Movies I like Hollywood to Make, Keep On Making, or Start Making Again

Being a movie lover ever since (being influenced by my father), I would almost watch every kind. When I was a kid, I was not very picky.  I would watch a cartoon just because it was a cartoon, even if the story is poor.  I would watch comedy just because it makes me laugh, regardless of the stupid and desperate jokes and antics.  I would watch sci-fi or fantasy just because I was awed of the special effects, even if the plot is depthless, filled with clichés, and plenty of holes.  I would watch action just because it has plenty of gunfights, explosions, and fight scenes, even if Steven Seagal was a terrible actor.  And so on. When one is a child, one has low standards of entertainment.   But not this low...

But as I grow up, I begin to become a bit picky, more sophisticated (just part of growing up). Standards are raised.  Cheap jokes don’t sell anymore.  Clichés start to become stale.  Bad acting makes me shrug.  And most especially, the story matters now.  Sure, fiction will always have flaws in their story.  But at least, not so much, that the creators at least made an effort to make it minimal and does not make stupid, unimaginative and lazy remedies.  I sometimes ignore absurd coincidences, inconsistencies, minor plot holes, and continuity conflicts (in series or film franchises) in fiction as long as, overall, the story is entertaining and intelligent – made me feel that watching (or reading, if it’s literature) it did not waste my time.

Movies are the top pop culture makers.  So, here are some movies that I hope Hollywood would keep on making, some kind of movies that would potentially create the fashion of pop culture I want to be influenced with.    Of course, these opinions are dependent on my tastes and do not necessary mirror the taste of the general public.

Musicals

Create more musicals with the same class as “Sound of Music” and “Fiddler on the roof.”  Making “High School Musical” and “Mama Mia” is a start.  But they can do better.  Significant themes, three hours long, comedy at the start, sudden turn to seriousness at the last part.

Movies with Christian Heroes

It does not necessarily mean that it should be a movie of the Christian genre (though, it would be also nice if they can do that once in a while).  But at least the hero should be a Christian.  Christians are humans also; though they are grounded on sound moral and spiritual principles, they also have the same flaws, psych, strengths, weaknesses, limitations, backgrounds, references, etc. as other humans. What makes them special is their being a Christian.  They can be subjected to any genre of any kind or any situation a human can be put into, and their reactions or acts are dependent on their being a Christian.  And when I say that Christians can be depicted on “any genre”, I mean any genre.  Even sci-fi or fantasy.

        

I can only come up with two Christian heroes I encountered in movies.  And they are just great. Still a flawed human but Christian-themed.  There’s the Puritan Solomon Kane and, the post-apocalyptic Christian who memorized the New King James Bible, Eli.

Badass Christian heroes.  Given into the situations they were set, I believe that the response and action they've shown is how a Christian would actually do and how a Christian would actually act, hypothetically speaking of course.

Or they could create movies out of the already popular Christian heroes in literature, like Robinson Crusoe.  Or even make a “Pilgrim’s Progress” movie.  It’s a fantasy with explicit allegory on a Christian’s journey.  Heck, the main character’s name is Christian!  They could do that.  With a gritty graphic novel-style motif.  And there’s Zaanan, the Christian hero of a Christian sci-fi book series.  Or even Power Mark, hero of a Christian comicbook series.

What of Bible heroes?  Some say that Bible stories are “fairy tales” anyway, therefore stories like the Noah’s Ark will have the “fairy tale” charm.  Imagine the CGI on the Flood and the mob of animals (a preview of how this can be good is “Evan Almighty”.  It’s clumsy, but Hollywood can do better by using the actual story).  Yup, back then, Hollywood already made movies about some Bible stories.  But the film techniques and technology back then can’t really interpret the visual grandeur of the Bible stories.  Heck, even the costumes were lame.  From Noah to Jesus’ time, span of thousands of years, the same style of clothing applies?   Unimaginative stereotypical ideas; just think of it, moviemakers, just by the costume matter alone, can make something exciting.  They could presume or interpret – based on some trends of that era and other facts we know regarding clothing of that era, if we have any – what the clothing are during the time of a Bible story.  The possibilities are actually endless with today’s film technology and artistry.  “Avatar”-style interpretation of Eden.  Parting of the Red Sea.  The numerous battles.  The fall of Jericho’s walls.  Daniel with the lions.  Christians getting eaten by lions.  God’s manifestations of natural wonders.  Plagues of Egypt.  The Flood (It’s going to be awesome.  Let’s use the effects of the mediocre “2012” as reference).  There is lot of room for imaginative speculations, trivial additions that can make the story more exciting (which what Hollywood does to biopics or “based on a true story” movies anyway: lots of additional details, story revisions, and sometimes even straying from the main truths of the “true story”).  It actually does not matter what additional material is added, as long as it will not contradict with the main and important facts and ideas in the original Bible story.  Take a look on Mel Gibson’s “Passion of the Christ”, a few trivial details are added to the story, like the manifestation of Satan and evil and death as a wicked looking mother and child.  It doesn’t matter if it was not mentioned in the Bible, such additional detail is trivial.   That minor detail did not change the main theme of the story: Christ’s passion that made him endure such humiliation and pain.            

                

All kinds of stories exist in the Bible.  Historical.  Fiction.  Drama.  Romance.  Action.  Supernatural episodes, which led some to saying that the Bible stories are fantasy.  Even erotica.  The Bible is actually the only R-18 book recommended by Christians for children to read.  Violence and sex are very graphic and extensive throughout the Bible.  To pretend that stories of incest, genocide, orgies, murders, treacheries, sexual deviance, gory violence, adulteries, extreme sins, and other shocking details – which are even committed by the heroes – do not exist in the Bible , or real life for that matter, is wrong.  If kids are going to be exposed to these realities of life, it is better off that they do through God’s Word.  To see these evils is the first step to realize that there is something wrong with this world and with us.  That there is sin.  That there is darkness.  All of these things are in the Bible because it is part of human life and history.  It is reality.  It will not go away.  Evil exists.  And the Bible does not shield as from reality.  It is there to illustrate how human psyche and culture can become rotten or how it is already rotten.  And we must realize that.  This world, this life, this reality is black and white.  Good versus evil.  And that God is good and he hates evil.  But that even evil happens and used by God’s will for a good end, which only his sovereign wisdom knows.  That is what the Bible intends to show by including these “shocking” details in the Bible.

And Hollywood loves sex and violence.  And Bible stories can provide that.  However, at the context of the story (and the whole Bible), these things are necessary in the story to show a good end or a moral.  Hollywood likes to add sex and violence in movies even if they are not actually justified in the story.  They are added just to “spice” it up.  Often times, the sex scene is not relevant to the whole plot at all.  Just for the sake of sex, they put it in the story.  But the graphic details of sex and violence in Bible stories are very relevant to the overall plot of the story.  And Christians will accept it and it is very possible to even recommend it for children to watch.  Back to “Passion of the Christ” as illustration.  The torture and crucifixion scene in that movie was very squeamish and very “R-18”, but it never offended Christians and even allowed children to watch it because (a) Christ’s suffering was really great and the graphical image in the movie is actually underrated, and (b) the violence is justified since it provokes thoughts on how great Christ’s love is and illustrates the comparison of the glory of his resurrection.   These “R-18” details are there in the Bible since they serve as comparisons.  Black to white.  When there is something bad to compare the good into, the good is more appreciated.  That’s how sex and violence is an integral part in Bible stories and why it is justified to show them graphically in movies based on Bible stories.

