The grudges we bear

I missed last night's Nats game, but nearly fell off my chair when I got the post-game e-mail announcing the final score of 13-0, in favor of the hated Atlanta Braves.

I've probably mentioned this before, but it bears repeating: I've hated the Braves with a passion ever since they defeated the Pirates in the 1991 National League Playoffs. That was the first time I'd ever heard the tomahawk chop, and not only did it grow old fast, but I knew instantly that it was a rip-off from the Florida State Seminoles. Yet growing up, I almost couldn't escape the Braves, because they were aired on TBS damn near every night! And the fact that they went to the World Series nearly each year for the next several years got old fast, too.

So suffice it to say, anytime the Nats lose to the Braves, it stings a little more than customary.

A belated anniversary

While I was away, I had to recognize one notable anniversary in absentia: June 24 marked my one-year anniversary at River House. I can't believe it's already been a year since I moved in, and suffice it to say . . . it's been a hell of a year!

I do admit to missing my old apartment in Alexandria sometimes (well, I did live there for five years!) and feeling a certain sadness when I remember what happened to that complex (it went through a very ugly condo conversion that, ironically, bottomed out in the end) . . . but all the same, moving to River House was definitely a good move, a big step upward in my quality of life, and I'm very grateful for the time I've spent living here.

I have returned!

After a long day's journey, I have finally returned to the land of Idaho potatoes and chili dogs after spending a week and weekend in London. I must admit, it was quite a fantastic time over in merry old England—but I'm just as glad to be back home.

I took somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 pictures on my digital camera, which I'll (somehow) post soon, along with more detailed recap of the trip.

One thing's for sure, though: tomorrow's lunch is going to be Sine'. After a week of eating pub food, I'll need some of that fantastic potato soup and bangers and mash from my nearby Irish pub.

National Lampoon's European Vacation

For those of you who don't know yet (all three of you), today I set sail for London. I'll be spending three days conducting training in my company's London office, and over the weekend I'll be playing Mr. American Tourister (with lots of pictures to follow). So as part of my preparation for this upcoming trip, I decided to revisit an oldie but goodie: National Lampoon's European Vacation. I must admit, it's been years since I've seen this movie, and probably even longer since I've seen the original Vacation movie; my only excuse is that these days I'm more of a Christmas Vacation fan.

But for anyone who doesn't know the story by now, Clark Griswold (or is it Griswald?) and his family win a fabulous European vacation courtesy of their winning the grand prize on the game show "Pig in a Poke" (hosted by John Astin in what was an obvious send-up to flirtatious game show host Richard Dawson). The Griswold's itinerary includes stays in England, France, Germany, and Italy . . . and to say the least, it's anything but a relaxing vacation. As was the case in the previous Vacation movie, Clark becomes way too enthusiastic way too fast about taking his family on the "perfect" vacation—so much so that his over-enthusiasm serves as a major catalyst in the vacation's downfall.

Chevy Chase will probably be forever remembered as Clark Griswold (if not Fletch or Ty Webb), and he knows this character so well that he can probably play Clark in his sleep. Beverly D'Angelo reprises her role as Clark's devoted wife Ellen, and in keeping with all of the Vacation movies thus far, different actors play the Griswold children. Here in European Vacation, we have Jason Lively playing Rusty, and a very short Dana Hill playing a very weight-conscious Audrey. I thought Jason Lively effected an enjoyable Rusty, who does his damndest to get laid all throughout Europe, though Dana Hill seemed somewhat miscast to me. For one thing, her constant pining away for Jack, her not-so-faithful boyfriend back home, got rather tiresome quick. Plus, these smirks she gave . . . somehow they just made me want to smirk (and look away). And given the fact that she whines about everything when she isn't pining away for Jack, it didn't make me want to like Audrey as a character. So to cut a long story short, I didn't think Dana Hill made a good Audrey. Jason Lively, however, almost stole the show from Chevy a few times! His "Some Like It Hot" dream sequence was simply a laugh riot (though part of me was laughing at how dated it was, too; if I remember correctly, European Vacation was made around 1985 or so), but watching Rusty's attempts at picking up women all across Europe was simply priceless! The burn he received atop the Eiffel Tower (of all places) was something of a downer, but it was more than made up for by that blond Bavarian girl! Even Ellen herself had a few "sexy" scenes . . . and will forever be remembered as "The Wet Hot Wife" across Europe, courtesy of Clark's forgetfulness.

