Movie Reaction: Brooklyn

Formula: Bridget Jones's Diary - 50 years

Cast: There's Saoirse Ronan and there's everyone else. It's her movie and no one comes close to outshining her. Emory Cohen and Domhnall Gleeson play her suitors. Jane Brennan and Fiona Glascott play Ronana's mother and sister. Jim Broadbent is a helpful priest. I especially enjoyed Emily Bett Rickards (Arrow) and Jessica Pare (Mad Men) in small roles.

Plot: In the 1950s, an Irish immigrant names Ellis (Ronan) travels to Brooklyn to build a new life. There, she falls in love with a plummer of Italian decent (Cohen) - not named Mario. Tragic events bring her back to Ireland, where she must decide to either stay home with a new potential love interest (Gleeson) or return to her new life in America.

Thoughts:
It's easy to assume that this is just a love story. That's certainly how it's being sold, and any description of it sounds like one. The "Who will she choose: the American or the Irishman" of it all is a big part of the story, but it isn't the story. No, the real struggle in the movie is between staying home and building a new life elsewhere. That's the strength of the movie.
Ellis leaves Ireland because there's no opportunities for her there. At first, her life in Brooklyn is hard, but she overcomes that. She makes friends, finds work, and best of all, falls in love with a good man. When she returns to Ireland her old friends and family are there, a good job is available, and a good man falls for her there too. There's compelling arguments on both sides of the ocean.
Ronan does a fantastic job playing every beat of the story. Ellis is not an easy role. She's goes through a lot and goes through a range of emotions. This is a great reminder of why she is a previous Oscar nominee and will be again, if not for this, then in the future. I haven't seen Emory Cohen before. He's very charming here. Domhnall Gleeson has to be just as good in a fraction of the time Cohen has. No surprise, he's up to the challenge. The entire cast exists only to supplement Saoirse Ronan and they do a great job.
At it's heart, this is still a period romance (of a man or of a city). I was surprised by the sense of humor in it and it looks great. It's not the most exciting movie though, and a couple times, I question the need for certain plot decisions and scenes. Overall, very well done.

Elephant in the Room: Who does she choose? If I told you that, what fun would it be? I'll say this much, it's the decision that feels right.

To Sum Things Up: 
It's fun to go back to 1950s New York. This is the best vehicle for Saoirse Ronan that I've seen and the movie works because of her. I expected it would be more of a tear-jerker. That it isn't is for the best.

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Shoot to Kill

What I Guessed It Was About: Let's see, the box has Sidney Poitier and Tom Berenger with a bandana. There's some mountains at the top. I'm going to guess that Poitier has to hunt down Berenger in the mountains for some reason, probably related to some crime, given the title and big gun in the picture.

How I Came Into It: As the previous section suggests, I knew very little about this. I've only recently realized that there was a time when Tom Berenger was considered a box office draw, which is surprising. Also, this is Poitier's return to acting after over a decade off. Then there's Kirstie Alley just as she's getting into Cheers fame. In hindsight, this was a sort of big deal movie. Then there's the 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. That's probably a bit too high, but that happens on occasion with things made before the site was around.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) It's a good chase movie, and even old Sidney Poitier can hold the screen better than just about anyone. Berenger is a natural choice for the outdoorsy hero. This makes sense for the kind of movies that Roger Spottiswoode was directing at the time (including this, this, and this). He likes action movies that are light, but not unsubstantiative. This fits that mold.


Why I Wish I Hadn't: I've gone into this before, but we are too sophisticated as viewers now, especially in crime movies and shows. When Poitier is still in the city, the level of idiocy of the cops (who aren't being painted as complete fools) is comical. I mean, there's a moment when the cops think that the killer is lost, not trying to lose their tale. What is that?! No, the level of police work even today is still not right, but seeing something from 25 years ago is just bad. Also, Poitier is not the right star for this movie. He's too old and, more importantly, thinks he's in a much more serious movie. I want to know how they decided on this title. Was there a list of unused Dirty Harry or James Bond movie titles they pulled from? That is such a generic title and only tangentially related to the movie. Oh, and remember when Berenger and Poitier manage to dig an underground igloo in the middle of an ice storm?

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Movie Reaction: Spotlight

Formula: All the President's Men + Primal Fear*
*But not really either at all. I'm looking for better comparisons

Cast: It's hard to say who the lead is. Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, and Brian D'Arcy James are all members of the Spotlight team. Liev Schreiber and John Slattery are other editors for the paper. Stanley Tucci and Billy Crudup are lawyers involved in the investigation.

Plot: This is based on the Spolight team of the Boston Globe, the special division of the paper who in 2002 broke the story about the Catholic church molestation cover ups. It's about how they built the story, not the fallout from it.

Thoughts:
I'd heard a lot of good things about this movie going in and I was mostly curious to see how it was all handled. There's a lot of angles this could take. It could be about saintly reporters taking on a corrupt system. It could be about vilifying the Catholic church. It could focus on the victims using the paper to be heard or the city who ignored them. It settles on making this about the investigation itself and how the fact that it took this long to come out is a failure on everyone: the church, the lawyers who helped them, the papers that refused to cover the story earlier, and the city that protected the church. It's not concerned with the villains or the victims really. It's about building the story.
It's hard to highlight any one of the actors for doing a great job because this is so much an ensemble. They all have their own stories they are working through. They're all tied to the scandal through family, friends, proximity, or history and all chasing their own leads. Ruffalo gets the biggest single moment in the movie and he nails it. This is perhaps the least flashy I've ever seen McAdams. Keaton holds it all together. I had no idea that Liev Schreiber could underplay this much. As the new chief editor of the Globe, he's the one who gets the Spotlight team on this story in the first place and he's so controlled the whole time. That's the unifying trait about all the performances: they are all very controlled and grounded. These are reporters doing their job. They are doing their job well, and they know that it's important work, but they aren't superheroes.
Given the subject matter and style of the movie, I was pleased by how well paced it was. I wasn't bored at any points. It zips from one story to another fluidly and ties them all together in satisfying ways.

Elephant in the Room: Isn't the Catholic Church an easy target? It is, but Spotlight isn't going after Catholics. It's going after the institution. Many of the people on both sides of this are people of faith trying to make the best of a bad situation. I was impressed how even-tempered the movie was about things, because it could be a furious movie, given the awfulness of what is being investigated. Instead, it opts for a more sober perspective.

To Sum Things Up:
This is my second movie in a row that's great simply because it's executed impeccably. The cast, script, look, and tone are all spot on. There is not a weak link in the cast, who are all doing some of the best work of their careers. I'm perfectly fine with this being an Oscar front runner.

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Primer

What I Guessed It Was About: A couple guys develop a time machine.

How I Came Into It: I was scared to watch this. The hype was built up too high, I was certain. It was made for a few thousand dollars and has a reputation for having perhaps the best handling of time travel of any movie. It was either going to be a let down or be too smart for me.

Why I Saw It: Ok, it was too smart for me, but not in an isolating way. It does so much with limited resources. Movies made for 100x as much money aren't able to pull off what this does. While I couldn't explain everything about the timelines and how it all plays out, I'm sure that writer/director/star Shane Carruth could. I appreciate that. I don't generally seek out movies that make me think this much (or in this way), but I'm glad I did for this.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: The mix of unpolished production, dense topic, and slow start made this a little hard to begin. Once I got used to all that, it zipped right along (the short run time helped that too).

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

Movie Reaction: Creed

Formula: 1 / (Rocky + 40 years)

Cast: Michael B. Jordan, who, after The Wire, Friday Night Lights, and more recently Fruitvale Station, I think the sky is the limit for him. Of course Sylvester Stallone is back. Tessa Thompson is Creed's (Jordan) love interest. Phylicia Rashad is Creed's foster mother, of sorts.

Plot: Adonis Creed (Jordan) is the youngest son of Apollo Creed, the result of an affair, who was born after Apollo died. Apollo's wife (Rashad) takes Adonis is after years of bouncing around foster homes and raises him in a life of privilege. Adonis is determined to be a boxer though. He moves to Philadelphia and convinces Rocky Balboa to train him. Way too early in his career, Adonis' name gets him a chance to fight the current boxing world champion. The movie builds to this fight.

