Looking up this shit is fun. It's not like he's doing archival research on hunger relied programs in subsaharan Africa. So would it kill him to do a good job?PC Drunken Friar said:Jesus, he created a fictional action hero title belt! He's not writing the definitive book on action movies here.
Then you think he'd be able to do a better job at writing something readable then.PC Drunken Friar said:Jesus, he created a fictional action hero title belt! He's not writing the definitive book on action movies here.
Reverend said:Looking up this shit is fun. It's not like he's doing archival research on hunger relied programs in subsaharan Africa. So would it kill him to do a good job?
PC Drunken Friar said:Jesus, he created a fictional action hero title belt! He's not writing the definitive book on action movies here.
Arnold didn’t have to release anything after the historic Total Recall/Kindergarten Cop/Terminator 2 trifecta. He could have released a one-man movie called Arnold Puts on Sunscreen and grossed $100 million. And actually, that would have been a better idea than Last Action Hero... This wasn’t an apex, this was an a-fucking-pex. In two years, Arnold somehow crushed the science fiction, action comedy, summer blockbuster, three-boobed women, special-effects nerd-vana and “It’s not a toomah” corners.
joe dokes said:
Only the action hero was supposed to be fictional.
There is nothing wrong with saluting Steve McQueen or, say, liking Batman better than Superman. But he came *this* close to saying "I like Batman better because of his vulnerability to kryptonite and the way his alter ego treated that nasty editor J. Jonah Jameson."
IHateDaveKerpen said:
J. Jonah Jameson was Spider-Man's editor. Thank you.
EDIT: ...or was the point? IM SO CONFUSED
joe dokes said:
Look! Up in the sky! There goes my point! :colbert:
drleather2001 said:Bruce Lee really should have won for at least a year in the early 1970s.
I mean, for fuck's sake, he inspired a national martial arts craze in the U.S.!
And Danny Trejo and any other (non-white) guy not in a Hollywood movie with a budget over a $100 million dollars.drleather2001 said:Bruce Lee really should have won for at least a year in the early 1970s.
I mean, for fuck's sake, he inspired a national martial arts craze in the U.S.!
drleather2001 said:Bruce Lee really should have won for at least a year in the early 1970s.
I mean, for fuck's sake, he inspired a national martial arts craze in the U.S.!
Reverend said:
Bringing the concept and all it represents in terms of the strength of a people to America to inspire the Wu Tang Clan should alone be enough to warrant at least a mention.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:I have no problem with him making a list of action movies he likes and then telling us why he likes them. He built his entire empire on that kind of "analysis" and he can be good at it, when he wants to be. And I also don't expect him to have a academic understanding of every subgenre of the action flick, but he has to take other things into consideration when he's writing a piece like this or at least say, up front, "I'm sticking to what I've seen and what I liked. I understand there is a whole Asian form of action flicks that I don't know a ton about, but I'm writing about what I know."
However, that would mean that Simmons had to have a bit more self-awareness of himself and a bit more awareness of the world around him.
Which is something that he never, ever had. I remember him arguing with people back in his DC days that he never watched "The Simpsons" because "it's a cartoon and he doesn't like cartoons." If he can throw perhaps the most comedic transcendent show out the window because it's a "cartoon", it doesn't surprise me that he would say that Jackie Chan won his belt based on "Rush Hour 3" and not the dozens of better and more exciting flicks that he made overseas.
Also, he needed to stick to his rules more. I have no idea why Matt Damon isn't considered an action hero belt holder but Uma Thurman or Denzel Washington is.
All so true.NatetheGreat said:That column was unbelievably awful. And the thing is, its the sort of thing that really should be in his wheelhouse. This isn't "Bill Simmons went outside his comfort zone and it didn't work out." This is a fat pitch down the middle and he whiffed so badly it could cause an injury.
Its one thing to write a lazy, phoned in column where you blatantly don't do any research, don't make a single good point and contradict yourself repeatedly. Thousands of those are published every day. But most of them are least mercifully short. This felt fucking endless, and at a certain point I didn't even know why i was reading, apart from amazement out how bad it was.
Grantland has this column called HotSportsTakes, that basically intentionally publishes the worst possible sports columns (the one this week was a masterpiece http://grantland.com/the-triangle/hotsportstakes-does-andrew-wiggins-want-to-get-rich-or-get-better/). But the funny thing is, I'm pretty sure this column was unironically worse than any Hot Sports Takes ever. It was truly execrable garbage.
ifmanis5 said:All so true.