The cameos in European Vacation were rather unexpected, though not at all unwelcome. I recognized a few old-school British actors during the London sequences, in particular Ballard Berkeley—but the real treat came with the recurring appearances of Eric Idle, whom we all remember from the Monty Python troop. (And I simultaneously laughed and groaned when he proclaimed to Clark, "It's just a flesh wound!" after his bicycle collides with Clark's car.) I thought I recognized the old relative that Clark and his family mistakenly visit in Germany, but I can't for the life of me think of where I might have seen him. Oh, well.

I thought the opening credits were very original in their presentation: every character's passport being stamped with their respective actor's name, to the tunes of the original Vacation's "Holiday Road." I think this was also the last Vacation movie to play the song "Holiday Road"; makes sense, when you consider that Christmas Vacation wasn't necessarily a roadtrip movie but a vacation in the holiday/time-off-work sense.

The plot was consistent enough to keep me engaged throughout all the countries the Griswolds wreaked havoc on, though I thought the whole "kidnapping" bit at the end was a bit unnecessary. I can't quite explain why, but I just don't think it added very much to the story. I can't speak to the authenticity of European Vacation, being that I've only been to Europe once before. Two years ago I visited Germany for a week, and it was quite a fun and worldly experience! I stayed largely in the northern part of Germany, though, never getting down into Bavaria, so I didn't have the same experience that Clark and his family did (though maybe the Griswolds should have gone to a soccer game in Germany like I did; I can only imagine what kind of mayhem Clark and his family would have unleashed there!).

In comparison to the other Vacation movies, I'd put Christmas Vacation ahead of this one. Though I'd have to watch the original Vacation again to be fair (and before you even ask, no, I don't count Vegas Vacation as a legitimate entry into the series, much like I don't take The Godfather, Part III seriously). But I nevertheless give European Vacation a 7, and I don't think I can end this review without showing this infamous video clip.

Musings from a DC walkabout

I took a walk through DC this afternoon—a wholly unexpected walk, I might add. After running several errands this morning and enjoying this beautiful day in the process, I was overcome by a powerful urge to stay outside in this beautiful weather rather than seclude myself inside my air-conditioned apartment. Yes, it was 90 degrees out, but there was more than enough breeze to keep the heat at a comfortable level, and I ended up walking the entire length of the National Mall. I actually didn't set out to walk that distance; I just kept walking and walking and walking until I couldn't walk anymore. But that long walk gave me a lot of time to think, and two major points kept running through my head (three, if you count me constantly berating myself for forgetting my camera).

Eastern Market

I originally set out to just visit Eastern Market this afternoon, since it's been close to three months since my last visit. I was actually a bit nervous on approaching Eastern Market, since I haven't seen the building since the fire back in April. I had seen several pictures of the south building charred and windows boarded up, but today, the brick front was still red, and the boarded windows were splashed with decorative paintings—as if to say, "That fire hasn't taken the life out of this building or this flea market!"

And for a Sunday afternoon, the flea market was just bustling! Seriously, it did my heart such good to see all the stands up in tents along 7th Street (obviously displaced from their previous indoor stands) and the patrons out and about, bringing continued life to this local landmark as it rebuilds into the pillar of this community that it once was.

I was tempted by all the print and painting tents (I particularly love photos of the DC landscape), but the only purchase I made was at my now-customary stop: Murky Coffee. Yes, I am that crazy that I'll drink a cup of hot coffee on a 90-degree day. Trust me on this—Murky Coffee is the coffee you don't say no to!

DC Escalator Etiquette

This is a constant issue locally, because the unspoken, unwritten, but commonly-understood prerogative of escalator conduct in the Washington area is "walk to the left, stand to the right." I say this is a constant issue because nobody anywhere, particularly Metro, posts signs that actually state this rule. Thus, we have people on escalators, mostly in malls and on Metro, who stand to the left when they don't even know they should move to the right—thus creating conflict between those who obey the rule and those who don't know it.

As a general rule, I stay on the left and walk up the escalator steps, but when I arrived at the Eastern Market Metro stop this afternoon, I saw a few people standing to the left, and decided to just stay on the right. A few people did walk up on the left, and one older couple in front of me (the man and woman were standing abreast) politely moved out of the way to let those walking up the left side pass. The old man then turned to me and said, in a you-learn-something-new-every-day voice, "I didn't realize the rules of the road applied to the escalators."

I smiled at him, and explained the unspoken rule of DC escalator etiquette—walk to the left, stand to the right. It made perfect sense to him, and knowing that it's an unspoken rule I think put him a little at ease (i.e., he probably felt a little less apprehensive about moving over to the right), but he did make one point that so many of us have been harping on for years: they should make the unwritten rule written, so that way locals and tourists alike will know how to conduct themselves properly on the escalators!