Thoughts:
I had no expectation that this movie would be this good. While I trust in Michael B. Jordan to deliver, the Rocky franchise hasn't been one to take seriously for a long time. As much as I enjoyed Fruitvale Station, that alone was not enough to convince me that director and co-screenwriter Ryan Coogler could deliver in a very different kind of movie.
It turns out this concern was unfounded. This is good in every way I wanted it to be. Creed honors the things people love about the Rocky series and manages to be something all its own. Jordan is a star and if this doesn't make him a household name, then I worry about what's wrong with households. He absolutely sells the physical and the emotional requirements of the role with a sincerity and likability that not many actors have. Stallone is a limited actor, but he isn't a bad one. This is perfectly in his wheelhouse and he keeps the whole movie grounded. Best of all, Jordan and Stallone's relationship is executed exactly right.
When I first heard the story synopsis, I was concerned about the many ways it could go wrong, and the movie didn't opt for any of them. It actually reminded me a lot of Whiplash, starring Jordan's Fantastic Four co-star Miles Teller. This is a movie about working to be something. Adonis has an easy life (They play up his delinquent years before Apollo's widow takes him in, but they don't lean on it too hard). That's not enough for him. He wants out of his father's shadow and he's willing to work for it. He doesn't reject his good fortune, but he certainly wants to make something of it. There's never a moment when he gives up because it's too hard or pretends his situation is anything other than what it is. I seriously loved this screenplay.
And I haven't even gotten to the fighting. Coogler has a real skill at shooting that. He loves to do long takes that don't let the actors off the hook. Jordan has to look like he knows what he's doing. And Coogler knows how to get a moment. My theater applauded during the climactic moment, which I don't run into very often. It does the Rocky series proud.

Elephant in the Room: It's still a Rocky movie though. That's true. Boxing movies in general, thanks to the success of Rocky don't have a lot of tricks left. The boxer wins the big fight or he doesn't. After seeing Southpaw earlier this year, I wondered if the boxing movie has anywhere left to go. It turns out it doesn't matter. There's always room something if it's done well. This is done very well.

To Sum Things Up:
If a movie has ever made you jump out of your seat and cheer, you should see Creed. Michael B. Jordan is sensational, and, like his character, he's now a big step closer to getting out of the shadow of his own famous name.

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Man on Wire

What I Guessed It Was About: This is the story of the crazy man who decided to do a hire-wire walk between the World Trade Center towers back in the 70s.

How I Came Into It: This is a phenomenally well reviewed documentary. I've been wanting to see it for a while. With the Robert Zemekis movie coming out in a month or two*, it seemed like a good time to finally get to it.

*I left that in to give you an idea of how far behind I am on these reactions.

Why I Saw It: It's incredible to think that anyone could do this. The confidence, the skill, the foolishness. Just looking at the pictures of him doing this spooked me. Even more fascinating than the actual stunt is seeing how they accomplished it. I always assumed it was a secure job, not sneaking into the building and firing arrows with fish wire. Simply incredible.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: I regret nothing about the movie. The only downside is that it may kill some of the suspense for The Walk in a couple months.

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

Movie Reaction: The Night Before

Formula: A Very Harold and Kumar 3D Christmas + Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

Why I Saw It: This directly lines up with my brand of comedy. Basically, if Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg produce it, I'm probably going to see it.

Cast: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Seth Rogen, and Anthony Mackie are the leads with fun supporting work by the likes of Jillian Bell, Lizzy Caplan, Michael Shannon, Mindy Kaling, and others.

Plot: Levitt, Rogen, and Mackie play three friends with a long-running tradition of hitting the town (New York City) on Christmas eve. They are all getting older and have different responsibilities pulling them apart. Rogen has a baby on the way. Mackie is trying to navigate his current fame in a resurgent season in his NFL career. Levitt is stuck in place. The three agree that this Christmas Eve will be the last one for their specific tradition. Oh, and Rogen's wife gives him a box full of all the drugs, Mackie keeps getting his weed stolen by an aspiring Grinch, Levitt isn't over his ex-girlfriend who they run into, and they are on a quest to track down an elusive party called the Nutcracker Ball.

Thoughts:
This is a funny movie. I've come to expect nothing less from this group. The screenplay was written by a collection of Rogen's buddies. The director also directed 50/50 with Rogen and Levitt. Rogen and his partner in most things, Evan Goldberg, produced this. You should really already know if you'll like it or not.
The story is part Christmas Carol, part Superbad. It all takes place on Christmas Eve. It's linked together by a weed dealer they know, played hysterically by Michael Shannon, who acts as Scrooge's ghosts, helping each of the leads come to terms with their future (Rogen), present (Mackie), and past (Levitt). The idea of how friendships evolve and change is a recurring one with Rogen and Goldberg's productions, from The Interview and This is the End, all the way back to Superbad. So, this does right by that part. The story runs into some trouble elsewhere. At times, the shorthand all these frequent collaborators have is almost problematic. Several scenes play like the actors are riffing but still needed to fit in a specific line of dialogue, which sticks out from the rest. There's a lot of telling rather than showing. I'm being really nit-picky, I know, but all the rhythms were a little off because of it.
As a comedy though, it's got everything you need. Physical comedy. Gross-out humor. Stoner comedy. Entertaining cameos. This was made to be part of a double feature with A Very Harold and Kumar 3D Christmas.
 Elephant in the Room: Isn't it a little early for a Christmas movie? Well, the box office numbers certainly think so. I'm curious to see how well it plays for the rest of the season. Probably the better question to ask is if we need a Christmas comedy with a hard R rating like this. I'm not really sure. Love, Actually earns its R rating, but it's somehow also a hopelessly sweet movie. The Night Before has a sweetness as well, but that's not its focus. It goes hard after the Pineapple Express crowd, who, I guess need Christmas movies too. I don't know, it's likely to work its way into my Christmas rotation, although I'm incredibly biased.

To Sum Things Up:
This is the adult Christmas comedy I never needed but am glad I have now. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anthony Mackie, and Seth Rogen have a great rapport and a strong collection of comedic performers keep this moving along and funny all the way through.  

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend

Weekly 10: 11/17-11/23

Agents of SHIELD “Many Heads, One Tail”
Am I alone in the idea of Fitz and Simmons being vastly more interesting as only friends, with no sexual tension? I realize that ship sailed seasons ago. I like that those two characters continue to get focus. I just wish the context was different.

Modern Family “Phil's Sexy, Sexy House”
I get the feeling they gave up while writing this episode. No show stages chaos as well as Modern Family (Look no further than "Las Vegas" a year or two ago). This episode had the madness, but lacked the staging. They kept throwing more people into the house without it really tying together all that interestingly. Half the complications  (Luke with the beer) were thrown in out of nowhere. The changing perspectives in the beginning barely had a payoff either. Occasionally, I wonder how good Modern Family would be if they had half the episodes and twice the time to work on the scripts.

LA Story
This is a strange little movie. I'm not sure I'll ever be able to fully grasp what exactly it's doing, but I think I like it.

Jessica Jones
A second hit for the Marvel/Netflix partnership. This is a pretty perfect role for Kysten Ritter. I'm only about four episodes in and will be taking my time so it isn't one big blur like Daredevil was.

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part2
I can't imagine how scared Lionsgate is now that their cash cow is gone. There was a time when they had both Twilight and Hunger Games in the same year. Now, their big hope is that the Divergent series doesn't tank.

Saturday Night Live “Matthew McConaughey/Adele”
There's something about the home stretch for the year that gets SNL rolling. This was the second week in a row without a bad sketch and the promise of Christmas generally get the best out of the writers and performers. One more good episode like this and it might actually make sitting through the Donald Trump episode worth it...No, that's too much. That was an awful episode.

The Night Before
It's a couple weeks early for a Christmas movie. I couldn't wait though. This is the last time I have any breathing room for movies for the next few weeks.

The Walking Dead “Heads Up”
I'm glad they waited a month to tell me something I already assumed when it first happened. Glenn is alive and I'm thoroughly bored. The pacing of this batch of episodes has been horrible. I keep hearing about how more showrunners are designing their shows for binges rather than individual episodes and that's definitely the case here. This is the first stretch of episodes in several seasons that I've actively disliked watching.

The Leftovers “International Assassin”
That was a bizarre episode that only The Leftovers could pull off. I feel sorry for anyone who hate watches this show, because there's so much for them to dislike. I'm fully loving it though. I can't believe there's only two more episodes left...and that there's no guarantee that there will be another season.

Fargo “Did You Do This? No, You Did It”
I got a little confused about this episode. I was completely confused about Dodd the whole time. Not in a "I wonder where Dodd is?" way, but in a "Did Dodd die? Did I miss something". This is the first week in which I worried that I somehow wasn't paying enough attention. It turns out I wasn't alone. Other than the bits of confusion, there was all sorts of things to love.

Delayed Reaction: Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey

What I Guessed It Was About: It will feature Bill and Ted. Probably more time travel. I have to assume that the end game of the time travel will be to fix some important moment in history.

