Future of Chris Paul in the NBA? Where does he go?

 Last night on Twitter I began my petition to “Bring Chris Paul to Disney World” to buddy up with Defensive Player of the Year Dwight Howard of the Orlando Magic in an attempt to keep Dwight from heading to Disney Land and Lakers. This stirred up a whirl wind of discussion as many of you are 100% -or as a friend of mines said “95% sure Chris Paul would joing Melo and Amare as a Knick.” Where does Chris Paul go after the Hornets?   There’s no surprise that Chris Paul will be chucking the deuces to New Orleans. They won’t risk losing him to free agency and getting nothing, so I’m sure it will end in another Melo Trade scenario. What are the options? 

The Knicks seem to be the obvious pick. Build another “All Star” team. Three seems to be the magic number in the league as the “Heatles” have taken Miami with the Bron Wade and Bosh trio. The the Green Machine in Boston with the likes of Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen. It would only be right for Chris Paul to join Amare and Melo in New York. While Anthony forced a trade, it won’t be as easy for Paul. If the NBA has its way with the new collective bargaining agreement, its possible that a franchise tag can be placed on Paul, keeping him in a Hornets jersey for a few more year. Same case can happen to Dwight in Orlando. Paul has not idicated any long term decisions and has yet to say upfront “I’m taking my talents to the Big Apple” , but he has said repeatedly that all he cares about is winning.

I’m personally sick of speculation and hate the way people claim to be Miss Cleo fortune tellers of the league. We won’t know where Chris is going until he announces it. Until then, I will petition to bring him to Orlando.   General manager Dell Demps intends to do what he can this summer so that it stays that way beyond next year. Paul is not eligible for a contract extension until after July 9, by which time there could be a lockout preventing contract talks. But if a labor agreement is in place, Demps intends to reach out to Paul and is optimistic that the All-Star point guard's confidence in the franchise has at been restored enough that he'll be willing to reopen negotiations.

"When that time arises, we'll have those conversations," Demps said. "Chris has been engaged since Day 1. ... We have open lines of communication and we believe it will stay like that as this thing continues." Demps was flooded with trade offers, but he and Williams remained firmly committed to making Paul the centerpiece of the franchise. That vision remains unchanged, even though Paul, in essence, has only one more year remaining on his contract because he can opt out in 2012-13.

"He's made some comments to us that he's happy and he likes the direction that we're going," Demps said, "and we're happy with him and we want to just keep building and growing." While Paul has often praised Williams' performance, he has avoided discussing his future beyond saying that he is looking forward to trying to help the Hornets improve next season. Calls to Paul and his agent, Leon Rose, on Wednesday were not immediately returned.

The Hornets were 46-36 this season, and improvement of nine wins over the season before and good enough for the seventh seed in the Western Conference playoffs before being eliminated by the Lakers.  I've made 3 different trade speculations for these teams to acquire Chris Paul and possibly Dwight Howard.

For Lakers. Click here.

For Knicks. One for Chris Paul and one for Dwight Howard.

For Magic. Click here.

Start the Conversation

Which one of Joss Whedon's TV Show's is the best?

I'm a fan of "Buffy".  I'm a fan "Angel".  I'm a fan of "Firefly".  And now I'm a fan of "Dollhouse".  Yet, I still can't decide which one is my favourite.

"Buffy" is obviously the most well known, and Joss's first project.  The stupidity of mixing villain of the week with a long term arc was a spurt of utter genius, and it worked very well.  Depite a very bad season six, "Buffy" had very good seasons (my favourite either has to be number two or five) otherwise, and was a great show: quirky and whimsical and witty and odd dialog, great actors, awesome plots, some of the best character development ever and that uncanny ability which I've always loved about the show where no character is minor.  They all return at one point and never just make one appearance.

The darker theme of "Angel" is what really drawed me in, but when I saw it still had the unusual dialog I was shocked and thought it was awesome.  Bringing back Cordelia and Angel was great, and Cordy especially grew on me and I thought she was awesome.  It had a more realistic and credible tone than "Buffy" (one of my favourite things was in season three episode "Carpe Noctem" where they all head out to retrieve the possessed Angel, and where as Wesley and Gunn are showing off with martial arts moves and stuff, Fred and Cordy just have two baseball bats and start whacking him with it) also, and it included my favourite character: Fred.  Weird name as usual for Joss, well for a girl, but she evolved from being a timid wallflower into a strong feministic role, and it was so sad when she died.

"Firefly" was awesome.  We all love it, even if you haven't seen it.  Yet again, funny dialog but different, and I swear I must have been saying "Shiney" and walking around holding my belt for like a month after I first saw this series.  Character interactions were some of the best I've ever seen, and the actors (Summer Glau - awesome!) were amazing.  The whole mystery incorporated with River and Blue Sun Corporation was so intriguing and the political status made so much sense (and the cussing in Chinese was awesome).  Followed by the movie "Serenity", (which is one of my favourite movies of all time, and I'm such a big fan of the River bar fight scene, that I've learned most of it (except the flip, can't do that)), which gave some of us some answers and more questions, "Firefly" was a short but sweet.