I'm hoping the reality is that he's outgrown this kind of crap and is ready to move on to something better. I hope he realizes this and pushes himself to become a better writer. If everyone around him at Grantland pats him on the back and tells him this was great then he is doomed to this kind of crap forever and he becomes the old guy at the club that everyone feels sorry for. At some point you need to graduate from this kind of thing. Maybe he needs an intervention?
Shelterdog said:
His range of interests is remarkably narrow for someone who runs a pop culture website. No Simpsons, no Coen brothers, doesn't like sci-fi, doesn't like fantasy (as he often says "I don't want to be in the forest"), no kung-fu movies, barely likes Westerns, thinks Paul Thomas Anderson is too artsty fartsy, he's infrequently mentions music and he's mentioned fiction rarely if at all, etc., etc.
:lol: Baby steps.drleather2001 said:Hey, while we're at it, maybe Adam Sandler will become the next Scorcese.
Reverend said:
The very fact that he says he doesn't like sci-fi should give us all pause.
Shelterdog said:
Well if you read his explanation as to why it makes perfect sense: only weird kids liked sci-fi at his school.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/050601&num=0
Q: In the "More Cowbell" update on 5/23, you sort of implied you hadn't yet seen the new Star Wars movie (which is understandable, having a new baby and all). I'm sure many readers are curious as to your thoughts, but I'm specifically wondering as to your thoughts about its impact on sports. How many kids, from 1977 to this week, shunned sports growing up, either as participants or observers, because they were watching "Empire" for the 50th time, or were playing with their action figures or were discussing script rumors on the Internet? Now that the series is finally over, will the youth return to sports in record numbers? Or will they just latch on to something equally as tragic?
– Adam Woodyard, Dallas
SG: It's tough for me to comment since I was the same kid who probably watched 1,000 hours of pro wrestling growing up. And I don't know if everyone's elementary school worked like mine did. But in my school, the kids who liked "Star Wars" didn't like sports, and vice-versa. There were no crossovers. I just remember being totally confused by the whole thing – they kind of kept to themselves, almost like cross-dressers in a penitentiary, and it was like they were talking another language. Nobody really bothered them. But after elementary school, I made at least 4-5 friends who were sports fans and loved "Star Wars." So I think it depends on the school.
I look at it this way: Everyone needs something growing up. For some kids, it's sports. For other kids, it's "Lord of the Rings," "Star Wars" and whatever goofy fantasy thing is out there where you get to watch something 20 times, dress up like the characters and say things like, "The movie is coming out in three weeks, wanna go to our local theater and wait in line with 250 other guys?" Again, since I count Superfly Snuka and Hulk Hogan as two of the 10 most influential heroes from my childhood, I'm in no position to judge.
(As for your question, "Will they just latch on to something equally as tragic?" – the answer is obviously, "Unquestionably.")
drleather2001 said:Right.
Simmons was born in 1969, so he was in elementary school and junior high from the time Star Wars first came out until ROTJ was released.
In other words, he was smack-dab in the prime Star Wars audience. I find it 100% implausible that the vast majority of kids that he went to school with weren't Star Wars fans on some level.
You're telling me that a sample of, say, 200, mostly white, middle class, 8-14 year olds between 1977 and 1983 had only a handful of "Star Wars" fans? That were ostracized on that basis? In elementary school?!?!?
My guy feeling is that Simmons was told by someone influential, probably his dad, early on that "Star Wars" was for nerds, and so he skipped out on the whole thing. Now, of course, it's much easier to just go on with the cliche "Sci Fi is for GEEKS!" nonsense than it is to admit that you missed out on the single fucking biggest cultural phenomenon of the last 40 years because you were too concerned with trying to be "cool".
JimD said:
This is spot on. I was in high school for both Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back and those movies were hugely popular across the spectrum. The geek factor only kicked in when a kid was obviously obsessed with them.
cromulence said:You're welcome. I know discussing the latest shitty Bill Simmons article is of utmost importance and I would never want to do anything to distract attention from that. I feel really, really bad about it. I hope you can forgive me.
His username adds a special level of je ne sais quoi to the misguided nature of his post.drleather2001 said:Premise: Star Wars was super, historically, popular during the late 70s and early 80s. It's impossible that a group of child fans of Star Wars during that time would feel like social outcasts because they liked the most popular movie franchise ever as it was being released.
Cromulence: I grew up at a period when Star Wars wasn't as popular as it was when Simmons was a kid and I didn't like it. But a lot of people I know did. So, um, ya. Star Trek. Simmons rulez.
cromulence said:My apologies, doc. I know that with Peter King out of commission for a week you need someone else's writing to piss and moan over. I'll stay out of your way.
URI said:He didn't like the Simpsons because everyone liked it and he hates being told what's good.