Talking with that old man today made me feel a little better about the tourists who come here, because it showed how non-locals are willing to adhere to local customs . . . as long as they're made aware of them!!! I think I'll make note of this in the Dr. Gridlock and Marc Fisher chats next week.

The dilemma that is MASN

As I sit here watching the Nats-Blue Jays game on UPN 20, I can't help but think of how much I dislike MASN, and what kind of conflict it stirs in me. It goes without saying that anyone in the Washington regions despises Peter Angelos for doing his damndest to keep a team out of Washington for so long, simply because he wanted to maintain a Orioles monopoly within the region (damn that anti-trust exemption to hell!), not to mention his general condescension towards Nats fans in general (think his "there are no baseball fans in DC" schtick).

And I know it's old news, but it really does turn my stomach to remember how MLB caved to his demands to retain the TV rights to the entire DC/Baltimore region. I mean, c'mon—is one team owning the TV rights to another team not the very definition of "conflict of interest"??? And they can spare me that rhetoric of Angelos paying the Lerners a respectable and fair sum to air the Nats games. I'm sorry, but there's nothing anyone can say that will convince me that the owner of the Baltimore Orioles, the man who fought heaven and earth to keep a team out of Washington, is in any way entitled to profit from the presence of a team in Washington.

Having said all that . . . I still find myself somehow happy that I can sit in the comfort of my own living room and watch a Nationals game on TV every night! Somehow, enough time has passed for me to forget that this TV deal is corrupt and that MASN is the brainchild of politics, intimidation, cowardice, and good-old-boy bullshit.

And as I sit here watching the Nats try to pull it together against the Blue Jays . . . it might be best for Nats fans to remember the price we're paying (literally!) to see the games on TV—particularly the next time you pay your Comcast bill.

Bang zoom for the sweep!!!

Today started out as a pretty rotten day for me, but tonight I go to bed a happy man knowing that the Nats swept the Orioles of Baltimore—yes, Baltimore!!! Despite their not putting the name of the city on the uniforms, the Orioles belong in Baltimore and not in Washington! They have their team, we have our team.

Okay, despite that unexpected rant, I'm having a mental picture of Peter Angelos sitting in a smoking jacket inside a very lonely and very empty mansion, brooding angrily into the fireplace whilst he swirls his glass of brandy in bitter defeat—isolated from all by his contempt for the baseball fans in Washington that supposedly don't exist.

The new Fletch?

IMDb reports that Joshua Jackson, best known as Pacey from his days on Dawson's Creek, has apparently landed the role of Fletch in the upcoming adaptation of Fletch Won.

Few may know this, but Fletch didn't actually begin with the 1985 Chevy Chase movie. Fletch was originally a novel that turned into a series of like 9 or 10 books by Gregory McDonald (and Fletch Lives wasn't part of that series of novels, either; it was an original screenplay based on the characters). Having read the Fletch books a long time ago (i.e., middle school) and being a big fan of the Chevy Chase film, I must admit to being surprised when I first got wind of Kevin Smith's desire to make Fletch Won a few years back. Though that surprise eventually gave way to a reality check on my part, because I realized that Fletch Won would probably remain more true to the original Gregory McDonald stories than the Chevy Chase movies did.

In all truthfulness, the movie adaptation of Chevy Chase's Fletch was maybe only 50% faithful to the original novel. The basic premise of the story remained the same, but in accordance with Hollywood tradition, many liberties were taken with its big-screen adaptation. In the Chevy Chase film, Fletch was more of a fun-loving character, whereas in the books, he was kind of a slacker and a bum—but he also happened to be an excellent investigative journalist. Having gotten used to Chevy Chase as Fletch, it might be a bit of a shocker to see Joshua Jackson portray the character as he was originally conceived by Gregory McDonald, but that's not a criticism of Joshua Jackson as an actor! It's merely an observation about how people grow accustomed to things and have to readjust to something entirely new—sort of like how audiences had to rethink their preconceptions of James Bond when Casino Royale was released.

Some Fletch purists might be disappointed that Chevy Chase won't resume the title role, but if Fletch Won is going to remain true to the original novel, Fletch was a much younger man in this installment, so it makes sense to have Joshua Jackson take on the role of Fletch. The only part where I might feel disappointment, though, is the fact that Kevin Smith isn't directing; Steve Pink is purportedly going to helm this picture.