How I Came Into It: The first Bill and Ted movie is perfect teen comedy anarchy. It's the kind of movie that starts with a high concept and has ridiculous fun with it. Coming back for more is either a fool's errand or recognition of a malleable concept. I wasn't sure which.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) Look, I'll always approve of a little Ingmar Bergman parody in a comedy movie. They find a new direction to go with this, becoming more of a Dante story, without forgetting the wacky elements that made the first movie fun. I find the part when they bring in the guitarist from Faith No More in interesting because of how that joke's evolved. It was funny because he was famous at the time and now it's funny because he isn't.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: This is simple. I liked the first movie better. The Awesome Adventure was a random idea. The Bogus Journey felt more like an attempt to reverse engineer the spirit of the thing. They do a good job of it, but that's why sequels are hard.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Movie Reaction: The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2

Formula: (Mockingjay - Part 1 * The Deathly Hallows - Part 2) / The Deathly Hallows - Part 1

Why I Saw It: Short of being animated, it's hard to find a movie that makes over $100 million on its opening weekend that I don't see.

Cast: As always, it begins and ends with Jennifer Lawrence. She's the sole lead. The next biggest supporting performances are, as expected, from Josh Hucherson and Liam Hemsworth. Pretty much everyone else, Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland, Julianne Moore, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Willow Shields, Elizabeth Banks, Jena Malone - good lord, this is a big cast- Jeffrey Wright, Stanley Tucci, etc., is relegated to a few scenes.

Plot: The rebels finally gain some momentum and decide to storm the Capital. Of course, President Snow has setup traps across the city to stop them from getting to his mansion.

Thoughts:
I like to be positive, so I'll start with the good things. It cannot be overstated just how good Jennifer Lawrence has to be to make this work. She's the sole lead and the story doesn't move beyond her. The script doesn't move far from the first-person narrative of the books. It's doubly hard because Katniss is not a chatty character. You need an actress of Lawrence's caliber to sell as much as she does with a look. The supporting actors don't get a lot of time, but just about all of them get their moments to shine. That's harder than it looks with a cast this large.
The action is every bit as exciting as in the first two movies. In a lot of ways, opening it up beyond the Hunger Games arena lets things breathe and gave the characters a refreshing amount of agency.
I like that The Hunger Games has more on its mind than a lot of these other Young Adult dystopias, which is why it's found success that others have not. Katniss isn't a "chosen one". She's a god damn hero who accepts the situation put before her and does what's right. I don't know why that's such a hard egg to crack for other movie.s
The Hunger Games has been a hard franchise for me to get into. The first movie was pretty good. The second was too much of the same. The third movie really didn't impress me because there's wasn't enough story to justify it as its own movie. The fourth didn't change my mind about that. Given how much time they got to spend on the third book, I don't know how this movie managed to be so vague. The entire plan to storm the Capital is riddled with holes. Are there cameras all over the city or not? If not, why aren't there any? How could they set up so many elaborate traps in the city in this amount of time? How could they ensure the traps wouldn't harm the citizens who were apparently still living in the city? Taking things out of the controlled environment of the Hunger Games arena left a ton to explain that the movie simply didn't care to.
Pretty much everything after the climactic bombing didn't sit well with me either. The "Return of the King"-esque 10 endings needlessly drew things out. More importantly, I didn't buy the political strategy. Coin became too much of a heel and a fool at the same time. I don't believe she couldn't've gotten to that level of prominence if she was both.

Elephant in the Room: How to they do with the lack of Philip Seymour Hoffman? For the most part, I didn't notice it. There's only one scene where it feels like they had to write someone else into it instead of him. Even that scene plays well enough. Overall, seeing him on screen was just a sad reminder that I won't be seeing him again.

To Sum Things Up:
This is a fitting end to the series. Jennifer Lawrence shines. Things explode. Empires crumble. It's a shame this had to come out in a moment when the Star Wars hype machine is eclipsing it.

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Married to the Mob

What I Guessed It Was About: Michelle Pfeiffer gets married to a man who turns out to be in the mob and tries to find a way to accept this.

How I Came Into It: This is an awful strange movie to immediately precede the main movie that I know Demme for, The Silence of the Lambs. Given his other movies though, I think that Lambs is the outlier pick more than this movie is.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) I've been getting a reminder lately of how famous Michelle Pfeiffer was at one point and this is an example of why. She is very strong here, with a deeper character than the movie requires. Dean Stockwell actually got an Oscar nomination for his performance, which wasn't undeserved, necessarily. You just don't see that kind of performance getting Oscar attention very often. Most of the supporting characters are such oversized roles that it all meshes better than it should.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: I don't get the amount of love this movie has. Rotten Tomatoes has it with a 91%. Granted, the audience rating is 48%, so maybe it just didn't age well. Regardless, this wasn't a particularly sophisticated comedy. I found the big showdown in the honeymoon sweet to be pretty clumsy. There's small moments that work in the movie, but the larger story is forgettable.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Alive

What I Guessed It Was About: I'd read the Wikipedia article before so I was familiar with the story. A Uruguayan rugby team crashes on the Andes mountains and has to survive for about two months. Cannibalism occurs.

How I Came Into It: Being familiar with the story already, I was mostly curious about how they'd handle the cannibalism. I assumed "not well" considering that this movie hasn't carried a lot of infamy since its release. That generally means they undercooked the scandalous part(s).

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) This is one of those movies that works best with the Wikipedia page pulled up in order to critique every decision made. Overall, it stays pretty true to the actual events, mostly dropping a couple of the duller parts. Thankfully, the real story is harrowing enough that not much needs to be done to Hollywood it up.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: The performances are too big. The different people going mad after the plane crash are comical. You get the feeling that someone in the production read a book that said people act hysterical in situations like this, and the director took it to mean those people should overact like they never have before. I shouldn't laugh as much as I did, especially in the beginning, and I laughed a lot.

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Hercules

What I Guessed It Was About: The Rock is Hercules. I'm guessing this will be a post-dead family story. He's going to go around decimating armies and monsters for 1.5-2 hours and maybe hookup with Rebecca Ferguson because who wouldn't?

How I Came Into It: This was the second Hercules movie that came out last year. Despite being an overall box office letdown, this was certainly the better received of the two movies.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) If there was a man alive right now who could embody Hercules, Dwayne Johnson would be that man. Right there you have enough to get this movie a pass. I feel like this was made thinking that it was Troy and ended up closer to King Arthur. By that, I mean there's no epic scale, but if you are looking for a bunch of hack 'n slash ancient warfare, this'll sate you.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: It's a bad start to have a movie with direct alternatives that I'd rather see. I can get everything I want out of Troy or King Arthur that I could want from this. Seeing that I like each of those better (Troy by a lot. King Arthur by a little), that immediately puts this as a third option to ever want to see again when I'm in the exact mood for this kind of movie. That's more of a personal issue though. In general, the movie's a bit generic and the machinations of the story are weak. It's an ok movie for what it is. It's just not anything more.


Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Universal Soldier

What I Guessed It Was About: You know Robocop? Imagine if he was a kick boxer. Otherwise, I figure this is the same movie.

How I Came Into It: Without this movie, there wouldn't be Stargate. Without Stargate, there wouldn't be Independence Day. I wouldn't say those are natural conclusions, however they do follow Roland Emmerich's career arc in the 90s. And still, this is a Jean-Claude Van Damme movie, which means it's like a Steven Seagal movie except I'm rooting for the protagonist.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) I like when any movie goes in knowing its limitations. For example, this is an action movie about Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren beating each other up. The story makes sure to contrive a way to make them superhuman and adds an attractive woman to do most of the talking. That's proper management of resources.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: I'm going to go ahead and let you peak at my notes while I watched this...
-Those two aren't American soldiers with those accents, I hope.
-Neither of these men are supposed to be Americans. I'm going  to keep telling myself that.
-Good. They at least acknowledge the accent.
-Ok, they kind of covered why JCVD speaks that way. What about Ludgren?
-Did I miss an explanation for Lundgren or was that really supposed to pass for an American accent?

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Funny Farm

What I Guessed It Was About: This is The Great Outdoors, right? Like, it's one of those exercises in a creative writing class where someone takes the same script and has two different people develop it into a movie.

How I Came Into It: It bothers me that this and The Great Outdoors were released two weeks apart but neither Wikipedia page notes that. Or maybe I'm seeing more similarities than there really are. There's a similar theme to them though and setting, more or less.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) This is an odd movie with a tone all its own. Maybe Grown Ups is a better comparison. It has to loose structure and is as much about the random small adventures as the larger story. It's a likable Chevy Chase vehicle and it's amusing enough.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: The tone of the movie works at times to convey the simplicity of the town or the events, but it also makes entire stretches of the movie lifeless. I don't really get why Chase and his wife change their mind at the end. I get what the movie wants me to think the reason is, I just don't think that it's a decision those two humans would make if they weren't supposed to for the movie to get the desired ending.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Weekly 10: 11/10-11/16

The Middle "Homecoming II: The Tailgate"
Axl said he broke up with Devin. Did I miss that? Did it happen off camera? Is that what the whole Open Relationship conversation was supposed to be taken as?

