• Home
  • About

    About Troy

    Dad to Madelyn, husband of Tricia, friend to all (which you can all read about here, if you care).

    My day job is in the exciting world of ones and zeros as a computer applications engineer.

    About The Blog

    The blog has changed a lot throughout it's existence, beginning as a chance to crack wise with friends amd sometimes talk about bad movies.

    Then, at some point it morphed into an attempt at writing relevantly about movies, to whatever degree I've been sucessful with that.

    I still love bad movies as much as I love good, and from time to time I remember to write about those. I also will dip my toe into my other interests, including TV, comics, board games, and sports (my teams are Blazers/Seahwaks/Mariners/Ducks).

    About Robert Denby

    You can click here to see why is he so elusive...
  • Contact

    Contact Me

    Email me at: troyolson1 at gmail dot com
  • Ratings Key

    The general thought process behind my movie ratings key...

    Shocking, but true, these ratings are a mix of how much I personally enjoyed the film along with the film’s technical and narrative proficiency, thematic depth, and genre influence.  Revolutionary stuff, I know.

    Due to the subjectivity of these ratings and because my feelings on a film can and do change over time, I may change my ratings on a film at a moment's notice. After all, even the Top 10 All-Time Movies list from Sight and Sound magazine is in a constant state of flux every 10 years -- similarly, my viewpoints and feelings on a film can change as I go through different passages in my life, learn and read more about a specific film, and/or see a movie from different perspectives.

    ***** Masterpiece Essential and not to be missed. A perfect film that need not be added to or taken away from (any flaws are easily overlooked), it deserves its place as an all-time great. It is superior in multiple fields, be they narrative proficiency, thematic resonance, characterization, cinematography, direction, acting, production, or overall influence. It's a great artistic achievement and/or a top-notch piece of entertainment. Many of these have affected me in a special way -- films I find immensely rewarding to watch again and again.
    ****½ Near Classic Worthy of multiple viewings and high acclaim. The difference between a Masterpiece and a Near Classic is often akin to splitting hairs, often coming down to minor details I couldn't overlook, nebulous gut reactions, or perhaps even my viewing experience. This rating denotes that this is assuredly an upper echelon film, but it is lacking something from placing it among the all-time greats. In contention for the best film of its year and the highest example of its genre. Even if not the utmost essential, these films still shouldn't be missed.
    **** Excellent Entertaining throughout and among the best of its genre/type. A film that is worthy of multiple views and I would certainly recommend you see. It won't disappoint, but shows some obvious shortcomings or is missing the artistic resonance that would make it an essential viewing. In consideration for the 10 best films of its year and/or near the top of its genre, but for one reason or another doesn't match up to the top tier of films.
    ***½ Very Good It's never on it's way to being great, but it's entertaining enough and worth seeing if you have the chance. A film that interested me while still having too many obvious flaws or failed to impress enough to consider it for a higher rating. Still better than most films out there. The entry-level rating for what I consider rewatchable. I would recommend this film and it's likely among the best 20 films of a year or a good example of a specific genre.
    *** Above Average A good way to spend some time, but not something that is entirely necessary or that I'll be clamoring to see again. I enjoyed it enough, with the good things outweighing the bad, and it has enough quality or entertainment in a few areas to keep you at least interested throughout.
    **½ Average There's at least one redeeming facet that keeps it watchable -- a performance, a particular genre, a scene, great cinematography/score/effects. If that aspect of the film interests you, then you may enjoy it, but otherwise don't waste your time or money on it.
    ** Below Average A forgettable film with very noticeable issues in terms of acting, directing, and story. A no-man's land where the film doesn't qualify as something I could recommend taking the time to watch for any reason, yet isn't so objectionable as to be entirely worthless.
    *½ Bad By any objective critical standard, this is not a good movie, lacking in many areas. However, there may still be some value in watching it -- I do use this rating for the amusing films that can be labeled "so bad, it's good".
    * Terrible Whether it's boring, inept, badly made, or annoyingly stupid, this is of poor quality all around and a waste of time. Not even bad enough to be moderately funny.
    NO STARS An affront to humanity Insulting to your intelligence and offensive on a moral level. Saved only for those films that are truly, truly awful, with no redeeming values (i.e. bad romantic comedies, Michael Bay movies, Norbit).
  • Movie Reviews

    Click here to go to my database of all movies watched and rated.

    For a list of movies I've written reviews on in some form, click here.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Blazers/Mavs, Game 2, Preview to Liveblogging

9494689-essay

It was brought to my attention (thanks, Jamie) that I haven’t talked any NBA around here for a while.  I wasn’t able to watch Game 1 of the Blazers/Mavs playoff series, but I will be able to watch Game 2 and thought I’d try liveblogging the game tonight.

It seems pretty simple as to what the Blazers need to do to win tonight.  First, they need to either make a few outside shots or simply stop shooting them.  It’s been a season long issue that this team lives and dies by the 3-pointer and it seems that when they die by it, like they did in Game 1, it’s in the most grisly of manners (2-of-16).  Second, they need either Gerald Wallace or Wesley Matthews to bounce back.  Wallace has been a model of consistency since joining the Blazers, so it was strange to see him play so poorly in Game 1.  Matthews inconsistency has been a hallmark of his play this season, but he typically can be counted on to follow up a poor showing with a game or two of great play.

I don’t have any worries about LaMarcus Aldridge (and it should show how far he has come this year that I can say that), who the Mavs don’t have an answer for defensively, or Andre Miller, who continues to amaze me with his “old-man” basketball skills. Similarly, Marcus Camby should provide consistent rebounding and defense (why he wasn’t in there in the 4th quarter of Game 1 is hard to fathom, though since I wasn’t watching the game flow, I’ll withhold comment) and Nic Batum will give good defense, even if his shooting stroke is off.

At this point anything you get from Rudy Fernandez and Brandon Roy is a bonus. Rudy had a stretch of the season where it seemed like he was figuring things out and finally finding a role on the team. Then his 3-point shooting cratered late in the season and it hasn’t yet recovered. But Rudy is just a complimentary player, while Brandon’s descent into mediocrity is sad. I keep reading things from writers and bloggers in other cities and they all seem to make mention of Roy still being a threat, even in his current condition. How I’d love for that to be true, but apart from a couple of flourishes here and there, I just don’t see it. He isn’t much more reliable than Rudy at this point, seemingly losing all of the ultra-confident swagger he used to have. I know McMillan thought that playing him in the 4th quarter might bring back a bit of the old Brandon, but it was a failed experiment and even IF Matthews plays like he did in Game 1, I’d like to think his explosiveness and defense provide more of a threat than Brandon does during a close game.

I’ll create a new post when I start the liveblog and you can refresh it all night to follow along.  Game time is 6:30 Pacific, so parenting duties might make it so I have to watch parts of the game time-shifted on the DVR, but I’d guess I’ll be all caught up by the beginning of the second half.

Labels: , ,

0 comments

Post a Comment