A close call

A quick double-play gave the Nats a beautiful but nail-biting victory over the Orioles tonight—one up in enemy territory, no less!

I actually missed much of the game, though I caught glimpses of it at Crystal City Sports Pub (where I was attending a Penn State board meeting). I was able to watch the last two innings from the comfort of my living room couch later in the evening, and actually didn't sweat it too much when the Orioles snagged a solo homer in the bottom of the 9th. I was starting to sweat, though, when we allowed two men on base from bad pitching—possibly giving the O's a chance to tie up the game. But a well-fielded double play from Christian Guzman (God, I never thought I'd utter those words!) quickly shot those chances down, thus ushering the Nats to a 7-4 victory.

And the fact that it all took place in Peter Angelos's front yard makes this victory even sweeter.

June birthdays

June 13: Hold onto your hats, folks! My grandfather turns 90 this year—and he's still kickin'! What a ride this fella's had!


June 14: Let us all wave our Terrible Towels in honor of Sam's birthday! Sadly, I couldn't find a photo to post, but I offer up this video clip instead. (And congratulations on your new home in Ellicott City!)



June 15: A mere two days after one grandfather turns 90, my other grandfather adds another year of wisdom to his birthday cake! One of these days, I want this man to make me a martini. I have it on good authority that his are the best ever!

A very discouraging Metro ride (revisited)

Following up my previous post on recent Metro service, I e-mailed Metro outlining my grievance, and so far I have only received the standard reply, as below.

Thank you for taking the time to complete Metro's online Customer Comment Form. Metro appreciates hearing from customers, because it helps us continue to improve our services. We will review the information you provided and route it for appropriate action.

Today I posted the same story on the Post's Dr. Gridlock chat.

Arlington, Va.: In 7 years of riding Metro, I had my first really unpleasant Metro experience last week (yes, I know it's hard to believe I went this long with a good Metro experience, but I did!).

The bad experience I point to was TWICE having to wait up to 40 minutes for a Yellow Line train, neither time with any communication from Metro officials about why everyone on the platform was being made to wait.

The first 40-minute wait was after a Nationals game last Wednesday--40 minutes wherein two Green Line trains serviced L'Enfant Plaza, as well as one out-of-service train, but a Yellow train conspicuously absent. And I have never EVER had to wait more than 15-20 minutes for a train, even during off-peak hours.

The second wait was this past Saturday (though in all fairness, it was a half hour before ANY train went through Pentagon City, be it Yellow or Blue).

What bothers me is the COMBINATION of long train delays with the lack of communication from Metro officials. If there is going to be a delay on the Metro, for any reason, it would be greatly helpful to the customers on the platform to know why they're being made to wait. For me, at least, knowing why makes it a little more bearable.

Dr. Gridlock: That shouldn't have happened to you. I can't imagine any excuse for it. I'm wondering what the station's electronic message boards said during those times.

The electronic message board, after the Nats game, didn't display any Yellow Line information whatsoever. On Saturday, it just displayed the upcoming Yellow and Blue trains, but didn't post any wait time at all (which I usually interpret as Metro not knowing how long it'll be before the next train).

At this point, I'm not really anticipating any further responses from Metro, but I'm just crossing my fingers that service will improve again in the future.

No Connery for Indy 4

It's official: Sean Connery will not be returning for Indy 4. Connery made the announcement himself recently, but still remained enthusiatic about the newest Indy installment. I will admit, it would have been fun to see Sir Sean team up with Harrison Ford again, because the two made an amazing and quite enjoyable father/son pair in The Last Crusade, but it actually makes good sense that Connery not reprise his role—simply because, if the story takes place in, say, the late 1940s, his character Henry Jones, Sr. will be pretty damn old! And bear in mind, Harrison Ford himself is no spring chicken, either.

But in the final analysis, I'm content to simply revisit The Last Crusade to see Harrison Ford and Sean Connery in action together.

Now I've seen everything (IV)

The latest entry in the ongoing series of puzzling lawsuits—though I don't really see a downside to this particular complaint! . . . And evidently, neither did he.

A very discouraging Metro ride

Last night I had a rather frustrating Metro ride home from the Nats game. I left RFK in the 8th inning after Pittsburgh tied the game at 5, and boarded an Orange Line train at Stadium-Armory. At L'Enfant Plaza, I normally switch over to the Yellow Line to Pentagon City, usually waiting no more than 10 or 12 minutes for a train at that hour.