Currently, I seem to be the only one who's completely enjoying "Dollhouse".  The whole Alpha mystery is something I wasn't expecting, and teamed with the illegality of the whole operation has just dragged me in.  Eliza Dushku, previously Faith in "Buffy" is a brilliant actress and evolves every week, and other cast members (Amy Acker again, and Alan Tudyk and Felicia Day and Mark Sheppard soon, except the latter because he's already appeared) are awesome.  Adelle DeWitt is one of the most intimidating best female character Whedon has ever created and I seem to be in the minority of people who actually like Topher.  And even though the whole point is that the Actives don't remember their personality etc, we can still see their characterisation evolving already (especially in the latest episode, Victor and his "man reaction"), and alreadly we can see Topher's cowardess yet sadisctically creepy personality showing.

So I ask you, which one is your favourite?  I have to say, no matter how much I enjoyed it, "Buffy" was my least favourite.  But the others, I don't know.  Can't wait to hear your comments.

Start the Conversation

Off My Mind...

Why is so much effort put into these superfluous "news" articles when the majority of the people with any power don't do anything to actually address any of the real problems on this site? A while ago myself and several associates started a peaceful campaign to have a mod instated especially for the battle forums. It sounds like a simple enough request; the artist show-off forum gets its own mod, and hardly anyone even goes there. It shouldn't be a problem to have someone given the task of patrolling the area where ninety percent of the trolling on this site occurs, right? Wrong. 
 
We were either ignored or, in one case, attacked. I can understand the fact that the Staff are busy. I mean, they need to think up such interesting reports as "why doesn't the Hulk have a mustache?" That clearly takes precedence over something as silly as the voice of the users. Maybe if we were all paying members our opinions would be more potent, but in the off chance that isn't true we are then paying people to ignore us, and I feel that there is enough of that going on in real world politics that we don't need it here too. 
 
You know those friends that I mentioned? They all finally got fed up with the bullsh!t and moved on to their own greener pastures. That's right, they would rather make their own forum than put up with being ignored by the people in power. Actually, it would be kind to say that being ignored was the extent of it. There was an occasion where one of them was told off by a mod for for creating many well thought out battles. I believe the exact words were "let someone else have a chance." You know, because we need more "Bane vs. Juggernaut" and "How can I hook up with this chick" threads. 
 
This is more than just not getting a mod now. This is the fact that we are never told when an update is on its way, and that we have no say in any new features. Since the last one I haven't been able to access any of my alt accounts, which makes doing anything in the RPG forum that much more difficult. In fact, the only reason I haven't left too is because of one person who is very near and dear to me. It is not because I have any faith left in the people who should, in theory, listen to what we have to say.  
 
Let me make this clear: I have nothing against someone posting their opinions. It  takes precedence over the users on this site that I have a problem.

Start the Conversation

Thor Movie

I was watching some previews of the trailer when I realized I actually had a few thoughts on the thing myself. I'm not really a big fan of Thor and I wasn't at the edge of my seat waiting for this movie so it was a surprise to me to realize I'd actually thought about it a fair bit. As a result of this discovery, I wanted to write down some of the things I've been thinking since I started seeing media for Thor.  
  
Ok, so who remembers that picture of Odin, Thor and Loki? That was one of the first things I saw of the movie. (I think the only thing I saw before that was that picture of just Thor in his costume on a white background.) Whether it was actually the first or not, it became the foundation of my future thoughts about Thor. I saw other stuff after that, but I always came back to that image and it did not leave me feeling good about the movie. The picture turned me from neutral to negative and nothing changed that for a while. What was wrong with it? At this point I'm not entirely sure, but the vague memories of my distaste for it are bringing up the words "tacky, over-the-top, silly, garish" and several other similar words.  
 
The costumes just looked bad to me and I thought, "If this is how the movie's creator visualizes the most important characters, will I like what his mind comes up for the rest of it?" I decided that I would not. The background (and the eye patch, oh Lord the eye patch...) annoyed me too. I felt like it was lacking something and I thought all of Asgard would be similar. What changed it for me was nothing really. I'm still not the biggest fan, but I'm able to see some worth in it (whether the explanations and justifications in my head are shared by the costume designer is something I don't know, but also something I'm not sure matters if it makes the movie more palatable to me). I'd heard some things about Thor not switching bodies but I wasn't sure about it until the trailer (I wasn't really paying attention before). Seems like he won't be transforming. I'm good with that.  
 
The trailer brought out most of my other thoughts too. The first was about how explicit they were with the science/magic thing. I would have preferred something less blunt, but I guess they had to get it out there quickly and clearly because some people can't take magic, or even the possibility of it, in their fiction. I think it's a shame as I feel like it could have been more interesting if it were left unclear or debated by characters in the movie. Even sticking with the "sufficiently advanced technology"-route wouldn't have been so bad if it was a little more subtle in its delivery, but that's just me. Showing Thor fight people and going on about how he must be trained was pretty cool to watch, so I liked seeing it. I thought I was seeing too much though when he went to pick up the hammer. He couldn't though and then I realized that was the point and I was again pleased. 
 
