet The Mother. For example, we learn that The Mother was a student in the Economics class Ted accidentally taught during his first day of teaching. We learn the fact that Ted runs into Stella and Tony with his yellow umbrella is an important milestone in his life (which did cause Ted to get the teaching job). Every episode ends with Ted explaining why this is some amazing event this in his life. But as we trek further and further along, these major plot points start to become irrelevant.

As we watch Seasons 7 and 8, the train is officially off the track and what we as an audience want to see- Ted meeting The Mother- isn't happening yet. We get a great insight into further delving into Barney's psyche that fact that he's willing to settle down and that he's reconciling with his father and we further develop Marshall's character stemming from the death of his father but the story lines revolving around Ted and Robin (nobody cares about Lily) in the later seasons are strenuous to watch. We know Barney is going to marry Robin so this relationship with Kal Penn and the fact that Robin is STILL staying with Penn is asinine.

Shows want to prolong relationships because audience love the tension between two characters who will soon be together but are not together yet. However, at some point, the tension becomes too unbearable for the audience and the writers need to shit or get off the pot. They need to make the characters come together. The Office (successfully) managed to keep Jim and Pam apart for three seasons but as Karen left and as the fourth season started to roll around, the writers realized they needed to make them come together. The show is trying to recapture that with Andy and Erin to get their old spark back (talk about another show that needs to end, but that's for another post) but that is not coming off as successfully as they would like. Parks and Rec (successfully) kept Leslie and Ben apart but after a season and half the show realized the two needed to come together and it's working very well. But for seven plus LONG seasons, the show has kept Ted and The Mother apart. The reason the other shows put characters together is because that was just the natural order to things and that is what the audience wanted and needed. When the show is entitled "How I Met Your Mother" the natural course of events should have been that sooner rather than later The Father and The Mother should meet. What a crazy notion!

A big part of me wants Jason Segel (Marshall) to leave the show and focus full time in movies. The Muppets was a great success and Forgetting Sarah Marshall is one of my all time favorite movies. With The Five Year Engagement and Jeff Who Lives At Home coming out soon and both looking great, I hope Segel has such great success that he chooses not to resign with CBS after his contract ends and the show comes to its natural resting place. Plus, it's extremely hard for any television program to last more than eight seasons and be good. Jokes and story lines eventually dry the well. I love the show as a whole but I would rather see it conclude properly than keep going on being mediocre at best.

Who Will Win The 2012 Oscars?

2012-01-28T12:42:00.001-06:00

I will do three categories for each nomination. The first one is "What Will Win" which will be out of all the actual nominations which one do I think will actually take home the award. The second one is "What Should Win (Oscar Nominated)" which means out of all the actual nominations which one do I think deserves to take home the golden statue. The third one will be "What Should Win (All Movies)" which means out of every single movie of 2011 which movie or person do I think should take home the award, whether or not they were nominated.*

Best Picture

What Will Win: The Artist
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): The Descendants or Moneyball
What Should Win (All Movies): Young Adult

Best Director

What Will Win: Martin Scorsese (Hugo)
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): Martin Scorsese (Hugo)
What Should Win (All Movies): Bennett Miller (Moneyball)

Best Actor

What Will Win: George Clooney (The Descendants)
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): Brad Pitt (Moneyball)

* Really though, I have no problem if anyone in this category wins it. All were great and no one really stood out above the rest

What Should Win (All Movies): Brad Pitt (Moneyball)

* I personally am a Brad Pitt fan and I would like to see him take home an Oscar

Best Actress

What Will Win: Viola Davis (The Help)
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): N/A

*I've only seen The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. I don't (along with the rest of America) watch movies that have Best Actress nominees in them

What Should Win (All Movies): Charlize Theron (Young Adult)

Best Supporting Actor

What Will Win: Christopher Plummer (Beginners)
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): Nick Nolte (Warrior)
What Should Win (All Movies): Andy Serkis (Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes)

Best Supporting Actress

What Will Win: Octavia Spencer (The Help)
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): Melissa McCarthy (Bridesmaids)
What Should Win (All Movies): Shailene Woodley (The Descendants)

Best Original Screenplay

What Will Win: Woody Allen (Midnight In Paris)
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo (Bridesmaids)
What Should Win (All Movies): Diablo Cody (Young Adult)

Best Adapted Screenplay

What Will Win: Alexander Payne, Jim Rash, and Nat Faxon (The Descendants)
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): Steve Zaillian, Aaron Sorkin, and Stan Chervin (Moneyball)
What Should Win (All Movies): Steve Zaillian, Aaron Sorkin, and Stan Chervin (Moneyball)

Best Cinematography

What Will Win: Robert Richardson (Hugo)
What Should Win (Oscar Nominated): Robert Richardson (Hugo)
What Should Win (All Movies): Magdalena Gorka (Paranormal Activity 3)

Best Animated Film

What Will Win: Rango

Best Foreign Language Film

What Will Win: Iran (A Separation)

Best Original Score

What Will Win: Ludovic Bource (The Artist)

Best Original Song

What Will Win: "Man Or Muppet" by Bret McKenzie (The Muppets)

Best Costume Design

What Will Win: Mark Bridges (The Artist)

Best Make Up

What Will Win: Nick Dudman, Amanda Knight, and Lisa Tomblin (Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows Part II)

Best Visual Effects

What Will Win: Tim Burke, David Vickery, Greg Butler, and John Richardson (Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows Part II)

Best Sound Editing

What Will Win: Ethan van der Ryn and; Erik Aadahl (Transformers: Dark Of The Moon)

Best Sound Mixing

What Will Win: Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers, Jeffrey J. Haboush, and Peter J. Devlin (Transformers: Dark Of The Moon)

*NOTE: While I have not seen every movie in 2011 nor every Oscar nominated movie in 2011 I have seen most. The ones I actually will see from 2011 are: Drive, The Help, and Shame. This list will get updated accordingly once I have seen those flicks.

#2- The Matrix (1999)

2012-01-27T09:59:00.000-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Adam Kaplan: #3
- Bryan Hernandez: #5
- The 'Bright' One: #5
- David "MVP" Eckstien: #12
- Cubsfan4evr1: #20

Directed By: Andy and Lana Wachowski
Written By: Andy and Lana Wachowski
Starring: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Ann Moss, Hugo Weaving, and Joe Pantoliano

The Plot

Infamous computer hacker Neo (Reeves) is "freed" from what we call the real world but is in actuality a computer program called the Matrix generated by robots to keep humans complicit while they use our energy to survive. A group of rebels in the actual world led by by their leader Morpheus (Fishburne) to try and find "The One" (and be believes Neo is "The One") to help stop the reign by the robots.

Why This Movie Is Great

I think The Matrix is great because it is the best science fiction movie of the past 25 years (and maybe ever). After first viewing of the film you loved what you saw but you're not quite sure what really just happened. The movie is purposefully complicated and full of symbolism (besides the obvious Alice in Wonderland references in the beginning of the film).

The Matrix toys with the idea of what is real and what is not. The world that we all know turns out just to be a computer program and a creation of our minds. The themes of reality versus dreaming run throughout the film and makes you question your existence.

Plus, the movie revolutionized special effects with "bullet time."

There's so much jam packed into one two-hour film that I could spend many posts and many paragraphs talking about the nuances of it. So I'm just going to spend some time talking about the symbolism of the names and an explanation of the end which is very confusing on first viewing.

Explanation Of The Names

- Neo: "Neo" in Latin means "new" and is an anagram for "one". Thomas Anderson (Neo's real name) relates to "doubting Thomas" in the Bible when he doesn't believe he is the One. Anderson also means "son of man" which is a messianic title.

- Trinity: An obvious religious reference to the Holy Trinity and actually means "three". The themes of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost run rampant throughout the film.

- Morpheus: In classic mythology it means "fashioner" or "molder" because of the shapes he calls up before the sleeper. He is the God of Dreams which ties into the theme of sleep and dreams throughout the film as well as Morpheus being responsible for "waking people up".

- Cypher: The classical betrayer, the Judas Iscariot. The word refers to a mathematical symbol denoting an absence of quantity, a zero. Also, someone with no value, a nonentity. Cypher can also be short for "Lucipher" which explains the Satan imagery Cypher has towards the beginning of the film when he's the only one wearing red and sporting a goatee.

- The Oracle: In Greek history, The Oracle was an intermediary between God and Man (instead in the movie God is robots). People could ask The Oracle questions and would often get answers in riddle format. Also, in The Matrix The Oracle says, "Do you know what that means? It's Latin. Means 'Know Thyself'" "Know thyself" is inscribed upon the Oracle of Apollo and attributed to the Delphic Oracle.

Explanation of the Ending

***WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS***

Obviously

On the surface, The Matrix is about Neo's journey to become The One. Morpheus frees Neo from the Matrix because he believes that Neo is the only one that can stop the computer's reign of terror. Morpheus takes Neo to see The Oracle (Gloria Foster) to make sure Neo is The One.

The problem most people have on first viewing is that after the meeting we learn that Neo is not The One. However, as Morpheus tells Neo before the meeting:

Try not to think of it in terms of right or wrong. She is a guide Neo. She can help you find your path.

So let's dissect this conversation between The Oracle and Neo because the key to understanding this conversation is the key to understanding the ending.

First, we know going into it that we can not take everything she says verbatim, and we shouldn't. The Oracle's purpose is to guide her subject, not outright tell them. As we have learned from classic literature, mainly from MacBeth, being told the future could end up shaping it. If The Witches had not told MacBeth that he would have become king, would he have become king? MacBeth doesn't become king by waiting it out. He takes steps to kill all those in his way to become king and makes the conscious effort to become king only because of what The Witches prophesied. The same holds true in The Matrix. The Oracle can't just tell you the future but she can see into the future and she can help guide the person down the correct path. In fact, towards the beginning of Neo's conversation, The Oracle says don't worry about the vase. This causes Neo to turn and immediately breaks her vase. The Oracle then says, "What's really going to bake your noodle later on is, would you still have broken the vase is I hadn't said anything?"

So now that we have established we can't take everything The Oracle says as face value, let's deconstruct this conversation (and other conversations with other members of the crew) to help explain the ending.

In fact, let's jump to the end of the movie. After Cyphus (Pantoliano) betrays the crew of the Nebuchadnezzar, Agents chase Neo throughout the city and eventually catch up with him. In the end they actually kill Neo.

But then Trinity (Moss) comes over the console the body of Neo and says:

Neo I'm not afraid anymore. The Oracle told me I would fall in love and that... that man... the man that I loved would be The One. So you see, you can't be dead. You can't be... because I love you. You hear me? I love you!

This scene ties back in to two things The Oracle told Neo.

The first is that she says:

I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Being The One is like being in love. No one can tell you you're in love, you just know it. Through and through. Balls to bones.

She also earlier tells Neo, "You're cuter than I thought. I can see why she likes you."

We learn for sure that "she" refers to Trinity and we see throughout the film that Neo and Trinity both like each other and flirt with each other but it isn't until the end of the film that both fall in love with each other. (Maybe more appropriately Trinity knows for sure that she loves Neo).

But this still begs the question, "Neo died, how can he still come back to life?" Good question. First, keep in mind that we are still in the Matrix. While earlier we learn that if you die in the Matrix you die in real life because the body can not live without the mind. However, also keep in mind that The One can not die in the Matrix as well. As we learn from later movies, The One is the constant and a reincarnation and Neo is just the current reincarnation. This also brings us back to Neo's conversation with The Oracle. She says to him:

Sorry kid, you got the gift it looks like you're waiting for something

as it turns out its love

Your next life maybe who knows? That's the way these things go.

I believe that last line is literal. While Neo needs to fall in love first to become The One, I also believe he needs to die. In works of Friedrich Nietzsche, he says that one must climb an impossible mountain of thorns to become immortal, but in order to become immortal you must die. The same must happen to Neo. Plus, Neo's death triggers Trinity's love for him. It isn't until Neo is dead that her true feelings come out for him. Because Neo is a reincarnation of The One and because we're in the Matrix, after Neo's death he comes back to life as The One and kills all agents in his path.
__________
One last thing before I go. I was reading Roger Ebert's review of this film and he originally gave it three stars- mainly because it turned into a Shoot 'Em Up movie in the third act. It's weird to hear him say that because when Inception originally came out my cousin had the same critique of that film as well. There's a lot (I mean A LOT) of similarities between The Matrix and Inception (besides that critique) and I just think it's extremely difficult to create a pure science fiction movie without having a Shoot 'Em Up climax. A lot of what The Matrix is is Morpheus explaining to Neo (and the audience) the construct of the world that currently exists and that can only go so far. You can only explain the trippy-ness of the situation before the movie starts to become boring and stale. While the film is a critique on modern society it is still a movie nonetheless and it still needs to keep audiences entertained. I think the Shoot 'Em Up aspect of The Matrix worked really well because the Agents capture of Morpheus is the trigger Neo needed to help him lead down a path to become The One. Plus, it fit into the double cross of Cyphus. Lastly, it was just cool.

Sexy Rexy's 2012 Oscar Nominations Rants

2012-01-24T19:13:00.000-06:00

Like all my Oscar rants, I will say I have not seen all the nominated films and in this terrible, terrible year for films I probably will not see any more except for Drive (I'll see it when it comes out this weekend on DVD). But nevertheless considering I'm able to write posts on the best television shows of the year and some music and fantasy sports and able to hold my own in an Oscar conversation, I think the fact that I have not seen Albert Nobbs and We Need To Talk About Kevin should give me a pass.

- Young Adult was by far and away the best film of 2011. It was made by Oscar veterans Jason Reitman (Juno, Up In The Air) and Diablo Cody (Juno) and starred Oscar veteran Charlize Theron (Monster). Yet it garnered absolutely no nominations. Hollywood hated the film which is absurd. The movie is not for everyone because it is purposefully not a feel good movie and purposefully left a sour taste in people's mouths at the end but so did No Country For Old Men and yet that swept the Oscars. I knew Hollywood hated the film so I knew Reitman would get screwed for Best Director and the film would get screwed for Best Picture but at minimum I thought it would get Best Original Screenplay and I had hoped Theron would squeak in as the 5th Best Actress slot. Instead, that went to Rooney Mara for The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. Clearly, Hollywood did not see the great Sweedish original. Patton Osawlt also got fucked for his great, nuanced performance in YA. Overall, the film is walking funny, Lisbeth Salander style because of what the Academy did to it (Sorry, that might have crossed the line. My bad.)

- I knew Brad Pitt was going to get nominated for his portrayal of Billy Beane in Moneyball and while it wasn't a lock, no one was surprised to see Jonah Hill get nominated for his portrayal of Peter Brand/ Paul DePodesta. But I was pleasantly surprised to see Moneyball get nominated for Best Picture as well. I know my fellow GOI authors disagree with me on the film and all four of us are biased by the movie because of our intense love of the Michael Lewis book but the film was great. All sports movies are about the underdog willing their way to win at all in the end but Moneyball was different. It took the GM's perspective and (spoiler alert) they lost in the first round of the playoffs. It redefined sports movies and I'm glad it got its due. I would have liked to have seen Bennett Miller get nominated for Best Director because I loved his style but after all the other nominations I knew that was too much to ask.

- I love Gary Oldman and I'm glad he got his due for his years of great work by getting a Best Actor nomination for his role in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. I also love Michael Fassbender but he did not get a Best Actor nomination for his role as a sex addict in the NC-17 rated Shame despite getting a BAFTA and Golden Globe nomination for his work. While I haven't seen Shame (it's extremely hard to see NC-17 rated movies because mainstream theaters refuse to show them and mainstream stores like Wal-Mart refuse to sell them) but when I do end up seeing Shame I'm sure I will say Fassbender got snubbed.

- Kristen Wiig can say she has an Oscar nomination! She and her writing partner Annie Mumolo get nominated for writing Bridesmaids. While I'm glad to see the Academy broadened their scope and nominated a raunchy comedy, I'm still a little bitter that it took them this long. Writers for The 40 Year Old Virgin, Knocked Up, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and especially Superbad did not get nominated for Best Original Screenplay and all were much more deserving than Wiig and Mumolo. Melissa McCarthy also got nominated for her role in Bridesmaids for Best Supporting Actress although this was no surprise. Not only did she get nominated in everything before this and stole the movie but the Academy has always looked kindly towards comedic actors getting nominated in supporting roles. Robert Downey Jr. got nominated in 2009 for his portrayal of an actor undergoing surgery to become a black man in Tropic Thunder and Marisa Tomei won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar in 1992 for her work in My Cousin Vinny.

- To much of people's dismay, Tilda Swinton did not get anything for her role in We Need To Talk About Kevin. Not that I was going to see the film anyways but now I definitely do not have to see it because it didn't get any nominations.

- The Artist is going to sweep the Oscars this year and to be honest it's hard to argue with it. It was very well made, the acting (especially by its two leads) were great, and I was surprisingly entertained by it. No one is going to get Hurt Locker'd this year. I will say that as good as The Artist is, I never want to see it again. It's a one and done for me.

- My girlfriend was trying to force me to see The Help when it came out in theaters. I said "no" because it looked stupid and cheezy and I said the only way I will see it is if it gets nominated for Oscars. Thinking only chicks would like the film and it wouldn't get anything, I was fairly confident I wouldn't have to see it. Now I have to go see it as it got nominated for Best Picture, Best Actress, and two Best Supporting Actresses. Damn.

#3- Inglourious Basterds (2009)

2012-01-17T11:19:00.000-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Cubsfan4evr1: #2
- David "MVP" Eckstein: #9
- Daniel Bennett: #10
- Bryan Hernandez: t-#11
- Adam Kaplan: #20

Directed By: Quentin Tarantino
Written By: Quentin Tarantino
Starring: Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Melanie Laurent, Eli Roth, Diane Kruger, and Michael Fassbender

The Plot

The movie centers around three main characters: American Lt. Aldo Raine (Pitt) and his misfit team of Jewish-American soldiers who call themselves "The Basterds". This guerrilla group is dropped into war torn Europe during the Nazi's reign in WWII and whose sole goal is to cause havoc on the Nazi's and to eventually take down Adolf Hitler. Raine's second in command is Sgt. Donny Donowitz (a.k.a. The Bear Jew) played by Eli Roth, a local boy from Boston, Massachusetts who's main purpose in the group is to beat the hell out of Nazi's with a baseball bat.

The second story line centers around Col. Hans Landa (Waltz), a fairly high ranking officer in The Third Reich. The Colonel's nickname is The Jew Hunter and it is his mission to help wipe out the Jewish race and to stop The Basterds.

The last main story line follows the life of Shoshanna Dreyfus (Laurent), a young Jewish girl who has managed to escape the grasps of the Nazi's and ended up owning a movie theater in Paris. Shoshanna is then befriended by a young Nazi soldier by the name of Fredrick Zoller (Daniel Bruhl) who's recent courageous acts have caused Joseph Goebbles (Sylvester Groth) to create a movie about him and Zoller wants his movie to be premiered in Shoshanna's theater.

Why This Movie Is Great

Tarantino movies are probably the hardest movies to analyze. After you first see the movie you love it. The film is so engaging and so exciting and so thrilling that you just can't help leave the theater with a smile on your face. The inherent problem (at least for me when trying to write a movie review) is to help explain the "why"? Why was the film so engaging and exciting and thrilling? Why did you leave the theater with a smile on your face?

Tarantino films do not delve deep into the human psyche like say a Martin Scorsese or Darren Aronofsky film would and his films do not portray a deeper message about the society we live in like a Steven Spielberg or Stanley Kubrick film does. In fact, his movies are most comparable to action movies where you like it because it's awesome. Tarantino gets most his influences from the crappy B movies he saw from his youth. But Tarantino makes the movie all his own.

If you saw any of Tarantino's films, especially Inglourious Basterds, you'd know it was a Tarantino film without seeing any of the credits whatsoever. QT has a movie style brand all of his own. It can not be copied or duplicated. You may try, but you will not succeed.

I think the real reason Inglourious Basterds is such a fantastic film is because Tarantino creates characters and scenes that are just so engaging and entertaining that you can't helped but be sucked in waiting for more. The scenes and characters may not necessarily have anything to do with the overarching plot, but because characters are so well developed and because they are so witty and engaging that you don't care. Two scenes from the film stick out to me that fit this description.

The first scene is the film's opening sequence between the French farmer (Denis Menochet) and Col. Hans Landa where the audience is introduced to the evil German. We get a sense of what makes this man tick and what his job entails. Truth be told, this scene is way too long if all the director wanted to accomplish was introduce characters but as the audience you love this scene. You don't care what another director would have done, you love what Quentin Tarantino did do. Plus, the length in the scene helps build tension for the final minutes of it. The build up and anticipation was not only fun to watch but well worth the wait.

The second scene is the entire sequence where Sgt Hugo Stiglitz (Til Schweiger), Archie Hicox (Fassbender), and Wilhelm Wicki (Gedeon Burkhard) meet up with the famous actress Bridget von Hammersmark (Kruger) in the basement of a local pub. Upon my last viewing of the film I timed how long the scene was and it went north of thirty minutes. The last five to ten minutes of the scene are the most important elements of it in order to advance the plot but you don't care how long the scene goes because these characters- especially Major Deiter Hellstrom (August Diehl), the Nazi soldier's commander- are so engaging and entertaining that you never want the fun to end. The vast majority of the scene are just people playing 20 questions but because of Tarantino's genius you love every minute of it.