Last night, I waited for close to 40 minutes for a Yellow train. And that is just unacceptable, plain and simple. I've been riding the Metro subway system for 7 years now, and have rarely encountered a delay as long as this—especially after a sporting event downtown. And during that 40-minute wait, two Green Line trains serviced L'Enfant, as did one train that was out of service.

I wrote an e-mail to Metro outlining this issue, but I'm not really crossing my fingers for a response. Hopefully, though, this kind of long delay will be avoided in the future—or if one is to occur, hopefully Metro will employ better communication between the station managers and the passengers on the platform. Because the last thing Metro needs is a platform full of pissed-off customers.

Clerks

Every filmmaker has to start somewhere. Steven Spielberg had Amblin. George Lucas had THX 1138. Darren Aronofsky had Pi. Kevin Smith? He had Clerks—the black-and-white, low-budget indie film that quickly became something of a cult classic! I was first introduced to Clerks during my freshman year at Penn State, when I met up with some friends of friends to watch this black-and-white film that I'd never even heard of . . . and I liked it so much that about a year later, as a broke college sophomore, Clerks had the distinction of being the first VHS tape I bought in college (yes, this was back during a time when DVDs were only viewed as a novelty, rather than the medium of choice, on the home video market).

The target audience for Clerks is basically those in their early 20s who work minimum-wage, customer-service jobs—i.e., those jobs that essentially serve as our one meager means of income during our college years. Having first watched this during college and while working summers at a grocery store, I could relate to various aspects of this movie a bit too well. As anyone who's worked a day in customer service of any kind will tell you, some customers are just plain assholes . . . and Clerks pokes fun at this very fact in some outrageous, yet totally human ways.

Clerks tells the story of Dante Hicks, as played by Brian O'Halloran. He's 22 years old, still lives at home, doesn't really go to school, and spends his days working at the Quick-Stop Convenience Store—Dante's quote-unquote inferno, as it were, since he hates every minute of that store. But despite his hatred of it, he also has no motivation to do anything else with his life, to change his life for the better. So he just wallows away in his misery at Quick-Stop. The yin to Dante's yang, however (or should I say, "the comedian to Dante's straightman"?), comes in the form of his best friend/worst enemy, Randal Graves (Jeff Anderson)—the very definition of "slacker." Randal works at the neighboring RST Video, where he could care less about the customers; rather, he gets his kicks insulting them at every turn. Frequently closing up the video store on a whim (whether to go rent movies elsewhere or attend the random funeral), Randal is essentially Dante's confidant and only company during the workday.

On this particular day, though, everything that possibly could go wrong does, courtesy of the odd assortment of customers who come into the store: the guidance counselor who examines all the eggs for perfection, the personal trainer who just so happened to sleep with Dante's ex when they dated during high school, the anti-smoking chewing gum salesman, a man with a Pringles can stuck to his hand, the Russian heavy metal singer, stoners Jay and Silent Bob who hang out in front of the stores all day, or the old man who mysteriously disappears into the bathroom . . . and if that's not enough to deal with, Dante is suddenly faced with a girlfriend dilemma: Caitlin, his cheating ex-high school sweetheart, now returns to town with news of her pending engagement to an Asian design major. Dante, having never really gotten over Caitlin despite his current seven-month relationship with caring, devoted Veronica, now starts to entertain thoughts of getting back together with Caitlin. Sounds like enough to deal with for one workday, right?

No??? Okay, then let's add in a hockey game on the roof of the store, and an angry crowd pelting Dante with cigarettes.

The dialogue I found rather clever, though at times maybe a little too scripted. But that doesn't detract from the uniqueness of the conversations that take place: like Randal's feelings on Star Wars and personal politics.


Or Dante and Veronica's thoughts on sex (though why they waited seven months into their relationship to ask about each other's sexual history is a little puzzling).


Being that this was a low-budget indie film, various elements of Clerks really do highlight this nature—the most prominent being its black-and-white color scheme. Though the black-and-whiteness doesn't by any means detract from the film's appeal! In fact, it actually enhances it—largely because, at least in the early to mid-'90s, you didn't see many (if any) black-and-white films coming to the theaters. The other low-budget giveaway was the actors taking on numerous roles, like producer Scott Mosier showing up at least twice in the film, first as the spaced-out Willem and then as the angry hockey-playing customer, or Walt Flanagan as the egg-scrutinizing guidance counselor followed by the sexually-offended customer. Though Kevin Smith picked his music well! Scored to a soundtrack that mostly consisted of '80s and '90s rock music, the musical selections highlighted their respective scenes quite well!