Plenty of stories to choose from.  Elijah and Elisha’s  “Qui Gon Jinn and Obi Wan Kenobi”, “Juan Sánchez Villa-Lobos Ramírez and Connor MacLeod”-type of mentor-apprentice relationship.  The former challenging Baal priests to a duel (how convenient if religious debates are settled like this nowadays.  The story?  Check it out somewhere in I Kings 18), getting fed by ravens during time of famine, and then going to heaven in a chariot of fire when his mission was finished!  And the latter summoning bears to devour youths who mock a man of God (never mess with men of God; nowadays known as Christians).  Moses’ a la soap opera dramatic life story.  Samson the real life Incredible Hulk; who has wrestled a lion to death and killed thousands of Philistines with just a donkey’s jaw bone. 

Just imagine that, the epic fight scene proportion is a la “300”!  And speaking of “300”, what about Gideon’s own 300?  A testament on how badass an outnumbered Israeli army can be (which we saw again in their wars against neighboring nations such as Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Algeria, etc. as tiny Israel crushed them all). 

What about romantic love stories?  We have Isaac and Rebekah, which shows that “love at first sight” is real, but not how pop culture perceive it.  And we have Hosea and Gomer, which is a better story than the “Pretty Women” concept. 

We also have King David, the best of the best Old Testament heroes.  Shepherd boy who killed lions and bears.  Also a very talented musician and poet and singer.  Then he killed Goliath.  Which prompted him to be a soldier, a very skilled and popular soldier.  He suffered the envy and murderous attempts of the king (Saul) then, and had a once-in-a-million deep friendship with the prince (Jonathan) – the type of which was called “romantic friendship” back in the 1800s, which would be considered so gay in today’s era.  He then became an outlaw.  He married a lot of ladies.  Being a legendary warrior himself, he had other legendary warriors that joined his command as well.  He raised an elite group of fighters a la mafia famiglia.

And just like real mafiosis’ loyalty, these warriors would remain with him up to the time he was king.  As David was king, he created, though small, the greatest empire Israel ever had.  David, his mafia, and his kingdom would remain a power throughout his reign (and Solomon’s, his son).  He would also commit mistakes like adultery and murder, and would suffer from the consequences of his sins.   Nonetheless, he is called “the man after God’s own heart” as his relationship with God and realization that God, alone, would really make him happy grew each passing day of his life.  Really, David’s story is the best in the Old Testament.                     

With all the creative resources Hollywood now has, the Bible stories can now be really effectively brought to life in the screen in all its awesomeness.   Moreover, even if the stories are all about these Bible heroes, the stories will show that the real main character is God Himself.  Imagine how Hollywood’s special effects can manifest all of God’s glory and power.  It would fall short, by so much, compared to the real deal but it can still be good.  Come on, Hollywood, you can do better than this.

More Toy Story and Shrek

Come on. Shrek 4 is the last Shrek?  It was not the band of an ending to end a good animated movie franchise.  Sure, probably Shrek 4 was a story upgrade of Shrek 3.  But the previous movies have better fairy tale allusions and gags.  Shrek 4 is okay but if they are going make a final Shrek movie, it should be a bang.  And Shrek 4 failed, in my opinion, to make that bang.  A Shrek finale should have a good story, plenty of timely gags, and plenty of funny reinventions of fairy tale stereotypes.   

Shrek is the greatest 3-d animation franchise.  Shrek or Toy Story.  Toys coming to life is a very charming and refreshing concept when the first Toy Story movie came out.  Mainly because the previous movies that used the concept of toys coming to life gave the kids nightmares.   

                

Yup.  Toy Story erased the earlier concept of toys coming to life is satanic.  I had always been a lover of toys.   I was a toy lover since, and still a toy lover now.  Thus, you see how much I love the Toy Story movies.  I had waited for the sequel for Toy Story 2 for more than ten years and it was just recently that the 3^rd installment came out.  I was about ten when Toy Story 2 came out at the theaters, and I’m now 21 when I watched Toy Story 3.  Thus, in some ways, I had been able to relate to Andy growing older and about to go to college.  Though, of course, as for me, I, instead, had just graduated from college.  But allegorically speaking, there are parallels.  Andy grew older, I grew older (We were both kids by the time of Toy Story 2).  Andy’s steppingstone change in life was going to college, mine was finishing college.  Andy has to let go of his toys, a symbolism of letting go of important things of the past and comfort zones so we can grow up.   There, Toy Story 3 made me sentimental.  Made me reminisce my past and provoked pondering of my future. 

Toy Story 3 had a good story and has the same charm it had when the first movie came out.  Plenty of funny moments, plot progress, and character developments.  Thus, it is a pity if it would be the last Toy Story movie. 

Shrek and Toy Story are on a league of their own in the 3-d animated genre.  Plenty of 3-d animated movies had come out since Toy Story pioneered it, but there was no other movie that was as special as Shrek and Toy Story.  I am not saying that the other movies of the genre were terrible, but it had never reached the standard which the first Toy Story movie set.  Oh, the Ice Age franchise was close, but there are still some things lacking in it for it to join the ranks of Shrek and Toy Story in my book.  “Finding Nemo” had also some high parts, but not enough. 

Shrek and Toy Story are the best and I hope there would be more.

Old School Action Flicks/Martial Arts

An action movie does not need to have a complicated story or award winning acting, though they should be at decent enough not to induce nausea.  Just put in lots of gun fights, explosions, gun fights, bad guys getting beaten up, gun fights, cars, maybe a hot dame or two, gunfights, explosions, some adrenaline rushing fast paced scenes, hand-to-hand combat, explosions, maybe some witty lines, and first class badassery by the main character(s) – plus more gunfights and explosions.  Of course, if the story and acting happened to be good, too, that would be just a bonus.  If there are going to be legendary dialogues and one-liners in it, it’s an instant classic.

I grew up with lots of action and martial arts films.  The 90s was, maybe, the best decade of action movies (or maybe the 80s).  And the 90s was my childhood.  Not only 90s movies, but because of HBO and cable, I was also exposed to some good action movies prior 90s.  Again, I don’t mind much if the story is mediocre or cliché, just as long it has the elements of a good action – fight scenes and all.  Remember, children’s low standards of entertainment.  However, there are just some action films that I would enjoy even if I had re-watched them post-childhood.  So it means either I did not outgrow my “low standards of entertainment” from childhood or the movies are definitely classics.  Especially, if the main character of the movie is pretty badass.

There’s “Dirty Harry” with his classic line: "I know what you're thinking.  'Did he fire six shots or only five?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, punk?" 

                

There’s John McClane of the “Die Hard series.”  (Note: that latest Die Hard film is tame compared to the first three.  Not “90s-standard-of-action” at all.)

 Of course, Rambo.  The epitome of the badass action hero. 

     

Then, there’s the T-800, the greatest Arnold Schwarzenegger character, which some said the most comfortable role Arnold ever played since he was actually just playing himself in that movie.

There also was Jericho Cane,  Arnie’s character in “End of Days.”  This was his second best character in the 90’s, for  he took the devil on with guns and grenade launchers!

           

The 90s was such a good decade for action that even George of the Jungle has a stint as a first-class action hero, as he take on an immortal mummy, which is just a little bit tamer than Arnold taking on the devil.

             

That movie improved Brendan Fraser's image.  Then he destroyed it again by being Dudley Do-Right.        

I loved all the Jackie Chan movies from “Drunken Master” to “Who Am I?” to “Armor of God.”  Nick Cage also had some pretty good movies, like “The Rock” and “Face Off.”  And even John Travolta who is lame most of the time hit paydirt with “Face Off” (one of the best action movies of the 90s) and “Pulp Fiction.”  Keanu Reeves got “Speed.”  Pierce Brosnan became immortal with the 007 movies, actually way past immortal status since he already reached it prior to being Bond when he played Remington Steele in the TV series.  Christopher Lambert has the “Highlander”, which was a great concept for fiction but was ruined by the “Highlander: The Source” movie (I pray to God that the reboot which would be on theaters soon would redeem the franchise).  I even liked Jean Claude-Van Damme and Dennis Rodman’s “Double Team.”
                 Heck, I even liked the movies of this guy, which has lots of fast hands action:

And though he’s a terrible actor and currently just do crappy (but still action-packed, and I still had watched some of them) direct-to-video flicks, he’s still an interesting guitarist, a real life aikido master, and a real life cop!  Wow!

