Review of 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (2007) by Janice : — 02 Aug 2008

With the Hall of Fame Game on tonight, NFL season is upon us. Those last six months freakin' flew by!

First, let's talk Favre. As sure as I am you're sick of seeing this drama all over ESPN, I figure as a Packers fan I gotta address this in some way.

More than a few friends have questioned my sanity because I've more or less sided with the Packers and not Favre. "He just wants to play," comes the retort. "He was one bad pass from the Super Bowl and had one of his best years!" "If you don't want him to play against you in Minnesota or Chicago, then you obviously think he's still a dangerous player, so why not bring him back?".

All good points. Sound and logical reasoning behind them all. The problem is the future. Favre has held the Packers' future hostage for the last 5 years, through no real fault of his own until this past off-season. The team can't really move on until Favre does, and when he decided to retire (and then hem and haw once again in April before deciding to stay retired before deciding to unretire at the end of June) the team had to do what it's needed to do. And they were in a decent position to do so, since they had a quarterback waiting on the bench with some serious potential. They had moved on. And Brett decided to drag them back kicking and screaming, future be damned.

We all know Favre will leave again, whether it's after this season or the next. And that's what frustrates me as a fan. The moment I had been dreading had come, I dealt with it, and prepared to root for Rodgers and hope for a Super Bowl run.

Let me put it in another way: Imagine the Packers and Favre were a couple in a serious relationship. Favre ends the relationship, says he's unsatisfied, tired and can't commit anymore. While sad, the Packers accept and begin the healing process. "We'll always think fondly of the good times we had," they say. A few weeks later, Favre calls up and wants to get back together. The Packers are willing to let him back in their lives and welcome him back with open arms. Then he leaves again. After this second time, a young guy comes along to take Favre's place. He shows some promise and while he's not Favre, no one ever will be. They've spent some serious time together and are looking forward to the future together. Then comes a text message: "I stll luv u. Tk me bk?".

So, there. Hopefully that clarifies.

-------------------------.

While I would prefer Favre to stay retired, him coming back and being allowed to compete for the starting job is quite acceptable. I really don't think Favre wanted to play anywhere else but Green Bay. Yes, there were talks about Minnesota, but I think that was a bluff on his part and the Packers called it when they initiated trade talks with them and the Bears. Where Favre acted like a total douche was when two teams DID show an interest, Bucs and Jets, he didn't even bother to speak to them. Total dick move.

So now Rodgers gets to compete against the legend himself. Ryan Grant has finally been put under a long term deal. Things are calming down in Titletown.

----------------------.

Thoughts on the NFC North:

The division will come down between the Vikes and the Pack, and doing my best to be unbiased, I don't see Tavaris Jackson doing it in Minnesota. So teams will focus solely on Adrian Peterson and dare the Vikings to throw. In their favor, Peterson is no doubt a game breaker and will win a few games, with a killer defense picking up a few others.

I won't make a difference who QBs the Packers (ever think you'd read that?). If Rodgers wins the job in camp, he beat Brett Favre. If Favre wins, well... he's Brett Favre. The offense added some depth and competition in the draft, as did the defense. I hate that Ted Thompson doesn't work free agency a bit more aggressively, but I can't argue with his results thus far. Both units only got better as the year went on, and I can't see that changing much. Hopefully the QB controversy doesn't distract.

I don't see either team winning the division decisively, and I have to give the edge to the Packers.

The Bears and Lions did nothing of note in the offseason, and will do nothing of note during the regular season.

I predict:

1. Packers (12-4).

2. Vikings (11-5).

3. Lions (7-9).

4. Bears (6-10).

I can't say I know as much about the other divisions as I do the NFC North, but I know enough to take a stab at the playoff teams:

NFC North: Packers, Vikings.

NFC East: Dallas, Redskins - Yep. No Giants.

NFC South: Saints - improved D and Shockey on offense - should be a dangerous team.

NFC West: Seahawks - I was tempted to pick the sleeper favorite Cardinals... but then I remembered it's the fuckin' Cardinals.

AFC North: Steelers, Browns.

AFC East: Patriots.