I have to say, also, that Kevin Smith really knew what he was doing when he cast this picture. Everyone fit their roles beautifully, and Dante and Randal have since become legend in the View Askewniverse! And Silent Bob's one or two lines have become eagerly-anticipated moments in nearly all of Kevin Smith's follow-up films (or at least those that feature Jay and Silent Bob). And am I the only one who thinks that Silent Bob is a great dancer? My only real gripe is that Marilyn Ghigliotti, who played Veronica, could be a bit grating at times.

As I said before, anyone who's worked in customer service will find something to relate to in Clerks. For my part, I never played hockey on the roof of my old grocery store, nor have I ever encountered the milk-maids . . . though I have come across a few customers I'd have liked to spit water at. Kevin Smith may have created a semi-autobiographical account of his days as a convenience store clerk, but his pain is something we've all felt already—and I commend his vision for turning that pain into something hilarious, memorable, and personal. That said, I give Clerks a full 10 . . . though wouldn't it be more appropriate to give it a score of 37?

Hometown teams

It's not very often I see the Post reporting about anything from my hometown area, but it's been happening more and more lately, what with two DC-affiliated minor league sports franchises nestled up in Harrisburg: the Harrisburg Senators (affiliated with the Washington Nationals) and the Hershey Bears (affiliated with the Washington Capitals).

And in today's edition, the Post examined the Hershey Bears' pursuit of the American Hockey League title.

When I was in PA over Memorial Day weekend, I got to listen to some of the Bears game on the radio, and I realized that a) I haven't been to a Bears game in probably 10 years or more, and b) I still haven't been to the Giant Center yet—and I think the place has been open for maybe 7 years now. Growing up, I fondly remember watching Bears games (and other events) at the Hershey Park Arena—a venue that was in major need of updating, but still had lots of character. I can still remember those insanely steep steps leading up to the seats. Maybe one day soon, though (like next season), I can make it to a Bears game at the Giant Center.

A tale of two sci-fi shows

A challenge was issued recently to respond to an age-old question of our existence: is Star Trek better than Star Wars? I know many people who will emphatically say no, firmly asserting that Star Wars is the superior of the two—which leaves me in a very notable "cheese stands alone" mode, for I must confess a strong preference of Star Trek over Star Wars.

You might say I've been a lifelong Trekker, having grown a fondness for the original Star Trek series at an early age. Though as the years went by, I found myself migrating to Star Trek: The Next Generation more and more, and enjoying that series far more than the original—though I can't quite pinpoint why, because a lot of the character templates remained the same (free-thinking captain, straightman first officer, capable chief engineer, etc.). And as is inevitable for so many TV franchises, spinoffs became abundant. Deep Space Nine initially had to grow on me, but it quickly moved up alongside The Next Generation in terms of compelling storylines and intriguing characters. Voyager I had to make myself watch, but for some reason, that one didn't grow on me as much as NextGen or DS9 did.

Some will say that Star Wars has so much more to offer, though, like swash-buckling light-saber battles and legendary villains like Darth Vader. I don't argue these points, but in my case, they don't appeal to me in the same way that Star Trek does. I guess that's because Star Trek works from a philosophical/intellectual basis, whereas Star Wars is more of an action movie franchise. Coming from a more cultured background, the philosophical, ethical, and intellectual aspects of Star Trek appeal to me more—though by the same token, that's not to say I don't enjoy a good action movie. God knows how much I love crime movies like Heat and The Godfather, or just a mindless action movie like Lethal Weapon and Die Hard. But in terms of sci-fi, the action of Star Wars doesn't grip me like it does so many others.

One benefit Star Trek has over Star Wars is that its creator isn't constantly revisiting the series and meddling with "improving" upon it with newer special effects—which end up angering the fan base who don't want the originals tinkered with in any way, shape, or form. I was going to mention how Star Trek hasn't done any prequels, but then I remembered the upcoming Star Trek XI, which supposedly takes place when Kirk and McCoy are young and training at Starfleet Academy. When it comes to the Star Wars prequels, though, I honestly think that George Lucas was doomed from the start, because the fan following for the original three installments was so strong that, by default, the bar for future projects was set too high. Plus, George Lucas is a director whose talent has sadly declined over the years—or more accurately, his best cinematic works came early in his career. Just take a look at American Graffiti. Long before he even penned the words, "A long time ago in a galaxy far far away," Lucas directed this fantastic film that examined pre-Vietnam '60s youth: just a bunch of friends cruising around downtown each night, hooking up with other friends just cruising the streets after dark. A truly fantastic movie that came from George Lucas's heart. The original Star Wars came from this period, which is probably one reason it premiered so well in 1977.