So, Hollywood should keep on making movies with time-proven “80s-90s” action formula.  And they still do.  Though, not at the same degree as what we got in the 90s.  The “Rambo” follow-up film this decade was okay.  And, so far, there are two movies of the 2000s that I would like to have sequels.  First, is “Transporter 3” (okay it’s the third Transporter movie already, but I would still like to see more).  Second, a sequel to “Hollywood Homicide.”  They said the movie was a flop.  But it was funny, with interesting characters, and the appeal of cop stories in Hollywood.  I like it a lot because the movie feels like “90s action movie.”  Plus, one of the main characters was played by Harrison Ford.  Remember, he’s Han Solo…

…and Indiana Jones…

…and Jack Ryan! 

That’s three legendary fictional characters!  That alone should be reason enough to make a “Hollywood Homicide” sequel, or any sequel to a Ford movie whatsoever.

Cats and Dogs

I think the movie poster conned me.  Canine Commandos and Feline Fighters looking so badass.  I was expecting an action packed battle royal between the two camps.  But the action was only halfway my expectation.  The story was warm, I’ll give that. But it all revolves one character.  I was expecting it would revolve around a team of dog good guys.  And don’t get me started with the cats.  I don’t mind if the cats – the animal I root – are the villains, as long as their interesting and not so clumsy.  Sure, the ninja cats were so cool.  But the rest?  Very cartoony.  I was expecting the cats to at least have depth and a rightful charismatic antithesis to the good guy dogs, which were also a disappointing bunch.  I was expecting the charisma of the cats as something like this:

But what I got was something like this: 

I was expecting the coolness of the dogs as like this:

But what I got was like this:

Mushy, mushy stuff.  Yeah, the importance of relationships and loyalty and friendships should be conveyed, but it was too forced in the movie and out of context.   Come on.  The Cats and Dogs concept is very good.  That’s why I hope they make a reboot or sequel to redeem it.  Don’t use a lazy story.  And, please, add in lots of potential action as the movie poster suggest. Again, look at this:

It’s so cool!  Like, a classic rumble would break out.  It never happened in the film.  At least, the next time, if there is a next time, they should meet the expectations the poster has created on the moviegoer.
Lots of fight scenes...

Lots of cat savviness (and cuteness)...

Again, I don’t mind if the cats are the villains.  Just make them interesting villains.  Charming loveable bad guys.

Titan A.E.

So there, I hope Hollywood would redeem Cats and Dogs with a sequel.  While they’re at it, why not redeem a good sci-fi animated movie as well, which only flopped because of poor marketing and promotion.

Sci-Fi

                

Another genre that I had grown up with.  I always love the sci-fi genre.  Whether, it’s space travel, galactic-type (“Star Wars”, “Star Trek”, “2001: A Space Odyssey”, “Starship Troopers”) to techno-thriller-type like (“Jurassic Park”) to futuristic-type (“Surrogates”, “Minority Report”, “Planet of the Apes”) to metaphysical-chaotic-VR-type (“The Matrix”, “The 13^th floor”) to time travel-type (“Back to the Future”, “Terminator”) to post-apocalyptic (“I Am Legend”) to Twilight Zone-y (“Flatliners”)…  Any kind of sci-fi.  They are exciting and intelligent.

                

James Cameron’s “Avatar” and the re-booted “Star Trek” revive the excitement of raw sci-fi (space-galactic-type).  The “Star Wars” prequels, though, have mediocre stories (except Episode III, which is equal to the quality of the original trilogy) and failed to make the same impact as the first Star Wars trilogy. Sure, the special effects were better, but the overall classic quality was lacking.   Episodes 7, 8, and 9 can’t be filmed anymore for obvious reasons (clue: age of the main characters), thus what is left to return Star Wars to greatness is to reboot the franchise.  Though, I have no idea how it can be rebooted without sacrificing continuity.  Star Trek, though, successfully rebooted the franchise and being freed by continuity problems by using the time travel approach (something that is not applicable to Star Wars, since time travel is not an established convenience in that universe).   The recent Star Trek movie (2009) is the best Star Trek movie in history, and the franchise looks promising again to a fan like me (I only became a fan of Star Trek because of the movies; the Star Trek TV shows suck… big time). 

                

As for sci-fi stories derived from classic sci-fi books, well, what I like is that Hollywood will remain faithful to the concept, themes, and story as much as possible.  I watch sci-fi movies like “Surrogates”, “I, Robot” and “I Am Legend” before encountering their literary counterparts and found them very very good.  Then I read the books and realize the axiom “the book was better than the movie” applies.  “I, Robot” is forgivable, since it’s not exactly based entirely on Isaac Asimov’s Robot novels (the “I, Robot” title itself was the title of Asimov’s anthology of robot short fiction and not the main “Robot” story), though the concept was based on Asimov’s concept of a society of robots and humans together.  But the “I Am Legend” movie will actually disappoint when you are familiar with the original Richard Matheson classic. The novel would give sense to the title “I Am Legend.”  The ending of the novel is better.  Actually, the intended original movie ending (the alternative ending packaged with the DVD) has almost the same similar impact (though, not the same story ending) as the book’s.  The original ending was changed because of unfavorable response by test audience.  Which is a pity, because in my opinion that original ending would make more sense regarding the scene where the vampire-zombies created a trap for Will Smith (which means they are evolving).  You can watch the alternate ending in youtube. And it’s a bit of a twist ending, too (almost as much twist the Matheson novel has).

                

There are plenty of pretty good sci-fi books that can be turned to movies.  There’s Isaac Asimov’s magnum opus, the “Foundation” series, which is related to the “Robot” mystery novels, though I think the concepts of psychohistory is unfilmable.  But that’s the challenge for Hollywood.  There’s also Hubbard’s “Battlefield: Earth.”  I refuse to acknowledge the existence of a movie already made based from it, that movie was trash.  “Final Blackout”, another of Hubbard classic.  There’s Anne McAffrey’s “Dragonriders of Pern” series and “Pegasus” series.  There’s Harry Turtledove’s alternate history stories.  There’s Arthur C. Clarke’s “Ringworld.”  There’s Frederick Pohl’s “Gateway.”  Plenty of sci-fi material in classic sci-fi novels. And the only way to make a movie based on a sci-fi book really successful is to spare no expense in the special effects for visually interpretation and never stray much from the original story.

The Rest of Potential Movies from Books

               

Again, my main thought on basing a movie from a book: as much as possible, remain faithful to the book’s story, concepts, and themes.  Of course, the axiom of “the book is better than the movie” would almost always apply most of the time.  But, maybe if Hollywood can do it right, they might create the rare “better than the book” movie.  Like, “The Godfather”, as many say (though, I can’t be personally sure because I haven’t read the book, though I agree that the movie was one of the best I had seen). 

                

There’s plenty of books I would like Hollywood to make movies of.  Like the other fantasy classics that are not “Lord of the Rings” or “Narnia.”  Speaking of Narnia, I heard that the production of “Dawn Treader” is on hold.  I hope this is only temporary and not an end to movies based on the C.S. Lewis series. Aside from the continuation of the rest of the Narnia books, I want a movie to be made of Stephen Donaldson’s “Chronicles of Thomas Covenant” trilogies, one of the best fantasy book series I had read.  And there’s “Artemis Fowl.”  I already heard there’s a production of an Artemis Fowl movie, but that was years ago, and we still don’t have an Artemis Fowl movie.  And, of course, there is Stephen King’s “Dark Tower” series. 