AFC South: Jaguars, Colts - Yeah, I have a feeling the Jags will win the division.

AFC West: Chargers, Raiders - Raiders are my "Cinderella" pick. They've spent a lot to load up on some serious talent. I don't much like JaMarcus Russell, but McFadden is gonna light some people up and they've improved their D.

Super Bowl XLIII: Packers over Patriots. Hey, a man can dream, right?

-----------------------------.

So, have you heard that the state of New York faces a budget short fall of about $930 million? You see, they were banking on collecting taxes on those massive bonuses that those Wall Street millionaires have been racking in over the years. Now, suddenly, with those firms taking hits, not paying as lucrative bonuses and laying people off, the state of NY is gonna have to cut some programs.

Great planning. Terrific. Almost as great as the Feds.

"Hey, we're short on cash. Maybe we shouldn't spend so much.".

"Are you kidding? Just raise the taxes on the rich. This way, we get our money and all the regular folks will think we're being fair and look after the little guy. Win-win!".

-----------------------------.

I saw [i]The Dark Knight[/i] for the thrid time on Saturday. So many little things I find to appreciate about it. This time it was the cinematography. Wally Pfister did a great job painting that movie in darkness, and the cold color palette gave the whole movie a great urban feel. It also made that burning fire truck all the more surreal and ominous.

I also noticed Heath Ledger in a long shot, standing in formation before he attempts to shoot the mayor. Great attention to detail.

Talking box office is on its face silly if you aren't a Hollywood executive, but even a casual movie fan has to find it amazing the kind of numbers the movie is pulling. It was number one again, edging out the new Mummy movie. Conceivably the movie [i]should[/i] hit the $400 million mark on Monday. If not it definitely will hit it on Tuesday. So, worst case, the movie hits that point after 19 days. [i]Shrek 2[/i] is currently the fastest movie to hit that threshold, and it did it in... 43 days.

I don't think it will hit [i]Titanic[/i] numbers. It's a different era, even though it's merely 10 years later. There were no DVDs then, and [i]Titanic[/i] was released in December with absolutely no competition until mid-February and the release of [i]The Wedding Singer.[/i] And even if it does, ticket prices mean that [i]The Dark Knight[/i] would have to do about $900 million to match [i]Titanic[/i]'s ticket sales, and $1.4 billion to touch [i]Gone With the Wind[/i], the true champ.

Batman has a [i]Star Wars[/i] movie and a Ben Stiller comedy in two weeks which are the biggest competition lurking. After that, it's a lame-looking [i]Death Race[/i] remake, a not-so-promising Vin Diesel vehicle (and I just realized I made a really, really stupid pun), and a wasteland called September and October.

Anyway...

-----------------------------.

I finally saw [i]Hellboy[/i]. I really couldn't tell you what the hell the movie was about (something with Rasputin and demons), but it sure as hell was interesting looking and pretty darn entertaining. Now I guess I need to get around to the sequel.

I also watched [i]4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days[/i]. It's one of those movies that I found absolutely great, but not sure I could sit through again. It's the story of a woman helping her friend get an illegal abortion while living in Communist Romania in the late 80s. All around them is the decay of a stagnant country which seems to operate by two means: bureaucracy and bribery. The movie never preaches or overtly takes a side on the abortion debate. It simply presents a situation which brilliantly leads to a tense 30-minute climax as we follow a regular woman go about breaking the law, and the biggest threat to the whole operation is her feelings of guilt. It's not a film for everyone, especially the ADD crowd as there are probably a dozen cuts the whole movie with little camera movement, and the fact the dialogue is Romanian with English subtitles. If that hasn't turned you off, well, go rent it.

----------------------.

Edouard? What kind of name is that? Thank God it hasn't become a hurricane. Yet. And when it does, which seems likely, watch gas jump about 15 cents as it makes it's crawl through the Gulf towards Texas...

Speaking of gas...

I have to find that post I made predicting gas prices. I want to see how close I was... Seems they've normalized, and barring a Cat 5 storm this summer in the Gulf, we should see $3.75-$4.00 be the norm from here on out. We've pretty much been willing to pay in that range, only cutting back as we crawl closer to 4 bucks.