Master of None "Mornings" & "Finale"
That was a very solid ending to the season. It moved away from standalone adventures and focused pretty heavily on the relationship stuff. "Mornings" in particular is very oddly structured, covering a lot of time, which I liked. I'm somewhat undecided about how the season ended. It all depends on how a season 2 would pick back up. It's pretty definitive as it is, so I don't know. Such a great season though.

The Big Bang Theory "The Mystery Date Observation"
As much as I did enjoy the joke of Sheldon turning down the perfect woman because she was late, I am disappointed that it means there's no excuse to use Annaleigh Tipton more.

The Peanuts Movie
I think I prefer Peanuts in holiday special form. 90 minutes is too much for me.

Girl Meets World "Girl Meets Belief"
As soon as I see this title, I know it's going to frustrate me. There's only one way a children's show can look at this: believers smugly believe and non-believers have to be angry at god or stubbornly illogically logical. I'll credit the writers for trying to present a spectrum. Riley is a staunch believer (they make damn sure to stay as vague about the beliefs as possible). Lucas is a more passive believer (It's there and he's comfortable with that). Maya seems to be angry at god (i.e. actually believing, but hating that she believes). Farkle takes the "science as religion" angle. It's fairly imbalanced though, especially with Corey chiming in too. Ultimately, it's a much bigger topic than the show's equipped to handle. They did what they could with it. The story touches on several of my personal pet peeves, but from a writing perspective, it was solidly handled.

Gorillas in the Mist
I want to see Sigourney Weavers outtakes for this movie.

The Last Man on Earth "Baby Steps"
I have to give the show credit. Not many shows have the brazenness to keep the main character this unlikable without making him the villain. Tandy is such a douche, even when he's being a good guy. He's completely incapable of saying the right thing. You know what he means to say, but it never comes out that way. I really could use some niceness amongst the characters though. They all seem to hate each other.

Last Week Tonight
John Oliver has been dipping into the sports well an awful lot. I was on board with this one though, because I've been wondering how these daily fantasy sites could be legal. It turns out, as with anything these days is, the answer is "through a loophole".

Spirit: Stallion of the Cimmaron
Yeah, let's turn a slave narrative into a story about a horse. That won't diminish the meaning at all.

Fargo "Rhinoceros"
How crazy would it be if Nick Offerman gets an Emmy nomination for Fargo after seven years of snubbs for Parks & Rec? He's still way down in the pecking order on the show, but if he gets another showcase or two like this week's, it could happen.

Delayed Reaction: Tequila Sunrise

What I Guessed It Was About: Cocktail with Mel Gibson and Kurt Russell? No. This title gives an indication of nothing.

How I Came Into It: It was odd the level at which I didn't know about this movie. It was written by Robert Towne who also did Chinatown and The Firm. It had Mel Gibson, Kurt Russell, and Michelle Pfeiffer in the relative intersecting peaks of their careers. I should've known about this movie before it arrived in my mail from Netflix.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) Gibson, Russell, and Pfeiffer are very watchable. Gibson and Russell's friendship in particular is enjoyable. They are clearly working from different sides, but when they are opposing one another, it's as old chums. I was never worried that they'd turn on each other, even if they weren't working together. I liked that dynamic.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: I watched this while I was in the middle of True Detective season 2. I'm not sure which was hurt by the other. Neither came away looking great. I didn't really follow the plot of Tequila Sunrise. I got the sense that I wasn't meant to be focused on the plot. I was supposed to be enjoying the characters, the setting, and the interplay between them. That didn't happen though, so I kept coming back to the plot. I didn't care about the plot. You're starting to see the issue now.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Movie Reaction: The Peanuts Movie

Formula: Peanuts + The Peanuts (repeat until it's a feature length)

Why I Saw It: Even though I don't carry a specific love of Peanuts, I know that it's beloved by many and I've always wanted in on that.

[Voice] Cast: One of the fun things about the Peanuts animated series and specials are that there's a rotation of children doing the voices. Slight variance is expected and welcomed. All the kids in this case were familiar enough. Only Bill Melendez, voice of Snoopy and Woodstock was reused (I'm assuming through archived sound files since he's been dead for 7 years).

Plot: This follows a school year in the lives of the Peanuts gang as Charlie tries to impress the Red Haired girl who just moved in across the street.

Thoughts:
I need to add a disclaimer here. Peanuts is not something beloved to me. I like it. I've watched the Christmas Special many times. I've read some comic strips now and again. But it's not a huge part of my childhood. I don't even think I've seen It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown. I have no vested interest in this movie being good or bad or true to the spirit of the thing.
That disclaimer is important, because this movie is very much for the fans. I can't imagine anyone who loves Peanuts not enjoying this. All the characters get their familiar beats. All the classic gags  are back (Lucy's psychiatry stand, Charlie and the kite, Lucy pulling away the football, Snoopy vs. the Red Baron, etc.).If you make a checklist of all the references you want to see before seeing the movie, it'll all be marked off. Even the overall story is a mix of familiar stories from Peanuts. As a loving homage to all of Charles Schultz's characters, it couldn't be much better.
This looks great too, which I figure was hard to pull off. Hand drawn aesthetics don't always translate well to CG, which tends to clean things and smooth them out too much. Blue Sky Studios did a great job transitioning Peanuts to a more modern look without taking away the distinctive look.
Here's the less popular thing I have to say. I found this movie to be pretty dull. There isn't much of a story to it. It's more of a relaxed pace that's about the smaller stories than the big one. A lot of that requires heavy investment in the characters or else it's just meandering to the end. If all you need to make a scene worth it is Schroeder playing his piano in his desk, that's great. If that doesn't mean much to you, that's a problem. I was reminded a lot of the Mr. Peabody and Sherman movie from last year. I was certain that the movie was up to more than I was catching on to, but that still left my experience pretty dissatisfying. This is all a choice, of course. The studio decided to stay true to the material as opposed to targeting outsiders. One decision isn't any better than the other. It sure makes it hard for me to talk about or come away feeling great about it though.

Elephant in the Room: But did they include <insert beloved Peanuts reference>? I mean, probably. I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of Peanuts, but it certainly seemed like it was doing a ton of fan service up front and in the margins.

Movie Theater LVP: This has to go to the mother who sat behind me and narrated the movie for her son for the first 20 minutes of the movie. Her kid was amazingly well behaved. She, on the other hand, kept making asinine comments like "That's Schroeder" or "Now they're going to school" or "Woodstock was funny right there". I almost moved seats when she was doing it during the previews but told myself that surely she'd stop when the movie began. Nope. Thankfully, she got tired of doing it after about a half hour. When I go to a family movie on a Sunday afternoon, I know what I'm getting into. I'm fine with some loud kids. They're kids. The parents have no excuse.

To Sum Things Up:
For lifelong fans of Peanuts, it's a loving tribute to Charles Schultz's work. To the less familiar, it's still pretty good, though at times a little dull.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: A Perfect Murder

What I Guessed It Was About: Michael Douglas hires a guy to kill his young wife. He does, then the plan unravels.

How I Came Into It: Michael Douglas is a year younger than Gwyneth Paltrow's mom. I get that Gwyneth always seemed a bit older than she was and audiences weren't quite ready to let go of "leading man" Michael Douglas. Still, that's a mighty age gap. Then when I realized she wasn't even a trophy wife (apparently he married her for the money, if anything) it made even less sense.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) Michael Douglas, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Aragorn Viggo Mortensen are a good set of leads. At times I was genuinely curious if Douglas would be able to get away with it. At its core, this is a mindless 90s thriller and sometimes that's enough.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: It's never good to start by remaking Hitchcock, even though this changed the plot greatly from Dial M for Murder. The title promises exactly two things: a murder and a perfect plan. It delivers neither. I can accept one or the other missing. "Neither" is overly misleading and annoying. Is it that hard for Hollywood to have a script with plan that's thought out? It didn't have the balls to kill off the wife either. This movie is lame and more importantly, uninteresting.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Innerspace

What I Guessed It Was About: Dennis Quiad shrinks somehow and goes all Magic School Bus through Martin Short's body. Zaniness ensues.

How I Came Into It: On paper, I like this cast. It's Dennis Quaid, Martin Short, and Meg Ryan all in their primes. That's a pleasant mix. Beyond that, it's part of that growing list of movies that barely made the top 50 in a time when far fewer movies were released, and I would've never heard of if not for my list. There haven't been a lot of those that were pleasant surprises.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) Martin Short is let loose and gets to be physical and funny. That's why you watch this movie. Dennis Quaid doesn't have to do much. When he does, it's with an ease that works well for him. Meg Ryan is off to the side a bit. She still gets to be charming, stuck in the middle of these guys. This is a loopy story that didn't try to make me take it seriously often. That was a smart move.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: It's not hard to see why this has been mostly forgotten. All the actors have done their shtick elsewhere in better movies. I can't say it made enough of an impression on me to find things I didn't like about it, which then becomes my most damning criticism.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: A Nightmare on Elm Street 5

What I Guessed It Was About: I'm not sure how else they can stretch this series out. People go to sleep. Freddy kills them. That's about it.