                

There are already many movies based on Stephen King works.  Some are good, but they would never hold a candle against a “Dark Tower” movie.  “Dark Tower” and “The Stand” are the only two Stephen King works I want to be filmed.    

Space Jam

                

Aside from “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?”, “Space Jam” is the best movie mixing live action and animation.  It’s one of the movies I never get tired of watching over and over again when I was a kid.  I would regularly check HBO schedule just to watch it again. 

                

I would really like a sequel.  Back then, the best basketball player of that era (also the best of all time, as many consider), Michael Jordan, starred in it.  Now, in this sequel, the best basketball player of this era should star in it.  And that would be Kobe Bryant.

                               

Kobe Bryant starring on a sequel to Space Jam would bring lots of fun.

Will Smith films

                

He’s probably one of my most favorite actors, if not my most favorite.  He brings wit and charisma and depth to every movie I had seen him.  “Enemy of the State”, “MIB”, “I, Robot”, “I Am Legend”, “A Pursuit of Happyness”, “Bad Boys”, “Independence Day”, “Wild Wild West”, etc.  Not only is he a blockbuster-making actor, he is also an underrated rapper.  Check out his tracks and his freestyle performances.   He does not need a lot of gimmicks (like backers), angry screaming, or cursing, to make intelligent (believe me, his vocabulary is great) catchy raps.  Any Smith film is almost sure to be good. 

                

But the Will Smith movies I want Hollywood keeps on making is “Men in Black” and “Bad Boys.” Yeah, I heard that there are already talks on making Men in Black 3 and Bad Boys 3, if they are not already in production. 

                

The most disappointing thing about Big Wil’s career is of him turning down the role of “Neo” in “The Matrix” so he can take on “Wild Wild West.”  Sure, “Wild Wild West” was okay (at least, for me) but, come on, it’s “The Matrix”, one of the best films ever made.  Will Smith as Neo would definitely make the Matrix Trilogy better.  Bummer.

Johnny Depp films

                Let’s make a review on some of his characters:

                Edward Scissorhands

                Willy Wonka

                The badass CIA operative Sheldon Jeffrey Sands

                Sweeney Todd

                The Mad Hatter

                And the best of the lot, Captain Jack Sparrow!

Johnny Depp probably is the best actor in portraying unique charismatic character and making it very charismatic.  He also plays guitar well and, he confessed in an interview with David Letterman, never watches the movies he stars in.  Totally fun guy!  Are the characters making Depp interesting, or is Depp making the characters interesting?  For me, it’s the latter.  Thus, more Depp films! 

Mystery/Twists               

Who doesn’t like twists in movies?  Director M. Night Shyamalan (“Unbreakable”, “The Sixth Sense”, “The Village”) made it his trademark (though he would also make the crappy “The Happening”).  But twists are often more charming if it’s found on a stretch of a movie series, like the “Saw” franchise or even “Harry Potter.”

As for mysteries, usually mysteries and twists come hand in hand together.  It’s always fun watching the smart main character (Robert Langdon, Benjamin Gates) racing against time to figure out puzzles and mysteries.  And the answers to these puzzles are usually significant twists that blow us away from our seats.

The greatest detective in the planet, Sherlock Holmes, has a potential movie franchise on the way. So, more of SH movies.  And how about thieves doing cons and heists?  The “Ocean’s” movies are the best of this genre, lots of cleverness and twists.  Ocean 13 is supposed to be the last, but I think, they can still make more.  They should make more Ocean movies.  Maybe in the “Ocean’s 14”, aside from George Clooney, Bradd Pitt, and Matt Damon, they can have a new lineup (since the original team would never be complete since Bernie Mac is now dead). 

So, more twist and mystery movies.  More “Saw” and “National Treasure” movies.  Hopefully, more “Ocean” as well.  And less, M. Night Shyamalan.  He already lost his step in this game.

Anime

                

Hollywood live adaptations of anime, so far, suck.  Like, “Dragonball” and “Astro Boy.” “Dragonball” was so terrible that I stopped watching it halfway through.  But I still think that a live version of an anime could still work.  Hollywood might start with an anime movie like “Blue Submarine no. 6” since the plot is already on movie length and they would just have to follow it.  Or closer to reality animes, like “Samurai X.”  All it takes is a good script for a live adaptation of an anime to be successful that retains the charm of the anime.

                

And when I mean the “charm of the anime”, I’m not exactly referring to the anime’s style of cute large eyes and surreal hairstyles with surreal hair colors ranging from pink to green.  These are good in cartoons.  But these styles are not applicable to real life.  It is plain silly.

                

Yeah, disappointing.  Male fantasies crushed.  Anime girls are cute with those large eyes, but only in anime.  It’s definitely silly and weird in real life.  Just like comicbook heroines, they look hot in their super hero costumes, but in real life, they would really look sil –

                Uh, my bad.  They would look hot in real life!         

Movies From Comicbooks

Marvel Comics still rocks the stage for movie adaptations of their superheroes.  They had already made successful films based on their products, though some of them have mediocre stories.  Tobey Maguire as Spider-Man did well, though I find it a bit disappointing there’s no Spider-Man 4 anymore but a reboot instead.  Spider-Man 3’s ending did not really settle all the issues of the Tobey Maguire Spider-Man. It was much better if they had made a Spider-Man 4 first, that would make a concrete ending for that Spider-Man story, before doing a reboot.    The reboot looks promising, though, with a promising and refreshing actor to play Peter Parker.  X-Men needs a reboot, too.  X3’s story was above average but disappointing.  And reboot, Daredevil, too, if they’re not going to make a sequel.  As of now, the healthiest Marvel Comics superhero film franchise is Iron Man.  Robert Downey, Jr. made the Iron Man loveable – after being the most hated character in Marvel after the Civil War storyline.  Iron Man and Incredible Hulk franchises look promising, and with Thor and Captain America coming up, I am excited with the Avengers movie.

                

The axiom of “book better than the movie” also applies with graphic novels.  With a sole exception of “300” which successfully graphically portrayed Frank Miller’s classic, the rest are not as good as the movie.  “Watchmen” and “V for Vendetta” films, though, did their respective graphic novels justice.  They were not as good as the graphic novels, but were still excellent.  The rest of the movies based on Alan Moore’s works sucks.  Add “Constantine” (based on Hellblazer) to that mix, and those movies are insults to the graphic novels they were based from.

                 

Still, Hollywood should keep on making movies based on comic books. Who knows, they might get it right next time.  Comicbooks/graphic novels I want movies to be made of are Neil Gaiman’s “Sandman” series, Brian Michael Bendis’ “Powers”, some Crossgen titles like “Ruse” and “Negation”, and Justice League.

       

Vampire Movies

           

    

Nobody is afraid of vampires anymore.

                

We used to be fascinated of them because they symbolize the darkness we hate and battle, but sometimes succumb to.  They used to be fearsome.  The epitome of evil in fiction.  They are full of sexual tension and violent energies.  They used to be the coolest bad guys ever created.  And they strike fear.  Fear because they are evil, and they have the powers to enforce their evilness.  They also inspire fear because, by their bite, one can be someone like them.

                  

 Then “Interview with the Vampire” (based on Anne Rice’s novel) made them so gay.

                

But, hey, the essence of darkness is still there.  Sexual tension and violence.  Hypnotic attraction and bloodlust.  The charm of vampirism as manifestation of evil is there.

                

Then a movie series based on a bestselling overrated novel series by an untalented author who lucked it out destroyed all the real charisma of vampires. 

                

I can write a whole essay why the Twilight series is overrated like Harry Potter.  But at least Harry Potter was good, just not that brilliant as many think, but actually good.  Take away the vampire mythos and Twilight’s story would be like a regular paperback romance novel.  But, hey, give Stephanie Meyer credit for finding vampirism as the secret formula to make a second-rate story a bestseller.                                  

