Sunday, March 22, 2020

Frascella's 2020 MLB Predictions: AL West

Photo Credit: Yahoo Sports


Coronavirus ain't stoppin' us - let's continue on with the series...

Volume I: American League East
Volume II: American League Central

My Win Projections to Date:

(** Editor's note: Of course, these projections are based on a 162-game schedule, which probably won't happen in its entirety.)

1. Twins: 100
2. Yankees: 97
3. Rays: 95
4. White Sox: 87
5. Indians: 84
6. Red Sox: 80
7. Blue Jays: 74
8. Royals: 63
9. Orioles: 52
10. Tigers: 50

And here...we...go:

5. Seattle Mariners

2019 Record: 68-94
2020 Vegas Over/Under: 67.5
Frascella's 2020 Projection: 54-108

Betting Influence: I dunno what the heck Vegas is thinkin' - Domingo Santana and Omar Narvaez are both gone, and the injury prognosis for Mitch Haniger isn't at all promising. Who, exactly, do the Mariners have for production? This just feels like a major reach by Vegas; especially with the Angels getting Anthony Rendon and the Rangers improving their pitching with Corey Kluber and Kyle Gibson. Teams will improve in this division, and I can't see how Seattle will be one of them.

Position Players: The Mariners will need breakout years from 1B Evan White, SS J.P. Crawford and OF Kyle Lewis, and I just don't see those breakout years coming this quickly. I really don't see how Seattle is going to score runs. Their best fantasy players are Kyle Seager, catcher Tom Murphy and...Mallex Smith? C'mon, man!

Pitchers: Marco Gonzalez pitched pretty damn well atop this rotation last year, but Yusei Kikuchi was a major disappointment and Kendall Graveman is a real reclamation project. Somebody has to bust out from this trio: Justus Sheffield, Taijuan Walker and Justin Dunn. Again, it feels like we might be reaching here. Could the Mariners actually be the worst all-around team in the AL? Not sure what Vegas knows, that I don't.

4. Texas Rangers

2019 Record: 78-84
2020 Vegas Over/Under: 79.5
Frascella's 2020 Projection: 77-85

Position Players: I actually like the Rangers' talent in the outfield; see here:
But...and this is a big but...there are a whole lotta strikeouts in this lineup. Can this team possibly hit with runners in scoring position? Todd Frazier is in the last two or three seasons of his career; Rougned Odor could barely even make contact last season; Calhoun still needs to refine his approach and polish up; Ronald Guzman has a long way to go and obviously Gallo is a strikeout king. I like the talent of Calhoun, Gallo, Santana, Choo, Elvis Andrus and Odor - but can they put it together as a collective unit? Especially in tight, late-game scenarios where contact and situational hitting are of paramount importance? Maybe in another division they'd get more than 77 wins, but I don't see it with the Astros, A's and Angels around. (That's alotta A's.) It's gonna be all about the longball for Texas.

Pitchers: Welcome aboard, Kluber and Gibson. I don't think Kluber will be what he once was - especially in his new home park - but he's still an impact pickup for Texas. You need some steady guys atop the rotation. The Rangers also welcome Jordan Lyles, who was a revelation after being acquired by the Brewers last season. He was basically untouchable with a 2.45 ERA. That's awfully hard to duplicate in this division, in this park, though. Still...to go with Lance Lynn and Mike Minor, this is actually a very good rotation. On paper, this may be the best Rangers' rotation I've ever seen. I'm more worried about Texas' situational hitting than its starting pitching. In the bullpen, Jose Leclerc is still around as one of their top dogs, and Rafael Montero - say whaaat? - has emerged as a key reliever. I never thought my Mets had enough patience with him as a converted starter.

3. Los Angeles Angels

2019 Record: 72-90
2020 Vegas Over/Under: 85.5
Frascella's 2020 Projection: 87-75

Management: Joe Maddon has to change things for this club. It's been messy for quite some time now. Yes, you can't win with a single player in baseball - but the Angels have had Mike Trout in his prime! I've always blamed the front office more than the manager, but now the former has finally come through with Maddon and Rendon. Are those two enough for a quantum leap?

Position Players: I like the potential and flexibility of Maddon's lineup. Like the Rangers, I've already discussed this club on Twitter:

I like my lineups to have a certain kind of texture - not everyone can have true superstars (especially those who can hit for power and average), but the Angels have that right off the bat with Trout and Rendon. You can get an awful lot of run production from those two guys, alone. Then, you gotta have some guys who make contact consistently - batters who build up pitch counts and deliver quality at bats in key spots. Here, that would be Tommy La Stella, David Fletcher, Brian Goodwin and Andrelton Simmons. Then, you have home run thunder from Justin Upton, Shohei Ohtani and future Hall of Famer Albert Pujols. Maddon can really mix-and-match with this group. Injuries can derail the best-laid plans of mice and men, but if they stay relatively healthy, it'll be awfully hard to keep the Angels' offense quiet.