I had a talk with one of my friends that's kind of pretentious and likes to hate on everything under the sun and I was just mentioning that I thought the trailer was pretty good and he started going on about how the movie would be boring because, "Thor's a god and gods are just inherently better and there's no challenge for him and he doesn't have a real personality and his character can't grow." I got to explain to him the whole point of Thor (as I see it anyway) and the reason he's able to manage a character of his own is because even though he's a god and can physically deal with a lot, there's plenty for his character to grow in. Thor being sent to Earth is about him being humbled by losing his god status and being around mortals, which is what makes it interesting. 
 
With the problems of costume mostly addressed and the trailer showing me some stuff that I liked, I only had a few issues with the movie, and they come from the portrayal of the Asgardians. I don't know what they're supposed to be. If magic is out, does that make them aliens? Higher-dimensional beings? I guess that's a little easier to swallow than gods (because then you don't have to deal with "which one is the real one/where's Jesus?" problem) but it creates its own problems of why they're connected to us. For instance, why do they look like us? Why do we know about them?  
 
Why were they worshipped by humans? Did they come to Earth before? Why our planet? It just creates a lot of the same questions you get when you talk about why aliens would deal with humans and the anthropic principle. Those are questions I would accept though since they're necessary for the story. The single biggest problem I have after watching the trailer, is that Odin keeps talking about peace. He says he's brought peace to his people and Thor's introuble for bringing war. If these are supposed to in some way be Asgardians and somehow the origins for the gods of the Vikings, why would Odin be so upset with war? All in all though, I think the trailer was good. If nothing else, it did its job by making me actually want to see the movie.

Start the Conversation

Meet JD2K, The L.A Lakers Highlighter.

Say Hello to JD2K. He's a highlighter for the L.A Lakers and no, He's doesn't work for the NBA. Although He said....

"I was hoping to bid a farewell to everyone at the end of the playoffs after a second 3-peat from the Lakers. Obviously the second 3-peat won't be happening anymore. It has nothing to do with the loss to the Mavericks. I've been following the Lakers since 1998 and I'm still an avid fan. I will continue to follow the Lakers just like all the real fans out there but I won't be putting up videos anymore.

I've dedicated much time and effort to this site and didn't really want to see it end. I'm glad that I was able to provide highlights for the last 4 years. There are many highlight makers out there and I'm sure many of you will have no trouble finding another source. Thank you to everybody who donated to me for the last 4 years. Thank you to all the fans out there for making this the #1 place to go for Laker Highlights.

Have a great summer and I'll be looking forward to a new season if there isn't a lock-out. This is JD2K signing off
." - JD2K on May 8, 2011 
 
....His highlights will be there for eternity. So, lets get this started.

Q: Is He INSERT_NAME_HERE on YouTube?
A: No, He doesn't put his videos on YouTube but He appreciates them for making his work available to more people.

Q: Is He JD2K on MixMakers.net forum?
A: Nope, the only forum He post links to his videos is LakersGround.net

Q: Why doesn't He put his highlights on YouTube?
A: YouTube video quality is just plain bad for sports footage due to its recompression.

Q: But YouTube has HD mode now and it looks amazing.
A: You need to upload videos in 720P or 1080i format to have HD mode enabled for YouTube. A 3min 1080i clip at 17Mbps is over 350MB in size and will take a while to upload to YouTube. Plus you have to wait for YouTube to recompress the video. Not to mention that the videos can just magically disappear a day later due to you-know-what reason. His upstream is quite slow and he does not want to have to reupload when this happens.

Q: Does He have a way for me to stream the videos on my iPhone or iPod touch?
A: You're in luck. Starting 12/10/09, all new videos will be viewable on your device at http://m.lakersmedia.com or http://lakersmedia.com/mobile/

Q: Where are the download links now?
A: It's on the right side of your screen under "Download Links" for each video that you're watching.

Q: My name is Kobe Bryant and I really like what He does, what can I do to help?
A: Mr. Bryant, you are more than welcome to Donate to the cause.

Q: Why did He make LakersMedia.com?
A: He was tired of watching blurry Lakers videos on YouTube. He tried other video hosting services but they didn't like the idea of that and would promptly remove his videos. Stage6 was home for a while but then they went the way of the Dodo. So in March 2008, He decided to launch this site for all the Lakers fans out there because He knew that He wasn't the only one feeling this way about YouTube.

Q: Were the Celtics really suck because I see nothing but footage from the Lakers for last night's game?
A: First, Celtics do suck. He only does highlights for the Lakers regardless if they win or lose.

Q: What constitutes a highlight for him?
  • An alley-oop.
  • A dunk.
  • A layup by Derek Fisher.
  • A great defensive play.
  • A spectacular pass that leads to a basket.
  • A basket that follows a great defensive play.
  • A basket that beats the 24-sec shot or to end the quarter.
  • A difficult basket.
  • A hustle play that leads to a basket or possession.
  • A 3-point play or 4-point play.
  • A weird moment.
Highlights will typically be longer if the Lakers win.