                       

What is Twilight’s pop culture impact?  Girls fantasizing of being kissed by a prince charming in their sleep now fantasize of being bitten by a vampire.  Dreaming of getting bitten by a vampire?  That used to be disturbing.

                

Even Robert Pattinson, a decent and good actor (really he is), who played Edward Cullen hates his character and Twilight.  According to Pattinson, he had little knowledge of the books when he auditioned. He said, "I went into it thinking it was a vampire film directed by Catherine Hardwicke, who does like gritty sort of realistic indie films. If you're doing a vampire fantasy shot like ‘Thirteen’, then that would be interesting. That's why I went into it really, and it ended up being something totally and utterly different." He said that he came to hate the "perfect" character of Edward, and so he decided to play him as a manic-depressive who hates himself. He also claims he felt voyeuristic while reading the novels, as if he were peeping in on the author's fantasies. He noted, "I was just convinced that this woman is mad, she's completely mad, and she's in love with her own fictional creation."  

Pattinson has a right idea on how a vampire should be.  But he got tricked on playing the Edward Cullen character.  He will forever carry the curse of being identified with Edward Cullen.  I pity the man.

                

I propose that Hollywood should fix this.  Destroy the stigma Twilight gave vampirism.  Vampires should be scary.  Fascinating but scary.  Heck, when I read the “Dracula” by Bram Stoker, I was still freaked out a bit. And I was in college already when I obtained that book!  Return the true image of vampires.  Make decent vampire films like “John Carpenter’s Vampires” and “Bram Stoker’s Dracula.”  Vampires should be the romanticized reflection – not of our Prince Charmings – but of the evil and darkness and lust that we hate. And when a vampire is killed, it would bring back the satisfaction of destroying the evil that could tempt us into darkness – good triumphing over evil.

                               

Let’s root for the slayers rather than the vampires.          

Read More

Celebrating the Lakers' 09-10 Season

Every time the Los Angeles Lakers loses in an NBA Finals in June, it hurts big time.  Yup, it would also hurt every time they are defeated earlier in the playoffs.  But not so much. Because it happens on an April or a May, and when June comes, by then, I would have recovered from the disappointment of the Lakers getting eliminated.  Since my birthday is in the month of June, if the Lakers fell in the Finals, it is heartbreaking and it kind of ruins the mood a bit for the upcoming birthday.  And if they win, I always consider a Lakers championship as a birthday gift for myself.

This latest Laker championship they won is the ugliest and toughest one I had ever seen.  However, it is also the sweetest since it came against the Boston Celtics.  The championship won against the Magic the previous year was great, but ever since the Celtics beat the Lakers on 2008 and ruined my birthday for that year, I really wanted a rematch to get back at them.  Thus, I was excited when the Celtics upset the Cavaliers and the Magic and prepared the stage for another Laker-Celtics NBA Finals.  I knew it was going to be tough, but I was not expecting it to be that ugly.  The Lakers barely got the championship, though they won blowout games in Games 1 and 6.   The Celtics were playing tough and grinding basketball against the Lakers finesse, even getting a 3-2 advantage on them.  But the Lakers outplayed the Celtics in their own grinding game and out-willed them in the end to win the championship. 

This NBA season was never an easy season for the Laker’s path to a repeat championship.  But it was still fun, and the ending made that tough journey worthwhile.   Let me review: 

KOBE BRYANT

Kobe was awesome early this season, a shooting guard who played like a power forward most of the time.  Kobe played the part of the injured and out Pau Gasol earlier in the season as he transforms into Hakeem Olajuwon.  His post-up plays awed us all, adding another variety to his already dangerous arsenal.  He was shooting 49%!  In that pace, he was already on his way for a second MVP.

Unfortunately, the injuries came and limited Kobe.  Fingers, back, knee, ankle… such bad luck to suffer such package of injuries.  I think fortune gave him the injuries because if not, he will greatly dominate the NBA and would make it impossible for the younger superstars to have a chance to catch up to his greatness.  But, still, he played through the injuries because he has a warrior’s heart.  However, his numbers suffered, allowing LeBron James to overtake him for MVP.  I’ll admit it now, LeBron is the better player.  Yes, he is… when Kobe is friggin’ and seriously injured!  LeBron still has the potential, the odds, and the prowess to overtake Kobe some day, but for now, he’s still below Kobe.  No way he can take the title as the planet’s best player from that healthy Hakeem Olajuwon-style Kobe Bryant we saw at the start of the season.     

You may say I’m biased since Kobe Bryant is my most favorite NBA player.  As a Laker fan, I should be “biased.”  But this observation that Kobe is better than LeBron is not all through personal bias at all.  Sure, LeBron still statistically dominates Kobe.  But I had always argued that statistics is not the whole story.  Kobe has things that cannot be measured by stats.  I already admitted that LeBron was the better player this season, but only because Kobe was greatly limited by his many injuries.  And yes, LeBron got his second straight regular season MVP.  But Kobe Bryant still ended up on top this season.  Kobe got the Finals MVP, which I always point out, an honor that comes with a championship ring.  LeBron James might be the King, but Kobe Bryant is the King of Kings.  Bow down to the Black Mamba, Bron.

I read an essay of Daniel Buerger this year that analogized the Kobe-LeBron debate with the Batman-Superman debate.  Here are some of the good parts in his excellent written essay:

·    “LeBron James is a physical anomaly, a combination of brute strength and pure bodily dominance that is unlike anything we have seen before. Kobe Bryant has a regular sized physique and was not given outrageous physical gifts, but has propelled himself to legendary status using his wit, mind, and willingness to adapt to his surroundings. In this situation Bryant is the clear Batman representation while James will send Dwight Howard to the bench and don the Superman cape.”  

             

·    “To begin this debate we will start with my personal favorite, Batman. Batman is a super hero that isn’t, as he possesses no abnormal powers or abilities. He is in every sense of the word, a man. However, his mental quest for what he deems is right in unmistakable, and his brain ticks differently than anybody else’s. His quest for vengeance comes from within, and this drives him to make an impact on the world. His determination allowed him to turn his otherwise normal body into a weapon. His relentless drive forces him to work harder than his opposition, so when his enemies are at the end of their rope he is just getting started. In his enemies mind, he is much more than a man, and this edge is created purely by the Dark Knight’s mind.

“Superman is a completely different animal, almost literally. He is from a different planet and is immune to the perils that all humans face. He is untouchable in every aspect of the word, and other than small fragments of his home planet known as kryptonite, he is invincible. Superman possesses physical attributes that no other human comes close to, and is able to defeat his enemies with brute strength and overwhelming power. While I am not calling him a dumb brute, the fact is that Superman doesn’t have to use knowledge or excessive mental activity to defeat his enemies due to his overwhelming physical presence. This is not to say that he is unable of such a feat, it is just unnecessary.

·    “So, both players are great in different regards, and they represent each super hero quite admirably. James has been gifted with the physical dominance that allows him to not just go around his opponents, but over them. He can do things with his body that many of us deem other-worldly, and it is truly amazing to watch. Bryant on the other hand is a crafty veteran that uses his mind to motivate his body. He adapts to his surroundings, therefore forcing his surroundings to favor his game. James doesn’t need to outsmart his opponents because he is such a superior athletic being, just like Superman. Bryant is continuously adding new tricks and gadgets to his utility belt, always trying to stay a step ahead of the opposition.

“Another strong similarity between each player and their respective super hero is the frame of mind that each features. Superman knows he is going to defeat his enemies using the gifts he was given, and James is the same way. You don’t see LeBron James working on things like midrange jumpers or his post-up skills, because he doesn’t need to use them most of the time. The Man of Steel clichés we are all familiar with, the one involving him jumping over buildings and flying through the air like a speeding bullet, all ring true when you see James step on the floor.