Pitchers: Julio Teheran is just so hittable. Have you seen him pitch in recent years? His fastball is gone. It's all about changing speeds and misdirection now, but can that fly in this league, in this division? I'm sure he'll be good for the first month of the season - before the AL hitters figure him out - but I don't see any sustained success from Teheran. He's gonna get rocked sometimes; maybe even more than sometimes. Dylan Bundy is kind of similar in that, his fastball has already dipped below its initial level of hype. Bundy, despite being just 27 years old, has already become a mix-it-up, change speeds kinda guy. I actually think he will outperform Teheran, but I can't see either acquisition being lights out. Andrew Heaney needs to take the next step up. This club needs that badly. In the bullpen...another Mets' castoff? Hansel Robles leads the way at the back end.

2. Oakland A's

2019 Record: 97-65
2020 Vegas Over/Under: 89.5
Frascella's 2020 Projection: 93-69

Betting Influence: Hmm...notice a trend, here? Vegas is taking a step back from these analytics nuts. They have the Rays droppin' down from 96 wins to 90.5, and now Oakland dipping from 97 to 89.5. Obviously, the latter has something to do with the Angels' signings of Rendon and Maddon. With the Angels' bump up, they have the A's dippin' down. I understand the logic, but I'm not gonna doubt Billy Beane and these scrappy A's. They've been putting things together in recent years. Sure, they can't seem to get past the AL Wild Card Game, but we're only talking about win totals, here. They've been winning an awful lot of games. Let's see how their personnel looks, this time around...

Position Players: My main man Billy Valeriano doesn't think Marcus Semien can repeat his outstanding production from last season. Okay, maybe he will regress a bit, but the A's still have Matt Olson, Matt Chapman, Khris Davis and Mark Canha as solid producers. Ramon Laureano and Sean Murphy look like the kids with upside, here. Again - like Tampa - it isn't necessarily about the personnel here, either. Beane and his front office team clearly have some magic sauce - do we know exactly what it is? No. It's probably just a combination of various "edges". So, they have some solid position players, and they will likely end up getting more out of them than we'd expect. Good enough, for sure.

Pitchers: Good texture with the foursome of Sean Manaea, Mike Fiers (the whistleblower!), Frankie Montas and Chris Bassitt. My gut sense is that Montas has the potential to be the best of the four, but we have to wait and see how he looks without the PEDs. It doesn't always look pretty with Fiers, but he gets the job done. Manaea is an effective lefty when he hits his spots. Oakland's bullpen is pretty stacked with Liam Hendriks, Lou Trivino, Jake Diekman, Yusmeiro Petit and Joakim Soria. I wouldn't put them ahead of the Yankees' electric bullpen, but I'd put them right there with Tampa for the No. 2 spot in the AL.

1. Houston Astros

2019 Record: 107-55
2020 Vegas Over/Under: 94.5
Frascella's 2020 Projection: 101-59

Outside Circumstances: I'm not going to go on and on about the cheating. The media beat this thing to death all winter. The only question is...what impact does this have on the Astros' results, going forward? Personally, I think they are going to embrace the villain role. One-hundred seven wins are hard to duplicate - especially with the Angels and Rangers improving on paper - but I can't see this club dipping below 100. They still look like the best team in the AL to me.

Position Players: Hard to match Bregman, Altuve, Correa, Springer, Brantley, Gurriel and Alvarez. Strongest group of seven in the league. Only question...will their production taper off without knowing the speed of the incoming pitch? I dunno, overall, I have faith in the true ability of these guys. Out of the group, Bregman, Altuve and Gurriel will really embrace their roles as villains.

Pitchers: The obvious elephant in the room...Gerrit Cole is gone. Over the course of the past two seasons, that was some of the best pitching we have ever seen. Simply out of this world. So yeah, that's a difficult void to fill, but the Astros can win in a number of different ways: with offense, relief pitching, "advanced strategies" and still some starting pitching with Justin Verlander, Zack Greinke and the return of Lance McCullers. Verlander (groin surgery) now has more time to recover due to the coronavirus epidemic, and did you know that Greinke was the fourth-ranked starting pitcher in most fantasy formats last year (behind Verlander, Cole and deGrom)? I had no idea Greinke had been that good. Jose Urquidy has shown some effective craft, too. In the bullpen, they go five deep in quality with Roberto Osuna, Ryan Pressly, Joe Smith, Chris Devenski and Brad Peacock. Joe Biagini shows some nice flashes, as well.

American League: ALL of Frascella's Win Projections

1. Astros: 101
2. Twins: 100
3. Yankees: 97
4. Rays: 95
5. A's: 93
6. Angels: 87
7. White Sox: 87
8. Indians: 84
9. Red Sox: 80
10. Rangers: 77
11. Blue Jays: 74
12. Royals: 63
13. Mariners: 54
14. Orioles: 52
15. Tigers: 50

On to the National League in the coming weeks!
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, March 20, 2020

Frascella's Top 10 Movies of the 2010s: Scorsese, Tarantino & Fincher Lead the Way

Photo Credit: Relativity Media and movieposters2


This post owes a special thanks to Mr. Alexander Tucciarone, my good friend who fires up a "Best Movies of the Decade" debate every 10 years. Much of the content below is from my correspondence with "Tucc" and others involved in the debate. Let's start off with a flashback...

