What Happens When a Stoppable Force Meets a Moveable Object?

A question posed by my little brother deserves a wider audience. Who would win a fight, this guy:

or this guy:

?

As my sister said, we can't be sure, but there would be a lot of hugs.

Hey Big Jim

Jealous much?

5. Marquette alumnus to present Tolkien Lecture

Dr. John Rateliff, a Marquette alumnus and author of the two-volume series The History of the Hobbit, will discuss his research on J.R.R. Tolkien on Thursday, Oct. 4, at 4 p.m. in the Raynor Library Conference Center Beaumier Suites B-C. The Rateliff presentation, "'A Kind of Elvish Craft': Tolkien as Literary Craftsman," will be followed by a question-and-answer session and book signing. The event is part of the libraries' celebration of the 50th anniversary of the acquisition of the Tolkien manuscripts.

Rateliff said that he selected the Department of English at Marquette for his doctoral studies because of the Tolkien manuscripts preserved within the Department of Special Collections and Archives. He has worked with these manuscripts for more than 25 years.

The event is free and open to the public. The general public should pre-register by calling 414-288-0591 at least 24 hours prior to the program. Anyone with a Marquette ID need not pre-register.

For more information contact Matt Blessing at 8-0591.

The Necromancer Revealed

Both Peter Jackson and New Line seem determined to stretch the movie version of The Hobbit into a two movie series while making it equivalent in tone to The Lord of the Rings. Needless to say, this will demand some padding. The obvious choice: show the White Council's assault on the Necromancer (a.k.a. Sauron in hiding). The problem? Well lots of problems, mainly having to do with creating a whole new script not actually built on anything Tolkien wrote. However another problem is Peter Jackson's somewhat interesting choice of portraying Sauron as a giant eye that doubled as a lighthouse (doubtless to help pay the rent). I have a feeling the denizens of Middle-earth probably would have been able to find out the identity of the Necromancer fairly easily in Jackson's versions of events--not too many giant, flaming eye-balls walking around. I, however, have come up with an elegant solution, using the latest in computer graphic technology to ensure that Sauron would plausibly be able to conceal his identity:


"Sauron? You must have me confused with someone else."

Prediction updates

Here was my prediction from March about our opening game starters:

QB - Demetrius Jones (Likely correct)
HB - Travis Thomas (Correct)
FB - Asaph Schwapp (Correct)
WR - David Grimes (Correct)
WR - Duval Kamara (Incorrect, though a boy can dream)
TE - John Carlson (Correct)
LT - Paul Duncan (Correct)
LG - Eric Olsen (Incorrect)
OC - John Sullivan (Correct)
RG - Dan Wenger (Correct)
RT - Sam Young (Correct)

DE - Trevor Laws (Correct)
DT - Chris Stewart (Incorrect)
DE - Pat Kuntz (Correct, but wrong position)
OLB - Morrice Richardson (Incorrect)
ILB - Maurice Crum (Correct)
ILB - Toryan Smith (50/50)
OLB - Anthony Vernaglia (Correct)
CB - Terrail Lambert (Correct)
FS - David Bruton (Correct)
SS - Tom Zbikowski (Correct)
CB - Ambrose Wooden (Incorrect)

By my math, I should have 9/11 on offense (assuming Jones starts) and 7/11 on defense (assuming Smith does not start) for a total of 16/22.

Now let's have a look at Jim's:


QB - Jimmy Clausen (Likely incorrect)
RB - Travis Thomas (Correct)
FB - Asaph Schwapp (Correct)
WR - David Grimes (Correct)
WR - Robby Parris (Incorrect)
TE - John Carlson (Correct)
RT - Sam Young (Correct)
G- Dan Wenger (Correct)
C- John Sullivan (Correct)
G - Matt Carufel (Incorrect)
LT - Paul Duncan (Correct)

DE - Trevor Laws (Correct)
NT - Chris Stewart (Incorrect)
DE - Derrell Hand (Prostitute)
OLB - John Ryan (Correct)
ILB - Maurice Crum (Correct)
ILB - Toryan Smith (50/50)
OLB - Morrice Richardson (Incorrect)
CB - Terrail Lambert (Correct)
CB - Darrin Walls (Correct)
FS - David Bruton (Correct)
SS - Tom Zbikowski (Correct)

That's likely 8/11 on offense and 7/11 on defense for a total of 15/22. By our agreement, I win his favorite book. Although I'm not particularly sure I want a first edition of Tolkein, Meus Vir. (That's Tolkein, My Hero, according to my online English-Latin dictionary.