The actor that steals the movie is Christoph Waltz who beautifully plays Col. Handa. Waltz's award for Best Supporting Actor was the only Academy Award the film received (because the film got Hurt Locker'd by Kathryn Bigelow and The Hurt Locker. The next year The Social Network got Hurt Locker'd by The King's Speech). If it wasn't for The Joker the year before in The Dark Knight Col. Hans Landa would be my personal favorite movie villain of all time. Col Landa's actions are reprehensible but he's so much fun to have a conversation with. ("That's a BINGO!") He's so playful and smart and witty and I throughly enjoyed every minute he was on screen.

Tarantino also adds his love of movies into Inglorious Basterds as it becomes a motif throughout the entire film. Archie Hicox is an English soldier who also happens to be a film historian and discusses in length to General Ed Fenech (Mike Myers) the history of German cinema, The Basterds mole within the German society is an German actress, and Shoshanna owns a movie theater and there is interest to have Fredrick Zoller's movie shown in her hall- just name a few examples of this motif. It's very meta and nerdy of Tarantino and I love it.

One last thing I'll say about Inglourious Basterds is that it was genius of Tarantino to make most of the movie in another language. Col. Landa is awesome in three languages. I think it's a cop out (most notably in Fincher's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo and Scorsese's Hugo) to set a movie in another country and yet all the actors speak English. Moviegoers are smart enough and well equipped enough to handle reading subtitles. When Landa is talking to Goebbles, he appropriately talks in German. When Landa initially meets the French farmer, he appropriately talks in French. What a novel concept! I appreciated the movie much more because it was in three languages as opposed to the entire thing being in English.

Inglourious Basterds is just a classic Tarantino picture and one that anyone can enjoy. He re-writes history that only Quentin Tarantino can and for that we here at Game Of Inches thank him by putting this 2009 epic #3 on our list of the 25 Greatest Films In The Past 25 Years.

#4- The Departed (2006)

2012-01-12T11:27:00.001-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- David "MVP" Eckstein: #4
- Bryan Hernandez: #4
- Daniel Bennett: #9
- The 'Bright' One: #12
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 75

Directed By: Martin Scorsese
Written By: William Monahan
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson, Mark Wahlberg, Vera Farmiga, and Martin Sheen
Based Upon: The Hong Kong movie Infernal Affairs directed by Alan Mak and Andrew Lau.

The Plot

The Boston Police Department is on a manhunt to stop one of the city's most powerful gangs led by Frank Costello (Nicholson). To help stop Costello, the BDP places Billy Costigan (DiCaprio) as a mole in Costello's gang. On the other hand Frank Costello has a mole in the BDP- Colin Sullivan (Damon). The Boston Police Department promotes Sullivan to search for Costello's mole within the BDP. While leading the task force Sullivan searches out for the BDP mole within Costello's gang while Billy Costigan searches for Frank Costello's mole within the BDP. The movie turns into a double cat and mouse chase as Cositgan and Sullivan each search out to find the true identity of other one.

Why This Movie Is Great

Martin Scorsese's second appearance on this list (or first which ever way you want to look at it) is a certifiable bad ass movie. During one of the first scenes of the film, Billy Costigan gets accosted for drinking cranberry juice by a bar patron. "It's a natural diuretic. My girlfriend drinks it when she's get her period. What, do you got your period?" DiCaprio looks at the patron and then proceeds to smash his glass in the man's face and beat the crap out of him. The film slam on the gas and never lets up until the ending credits role.

The Departed is the ultimate cat and mouse movie. Billy Costigan is on the look out for Colin Sullivan while Colin Sullivan is on the look out for Billy Costigan while at the same time each men is on a search to find the mole: themselves.

Sullivan was raised by Frank Costello and was bred to be a gangster. In order to fulfill his "gangster duties" Costello sends Sullivan to be his personal spy within the Boston Police Department. On the other side, all Billy Costigan wants to do is be a police officer. After excelling in the Academy but before even becoming remotely entrenched within the BDP (therefore no cops will be able to recognize Costigan which makes Costigan the perfect mole) Billy's first assignment as a police officer is to become a gangster.

Not only does Scorsese tell an amazing story and keeps you on the edge of your seat as he navigates you through the twists and turns of this cat and mouse chase but the film gets another dynamic layer as Scorsese smartly chooses to set the film in Boston. Recently I ranked The Departed as the second best Boston movie of all time. The reason the film works so well in Boston is because the film has a motif of guilt running through it. Boston has one of the biggest percentages of Irish-Catholics in America and what are Irish-Catholics known for: guilt. Plus, Colin tells Madolyn one night, "what Freud said about the Irish is we're the only people impervious to psychoanalysis." The story works so well because the main characters are Irish-Catholic and there's no better place to set a story about Irish-Catholics (other than Ireland itself) than Boston, Massachusetts.

Both Sullivan and Billy struggle with their newfound roles that they have and both have to confide in police therapist Madolyn (Farmiga). Both men have grown up knowing one thing and now each one is conflicted by living a lie in a world in which they don't belong in while having that Irish-Catholic guilt wash over them.

Martin Scorsese FINALLY won an Academy Award for Best Director for his work on The Departed (the second best film he's ever made behind Goodfellas) which helped propel the movie to win the Oscar for Best Picture.

Other Notes
- Jack Nicholson's character, Frank Costello, was based after the most infamous man in Boston's history: Whitey Bulger . Bulger was finally captured in the summer of 2011 at the age of 81.
- I love Leo DiCapro but he's terrible at accents. He couldn't do one in Blood Diamonds and he couldn't do a Boston accent in The Departed. Jack Nicholson realized he couldn't do one so he just said "fuck it" and spoke normally.

#5- The Dark Knight (2008)

2012-01-11T14:54:00.000-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Adam Kaplan: #2
- Dan Bennett: #2
- David "MVP" Eckstein: #2
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 72

Directed By: Christopher Nolan
Written By: Christopher Nolan and Jonathan Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and Morgan Freeman.

The Plot

In Batman Begins Bruce Wayne (Bale) attempts to get rid of the mob and corruption that riddles the streets of Gotham by creating a superhero alter ego- Batman. Batman has greatly affected the city as hope and change to start to flourish. The city elects a great District Attorney Harvey Dent (Eckhart) who starts to make legitimate changes cleaning up the streets of Gotham. The mob, who is none to thrilled with the changes that are occurring and seem powerless to stop it, turn to a no-named terrorist who calls himself The Joker (Ledger) to help stop the Batman. The Joker's antics and mayhem however go out of control as he turns the city of Gotham into a state of fear and panic and leaves Batman helpless to do anything about it.

The Dark Knight is all about escalation. The mob controls the city. Bruce Wayne then comes into town- as a masked and costumed vigilante- and starts to quell the mob's power. In response to a greater threat, the mob creates the greatest threat of them all- The Joker- in attempt to get rid of Batman. This film follows the tale of what happens when things spiral out of control and cause a city to turn on Batman and forces Bruce Wayne to do nothing about it.

Why This Movie Is Great

Heath Ledger and The Joker. It's that plain and simple.

The Dark Knight is an amazing film made brilliant not only because of how the Nolans wrote the character but because how Ledger played the character. Think about it. If either Ledger didn't play The Joker or if that character was even 75% of the awesomeness it is, this movie is just another Batman Begins. I'm a big fan of Batman Begins but it (nor really many other films) touch a candle to the greatness that is The Dark Knight. Without this amazing character, this movie dangerously borders into the X-Men category.

I could write a book on why The Dark Knight is so amazing (Seriously, if any publisher out there wants me to I would be willing to write you a treatment. I mean this without hyperbole that I could literally write a book on how great this film is). However, this post will only be dedicated to The Joker. I'm not even going to touch Harvey Dent, how he is the White Knight in comparison to how Batman is the Dark Knight, how everything the character Harvey says is brilliant, the moral and ethical dilemmas that Lucius Fox (Freeman) and Alfred (Caine) must face, or even about the mob and its head (Eric Roberts) deal with Batman. No, all I will focus on in this post is The Joker.

In my opinion, there is no greater acting job in the history of cinema that what Heath Ledger did with The Joker. Even despite all the hype and infamy that surrounded Ledger and his performance before the film was released (Ledger killed himself before the movie was released) you could not tell me that was Heath Ledger playing The Joker. I just watched the film again a few days ago and I still see no traces of Heath in there. He does such a fantastic job. His mannerisms, his voice, his look, everything is The Joker.

What is first and foremost great about The Joker is that you don't get a back story on him. There is no origin story on The Joker and frankly you don't care. In two different situations, he tells the audience of how he received his signature scars and both times he tells a different story. All you need to know is that this man is crazy. He is pure evil. After many viewings here is what I can gather on his background. I do believe his father messed him up. The first story we hear about The Joker's scars is how his father was a drunk and how one night his father struck him. Next, when The Joker crashes Bruce Wayne's party for Harvey Dent, before he tells Rachael that version of scar story, he meets an elderly gentlemen and he says, "You remind me of my father, and I *hate* my father." Although, one could make the argument that he tells a different story and says different things to different people based on who his audience is. He'll tell Rachael he got the scars about his wife because the person who he's talking to a PYT and he'll tell Gambol and an elderly party guest a story about his father because they're male. Either way, point is, the film never gives The Joker a back story and its better that it doesn't. The one true thing I think The Joker gives away is that he's been called "crazy" before and that's something that truly irks him. He doesn't mind being called a freak, in fact he constantly calls himself a freak, but what he does mind is being called crazy. When we first truly meet The Joker when he interrupts the mob's meeting in the kitchen, Gambol calls The Joker "crazy". The Joker responds by saying, "I'm not. No, I'm No*T*" Ledger plays that line like The Joker takes a huge personal offense to being called "crazy". It makes sense considering The Joker attracts mental unstable people and I'm sure he does have a diagnosable mental disorder.

Nolan did a fantastic job of not only writing the character of The Joker but also working with Ledger to bring the character to life. Heath Ledger's Joker is by far and away the darkest the character has ever been and is a cold-hearted, sadistic, terrorist through and through. This is why I ranked The Joker as the most evil movie villain in movie cinema of all time.

Nolan helped shape this evil character by helping shape the characters physical appearance. Nolan looked at the creepiest paintings throughout the art world to help shape where this character was going. The Joker's hair is purposefully grimey and stringy and even without the green hair coloring would just look gross. Heath Ledger insisted that he apply his own make up because he wanted to keep the authenticity of the character alive. Ledger also perfected The Joker's voice and does this very creepy lizard-like thing with his tongue. As if the character wasn't written evil enough Nolan and Ledger made great physical strides with The Joker to help enhance the movie character's awesomeness.

What's so great about the character of The Joker is that he's not just in it for the money, he's just a crazy person looking to perform social experiments on the city of Gotham. Alfred says to Bruce Wayne in the movie:

Some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn

The Joker burns a huge pile of cash just because, he convinces a city to kill Reese and when they fail to he blows up a hospital, and what's "best" of all is that he kills a person everyday Batman does not reveal himself (and follows through on his plan) and as a result causes an entire metropolis not to turn on him but to turn on the city's savior instead. Truly there is no doubt that The Joker just wants to watch the world burn.

Heath Ledger rightfully won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor but it's an interesting debate I had with my roommate at the time- Why was Ledger only up for Best Supporting and not Best Actor? At the time my response was that this film is all about Batman and Joker is the supporting character in how he changes Batman. But over time, I've come to agree with my former roommate. The Joker admits to Batman that he doesn't want to kill him. I believe when the mob first enlists The Joker's help he had true intentions to carry out his original plan. But then he had so much fun killing people and bringing Gotham to its knees that he means it when he says to Batman:

I don't want to kill you! What would I do without you? Go back to ripping off mob dealers? No, no, you... complete me.

Batman changes but he does so because that's what Gotham needs him to do. The Joker changes because of Batman himself. Plus, as mentioned at the top of this post, this movie would be nothing without Heath Ledger's portrayal of the iconic character. Either way, I'm pleased Ledger was rewarded with the Oscar statute at the end of the day.

I think Nolan originally intended for The Joker to show up in the sequel. At the very end of the film when he says to Batman, "I think you and I are destined to this forever". Not only is it a shame that Heath Ledger died because it's a shame when any human life is taken but it's also a shame that Ledger can not be in The Dark Knight Rises. I loved the character as The Joker and I want to see Round Two between him and Batman.

FUN FACT: When the Mayor appoints Jim Gordon (Oldman) as the new police commissioner in the jail after capturing The Joker, Ledger ad-libed his sardonic clap while everyone else was clapping. Christopher Nolan loved it so much he decided to add it to the film.

ONE FINAL NOTE: I think it's a severe under-simplification to say that Heath Ledger's portrayal of The Joker killed him. I understand that he spent long hours in a room by himself to perfect his character and the voice but the man was a professional. I do think his preparation for this role was a factor in his death but not the sole cause. I never met Ledger and I am just speculating based on media reports but it sounded like Ledger had a mental problem or a mental disorder before he started filming and the role amplified his disorder. That being said I still wish Michelle Williams and everyone in The Ledger family my deepest condolences for their loss.

Why Wild Card Weekend Was A Bad Weekend For The Packers

2012-01-10T00:08:00.000-06:00

Of course the Green Bay Packers who rightfully earned the #1 seed in the NFC did not play last weekend as they rested during their bye week. They are still in the playoffs. However, the worst case scenario happened last weekend. The two NFC teams that won their playoff game- the New Orleans Saints and the New York Giants- are the two teams that can have a chance at defeating Aaron Rodgers and the Packers. The Atlanta Falcons and Detroit Lions are good match ups for the Packers. While the Lions have the talent to beat Green Bay, Week 17's shellacking of the Lions against Matt Flynn and the Packers back ups in a game Detroit was trying in was all the proof needed to show that Detroit is still a year or two away from hanging with the big dogs. And while people may like Matt Ryan and the Falcons, there have been no evidence to suggest that Atlanta can either score with Aaron Rodgers or has the pass defense to stop Aaron Rodgers.

However, the Giants and the Saints do have the potential to defeat the Packers. If the Saints beat the San Francisco 49ers next week, the Green Bay Packers will have to face two teams that are bad match ups for them.

Why The New York Giants Are A Bad Match Up

The Giants front four and their ability to bring pressure on the quarterback is incredible. The same defensive formula that helped defeat the undefeated New England Patriots in the Superbowl in 2007 is still in place here in 2011. That 2007 Patriots looked like the best offense ever and it looked like nothing could stop them. As it turns out, Michael Strahan, Osi Umenyiora, Jutsin Tuck, and Mathias Kiwanuka could stop them. Replace Straham with potential Defensive Player Of The Year Jason Pierre-Paul and you still have a dominant pass rush. The Giants have the ability to rush effectively with four to stop Aaron Rodgers. This also allows them to throw seven back into the secondary to guard against the plethora of receivers Green Bay has.

Not only can the Giants stop Aaron Rodgers but they can also score with them. Eli Manning has stepped up his game and taken it into the elite level stratosphere. Led by wide receivers Victor Cruz and Hakeem Nicks, the Giants passing attack is explosive and they have the will and ability to score on anyone. Eli has been cool under pressure in the 4th quarter as well which does not bode well for the Packers.

The Giants lost to the Packers during the regular season back in early December where Green Bay barely scraped by with a win. Hakeem Nicks caught a touchdown pass with 58 seconds left to tie up the game and it took a Mason Crosby field goal to win the game as time expired in order for the Packers to win. Aaron Rodgers and The Pack essentially won because they had the ball last. They might not be so lucky the second time around.

Why The New Orleans Saints Are A Bad Match Up

First of all, it is no guarantee that the Saints will make it past the 49ers as the game is played in Candlestick Park, but either way, their win during Wild Card Weekend was still much worse for the Packers than if the Lions had won. However, if the Saints and the Packers do end up playing in the NFC Championship Game (which of course is now realistically possible considering New Orleans won on Wild Card weekend), the Green Bay Packers will yet again be faced with another bad match up.

While I dislike the Saints defense immensely and don't think they will be able to stop Aaron Rodgers in the slightest, I also do not believe the Packers will be able to stop Drew Brees either. Not only can Drew Brees throw the ball well (no shit, Sherlock) but they have a surprisingly good ground game as well. While their rushing offense might be split up between three running backs, the combination of Darren Sproles, Pierre Thomas, and Chris Ivory is a lethal one for any team.

In 2009, when Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay Packers faced Kurt Warner and the Arizona Cardinals during Wild Card Weekend, Rodgers and The Pack were able to score 45 points. Unfortunately, it was not enough as the Cardinals scored 51 points and won the game. There was obviously no defense whatsoever but considering the Cardinals had the ball last, they won the game. If there was ever an offense that can put up 50+ points at Lambeau it is this 2011 New Orleans Saints offense.

Again, I believe the Packers will go to the Superbowl and will defeat the Saints if they play them but it will be an offensive explosion and it will not be a guaranteed win in the slightest.

Why The Packers Will Win The NFC

Despite the Giants and the Saints being bad match ups, the Packers are also a really bad match up for those teams as well.

NEW YORK GIANTS

The Giants secondary is atrocious. It's awful and now its weak and thin as well. It gets hidden from time to time because their pass rush is so good but it is still bad. Aaron Rodgers is mobile enough to elude the pass rush and accurate enough to be able to hit receivers, even with seven guys in the secondary. Plus, if no one is open, Rodgers will just run with the ball which in turn will cause less defenders in the secondary which means Rodgers will have more open receivers to hit as the game goes on. Plus, as good as Eli has been, I just think Rodgers can go up so big so quickly on the Giants that it will not be enough.

NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

In a recent ESPN The Magazine article, Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders said that Drew Brees is terrible on blitzes- especially on corner blitz. The Packers have a little corner back named Charles Woodson who is fantastic at blitzing. Packers can get to Drew Brees and get to him early. Plus, the Saints are terrible outdoors and on grass. They look explosive and unbeatable at home and in domes but have a terrible track record on the road- especially in cold whether games. Just look to their loss to the 7-9 Seattle Seahawks in 2010. The Saints were by far the better team on paper but could not handle the arena in January. Even if the Saints do manage to defeat the 49ers outdoors I don't think they can win on the road twice in a row.

#6- The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

2012-01-09T15:37:00.001-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Adam Kaplan: #1
- Dan Bennett: #3
- Cubsfan4evr1: #3
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 71

Directed By: Frank Darabont
Written By: Frank Darabont
Starring: Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman
Based Upon: The novella Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption by Stephen King

The Plot

Successful banker Andy Dufrense (Robbins) gets convicted of shooting and killing his wife and the man she was sleeping with. He gets sentenced to two consecutive life sentences in prison. While in jail he befriends "The Man Who Can Get You Anything You Want" Ellis "Red" Redding (Freeman). The story is about the relationship between Red and Andy and what Andy must do in order to survive in prison.

Why This Movie Is Great

I have literally seen this movie 30+ times. I love The Shawshank Redemption, I can (probably) quote the entire movie to you, and no matter what else is on I can will always stop what I'm doing and watch the two and a half plus hour epic. The voters who vote on imdb.com rarely do anything right but ranking Shawshank as the best film ever was their greatest accomplishment. AFI finally wisened up. They left Shawshank off of their original top 100 greatest movies ever list but it ranked #72 in their 10th anniversary edition and it ranked it as the best film of 1994 ahead of Forrest Gump (76) and Pulp Fiction (94). (Also, fyi, how great of a year was 1994 for movies, right?). Forrest Gump swept the Academy Awards that year leaving Frank Darabont and company in the dust. As great of a movie as Forrest Gump is (we here at GOI ranked it as the 9th best movie in the past 25 years) Shawshank deserved every single award except for Best Actor (that one obviously still deserved to go to Hanks).

The Shawshank Redemption is probably the worst title ever for a movie. Distance yourself from the quality of the film and think about if you just saw a poster for this movie and nothing else. The title doesn't make sense until you watch the film. If you were a casual fan in 1995 renting a movie (Shawshank was the most rented movie of 1995 and one of the highest rented films ever) and you saw this new release called The Shawshank Redemption and you didn't know anything about it besides the snooty Academy liked it, you would never have watched it. Frank Darabont freely admits it's a terrible name for a movie.

OK now, enough with the background, let me talk to you briefly about why The Shawshank Redemption is a great movie along with its thematic elements. At its core, the film is about institutionalization and hope. The subtitle of Stephen King's novella is "Hope Springs Eternal". Frank Darabont did an amazing thing to add to these ideas. First, he added the "Brooks" character- a character that did not exist in the original novella. The story line that surrounds Brooks not only helps pave way for the reveal surrounding Red at the end of the movie but he is everything the movie stands for and a physical embodiment of its themes. The second amazing thing Darabont did was add the element of music and literature to help show what a great thing Hope can be. Andy listens to music while in "The Hole", creates a library for the prison, gets records for them and even plays a beautiful opera song for the entire prison ("I have no idea to this day what those two Italian ladies were singing about. Truth is, I don't want to know. Some things are best left unsaid"). When Andy plays the opera song over the loudspeaker, everyone in the prison just stands there in awe. For a moment, all the prisoners were free because of the power of music.

The Shawshank Redemption is a character study into the lives of both Andy and Red. Andy is this mild mannered, wouldn't-harm-a-fly type of guy before entering jail. The film however portrays how prison will change a man. Andy first has to fight for his life against the prison's "Bull Queers"- a gang full of homosexuals who use force to have their way with the other male prisoners. But as Andy spends more time in prison he uses his intelligence and banking knowledge to his advantage to help get out of trouble and ends up shaping the entire prison landscape.

However, once Andy goes to prison within the first five minutes of the movie, the film is never seen through Andy's point of view. The entire film is narrated by and is seen through the eyes of Red. The story follows Andy but the story was created to show how Andy affected Red life and the life of everyone around Andy.