Top 10 Movies of the 2000s (2000-2009 aka "The Aughts")
(Just the list, here)

Honorable Mention(s): Boiler Room (2000), Wedding Crashers (2005), The Fast and the Furious (2001), The Incredibles (2004), The Prestige (2006), Stay (2005, read my full-length review, here), Gone Baby Gone (2007), 25th Hour (2002), Knocked Up (2007), Traffic (2000), Sideways (2004) and Syriana (2005). 

As of September 7, 2009, this was what I considered to be the top 10:

10. Sin City (2005)
9. Children of Men (2006)
8. Cinderella Man (2005)
7. Memento (2000)
6. The Departed (2006)
5. Training Day (2001)
4. Crash (2004)
3. The 40-Year Old Virgin (2005)
2. Almost Famous (2000)
1. City of God (2002)

Revisionist History: Inglourious Basterds (2009) would be No. 1 on this list, now. I hadn't yet seen it when I replied to Tucc back then. Quentin Tarantino's masterpiece is one of the most complete films I have ever seen. That's "QT" at the height of his powers. 

Sin City was really unique at the time for its cutting-edge visual style, but if not for Inglourious, I would probably replace it with 25th Hour or Sideways, now. I like these lists to have a certain kind of texture - Spike Lee is an important director, and 25th Hour was an important 9/11 elegy. Edward Norton was an elite leading man at the time, too. Notice how Martin Scorsese, Christopher Nolan, Judd Apatow and Cameron Crowe all got their due on that list. Spike absolutely should have been there with them. 

Sideways holds up really well for me, too. I'm a huge Paul Giamatti guy - and to me this was his most memorable performance. Alexander Payne is a heavy hitter in the director's chair, as well. 

On to the next decade we go...

Top 10 Movies of the 2010s

Honorable Mention(s):

Steve Jobs (2015): One of my favorites of the 2010s, but "favorite" doesn't necessarily mean "best". Also, like I said, I like these lists to have a certain kind of texture - later on, you will be seeing a similar-type film near the top of my list. Don't want to have too much overlap. Nevertheless, please feel free to check out my full-length review of Steve Jobs, here. 

45 Years (2015): Don't think this film would have made my list back in the aughts. We grow with time, as does our taste in movies. This is a quiet, little film about a lifetime of marriage. How delicate our relationships really are... (full review, here). 

Zero Dark Thirty (2012): I just finished watching Homeland start-to-finish, and now I'm thinking I should probably add Zero Dark Thirty to my top 10. Go America! Fight terrorism! Dude, the bin Laden assassination scene is sick. Director Kathryn Bigelow is simply fantastic. Shout to The Hurt Locker and Point Break, too. 

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018): Best Western of the 2010s (no pun intended). The Coen Brothers really seem at home with Westerns - I was a big No Country for Old Men guy, too. I like the way they let things breathe within this genre, and their cinematography in Scruggs is drop-dead gorgeous. I really enjoyed the six-story structure; it kept things fresh and interesting. The stories ranged from screwball to action to existential despair. Really good, fun stuff. 

Lady Bird (2017): Like I said about 25th Hour earlier - this is an important film. Important for two reasons: (1) for announcing writer/director Greta Gerwig as a serious force in the business and (2) for continuing to show that Saoirse Ronan is one of the most talented actresses of her generation. And ya gotta have a coming-of-age story on your list, right? Here's my full-length review. 

A Star is Born (2018): A classic story, done before...but I found it rather moving. Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga showcased scintillating chemistry, and I really enjoyed the original songs. Also, I crack up every time I read Cooper's NY Times interview about this film. The guy is really taking himself seriously these days, lol. 

Ex Machina (2014): Sci-Fi baby, Sci-Fi! Definitely not my thing. But this was a good one. Domhnall Gleeson and Oscar Isaac really ground this story with excellent performances, and writer/director Alex Garland knew exactly where he was going with this one. I don't like Sci-Fi movies or TV shows that fly off the rails - the ones that seem to be making it up as they go - but thankfully, that doesn't apply here. Ex Machina is an actors' showcase wrapped in a "message" movie. 

All right, here we go, it's top 10 time...

Photo Credit: Entertainment Wallpaper


(These write-ups are copy/pasted from my correspondence with Tucc.)

10. The Drop (2014)

My sleeper of the decade. 

Simply put...a crime drama done extremely well, featuring the final performance of the great James Gandolfini. Here's my longer review. 

Additional comments: Writer Dennis Lehane is a beast - this guy knows how to execute dark crime dramas. The Drop, Mystic River, Gone Baby Gone and Shutter Island off the top of my head. A very impressive resume, indeed. 

9. Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014)

Alejandro Inarritu got really meta with this one -- especially with Michael Keaton and Ed Norton -- and I wholly appreciate his grand-scale ambition. 

And...ambiguous endings are the way to go! (Here's my full-length review.)

Additional comments: This was an important film because Inarritu was a major player in the 2010s. This movie's critical success allowed him to secure Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy and Gleeson for his well-liked follow-up, The Revenant (my review, here). Birdman is clearly the better of the two films, though. Overall, you have to appreciate Inarritu's energy and passion for his medium. He's an easy guy to root for. 