How I Came Into It: This series went downhill. I didn't love the first movie but it is the clear high mark. Each movie has been less enjoyable than the one before it. That's a bad mindset to be going into a movie with. I couldn't help it.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) Inertia.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: I have to say that I was massively disappointed that this wasn't released in 3-D. Based on how the dreams were shot, I was convinced that this was originally a 3-D movie. I don't know what the hell was going on. Apparently, this is just about everyone's least favorite Nightmare on Elm Street movie. I mentally checked out so early that I can barely recall details from it. I guess Freddy was pretty good. This was more comedic. I mean, I didn't find it funny, but I like that they tried something different. It's an important stepping stone for understanding how we get from the Freddy of the 1984 original to the Freddy vs. Jason Freddy.

Verdict (?): Strongly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Deceived

What I Guessed It Was About: Goldie Hawn falls in love with a man and realizes that she's been deceived. I assume he wants to murder her, but he could just have another family. Maybe he beats her. There's not a lot of ways this movie can go.

How I Came Into It: Somehow, this movie didn't turn a profit in the box office. I look at this movie, the limited cast, the simple setup, the basic script, and can't fathom it not making its budget back. I guess this is less "how I came into it" and more "how I responded after checking the Wikipedia page". It's certainly my biggest takeaway from the movie. Other than that, I had both this and the movie Betrayed queued up to watch. There is a 0% chance I'll keep those straight in my head a month from now.

Why I Saw It: (Club 50) Goldie Hawn is fine and carries the movie as well as you'd expect from a movie star. John Heard is the right level of menacing without being over the top (most of the time).

Why I Wish I Hadn't: This is an unremarkable movie in every way I can think of. Every single beat is a familiar one and the final explanation for all the deceit is convoluted.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: The Big Sleep

What I Guessed It Was About: Humphrey Bogart is a private eye investigating a murder. I'll go ahead and assume this was all set off by a dame who walked into his office one day, of course referring to Lauren Bacall. And, somebody dies, hence, the big sleep.

How I Came Into It: I still understand Bogart and Bacall fever, 60 years after it was a thing. Those two are great.

Why I Saw It: I miss film noir. It had its time long ago and it's rare that anyone finds a way to reproduce it successfully. Bogart is The Man, plain and simple. He was made for this kind of movie. Also, this was funnier than I expected. Perhaps that's just because I haven't seen enough of this genre.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: The mystery was hard to follow at times. It was never so bewildering that it took me out of the movie a;together, but if you challenged me to outline what was going on, there would be a lot of blank spaces. Upon later research, I found out that there's an original cut of the movie and a "movie star" cut that was released to theaters. This second cut was harder to follow and focused more on the performances. I wonder which version I saw and how it would've been different had I seen the other.

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Weekend

The Pitch: It's like the Before series, but a lot more raw, and with British gay men.

How I Came Into It: I was torn about whether or not I should do this reaction. I've seen this before. The first time, I wasn't prepared for the type of movie that it is. It's a movie that doesn't demand your attention. It rewards it, which is what threw me off.

Why I Saw It: This is a small, quiet movie. It starts off somewhat disoriented, following Russell, who is very quiet then skips Glen and his first night together. The movie doesn't really begin until the next morning. I like how slowly the relationship builds. Yet, somehow only a day and a half later, it's over and I can't believe how much it's gone through. There's the fly on the wall approach to how the scenes are shot which I really liked once I realized that's what it's doing. The emotional beats toward the end payoff one after another after another and it leaves you sort of an emotional wreck.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: That's another thing I forgot to mention from the first time I watched this. Turn on subtitles. There's a specific choice in the movie to not always make the dialogue clear. Mix that in with it being British and it's very easy to miss what's being said at times. Or maybe that's just me. Whatever. It helped my second viewing tremendously.

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Singin' in the Rain

What I Guessed It Was About: Gene Kelly, Debbie Reynolds, and Donald O'Connor get stuck in the rain. Rather than let it ruin their day, they decide to sing and dance about it.

How I Came Into It: I watched this as part of a favorite movie night. This was another friend's contribution. This is constantly on lists for all-time greatest movies. For god's sake, it's part of The Great Movie Ride in Disney World. That's what I call credentials.

Why I Saw It: This is a wonderful movie. There's no other angle to approach this from. It's great. It's funny. The dancing and showmanship are fantastic. The performances are top notch. It's a deliriously happy movie. "Make 'Em Laugh", "Good Morning", and "Singin' In the Rain" were stuck in my head for days after watching this. I simply can't find a reason not to like this movie. It's worthy of all the praise given to it.

Why I Wish I Hadn't: That's hard...It even manages to handle making commentary about the jump from silent movies to talkies, which anyone who has talked to me about The Artist, knows is a bugaboo of mine. Uhh...perhaps the part where Gene Kelly is acting out a Broadway-type sequence goes a little long. Even that I didn't mind.

Verdict (?): Strongly Recommend

College Basketball Conference Picks 2015-16

I don't think I can stress enough the amount of time I put in tracking college basketball rosters.  I follow recruits, transfers, minutes played, positions, All-Conference teams, etc. I'm also clearly a narcissist, given my proclivity to blog about everything I watch. That means, if I'm crazy enough to make picks for every conference, I'm sure as hell going to make a post about it.

This Year:
Top 25
Last Year:
Top 25
Conference Picks

The Power Five

Atlantic Coast Conference
1. North Carolina - Let's see, the Tar Heels are my preseason #1 team, so clearly, they will be my pick to win their conference. Marcus Paige is a certain Player of the Year candidate. The team is deep. It's talented. They aren't the certain top tier the way Kentucky was last year, but I can find no way to pick anyone other than them.
2. Virginia - Malcolm Brogdon is a beast. The Cavaliers were a top 10 team last year. They lost Justin Anderson to the pros. With him, they'd be unbeatable. Without him, they lose a half-step. It's stupid to think they won't still be one of the toughest outs in the conference if not country.
3. Duke - To me, Duke is a distant third in the conference. They don't bring in enough recruits to make up for everything they lost. They'll be good. A Coach K team always is. They won't be world beaters unless absolutely everything goes right.
Sleeper: Florida St. - The Seminoles were barely a top 100 team last year. They return three guards who averages 30+ MPG, including potential Player of the Year Candidate (I'm calling it) Xavier Rathan-Mayes. Then there's Freshman guard Dwatne Bacon, who could also make some noise.
Bottom of the Barrel: Boston College - 7 players graduated. Oliver Hanlan, the first team All Conference player left to play professionally. There's no great recruits to speak of. Virginia Tech. makes a strong case for being the worst in the conference again, but I think the Hokies return enough to be better than BC.

Big 12
1. Kansas - The Jayhawks are somehow being underrated this year. There's an argument to be made for them to be the top team in the country. There's a ton of returning talent and a great recruiting class. Perry Ellis is Player of the Year material and there's about a half dozen others who have All Conference potential.
2. Oklahoma - This top 15 team from last year returns 4 of 5 starters. Sure, losing Big 12 Newcomer of the Year TaShawn Thomas will hurt, but keeping Big 12 Player of the Year Buddy Hield helps more. If they can even find a half-competent 5th starter, this team will stay at the top of the conference standings.
3. Iowa St. - Their three best players from last year (Monte Morris, Georges Niang, and Jameel McKay) and back as well as a solid bench. The only question mark is how new coach Steve Prohm will do with a Fred Hoiberg lineup.
Sleeper: Texas – This is not a Shaka Smart team. That's all that gives me pause though. If he can figure out how to use those talented big men with All Conference Point Guard Isaiah Taylor and a solid recruiting class, then this could be a top ten team in the country.
Bottom of the Barrel: TCU – This is a case of the bottom of the league all getting better. The loss of Kyan Anderson and Trey Zeigler in the back court will hurt, but the returning front court should keep them teetering around the top 100.

Big Ten
1. Maryland – Melo Trimble, Rasheed Sulaimon, Jake Layman, Diamond Stone, and Doamonte Dodd make for the best five man lineup in the Big Ten. They have a solid bench as well. It will all come down to how much they miss Dez Wells.
2. Michigan St. - It's Denzel Valentine's time to shine. West Virginia transfer Eron Harris should make an immediate impact. At the end of the day though, this is a Tom Izzo team and there's almost no currency valued higher than that in college basketball.
3. Indiana – All the important parts of the lethal offense from last year are back, including Yogi Ferrell, James Blackmon, and Troy Williams (all certain to make All Conference teams). Assuming incoming players like Freshman Center Thomas Bryant can give them some semblance of the defense, the Hoosiers will take a big step forward.
Sleeper: Michigan – Few teams were as plagued by injuries as Michigan last year. PG Derrick Walton and wing Caris LaVert are back now and everyone else got a lot of value from the extra playing time without them. Even at full strength, this was a team that lost to NJIT last year. They are no lock to improve enough to matter.
Bottom of the Barrel: Rutgers – They were by far the worst team in the Big Ten last year, lost two starters, and have an unremarkable recruiting class. Expect more of the same for the Scarlet Knights.