But when Lucas unveiled The Phantom Menace in 1999, too many years had passed since the original trilogy, and naturally the fans were expecting something so much grander. In a nutshell, the original trilogy was visionary, whereas the prequels were good intentions gone bad, suffering from bad acting (to wit, Hayden Christensen), bad dialogue, and at times, bad scriptwriting. During Episode III, which I first watched at the Drafthouse, it was almost painful to watch a fabulous actress like Natalie Portman have to deliver such ham-handed lines like, "Anakin, you're breaking my heart!" (On a somewhat comedic note, on IGN's DVD review for Closer, there's a caption underneath one of Natalie's pictures, in reference to Lucas, that I'm sure a great many people—Star Wars fans included—would agree with.)

Given the overall negative reaction Star Wars fans had with the second trilogy (never mind Jar-Jar Binks!), I have to wonder if the only thing Star Wars fans really enjoyed was the opening John Williams fanfare followed by the textual prologue running across the screen.

In terms of the fan base, I would honestly have to say that both are a little too maniacal. I have yet to actually attend a Star Trek convention, but having stood in line at Uptown for the opening night viewing of Attack of the Clones, I guess I shouldn't have been surprised by all the wookie costumes, Princess Leia haircuts, or Storm Trooper outfits. (Though let me state for the record, I actually did enjoy Attack of the Clones, whereas I think the entire Star Wars-viewing universe hated it.)

As to the Star Trek movies . . . well, maybe I should do a brief examination of each one (sort of a mini-review, I guess).

• Star Trek: The Motion Picture: Released in 1979, 12 years after the completion of the original series, Star Trek came to the big screen with this tale of a gigantic cloud floating through space directly for Earth, destroying anything and everything in its path. And who should come to the rescue but Captain James T. Kirk and crew, aboard a brand-new starship Enterprise. This film clearly catered to the legions of Star Trek fans who had been calling repeatedly for a big-screen film, and oh, does it tease them at times! Take the long shots that dragged over the Enterprise while in Spacedock, while firmly asserting Jerry Goldsmith's now-trademark score. I can't imagine how it must have been in the theaters to see the new Enterprise silhouetted, teased, then finally brought into full view. Or see Spock's entrance onto the Enterprise for the first time since the original series. If I have one complaint about this film, though, it's that it feels campy at times.



• Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: Invariably, this always draws a comparison to Moby Dick, and has been lauded as being the best Star Trek movie ever. Oddly enough, this one never really did much for me, even though it does have some pretty amazing sequences—such as the blind chase of two starships through a nebula, bringing to mind a kind of submarine chase in outer space. To this day, I'm still not sure who I prefer in the role of Saavik—Kirstie Alley or Robin Curtis. But even though Khan was a remarkable villain, I've always wondered how they came to choose him as the central villain for this installment. I say this because he was one of many villains from the original series, which leads me to wonder if they just arbitrarily chose him, or if he really was the most famous Kirk-antagonist. As to Spock's death, I will admit, even all these years later, it's still hard watching him die. I mean, I know to expect it each time I see the film, but somehow it still tugs at my heart to watch it.



• Star Trek III: The Search for Spock: The Star Trek franchise often is falsely branded with the following notion—the even-numbered installments are good, and the odd-numbered installments are bad. I disagree, pointing to The Search for Spock as the proof in the pudding. This is actually one of my favorites, as it showcases the Enterprise crew essentially becoming outlaws in order to save their beloved comrade Spock. Of equal importance is the supporting cast, like Judith Anderson's cameo as the Vulcan high priestess, Mark Lenard's resurrection (no pun intended) of the character Sarek (Spock's wise but estranged father), and most importantly, Christopher Lloyd as probably the best Klingon ever—equaling and damn near rivaling Michael Dorn's Worf from The Next Generation. Even all these years later, it still seems like an odd casting choice to see the man who played Professor Plum and Doc Brown don Klingon attire, but here he's downright phenomenal as Kruge!



• Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home: This entry was more lighthearted and comedic than anything else, which is probably what draws me back to it over and over. Though it does attempt to be serious, what with the probe's travelling to Earth and vaporizing its oceans. But to see Kirk and company travel back in time to 1986 San Francisco, being a fish out of water (no pun intended) in so many ways, is just gut-busting hilarious. Just the sight of Spock walking the streets of San Francisco wearing nothing but a white robe and covering his pointed ears with a headband is priceless—as are the constant "colorful metaphors" that Spock can't seem to get a grasp on. I've often thought that this would have been a good ending point for the films, because it provided adequate closure on many fronts, but an ending wasn't quite in the cards yet.