“The same rings true for Bryant, and his alter-ego Batman. Without the supernatural powers, Batman uses determination and constant vigilance to create his legend. He seeks experts from around the world to help improve his hand-to-hand combat, always trying to learn the latest tricks. Sound familiar? Remember this, last summer, fresh off his NBA Finals MVP award, Bryant called up Hall of Famer Hakeem Olajuwon to help him work on his post-up game. While most people in that position would be polishing their trophy and celebrating being the best basketball player on the planet, Bryant was already working to stay ahead of the opposition.”

As a comic book fan, Batman is one of my favorite characters and I am a fan of him.  I prefer him over Superman, whom I found as “too powerful”, thus lacking depth and charisma as a character (many would even go the extent of claiming that Superman is boring).  I am not a fan of Superman but it does not mean I hate Superman either; I am actually a Superman “fan” in a sense that I appreciate his mythos and character and what he brings to comics.  Thus, as an NBA fan, Kobe is my favorite because he’s a versatile all-around player who might not be as athletic and naturally and physically gifted as LeBron, but is deadly because of his intelligence, hard work, and “utility belt” or arsenal of weapons.  I am not a LeBron fan but it doesn’t mean I hate him either; I am actually a LeBron “fan” in a sense I appreciate LeBron as a player and his talents and what he brings to the NBA.  I just find the Kobe-Batman type of character more interesting and if compared or pitted against the LeBron-Superman character, I would pick Kobe-Batman.  So, even if LeBron James have the natural, physical and given Superman invincibility to beat Kobe Bryant, Kobe has the Batman wits and cunning of furnishing a kryptonite bullet, held ready for the purpose of destroying LeBron.

Actually, that Kobe-Lebron Batman-Superman analogy made me appreciate Kobe more.   Just one factor why I think Kobe is still the best.   Another factor?  His six gamewinners this season.  Let's review it, shall we?

First he hit a tough buzzer-beater bunk-shot three against the Miami Heat…

Then, a few days later, he hit another buzzer beater gamewinner against the Milwaukee Bucks… 

This is my favorite gamewinner this season, when he hit a buzzerbeater three-pointer against the Sacramento Kings.  As C.A. Clark, a Laker blog writer, pointed out “…Kobe Bryant set his own screen for the game winner.  Next time, he will inbound the ball to himself, while setting himself a screen, and then hit himself on the dive for a dunk to win the game.”

Then, though no longer a buzzerbeater, it was still great.  The Boston Celtics actually gave Kobe a hard time shooting (a preview of what the Celtics can do in the Finals), but he hit the most important shot.  The gamewinner against Ray Allen…

A clutch three-pointer against the Memphis Grizzlies when he returned to the line-up after a brief hiatus due to injury.

Kobe was not yet finished. His sixth gamewinner came against the second meeting with the Toronto Raptors…

He’s just amazing.  Sure, he missed another gamewinner attempt at Orlando (and the first game against the Raptors).  But these six were just awesome.

In the playoffs, he carried his team against tough opponents.  His offense was mediocre in the first round against Oklahoma Thunder, but when he got the swelling in his knee drained, we finally got the old explosive Kobe back.  And when he started guarding Russell Westbrook and neutralized him, the Lakers took control of the series.  Kobe would play his usual good defense throughout the playoffs, justifying another selection in the All-Defensive First Team.  In the second round, he led the Lakers to sweep the Utah Jazz.  Then in probably Kobe’s best individual statics playoff series ever, the Lakers took out a rejuvenated Phoenix Suns in six games. 

In the Finals, the Kobe went against the toughest defense he encountered in the playoffs,  that though he would score, the Celtics made sure it was not easy baskets.  Especially in Game 7, which probably his worst playoff offensive game ever.  Let us remember, though, that almost all players, not only Kobe, in that Game 7 shot badly considering the tough, grinding and awesome defense of both Lakers and Celtics.  But though the Celtics defense made it hard for him to score in the series, however, most of the time, he encouraged the Laker ball movement, energized offense and defense, and his mere presence disrupted Celtics defensive strategy that made it possible for Laker plays to happen.  And he just did everything he can.  Even in that terrible Game 7, when his offensive game was not working, he did what he had to do as he crashed the boards and got 15 rebounds, played his usual awesome defense, and hit the crucial free throws in the last quarter.  He would win Finals MVP in the end, not because of monster statistics but because of his usual heart.  Not because he carried the Lakers in Game 7 but because he is the most prominent Laker – being a presence and motivation for his teammates, thus they instead carried him.  Kobe acknowledges this.  He admitted he owes his teammates.  Though he probably has the best and consistent averages in the Lakers throughout the series, he is not the Laker who made the most impact in their wins (though, of course he contributed major impact, but just not the most impact), that would be Pau Gasol. And he also acknowledges this.  He gives credit to whom credit is due.  During the presentation of the Finals MVP to him, he complemented and acknowledged that everything would not had been possible if not for Pau Gasol, thus as if implying that Pau is more than worthy to be an alternative for Finals MVP (or even the real Finals MVP as to some people’s book), and at least in that way, he “shares” the Finals MVP with Pau. 

Let’s consider Kobe’s performance in Game 7, if the Lakers lost, his legacy would take a sharp dive.  Maybe Laker fans would hate him and blame him for the loss, or branding him a “choker”, suffering the same treatment of Magic Johnson (when he was called “Tragic” Johnson) during his Laker team’s loss in his first Finals match-up with Larry Bird’ Celtics.  Pau and the others saved him from this fate in Game 7 and instead earned him another ring and Finals MVP for his legend.     Kobe Bryant knows how close he was from this and deeply appreciates Pau and the rest of his teammates more than ever.  Nonetheless, Kobe deserves the Finals MVP award since he's still the best player of the Finals and he made most of the Laker's plays happen throughout the series. But he had lots of help to get it.

Oh, Kobe Bryant can act all impervious to hype and excitement of the Boston-Laker rivalry, or the “revenge on the Celtics” arch, or winning without Shaq.  He acts and talks like it was just a regular Finals series to him.  Nothing more.   Of course, we know he is lying (long before he admitted it after the series).  But we forgive him because he had to lie.  It is part of not getting it all to his head and having and maintaining great focus.  That awesome Kobe focus and mental strength was greatly epitomized by this epic scene during Game One of the Finals:

Chris Rock doing a private show for Kobe and the latter just ignoring the former’s jokes.  Rock probably had been giving one of his funniest stand-up comedies to Kobe but he remained undistracted.  It was like Kobe was unconscious of everything but the game.  Such mental focus is awesome.  But when it is all over, he finally let his defense down.  The trademark cold and focused scowl broke and turned into a smile overflowing with joy.  He admitted that he lied and does appreciate the Lakers-Celtics rivalry since he was a student of the game and just shunned about it during the series to maintain his focus.  He was bursting with delight that he let it slipped that he “…got one more than Shaq… take that to the bank.”  But what I like most about this Kobe Bryant is although he is a proud man – because he needed to show no weaknesses in the journey – he is ready to show humility and honesty when he finally lets his defense down after getting the goal.  He showed great relief and appreciation, as he admitted that his teammates carried him and saved his legend from taking a dive in that Game 7.                    

There you go, why he’s my favorite (and why I think he’s better than LeBron James, at least, for the present).  He’s an all-around player.  He led the Lakers to another title, and a championship is a greater achievement than any individual award.  He has the heart and determination to continually push himself to improve and furnish his skills.  He has a high basketball IQ, and not only smart but Batman-smart.  He has great mental focus and does not shun away at the pressure of taking big shots, whether he’ll be considered a hero if he makes them or the scapegoat if they lose (at least, during a game), though we saw him at the brink of losing this mental toughness in the Final’s Game 7.   Moreover, he gives credit to whom credit is due and shows appreciation to those who help him get his goals.    