Pac 12
1. Utah – It's all about how much losing Do-Everything guard Delon Wright will impact the team. All the top teams in the conference are taking a step back. With center Jakob Poeltl, forward Jordan Loveridge, and guard Brandon Taylor back, the Ute's are falling the least.
2. Arizona – Losing four starters (all now in the NBA) is tough to come back from no matter how much talent the recruiting class has. With bench players like Parker Jackson-Cartwright, Gabe York, and Elliott Pitts to step up, this rebuild shouldn't take as long as Sean Miller's last one.
3. UCLA – Bryce Alford (PG), Isaac Hamilton (Wing), and Tony Parker (C) form as solid a trio as you're going to find. There's always strong recruits coming in too. Many would pick Cal for this third spot. I'm not biting. UCLA has more to build on.
Sleeper: Oregon St. - Gary Payton II is really good. All the starters are back too. If even one Freshman recruit can make some noise, this could be an excellent team.
Bottom of the Barrel: Washington St. - The Pac 12's worst team lost their star player. There's really no path to improvement

Southeastern Conference
1. Kentucky – They aren't untouchable like last year. Point Guard Tyler Ulis, a healthy Alex Poythress, and the best recruiting class in the country keep them as the team to beat in the SEC.
2. Vanderbilt – They were the best team not to make the NCAA tournament last year and they bring back just about everyone, including future NBA Center Damian Jones.
3. LSU – Ben Simmons is going to be very good. LSU teams have a history of squandering talent though.
Sleeper: Mississippi St. - They were pretty putrid last year. How much can stud recruit Malik Newman improve them?
Bottom of the Barrel: Missouri – This is an awful team that suffered numerous transfers. I'll be impressed if any team manages to somehow be worse than them.

The "If It Wasn't For Football" Majors

American Athletic Conference
1. Cincinnati - Remember that team that gave UK some trouble for a little while in the NCAA tournament? They're mostly back. Octavius Ellis, Gary Clark, Troy Capain, Farad Cobb? All back. There's no star power on this team, so most people are overlooking them. That doesn't matter to me.
2. SMU - This program is in deep shit, but they still have a ton of talent, you know, like AAC Player of the Year Nic Moore. The only reason this won't be a great team is psychological.
3. Connecticut - There is just so much talent on this team. Frankly, I have no idea how they weren't good enough to make it in the NCAA tournament last year. And they don't have Ryan Boatright anymore. Look for a pair of graduate transfers (Sterling Gibbs and Shonn Miller) to fill in for him. Meanwhile, the core of Rodney Purvis (PG), Daniel Hamilton (F), and Amida Brimah (C) is as good a core as you could want for a team. Really the only thing holding them back is that I don't understand how they weren't better last year.
Sleeper: Houston - They were not a good team last year. Perhaps LeRon Barnes and Devonta Pollard will finally live up to their potential? Perhaps transfers like Damyean Dotson and Ronnie Johnson will have an immediate impact? Perhaps Kelvin Sampson recruited better than projected? I'm not rooting for this team because I don't like Sampson. This could really be a vastly improved team though.
Bottom of the Barrel: East Carolina - Losing guard Terry Whisnant will hurt a lot.

Atlantic 10
1. Davidson - What to do with a team that won the conference, lost the conference Player of the Year, but kept everyone else? I say Brian Sullivan, Jack Gibbs, and Peyton Aldridge will keep up the success.
2. Dayton - It's hard to not looks at the Flyers as overachievers last year, what with their 0 players over 6'6 left by the end of the year. Archie Miller has a very good core of Scoochi Smith, Dyshawn Pierre, and Kendall Pollard. Only the loss of Jordan Sibert should really hurt. As long any big man (Freshman center Steve McElvene, perhaps) steps up, they should be fine.
3. Rhode Island - E.C. Mattews could carry this team if he wanted. That shouldn't be needed.
Sleeper: VCU - Losing Shaka Smart prototypes Biante Weber and Treveon Graham hurts as does Trey Larrier to transfer and the man himself, coach Shaka Smart. There's still enough talent on the roster to compete for a top 3 spot. With the core players and coach gone, I have to predict a decline. If I'm wrong though, watch out.
Bottom of the Barrel: Fordham - They were pretty bad last year, then lost Atlantic 10 Freshman of the Year Eric Paschall.

Big East
1. Villanova - The Wildcat's national rankings a little high, but they should still be the class of the Big East. Reigning Conference player of the year Ryan Arcidiacono is back. Jalen Brunson is a top 20 recruit. There's a lot to work with on this roster.
2. Xavier - Senior stalwarts Matt Stainbrook and Dee Davis are gone. Basically everyone else is back. Trevon Bluiett should be a star and Jalen Reynolds looks great when he can stay out of foul trouble.
3. Butler - Kellen Dunham and Roosevelt Jones have been around long enough to deserve to have buildings named after them. Tyler Lewis is eligible after sitting out last year. Only the loss of their only reliable big man, Kameron Woods will be felt.
Sleeper: Seton Hall - There's a lot of teams that could be really good that we all see coming (Georgetown and Providence come to mind). Seton Hall is one that most people aren't thinking about. Isaiah Whitehead (before his injury) and Angel Delgado were two of the Big East's best Freshmen last year. Add in Massachusetts transfer Derrick Gordon and a solid rotation of role players and you have a team that could make a big leap.
Bottom of the Barrel: St. John's - New coach Chris Mullin lost everyone. Last year, they played six deep and lost all six of those players. A respectable recruiting class and a couple promising transfers won't be enough to prevent a free fall.

Mountain West Conference
1. San Diego St. - I'm bully on the Aztecs. All they have to do is figure out how to score.  They have the best mix of talent and experience returning in the Mountain West. If Malik Pope, Winston Shepard, and co. can figure out how to score a few more points, the will be untouchable in the conference race.
2. UNLV - On paper, the Runnin' Rebels are stacked with talent. They are also very young. Expect Mercer PG transfer Ike Nwamu to keep youngsters Stephen Zimmerman, Dwayner Morgan, etc. focused.
3. Boise St. - How important was conference player of the year Derrick Marks (now gone) to last year's team? I expect the Broncos to be a distant third or second.
Sleeper: Fresno St. - Marvelle Harris, an All Conference first team player, is back. Most of the rest of the rotation is too. There's a lot of transfers coming in. That last part is a wild card. In all honestly, I don't see anyone who could sneak up on me in the conference.
Bottom of the Barrel: San Jose St. - They're bad. They've been bad for a while. They lost most of their significant players from last year. They will continue to be bad.

The True Mid-Majors

Conference USA
Favorite: Old Dominion - They were the best team in the conference last year and still have conference Newcomer of the Year Trey Freeman on the roster. There's no one else worth getting excited about on the team, just a solid core of returners.
Runner Up: UAB - I'm not ready to anoint them yet. They return almost everyone from the young team that upset a 3 seed in last year's NCAA tournament. That includes All-Freshman teamers Nick Norton (G) and William Lee (F) and Senior Robert Brown. I'm not fully decided on if that late season surge was a sign of things to come and simply a good run.
Sleeper: UTEP - This is easily the highest upside team in the conference (The next closest is Charlotte who is a deep sleeper if I were to pick one). UTEP is the only team with three former top 150 recruits. One of those is former Oregon guard (by way of Junior College) Dominic Artis who should make an immediate impact. They have the strongest recruiting class in the league too and a strong duo of returning big men. If not for losing conference Defensive Player of the year Julian Washburn and All Conference forward Vince Hunter, I'd have them as my team to beat.
Bottom of the Barrel: Southern Miss - Donnie Tyndall got them in a lot of trouble.

Horizon League
Favorite: Valparaiso - They were the best team in the conference last year. They bring back everyone except one end of the bench reserve. The next two best teams last year took big personnel hits. It'll be lonely at the top for Valparaiso.
Runner Up: Oakland - A pair of All-Freshman players and All Conference guard Kahlil Felder will be the closest thing Valparaiso has to a competitor this season.
Sleeper: Detroit - They weren't great by any measure last year, but they do return Freshman of the Year Paris Bass. That's called "a building block".
Bottom of the Barrel: Youngstown St. - They lost all their experience to graduation or transfers, returning only one significant contributor. And before you ask, no, they do not bring in a great recruiting class.