8. Her (2013)

In 25 years, we'll look back at Spike Jonze's sad film and think...did he come back from the future? 


Additional comments: I loved the look of this film, and the grand ideas behind it. If it just had a little more narrative momentum, I could have gone higher than No. 8. 

7. Django Unchained (2012)

Gotta have one Tarantino, right? 

Christoph Waltz picks up right where he left off, here, and the result is another bloody good time. 

Will Smith turned down the lead role and well...he had to do After Earth, right?

Additional comments: This film has very high replay value for me. It starts so strong, especially when Dr. Schultz is recruiting Django (a game Jamie Foxx) and developing his talents throughout the first half of the movie. If "QT" had cut this film 15-20 minutes shorter, we could have been looking at another 10 out of 10, here (like Inglourious). It runs on just a tad past its welcome; especially when Tarantino enters to do some shitty acting of his own. 

6. Midnight in Paris (2011)

Yeesh...I hope I don't get slayed for selecting a Woody Allen film. 

Annnnyway, to me, a film like this is what the movies are all about: Escaping boring, 9-to-5 life for a fun fantasy filled with refreshing characters and entertaining anecdotes. 

Allen's writing began falling off a cliff with Irrational Man (2015) and approached rock bottom in Cafe Society and Wonder Wheel; but here, he's as sharp as ever. Owen Wilson has never been better. 

Additional comments: If Almost Famous was my feel-good movie of the aughts, Midnight in Paris brings home that very same award for the 2010s. Woody is much-maligned at this point; but this was likely the last hurrah of his renaissance years as a filmmaker. 

5. Moneyball (2011)

In the 80s and 90s, the "sports comeback" and "underdog" stories were beaten to a bloody pulp. 

Thanks to innovative director Bennett Miller, old school movie star Brad Pitt and author Michael Lewis' groundbreaking source material, Moneyball reinvigorated a tired genre in 2011. 

This is a film about two men sitting in an office talkin' baseball, and yet Miller dazzles us with fresh visuals, Mychael Danna surprises us with a touching score and Jonah Hill announces himself as a serious actor worthy of an Oscar nom. 

It's awfully difficult for a sports film to hit fresh notes, but Moneyball does exactly that, and more. 

4. Bridesmaids (2011)

Harvey Weinstein's Hollywood used to fall back on a disgustingly misguided cliche: Women can't carry a comedy. 

 In 2011, Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy said FUCK THAT in convincing fashion. 

 I watch this movie virtually every time it's on E! or USA. There's no substitute for cast chemistry and camaraderie, and Bridesmaids reinforces that from opening reel to closing credits. 

 Additional comments: Perhaps the last, great piece of the Apatow Dynasty - but this one also stands on its own. Wiig, McCarthy, Maya Rudolph, Wendi McLendon-Covey, Ellie Kemper and Rose Byrne simply had the collective magic necessary to create a comedy classic. Here's a fun piece on their well-documented chemistry. 

 3. Boyhood (2014)

Richard Linklater is probably the most underrated filmmaker of all time. He always swings for the fences, and for that, I tip my cap. 

 Sure, Boyhood's decade-long filming is a bit of a gimmick, but this is a movie that shows us ourselves. It's easy to get wrapped up in the petty ills of the present - but looking back on everything, start to finish? 

 That's something that is truly worthwhile, and special. 

 Additional comments: I remember being up until like 2:30 a.m. after I saw Boyhood for the first time. The exact same thing happened with No. 1 on this list. I guess, for me, that's the mark of a great film. It lingers. You think about how you arrived at its conclusion. The journey, the craft. Linklater has always been fantastic, but this is absolutely his most relatable work to date. I wonder how it will be viewed in 15-20 years. 

 2. The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

Martin Scorsese is 76 years old, but who can match the raw energy of his controversial films? 

 Wolf is a long one, but it flies by thanks to Scorsese's deft hand, Leonardo Di Caprio's bullish lead performance and Jordan Belfort's are you kidding me? source material. 

 Scorsese has always been known for coaxing classic performances and exploiting explosive bursts of violence, but he can also be quite funny. We could feel that comedic side reintroducing itself in The Departed, but it bursts through the door full-bore in Wolf, on coke. 

 Another strong performance from Jonah Hill here, too. 

 Additional comments: This film really toes the line - is it an indictment of Belfort and his flock of felons, or an endorsement? Think near the end...Kyle Chandler's FBI man sits on the subway and looks around, dejected and defeated. Who was really living the American way - Belfort or Agent Denham? 

 1. The Social Network (2010)

The phrase perfect storm immediately jumps to mind. 

 We have director David Fincher at the height of his powers; screenwriter Aaron Sorkin delivering his note-perfect, pitter-patter dialogue; Trent Reznor pounding out a memorable score and young actors Jesse Eisenberg and Andrew Garfield taking their games to the next level. 

 Not to mention a plot that rolls three reliable storylines into one: misunderstood genius, rags-to-riches and corporate power struggle. High replay value here, too. 