I don't know why I love this film so much but I think it's because this was the first real film I can ever remember seeing. In 1995, a little 8 year old Adam was at his cousin's house when he saw this great film for the first time and ever since then he's been hooked. It was probably a poor parenting decision on somebody's fault as there is graphic rape and violence scenes which is probably inappropriate for an 8 year old to see, but I'm glad I saw the film. I think this movie is so great because it's a slow build. You grow with these characters. You love these characters. Frank Darabont does a fantastic job making you care about these characters that you want to see what happens to them throughout their lives.

I read Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption about eight years after I saw the movie and like everything, the first thing you read/watch is always the better version. I enjoyed Rita Hayworth but The Shawshank Redemption is infinitely superior. Here are some key differences (that I remember) between the novella and the book. Although truthfully, Darabont did a damn good job being truthful to the short story.

- As mentioned earlier, the character "Brooks" was a creation of Darabont, not King.
- In the novella, the character Red was a white, Irish dude. That's the actual reason the character is named "Red". Darabont originally wanted to cast a white man, but when he saw Morgan Freeman during casting call he couldn't resist. However when Andy asked him why his name was "Red" the line for the movie, "Maybe its 'cause I'm Irish" was left in as a joke.
- In the movie there is only one prison warden- Warden Norton (Bob Gunton) and boy howdy is he a great movie villain. However, in the novella there are several wardens that run Shawshank during Andy's tenure. I liked Darabont's decision to keep one, main warden for cohesive purposes.

***WARNING: REST OF REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS***

- The short story foreshadowed Andy's escape. Andy would sometimes have a prison mate in the novella and about five pages before Andy escapes, his roommate at the time kept complaining how his cell with Andy was always cold and always had a draft in it. Not only do I like the decision to not foreshadow Andy's escape in the movie and make it a huge surprise, but I also like to decision to not give Andy any roommates. It shows the kind of power Andy had while in prison and it makes it more believable how Andy escapes- it's a lot easier to do what he did without any cell mates.
- The one thing the novella got right that the movie did not was the ending scene in the short story was Red hopping on a bus to Mexico talking about how he hopes to see his friend again and how he hopes the water is as blue as his mind makes it out to be. Considering the entire movie is about hope this was a perfect way to end the film. However, the movie studio thought the audience would feel unfulfilled by that ending so they forced Darabont to add by one more scene to the movie where Red does in fact meet up with Andy in Mexico.

After watching the movie multiple times with Frank Darabont's commentary to it, watching the special features disc of the film, and trolling imdb, here are some great facts about The Shawhank Redemption that I think you will enjoy.

- The one thing fans get "upset" about is the film never explains how Andy got his movie poster to stick to the wall so perfectly so that when Warden Norton throws the rock through the poster the poster is tight enough so that the rock passes through it. On the DVD commentary Darabont admits he probably should have explained that.
- The warden hands Andy his Bible when he first tosses his cell and says "Salvation Lies Within". First of all, I think it's great how Andy "gives back" the Bible and you see how the rock hammer lay within. I love that shit. Secondly, that Bible was "Exodus". Notice any similarities between the book of "Exodus" and Andy's story?
- Before the movie was made, the script had the original title of the Stephen King novella. One agent who clearly didn't read the script sent a letter to Frank Darabont stating his client would be perfect for the role of "Rita Hayworth"
- Frank Darabont was very hesistant to use voice overs throughout the film. However, after constantly watching Goodfellas throughout the production of the Shawshank he decided it would be OK.
- Stephen King sold the movie right to his novella to Darabont for a dollar because the two were pals beforehand.

LASTLY, I would be remiss to talk about Shawshank without showing you this great Family Guy spoof of the film. Although, please watch The Shawshank Redemption if you haven't already before watching the spoof.

Family Guy - Shawshank Redemption Parody

Who Will Win Defensive Player Of The Year?

2012-01-09T15:23:00.002-06:00

This is something I've been pondering. It seems to me in recent years that guys who win the Defensive Player Of The Year award are players that can do everything. Not only do they do their original position very well but they also do a bit of everything. They can tackle, they can sack the quarterback, and they can intercept passes- the three basic functions of a defense. Players like Brian Urlacher (2005), Jason Taylor (2006), and Charles Woodson (2009) are players that fit this mold.

But that doesn't seem to be the case this year. There have been players that have been extremely dominant at doing that one thing they're supposed to do (EXAMPLE: Jared Allen at getting after the quarterback and getting sacks; Darrelle Revis at intercepting the ball and shutting down receivers, etc) but no player stands out as being able to do everything and do everything extremely well.

In the past it has been decently easy to predict who will win NFL's coveted Defensive Players Of The Year Award but this year I legitimately have no clue. The problem (at least for me) is trying to distinguish the qualifications of an award winner when there has not been a guy who has been able to everything. What makes the best corner back better or worse than the best defensive tackle? I don't know and I really don't believe there has been a conclusive answer to that question.

So this post is going to attempt to break down who I believe will win the Defensive Player Of The Year. It won't be pretty and you (nor I) might not like the end results, but here we go.

I think it is best to determine who are the best players at each position. Later it will be harder to try and distinguish the best from the best but let's try anyways.

DEFENSIVE END

Jared Allen (MIN): Allen almost broke Michael Strahan's record for most sacks in a year- by only half a sack. He led the league in sacks (obviously) with 22.0 sacks and did it without the help of anyone taking pressure off of him on the defensive line. Allen's been top three, if not THE best defensive end, in recent years and this year he was just amazing with absolutely no help from anyone on the 31st ranked defense of the Minnesota Vikings.

CORNER BACK

Darrelle Revis (NYJ): While Revis *only* had four interceptions, he was again THE shut down corner in 2011. Interceptions are overrated. DeAngelo Hall is an interception machine and he's terrible. The only reason he gets so many interceptions is because he's so bad quarterbacks throw on him all day. When you get that many passes thrown to you, you're bound to catch one every now and then. This is part of the reason that a New England Patriot (Kyle Arrington), the team that had the worst secondary in the league lead all defensive backs in interceptions. Point is, the most important thing I want out of a corner back is to make sure that the receiver he's covering does not catch any passes. And the best corner in the league at this is Revis Island. In 2011, the J-E-T-S Jets Jets Jets were #1 in lowest DVOA allowed to teams #1 wide receiver. What all that mumbo-jumbo means is that Darrelle Revis was amazing. Again.

LINEBACKER

Patrick Willis (SF): To be honest I really don't have anything to back this up. No advanced statistic (mainly EPA and WPA) will prove that Willis had an actual effect but here is what I base my conclusion that Willis was the best linebacker in the league is: 1) The San Francisco 49ers had the best regular season defense in 2011 2) Willis was the best linebacker in the league before 2011 so I find it hard to believe that while playing in the best defense he's ever played on that he's suddenly terrible and/or didn't have a major impact 3) The high marks that advanced statistics give to NoVorro Bowman and other defensive players tells me opposing offensive players are running away from Willis. Teams are purposefully strategizing around Willis. Sometimes the plays you don't make are better than the plays you do make and things like that do not show up on statistics 4) The 49ers have had an excellent defensive line. As the history of the Chicago Bears have proven, an outstanding defensive line makes linebackers better.

I will say that if you want to argue for a guy like DeMarcus Ware of the Dallas Cowboys was the best linebacker this year you'll find very little argument from me. The problem with linebackers is that there's a difference between the 3-4 linebacker and the 4-3 linebacker. A 3-4 linebacker will generate sacks and give you quantifiable stats whereas it is much, much harder to judge a 4-3 linebacker because those are guys who just have to watch to see how amazing they are. Hell, Mario Williams was a linebacker in 2011 just because the Texans ran a 3-4 this year. Ware is a 3-4 linebacker which makes it easier for you to make an argument for him just because of the nature of his system versus a guy like Patrick Willis who is a 4-3 linebacker. I still think Willis is the better linebacker even though both guys do different things.

DEFENSIVE TACKLE

Haloti Ngata (BAL): For the past three seasons, Advanced NFL Stats rated Arizona DT Darnell Dockett as a top three DT and the best DT for the past two years. They do this despite the fact that I've never heard anyone around the league talk about him and the fact that the league doesn't respect him enough to vote him into the Pro Bowl every year. This could be that the league and everyone is dumb for not recognize Dockett's talent or it could be the solution I choose to believe: that Advanced NFL Stats is not even close to the perfect system to how to correctly rate NFL talent- especially defensive tackles. Listen, I love ANS and respect them immensely, but I also don't completely follow them with a blind faith either. Not because I believe they do shotty work (not even close) but because I believe we're still a far ways away from correctly quantifying specific defensive players.

To me, the best DT's in the league right now are Ngata and New England's Vince Wilfork. Ngata (5.0) has more sacks than Wilfork (3.5), more forced fumbles (2) than Wilfork (1), the same amount of touchdowns as Wilfork (1) and has the better EPA and WPA. While Wilfork has an astonishing 2 interceptions as well, I'm giving the nod to Ngata.

Just real quick, I want to give a shout out to San Fran's Justin Smith who has been nothing short of spectacular in 2011 but I think Wilfork and Ngata are better players right now.

SAFETIES

Troy Polamalu (PIT): I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who believes that there are better safeties out there than Polamalu and Ed Reed (both DPY winners). They changed the game of football. The safety position is also by far and away the toughest position in football to quantify. A safety can be doing his job extremely well by being in coverage and giving a corner over the top help thereby causing the quarterback to throw the football in a different direction. Because the safety was so good and existing in space, the ball was NOT thrown to the safety. Seriously, how do you quantify that? You can't. Getting back on point, I think Polamalu was the better safety in 2011 by being top five in both WPA and EPA this year. Something Ed Reed did not accomplish.

San Diego Chargers' safety Eric Weddle had a fantastic season and was probably better than Ed Reed this year but I still think Polamalu was better.

So, who will win the Defensive Player Of The Year in 2011? To me, this race is a three way tie between Allen, Revis, and Willis. Polamalu has been great but he's lost something this year. I don't know if his instincts are off or he's missing a step but as great as he looks, he does not look like the dominant Polamalu of old. I also believe Ngata is out of the race- mainly because of his position. It's extremely difficult for defensive tackles, especially ones with low sack totals like Ngata (and Wilfork) have. He probably deserves a Defensive Player Of The Year Award, I just think that he (or any or other DT) needs to have a Warren Sapp type season in order to get one. I truly believe that Ndomukong Suh will get one if he stays healthy but he regressed in his sophomore season and needs to improve on his incredible rookie season in order to do so (and NOT stomp on players. Voters tend to not like that).

If I had a vote, I'd vote Patrick Willis. Even though I have absolutely no shred of evidence to prove this, Willis is the best defensive player on the best defensive team in football. After that I vote for Allen, Revis, Ngata, and Polamalu respectively.

Who do I think will win it? Your guess is as good as mine. Honestly, this post did nothing to clarify who the NFL will vote for but only helped narrow down the candidates. If I had to guess I would say Jason Pierre-Paul, the DE for the New York Football Giants WILL win it, but I just don't know.

Personally, I think any player I mentioned in this post (past the opening paragraph) deserves to win the Defensive Player Of The Year Award. Like I said, there's no proof that you can give me to say that Jared Allen as a defensive end was better than Darrelle Revis as a corner back. I think both players played for terrible teams and terrible defenses which severely hurt their chances (which is dumb considering those players are obviously not the fault why their team's defense was so bad in 2011) but that's life. And that's also part of the reason why I'm throwing my hat in the ring for Patrick Willis.

Box Score Weekend: Wild Card Round

2012-01-08T22:01:00.003-06:00

(6) CINCINNATI BENGALS vs. (3) HOUSTON TEXANS

- I've been a fan of the Houston Texans for some years now and I was glad to see them finally get a playoff birth and win a playoff game as they defeat Marvin Lewis' Bengals 31-10.
- If you needed any further proof why I ranked Lewis as the worst coach in the playoffs you need to look no further than the fact that he wasted all of his challenges (he didn't win any) before half time started. Plus, you could have looked at his nine year body of work.
- It's a shame Matt Schaub got injured because T.J. Yates absolutely did not pass the eye test. Pros: Yates did not turn the ball over and had a 97.7 passer rating. Cons: He only completed 55% of his passes for only 159 yards. And he made some terible throws and got lucky he was not intercepted a few times.
- To help make up for Yates's problems? The savior known as Arian Foster. There's no doubt in my mind Foster is the best running back in the game right now. He rushed for 153 yards (6.4 YPC) with two amazing touchdown runs. Ben Tate might be a #1 RB on many teams but is relegated to the #2 back (a la Michael Turner in San Diego) in Houston. Although he only got 9 carries he rushed for a damn fine 4.1 YPC.
- Kudos to the Houston defense- the second best defense in the league/the playoffs- to holding the Bengals to only 10 points and intercepting Andy Dalton three times. J.J. Watt's pick six was one of the best interceptions I've ever seen.
- To me, Andy Dalton looked like Peyton Manning before the Watt INT. Along with the three picks he had no touchdowns, completed 64.3% of his passes, and had a 51.4 passer rating.
- A.J. Green looked great in the first half but ended up catching only 5 out of his 12 targets (41.7% catch rate) for only 47 yards. It also looked like Dalton was forcing to Green in the second half which hurt both players' numbers.
- The Bengals only ran the ball 19 times with Cedric Benson leading the way with 7 rushes (2.0 YPC) but did get into the end zone. Cincinnati's leading rusher was Brian Leonard with 34 yards on 3 carries.

(6) DETROIT LIONS vs. (3) NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

- In Detroit's first playoff game in over a decade they lose to the powerhouse that is Drew Brees 45-28.
- Drew Brees was just amazing. He threw for 466 yards, 3 TDs, 0 INT, and completed 76.7% of his passes. While I will be really upset if he gets the MVP this year damn does he make the decision tough.
- My boy from Illinois Pierre Thomas makes me look good. Although he got less carries (8) than Darren Sproles (10) and Chris Ivory (13) he leads the Saints with 66 rushing yards (8.3 YPC) and a rushing TD. Sproles does everything: 51 rushing yards on 10 carries and 2 rushing TDs + 34 receiving yards, 5 targets, 4 receptions.
- I was talking about this with Cubsfan4evr1 today, this is the playoffs and Pierre Thomas is really good. Probably not the best decision to limit his carries. The playoffs is no time to be conservative with your players.
- Robert Meachum, Devery Henderson, and Jimmy Graham all catch a TD. Marques Colston leads all Saints with 120 yards (and caught all 7 of his targets) and he and Meachum get over 100 receiving yards. From what I saw in this game, the Lions secondary was more porous than a sieve. Saints receivers found the holes and were open all day. Meachum was WIDE open on his TD catch.
- If the Lions didn't get bounced from the playoffs Megatron (Calvin Johnson) might have had the post-season like what Arizona's Larry Fitzgerald had in 2009. He caught 12 out of his 15 targets (80% catch rate) for 211 receiving yards and two touchdowns.
- It's shame how one dimensional the Lions are. Yes they can pass it but it's really Calvin Johnson and no one else. They struggled heavily to run the ball. The Lions leading rusher was Kevin Smith: 6 carries, 21 yards, 3.5 YPC, and no touchdowns.
- Matthew Stafford needs to become a tad bit better at not turning the ball over- he had two interceptions in this game. Other than that he had an amazing game: 65.1% completion percentage, 380 passing yards, 2 passing TDs, 1 rushing TD.

(5) ATLANTA FALCONS vs. (4) NEW YORK GIANTS

- I know the Giants were favored in this game but it felt to me that everyone was picking the Falcons to win. Not me. I don't like how the Falcons are built and I'm not the biggest Matt Ryan fan (Although, when I say that, I believe he's the 12th best QB in the game right now. But still, overall I'm not a fan). That defense is piss poor at rushing the passer and the offense is way too conservative. As TBO once texted me this year: "Maybe another receiver wasn't the problem. Probably the QB" (or something along those lines). I firmly believe that to be the case. I also like how the Giants are constructed. They are amazing at rushing the passer (which helps makes up for their awful secondary) and I've completely changed my mind on Eli. He was an elite QB this season with help from Victor Cruz and Hakeem Nicks. It turns out my hatred of the Falcons and my like of the Giants paid off. I predicted the Falcons to lose and they did 24-2.
- Gotta love a game where a team's only points comes from a safety- in this case a mistake made by Manning.
- Matt Ryan only had a 58.5% completion percentage, 199 passing yards, a 71.1 quarterback rating, a 36.9 QBR (out of 100), and an atrocious 4.9 YPA. Hey, at least he didn't turn the ball over.
- In three postseason appearances, Matt Ryan has never won a game. In 2010, the Atlanta Falcons were dominant all season, couldn't lose at home, and rightfully earned the #1 seed. They were bounced in the playoffs by the 6th seed. Granted, that 6th seed was the World Champ Green Bay Packers, but they still lost and did so in an embarrassing fashion (Plus, at the time of the game, the Packers did not even remotely resemble the team you know and see today). This year, they were the 5 seed facing the 4 seed and, like I said earlier, many people predicted this "upset". They again lost in embarrassing fashion.
- I'm not saying the Falcons should draft another QB but Matt Ryan has done nothing to convince me that he's even remotely elite and that he's a franchise quarterback. From an outsiders perspective and one who doesn't watch very many Falcons games (so obviously take this opinion with a grain of salt) I would first overhaul the offensive system. I think if they ran a spread offense like something the Saints or Patriots do and not be so run heavy then Ryan would excel. Maybe. If I were a Falcons fan I think I would like to see that happen and then if that doesn't work either 1) start creating a Superbowl championship team a la the 2000 Ravens or 2) start seriously considering a new QB.
- Have I mentioned that I am not a Matt Ryan fan?
- A lot of the reason I would first consider changing the offensive philosophy is because I predicted every single first down the Falcons were going to do- run it with Michael Turner. I'm a casual fan and even *I* figured that out. It was obvious the Giants figured that out as well. Turner ended the day with only 41 rushing yards on 15 carries (2.7 YPC) and was stopped on every single first down he ran.
- As mentioned earlier, before this season started I was not an Eli Manning fan. He changed my mind this season and he was really damn good in this playoff game: 71.9% completion percentage, 3 TDs, 0 INTs, 277 passing yards, and a 8.7 YPA. Sure, a lot of Eli's stuff came because Hakeem Nicks is a beast (6/9, 115 receiving yards, 19.2 YPR, and 2 TDs) but hey, I like Eli this year and going forward in the playoffs.
- Mario Manningham was the second NYG receiver in this game (4/5, 68 receiving yards, TD) but I still like Victor Cruz (2/5, 28 receiving yards, 0 TD) for the rest of the playoffs and going forward.
- The New York Football Giants finally got their running game going. Brandon Jacobs: 14 carries, 6.6 YPC. Ahmad Bradshaw: 14 carries, 4.5 YPC.

If the Giants play this well next week they have a chance to defeat the Green Bay Packers. I'm not saying they will and I will predict the Packers to win in the GOI Pick 'Em game but this Giants team is built to defeat the Packers as they almost defeated them in the regular season. The Giants can rush the passer effectively with their front four which also allows them to keep seven to defend against the plethora of receivers, and Eli can score and keep pace with Rodgers. If I'm a Packers fan I'm super upset that both the Giants (as well as the New Orleans Saints who can also definitely keep pace with Rodgers) won this weekend.

(5) PITTSBURGH STEELERS vs. (4) DENVER TEBOWS

- The Denver Broncos at home stun the world by defeating the Pittsburgh Steelers 29-23 in OT.
- Big Ben was obviously not healthy for this game. He could not scramble and that clearly affected his entire game. He finished the game with a 55.0% completion percentage, 289 passing yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, and a 75.9 passer rating.
- I knew Isaac Redman would be fine to replace Mendenhall considering what a down year the Illini RB had but I never expected Redman to be this good: 17 carries, 121 rushing yards, and 7.1 YPC. Mike Wallace stole the rushing TD though with an end around.
- My boy Mike Wallace gets ten targets but only catches 3 passes. Emmanuel Sanders: 6 for 8, 81 yards, Antonio Brown: 5 for 7, 70 yards, Heath Miller: 5 for 7, 60 yards, and Jerricho Cotchery: Receiving TD, one target.

AND LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE MAIN ATTRACTION: TIIIIIIIIIIM TEEEEEEEBOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!
- Tebow looked really good in this game and made some great passes. I though the Steelers defense played terribly as well and left some wide open gaps for the Denver's sub par receivers to get through (especially on the one play in OT) but I'll gladly give credit where credit is due. Even though Tebow completed less than 50% of his passes (47.6%), he threw for 316 yards, an amazing 15.0 YPA, 3 touchdowns (1 rushing) and no picks. Plus, he had a 97.3 QBR (best is 100). He had a 125.6 quarterback rating to go along with his 50 rushing yards on 10 "carries". Plus, a win over the vaunted Steel Curtain.
- Surprisingly there are other players on the Denver Broncos than Timothy Dalton Praise-the-Lord Tebow (I know, shocking, right?). One of these players is starting running back Willis McGahee. I don't trust McGahee to hold up throughout these playoffs. He had a measly 3.2 YPC today. Seriously, I want to see more Lance Ball.
- Demaryius Thomas did his best Megatron impression: 4 for 7, 204 receiving yards, and a game wining 80-yard TD in overtime.

- Besides fellow gamblers and everyone in Colorado, no one is a bigger fan of this win than the New England Patriots and their fans.