Ivy League
Favorite: Yale - Ivy League player of the year Justin Sears is back for his Senior season. Still, expect a slight dip from the top 75 team they were last year.
Runner Up: Princeton - Supposing they can find a little help for Amir Bell in the back court, the trio of Spencer Weisz, Steven Cook, and Hans Brase have the front court covered well enough to make a leap in the conference pecking order.
Sleeper: Harvard - Don't sleep on Harvard. Just don't do it. Tommy Amaker is constantly reloading. They take a slight step back thanks to graduation and injuries, that is, until it turns out that half the roster is ready for breakout seasons.
Bottom of the Barrel: Cornell - Remember when they made the Sweet Sixteen a few years ago? That's not so much the case these days.

Missouri Valley Conference
Favorite: Wichita St. - Who else is it going to be? The Shockers are a certain top 20 (if not top 10) team. More than one loss in conference play seems unlikely. Fred Van Vleet, Ron Baker, Evan Wessel, Shaquille Morris, Cleveland St. transfer Anton Grady, Kansas transfer Connor Frankamp, top 100 recruit Landry Shamet. What's not to like?
Runner Up: Northern Iowa - They will not be a top 15 team again, not without Sean Tuttle, not even close. They have a long way to fall though before they need to worry about being the third best team in the conference.
Sleeper: Evansville - They bring back nearly everyone from a borderline top 100 team last year, including a pair of All Conference 1st team players with the inside out combo of D.J. Balentine and Egidijus Mockevicius. Calling them a sleeping is probably selling them short.
Bottom of the Barrel: Bradley - This tends to happen when a team is the worst in its conference then loses three starters.

Ohio Valley Conference
Favorite: Belmont – This conference lost a lot. The entire First Team All Conference is gone. There's no clear best team, so I'm going to have to go with the best mix of returning experience and traditional strength. The Bruins return most of their core from last year, bring in a lot of Freshman, and have a lot of Sophomores ready for a chance to break out.
Runner Up: UT-Martin – There's is no good choice here. UT-Martin lost two All Conference 2nd Team players, but still have Twymond Howard and Alex Anderson for Senior seasons as well as Myles Taylor back from injury.
Sleeper: Murray St. - Lose your coach to a bigger school. Lose your Player of the Year to the NBA Lottery. Lose an All Conference 1st Team Forward to graduation. The Racers are a historically strong program, so maybe Jeffery Moss, Gee McGhee, Justin Seymour, or some unexpected star can keep them on top of the OVC standings in this power vacuum.
Bottom of the Barrel: SIU-Edwardsville – They just lost so much. The whole starting lineup is gone. No one comes in to replace them.

West Coast Conference
Favorite: Gonzaga - They enter the season with arguably the best front court in the country (Kyle Wiltjer, Domantas Sabonis, and Przemek Karnowski). As long as they can come up with a functional backcourt to help Josh Perkins, returning from a broken jaw, they will be dominating in the WCC yet again.
Runner Up: BYU - It's always hard to predict how BYU is going to be with all the players rotating in and out for Missions. All I do know is that this is Kyle Collinsworth's team and I'm scared to even imagine what kind of numbers the NCAA's leader in triple-doubles will put up.
Sleeper: St. Mary's - Really, there's no reason to assume anything out of the Gaels this year. They lost a lot and don't bring back much to replace it. Still, St. Mary's doesn't stay out of the conversation for long, so they're always a dark horse.
Bottom of the Barrel: Loyola Marymount - By far the worst team in the WCC last year and then they lost five players who averaged at least 20 MPG.

They Have Some Good Teams

Big West
Favorite: LBSU - They are getting a major influx of talent with transfers from Maryland (Nick Faust), Marquette (Gabe Levin), and USC (Roschon Prince) along with A.J. Spencer returning from injury. The loss of Mike Caffey and Tyler Lamb hurt, but they have already reloaded.
Runner Up: UC-Santa Barbara - Losing Alan Williams hurts a lot. Keeping the back court of Michael Bryson and Gabe Vincents helps to ease the pain.
Sleeper: UC-Irvine - They were the best team in the conference last year. Despite personel losses, they still have two players listed 7'2 or taller. By calling them a sleeper, I could be selling them short (get it?).
Bottom of the Barrel: Cal. St. Northridge - They literally don't have enough players to have a lineup of returning players.

Colonial Athletic Association
Favorite: Hofstra – They bring back three players who averaged 30+ MPG (Brian Bernardi, Juan'ya Green – CAA 1st Team, Ameen Tanksley – CAA 2nd Team) along with Hampton transfer Deron Powers and Princeton transfer Denton Koon. A lot of experience on this roster.
Runner Up: William & Mary – They lost CAA Player of the Year Marcus Thornton but kept CAA Defensive Player of the Year Terry Tarpey and CAA 3rd Teamer Omar Prewitt. Sounds fair.
Sleeper: Towson – This was a bad team last year. The bring in Wake Forest transfer Arnaud William Adala Moto, a former top 150 recruit. If he can mesh well with returning forwards John Davis and Mike Morsell they could make a big leap.
Bottom of the Barrel: Charleston – They were the worst team in the conference last year and lost two key seniors. I expect they'll be better than last year, just not good enough to get out of the bottom of the standings.

Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference
Favorite: Iona – The Gaels were a borderline top 100 team last year and bring back MAAC Rookie of the Year Schadrac Casimir and All Conference 1st Team guard A.J. English. Supposing Wake Forest and James Madison forward transfers Aaron Rountree III and Taylor Bessick can mesh with them, they'll be even better this year.
Runner Up: Monmouth – Justin Robinson and Deon Jones are probably the best inside-out duo in the conference.
Sleeper: Manhattan – It's not often that often that a former top 30 recruit plays in the MAAC. Jermaine Lawrence was just that in 2013. If he could ever live up to his potential, he could terrorize the conference.
Bottom of the Barrel: Marist – They are young and inexperienced and lost only player of note last year, Chavaughn Lewis, to graduation.

Mid-American Conference
Favorite: Central Michigan – Senior duo Chris Fowler and John Simons make this the most impressive looking team in an otherwise balanced conference.
Runner Up: Kent. St. - Graduate transfers Galal Cancer and Xavier Pollard will team up with MAC 1st Team forward Jimmy Hall and make Kent St. one of the better teams in the MAC.
Sleeper: Ball St. - They were barely a top 300 team last year, but they bring back almost everyone, including MAC Freshman of the Year Sean Sellers.
Bottom of the Barrel: Ohio – Houston and Michigan St. Transfers Jaaron Simmons and Kenny Kaminski will be relied on heavily.

Summit League
Favorite: South Dakota St. - By now, it's foolish to expect anyone other than the Jackrabbits to win the Summit League. As long as they can find a replacement for Summit Defensive Player of the Year Cody Larson, then Deondre Parks and George Marshall will walk through conference play with no trouble.
Runner Up: North Dakota St. - If not the Jackrabbits, then the Bison. Their only significant loss was Player of the Year Lawrence Alexander.
Sleeper: Oral Roberts – Obi Emefano was a Summit 1st teamer. In a weak conference, that may be enough to sneak up in the standings.
Bottom of the Barrel: Denver – That's what happens when you lose three players who average 30+ MPG.

Sunbelt Conference
Favorite: Louisiana Lafayette – The Sunbelt is rapidly becoming one of the more interesting conferences. With potential pro Shawn Long still around, and Jay Wright running the point, it's hard to see anyone finishing above them.
Runner Up: Georgia St. - Few teams in the country have done better in the transfer market than the Panthers. There's definite holes left by Ryan Harrow's graduation and R.J. Hunter leaving for the NBA. Former top 50 recruit from Indiana Jeremy Hollowell is finally eligible as is Samford transfer Isaiah Williams. Kevin Ware, a former Louisville transfer himself (and a former top 75 recruit) should be ready to step in as a starter. Then there's forward Markus Crider in the front court. This conference race is going to be neck and neck.
Sleeper: Arkansas-Little Rock – They have a total of 10 players who are transfers coming in or returning from injury. That's a lot of wild cards.
Bottom of the Barrel: Texas St. - I'm very uncertain about this. There's about 4 or 5 teams that I could see bottoming out in conference play. I just find Texas St. to be the least remarkable.

Basketball's Not Their Thing

American East
Favorite: Stony Brook – This is a stacked team and it all starts with conference Player of the Year and Defensive Player of the Year, senior forward Jameel Warney. Carson Puriefoy, Rayshaun McGrew, and Longwood transfer Lucas Woodhouse will give him all the back up he needs.
Runner Up: Vermont – Ethan O'Day and Dre Wills are defensive stalwarts and Trae Bell-Haynes and Cameron Ward are sophomores ready to break out. Best of all, Vermont lost none of its best players.
Sleeper: Albany - This is a top heavy conference that didn't graduate most of their best players. Example, Albany graduated one All Conference forward (Sam Rowley) yet still have three All Conference guards (Evan Singletary, Peter Hooley, and RaAnthony Sanders) and plenty of front court experience. So, “sleeper” isn't even fair.
Bottom of the Barrel: UMBC – They were really awful last year. American East 2nd Team forward Cody Joyce won't be enough to get them out of the cellar.