 Additional comments: This just feels like THE movie of its time. You know what I mean? Silicon Valley exploded after Facebook. Every "genius" wanted to get theirs. The Social Network perfectly captured a very specific time in American (and really, world) history. Special shouts to Justin Timberlake, Dakota Johnson and Armie Hammer, too. This was a breakout film for a number of immensely talented artists. 

 All right, let's go...bring on the debate!
Posted by at No comments:

My 200 Favorite Movies: Spike Jonze Sees Into the Future with HER

Photo Credit: Annapurna Pictures and Warner Bros. 
(Editor's note: This was originally written in 2016.)

Original, innovative and ahead of its time in a rapidly-changing modern world, Her is a Spike Jonze joint that was mired in its fair share of controversy. Jonze was vindicated in the end, so I'll have to give him the benefit of the doubt.

In Her, Joaquin Phoenix plays Theodore, a personalized letter writer in a futuristic version of Los Angeles. As society has become increasingly more reliant upon technology, some humans have lost the ability to express themselves on paper. Theodore's is a niche job that allows him a window into the unique personal lives of others. He's a good writer with a big heart, a heart that remains broken after his divorce from Catherine (Rooney Mara), the only love of his life.

In his loneliness, Theodore befriends Samantha (Scarlett Johansson), his personal Operating System ("OS"). In future L.A., seemingly everyone has an OS that manages their many connections to technology -- e-mails, texts, calls, video games, voicemails, Internet searches, etc. OS's were originally created for practical purposes, but they advance themselves and establish complicated personalities over time. And wouldn't you know, the more Theodore talks to Samantha, the more he seems to be developing feelings for her.

On the other end of the line, as Samantha's personality diversifies and expands in many different directions, she too develops feelings for Theodore. The result is a thought-provoking romance between Man and Machine. It works because the dialogue is fresh, believable and occasionally funny.

Generally speaking, Phoenix is kind of a bizarre method actor who has a tendency to rub me the wrong way -- particularly in Irrational Man, The Master and We Own the Night -- but his portrayal of Theodore is spot on. I totally buy into him as a kind, tender-but-flawed lost soul in an evolving society that doesn't seem to have a place for him. He has a soft-spoken and frazzled friend named Amy (played by Amy...Adams) who seems to mirror him in a number of different ways.

One of the stars of the show is cinematographer Hoyte Von Hoytema (yes, he has "Hoyte" in his first and last name) who has quite the resume with Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Interstellar and Spectre. I thought Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy was slow and boring, and I remember thinking that the only thing I liked about it was the cinematography. There's something very clean and smooth about Von Hoytema's vision and subsequent execution of that vision. His future L.A. in Her seems like an inviting and comfortable place to be. Von Hoytema creates space nicely and gives his shots room to breathe. One could argue that he's just as important to Her's effectiveness as Jonze, Phoenix and Johansson.

Ooh, I'm glad I remembered the music. The score by Arcade Fire is sad, delicate and sometimes a bit haunting. It meshes beautifully with the direction and cinematography.

Finally, as I mentioned in the opening, strong endings are important to me. This film ends perfectly with a gorgeous shot of Theodore and Amy sitting on the ledge of their apartment building, staring out into the mesmerizing L.A. skyline. They are together, but alone.

** John Frascella's Score: 9.5 out of 10 **

MY UP-TO-DATE ARCHIVE OF ALL REVIEWS AND RECENT MOVIES SEEN
Inglourious Basterds (10/10) - Review Coming Soon
Birdman (9.5/10)
The Irishman (9.5/10)
Up in the Air (9.5/10)
Steve Jobs (9.5/10)
Django Unchained (9.5/10) - Review Coming Soon
Collateral (9.5/10)
No Country for Old Men (9.5/10)
The Wrestler (9.5/10)
Her (9.5/10)
The Drop (9.5/10)
Zodiac (9.5/10)
Kramer vs. Kramer (9.5/10)
Margin Call (9/10)
Office Space (9/10)
The Hateful Eight (9/10) - Review Coming Soon
Marriage Story (9/10)
Hannah and Her Sisters (9/10)
Mystic River (9/10)
L.A. Confidential (9/10)
Lady Bird (9/10)
Stay (9/10)
Gone Girl (9/10)
Nocturnal Animals (9/10)
45 Years (9/10)
The Edge of Seventeen (9/10)
Bernie (9/10)
Lucky Number Slevin (9/10)
Tape (9/10)
A Perfect Murder (9/10)
Wanderlust (8.5/10)
War Dogs (8.5/10)
The Founder (8.5/10)
Jackie Brown (8.5/10) - Future Review
In Bruges (8.5/10)
Split (8.5/10)
Bad Moms (8.5/10)
Basquiat (8.5/10)
Love, Actually (8.5/10)
Moonlight (8/10)
Pretty Woman (8/10)
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (7.5/10) - No Review Available
Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (7.5/10) - No Review Available
Joker (7.5/10)
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (7.5/10)
The Revenant (7.5/10)
The Good Shepherd (7.5/10)
The Shallows (7.5/10)
Focus (7.5/10) 
The Night Before (7.5/10)
The Walk (7/10)
10 Cloverfield Lane (7/10)
Loving (7/10) - No review available
Death Proof (7/10) - No review available
Hail, Caesar! (7/10) - No review available
Escape Room (7/10)
Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood (6.5/10)
A Most Violent Year (6.5/10) - No review available
The Shape of Water (6/10) - discussed in this review
The Boy (6/10) - No review available
The Accountant (6/10) - No review available
Bridge of Spies (6/10) - No review available
The Firm (6/10) - No review available
Muhammad Ali: Say My Name (6/10) - No review available
Joy (5.5/10)
Taking Lives (5.5/10) - No review available
La La Land (5.5/10)
Pulp Fiction (5.5/10) - Future Review
Belichick and Saban: The Art of Coaching (5.5/10)
The Visit (5/10) - discussed in this review
The Mule (5/10) - No review available
13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi (5/10)
Make Love Great Again (5/10) - No review available
Molly's Game (5/10)
Set It Up (5/10)
Get a Job (5/10) - No review available
The Interpreter (5/10) - No review available
Eric Clapton: Life in 12 Bars (5/10) - No review available
Reservoir Dogs (4.5/10) - Future Review
Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates (4.5/10) - No review available
Brooklyn (4.5/10) - discussed in this review, and this review
Ocean's 8 (4/10)
Everything Must Go (4/10) - No review available
Why Him? (3.5/10) - No review available
The Program (3/10)
Open Water 3: Cage Dive (3/10) - No review available
Pitch Perfect 3 (2/10)
Shut In (2/10) - No review available
Premonition (2/10) - No review available
Rings (1.5/10)
Mother's Day (1.5/10)
I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer (0/10) - No review available