Q: Divx version crashes my browser. What's going on?
A: You probably need the latest version 1.5 of Divx Web Player. Click on Upgrade Now when it prompts you to upgrade or download the whole installation package here (PC) / (MAC).

Q: How can I improve the performance of the Streaming Divx version?
A: Right click the play window and go to PREFERENCES and select no POST PROCESSING under VIDEO PLAYBACK. Post processing adds unnecessary strain to your system to your system and excessive sharpening which can lead to artifacts. Q: I don't see any video. What's wrong?
A: You need to have FLASH 9+ installed to view MP4 format and DIVX Web Player (PC) / (MAC) to view DIVX format.

Q: Is there something wrong with his videos because it stops right in the middle of the highlight?
A: Clear your browser's cache and try to view the video again. This usually happens when there's a slight pause from the server while uploading the video to your end. The flash player is unable to resume the download at this point so you end up with an incomplete file which the player displays as a complete one because it only reads the header of the file..

Q: Is it my internet connection or is your site very slow to load?
A: I am on a shared server and it can be quite slow on game day or a few hours after the game has ended.

Q: What do I use to play the downloaded videos on my computer?
A: I use Zoom Player that comes with Combined Community Codec Pack It comes with two players and all the codecs necessary to play most if not all video formats on your PC.

Q: Which version is better? MP4 or DIVX?
A: At any given bitrate, MP4 will look better than DIVX. MP4 videos will be "choppy" if your system isn't fairly new. Even if your computer is fairly new you still might experience this problem if you have many programs running. DIVX format is recommended if you're having this issue with MP4 videos.

Q: I just bought my computer last week and it's still choppy under Internet Explorer.
A: This problem is more prominent under Internet Explorer but can occur under Firefox and other browsers too. Usually it's due to excessive amount of disk I/O as it tries to download and play at the same time. Simply let the player download the whole video by quickly pressing pause and let the progress bar move all the way to the right before pressing play.

Q: Why did He call your highlights HD when they're only in 720x400 and HD means 720P and 1080i?
A: As of Jananuary 15th 2010, only the streaming versions are 720x400. You can download both 720P and 1080P versions in the download section. Standard MP4/Divx 720x400 download links will be available first since they're much smaller than 720P & 1080P versions to upload.

Q: Will He have 720P & 1080P versions available for download for all games?
A: ABC broadcasts in 720P at 60FPS so there won't be 1080P version for games on ABC. All other games on KCAL, TNT, ESPN, NBATV AND FSW will have both 720P(60FPS) and 1080P(30FPS) available for download. Don't expect the links to be available immediately after the streaming version since these HD files are much bigger and take longer to upload.

Q: How does He get 720P(60FPS) from 1080i(30FPS) broadcast?
A: He use a method known as "BOB" deinterlacing which converts interlaced fields into its own frames essentially doubling the frame rate from 30 frames per second or 60 fields per second to 60 frames per second. The action in 720P at 60FPS will be silky smooth when you compare it to the deinterlaced 1080P version.

Q: Why doesn't He offer 1080P at 60FPS using this "bob" method too?
A: The file size for 1080P(30FPS) video is big enough as it is and at 60FPS it will be twice as big. A 5min clip at 1080P(60FPS) will be roughly 600MB and that will require a lot of his time to upload. With so many games being played per week, he doesn't think He can spare any more time uploading such files.

Q: My computer started to cry when I tried to play his 1080P video, how do I comfort it?
A: 1080P takes quite a bit of horsepower from your computer to play smoothly. A dual-core processor running at 2.4Ghz or more will suffice. You can try using CoreAVC as your decoder to help achieve smooth playback. He was able to get smooth playback on an old AMD Athlon 4200+ with the help of CoreAVC but the CPU was running near 60-75% during playback. Ultimately, you want to offload the decoding process to your video card's GPU. Check with your video card to see if it offers H.264 hardware decoding.

Q: How do I embed his videos?
A: That feature is not available due to bandwidth reason. Bandwidth usage is at 10TB/month and allowing embedding will lead to server downtime due to bandwidth issue.

Q: Luke Walton did a 1080degree between the leg dunk but it's not in the highlight. What gives?
A: No, he didn't.

Q: Ok, ok, I lied but Kobe had a sick dunk over Dwight Howard in the 3rd quarter and it's not in the highlight. What gives?
A: Either He didn't think it was highlight-worthy or He simply forgot about it. He did forget a play here and there so leave a reminder in the comment and He'll try to post it.

Q: Can you please please please please send me the whole game?
A: A whole game is just too big and the NBA might not like that idea.

Q: The game ended 5 minutes ago, where's the highlight man?
A: Are you serious?

Q: Fine, the game ended an hour ago, where's the highlight man?
A: Either He's not available to do the highlight or He's still working on it. He does try his best to make the highlight available as quickly as possible but it is quite time consuming.

Q: How long can it be?
A: An average 3min HD highlight takes about 30min - 60min to compile the clips, encode, upload, and publish. It takes about 20min-45min to do a 3min SD highlight.