See y'all next week. And we... are... OUT!

#7- Goodfellas (1990)

2012-01-07T12:42:00.000-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

This post was written by guest writer Dan Bennett

Who's List Was This On
- Dan Bennett: #1
- Bryan Hernandez: #7
- David "MVP" Eckstein: #7
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 63

Directed By: Martin Scorsese
Written By: Martin Scorsese and Nicholas Pileggi
Starring: Ray Liotta, Robert DeNiro, and Joe Pesci
Based Upon: The book Wiseguy by Nicholas Pileggi

The Plot

The movie is based off of the book Wiseguy which is about the real life of the gangster Henry Hill. Henry Hill was a mobster in New York in Vario's gang. He had several stints in jail for just about everything mobsters do to get them in trouble and eventually snitched on everyone to avoid ending up in prison for life. He joined the FBI's witness protection program until the movie was released. It was said that when the film was released, Henry couldn't stop telling people who he was and the FBI refused to protect him. The film itself covers two decades of life in the mob, following Henry Hill (Liotta), and his friends James Conway (DeNiro) and Tommy DeVito (Pesci). The film begins with the three of them and some other minor characters pulling off a huge heist, and then follows them in how they turn on one another to avoid being caught, while at the same time trying to work their way up the hierarchy of the mob.

Why This Movie Is Great

The best way to explain why this movie is great is this movie does not pretend to be something its not. In looking at what the AFI deems to be great, and what the Oscar's consider to be best pictures of the year, some of them tend to be abstract, commentaries with weak plots that only pretentious movie snobs like. (For proof watch a lot of Stanley Kurbrick's work in the 60's and 70's). This is not one of those movies. This movie is not some abstract commentary, it is a good story, done by high quality actors and that is what it is meant to be. Robert DeNiro and Ray Liotta spent a lot of their time with a lot of the gangsters involved in the actual events (the ones that were imprisoned obviously, not the ones killed), and were able to portray these mobsters to the point where it seemed like the actual mobsters themselves were on the screen. Joe Pesci (the only person to walk away from this movie with an Oscar), had one of the most remembered lines in film history... "Funny how, funny like a clown," and just as a side note, the word "fuck" is said 296 times in the movie- an average of 2.04 fucks per minute.

This movie has set the benchmark for how gangster movies are made today. Much like how Die Hard was compared to every action movie after its release (Speed was Die Hard on a bus, Speed II was Die Hard on a boat etc), mobster movies after Goodfellas, even Scorsese's mobster movies are compared to Goodfellas (Casino is Goodfellas in Las Vegas, The Departed is Goodfellas but with the Irish, etc.). This is truly the greatest film of its genre, and has earned a well deserved spot on this list.

Adam Kaplan's Two Cents

This was a great review by my friend Dan Bennett but I wanted to point out two other things that make Goodfellas so great: the music and the cinematography.

First, the music. Scorsese is great at coming up with music for his film and it just wouldn't be a Martin Scorsese film without some Rolling Stones- in particularly "Gimmie Shelter". True, Scorsese has used the song multiple times since Goodfellas, but it's great every single time. Scorsese also manages to use the shitty four plus minute ending to Eric Clapton's "Layla" in a beautiful and haunting scene over a montage of deaths.

Secondly, we have the cinematography- the camera work throughout the movie. Scorsese has always been a great storyteller and his use of the camera to help tell the story is at its best in this film. One scene in particular stands out to me. There's a scene where Henry Hill and his wife are walking into a comedy club. But Henry fucking Hill does not use the front door- he's able to enter through the kitchen. Once he exits the kitchen, the wait staff creates a table up in front for Henry and his wife right in front. What was amazing about this scene was that it was all one, continuous tracking shot and the scene lasted a good one to two minutes. This may seem trivial to you but trust me, that scene was a work of genius. That scene in particular was shot seven times and one of the takes was ruined because the comedian (Henry Youngman) who has the last line in the scene flubbed his line.

FUN FACT: Both of Scorsese's parents are featured in the movie. Scorsese's mother (Catherine) plays Joe Pesci's mother and his father (Charles) plays the prisoner who puts too much garlic in the tomato sauce.

#8- Die Hard (1988)

2012-01-06T14:13:00.000-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Adam Kaplan: #4
- Dan Bennett: #6
- The 'Bright' One: #9
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 59

Directed By: John McTiernan
Written By: Jeb Stuart and Steven E. de Souza
Starring: Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman
Based Upon: The book Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp

The Plot

New York police officer John McClane (Willis) goes to visit his wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia) over Christmas who is working in Los Angeles for a major corporation. He meets up with his wife at the corporate Christmas party when all of the sudden a terrorist group led by Hans Gruber (Rickman) take over the Christmas party and the entire skyscraper and it is up to Officer McClane to stop the attack.

Why This Movie Is Great

There are two basic reasons why Die Hard is great: 1) The vulnerability yet awesomeness of John McClane and 2) Hans Gruber.

We'll start with John McClane first. Generally, the key to making a great action movie is to have a great action star in the center of it. In most action movies, the hero is essentially infallible; he can do no wrong. That's not true with John McClane. Sure, he does do some damage to Hans Gruber's team, but he hits many bumps and bruises along the way. This movie is not like say Arnold Schwarzenegger in Collateral Damage- a normal, everyday guy who just magically appears to be the best secret agent in the world when he start fighting people. John McClane is presented as a very good officer but the movie reflects his boundaries.

He is a police officer so he does have expertise in firing a gun and combat, but he still struggles to try and pick off members of Hans Gruber's elite team. Towards the beginning of the movie he barely escapes when three members of the terrorist group come after him. He has a hard time jumping in and out of things and almost falls to his death. The key to Officer McClane's vulnerability is that fact that he is forced to go barefoot throughout the entire film. At one point we see him walk over broken glass in order to survive.

In dime a dozen action flicks we see the hero/protagonist seem indestructible but this is not so with John McClane.

The second reason Die Hard is so great is because of Hans Gruber- the first major role for the great Alan Rickman. Hans Gruber is not your typical terrorist (as if there exists a "typical terrorist"). He is a smart, thoughtful, and rational man who surprisingly has great humor to him. There have been bigger and better movie villains that have come after Hans Gurber (mainly since No Country For Old Men was released) but Hans Gruber is the innovator and his still holds up today.

Of course there are gun fights and shootouts and things get blown up- like what is necessary in all action movies- but Die Hard rises above the rest because of John McClane and Hans Gruber and therefore cracks the top ten of Game of Inches' top 25.

FUN FACT: Forget It's A Wonderful Life, White Christmas, A Christmas Story, National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation or any other movie you can think of, Die Hard is the greatest Christmas movie ever.

BONUS: This is a great parody of the Die Hard movies from The Ben Stiller Show

#9- Forrest Gump (1994)

2012-01-05T15:47:00.001-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Cubsfan4evr1: #4
- The 'Bright' One: #7
- Adam Kaplan: #12
- Dan Bennett: #24
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 57

Directed By: Robert Zemeckis
Written By: Eric Roth
Starring: Tom Hanks, Robin Wright, Sally Field, and Gary Sinise
Based Upon: The book Forrest Gump by Winston Groom

The Plot

This movie is about the life of Forrest Gump (Hanks)- a slow witted man with a below average IQ as he travels throughout the world, becomes a part of the United State's historic events, and searches for the childhood love of his life: Jenny (Wright)

Why This Movie Is Great

99.9999999% of a time a movie is great, or really any moving medium is great because there's a conflict. However, that .00000001% is Forrest Gump. Roth's script is so great and Tom Hanks's acting is so incredible that you care about what happens to this dim-witted man even though there's very little conflict in his life. Sure his mom dies and he searched for Jenny, finds her, she leaves him, he finds her again et cetra, et certa, but in the grand scheme of things, Forrest Gump is entertaining without having a major conflict.

The reason this film is so engaging without a major conflict because this movie is about the life and times of America with Forrest Gump representing the mainstream culture and Jenny representing the counter culture.

Forrest was born in the 1950's and was a part of many of America's most important moments. He taught Elvis Presley his signature move, he was a kick returner for Bear Bryant and the University of Alabama, he fought in Vietnam, and he was there when the National Guard was called when George Wallace refused to let African-Americans into public schools.

Jenny on the other hand was fully entrenched in the counter-culture movement and the sexual revolution of the 1960's. She does massive amount of drugs, she constantly has sex, she befriends Black Panthers, and basically personifies everything Ken Kesey stands for.

Although the characters of the movie are great, Robert Zemeckis does a great job with this film. First, the music in Forrest Gump and its soundtrack is probably the greatest music ever in the history of cinema. When Buffalo Springfield's "For What Its Worth" plays while the helicopters are flying over Vietnam is just amazing. The soundtrack includes other greats like "Fortunate Son" by CCR, "Break On Through (To The Other Side)" by The Doors, and "Sweet Home Alabama" by Lynyrd Skynyrd.

Besides the music, the special effects in Forrest Gump is pretty incredible. While the film doesn't really contain explosions and giant action sequences like most Oscar winning films that win Best Special Effects what Zemeckis does is chop of Gary Sinise's legs as Lt. Dan and plants Forrest Gump right in the middle of famous historical events and he gets to meet many Presidents.

Tom Hanks does such an incredible job playing Forrest Gump and he helps to bring such an amazing character to life. The character of Forrest Gump is such an iconic character and has become fully entrenched as a part of Americana. No other actor could have pulled off playing Forrest Gump as what Tom Hanks did.

Tom Hanks has had a very interesting career and if you're as young as I am and you're first real memory of Tom Hanks is in Forrest Gump then you don't really remember what an odd career he had before the 1994 classic. He first started off in a TV show where he played a cross dresser in Bosom Buddies. Then, he starred in a lot of goofy comedies like Splash and Bachelor Party. He was still doing comedies but he evolved to better ones when he did Big in 1988. He then got to test his acting chops in A League Of Their Own. Then he did a 360 and starred in the romance classic Sleepless In Seattle. After 1992, Hanks finally got to play with the big boys when he starred in Philadelphia in 1993 and then Forrest Gump in 1994. Since winning back-to-back Oscars Hanks blew up and went on to star in: Apollo 13, Toy Story, Saving Private Ryan, Cast Away, Road to Perdition, Catch Me If You Can, and Charlie Wilson's War. What an amazing and incredible career that is. To start off doing a crappy cross-dressing television show and spending five plus years churning out comedy crap to becoming probably the best actor in the world and starring in three out of the top twenty five movies of the past 25 years (according to us here at GOI). His rise to the top was helped fueled by his amazing performance in Forrest Gump.

FUN FACTS:
- Tom Hanks got his signature Forrest Gump accent from Michael Humphreys- the actor who played young Forrest Gump and who actually talked that way.
- Every time Forrest Gump enters a new stage in his life he wears a different blue, plaid shirt.
- Very rarely do movies released during the summer sweep the Oscars. Forrest Gump (released July 6, 1994) is one of the exceptions
- I love Forrest Gump and as great of a movie as it is, it was the third best movie of 1994. The two movies ahead of it? Well, you'll just have to continue to follow this list and you'll find out.

Sexy Rexy's Top 10 Movies Of 2011

2012-01-05T01:51:00.002-06:00

NOTE: You are going to disagree with this list. We here at Game Of Inches have no inherent qualms against disagreement but all comments WILL be done in a civil fashion. Any name calling or disrespectfulness of any sort will not be tolerated.
___________________________

2011 was a horrible year for movies. I've (maybe) said that a handful of times in recent years but no year in recent memory has ever been as bad as 2011. I thought overall 2007 was a pretty terrible year but at least that year had There Will Be Blood and Superbad. The same can not be said of 2011. You know it's a bad year when a trailer is one of the best things released. You know the year is a bad year for movies when you can't use the cliche "top 11 of oh-eleven". I could barely come up with up with ten!

I will say though that I (obviously) have not seen every movie released in 2011 nor have I seen every movie that has the potential to earn a spot on this list. I have not seen Drive or The Help, I have not seen award darlings The Artist or War Horse (nor do I really care to though- they look boring as shit), nor have I seen (essentially) any movie in which any of its leading ladies have a shot to win an Oscar (I rarely do and so do almost everyone else in America). When I see any of these movies I will update my list accordingly, but considering I have seen a shit ton of films this year, I think it's appropriate to create a list.

10) Moneyball dir. Bennett Miller

Michael Lewis' Moneyball is the greatest sports book ever written and probably GOI's favorite book ever. So we all had extremely high hopes when we saw the movie adaptation. The film fell extremely short of our expectations- which I knew would happen. If you love one medium you're going to hate the other. I went and a saw the film for a second time coming in with much lower expectations and tried to divorce myself from the book. Bennett Miller's Moneyball is not the same as Michael Lewis' version and I tried to watch the movie through that prism.

That still failed.

As I watched the movie I couldn't help thinking "No, no, no! Just do what the book does. Why aren't you explaining that better!?" But objectively speaking, this is one of the greatest sports movie ever made. Those who loved the movie are ones that did not read the book because they are not constrained in the prison of the novel which allowed them to appreciate the movie more.

No sports movie has ever took such a realistic look at a front office like what Moneyball did. Some of the best sports movies are about the team or specific players on the team. No one has ever been bold enough to follow around a GM like what this movie did.

Steven Zaillian (Gangs Of New York, American Gangster, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) and Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men, The Social Network, Charlie Wilson's War) are a writing Tour de Force and did a great job not only portraying the excellence and insecurities of Oakland A's General Manager Billy Beane (as well as the phenomenal acting job by Brad Pitt) but also portraying this world of the new world thinking versus the old world thinking. It's Billy Beane and Peter Brand (based after the Beane's actual assistant GM- Paul DePodesta) using these new statistics to help out their small market team to fight in an unfair game.

As a huge fan of the book, the problem occurs is that the fight that Bennett Miller chooses to portray is a different fight that what Michael Lewis does portray. But the essence of the fight is still the same. The film presents a battle between how Beane and Brand choose the see baseball (FYI: the correct way) and how everyone else chooses to see baseball. The main way the film portrays this fight is through Beane versus Art Howe (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) the Oakland A's manager. Although it was a story line invented for the movie, it works well for the movie so the audience gets a glimpse of the huge battle Billy Beane fights in.

In the book, Billy Beane was taught sabermetric methods from his GM predecessor Sandy Alderson and Beane used those methods to create a winning team the many years before the 2002 season (the movie and book follows the 2002 Oakland A's). Emotionally, I hate the movie for it. Objectively, I think what the movie did was great to help explain to the casual viewer about the overall struggle Beane was faced with.

I thought Bennett Miller (Capote) did a fantastic job with this movie. The purpose of the film is to humanize Billy Beane and a front office that's fighting an uphill fight and that's something that has never been done in movies before. Miller uses a lot of close up and medium shots to help achieve this affect that even though Miller ended up and the low man on the totem pole for this project, I'm glad Miller's vision was the one that ultimately succeeded. I think his use of camera work and framing helped give the movie the feel that it did.

9) Super 8 dir. J.J. Abrams

The best way to describe this movie is that it is a combination of Stand By Me, E.T., and Jaws. It is no surprise that two of those films are Steven Spielberg films and that Spielberg was an executive producer of Super 8.

The movie follows a group of young kids who set out to make a monster picture. While doing so they witness a horrific train crash which in turn causes a mysterious creature to be let loose on their kids' small town.

The film mainly focuses around the young kids specifically Joe (Joel Courtney) and Alice (Elle Fanning) and the film is presented through their point of view. The story is about how these kids grow up and have to while searching for the mysterious creature.

However, the film falls apart in the third act. The movie does a great job throughout the first two thirds of the film in the sense that you never see the creature. The movie is about the children and the creature is just a McGuffin. Like Jaws, the movie worked better when you don't see the creature. In the first two acts, it's all about the kids. You care about these kids and this creature is just a movie device to help see how these young people will react to them. Really, the "monster" could have been anything because I loved these youngsters.

But in the third act you do see the creature and that (not coincidentally) is when the film starts to unravel. The film shifts away from a coming of age story to a straight up monster movie which detracts from the overarching themes and plot.

Overall, the film was enjoyable and I recommend everyone to rent it but because of the third act I couldn't put Super 8 any higher than nine.

8) Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol dir. Brad Bird

Sometimes you need fun, popcorn, action flicks and Tom Cruise is great at making those. You don't really remember what happened throughout the first three Mission: Impossible movies but I bet you do remember that you enjoyed them. The same holds true for the franchise's fourth installment: Ghost Protocol. In a few years this movie will probably fade into the dust, but as for this year (and especially for this weak year) Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocal rightfully earns a spot on my list.

We exist in a new age of action movies. Superhero movies like Spiderman II, The Dark Knight, and to a lesser extent Iron Man made it so that you need character depth in order to create a transcendent action movie. You almost need to take out the action to be a successful action movie nowadays. That, and a great and charismatic evil villain also helps.

Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol does not have any of that.

But what it does have a fun action scenes. And Jeremy Renner who is just awesome in whatever he's doing. The movie has the suspense mixed in with the comic relief and sometimes you need that and that is what I enjoyed about the movie. But because in reality it was just another dime-a-dozen popcorn flick, I can only rank it #8 on my list.

7) The Descendants dir. Alexander Payne

The movie follows along Matt King (Clooney) a Hawaiian real estate attorney, one of the descendants of the former king of Hawaii, and the trustee of a great deal of land that him and all of the descendants of the former king own.

Recently, Matt's wife was involving in boating accident in which her life hangs in the balance. Matt must balance preparing his two young daughters for the eventual death of his wife, the fact that he found out his wife was cheating on him, and the fact that him and all of his cousins have to sell the land they inherited "due to something like the Rule Against Perpetuities" (as someone in law school I'm impressed with myself that I actually know what this means) and is going through the process of entertaining bids for the land.

The movie follows Matt King as he struggles to deal with all of the problems that have suddenly come up in his life. He enlists the help of his oldest daughter Alexandra (Shailene Woodley) to not only be a "(wo)man" but to help him and her younger sister Scottie get through these troubling times. The movie rides on the strong acting performances by both Clooney and Woodley and both deserve, at minimum, Oscar nominations for their performances.

The major flaw of the film is that it is way too long. At least 15 minutes could be cut from it. Alexander Payne is a smart man and he knows what he's doing when it comes to making movies but I thought he could have achieved the same effect with a better editing job.

6) Larry Crowne dir. Tom Hanks

A lot of people did not like this movie. At all. It received a "rotten" rating on Rotten Tomatoes with only 34% of critics liking the movie and only 44% of fans. That's saying something. At least more than half the people liked Grown Ups. I honestly can not understand why people did not like Larry Crowne.

I get that Larry Crowne is not a very deep movie. I get that more thematic elements could have been brought out, but overall, the movie is a light-hearted romp with Tom Hanks as the focal point.

The movie follows around Larry Crowne (Hanks). He is an optimistic man who loves his job as a manager for a Wal-Mart type store. However, because he never went to college (he spent about two decades in the Navy as a chef instead) he gets laid off. In an attempt to turn his life around he enrolls in community college. The film follows Crowne into his first year in school- two main classes in particular- Mrs. Tainot's (Julia Roberts) Speech 101 class and Dr. Matsutani's (George Takei) Economics 101 class.

These two classes along with a young female student named Talia (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) help Larry Crowne put his life into perspective and eventually allows a blossoming relation between him and Mrs. Tainot.

What I like about this movie is that it doesn't pretend to be anything it's not. It's a fun little movie and that's about it. I have seen the film twice now and have enjoyed every minute of it each time. I think this movie was universally panned because people had unfair expectations for it. I went to see it, even after all the negative reviews and criticisms of it, and maybe that's why I enjoyed it more than most. Either way, I think this is just a pleasant and lovely movie to see.

5) 50/50 dir. Jonathan Levine

The movie follows around Adam (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who has just gotten a rare type of back cancer. The story is based on the true life of the film's screen writer Will Reiser and about his struggles with getting cancer.

No movie this year has filed me with every single emotion like 50/50 did and the movie is led by the strong performance of Gordon-Levitt. You feel the lows that Adam goes through and well of some of the highs (literally and figuratively).

Adam is helped out by his best friend Kyle (Seth Rogen) and his therapist- a medical student in training- Katherine (Anna Kendricks). I've always been a big fan of Seth Rogen ever since The 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up but he shows in 50/50 that he actually does have legitimate acting chops.

The entire movie is about a person who struggles to deal with cancer as well as chemotherapy. While I can not personally relate, from what I've heard, Adam's up and downs are fairly realistic and if you or someone you know has/d cancer I think this movie will be wonderfully touching for you.

4) X-Men: First Class dir. Matthew Vaughn

Matthew Vaughn (Kick Ass) comes back with another superhero movie and with the best rendition of an X-Men film yet.

The film follows around Charlies Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr/Magneto (James Fassbender) as they first get control over their powers. X-Men: First Class is an origin story about how the first generation of mutants that we've seen in the first three X-Men films came to be.

The main reason this film is great is because of the performance of Michael Fassbender. He steals every scene he is in and it's this performance that will propel him into stardom. I could have watched an entire movie of just Magneto. I wanted the first third of film that involved Lehnsherr (both as a young boy and the character Fassbender played) to last for two plus hours. It was great.

What X-Men: First Class did better than any of its predecessors was to delve deeper into the emotions of feeling like an outsider and it cast actors with actual acting talent as opposed to just actors who happen to look like the comic book drawing. Not only is Fassbender and McAvoy really good in the film but so is the female version of Fassbender (and super hot) Jennifer Lawrence and Kevin Bacon who plays a really good and charismatic villain. True, the movie does have January Jones (Betty Draper from Mad Men) who might be the worst actor in terms of talent in Hollywood right now, but considering she literally plays an ice queen in the film and also the ice queen Betty Draper (and also because she is super duper hot) I can let it slide.