Posted by at No comments:

My 200 Favorite Movies: Keaton and Norton Look Into the Mirror in BIRDMAN

Photo Credit: 20th Century Studios/FOX


(Editor's note: This was originally written in 2016.)

Ever since the 2014 Best Picture winner started playing on HBO, I haven't been able to turn it off. Birdman, as director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu has said many times, is a "bat shit crazy film." As is often the case with Best Picture winners, it has received some after-the-fact criticism -- namely that it's a "gimmick" that won't have the staying power or long-term significance of its primary competitor, Richard Linklater's Boyhood -- but I think Birdman holds up just fine on its own. There's so much going on in this wacky film; where do I start...

Well, the casting was pitch-perfect. It helps that Inarritu had many of these actors in mind when he wrote the parts; nevertheless the end result was an inspired cast that played beautifully off each other. The creative arguments and power struggles between actor/director Riggan Thomson (a revitalized Michael Keaton) and his co-lead Mike Shiner (the always-awesome Ed Norton) work, the fractured father/daughter relationship between Riggan and Samantha (Emma Stone, in quite possibly her best performance) feels genuine, the chemistry between Mike and Samantha is there, the friendship and business partnership between Riggan and his agent Jake (Zach Galifianakis) seems to have roots, etc. Basically, everything came together for Inarritu the way Riggan hoped it would with his stage production of Raymond Carver's What We Talk About When We Talk About Love. 

So what exactly is Birdman about? Well, (1) It is a biting criticism of the devolution of the film industry. Birdman symbolizes Michael Keaton's role in the cinematic history of Batman, the franchise that (Inarritu and I feel) opened the floodgates to the dominant reign of the superhero genre. I don't know about you, but I was already sick of superhero films over a decade ago. The only ones I kind of like are The Dark Knight and Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man 2 (with Doc Oc), but neither are enjoyable enough to crack my top 100.

So, I immediately connect with Inarritu's premise. It may not be the most original idea in the world at this point -- many others have noted the fact that lazy film making gets rewarded when studio superhero sequels break the bank -- but it's still an idea that I personally believe in. 

(2) Birdman explores the divide between true actors aka "artists" and "movie stars." Like, say, Philip Seymour Hoffman (RIP) and Christian Bale are artists; Vin Diesel and Keanu Reeves are movie stars. Keaton as Riggan skis skillfully down this slippery slope -- we can clearly see that Riggan's trying to be an artist, but he simply doesn't have Mike's acting chops. This concept actually creates an interesting internal debate, like, Denzel Washington is an artist and movie star; he has true crossover appeal, but what is Tom Cruise? How about Mark Wahlberg? Matt Damon? Anyway, that's a discussion for a different day. 

(3) This is a movie about the fine line between fantasy and reality. Does Riggan actually possess Birdman's superpowers, or has the downward spiral of his once-promising career caused him to go nuts? Inarritu's handling of this tricky thread is a thing of beauty. Sure, Riggan flies around town, but when he "lands" it appears that he has forgotten to pay his cabby for the ride. Or did he actually fly? These blurred lines appear, disappear and re-appear throughout the film. 

At some point I have to mention the fact that the entire movie attempts to present itself as one, long, single take (with two or three brief cuts). I guess that's where the "gimmick" talk comes in, but I personally liked the directorial decision. The long takes create movement, energy and a sense of the stakes. Inarritu's personal fire and energy come through in the camera work and quick transitions from one zany storyline to the next. 

And - quite importantly - Birdman closes strong. The ambiguous ending has rightfully become a topic of much debate and meticulous analysis. What do you think happened when Riggan jumped out of his hospital room window?