What’s left for Kobe?  He’s still not finished.  I know he still hungers for more championships.  As, a fan, I do, too.  I want the Lakers to get more championships, ultimately surpassing the Boston Celtics’ banners.   And I think he can lead the Lakers to not only one more championship but two or three more before he retires.  He still has time.  During his sit-down interview with Rick, Brent, and Steve after Game 7 of the Finals, one of those three said, “Get on with the party.  Enjoy number 5… You’re only 31 years old, Kobe. You and these guys are coming back for three more years.”  And Kobe replied, “I love hearing that.  As the season… as the playoff started, it was ‘Oh, my God.  He’s 31 years old. He’s done!’ Now, ‘He’s only 31.’  I’m loving it.”

PAU GASOL

It seems blasphemous now that years ago, I once considered Kevin Garnett, which by then was still playing for the Minnesota Timberwolves, as the perfect player to join Kobe Bryant in the Lakers.  Pau Gasol was just my second choice by then (and Dirk Nowitzki as third).   Of course, by then Garnett was still a great player and Gasol still lacking the spotlight at him.   But when Garnett went to the Celtics, and Gasol was obtained by the Lakers, I saw the error of my opinion.  When Pau finally got to the Lakers, people start to give him attention and saw how great he is.  In the Lakers’ complicated triangle system, an intellectual and finesse player like Pau thrived.  Pau is definitely a better – maybe even the best available – complement to Kobe.

Pau Gasol is the best big man in the NBA today.  And that comes from Kobe Bryant’s own mouth, as Kobe complements and acknowledges Pau as much as he can.  Pau is sort of a big-man version of Kobe.  Many people say that Pau has the best pivot in the league and there is a reason for that.  He moves with grace.  His arsenal almost rivals Kobe’s.  He is versatile and has high basketball IQ.  No wonder Kobe easily connects with him.  Of course, a player of Gasol’s caliber – graceful and classy – was labeled soft after the ’08 Finals. He plays with intellect and finesse, and that does not work against Garnett’s toughness and bullying.  After that defeat, Gasol worked out in the gym and toughened himself.  He learned how he can be both smart and cunning and both graceful and tough, like Kobe.  By next season, he now knows how to play tough, which he combined with his usual game.  The Lakers swept the season series against the Celtics and won against the Orlando Magic in the ’09 NBA Finals, in which Pau’s tough defense on Dwight Howard was a huge factor.  And this season, Pau got his revenge on Kevin Garnett and the Celtics.

Kobe Bryant might be the best Laker player in the NBA Finals – taking all 7 games into account – in the sense he has the highest scoring average.  However, in the four games the Lakers won, Pau Gasol has the most impact.  Thus, he is as deserving as, or even more so, than Kobe Bryant as the Finals MVP.  And Kobe knows this.  In 2008, in an interview with Kobe after he won the regular-season MVP award, he was asked what might be the difference between the previous seasons (where he was an offensive juggernaut) and that present season that made it possible for him to finally win the MVP.  Kobe’s reply was simple. “We now have Pau Gasol,” he replied with an appreciative laugh.  It is the same thing when Kobe received his second Finals MVP, he complemented and acknowledged Gasol.   Kobe was as if saying that, in a way, Pau Gasol made it possible not only for the Lakers to win the championship, but making it possible for Kobe to be the Finals MVP, that though Gasol is worthy to be Finals MVP, Pau indirectly gave it to Kobe.

I believe that Kobe wants to return the favor to Pau.  Probably, when Kobe is ready to take the back seat in the Laker scheme, he would do what he can do to help Pau get individual honors for himself and to help cement Pau’s own legacy.  Maybe Kobe would start next season in the All-Star game in Staples Center.  He might orchestrate the game to make it possible for Pau to get the All-Star MVP.  And he might, this time, make sure that the next Finals MVP next season would now go to Pau (if the Lakers successfully win their third straight).  But I think Kobe is still not yet ready to yield the regular-season MVP award to Pau, though.  Much as it is true that if Kobe is given a choice between a championship and an MVP award, he would choose the championship, it doesn’t mean he does not want another MVP (or two or three).  He definitely likes getting it, but compared to a championship, it is irrelevant to him.  But, as I’ve said, when Kobe is ready to step back, he would concentrate on building Gasol’s own legend.

I start to appreciate this Kobe-Pau tandem more than the Kobe-Shaq tandem, though the latter is still greater.  It is because Kobe has a better relationship with Pau than what he had with Shaq.  Hopefully, their partnership would become more legendary.  Hopefully, their tandem would continue hoisting banners at Staples Center.

THE REST OF THE LAKERS

By playing great games in the playoffs and Finals, Derek Fisher justified remaining in the starter lineup even though he was considered the weak point of the Laker first five and was not making an impact throughout most of the season.  Truly, he is the master of intangibles.  Though, I don’t think he’ll remain in the starting line-up next season, I know he’ll still remain relevant from the bench, contributing his “intangibles” and experience.  The question is who would fill Fish’s point guard spot in the first five?

Lamar Odom will never be an all-star.  But I hope he’ll get some sort of honor, too.  Maybe a sixth-man award.  But for that to happen, he should play consistently.  This season (as were the previous seasons), there are times he is an awesome X-factor.  But there are also times he is frustrating to watch, not playing to his full potential and just playing passively.  Hopefully, he’ll play like an excellent “sixth-man of the year” next season so he can win that award.

It’s a pity Andrew Bynum is plagued by an injury again this season.  Health is a major factor for the Lakers to win the championship again next year.  Bynum and Bryant and the others should be 100%.  Hopefully, they’ll fully recover for next season.  Hopefully, too, we’ll finally see the “future of Lakerdom” in Bynum very soon.  If what he had already been demonstrating in the previous seasons is already his peak, it is best to trade him.  But I think a little bit more of patience would do to trick.  Maybe a healthy Bynum would finally bloom next season and we’ll be confident the Lakers are in good hands after Kobe retires.

Ron Artest is definitely an upgrade over Trevor Ariza in the defensive end, though not in the offensive end.  I was a bit of a doubter on what Ron can bring to the Lakers as I was hoping Ariza would continue improving as a Laker.  But Artest, though sometimes not meeting the actual expectations during the season, did proved his worth.  Especially in that critical Game 7, where he made true in his word to Kobe after the Lakers lost to the Celtics in 2008, that he’ll make sure it’ll never happen again if he became a Laker.  Ron-Ron deserves the ring he won.  And has a right to thank anybody he wants to thank (which was just everybody around him) and do or say crazy things he thinks of in any interview.

My favorite bench player would be Sasha “The Machine” Vujacic.  He used to be a consistent three-point specialist and pesky defender during the 07-08 season.  However, he kind of fell from grace the following season, and since then remained inconsistent.  But even though he has his faults, I like him because he is proud to be a Laker and it reflects every time – when playing on the court, when high-fiving Kobe and the others, when cheering from the bench, or when hitting fellow Serbian Goran Dragic with an elbow.  Plus, I still believe he can still return to that “The Machine” mode he once had during 07-08.   He also did great in Games 6 and 7 in the Finals, being a “stopper” against any Celtic run in Game 6 and icing Game 7 for the Lakers.             

And it’s not only Sasha who never recovered from that great 07-08 season for the bench, but the rest of them.  The Lakers used to have the best bench in the league and it was christened the Bench Mob.  That’s another factor for another championship.  Just imagine how invincible the Lakers would be with the current starting five and a newly rejuvenated Bench Mob.  It is very probable though that the bench’s lineup would change next season.  I am feeling Kirk Hinrich, Michael Redd, and Peja Stojakovic, or any of that effect as the next Laker bench line-up.  If ever Jordan Farmar, Shannon Brown, and the rest are let go by the Lakers, the Laker management and Laker fans are still grateful on what they contributed and wishes them luck on their future endeavors.