Q: Why are some games not in HD?
A: Either the network didn't broadcast in HD or my hardware failed. All games as of 12/9/2009 will be capped in HD. Fixed the sync issue.

Q: What system does He use to make these highlights?
A: He has an old Athlon Phenom X4 9600 with 2GB PC6400 memory and Hauppauge PVR-1600 PCI and HD-PVR 1212 running on Windows Vista Media Center. Feel free to donate a Xeon Workstation so He can put the highlights up faster.

Q: What program does He use to encode your highlights?
A: He uses STAXMEDIA frontend to encode his highlights. x264 codec for MP4 version and free Divx codec for DIVX version. These can be downloaded automatically within Staxrip.

Q: What program does he use to make your mixes?
A: He uses a combination of Photoshop, After Effects, and Sony Vegas.

Q: Can He get me a job with the Lakers?
A: No, He doesn't work for the organization.

Q: Where's the site again?
A: Just click JD2K here and you'll see all of the Lakers Highlights from the 2007-2008 NBA Season to the 2010-2011 NBA Season.
Start the Conversation

Dark Knight thoughts...

First, this movie is a jumbled mess and I don't mean that in a bad way. It reminds me of a gymnast who does a routine that defies gravity and is graceful, but every so often flails their arms and stumbles.  think the movie could have used some tightening up. Simply, whereas "Batman Begins" had a clear cut narration (granted it was flashback within flashback when it started) but it was... here is how Bruce Wayne's parents died, here is what it did to him, here is how he got here and here is how he is going to save Gotham.

There were so many little plot lines to the movie I thought could have been taken out, such as the fate Commissioner Jim Gordon's family, the emphasis of the deaths of so many Gotham City heads of state, not to mention Cillian Murphy returning as the Scarecrow in a brief and unimportant role, as well as a plotline where one of the Wayne Enterprise employees learns of Bruce's secret and threatens to expose him in a rather moronic blackmail scheme. Second, this time around it seemed that the theme of the movie was "symbols vs. truth." Such as how do you compare Harvey Dent, a good looking "face" (pun intended) of the justice system vs. the Batman which is the spirit of the justice system. Both are meant to save civilation.+-+

Whereas the Joker is the worst of humanity. Insanity incarnate out for a leisurely stroll and wrecking whatever is in its way. I found that fascinating, but it seemed like it was more randomly drizzled at certain parts of the film in the way Jackson Pollack drizzled paint on a canvas. Also, I thought immediately after Dent morphed into his Two-Face character, they needed more depth to it. As Harvey Dent the District Attorney, Aaron Eckhart did an amazing job. But a man who just lost his loved and lost half of his face and refused pain medication I think he needed more time to sort out life and determine he was going to get even with Gordon and Batman.

Burning/scarring of Dent didn't feel right to me. I don't mind that Nolan is going with an actual burning this time and not a vial of acid... at all... but it just wasn't what I was expecting, and didn't really... I think... have the desired effect. I mean, Batman's already carted Dent out of the building, he's away from all that... and a stray spark just happens to ignite his face that was sitting in the gasoline whatever? This I can really almost swallow on its own, but with Batman literally right next to him... how much could it possibly have burned his face before Batman would've just thrown his cape over his face and killed the flame? And try something. Squirt a little bit of lighter fluid or a bit of rubbing alcohol or what-have-you on your hand. Light it. At first it's really just burning the fluid itself, it's not burning your skin. It just seemed like Batman had ample time to put out the fire to prevent anything other than the most superficial of burns.

I was confused in the early scene where Joker kills the black guy... you know, that first scene where the Joker makes up a story about where he got the cuts. He has his knife in the black guy's mouth, there's a quick cut (of the camera, not the knife), and the black guy falls down dead. I remain confused... what happened there? Did he just cut through the guy's mouth, like his knife was positioned to do so? If so, why did he die? Did he off-camera move his knife down to his throat and slit it? Even if so, he wouldn't just die instantly... so kind of a big "Huh?" on that bit from me. Wasn't entirely sold on the cellphone sonar business... but I do know that Nolan doesn't give Batman any tech in his movies that aren't scientifically possible or "going to be out in the next 5, 10 years." If that's true for the cellphone sonar business, that's kind of scary.

Maggie did a great job as Rachel. She portrayed the character very well. I didn't have a hard time getting past that it was a different actress at all. I still like Katie better, but it was a good choice and she didn't disappoint and Christian Bale did an amazing job as both Bruce Wayne and the Batman, however, I have two complaints in this movie, that I did in the first movie. First, the gravely voiced Dirty Harry tone in his voice was a little grating. Second, say what you will about the 1960s "Batman" show and the Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher's "Batman" movies there was at least a clean cut theme.

I still don't think "Batman Begins" or "The Dark Knight" had either of those. I wish it did. We finally got to see a little bit of the detective side of Batman too. I was hoping they would and was very pleased that they did. I mean he's frickin Batman, world's greatest detective. Man was I surprised and a little disappointed in myself for not realizing, that the Bat-pod came out of the Tumbler. That was f**king awesome, so glad I didn't hear about it, it would not have had the same bad ass effect. Now it makes more sense as to why it's called a "pod".