Throw Me a Frickin' Bone

In yet another display of its ongoing slide in moral turpitude, Hollywood has consistently refused to adequately portray a giant evil wolf.

Exhibit A:


WETA, normally superb on monster design, decided to with the giant hyena/hamster route, rather than portray the large, cunningly intelligent wolves Tolkien describes.

Exhibit B:

As good as ILM has been in the past, creature design for the Harry Potter movies has been less than stellar. I'm thinking of the centaurs in particular here. Anyway, Lupin's alter ego looks more sad than terrifying. Maybe even a little cute.

Exhibit C:

The best of the lot, as is befitting a Frank Miller inspired movie. Still, you can tell that The 300 didn't have a top-of-the-line budget (not that it helped the previous two creatures). He just looks a little fake. The movement, in particular, is a problem.

Until Hollywood manages to come up with a realistic, sufficiently scary design, I suggest it sticks to what it does best rather than churn out unsatisfactory canines:

I Can Die a Happy Man

Is "Deathstalker and the Warriors from Hell" (703) the greatest MST3K episode ever?

Yes.

True, Joel has long since exited, but Trace Beaulieu was still on; however, that much is unimportant. Its glory derives from the references contained therein. There are riffs on Saruman and Radagast, Shane MacGowan and the Popes, and "Safety Dance."

I'm pretty sure that's an unbeatable combination.

Oh yeah, and the movie itself was gloriously bad.

John Hood Makes a Lot of Sense; Jackson? Not So Much

From the Corner:

Reviewing outtakes from last night's GOP debate, some Democratic blogging, and poll averages, a few quarter-baked thoughts have come to mind.

First, if the war is the prime voting issue, the top three GOP candidates would all make credible presidents. Among the top Dems, only Hillary Clinton would. As an American, and particularly as a Southern Scotch-Irish win-at-all-costs type, I find myself hoping for Clinton as the nominee, thus to reduce lethal risk to the Republic.

However, despite her great talents and resources, I still think Clinton is the weakest candidate for Democrats. She brings lots of baggage. She splits the base on the war. She annoys independent voters ready for a fresh face. I know it's way early, but the head-to-head polls show her to be weaker than Obama or Edwards against the Republican field.

Plus, the GOP race is not yet fully formed. Newt Gingrich said earlier this week that he will probably get it in September (he's speaking to my group in NC on Thursday, so I'm hoping for more details). Fred Thompson seems likely to get in, too. Their hovering over the current field has distorted the polling significantly, as they are collectively drawing about 20 percent of the primary electorate — consisting of conservative stalwarts and disaffected partisans (not exactly the same) who don't like Giuliani or McCain and don't really know who Romney is. Once Thompson and Gingrich get in, things will change dramatically. Could be that they'll just further the split, making it a Giuliani-McCain matchup by default and re-creating a 1996 dynamic. Or there could be flame-outs and a conservative coalescence around a non-McCain alternative to Giuliani.

Finally, Giuliani is a loser unless he forms and delivers a clearer, more reassuring message to conservatives on social issues, abortion and others. The Paul Coverdell solution is a viable one, but Giuliani just isn't convincing on it yet. He's well-known and admired outside the Northeast corridor as a NYC mayor, thus explaining his 25-30 percent in the national polls, but that's about it. There's no silent majority for a tough-talking social liberal among GOP primary voters. That's a fantasy. He leads because there is a large field. It will shrink.

Hood's "half-baked" line reminded me of a thought I had a couple of days as I watched the The Return of the King for the first time in while, spurred on by Rico's previous comment about trilogies. The thought was: how has the drug culture affected the film versions of The Lord of the Rings?

Gollum, or should I say Smeagol, is played as a mostly-sympathetic junkie. Even Gollum's gollums (ha ha!) are more pitiful coughs than the original self-pitiable (and thus non-pitiable) gurglings. Tolkien never uses the word addiction, at least not to my knowledge, so I can't imagine him having Gandalf talk of Gollum's need for it with quite the inflection Ian McKellan uses. I would also add the movies are very clearly riffing on marijuana with the pipeweed. "Finest weed in the Southfarthing . . ." and all that. I'm too lazy to check, but I can't remember Tolkien's leaf ever being used as a shortening of pipeweed. My next thought was whether the cast and crew thought that these references were necessary, in that either there was no other conceivable way of portraying Gollum or there wasn't any possibility of them passing up the opportunity for the jokes. Sad.

Finally, we've finally got a Tolkien label now. Seriously, I'm surprised it's taken this long.