** John Frascella's Score: 9.5 out of 10 **

MY UP-TO-DATE ARCHIVE OF ALL REVIEWS AND RECENT MOVIES SEEN
Inglourious Basterds (10/10) - Review Coming Soon
Birdman (9.5/10)
The Irishman (9.5/10)
Up in the Air (9.5/10)
Steve Jobs (9.5/10)
Django Unchained (9.5/10) - Review Coming Soon
Collateral (9.5/10)
No Country for Old Men (9.5/10)
The Wrestler (9.5/10)
The Drop (9.5/10)
Zodiac (9.5/10)
Kramer vs. Kramer (9.5/10)
Margin Call (9/10)
Office Space (9/10)
The Hateful Eight (9/10) - Review Coming Soon
Marriage Story (9/10)
Hannah and Her Sisters (9/10)
Mystic River (9/10)
L.A. Confidential (9/10)
Lady Bird (9/10)
Stay (9/10)
Gone Girl (9/10)
Nocturnal Animals (9/10)
45 Years (9/10)
The Edge of Seventeen (9/10)
Bernie (9/10)
Lucky Number Slevin (9/10)
Tape (9/10)
A Perfect Murder (9/10)
Wanderlust (8.5/10)
War Dogs (8.5/10)
The Founder (8.5/10)
Jackie Brown (8.5/10) - Future Review
In Bruges (8.5/10)
Split (8.5/10)
Bad Moms (8.5/10)
Basquiat (8.5/10)
Love, Actually (8.5/10)
Moonlight (8/10)
Pretty Woman (8/10)
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (7.5/10) - No Review Available
Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (7.5/10) - No Review Available
Joker (7.5/10)
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (7.5/10)
The Revenant (7.5/10)
The Good Shepherd (7.5/10)
The Shallows (7.5/10)
Focus (7.5/10) 
The Night Before (7.5/10)
The Walk (7/10)
10 Cloverfield Lane (7/10)
Loving (7/10) - No review available
Death Proof (7/10) - No review available
Hail, Caesar! (7/10) - No review available
Escape Room (7/10)
Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood (6.5/10)
A Most Violent Year (6.5/10) - No review available
The Shape of Water (6/10) - discussed in this review
The Boy (6/10) - No review available
The Accountant (6/10) - No review available
Bridge of Spies (6/10) - No review available
The Firm (6/10) - No review available
Muhammad Ali: Say My Name (6/10) - No review available
Joy (5.5/10)
Taking Lives (5.5/10) - No review available
La La Land (5.5/10)
Pulp Fiction (5.5/10) - Future Review
Belichick and Saban: The Art of Coaching (5.5/10)
The Visit (5/10) - discussed in this review
The Mule (5/10) - No review available
13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi (5/10)
Make Love Great Again (5/10) - No review available
Molly's Game (5/10)
Set It Up (5/10)
Get a Job (5/10) - No review available
The Interpreter (5/10) - No review available
Eric Clapton: Life in 12 Bars (5/10) - No review available
Reservoir Dogs (4.5/10) - Future Review
Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates (4.5/10) - No review available
Brooklyn (4.5/10) - discussed in this review, and this review
Ocean's 8 (4/10)
Everything Must Go (4/10) - No review available
Why Him? (3.5/10) - No review available
The Program (3/10)
Open Water 3: Cage Dive (3/10) - No review available
Pitch Perfect 3 (2/10)
Shut In (2/10) - No review available
Premonition (2/10) - No review available
Rings (1.5/10)
Mother's Day (1.5/10)
I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer (0/10) - No review available
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, March 19, 2020

Frascella's 2020 NFL Trade Report Cards: Hopkins for Johnson? Say Whaaaaat?

Photo Credit: Sports Illustrated


In case you aren't caught up on recent posts, here's my MLB preseason series to date:


And my NFL offseason series to date:


All right, let's get into this absolute disaster of a trade...

Houston Texans Get: RB David Johnson, 2020 second-round pick, 2021 fourth-round pick

Arizona Cardinals Get: 2020 fourth-round pick, DEANDRE HOPKINS and the Texans eat $10 million in salary? Where the hell am I??

TEXANS GRADE: D-
CARDINALS GRADE: A

Let's start with my tweet on the topic:

It's interesting, too, because the Rams cut ties with RB Todd Gurley today; Sean McVay and the boys got the memo - investing heavily in running backs is franchise suicide this day and age! Look around - Damien Williams was a backup RB for the Dolphins when they were an average or below-average team...he became the RB1 for the Super Bowl champs. Raheem Mostert was outright released by multiple NFL teams, and he became a key rusher for the Super Bowl runner-ups. The guy the 49ers did invest in - Jerick McKinnon - hasn't played in two seasons on their payroll. Was it worth it? Just invest lightly in RBs and use a committee that keeps guys fresh throughout the year.

Which leads us to this travesty of a trade...Bill O'Brien obviously didn't get the memo. He thinks this is a fantasy draft from 2017 - that must be why he's so high on David Johnson, a RB who is clearly on the backside of his career. He's been an extremely productive player over the years, but we all know running backs have short lifespans in terms of top-tier performance. Johnson has clearly fallen out of the A1 group at his position. In all likelihood, he's probably not even in tier 2 at this point.