Fox was even better and more brilliant in this movie than the last. Very glad they made him more prominent and involved in this one. Best line of the whole movie: "You want to be able to turn your head?" Okay, while everyone is talking about Ledger's performance, I think Gary Oldman is largely ignored by the reviewers and I for one think that is the shame. And in so many ways James Gordon is the hero of the piece trying to hold a city together was both order and chaos clash overhead. Lt. Jim Gordon is just an idealist in touch with his humanity, his middle class lifestyle and a man who loves his family. While at the same time he is trying to make sense of a world where an undeputized vigilante who dresses like something out of a Leonardo DaVinci drawing does more in one year than any of the men (himself included) who went through years of police and law enforcement training can do.

Instead of being a self centered whiner about it (I know I would be) he uses this as a weapon to his advantage. Gordon does not have the money that Wayne does to put on a costume and fight crime. The only thing Gordon has to fight crime and evil is himself, a gun, a badge and no other choice to work with a corrupted law enforcement. While at the same time he wants to prove that their is still goodness left in Gotham City's corrupted law enforcement. He almost reminds me of Luke Skywalker trying to prove to the universe there is still good left in his father, who just happenes to be the Devil's enforcer throughout a galaxy that is far, far away.  Overall this movie was a masterpiece that will be remembered for a long time.  
 
Performances, story, action, everything well rounded and worthy of all the hype and commotion it has brought about. But I do have concerns in another sequel. While I have the utmost faith in Nolan, I fear that they won't be able to top this one at all. Based on a poor example but, the fact that the formula for most superhero movies have had a good first movie followed by an amazing 2nd part only to go downhill with the 3rd and deliver utter crap. I don't think this could happen t these films, but after Heath's performance and the effect that the Joker had within the story of the film and out in the real world, they just won't be able to top it without them.

So where do we go from here then? The supposed plot of having Dent as the 3rd films main villain and the Joker as a Hannibal Lector type character, was promising, but pretty much out the window unless an unlikely and undesireable recast for the Joker. But the idea of Two-Face returning could still work. I don't see how or why he coouldn't have survived. First, we see the Itallian mob guy survive a similar fall earlier on in the film. But Batman took the same fall as Harvey with a Bullet in him as well. Dent could have been revived or recvered and kept in critical condition. To wake later on and be driven even more mad and have a great animosity towards Gordon and Batman.

I hate that Batman is now wanted. It works great for the making Harvey look like a hero and progression of the story, but I just hate it. The only way to fix that would be if Harvey was still alive and revealed to be a villain later on. Re-en stating the publics faith and hope in Batman as their hero and protector. Even if the whole movie they or we weren't aware that Harvey/Two-Face was the villain. They could do a Hush or Phantasm type of thing where he takes on another identity. Just an idea.

But if they don't do any of that and there is a new villain or villains. There are a few that could work and many that could NOT in the Nolan Bat-verse. Let's start with the ones that can't. First; Clayface, I don't need to explain why other than that he's way too unrealistic and they already had Sandman in Spidey 3 and it was LAME. Others would be Mr Freeze, lame and gimmicky. Riddler would be cool, but too close to Joker. Bane, just no for too many reason's (and I have already pointed out alot of good ones) Man-Bat would be the worst idea of all of them.

Onto some that might: Penguin could work, if he was just a deformed midget, but why bother? Ivy could work, if the made her not have powers and just use weaponized pheromones or something. Harley could work (she would be inspired by Joker) But it would be the same thing as this movie, just with a girl clown. Catwoman would be the best possibility, but not a big enough threat and after the disaster of her solo wannabe movie, I don't think they'll use her.

Talia would be my BEST guess, but again, it would be close to what they've already done. All that said I'd really like to see Hush. But I don't know, there wouldn't be much mystery for us, because we know who he is.

All that said I loved TDK and I'm looking forward to the next one, whatever they decide. But I will remain skeptical that it might not be able to achieve what this one has. I hope I'm wrong. Here's to waiting for 3 years until the first trailer!

Start the Conversation

Majestic Has No Durability

Seems like it's getting common to say Maj has low durability because one time he went to the sun with protection and some characters have knocked him around. I disagree with this assessment so I'm just saving one of my posts where I responded to it here so I know where to find it in the future.  
 
In one instance when he goes into the sun for weeks on end he protects himself. In another, when he's not there for long, he is unprotected. He's also shown the durability to fly around stars, take nukes to the face, fly into a planet-sized object at FTL speeds (which provoked only an "ouch"), remain unharmed though being inches away from multiple multi-thousand megaton explosions (and trade blows with a character that could be hit directly with the same force multiple times), resist the forces exerted on his body when moving planets, literally shrug off magical assaults that would topple giants, resist the applied force of a being that smacked down Superman (when Supes had backup that was on his level of strength and durability), take hits from a character that has displayed the ability to shatter the moon (and casually toss asteroids and go literally head to head, as in flying at it at full speed, with a being bigger than a planet), withstand an explosion powerful enough to at least break the earth and moon and at most destroy the planet entirely, and survive in Otherspace unharmed (multiple times).  
 