The movie is not as good as The Dark Knight or Spiderman II but it falls in the category right below it (joining Edward Norton's The Incredible Hulk) and it's light years better than the dribble that the other superhero movies we saw this year like Captain America, The Green Lantern, and Thor.

I really enjoyed X-Men: First Class and I should probably go out and see Shame and/or A Dangerous Method because a) I'm officially a Michael Fassbender fan and b) They will probably easily earn a spot on my revised list.

3) Paranormal Activity 3 dir. Ariel Schulman and Henry Joost

I know I am going to get a lot of shit for this selection and I don't care. You go on being a hater. Paranormal Activity 3 accomplished what very few films before it accomplished- It was able to scare the ever-loving shit out of movie without using any type of gore whatsoever.

I enjoyed the first Paranormal Activity. It was absolutely not as scary as the commercials painted it out to be (e.g. many of its commercials had shots of just the audience in the theater as they screamed and threw their popcorn in the air) but I enjoyed it nonetheless. The same holds true for the sequel. But the third installment of the franchise? Holy crap. I literally screamed in the theater like a little girl.

Even since Saw came out (yes, movies have been doing it way before Saw but that film helped usher in the torture porn of cinema today), horror movies have been using the cheap trick of gross out gore in order to get scares. This is a cop out. The truly best way (and it is very hard to accomplish) to scare the audience is to build up tension and uneasiness and Paranormal Activity 3 was the best film since The Sixth Sense to accomplish this.

The great thing about this Paranormal Activity is that is uses a different kind of camera technique. The first two movies was filmed using a single camera set on a tripod. What Paranormal Activity 3 did was use a camera that rotated in between two rooms- like an oscillating fan. There was one scene in particular that stuck with me. The parents go out for a lovely evening and leave the babysitter home to watch their two young girls (these girls grow up and become the stars of Paranormal Activity and Paranormal Activity 2). The babysitter spends some time downstairs between the living room and the kitchen. The oscillating camera pans back and forth between these two rooms. I knew something was going to pop out and scare the babysitter; however, the problem was that I did not know when. I thought the pop out would occur early on but eventually it seemed to never come. The camera just kept oscillating back and forth. Eventually the movie lulled me into a false sense of security. I almost got so bored because the film spent so much time switching back and forth between two rooms with absolutely no action whatsoever. However, what the film was actually doing was slowly building up tension which was much scarier than the actual pop out itself. Paranormal Activity 3 used this slow build up throughout the entire movie and it's what distinguished itself from the first two.

Now, as a movie in and of itself Paranormal Activity 3 was not very good. The movie is riddled with plot holes and when you think about what happens in Paranormal Activity 3 it does not quite follow along the same guidelines as what we learned about and what we were told in "1" and "2". But I don't care. Ultimately, Paranormal Activity 3 is a horror movie and when I go see a horror movie, I want to be so scared that I piss my pants. That this film (almost) accomplished that goal.

2) Rise Of The Planet of The Apes dir. Rupert Wyatt

I never really wanted to originally see Rise but I'm certainly glad I did. What was so great about the original Planet Of The Apes (the Charlton Heston version not the Marky Mark one) was that it not only was an entertaining story but it was a great science fiction questioning the role of science versus religion. However, the movie studio has bastardized the original thinking people just wanted to see monkeys and that was it. Thinking that Rise Of The Planet of The Apes would fall along this same vein, I was hesitant to see this new one. I was wrong.

While Rise does not even come close to the science fiction classic of the original, it also doesn't try to be. The only hint that this movie is a prequel to the 1968 classic was the title of the movie and the ending credits. Other than that, Rise is its own movie entirely. Sure, the film does touch on the concept of, "What should we really being doing in the name of science?" but it presents the situation that the problem lies within the greed of the owners of the pharmaceutical companies and not of a problem of the scientists who are just trying to help.

The story follows along Caesar (Andy Serkis) a chimp who was saved at birth from Will Rodman (James Franco) a scientist working on a cure for Alzheimer's. Caesar's mother held the cure to the disease and passed along the genetic material to Caesar. Caesar's mother dies right after giving birth to her son because she went crazy, destroyed a building during the same time in which an investor's meeting was going on, and the security in the drug company had her killed to prevent further mayhem. Will is forced to keep Ceasar in hiding because of his mother's actions. Although Will soon realizes that Caesar's genetic material holds the cure to Alzheimer's and he creates a formula which helps to slow down and looks like it will eventually stop the disease. Will tests his miracle drug on his father Charles (John Lithgow) and the drug works in leaps and bounds.

However, the main purpose of the film is not about pharmacy or drugs but mainly about the life of Caesar. Because of the scientific testing done on his mother, Caesar is the next stage in evolution of primates. He can communicate well to humans through sign language and has the intelligence of a human child equivalent. However, because Will is not supposed to have Caesar, the monkey is forced to seclusion within Will's home.

Unfortunately, one afternoon when the drug starts to fade and the symptoms of Alzheimer's starts to kick in, Charles runs amok and gets berated by his and Will's neighbor. Ceasar goes to help Charles and long story short, he ends up in the equivalent of monkey jail where he's beaten and abused by the caretakers John Landon (Brian Cox) and his son Dodge (Tom Felton).

The movie presents the life of Caesar from special monkey to eventual dictator and overlord of all primates. (I know this sounds silly when I'm writing it, but trust me, the movie does a great job with it and makes it serious) Analogous to how we see Natalie Portman's decent into madness in Black Swan we see Caesar getting slowly and surely beaten down where eventually the world around him forced Caesar to take drastic actions. While I do not like (whether inherent or not) the similarities between Adolf Hitler and Caesar, the movie still causes you to sympathize with Caesar and you want him to create a rebellion and rise up against the world.

The whole reason the movie works is because of the great acting by Andy Serkis. I don't care that he says two words or the fact that Caesar is largely computer-based, the reason Rise works so well is because of Serkis. The computer did not create the facial expressions of Caesar or the movements and the computer did not cause you to relate to Caesar on an emotional basis. Andy Serkis did. I think it's extremely close minded to not even nominate Serkis for major awards. He did the same exact thing as what every other actor in Hollywood does- except he did it in a different room than where everybody else was filming. Serkis brought emotion and depth to a character which helped define the movie. Jean Dujardin is going to win an Oscar for his performance in The Artist without saying a word so why should we hold Serkis to a different standard? I guess many people are worried that if we nominate Serkis then that will lead us down a slippery slope of nominating actors when they solely use their voice in animated works. But what Serkis does that voice actors do not is that he uses facial expressions and body movement to portray his character and to me, that's much more important than vocal inflections. I know Serkis will get screwed but I thought he did a fantastic job.

1) Young Adult dir. Jason Reitman

No movie has stuck with me in 2011 like Young Adult did. In my mind, this was the only film this year that could actually stand on its own with other great movies of past years.

The movie follows Mavis Gary (Charlize Theron) a former head plastic of her high school who comes back to her town because her former boyfriend- the typical high school jock- recently just had a kid with his wife. Upset at how her life has turned out and after another night of meaningless sex, Mavis comes back to her town to relive her glory days and attempts to reunite with Buddy Slade (Patrick Wilson)- her ex-boyfriend.

Mavis Gary is one of the most complex and compelling females characters in movie cinema. There have been some great female actions roles (Ellen Ripley, The Bride, etc.) and some great female characters (Clarice Starling, Annie Wilkes, etc.) but never has there been a character with so many different layers all at once than Gary.

The thing about Mavis Gary is that she actually is smart. She was not your average bimbo cheerleader but moved to the big city (Minneapolis) and actually made something of herself. She is the "ghost" writer of a once popular, but now dead young adult book series. This is part of how the movie gets its title. Throughout the movie, Mavis is writing the last installment of the series and throughout the movie she writes different parts of the book which happen to correspond with her life. I know it's not the most creative movie device but I loved it.

Mavis is also extremely sociable. She has not outgrown her high school days but she still can enter into any conversation. But with that being said, you are supposed to dislike Gary.

What's great about Young Adult and the wonderfully written script by Diablo Cody (Juno) is that you are supposed to despise Mavis Gary but at the same time you feel for her and grow to love her as a character. This is where the movie really gets its title from. Mavis Gary has not grown up from her high school days. Although it's been over a decade, she still goes to her old school to get drunk and reminisce about the good old days and still acts like she did in high school.

Plus, think about the plot. Mavis Gary is purposefully trying to be a homewrecker. Her ex-flame is in a loving and caring relationship, has shown no indications that he wants to get out of it, and just had a beautiful child. The movie is all about the narcissistic, corrupt, and destructive nature of this woman who never really learned to grow up. Young Adult is the opposite of a feel-good movie, yet it has all the qualities of one. I don't want to spoil the ending for you but it falls right in line with that same theme.

While in town, Gary meets Matt Freehauf (Patton Oswalt). Matt was a fellow classmate of Mavis and Buddy and while in high school he was the victim of a savage beating by his fellow classmates who permanently disfigured him because they thought he was a homosexual. Matt plays the voice of reason to Mavis Gary and Patton Oswalt gives one of the best acting performances of not only his career but of the year. Mavis ends up spending a lot of time with Matt during her stint in town and he helps to guide her along her path.

For those of you who want to relate to a character and who wants them to succeed then this movie is absolutely not for you. However, if you can appreciate the complexities of a character and the subtleties of a performance then I highly recommend Young Adult.

MOVIES THAT JUST MISSED THE CUT (in no particular order)

- Bridesmaids: I love that style of comedy and I can see why everyone was infatuated with it, but personally, I just didn't find it funny like how everyone else did. Although Melissa McCarthy was amazing and I hope she gets a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination.

-Win/Win: Great acting by everybody involved but it took way too long to get to its point, it didn't do the greatest job connecting the audience to the characters, very predictable, and at the end of the day I never want to see this film again. This film is almost the quintessential split between "good" and "entertaining".

- Hugo: Everything about this movie was great. The film making was great, the special effects were great, and the acting was very good. However, I was bored as all hell while watching it. Any movie that makes you think "Holy hell this is boring as shit. When is it going to end!" can't earn a spot on my list. This is the quintessential difference between "good" and "entertaining".

- Crazy, Stupid, Love: A surprisingly good movie that completely fell off in the second half. I could have (and wish I did) watched an entire movie of just Ryan Gosling and Steve Carrel.

- Midnight In Paris: Really good movie, WAY too pretentious for me.

- The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo: A movie that didn't need to get remade. Fincher didn't add anything new to the story and the entire time I just kept thinking, "the original is better". Also, why have a movie set in Sweden yet have everyone speak English with Swedish accents? Clearly the movie can be done and done well when everybody is speaking a foreign language.

- Arthur: Came into the movie with very low expectations but Russell Brand (while he plays the same character all the time) was very funny throughout the entire film.

IF I WAS THE ACADEMY AWARD CZAR

Best Movie: Young Adult
RUNNER UP: Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes
Best Director: Bennett Miller (Moneyball)
RUNNER UP: Martin Scorsese (Hugo)
Best Actor: Geroge Clooney (The Descendants)
RUNNER UP: Brad Pitt (Moneyball)
Best Actress: Charlize Theron (Young Adult)
RUNNER UP: Rooney Mara (The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo)
Best Supporting Actor: Andy Serkis (Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes)
RUNNER UP: Patton Oswalt (Young Adult)
Best Supporting Actress: Shailene Woodley (The Descendants)
RUNNER UP: Melissa McCarthy (Bridesmaids)
Best Original Screenplay: Diablo Cody (Young Adult)
RUNNER UP: Tom Hanks and Nia Vardalos (Larry Crowne)
Best Adapted Screenplay: Alexander Payne, Jim Rash, and Nat Faxon (The Descendants)
RUNNER UP: Steve Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin (Moneyball)

Sexy Rexy's 2011 NFL Mega Playoff and End-Of-The-Year Award Post

2012-01-04T15:36:00.009-06:00

PLAYOFF PICTURE

NFC

Wild Card Round

(6) Detroit Lions def. (3) New Orleans Saints
(4) New York Giants def. (5) Atlanta Falcons

Divisional Round

(1) Green Bay Packers def. (6) Detroit Lions
(2) San Fransisco 49ers def. (4) New York Giants

Championship Game

(1) Green Bay Packers def. (2) San Fransisco 49ers

AFC

Wild Card Round

(5) Pittsburgh Steelers def. (4) Denver Broncos
(3) Houston Texans def. (6) Cincinnati Bengals

Divisional Round

(5) Pittsburgh Steelers def. (1) New England Patriots
(2) Baltimore Ravens def. (3) Houston Texans

Championship Game

(2) Baltimore Ravens def. (5) Pittsburgh Steelers

SUPERBOWL

Green Bay Packers def. Baltimore Ravens

Best _____ In The Playoffs

DEFENSES

1) San Fransisco 49ers
2) Houston Texans
3) Pittsburgh Steelers
4) Baltimore Ravens
5) New York Giants
6) Green Bay Packers
7) Cincinnati Bengals
8) Denver Broncos
9) Detroit Lions
10) New Orleans Saints
11) Atlanta Falcons
12) New England Patriots

QUARTERBACKS

1) Aaron Rodgers (GB)
2) Tom Brady (NE)
3) Drew Brees (NO)
4) Eli Manning (NYG)
5) Matthew Stafford (DET)
6) Ben Roethlisberger (PIT) (only because of injury)
7) Matt Ryan (ATL)
8) Andy Dalton (CIN)
9) Alex Smith (SF)
10) Joe Flacco (BAL)
11) Tim Tebow (DEN)
12) T.J. Yates / Jake Delhomme (HOU)

COACHES

1) Bill Belichick (NE)
2) Mike McCarthy (GB)
3) Sean Peyton (NO)
4) Jim Harbaugh (SF)
5) Tom Coughlin (NYG)
6) Jim Schwartz (DET)
7) Mike Tomlin (PIT)
8) John Harbaugh (BAL)
9) John Fox (DEN)
10) Mike Smith (ATL)
11) Gary Kubiak (HOU)
12) Marvin Lewis (CIN)

RUNNING BACKS

1) Arian Foster (HOU)
2) Ray Rice (BAL)
3) Frank Gore (SF)
4) Ben Tate (HOU)
5) Darren Sproles (NO)
6) Tim Tebow (DEN)
(just kidding)
6) Cedric Benson (CIN)
7) Michael Turner (ATL)
8) Pierre Thomas (NO)
9) Willis McGahee (DEN)
10) Ahmad Bradshaw (NYG)
11) Ryan Grant (GB)
12) Kevin Smith (DET)

RECEIVERS

1) Calvin Johnson (DET)
2) Mike Wallace (PIT)
3) Jordy Nelson (GB)
4) A.J. Green (CIN)
5) Victor Cruz (NYG)
6) Rob Gronkowski (NE)
7) Hakeem Nicks (NYG)
8) Roddy White (ATL)
9) Wes Welker (NE)
10) Antonio Brown (PIT)
11) Marques Colston (NO)
12) Jimmy Graham (NO)
NOTE: If Greg Jennings is healthy I would rank him 6th between Green and Cruz

END OF THE YEAR AWARDS

MVP: Aaron Rodgers (GB)

Rookie Of The Year

Offensive Rookie of the Year: Cam Newton (CAR)
Defensive Rookie of the Year: Von Miller (DEN)
Special Teams Rookie of the Year: Patrick Peterson (ARI)

Sophomore of the Year

Offensive Sophomore of the Year: Rob Gronkowski (NE)
Defensive Sophomore of the Year: Jason Pierre-Paul (NYG)

Defensive Player of the Year: Patrick Willis (SF)

Comeback Player of the Year: Steve Smith (CAR)

Offensive Player Of The Year (Besides Rodgers): Tom Brady (NE)

#10- Good Will Hunting (1997)

2012-01-04T14:58:00.000-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's This Was This On
- The 'Bright' One: #2
- Adam Kaplan: #9
- Cubsfan4ever1: #14
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 53

Directed By: Gus Van Sant
Written By: Matt Damon and Ben Affleck
Starring: Matt Damon, Robin Williams, Minnie Driver, Stellan Skarsgard, and Ben Affleck

The Plot

Will Hunting (Damon) is a mathematical genius with no potential or drive to use his gift due to his horrific upbringing full of beatings and abuses by his father. While working as a janitor at MIT, Professor Gerald Lambeau (Skarsgard) discovers Hunting's gift and does his best to nurture it. He enlists the help of his former college roommate Sean Maguire (Williams), a psychologist, to help Will Hunting get through his demons and reach his potential. Maguire, along with Hunting's newfound girlfriend Skylar (Driver) and his best friend Chuckie (Ben Affleck) help to aid Will Hunting to get through his problems.

Why This Movie Is Great

This movie is brilliant because it's a character study into a wounded genius. The film is great because it doesn't show you why Will Hunting is the way he is, it just plops you right in the middle of his life and takes you on a journey to try and make this guy better. The film doesn't try to be cliche and bash you over the head saying, "Look! See! This guy is messed up! See! This is what happens when you beat children!" Instead, it takes a subtle approach. It comes out in bits and pieces. Hunting's abusive childhood affects his future relationships (no shit) but it does so at key moments. Hunting is very good at picking up chicks (he picks up Skylar with relative easy and bravado) but as the relationship progresses and gets more intimate, Will Hunting starts to get more distant.

*** WARNING: REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS***

A fantastic example of this is when Skylar asks Will to move away with her. As the audience all we see is a great and blossoming relationship. It just seems logical that Will would want to take his relationship to the next step. Instead, Will lashes out as a defensive mechanism to avoid intimacy. (In fact, most of what Will does is a defensive mechanism).

We see early on in the film that Will is messed up as Lambeau takes him to see psychiatrists, but we, as the audience, are not fully aware of how deep and troubled Will is because he is constantly fucking with everybody he meets. It's not until Sean Maguire, Lambeau's old college roommate, starts to see Will that we start delving deep into Will's problems. The meetings between Sean and Will are like Will Hunting himself. They start of tame and superficial but as you dig deeper the true colors get revealed.

Sean, like Will, is also troubled. Sean has lost the love of his life- his wife- and he still struggles to cope with her death. He has to deal with his own problems and he does so vicariously through his aid of Will. Like Will, Sean also grows and matures as we see through his therapy sessions with Will as well as his time spent with his old, and much more successful, former college roommate Lambeau.

Gus Van Sant does his best directorial job ever in Good Will Hunting. There are subtle shots and scenes that are just amazing. For example, as Will is riding on a train as he is getting closer towards his ending point, we see Will slouched in his chair with his arms spread across the seats next to him. The shot is just Will silent on a train but it's shot so as it looks like Will is Jesus on the cross. Brilliant! It's subtle things like that help make this movie fantastic.

I was reading a lot of online reviews before typing up this post and the most common criticism I found was that this film was too predictable. No shit Sherlock, of course it's predictable. Of course Will Hunting is going to overcome his demons and be with Skylar. I have two responses to that: 1) This movie is completely character driven and not even remotely close to being plot driven. I care more about what happens to the characters and their journey to get there rather than the plot itself and 2) That ending was not even close to a typical Hollywood ending. Will did not catch Skylar before she left for California and made some romantic speech to win her back. Will pushed Skylar so far away that she actually left for California thinking they were broken up and Will travels on a open road (a great, yet widely used symbolic gesture (see: Cast Away) to show Will's open path ahead of him). He just says "I'm going to see about a girl". He doesn't actually meet up with her. I thought the ending of the movie was great. Also, if you complain the movie ending was typical and cliche then ask yourself, would you want the reverse to happen? You want to see Will Hunting be a nobody piece-of-shit for the rest of his life? Well, if so, you're a dick.

It's a shame Good Will Hunting was released in 1997- the same year as Titanic- because otherwise it would have swept the Oscars. It did win two Academy Awards: Best Supporting Actor (Robin Williams) and Best Screenplay (Damon and Affleck) but it's a shame it didn't win more. But hey (and a bit of a spoiler alert), Good Will Hunting made Game Of Inches Top 25 Movies Of The Past 25 years and Titanic wasn't remotely close to making it. So, at least it's got that working for it.

FUN FACTS:

1) During a therapy session, Sean is discussing to Will how his wife used to fart all the time. This scene was ad libed by Williams which is why Damon is laughing so damn hard through it. The camera also shakes throughout the scene because the cameraman was laughing so hard as well.

2) During the therapy session where Sean tells Will how he met his wife before attending a Boston Red Sox game, we see a bird's eye view of Sean's office. In Sean's office are four chairs. They are set up like the bases of a baseball diamond (another subtle proof of Van Sant's greatness in this movie).

3) Will's three friends are Chuckie, Morgan (played by Ben's brother Casey Affleck), and Billy (played by Cole Hauser). Hauser barely talks throughout the movie because he purposefully gave up most of his lines to Casey. He did so because he felt there is always one shy dude in the group and if he barely talked it would add more authenticity to the movie. He was right.

4) In the scene where Skylar meets Will's three friends at the local bar, Chuckie (Ben Affleck) is telling a story about how his uncle got pulled over after a night of heavy drinking a stole a cop car. Van Sant told Casey to constantly interrupt Ben as he was telling the story to add authenticity to the group dynamic- without telling Ben what Casey was about to do. As Chuckie is telling the story he yells at Morgan "Will you shut the fuck up!" This was ad libed by Ben because he was pissed Casey kept interrupting his big monologue. Another subtle example of Van Sant's brilliance.