• Star Trek V: The Final Frontier: Reaction to this was probably as hostile as Star Wars fans reacting to Jar-Jar Binks. People weren't necessarily calling for Bill Shatner's head afterward, but common thought concluded that he made this installment mostly to placate his own ego (since Leonard Nimoy directed the previous two and highly-successful installments). I personally thought V was a decent and enjoyable film, though not necessarily a vital entry into the Star Trek canon. The premise was more daring than usual—the Enterprise crew essentially searching for God at the center of the universe—but I think the ending left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths, thinking that it just ended up being a big-screen TV episode. Though that's not to say that V didn't have good points! I personally thought the soundtrack here was one of the best, and the visuals and camerawork were equally as good as any of the other films.



• Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country: The swan song for the original crew—and the most hotly-anticipated film after the bust that was Star Trek V. Here, Kirk and crew are on the verge of retirement, but suddenly the Klingons need to negotiate peace because suddenly their planet is dying. But things aren't necessarily that simple, what with competing political interests and various powers-that-be somewhat uneasy at the prospect of peace. When this came out in 1991, endless comparisons were drawn to the recent fall of Communism and the collapse of the Soviet Union. A valid comparison, I admit, if somewhat dated. But when the final scenes played out and the credits started to roll, I as a Star Trek fan felt complete, like a proper sendoff had been given to the cast and crew of the original Enterprise. The circle was now closed . . . or so we thought.



• Star Trek: Generations: This eagerly-anticipated installment still garners mixed reactions from Trekkers, mostly because by this time Bill Shatner had uttered his infamous "Get a life" on Saturday Night Live—and because expectations were probably a bit higher for this film because it featured the long-awaited reunion of two Enterprise captains from different generations. I, for one, loved it. And Malcolm McDowell, whom we may remember (in true Troy McClure style) from such other villainous roles as Alex in A Clockwork Orange, provided a spectacular villain opposite both Kirk and Picard. In my humble opinion, this was a fantastic passing-of-the-torch from one Enterprise captain to another.



• Star Trek: First Contact: Easily my favorite NextGen movie. This had to be the darkest, most captivating entry into the Star Trek movie canon—especially as Picard loses perspective and becomes hellbent on getting revenge with the Borg. James Cromwell was a treat to watch as the drunken loser who learns he's the father of humankind in the future, and Alfre Woodard was downright fantastic as his sidekick who's brave enough to call out Picard when he's crossed the line. But the one who really steals the show is Alice Krige as the Borg Queen. She's cold, calculating, manipulative, dangerously seductive, and I will go so far as to say she deserved an Oscar nomination.



• Star Trek: Insurrection: If there's any Star Trek movie that I have a hard time swallowing, it's this one—for the simple fact that, for once, the crew of the Enterprise is taking a "moral stand," and naturally they're correct in their moral stand of preventing the removal of a race from their "fountain of youth" planet. I've grown very weary of "moral stand" movies, not because they're a dime a dozen, but because in real life, issues are never as black and white as they seem.



• Star Trek: Nemesis: This was originally supposed to be the final chapter of the NextGen crew, as well as the final Star Trek movie overall. But future prequel notwithstanding, I found great enjoyment in Nemesis! It's much darker than any of the previous movies from both the original series or NextGen (save maybe for First Contact), which is one of the reasons I find it so gripping! Some pan this for trying to be like Wrath of Khan (insofar as Data's death scene and possible resurrection), but I found Nemesis to be very unique, as it asks the question, "What do you do when the enemy might be yourself?"

So, all that being said, do I agree with the premise that a "bad Star Wars movie is better than all but one of the Star Trek movies"? I do not. Star Trek has had its fair share of bad movies, as has Star Wars, but if given the choice, I'd watch the bad Star Trek movie first. Not much of a defense, I admit, but it's just a matter of preference. And for me, that preference is Star Trek.

Now I've seen everything (III)

It's times like this I wish I had a camera phone, because if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, I might not have believed it.

This morning while on my way to work, something caught my eye by the bus shelter outside the Pentagon City Metro station: from a distance, it looked like a poster of R2-D2, but when I got closer, I noticed that it was, in fact, a miniature mailbox (one of those blue ones you find outside the post office) painted with the popular Star Wars character! In other words, the entire mailbox was R2-D2.

What can I say, except maybe someone really got into the 30th anniversary of Star Wars?