And the most important factor of all for another title run?  The return of Phil Jackson as coach.   Indeed, it would be critical that the team next season to still have the same leadership and basketball philosophy to win another championship. Kobe wants him back.  The Laker fans want him back.  He needs to come back.  Though, the Zen Master has nothing to prove anymore.  He already has 11 championships as a coach – two more than any other coach in NBA history.   But, still, hopefully he would come back.  He does not win championships in twos, he wins them in threes.

THE LAKER GIRLS

Still the best NBA franchise’s cheerleaders in history.  I got nothing more to say.  Just that they are another (major) reason to love the Lakers.

BOSTON CELTICS

Close, but no cigar.

               

I have to hate them since I’m a Laker fan.  But I respect them also.  It’s not hard to appreciate them.  They worked hard and fought a good fight.  As underdogs, they proved their critics wrong that they were already “old news.”  Even though they lost, their run was worth applauding.  Nobody was expecting the 4^thseed Celtics to get through the East playoffs.  They stunned the Cavs and the Magic.  I was actually rooting for them in the East to win.  And I thank them that they succeeded in setting the stage on what I wanted: them getting beaten by the Lakers in a Finals rematch. 

THE FANS

The Laker fans watching in Staples Center on Games 6 and 7 was the loudest and most enthusiastic I had ever seen since the 2002 Conference Finals against the Sacramento Kings.  Laker fans became sort of numbed after the franchise’s successes, that they become almost passive and unenergetic during games.   Laker fans are only excited by championships.  Anything less is failure.  Thus, by such high standard, they treat a game with not much excitement.  But their enthusiasm during the last two games of the Finals was a big factor on energizing the Lakers on winning the championship.   Phil Jackson is right, they couldn’t have won without the fans.  And Magic Johnson is also right, we Laker fans are the best fans in the world.  Because our hearts are exhilarated or broken along with each Laker make or break.

Which brings me to the “fans” emerging every time the playoffs and Finals come.  I don’t like bandwagoners.  Oh, it’s okay to support a team during the Finals season.  But there are those who only become “fans” during the playoffs and Finals, and arrogantly claim that they were fans all along, all the way from the start, pretending to know everything about NBA and stats and history and all that jazz when actually they know nothing and had only became fans after a team’s recent success.  Such arrogance mixed with such ignorance always annoys me. 

I accept those Boston fans that hates the Lakers.  They should.  And the NBA fans who hates the Lakers has the right to choose to hate the Lakers.   But it is because these fans are familiar with the NBA, so they are familiar with how the Lakers can be polarizing, making you either to hate them or love them.  They found reasons to hate them during their existence as fans of the NBA.  Like the Lakers are just full of Hollywood "glitz and glamor" and conceit.  That's valid.  Though this makes it hard for us Laker fans, we accept them since these fans are real NBA fans and are entitled to such opinions.  Now these bandwagoners only have blind hatred. They are never familiar with how it goes in the NBA, thus they are not familiar with the Lakers, and thus not having a reason at all on hating them.  These bandwagoners hate the Lakers, just because they are the Lakers.  Just baseless hate.  Really annoying.  So they just support any team that the Lakers face in a series.

And, yes, being a Laker fan makes Taylor Swift hotter.

       

LEBRON JAMES

Oh, stop being a crybaby, LeBron.  You’ll get your ring soon.  Hahaha.  The fan in me just can’t help it. 

The last part, a sort of epilogue, on these thoughts on the recently finished Laker 2010 season is about the second best player in the NBA, LeBron James.  As an NBA fan, I also like and appreciate LeBron James as a player.  Indeed, there is a reason why some consider him the best (though, he’s not).  His play is almost as awesome as Kobe, and maybe more entertaining with all those powerful dunks, blind passes, and blocks coming out of nowhere.  Oh, I already said that he can be the best someday.

But I notice that LeBron seems to kind of always wanting the spotlight on him.  It is, of course, ego.  But it is acceptable since all stars in the NBA have ego, even Kobe.  But what LeBron does to catch attention for himself is sometimes aggravating.  With this incoming free agency buzz this offseason of a crop of great talents like James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Amare Stoudemire, and Joe Johnson, in which LeBron is the most prominent of the bunch, he seems to be creating his own buzz in an effort to steal the show from the NBA Finals.  

Not exactly like this, but almost of the same effect (He failed in the attempt.  The Finals earned the highest TV ratings since 1998).  He seems to want the attention diverted from the Finals to the drama of his free agency.  Oh, LeBron has been hyping about it since 2007.  But what he is doing right now to draw attention to himself is a bit too narcissistic.   He appeared in Larry King Live just to talk about it.  He organized some sort of conference among the free agents to discuss about their free agency plans.  “I’m the ringleader,” he said.  But as columnist Adrian Wojnarowski points out, “only, he has no rings.”   


Wondahbap, a Laker blog writer, wrote: “"Staying on LeBron, I'm finding him increasingly more annoying everyday to the point of dislike. I try to like him. I watch him often. I admire his game, and don't want to make this seem like a Kobe over Lebron hatefest, but he's just so corny sometimes. And arrogant. Probably insecure. At times phony. Defintely a frontrunner. Some people accuse Kobe of all of these things, and they probably have valid points. It just proves how corny LeBron can be, because he straight-up copycats everything Kobe does. Kobe takes a book from MJ's page and relishes games in Madison Square Garden? Here comes LeBron tagging along. It's so special to him all of a sudden. Kobe changes his number? LeBron wants to change his. Kobe has a penchant for sometimes taking ill advised three-point shots? LeBron takes stupid threes more and more. Kobe puts on the serious face and steely demeanor during the playoffs? Now dancing, air camera, picture taking LeBron decides it's time to play no games and get all stone faced. Now the elbow? Seriously, I don't believe his elbow hurts for a minute. He watches Kobe get this praise for being a tough-as-nails warrior, so he has to overdramatize an elbow injury enough to make Paul Pierce want to sue for infringement. So LeBron's elbow hurts so bad, he has to shoot a free throw left handed. Right. Pun intended. He sure seemed like he was having a hard time keeping a straight face filling us with his crap. Boo frickety hoo."

I used to ignore (though I enjoy) those kinds of criticisms.  But when he started promoting the drama of his free agency when the playoffs was still going on, I started to believe all those criticisms were true.  Nonetheless, he is a superstar.  And his presence in the league and the stories and hype he creates are entertaining and fun.

The best LeBron story though is still this “Who is better? Kobe or LeBron?” debate, which is very enjoyable to fans of either superstar.  It is probably as exciting as the Magic Johnson vs. Larry Bird debate.  Maybe even more so.  Did the Magic-Bird have puppets?

Yup.  The Kobe and LeBron rivalry might not be the most exciting (it’s still Magic vs. Bird), but it’s the most entertaining.  After finally dismantling the Celtics, I now want Kobe to face LeBron in the Finals.  But not with a boring franchise like the Cavaliers, no.  This Finals should be special.  A showdown that would be legendary.  Thus, LeBron should have a perfect team.  A team that is one of the most exciting franchises in the NBA, located in a major city and having a fan base as enthusiastic and loyal as the Laker fans.  And that team should have the Biggest Stage of Them All. 

That would be the New York Knicks.  It’s time that LeBron and the Knicks should have some success together.  Kobe vs. LeBron.  Lakers vs. Knicks.  Los Angeles vs. New York.  With this, the rivalry would become more entertaining and probably become the most exciting in the history of the NBA.

It is ironic that though Kobe is Batman, LeBron is the one I want to go to Gotham.  Nonetheless, join the New York Knicks, LeBron, and lead them to the top of the East.  Kobe and his Los Angeles Lakers would be waiting.  Bring it on.

Read More