5) In the very beginning of the movie, Will and his three friends are watching a little league baseball game. They leave the game and one of them says, "Let's go to Kelly's" (which the boys then do). Kelly's is a fast food chain in the Boston-area and is the best fucking place ever for seafood. I try to go to Boston once a year and when I do I always go to Kelly's to get a lobster roll. Part of the reason I ranked Good Will Hunting the best Boston movie of all time.

Worst QB League Update- Week 17 And Final Standings

2012-01-04T03:14:00.000-06:00

1) The 'Bright' One

Total: 1,526
Last Week: 108

Washington: 5
Indianapolis: 29
Denver: 80
Philadelphia: -6

2) Adam Kaplan

Total: 1,358
Last Week: 108

Jacksonville: 35
Chicago: 25
Tampa Bay: 36
Baltimore: 12

3) Dan Bennett

Total: 1,243
Last Week: 65

Miami: 22
Oakland: 10
Kansas City: 6
NY Jets: 27

4) Cubsfan4evr1

Total: 1,203
Last Week: 102

St. Louis: 5
Minnesota: 47
Tennessee: 0
Buffalo: 50

5) Steven Anderson

Total: 1,116
Last Week: 39

Seattle: 7
San Francisco: 0
Cleveland: 27
Arizona: 5

Final Standings

First Place: The 'Bright' One
Second Place: Adam Kaplan
Third Place: Dan Bennett

GOI Turned 3 In December!

2012-01-03T23:32:00.005-06:00

My first semester of my third year of law school was quite intense. Intense enough that I did not realize that GOI's three year anniversary came-and-went in December.

In case you were curious, the GOI authors have continued to prosper despite a major slow down in GOI production in 2011. In the last year, I made new connections in the baseball world. I made a few guest appearances on the Fantasy Phenoms podcast, and I was even on ESPN Radio. I recently started a blog titled saBEERmetrics that follows my recent exploits in to the world of being a beer snob. I only won one fantasy title between several leagues this year, but I at least beat out the GOI authors in each of them, which is all that matters. Heck, I even beat them in fantasy football #notsohumblebrag. Each of the GOI authors are also doing well in Law/Med School. Wish us jobs.

As has been the tradition the past two years, I like to celebrate our anniversary by making the Hall of Fame case for an underrated player. This year I chose Larry Walker.

Thank you for your continued support. Enjoy the remaining top 10 of our top 25 movies of the past 25 years series. (You can see all of our movie selections so far here)

Feel free to email comments/questions/hate mail to gameofinchesblog AT gmail DOT com.

#11- Toy Story (1995)

2012-01-03T22:07:00.001-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Adam Kaplan: #8
- Daniel Bennett: #8
- David "MVP" Eckstein: #10
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 52

Directed By: John Lasseter
Written By: Josh Wheedon, Andrew Stanton, Joel Cohen, and Alec Sokolow
Voices Of: Tim Allen, Tom Hanks, Don Rickles, and John Ratzenberger

The Plot

In a world where toys can talk, a young boy named Andy has a favorite toy- a cowboy doll named Woody (Hanks). Andy's world is consumed by Woody and loves all things cowboys. However, when Andy gets a spaceman action figure named Buzz Lightyear (Allen), the balance of Andy and his toys shifts towards spaceman and Buzz and away from cowboys and Woody. Threatened and jealous of the new Buzz Lightyear action figure, Woody exacts his revenge on Buzz Lightyear. However, things go incredibly wrong when he does so.

Why This Movie Is Great

Toy Story is the only animated movie to make Game Of Inches' top 25 list and for my money, there's no greater animated movie within the past quarter century- or even ever. There have been some great animated flicks (The Lion King, Wall-E, Finding Nemo, and Beauty and the Beast just to name a few) but none quite like Toy Story. No movie has been so influential on animated children's films since Steamboat Mickey. Pixar studios revolutionized animated movies as we know it. Not just in terms of the quality of the animation (which holy crap did it bring animated movies into another, better dimension), but in terms of the quality of the movie itself. Pixar's first film, Toy Story, helped pave the way for animated movies as we know it today.

Animated and Disney movies have always had layers. There's the outer shell layer of a great a great comic romp for little children. Little kids just enjoy seeing toys talking and interacting with each other. It's great fun for them. Then there's the under-the-surface layer. The layer that has a deeper hidden meaning behind it. Most Disney movies are based off of fairy tales which mean they all have a hidden meaning. That meaning tends to be, "Be yourself" or "You can do anything as long as you are good" or "Be nice to others". Essentially the moral of every animated/Disney movie was a cliche. But Pixar choose to go deeper with their morals. There are deeper thematic elements in throughout the Toy Story trilogy and Pixar movies in general (at least the better ones). It was Pixar's ability to throw out cliches and nonesense dribble that made them the powerhouse they are today.

The thematic elements of envy and jealousy. The idea of being tossed to side like, well, a used up toy. Sure, there's that idea of "Be yourself" that centers around the Buzz Lightyear plot line because he thinks that he is an actual space ranger, but Toy Story has just done it so much more effectively than any animated movie before it. It was Toy Story's ability to dig deeper as well as it's groundbreaking and breathtaking visuals that made it literally a great movie for all ages.

The Quick And Dirty HOF Case For Larry Walker

2012-01-03T21:26:00.002-06:00

Larry Walker deserves to be in the Hall Of Fame (as should Andruw Jones and Scott Rolen upon retirement) because he meets the 70 career WAR rule despite falling in the grey area between “the best” and “great for really long time.” The 70 career WAR rule is meant to capture guys like Sandy Kofaux who burn brightest for a short period (the equivalent of 10+ WAR for 7+ years) or who, like Paul Molitor and Carlton Fisk, defined excellence by being perennial All Stars for a very long time (the equivalent of 3.5+ WAR for 20+ years). Guys like Jim Edmonds are the epitome of excellent players who were just not good enough and narrowly miss out.

Larry Walker was a great player, but he does not get the proper level of respect because his career falls in that grey area between “the best” and “excellent for really long time.” Larry Walker was neither Sandy Koufax-esque (burning brightest briefly), Pujolsian (truly one of the most elite ever), and certainly he did not stick around for 20+ years (although a fifteen-plus year major league career is nothing to sneeze at). Position differences aside (WAR accounts for that), Walker’s value and case reminds me a lot of Ron Santo with the off-the-field baggage. Nonetheless, Larry Walker's numbers stack up and are Hall of Fame worthy.

With two standout seasons (1997 and 2001) mixed amongst with many great ones, Walker falls much closer to the Moliter side of the Hall (excellent duration) than the Ted Williams (best of the best) or Sandy Kofaux (brightest briefly) side. Per Fangraphs, Walker logged seven seasons with 5+ WAR and ten seasons of 4+ WAR. Larry Walker only posted sub-3 WAR campaigns in a four seasons: 1989 [-0.1 WAR], when he received less than 60 trips to the plate in his first major league cup of tea; 1995 (+1.3 WAR), when he only played 83 games; 2000 (+2.0 WAR), when he only played 87 games; and 2005 (+2.6 WAR), when he only played 100 games. If we're being honest, Walker only had three sub-3 WAR campaigns, and they came in partial seasons where his full season pace was above the 3 WAR threshold. Larry Walker's career WAR per 650 PA is 5.9.

Going back to the Paul Molitor and Carlton Fisk analogy…

…Fangraphs’ WAR data shows him comfortably sandwiched in value between the two. He lasted fewer season than either Molitor or Fisk, but Walker had two better single seasons (1997 and 2001) than either Molitor or Fisk ever had.

More telling, perhaps, is a WAR comparison to three recent Hall of Fame inductees (although one was a second baseman):

Notice that Walker is close in value to the group for the majority of his career, edging the group out in 10 of 17 seasons (he also had the two single best seasons of the group).

If you want to be slightly more scientific, let's consult the Sabermetrician's check list:

Does he walk a lot? 11.4% career walk rate.
Does he hit for power? .252 career isolated power (ISO) and 383 career home runs.
How did he fair against the rest of the league? Career .414 wOBA, 142 wRC+.
If he stole bases, was he efficient? Career success rate slightly above 75%, so sure.
Did he play for an obscure franchise that Jonah Keri can rally around? Five-plus year tenured Expo!

Now I know what you are thinking when looking at that check list. 383 home runs is not a lot, and Walker played at Coors field. Let me address both issues in kind.

First and foremost, 383 home runs may not seem a lot by today's standards, but it is still top 70 in the history of baseball. Only 11 players in the history of the game have more home runs and more stolen bases than Larry Walker, who was a pretty good baserunner. Fangraphs only tracks relative baserunning from 2002 and beyond, but even then, in the "twilight" of his career, Walker’s baserunning added an extra 10 runs over the final 461 games of his career.

Second, while Coors may have inflated Walker's numbers, when park factors and relative league production is accounted for, Walker was still 42% better than the league average player at the time. His career wOBA is a superb .414. To put this relative career production in perspective, note that less than 35 qualified players own a career wOBA that is 50% better than their peers. Note further that of those 34 players, a handful are currently active players. A 142 wRC+ narrowly places Larry Walker in the top 55 to 60 range in terms of relative career production in the history of retired ballplayers.

In short, Larry Walker, with 73 WAR to his name, deserves a spot in Cooperstown. Jeff Bagwell may be more deserving, but that argument is for another day.

#12- Terminator II: Judgment Day (1991)

2012-01-02T21:45:00.003-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- The 'Bright' One: #6
- Adam Kaplan: #13
- David "MVP" Eckstein: #14
- Cubsfan4ever1: #21
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 50

Directed By: James Cameron
Written By: James Cameron and William Wisher Jr.
Starring: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Edward Furlong, Linda Hamilton, and Robert Patrick

The Plot

In the future, when the machines revolt against mankind, John Connor leads the human resistance to fight back for humanity. After the machine's attempt to go back in time to kill John Connor's mother, Sarah, (Hamilton) before John is born fails, the machines try again in Terminator II. This time, they try to kill a young John Connor himself (Furlong). The machines send back the T-1000 (Patrick) to kill John Connor so the humans send back The Terminator (Schwarzenegger). Instead of The Terminator trying to kill a Connor, it is sent back to protect the Connor's against the T-1000.

Why This Movie Is Great

This movie is great because it is one of the best action movies ever made. Terminator II: Judgment Day sets the bar for action movies. This movie was made by guys for guys. There is no love story here. There is no B plot with some sappy romance to compliment the action. This movie is just straight action. Pure and simple. Everything guys want out of a movie, Terminator II: Judgment Day delivers.

Even though this movie was made in 1991, it still holds up. Even before Jurassic Park was released and before Cameron revolutionized special effects 18 years later in Avatar, Judgment Day's special effects are incredible. This movie could be released tomorrow and still its special effects would be praised, despite the amazing advances movie technology had accomplished in the two decades since the release of this film.

Ah-nuld was very smart when selecting his movie choices. He knew what his body type was and he knew that he was an action star through and through. But what made Schwarzenegger great was that he choose the right action movies. Movies like the first two Terminators, The Running Man, Commando, and Predator. Movies that seem to have transcended the action genre. Action movies are a dime a dozen. Hollywood believes that males (especially young males) are the target audience where they can get their money (as someone who was once a teenage male, I can attest to the accuracy of this belief. I saw every shitty movie under the sun just because it "looked cool". Because of this, action movies seemed to get churned out like a Willy Wonka factory producing chocolate. But Schwarzenegegr movies (especially throughout the first half of his career) are the ones that get remembered. Schwarzenegger was great in the Terminator movies as both the good guy and the bad guy.

Speaking of bad guys, what Cameron did with the T-1000 was just fantastic. Even though it looks like it is created from the goo from The Secret World of Alex Mack (kudos to you if you understood that reference), the design of the robot and its execution was brilliant. The T-1000 is not just any robot, it's a super robot. The T-1000 surpasses what the imagination could think of about androids. It's built to be better that any Terminator machine and that's how the movie plays off of it. Mere mortal bullets and everyday things barely scratch the T-1000. Plus, the helicopter scene with Patrick towards the end of the movie was just pure moviegoing entertainment.

Robert Patrick plays the T-1000 perfectly. It's not supposed to be the charismatic over-the-top, remember-able villain like Gary Oldman in Leon: The Professional, Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight, or Christoph Waltz in Inglorious Basterds. Patrick plays the villain so stoically- like it should be. It's a killing machine; it has one job and one job only- kill John Connor.

Cameron is also known for having movies with powerful lead woman (see: the first Terminator and Aliens). Traditionally, action movies are filled with male action stars, but Cameron helps to buck that trend. Not only did he make Ellen Ripley more of a bad ass in Aliens, but Sarah Connor in the first two Terminators is a certifiable BA. John Connor doesn't have a father to protect him- he has his mother. This was and is a pretty revolutionary trait all things considered.

Lastly, we get to Edward Furlong, who was 13 when this movie was filmed. He's almost like a modern day James Dean- he does a few great movies (American History X and Terminator II) and then is never seen again (Though Furlong is not dead- as much as it seems like is). He was great as a young actor in Cameron's classic and helped you sympathize with him and his plight. If you don't care about John Connor then this movie becomes meaningless.

All four main actors in Terminator II: Judgment Day along with the great vision of James Cameron helped make the movie the classic sci-fi action/adventure the standard for all other action movies. The plot is simple, it's one villain against three heroes. This simplicity (along with some stellar explosions, fights, and special effects) helps this sequel stand the test of time and make it earn a spot on Game Of Inches' 25 Greatest Movies Of The Past 25 Years.

FUN FACT: Right now, the #1 and #2 highest grossing movies of all time (Avatar and Titanic, respectively) are James Cameron movies. Those are also probably his worst two movies he's ever created. Some great classics Cameron made are: Terminator, Terminator II: Judgment Day, Aliens, True Lies, and The Abyss.

GOI Fantasy Basketball league

2012-01-02T11:23:00.064-06:00

I thought the NBA lockout was going to last the entire season and the entire NBA season was going to be canceled. TBO and myself actually made a bet on this if we would have a season. I said there would be no season, and TBO said I was crazy so we had a Wendy's board wager on the line. He won and I had to pay up. So the NBA season has been back since Christmas and with that means fantasy basketball.

This is the third year of GOI fantasy basketball league. We didn't create the league right away because of the lockout, so we waited until the lockout was over and then scrambled to have it ready for the season. I tell you folks, I don't know how the NBA did it with free agency, training camps, exhibition games, and everything else. It was hard enough to create a league when your busy with work, find people who will be competitive, a draft time that works for everyone, figure out all the settings, and most important make everyone in a 13 team league happy! I don't know if we accomplished that last goal, but GOI has a 13 team, live auction rotisserie league.

The third annual GOI fantasy basketball league drafted on December 19th. This year in addition to having TBO and myself in the league, Adam "Sexy Rexy" Kaplan joined for his first year of fantasy basketball. So we have three of the four GOI authors. We did try and convince David "MVP" Eckstein to play, but all of our attempts were unsuccessful this year. Hopefully next year he will join us. TBO won the league last year so he is looking to repeat. I won two years ago, but fell to third place last year so I am looking to rebound and take back first place. Adam is trying to prove he knows enough about basketball to compete with us. Like in previous years, I will post updates about the leagues a few times throughout the season.

As I mentioned earlier, this was a auction league with a $300 budget I raised from the default of $200. The rationale for raising it was so managers wouldn't run out of money so quickly at the end, and have some money to spend in such a deep to league to make it fun. Even though I understood the logic that if you raise the budget, it just inflates the players values, that is exactly what happened. It did inflate the players values throughout the draft, but those who did wait and save, did have enough to spend and were able to buy people later in the draft when people were going for much more than $1 players, which was my concern. The inflation rate was about 33%.

Adam's strategy was to get Chris Paul and build around him. In addition to Paul he got Stoudemire, and Curry for a good core nucleus of stud's. He obviously went with a stars and scrubs approach. Here is the team he drafted:

TBO drafted a stud guard in Dwyane Wade and a Stud big guy in Blake Griffin. He also drafted good role players with a lot of upside in Brook Lopez, Luol Deng, Andrew Bynum, James Harden, Paul George, Gerald Henderson, and Derrick Favors. Sadly for him, Lopez is now out 4-6 weeks and Bynum missed the first 5 games of the season. He has a good core though and good depth. Here is how his draft looks:

My Team, Cubsfan4evr had a different approach from the other 2 teams. I don't have any big superstars. I went for more of a well balanced team trying to collect assets. My studs are Al Horford, Steve Nash, and Kevin Martin. These studs aren't on the same caliber of Chris Paul, Dwyane Wade, Blake Griffin, and Amare Stoudemire, but I like my team. I have very good role players in Roy Hibbert, Gortat, Holiday, Turkoglu, Collison, Jennings, Blatche, and Frye. I have three players off to rough starts in Jennings, Blatche, and Frye, but if they pick it up by team will be unstoppable. Here is how my draft looks:

As you see I didn't spend all of my money, which I never seem to do in any auction..........but I am getting better with that.

#13- Inception (2010)

2011-12-31T02:55:00.002-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's This Was This On
- David "MVP" Einstein: #6
- Daniel Bennett: #7
- Adam Kaplan: #19
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 46

Directed By: Christopher Nolan
Written By: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Godron-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Marion Cotillard, Ken Watanabe, Cillian Murphy,
Dileep Rao, Tom Berenger, and Michael Caine

The Plot

Dom Cobb (DiCaprio) is an "extractor"- a thief who sneaks into people's minds to steal their inner most thoughts to extract information from them- mainly for corporate espionage. Saito (Watanabe) offers Cobb and his team a lot of money to break into Robert Fischer's (Murphy) dreams in order to add an idea (a.k.a. inception) so that Fischer will dissolve his company in order for Saito to have a monopoly over the energy industry. Inception is believed to be impossible so Cobb and his team are dealt with a tough task of finding a way to add an idea to Robert Fischer's mind. Though once the team begins their inception process things go incredibly wrong. The team must deal with extreme hardship while inside Robert Fischer's mind and must venture further inside his subconscious in order to complete their mission.

Why This Movie Is Great

***WARNING: REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS***

Why is this movie great? How much time do I have? Inception is fantastic because not only is a complex science fiction brain turner that forces you to watch the movie many, many times in order to understand it fully but it's a great action movie who's second half literally forced me to the edge of my seat when I saw it in the theaters.

At its very basic level, Inception is an action movie. While it's an exciting new twist on the heist movie, it is a heist movie nonetheless. But Inception is all about layers and about depth. If you scratch the surface and go a bit deeper the movie is a psychological story about Cobb and how he chooses to grieve after the death of his wife Mal (Cottilard). Cobb brings Ariadne (Page) into the mission as the architect because he can't create anymore. Now, every time he brings his own imagination into the dream world he sees Mal. Mal is always on his mind and she is so because he still has not let her death go. Mal's death was tragic and Cobb still blames himself for it. However, no matter how horrific a loved's one death may be, it is human nature to grieve and eventually get over it. However, Cobb has not gotten to that point yet and throughout the entire film he struggles to cope with the death of his wife.

As we go even further down the rabbit hole, Inception is about asking yourself what is reality and what is fantasy. The world you live in and what you perceive as real is a social construct and not necessarily objective fact. This was a concept Mal could not face. The film paints a picture that Mal has spent so much time in her fantasy that she can not cope with the realities of "the real world" and therefore kills herself. She believes killing herself will wake her up and get her out of this dream world. Cobb also struggles to differentiate what is real and what is not. One night, Ariadne catches Cobb in a deep, dark slumber. The team's chemist, Yusef (Rao), tells Ariadne that Cobb often spends many, long nights in a slumber and Ariadne catches Cobb dreaming about Mal and the life they lived together. Cobb still struggles to deal with reality which is why he still has not properly coped with Mal's death.

Tangentially, Inception is a metaphor for movie making. Saito, the man who funds the entire mission, is the film's financier. Cobb, who tells everyone what to do and how the show will run, is the director. Arthur (Gordon-Levitt), who does research and the guy sets places up to sleep, is the producer. Ariadne is the screenwriter because she creates the world that will be entered. Eames (Hardy) is the actor as shown by his morphing into different characters throughout the mission. Yusef represents the technical aspects of film making (key grips, lighting, sound guys, etc.). He makes everything needed so that the rest of the crew can successfully complete their mission. Lastly, we have Robert Fischer- who is the audience. Cobb takes Fischer on a wild and amazing adventure so he can have a better understanding of himself.

The biggest question that movie goers have upon first viewing of the movie is whether Cobb's totem top falls over at the very end and whether Cobb successfully got home to see his two children (after all, Cobb took on an incredibly dangerous mission of inception so that he can go home and see his kids- remember Cobb gets blames for Mal's death so he gets forced into exile otherwise he would be locked in jail). First of all, Nolan does not want you to know. The movie at its heart is about the process and not about the end result so Nolan refuses to tell you the end result. However, if you put the clues together, I believe the totem never falls and Cobb does not get to see his kids.

I mainly believe this because when we see the children at the end of the movie they are in the exact same position and look the exact same. This is a very dream-like state. Everything Nolan does is purposeful and volitional and Nolan would not coincidentally place Cobb's children is the EXACT SAME position wearing the exact same clothes.

However, I think the fact that Cobb gets to see his children's faces means that neither we (nor Cobb) really cares that the totem fell. Throughout the movie Cobb struggles to cope with the well-being of his family that the fact that we get to see his children's faces means Cobb is finally starting to move on.