If you cancel out the sun thing (since he displayed the durability to withstand the sun later on when he  turned a star ingot into a star hot and bright enough to stand in for the sun - he actually had to put in dampeners too so it might have been producing more energy - and sustain life on Earth and then moved it without protection) the rest of the feats paint a pretty nice picture. You can average it in and that one thing (which isnt even a bad showing) doesn't bring down his other feats of durability. You're trying to say his durability isn't all that but when you look at a good list of his durability feats, he's solid. 
 
That didn't include anything about other characters he fought so I'll just say that Spartan and Maul, the two characters most often brought up, are a lot stronger than people give them credit for. Spartan's power levels were raised to Majestic's level and when they fought Majestic was dying anyway. Maul can easily put more mass in one fist than an aircraft carrier, which is nearly 100,000 tons (more than even many top tier Marvel characters can lift) and still retain plenty of intelligence. If he sacrifices some smarts, that number skyrockets, and that's just one fist. Maul has also beaten Captain Atom (someone approaching Superman's durability) so hard he literally couldn't think straight. Maul hitting someone is not a joke. However, Majestic has taken a full on hit from Maul directly to the face and was not only unmoved, but responded by tossing him away after telling him he wasn't good enough.  
 
And the fight that people usually bring up to say Maj couldn't beat Maul was in Majestic's first appearance and it wasn't like he lost the fight. Maj would hit Maul and then Maul would grow bigger and stronger to take it and then Maj would hit him harder. The fact that he was able to hit harder each time means that he wasn't hitting his hardest. He was trying to knock him out, not kill him, and Maul's power allows him to take tons of physical damage. Majestic has also traded blows with a clone of the High, who was strong enough to crack the moon in half.  
 
Yes, there are times where things not on planet-destroying level have hurt Majestic, but that doesn't set the bar for his durability, and is no different than Flash being hit by people not moving at lightspeed, Wonder Woman being hit by people who aren't on the top tier in fighting skill, and Superman getting hurt by attacks from people who aren't on his level. Majestic shows high durability more consistently than low durability. 

Start the Conversation

Summer

Think about it for a minute. Summer vacation. Remember when months of freedom is what you spent an entire school year living for? Imagine that last day of school. The possibility in the air, the sense of complete abandon, the reality of being able to fully indulge in your own laziness. These things should never be taken lightly, because they never last.   

What's so funny is that each month of that summer break has its own distinct "feel." June is probably the laziest month of the year. You take those first two weeks to decompress and get the stink of school off your skin. July is when you start to feel like a normal human being again, free from the regimented lifestyle that the school schedule forces upon you. Then, of course, August feels like your last month on Earth. Every single moment of life is precious.

You almost forget what school is like. Summer lasts just long enough to let you forget. A cruel trick, actually, because you end up sucker punched in September. The thing is, in hindsight, there's much more education to be had during summer vacation. Certainly more than you learn sitting in a classroom. Summer vacation is life a its most glorious, most desperate...and most heartbreaking. The extremes of life experienced in three short months.

How many summer romances have come and gone? How many pointless adventures that end up having more significance in your mind than you ever thought they would? How many family dramas were you privy to simply because you weren't preoccupied with homework and you actually had an opportunity to pay attention?

Summer, I'm guessing, doesn't exist for adults. Real jobs are year-round circumstances. It's a little sad actually. Those three months a year were definitely an unconscious means to put your own young life into something resembling perspective. Sure, you don’t know it at the time, but I think we do most of our growing up over the summer breaks. School breeds conformity. School fears change. You’re meant to sit in your neat little rows and only speak when spoke to. Only the short breaks between classes provide something akin to summer vacation.

Summer vacation. An event. A period of time. A circumstance that is much more profound than adults would have us believe. I hear that most adults dread summer vacation? When did things get so screwed up? Does the onset of age and maturity have to mean turning your back on the things that were once so important? Makes no sense.

Remember when your expectations of summer were so great and by August you felt somehow cheated because nothing significant happened during those three short months? Meanwhile, you just had a summer that you'll eventually look back on as "the greatest time of your life." So what have we learned from this? How about the idea that value doesn't always have to equal to the occurrence of significant events. Or the notion that even when nothing is happening, something is happening.

Or how about the idea that time can move so slow and yet so fast at the same time? Think about the last day of the school year: sitting in class, two minutes until the bell rings. Those are the slowest two minutes of your life. And yet, summer vacation is a whole three months and they go by in a blink. This (among other things) is why I wish for time control. The ability to create bubbles of frozen time would be invaluable in these kinds of circumstances. When the end of August rolls around, I could just pop myself into one of these things and just...

Slow...

Time...

Down...

Until...

It...

Didn't...

Move...

At...

All...

Let...

The...

World...

Go...

On...

Without...

Me...

While...

I...

Enjoy...

The...

Greatest...

Laziness...

Ever...

Experienced.