That's not to say O'Brien won't get any value out of him - of course, coach and GM will want to justify his move by force feeding Johnson in a number of different ways. But how did that go for the Jets with Le'Veon Bell? He's a veteran RB they invested in and - especially early on - he was getting all he could eat. All that did was tire his veteran legs and make him useless for at least half the season. Gotta keep these veteran guys fresh, and I doubt O'Brien will have the restraint to do that, especially after getting savaged by the media for this deal. Johnson will be worth a look in fantasy drafts for his role alone, but there's just no comparison to DeAndre Hopkins in real-world value.

I'm a big wide receiver guy. Essentially, most of these teams live and die by their quarterbacks, but I'll put wide receivers up there with any other position in terms of importance. Again, let's look around...final four teams: Chiefs (Tyreek Hill, one of the best), Packers (Davante Adams, another of the best), Titans (A.J. Brown, breakout player). Further on down the line, other playoff teams: Texans (Hopkins, another of the best), Vikings (Stefon Diggs and Adam Thielen), Saints (Michael Thomas, out of this world), Seahawks (Tyler Lockett and DK Metcalf), the list goes on.

I mean, I'm working off the top of my head here, but I'd say Thomas, Hopkins, Adams and Hill are the best receivers in the game, with Julio Jones being the only megastar at his position to miss the postseason (and he's been there multiple times).

But clearly, again, O'Brien missed the memo. I totally understand that Hopkins was looking to command a boatload of money - nevertheless, this was a rushed deal. You have one of the absolute best football players in the world - you need to play the field. You need to dangle him everywhere. You can't be grabbing the first piece of fruit hanging from the tree - a trade returning a near washed-up running back.

Obviously, the only reason I didn't give O'Brien an F is the picks. The Texans had to win that part of the trade, otherwise the league would have exploded in protest. So yeah, he won that part of it by default. That gets ya from an F down to a D-. But given a deal like this, can you really count on O'Brien and his front office team to get key players in the second and fourth rounds? Deshaun Watson was a strong first-round selection, but that's supposed to be the "easy" round. Will you be shocked if the Texans miss on these second and fourth round picks?

Who would be, after this?

It all comes down to this...if you single-cover Hopkins, he's gonna burn you. If you double or stack, you may be able to keep him quiet...but what about the rest of the field? No matter what, Hopkins opens things up for his coaches and teammates. Kliff Kingsbury has to be salivating right now.

My hat's off to Arizona. I've defended Bill O'Brien in the past - but this time, I just can't. 
Posted by at No comments:

Frascella's 2020 NFL Free Agency Report Cards: Brady to Bucs

Photo Credit: Sports Illustrated


Finally! We have some things trending on Twitter that don't have to do with the coronavirus. I'm gonna jump right into this first one...

Tom Brady signs with the Bucs for roughly $30 million per season

BUCS GRADE: A-
PATRIOTS GRADE: D-
BRADY'S GRADE: B+

I've already voiced my opinion about this on Twitter:

And with this:

So yeah, this is a total win for the Bucs. The only reason I gave them an A- instead of a solid A is because of Brady's age. Obviously, once you make a move like this, you are instantaneously in win-now mode. You don't set up much for the future here, unless you count the abstract value of Brady mentoring young players; particularly young quarterbacks.

Now, I understand that signing with the Bucs is Brady's choice, but I'm still going to provide grades for the teams that lost players. So, this is a D- for the Pats because we don't know anything about Jarrett Stidham's readiness. We know Bill Belichick can coach 'em up, but in all likelihood the Pats will bring in a veteran quarterback; like say, Andy Dalton or someone of a similar ilk.

Let's not forget the multiplied effect, here - for so long, it's been "Brady and Belichick". Brady is fifty percent of the allure of the Patriots' dynasty. Players love Brady - particularly young players. Is Belichick enough to draw the same type of crowd? Will acquisitions "conform" and "buy in" the same way without Brady around to command additional respect and admiration?

We can't really know, going forward. I just know Brady is (nearly) as much of a draw as Belichick. People wanna play with Brady, and for Belichick. This signing has a trickle-down effect.

And lastly, Brady gets a B+ because well - when was the last time the Bucs were really good? Of course history doesn't necessarily impact future results, but the Pats were a safer bet than the Bucs. Note: My tweet above was in reference to the early reports that Brady was leaning toward leaving New England, no matter what. Personally, I think Brady should have left his ego at the door and stuck with the Pats. If Julian Edelman doesn't drop that easy pass near the end of their playoff loss to the Titans, who knows what happens from there? Every play matters; especially at crunch time. The Pats were still a highly-competitive team this past season.

Of course, on the bright side, Brady will hopefully reap the benefits of Evans and Godwin. In addition, both Brady and Arians will hope RB Ronald Jones and TE O.J. Howard take "the leap" this season. The more productive all of these players are, the more balanced Tampa's offense will be.

In the end, this move makes things awfully interesting for both the AFC East and NFC South. Maybe this will open up the door for Sam Darnold and my Jets!

Wishful thinking, I'm sure.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)