In fact, I believe much of the film is a dream. I think all the scenes in the warehouse are reality but everything else is Cobb's dreams. Think about the plot of the movie rationally and not withing a science fiction movie construct. First, Cobb and Arthur work for a secret corporation and when they fail their mission at the beginning of the movie this secret corporation that we never see is out to get them. Next, Cobb travels all over the world to find his team in order to add an idea into a future CEO's mind. Lastly, Cobb does all this just so he can see his family. He gets off of the place and just like a Disney movie everything is happily ever after. All major plot points are just too dream-like to say they are part of the reality that just happens to fall within the boundaries that Christopher Nolan created for these characters.

I think the scene that is most obviously a dream (before the crew starts their inception mission with Robert Fischer) is the scene where Cobb recruits Eames. First of all, the scene starts off with Cobb and Eames smack dab in the middle of a restaurant in Africa talking to each other. As Cobb tells Ariadne when he first shows her about the dream state, you never know how the dreams start but they feel real once you're in them. The scene starts off randomly and in the middle of a conversation yet you do not know how they got there. Then Cobb gets chased by henchmen of this mysterious corporation. In order to escape them he must travel down alley ways. He loses the henchmen by going down an alley which gets narrower and narrower and he barely escapes in the nick of time. When he does escape Saito is magically and inexplicably waiting for Cobb to whisk him away to safety. All classic elements that it's a dream.

There is great evidence that it's all a dream. As a viewer, we are told that what is real and what is a dream is based upon totems. However, the only totem that we actually see used is Cobb's top. However, Cobb says that the top was originally Mal's. Some people believe that everything was a dream world. First, when Mal kills herself, she is defying logic by being in the hotel room across from Cobb. This is evidence of a dream (Seriously, what person actual rents two hotel rooms, destroys one, then goes to the other in order to kill herself?) and therefore since the top is Mal's but Mal is mainly a dream, the totem is a MacGuffin to the audience and is not actually evidence of reality or fantasy. Others believe that this theory is just reading too much into the movie.

Either way, because I could spend 10+ paragraphs writing about Inception and because the debates will never end about the meaning of the film and because it's just so damn entertaining- Inception deserves a spot on Game Of Inches 25 Greatest Movies of the Past 25 Years list.

FUN FACT: The initials of the main character's names spell DREAMS (Dom, Robert, Eames, Arthur/Ariadne, Mal, Saito)

#14- The Rock (1996)

2011-12-30T13:23:00.000-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

This post was written by Cubsfan4evr1

Who's List Was This On
- The 'Bright' One: #4
- Cubsfan4evr: #9
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 40

Directed By: Michael Bay
Written By: David Weisberg, Douglas S. Cook, and Mark Rosner
Starring: Sean Connery, Nicholas Cage, and Ed Harris

The Plot

The Rock is about a US Marine General Francis X. Hummel (Harris), taking over Alcatraz with 81 hostages, and threatens the San Francisco Bay area with a specific biological weapons that many are not trained on. General Hummel and his men are threatening to bomb San Francisco with deadly gas unless $100 million is paid in war reparations to the families of servicemen killed in covert operations. A chemical weapons specialist Stanley Goodspeed (Cage) and the only man to have ever escaped from Alcatraz, John Patrick Mason (Connery) are the only ones who can save the day.

Why This Movie Is Great

In 1996 one of the best action movies in the last 25 years came out, The Rock. That is the reason why Cubsfan4evr1 ranked The Rock number nine and The Bright One Ranked it number four on their list respectively. Both of them grew up watching this classic action movie of all time.

The Rock stars a veteran cast of actors such as Sean Connery, Nicolas Cage, and Ed Harris. The acting is superb, in an addition to the suspense in this action thriller which has great writing. The storyline may not be the most believable, but it comes across that way due to the great acting. These types of crises may be happening every day in the U.S. Government and we just don’t know about it! Just kidding. Ed Harris plays a U.S. Marine general and his team takes over Alcatraz and hostages. He comes across as a passionate bad guy for his cause. The only ones who can stop them is Nicolas Cage’s character who plays a down to earth chemical weapons specialist who knows nothing about field combat. Yet he has to convince an ex-convict, Sean Connery, a former spy for the British government who was held captive by the US government to help him after being held captive by the US government. The character development of Nicolas Cage is well developed. He is just a dorky chemical weapons specialist, who has witty banter unknowingly to himself.

If you have been living under a rock since 1996, you need to see this movie to experience one of the best action movies of our generation!

Part Twelve: In Summation / Who Deserves To Be A Pro Bowler In 2011?

2011-12-30T00:48:00.000-06:00

Let this post be your guidepost to determine what statistics I use to determine who should go to the Pro Bowl as well as my actual selections

Tim Tebow

Part One: Does Tim Tebow Deserve To Be A Pro Bowler?

The Statistics That I Use As A Basis For My Selections

Part Two: Offense, NFC
Part Three: Offense, AFC
Part Four: Special Teams
Part Five: Defense, NFC
Part Six: Defense, AFC

The Actual Players I Believe Deserve To Go To The Pro Bowl

Part Seven: Offense, NFC
Part Eight: Offense, AFC
Part Nine: Special Teams
Part Ten: Defense, NFC
Part Eleven: Defense, AFC

Part Eleven: AFC Defensive Players / Who Deserves To Be A Pro Bowler In 2011?

2011-12-30T00:35:00.000-06:00

First of all, this list is based upon stats from Week One through Week Fifteen. Secondly, I am a firm believer in using statistics- especially advanced statistics such as DVOA, DYAR, and WPA. You can see the statistics to back up my selections here

DEFENSIVE ENDS

Starters: Andre Carter (NE), Elvis Dumervil (DEN)
Back Up: Jabaal Sheard (CLE)

Apologies to: No One

DEFENSIVE TACKLES

Starters: Geno Atkins (CIN), Haloti Ngata (BAL)
Back Up: Vince Wilfork (NE)

Apologies to: Tommy Kelly (OAK), Richard Seymour (OAK), Philip Taylor (CLE)

LINEBACKERS

Starters: Terrell Suggs (BAL), Von Miller (DEN), D'Qwell Jackson (CLE)
Back Ups: Tamba Hali (KC), Daryl Smith (JAX)

Apologies to: No One

SAFETIES

Starters: Eric Weddle (SD), Keenan Lewis (PIT)
Back Up: Troy Polamalu (PIT)

Apologies to: Ed Reed (BAL), Reggie Nelson (CIN)

CORNERBACKS

Starters: Darrelle Revis (NYJ), Joe Haden (CLE)
Back Up: Jonathan Joseph (HOU)

Apologies to: Brandon Flowers (KC)

Part Ten: NFC Defensive Players / Who Deserves To Be A Pro Bowler In 2011?

2011-12-30T00:21:00.002-06:00

First of all, this list is based upon stats from Week One through Week Fifteen. Secondly, I am a firm believer in using statistics- especially advanced statistics such as DVOA, DYAR, and WPA. You can see the statistics to back up my selections here

DEFENSIVE ENDS

Starters: Jared Allen (MIN), Jason Pierre-Paul (NYG)
Back Up: Jason Babin (PHI)

Apologies to: Chris Clemons (SEA)

DEFENSIVE TACKLES

Starters: Darnell Dockett (ARI), Justin Smith (SF)
Back Up: Cullen Jenkins (PHI)

Apologies to: Ray McDonald (SF), Ndamukong Suh (DET)

Linebackers

Starters: DeMarcus Ware (DAL), Patrick Willis (SF), Aldon Smith (SF)
Back Ups: Ryan Kerrigan (WAS), NaVorro Bowman (SF), London Fletcher (WAS)

Apologies to: Lance Briggs (CHI), Brian Urlacher (CHI)

SAFETIES

Starters: Kam Chancellor (SEA), Earl Thomas (SEA)
Back Up: Dashon Goldson (SF)

Apologies to: Roman Harper (NO), Quintin Mikell (PHI)

CORNERBACKS

Starters: Carlos Rodgers (SF), Charles Woodson (GB)
Back Up: Brandon Browner (SEA)

Apologies to: Charles Tillman (CHI)

Part Nine: Special Team Players / Who Deserves To Be A Pro Bowler In 2011?

2011-12-30T00:08:00.003-06:00

First of all, this list is based upon stats from Week One through Week Fifteen. Secondly, I am a firm believer in using statistics- especially advanced statistics such as DVOA, DYAR, and WPA. You can see the statistics to back up my selections here

NFC KICK RETURNER
Patrick Peterson (ARI)

AFC KICK RETURNER
Joe McKnight (NYJ)

NFC KICKER
Connor Barth (TB)

AFC KICKER
Mike Nugent (CIN)

NFC PUNTER
Andy Lee (SF)

AFC PUNTER
Brandon Fields (MIA)

Drew Brees Does Not Deserve The MVP: Why The New Orleans QB Is Not Having As Good Of A Season As You Might Think And Why Dan Marino Is Still The Best

2011-12-29T17:50:00.000-06:00

And How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb

In Week 16 of the 2011 season, New Orleans quarterback Drew Brees set the record for most passing yards in a single season- surpassing Dan Marino's record that he set in 1984. Through 15 games Brees has thrown for 5,087 yards. Through 16 games in 1984, Marino threw for 5,084.

But let's break this down further.

First, it's a lot easier to throw in today's football than it was 30 years ago. The NFL has changed drastically it's really to make it easier for wide receivers to get separation and it makes it harder for defensive backs (or any defensive player) to touch and cover their intended receiver. What Dan Marino did in 1984 is like what Babe Ruth did in 1927. Ruth hit 60 home runs when the rest of the league was hitting 12. Marino putting up the numbers he did at the time he did it in was that much more incredible.

Second, Drew Brees throws it a lot. I mean A LOT. Drew Brees currently leads the NFL in pass attempts with 622. He averages 1.2 more pass attempts per game than second place (Matthew Stafford- and the Lions have spent a lot of games down big by halftime/the 3rd quarter) and 3.067 more attempts per game than third place (Tom Brady). Brees' 2011 season currently ranks him 10th all time among passing attempts.

Having that many attempts hurts Brees tremendously. Through advanced statistics in all sports, we know now that it is not the absolute numbers you put up, but how you get to your total numbers that's most important. Leading the league in strike outs is not very impressive if you also happen to lead the league in innings pitched as well. What's more important is strikeouts per 9 innings as well as strike out to walk ratio. Keep this analogy in mind as we'll get to it later.

Drew Brees was able to set the single season passing record just because he threw it so damn much. Like K/9, the most important statistic for quarterbacks is not total passing yards but rather yards per attempt. Currently, Drew Brees ranks only SIXTH in YPA behind Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Matt Schaub, Eli Manning, and Carson Palmer. Ranking outside the top five in a single season for YPA is not very impressive in the least. This statistic alone should take Brees out of MVP discussions.

However, we're going to go further. Like K/BB ratio for pitchers, quarterbacks have TD/INT ratio. Pitchers can get away with not striking a lot of guys out if they also do not walk very many guys (see: most Minnesota Twins pitchers since Johan Santana left). Likewise, it's possible to get away with walking very many guys if you have the ability to strike guys out with batters on base. In baseball, one of the worst things a pitcher can do is walk a batter. We know know that's it's all about on base percentage (and not batting average) for hitters. Likewise for football, one of the worst things a quarterback can do is turn the ball over. Turn overs have been proven to be one of the leading factors to determine which teams wins the ball game. Also, a QB can make up for his turnovers if he's able to score a lot of touchdowns.

Wow! This analogy is perfect *pats himself on the back*

Through 15 games, Drew Brees currently has 13 interceptions and 41 touchdowns. This is good for a 3.15 TD/INT ratio. Anything above 2:1 is impressive so Brees has a fantastic TD/INT ratio. However, Brees currently ranks 4th in this category in 2011 behind Aaron Rodgers (7.5), Tom Brady (3.27), Tony Romo (3.22), and Alex Smith (3.20).

But wait Adam, Brees currently on pace to set the single season mark for most completions? Shouldn't that count for something?

Yes, random naysayer I just made up, yes it does. That completion percentage is another amazing accomplishment. Right now Brees has a completion percentage of 71.2%. Who's in second place? Bress and his 2009 season when he completed 70.6% of his passes (as well as Ken Anderson in 1982 when he also completed 70.6% of his passes).

However, I would be more impressed with that completion percentage if 1) It wasn't painfully obvious the percentage was a result of Sean Payton's system and 2) if New Orleans did not have three out of the top 15 receivers in terms of yards after the catch. Two of which are running backs and the third one being a tight end.

New Orleans running back Darren Sproles currently leads the league in YAC with 649, running back Pierre Thomas is 12th with 443 and tight end Jimmy Graham is 15th with 407.

What this tells me is that Drew Brees gets a lot of completions coming from dink and dumps and easy passes over the middle. While I would rather have my quarterback completing passes than not completing passes, if I'm going to say a quarterback absolutely deserves to win the MVP, he needs to not derive so much of his value from being Chad Pennington-esque.

What's even more telling about Drew Brees and his MVP chances if that he ranks 3rd in terms of DVOA (a metric that measures how valuable a player is per play), 3rd in WPA/game, and 2nd in EPA/game (WPA and EPA are metrics that takes into account not only total yards and such but time in the game, down, and distance. Think about it- a 3 yard gain is more impressive on 4th and 2 late in the 4th quarter than on 1st and 10 early in the first. WPA and EPA takes things like that into consideration).

Despite all my Drew Brees bashing that I have just done, do not get it twisted and think that I hate Drew Brees. I do not. Brees' 2011 season has been stellar and amazing and I would love for Brees and his system to be on the team that I root for. Brees absolutely deserved his Pro Bowl berth and he should get all the kudos in the world for having a great season in 2011. What I am saying is that he does not deserve to be the MVP.

That honor belongs to (ugh, this pains me to say as a Bears fan): Aaron Rodgers. First of all, there has been only two seasons where a quarterback has had a TD/INT ratio of over 6:1- Tom Brady in 2010 (9:1) and Tom Brady in 2007 (6.25:1). As mentioned earlier, Aaron Rodgers has a TD/INT ratio of 7.5:1. ESPN and the shitty hype machine that it is should be making a much bigger deal of Aaron Rodger's TD/INT ratio than of Drew Brees' single season passing record.

Rodgers currently leads the NFL in: TD/INT ratio, passing touchdowns, passer rating, QBR, Yards Per Attempt, DVOA, and EPA. That also doesn't take into account his 257 rushing yards (4.3 YPC) and 3 rushing touchdowns. Rodgers is also 2nd in DYAR (total passing value) and WPA. To add to that, Rodgers has a sub par offensive line. According to Football Outsides, the Green Bay Packers have the 23rd ranked passing O-line (In contrast, the New Orleans Saints have the 3rd best). PLUS, Rodgers passes the eye test with flying colors. Every time I see Rodgers play it looks like every ball he throws should be completed. Every pass looks right on the money and I am baffled to as how Rodgers doesn't have a 100% completion percentage.

There should be no co-MVP in 2011 and Drew Brees should not get any first place votes for MVP. This award is Aaron Rodgers' award and HE should get every single first place vote. I don't care that the Packers lost a game. If you're gonna be that petty then I'll point out Drew Brees and the Saints lost to the St. Louis Rams. THE 2-13 RAMS! (as well as two others- including Aaron Rodger's Packers). You are a very good and talented QB Drew Brees but I'm sorry, 2011 is NOT your year.

#15- Superbad (2007)

2011-12-29T16:30:00.000-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Adam Kaplan: #5
- The 'Bright' One: #14
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 33

Directed By: Greg Mottola
Written By: Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg
Starring: Jonah Hill, Michael Cera, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Seth Rogen, Bill Hader, and Emma Stone

The Plot

During one day towards the end of their senior year, Seth (Hill) and Evan (Cera) must prepare for their last party to create one last epic night before they both go their separate ways before heading into college.

Why This Movie Is Great

***WARNING: REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS***

Underneath the Coen Brother porn jokes and all the raunchiness of Superbad is a beautiful story of two long time friends that are struggling to cope with their last days together before they go their separate ways once the summer ends.

While I personally think there are plenty of Judd Apatow vehicles that are MUCH funnier than Superbad (e.g. The 40 Year Old Virgin, Knocked Up, and Forgetting Sarah Marshall) there is no BETTER movie than Superbad. Superbad is this generation's defining comedy. Whether you agree with it or not, no movie better has summarized a generation since Dazed and Confused.

We long to be young and care-free. We all have to grow up and evolve but we don't necessarily want to. This youthfulness and exuberance is the underlying motivations for both the Seth and Evan story line as well as the Fogell/McLovin (Mintz-Plasse), Officer Slater (Hader), and Officer Michaels (Rogen) story line.

First we'll talk about the B plot with the police officers and McLovin. Throughout the movie we're presented with this plot of two incompetent police officers who bring a high schooler to a bar and allow him to help apprehend potential suspects. However, as the story progresses and as we get the reveal from the officers when they meet McLovin' back at Jules' (Stone) house, all the officers want to do is show Fogell a good time. They know Fogell was using a fake I.D. the entire time and they know they're not supposed to take him to a bar to bust a drunk and disorderly person. But it's not about that. It's about just showing Fogell a great time. As the officers tell Fogell, they hated cops when they were Fogell's age and they just wanted to show the student that not all cops are bad. Superbad is about having that one epic night and Fogell absolutely achieved that with the help of his new friends.

Now the A story line between Seth and Evan. There's an underlying tension that's exists between the two characters throughout the entire movie. Evan will be attending Stanford in the fall and Seth will be forced to go to a state college. It's hard to say goodbye your best friend and it's even harder when you're as socially awkward like Seth and Evan are and when you haven't made many friends while in high school. This one last epic night will be one of the last times the friends will get to really get to hang out with each other and it truly is one of the last nights each of the boys will get to have a sexual experience while they're young. Seth jokes:

I don't want to talk a lot of shit OK. But [Jules is] gonna be at the party, and she's gonna be drunk, and she likes me at least a little, enough to get with me. At the very least I'll make out with her, two weeks hand job, month blow job, whatever whatever. And then, I make her my girlfriend. And I've got like two solid months of sex. By the time college rolls around I'll be like the Iron Chef of pounding vaj.

This quote is exactly what is at the core of Superbad. It's raunchy and gross but underneath it all is actually a sweet sentiment about youth and sexual yearning. To Seth, Jules is not a "notch on his belt" or someone whom he can brag to his friends about but a potential girlfriend or companion that he can spend his last remaining days before college with.

Seth and Evan struggle with the fact that not only are they sexually inexperienced but soon they not get to see each other every day. The movie slowly builds up these two problems the main characters have until it finally blows up in their face after Seth and Evan first escape from Officer Slater and Officer Michaels. It only seems fitting that they start to come to grips with their solution as they run away from the two officers the second time.

The parting shot where Seth rides down the escalator looking up at Evan on top is a beautiful shot. The boys have to part ways sooner rather than later and luckily they each have a beautiful woman on their side now. It was just a great way to end the movie to sum up all the problems the two main characters suffered through throughout the film.

Worst QB League Update- Week 16

2011-12-29T15:11:00.000-06:00

1) The 'Bright' One

Total: 1,418
Last Week: 92

Washington: 10
Indianapolis: -7
Denver: 89
Philadelphia: 0

2) Adam Kaplan

Total: 1,250
Last Week: 67

Jacksonville: 25
Chicago: 10
Tampa Bay: 10
Baltimore: 22

3) Dan Bennett

Total: 1,178
Last Week: 80

Miami: 9
Oakland: 10
Kansas City: 4
NY Jets: 57

4) Cubsfan4evr1

Total: 1,101
Last Week: 80

St. Louis: 62
Minnesota: 1
Tennessee: 1
Buffalo: 16

5) Steven Anderson

Total: 1,077
Last Week: 85

Seattle: 11
San Francisco: 18
Cleveland: 27
Arizona: 29

#16- My Cousin Vinny (1992)

2011-12-27T20:36:00.002-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Bryan Hernandez: #7
- Daniel Bennett: #15
- Adam Kaplan: #23
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 33

Directed By: Jonathan Lynn
Written By: Dale Launer
Starring: Joe Pesci, Marisa Tomei, Ralph Macchio, and Fred Gwynne

The Plot

Two friends from New York Bill (Macchio) and Stan (Mitchell Whitfield) are on a road trip before school starts when they get arrested and are wrongfully accused of murder while driving through Alabama. Bill calls on his cousin Vincent Gambini (Pesci) who recently graduated from a lower-tiered law school and is woefully inexperienced in criminal litigation to help represent the boys. Vinny and his fiance Mona Lisa Vito (Tomei) drive down to Alabama to help get Bill and Stan acquitted. Hilarity ensues.

Why This Movie Is Great

Hey, Stan, you're in Ala-fuckin'-bama. You come from New York. You killed a good ol' boy. There is no way this is not going to trial!

-Vinny Gambini-

It should be no surprise that when three out of the six rankers are currently in law school and one ranker just recently graduated from law school that My Cousin Vinny would make the list of the 25 Greatest Movies of the Past 25 Years.

This movie is not only the funniest legal movie of all time, but one of the funniest movies period. Of course it goes without saying that it is my favorite and probably the best legal movie ever (or at least within the past 25 years. A Few Good Men gave it a run for its money but Tom Cruise's and everyone else's over-the-top, non-subtle acting took the movie out of the running- at least for me).