Atlantic Sun
Favorite: North Florida – The Osprey were the class of a weak bunch last year and return 1st Team All Conference players Dallas Moore and Beau Beech as well as Defensive Player of the Year Demarcus Saniels.
Runner Up: NJIT – They aren't independents anymore. Most of the team that beat Michigan last year is back. It sure would be interesting if they won their conference the first year they're affiliated.
Sleeper: FGCU – The core of the Dunk City 15 seed that made it to the Sweet 16 is gone. They still have the only two top 150 recruits in the conference (Rayjon Tucker - #123 in 2015, Demetris Morant - #144 in 2012).
Bottom of the Barrel: Kennesaw St. - They were one of the 15 worst teams in the country last year. Keeping Yonel Brown and Nigel Pruitt isn't enough to fix what's broken.

Big Sky
Favorite: Northern Arizona - With Jordyn Martin taking care of the defense and Kris Yanku for the offense, the Lumberjacks are looking just fine.
Runner Up: Montana - Expect last year's Big Sky Newcomer of the Year Martin Breunig to have another big year. He'll need some help.
Sleeper: Weber St. - The Wildcats return the high usage trio of Jeremy Senglin, Richaud Gittens, and Joel Bolomboy. Supposing a talented recruiting class can fill in the rest of the holes in the lineup, they could make a big jump in the standings.
Bottom of the Barrel: Idaho St. - This is a sub 300 team last year returning only one player of note (Ben Wilson).

Big South
Favorite: Winthrop - So this is where Zach Price (former top 75 recruit, transfer via Louisville then Missouri) finally ends up. If he's worth the wait, then he, Keon Johnson, and Xavier Cooks will form quite the trio.
Runner Up: High Point - This is damn near the Platonic ideal of roster turnover. They lost a couple players to graduation last year. There's a group of Seniors ready to step up, Juniors ready to move from role players to key rotation pieces, Sophomores ready to move from scrubs to role players, and freshman ready to be scrubs. It sure is boring, but it's reliable.
Sleeper: Presbyterian - When in doubt, pick the team with the reigning Freshman of the Year. Expect this sleeper to stay deep in a REM cycle though. It would be a minor miracle for them to hit .500 in conference play.
Bottom of the Barrel: Liberty - Another case of a really bad team losing most of its lineup. Remember when they had Seth Curry for a little while? That sure was nice for them.

Northeast Conference
Favorite: Mt. St. Mary's - In a conference hemorrhaging top players, the team with the most returning talent is king. They have a pair of All Conference 3rd team players in Ifeanyi Umezuike and Gregory Graves returning along with diminutive point guard Junior Robinson (listed at only 5'5). A bunch of solid role players are back too.
Runner Up: St. Francis (Brooklyn) - They lost two All Conference 1st team players from last year but keep reigning Defensive Player of the Year Amdy Falls. This is a senior heavy team with a lot of experience. They just need to settle on a go-to scorer.
Sleeper: LIU-Brooklyn - They relied a lot on Sophomores last year. That experience should pay off this year. They also bring in Florida International transfer Jerome Frink who should make an immediate impact.
Bottom of the Barrel: Central Connecticut St. - Yeah, this is a school that exists, and they're terrible. I think the biggest gut punch was Northeast Most Improved Player Matt Mobley transferring.

Patriot League
Favorite: Bucknell - It's looking like a two horse race in the Patriot League. I like Bucknell's depth and that they bring back their most important players, like Chris Hass and Nana Foulland.
Runner Up: Lehigh - They have the reigning Freshman of the Year (Point Guard Kathron Ross) and Player of the Year (Center Tim Kempton). I love that kind of duo. The only thing that shakes me is their questionable depth.
Sleeper: Loyola (Maryland) - Really bad team that returns six players from a seven man rotation, including two sophomores who made the All Freshman team last year.
Bottom of the Barrel: Navy - I'm actually kind of pleased that the team for the US Navy is so mediocre. They have better things to worry about.

Southern Conference
Favorite: Chattanooga -They have two All Conference players returning, including Defensive Player of the Year Justin Tuoyo.
Runner Up: East Tenn. St. - The Buccaneers are playing deep in the transfer game with Deuce Bello (Missouri), Peter Jurkin (Indiana), and Ge'Lawn Guyn all coming in this year (and more to come next year). There aren't a ton of foundational players those transfers will be joining though, so that could make it tough.
Sleeper: Furman - When looking for sleepers, I like to look for transfers or All Freshman team selections. Furman has two of the latter (Sophomores Devin Sibley and Daniel Fowler), along with All Conference guard Stephen Croone, and a lot of depth.
Bottom of the Barrel: Citadel - You've heard this one before. They were the worst team in the conference last year and lost their best players. Expect another long year.

Southland Conference
Favorite: Stephen F. Austin - There is no way to exaggerate the stranglehold the Lumberjacks have on the Southland Conference. It might be a little tricky this year though. They return a ton of guards, including Southland Player of the Year, wing Thomas Walkup. No experienced forwards return though. They weren't overly reliant on the front court last year, but they need something. The tallest player who logged any minutes last year was 6'5. If they can find even one serviceable big man from the Freshmen and JC transfers, they'll be fine.
Runner Up: Northwestern St. - They have same problem as SF-Austin (no proven big men) but have guards that aren't nearly as good, while still the next best thing the conference has to offer.
Sleeper: Texas A&M-Corpus Cristi - They really aren't a sleeper. I just want to talk about this school. It has the weirdest location for a campus I've ever seen.
Bottom of the Barrel: Nicholls St. - The good news is they lost no one due to graduation. The bad news is six players transferred away.

Embarrassingly Bad

If you need any more proof that these conferences don't care about basketball, these were the last three conferences that gave full rosters for their teams. Otherwise, this post would've been up much sooner.

Western Athletic Conference
Favorite: New Mexico St. - As a top 100 team, the Aggies have been anomalous in this conference for a while. Even losing Daniel Mullings, Tshildzi Nephawe, and Remi Barry won't be enough to prevent them from being the class of the conference. Pascal Siakam will be the man. Freshman Sidy Ndir is already getting attention from NBA scouts. He, Ian Baker, and Tanveer Bhullar will be called on to do a lot more for the team. Keep an eye on them. They look like bubble busters.
Runner Up: Grand Canyon - Picking a runner up is like picking another sleeper in this conference. DeWayne Russell will need to do a little bit of everything for this team.
Sleeper: UMKC - First of all, they're the Kangaroos. How can I not talk about them? Secondly, they have the reigning conference Player of the Year Martez Harrison, That has to count for something.
Bottom of the Barrel: Chicago St. - They didn't lose anyone of significance from last year's team. They just lost a lot of people. I guess that means there's nowhere to go but up. Maybe next year.

Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference
Favorite: Norfolk St. - Jeff Short is an All Conference guard. Jordan Butler is an All Freshman forward. That's enough to be considered the best in this conference.
Runner Up: Maryland-Eastern Shore - They'll be relying a lot of reigning Freshman of the Year Ryan Andino and All Conference 3rd team forward Dominique Elliott.
Sleeper: UNC-Central - I can't help but talk about this team. The whole starting five last year made the All Conference 1st, 2nd, or 3rd teams. Four of them are gone now. Only Dante Homes remains. Florida Gulf Coast transfer Dajuan Graf is finally eligible. And there's always Jamal Ferguson, a former top 150 recruit, who could finally live up to his potential.
Bottom of the Barrel: Coppin St. - There's about eight teams that I legitimately know will be awful. Any one of them could be the worst. I'm picking Grambling St. just because they'll rely so much on Juco players.

Southwestern Athletic Conference
Favorite: Alabam St. - The SWAC most certainly will again be the worst conference in the country, with the team representing them in the tournament being a lock for a 16 seed. I like Alabama St. for their back court of Jamel Walters and Steve Rogers Jr.
Runner Up: Texas Southern - They were the best team in the conference last year and still not a top 200 team per Kenpom. They have a couple intriguing transfers, Jose Rodriguez returning after a redshirt season, and Chris Thomas, who at one time was a top tier recruit.
Sleeper: Alabama A&M - It's hard to understand how a team with All Conference 1st and 2nd teamers Nicholas West and Ladarius Tabb could be so bad last year. Perhaps with a new supporting cast, they could improve greatly.
Bottom of the Barrel: Prairie View A&M - The only returning player of note is Karim York and that's nothing to brag about.