But really, is that any way to live? School gives summer the proper context. We can't have the good without the bad, can we? The highs without the lows. Think of it as some sort of cosmic balance. It's rather appropriate if you think about it. Three months of joyous freedom versus nine months of conformist hell. Kinda sums up the ratio of life in general. I miss those times. Have any of you had these kinds of experiences like this?

5 Comments

My Reply...

I just thought I would post my reply to this "Why DC is better then Marvel" post that can be found somewhere. So... here's my reply:

You suck, Marvel rules!!!!!!!!!

That was a joke. Although I disagree with most (if not everything) in your post. Being a Marvel reader for quite some time now, I'm not entirely sure what you read that gave you this impression of the "Marvel Style". I'm guessing if I was to try and explain the "DC Style", I would probably make the same mistakes as you have since I don't read enough DC. These big violent action sequences you speak of might be present in a few of the books, but considering the amount that I read every month I think I'm in a good position to say that they are in a very small percentage of the comics you speak of. In fact I would go so far as to say that most of the top selling Marvel books are more about character then action. Not that there is anything wrong with big action sequences... I mean these ARE comic books after all. With that said however, it would not be unusual at all to pick up an issue of Amazing Spider-Man, Daredevil or Uncanny X-Men comic and see no action at all... or not even see the main characters in their costumes.

The other thing I believe you got wrong is what a "Marvel Reader" is like. What you've described in your post is not the way an average Marvel reader is like... what you've described is what a "Marvel Internet Fanboy" is like. There is a world of difference, and no one should ever think an "Internet Fanboy" of any genre represents what the majority thinks. I could easily find "DC Internet Fanboys" on the net that would make you ashamed of being pigeonholed in the same group as them. This is not something that is unique to comic books. You can go find internet message boards for video gaming for instance that are FILLED with Xbox Fanboys bashing anyone who dares to admit still using something made by Nintendo (vise versa, ect), but I'm sure you wouldn't come out and say that all Xbox owners are small minded children who'll insult you for not owning the same system they do would you? You ARE assuming that most Marvel readers are just like what you've experienced on Internet Message Boards... and you called MARVEL READERS ignorant? I'm sorry but THAT is the biggest flaw in your argument.

On a final note. For me personally... with the various people I talk to once a week at my LCS, which include DC readers believe it or not, most of us just find it easier to read multiple comic books that are all based in the same universe. And when you're that familiar with a universe, some things that would seem completely normal to you... might seem completely ridiculous to someone else. An example would be when a die hard DC fan tried to explain to me how Superboy's punch altered the history of DC... I'm sorry, but I thought that was the biggest load of BS I had ever heard of... but then, to a long time DC reader, maybe this made sense. Not being familiar with the whole history of DC, I was probably missing something. I'm sure the same can be said when a die hard Marvel reader tries to explain the whole Civil War thing to someone completely unfamiliar with Marvel's history.

Wow.. this post is way too long... I'm just going to end it as is. :-)

Start the Conversation

Do you read "Comic Books" or "Graphic Novels"?

My curiosity was sparked by some arguing on Slashdot pertaining to comic books.  This is not a new issue, but I am curious what the general consensus on the forums is. There is contention amongst fans and even writers of comic books about the use of the term "Graphic Novels" to describe certain comics and trades.  From Wikipedia:

Some in the comics community have objected to the term "graphic novel" on the grounds that it is unnecessary, or that its usage has been corrupted by commercial interests. Writer Alan Moore believes, "It's a marketing term ... that I never had any sympathy with. The term 'comic' does just as well for me. ... The problem is that 'graphic novel' just came to mean 'expensive comic book' and so what you'd get is people like DC Comics or Marvel comics — because 'graphic novels' were getting some attention, they'd stick six issues of whatever worthless piece of crap they happened to be publishing lately under a glossy cover and call it The She-Hulk Graphic Novel...."

Author Daniel Raeburn wrote "I snicker at the  neologism first for its insecure pretension — the literary equivalent of calling a garbage man a 'sanitation engineer' — and second because a 'graphic novel' is in fact the very thing it is ashamed to admit: a comic book, rather than a comic pamphlet or comic magazine."

Writer Neil Gaimen, responding to a claim that he does not write comic books but graphic novels, said the commenter "meant it as a compliment, I suppose. But all of a sudden I felt like someone who'd been informed that she wasn't actually a hooker; that in fact she was a lady of the evening." Comedian and comic book fan Robin Williams joked, "'Is that a comic book? No! It's a graphic novel! Is that porn? No! It's adult entertainment!'"

Some alternative cartoonists have coined their own terms to describe extended comics narratives. The cover of Daniel Clowes' Ice Havendescribes the book as "a comic-strip novel", with Clowes having noted that he "never saw anything wrong with the comic book". When The Comics Journal asked the cartoonist Seth why he added the subtitle "A Picture Novella" to his comic It's a Good Life, If you Don't Weaken, he responded, "I could have just put 'a comic book'... It goes without saying that I didn't want to use the term graphic novel. I just don't like that term".

What do you think about term "Graphic Novel"?  Is this a case of using fancy words that display insecure pretension or does the term better suit certain works than "comic" or "trade"?

35 Comments