This movie has scenes that make for a great tool for any law related class. I've seen about half of the movie just from taking multiple classes from one particular law professor. My favorite scene in the movie is where Vinny Gambini is cross-examining the witness who was making grits for breakfast and claims to have seen the murder take place while he was making his breakfast. I love this scene and even though I've seen this scene at least 20 times (not a hyperbole) it still cracks me up. While I was in high school, the law club used that scene to help advertise members to join their crew. Not only is that scene wildly hilarious, but it's the perfect embodiment of why Vinny Gambini is a great character and a great trial lawyer.

Joe Pesci and the rest of the cast does a great acting job in this comedy classic. I don't care that it's a comedy and that Pesci doesn't do his classic Pesci kick, great acting is great acting no matter if you makes you laugh or not. And while we're on the subject, I believe Marisa Tomei deserved the Academy Award for her performance and I don't believe Jack Palance read the wrong name when he presented. Tomei was fantastic as Pesci's fiance. She played that New York no nonsense girl perfectly and was great in Vinny. Lastly, we have Herman Munster himself (Gwynne) as Judge Haller. While he mainly plays the straight man to Pesci he brings a certain, subtle je nais se qua to the role to help anchor the movie- a lot of which takes place in the courtroom.

What I also like about My Cousin Vinny are the little things don't seem to drive the plot until the movie is completed. Vinny and Mona Lisa sitting and eating breakfast or talking about automobiles doesn't seem so important until you realize how it comes up later and how it helps develop Vinny and Mona Lisa as characters. I'm just a sucker for those moments that occur in film.

I've seen this movie about 10 times already and each and every time it makes me laugh. I still crack up when the Prosecutor (Lane Smith) goes "Eye-*claps hands together*-Dentical". I'm a big fan of My Cousin Vinny and I was pleased to see my fellow law breathren are as well.

Part Eight: AFC Offensive Players / Who Deserves To Be A Pro Bowlers In 2011?

2011-12-26T03:34:00.004-06:00

First of all, this list is based upon stats from Week One through Week Fifteen. Secondly, I am a firm believer in using statistics- especially advanced statistics such as DVOA, DYAR, and WPA. You can see the statistics to back up my selection here

QUARTERBACK
Starter: Tom Brady
Back Up #1: Ben Roethlisberger (PIT)
Named Back Up #2 But Can't Play Due To Injury: Matt Schaub (HOU)
Subjective Back Up #2: Andy Dalton (CIN)
Objective Back Up #2: Philip Rivers (SD)

You can read about my struggles to rank the second back up and I explore the possibility of making the last back up Tim Tebow here

Apologies to: No One

RUNNING BACK
Starter: Maurice Jones-Drew (JAX)
Should Be Named But Can't Play Due To Injury: Fred Jackson (BUF), Darren McFadden (OAK)
Actual Back Ups: Arian Foster (HOU), Ray Rice (BAL)

Apologies to: Ben Tate (HOU), Ryan Matthews (SD)

WIDE RECEIVER
Starters: Wes Welker (NE), Mike Wallace (PIT)
Back Ups: A.J. Green (CIN), Vincent Jackson (SD)

Apologies to: Brandon Marshall (MIA), Dwayne Bowe (KC), Anquan Boldin (BAL)

TIGHT END
Starter: Rob Gronkowski (NE)
Back Up: Antonio Gates (SD)

Apologies to: Aaron Hernandez (NE)

Part Seven: NFC Offensive Players / Who Deserves To Be A Pro Bowler in 2011?

2011-12-26T03:23:00.003-06:00

First of all, this list is based upon stats from Week One through Week Fifteen. Secondly, I am a firm believer in using statistics- especially advanced statistics such as DVOA, DYAR, and WPA. You can see the statistics to back up my selection here

QUARTERBACK
Starter: Aaron Rodgers (GB)
Back Up #1: Drew Brees (NO)
Subjective Back Up #2: Jay Cutler (CHI)
Objective Back Up #2: Tony Romo (DAL)

Apologies to: Matt Ryan (ATL), Matthew Stafford (DET), and Eli Manning (NYG)

RUNNING BACK
Starter: LeSean McCoy (PHI)
Should Be Named But Can't Play Due To Injury: Matt Forte (CHI), DeMarco Murray (DAL), Adrian Peterson (MIN)
Actual Back Ups: Marshawn Lynch (SEA), Frank Gore (SF)

Apologies to: Michael Turner (ATL), Jonathan Stewart (CAR)

WIDE RECEIVER
Starters: Calvin Johnson (DET), Jordy Nelson (GB)
Back Ups: Victor Cruz (NYG), Laurent Robinson (DAL)

Apologies to: Steve Smith (CAR), Roddy White (ATL), Hakeem Nicks (NYG), Greg Jennings (GB), Marques Colston (NO)

TIGHT END
Starter: Jimmy Graham (NO)
Back Up: Tony Gonzalez (ATL)

Apologies to: Jason Witten (DAL), Jermichael Finley (GB)

(Redux) #22- For Love Of The Game

2011-12-26T02:37:00.000-06:00

For Love Of The Game is GOI's own Cubsfan4evr1's favorite movie of all time. For that reason it deserved a spot on Game Of Inches's list of the25 Greatest Movies Of The Past 25 Years. When the final list for Game Of Inches was calculated, the movie ranked #22.

I personally started compiling the list and writing posts immediately after I finished my 5th semester law school finals. For Love Of The Game was ranked fairly low on the list and unfortunately for Cubsfan he had to turn in to me his movie review of the film in the middle of December- during the busiest month of his job. Sadly, he did not have time to turn in his review to me by the time the post was scheduled to be released and because I wanted to keep the list moving, I created a post for For Love Of The Game without Cubsfan's review.

But now Cubfan has completed his movie review! I added his review on to the original For Love Of The Game post.

Please read Cubsfan's full review here

#17- Casino Royale (2006)

2011-12-24T13:19:00.007-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

This post was written by guest writer Bryan Hernandez

Who's List This Was On:
- Bryan Hernandez: #9
- The 'Bright' One: #10
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 33

Directed By: Martin Campbell
Written By: Paul Haggis, Neal Purvis, and Robert Wade
Starring: Daniel Craig, Eva Green, Judi Dench,Mads Mikkelsen, and Jeffrey Wright
Based Upon: The book Casino Royale by Jason Fleming

The Plot

Daniel Craig portrays the classic character James Bond in a re-boot of the series. Casino Royale is an origin story of how James Bond becomes JAMES BOND and 007. Bond uncovers a terrorist plot created by Le Chiffre (Mikkelsen) and Bond must play in an international high stakes Texas Hold 'Em tournament started by Le Chiffre in order to get a better grasp on the terrorists plans.

Why This Movie Is Great

Hollywood seems to be all about the gritty re-boot these days. While this trend could be a breeding ground for some top-notch crap, film audiences can thank it for several fine motion pictures. Casino Royale is a perfect example.

For those of you know don’t know myself, I am a certified James Bond fanatic. In what has been called “an ostentatious display of wealth,” I own every single movie in an extensive box set, a custom tailored Goldfinger-esque white tux jacket, several real bowties, and both Omega watches worn by 007. Mr. Bond and his creator Ian Fleming can do practically no wrong in my eyes. That being said, Die Another Day is an abomination of a film. Bond villains, plots, and settings have always been far fetched, but Die Another Day approached another level. After 1995’s Goldeneye, the series went into free fall, releasing three films of decreasing quality, culminating in the disaster of Die Another Day. Casino Royale represents the coup de grâce that the series needed (and that fans like me had been craving). Casino injected some much needed realism and relevance into one of the greatest franchises of all time.

Sure Casino Royale capitalizes on some of Hollywood’s favorite money making techniques for creating a sure-fire and high-grossing modern action movie. The shaky “JitterCam” cinematography and highly choreographed fight scenes are straight out of the Bourne movies. What sets Casino apart from both other modern action movies as well as the rest of the franchise is new Bond actor Daniel Craig’s portrayal of the timeless 007 character.

Long time Bond producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli took a big chance casting Craig as James Bond; the media outcry over the casting of a blonde James Bond almost sunk the film before filming. In true Bond fashion, however, the gamble paid off in spades. Casino Royale is actually the first Bond story to be written by Fleming, and Craig is tasked with taking the Bond character from his earlier, rough and raw days. The film opens before Bond even obtains his ubiquitous “Double 0” status. Audiences used to the polished, suave, and sophisticated Bonds of Connery, Brosnan, et.al. did not recognize this agent. It is up to Craig to convincingly create a course and blunt Bond and then evolve his creation into the debonair agent audiences know and love.

Casino takes the audience on that journey, with Craig perfectly balancing the “blunt instrument” Bond with the slick and sophisticated one. The story is engaging, with appropriate pauses that not only entertain, but also seamlessly advance the plot of this specific Bond adventure while simultaneously establishing the background of the entire Bond franchise. The perfect example is Bond’s first on-screen card game, in which he slyly wins his wealthy opponent’s Aston Martin DB5... thus establishing Bond’s gambling prowess and obtaining pertinent mission information (plot-specific) as well as the origin of Bond’s famous Aston and his infamous luck (franchise-specific).

All of the necessary elements of the classic Bond film are present, from the action, the cars, the girls, the guns, and the quick one-liners delivered with a smirk. What puts this film over the top is the new, darker edge Craig brings to the Bond character... one that evolves in the second installment of the re-booted Bond, Quantum of Solace and, hopefully continues in the latest installment Skyfall, due out in fall of 2012.

Whether you’re new to the James Bond franchise or a seasoned veteran of 007’s exploits, Casino Royale is not just a great James Bond film, it is a great film in general. Period.

#18- Jurassic Park (1993)

2011-12-23T21:04:00.002-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- David "MVP" Eckstein: # 16
- Bryan Hernandez: #15
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 31

Directed By: Steven Spielberg
Written By: Michael Crichton and David Koepp
Starring: Sam Neill, Laura Dern, and Jeff Goldblum
Based Upon: The book Jurassic Park by Michael Crichton

The Plot

Billionaire John Hammond (John Attenborough) creates a theme park entitled Jurassic Park that has actual, living dinosaurs in it due to advances in modern science. Hammond invites two scientists (Neill and Dern), a mathematician (Goldblum), his grandchildren and a few others before the park becomes open to the public. However, while at the park, things go terribly wrong and the dinosaurs break free and wreck havoc.

Why This Movie Is Great

Jurassic Park is the quintessential blockbuster. It has everything. Great special effects, things getting blown up, and dinosaurs.

The special effects, especially when it came to creating the dinosaurs, is just incredible. Every little boy goes through a paleontology phase when they are just obsessed with dinosaurs. Mine happen to coincide with the release of Jurassic Park (I just turned six when the movie was released). To see your dreams and fantasies on the silver screen was just amazing. The film is extremely over-the-top and just excellent in every single way.

Overall, this movie is just an epic masterpiece. Everything is just larger than life. It's movies like Jurassic Park that are the reason we go to the movies.

#19- Saving Private Ryan (1998)

2011-12-22T01:43:00.001-06:00

Click here for Commenting Rules and how GOI's final list came together

Who's List Was This On
- Adam Kaplan: # 15
- Bryan Hernandez: t-#16
TOTAL VOTES RECEIVED: 31

Directed By: Steven Spielberg
Written By: Robert Rodat
Starring: Tom Hanks, Edward Burns, Tom Sizemore, Barry Pepper, Adam Goldberg, Vin Diesel, Giovanni Ribisi, and Matt Damon

The Plot

In war torn and Nazi-controlled Europe during WWII, Capt. John Miller (Hanks) and his unit must find Private James Francis Ryan in order to bring him back safely to his mother in the United States.

Why This Movie Is Great

How do you find decency in the hell of warfare?

-Steven Spielberg-

In my mind, there is no greater war movie than Saving Private Ryan. No disrespect to Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, Platoon, Black Hawk Down or any other war movie you can think of Saving Private Ryan is the best war film of all time. Every war film talks about the horrors of war and how terrible it is and how lives are ruined and the duality of man and all that jazz, but no movie pulls it off better than Saving Private Ryan. It is the best shot war movie ever, visually stunning, and character driven, yet still manages to keep you entertained throughout the entire time. That's part of the problem I had with movies like Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket- they are great, fantastic movies made by some of the best filmmakers of all time, but holy crap do they get boring. I respect the artistic vision of the movie, but at the same time, it is still a movie and I still need to take three hours out of my day to sit through it.

First of all, there can be no mention of Saving Private Ryan without talking about its opening scene when the Americans invaded on D-Day. It might be the best opening shot in the history of cinema. You actually felt like you were in battle and fighting along with the soldiers. It was gruesome, it was bloody, and that's exactly what war was like. While much (deserved) credit goes to Spielberg for that opening war battle, I think many people forget how amazing the climax of Ryan was. Every war scene was just incredible. Every scene was just incredible and Spielberg along with his director of photography Janusz Kaminski just did an incredible job with the film.

However, much of the movie does not consist of battle scenes. They are scenes between Capt. Miller and his unit and it's the great acting by Hanks and his crew that really carry this movie. Plus, any movie that can make you say, "Wow, Vin Diesel is not a half bad actor" should really tell you something.

Ultimately, the movie and its characters struggle with the question, "How valuable is a life?" Eight men sacrifice their lives just so just one can live. Why should one man have to die just so another one can survive? It's a great question and one ethics and morality professors still can't answer. That being said, Spielberg does a fantastic job when trying to find to in the 1998 classic Saving Private Ryan.

Saturday Night Live Mocks Tim Tebow

2011-12-22T01:41:00.002-06:00

Part Six: Stats Of AFC Defensive Players / Who Deserves To Be A Pro Bowler In 2011?

2011-12-22T01:17:00.001-06:00

DEFENSIVE ENDS

Sacks
1) Andre Carter (NE)
2) Mark Anderson (NE)
2) Elvis Dumervil (DEN)
4) Jabaal Sheard (CLE)
4) Dwight Freeney (IND)

WPA
1) Andre Carter (NE)
2) Jabaal Sheard (CLE)
3) Elvis Dumervil (DEN)
4) Robert Mathis (IND)
5) Michael Johnson (CIN)

EPA
1) Andre Carter (NE)
2) Jabaal Sheard (CLE)
3) Jeremy Mincey (JAX)
4) J.J. Watt (HOU)
5) Robert Mathis (IND)

DEFENSIVE TACKLES

Sacks
1) Geno Atkins (CIN)
2) Tommy Kelley (OAK)
3) Richard Seymour (OAK)
3) Marcell Dareus (BUF)
3) Karl Klug (TEN)

WPA
1) Geno Atkins (CIN)
2) Haloti Ngata (BAL)
3) Vince Wilfork (NE)
4) Philip Taylor (CLE)
5) Antonio Garay (SD)

EPA
1) Geno Atkins (CIN)
2) Haloti Ngata (BAL)
3) Vince Wilfork (NE)
4) Sione Pouha (NYJ)
5) Philip Taylor (CLE)

LINEBACKERS

Sacks
1) Terrell Suggs (BAL)
1) Von Miller (DEN)
3) Tamba Hali (KC)
4) Connor Barwin (HOU)
4) Antwan Barnes (SD)

Tackles
1) D'Qwell Jackson (CLE)
2) Derrick Johnson (KC)
3) Karlos Dansby (MIA)
4) Nick Barnett (BUF)
5) Brian Cushing (HOU)

Tackles For Loss
1) Von Miller (DEN)
2) Terrell Suggs (BAL)
3) Kamerion Wimbley (OAK)
4) Cam Wake (MIA)
5) James Harrison (PIT)
5) D'Qwell Jackson (CLE)
5) Tamba Hali (KC)
5) Connor Barwin (HOU)

WPA
1) Terrell Suggs (BAL)
2) D'Qwell Jackson (CLE)
3) Von Miller (DEN)
4) Daryl Smith (JAX)
5) Nick Barnett (BUF)

EPA
1) Terrell Suggs (BAL)
2) D'Qwell Jackson (CLE)
3) Paul Posluszny (JAX)
4) Daryl Smith (JAX)
5) Pat Angerer (IND)

SAFETIES

Interceptions
1) Eric Weddle (7) (SD)
2) George Wilson (4) (BUF)
3) 6 tied with (3)

WPA
1) Keenan Lewis (PIT)
2) Eric Weddle (SD)
3) Troy Polamalu (PIT)
4) Reggie Nelson (CIN)
5) Michael Huff (OAK)

EPA
1) Keenan Lewis (PIT)
2) Troy Polamalu (PIT)
3) Eric Weddle (SD)
4) Reggie Nelson (CIN)
5) George Wilson (BUF)

CORNERBACKS

Interceptions
1) Kyle Arrington (NE)
2) Darrelle Revis (NYJ)
2) Jonathan Joseph (HOU)
2) Vontae Davis (MIA)
2) Brandon Flowers (KC)
2) Lardarius Webb (BAL)

DVOA Against Opponents #1 Wide Receiver
1) New York Jets
2) Kansas City Chiefs
3) Jacksonville Jaguars
4) Baltimore Ravens
5) Pittsburgh Steelers

DVOA Against Opponents #2 Wide Receiver
1) New York Jets
2) Houston Texans
3) Tennessee Titans
4) Pittsburgh Steelers
4) Baltimore Ravens

WPA
1) Darrelle Revis (NYJ)
2) Nate Clemens (CIN)
3) Andre Goodman (DEN)
4) Williams Gay (PIT)
5) Joe Haden (CLE)

EPA
1) Christain Finnegan (TEN)
2) Lardarius Webb (BAL)
3) Jason McCourty (TEN)
4) Darrelle Revis (NYJ)
5) Kyle Arrington (NE)

Part Five: Stats Of NFC Defensive Players / Who Deserves To Be A Pro Bowler In 2011?

2011-12-22T00:16:00.001-06:00

DEFENSIVE ENDS

Sacks
1) Jared Allen (MIN)
1) Jason Babin (PHI)
3) Jason Pierre-Paul (NYG)
4) Chris Long (STL)
5) Chris Clemons (SEA)

WPA
1) Jared Allen (MIN)
2) Jason Pierre-Paul (NYG)
3) Calais Campbell (ARI)
4) Chris Clemons (SEA)
5) Cliff Avril (DET)

EPA
1) Jared Allen (MIN)
2) Jason Pierre-Paul (NYG)
3) Jason Babin (PHI)
4) Julius Peppers (CHI)
5) Chris Clemons (SEA)

DEFENSIVE TACKLES

Sacks
1) Justin Smith (SF)
1) Henry Melton (CHI)
1) Cullen Jenkins (GB)
1) Ray McDonald (SF)
5) Amobi Okoye (CHI)

WPA
1) Darnell Dockett (ARI)
2) Justin Smith (SF)
3) Cullen Jenkins (PHI)
4) Ndamukong Suh (DET)
5) Ray McDonald (SF)
5) Jay Ratliff (DAL)

EPA
1) Darnell Dockett (ARI)
2) Justin Smith (SF)
3) Barry Cofield (WAS)
4) Cullen Jenkins (PHI)
5) Ray McDonald (SF)

LINEBACKERS

Sacks
1) DeMarcus Ware (DAL)
2) Aldon Smith (SF)
3) Brian Orakpo (WAS)
3) Ryan Kerrigan (WAS)
5) Ahmad Brooks (SF)

Total Tackles
1) NaVorro Bowman (SF)
2) James Laurinaitis (STL)
3) London Fletcher (WAS)
4) James Anderson (CAR)
5) Lance Briggs (CHI)

Tackles For Loss
1) DeMarcus Ware (DAL)
2) Sean Weatherspoon (ATL)
3) Daryl Washington (ARI)
4) Aldon Smith (SF)
4) Ahmad Brooks (SF)
4) NaVorro Bowman (SF)

WPA
1) Sean Lee (DAL)
2) DeAndre Levy (DET)
3) Michael Boley (NYG)
4) James Laurinairtis (STL)
4) Ryan Kerrigan (WAS)

EPA
1) Stephen Tulloch (DET)
2) Lance Briggs (CHI)
3) London Fletcher (WAS)
4) Ryan Kerrigan (WAS)
5) Brian Urlacher (CHI)

SAFETIES

Interceptions
1) Dashon Goldson (6) (SF)
2) Kam Chancellor (4) (SEA)
2) Thomas DeCoud (4) (ATL)
2) Charlie Peprah (4) (GB)
2) Kurt Coleman (4) (PHI)

WPA
1) Kam Chancellor (SEA)
2) Earl Thomas (SEA)
3) Dashon Goldson (SF)
4) Roman Harper (NO)
5) Quintin Mikell (STL)

EPA
1) Kam Chancellor (SEA)
2) Earl Thomas (SEA)
3) Roman Harper (NO)
4) Quintin Mikell (PHI)
5) Donte Whitner (SF)

CORNERBACKS

Interceptions
1) Charles Woodson (7) (GB)
2) Carlos Rogers (6) (SF)
2) Brandon Browner (6) (SEA)
4) Corey Webster (5) (NYG)
5) 5 tied with (4)

DVOA Against Opposing #1 Wide Outs
1) Detroit Lions
2) Seattle Seahawks
3) Chicago Bears
4) Philadelphia Eagles
5) San Francisco 49ers

DVOA Against Opposing #2 Wide Outs
1) Seattle Seahawks
2) San Francisco 49ers
3) Detroit Lions
4) Washington Redskins
5) Chicago Bears

WPA
1) Carlos Rogers (SF)
2) Brandon Browner (SEA)
3) Charles Woodson (GB)
4) Trumon Williams (GB)
5) Aquib Talib (TB)

EPA
1) Charles Woodson (GB)
2) Brandon Browner (SEA)
3) Carlos Rogers (SF)
4) Charles Tillman (CHI)
5) Eric Wright (DET)