Morons Exist

Yes, morons can be found all over the world. The lastest manifestation in Australia is a German-born soccer player called Andre Gumprecht, who plays for the Central Coast Mariners in the A League. On Monday, the Mariners had a costume party to mark the end of the season (they lost in the championship game to the Newcastle Jets).

And Gumprecht "dressed in a khaki military uniform and mustache to resemble the former German dictator."

Apparently, he didn't get the memo from Prince Harry that dressing as a Nazi to attend a party outside of Aryan Nation circles is hardly ever a good idea.

It is especially stupid given that Gumprecht is German, where doing such a thing would not only be stupid, but illegal.

Another Mariner is in trouble for the same party. Tony Vidmar dressed in white robes and put on black face, apparently to resemble Morgan Freeman in his role of God in Bruce Almighty. That was kind of dumb and insensitive, presumably spurred by the fact that Vidmar's nickname is "God." But it doesn't rise to Gumprecht's level of moronity.

You Call That A Toad? THIS Is A Toad!

Queenslanders like to complain about the dreaded cane toad, another stupidly-introduced species that has run amok in the Australian environment.

But that's nothing compared to THIS monster - a frog that scientists think actually ate baby dinosaurs! This "devil frog" may have weighed over 10 pounds. When HE goes "ribbit", people listen.

(Yes, I know toads and frogs are different. But I don't care.)

Alas, Yorick Predicts the Academy Awards, 2008 Version

The entertainment staff at Alas, Yorick are all a-quiver at the prospect of the upcoming 2008 Academy Award presentation ceremony. We are so glad those silly writers quit trying to get a couple of pennies out of every dollar and just got back to work. And we so look forward to the continuing flow of high-quality entertainment from La-La Land.

Loyal reader(s) will remember that last February we predicted the winners for 2007 - and I am proud to say that we actually were correct on 5 out of 10 predictions, a better batting average than Barry Bonds.

So, here are THIS year's fearless predictions.

Let's start with best actor. Unfortunately, I have seen none of these movies but I can still make predictions based on my intimate knowledge of how Oscar voters think. Clearly Daniel Day-Lewis and Johnny Depp cannot win; their respective movies were "There Will Be Blood" and "Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street", and everybody knows Oscar doesn't reward slasher flicks. Viggo Mortenson is starring in a sequel to "The Lord of the Rings" called "Eastern Promises", where Aragorn takes over the post-Sauron rule of Mordor but is criticized for failing to live up to his campaign promises to the orcs. Michael Clayton starred in a movie called "George Clooney", or is that the other way around? Either way, it sounds boring. So I pick Tommy Lee Jones for "In the Valley of Elah", which I think is a sequel to "Brokeback Mountain" featuring old cowboys.

For supporting actor, the voters will disqualify Javier Bardem for being in a movie called "No Country for Old Men", a science fiction flick like "Logan's Run" about old people being exiled. Most Oscar voters are old men - this hits too close to home. Michael Clayton got another nomination, for being in "Tom Wilkinson." The name is too boring. Philip Seymour Hoffman got Oscar love recently for playing gay authors, I don't know why he would expect one for a Rambo-style action flick called "Charlie Wilson's War," about a Texas Congressman who single-handedly destroys a Soviet armored column in Afghanistan. I thought Hal Holbrook was dead and I bet most voters do too so he won't win for "Into the Wild." That leaves Casey Affleck, who was creepy, weird, and excellent in "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford", the only move of these five that I have actually seen. Affleck gets it and makes his big brother jealous.

Best leading actress. Well we can quickly dismiss Marion Cotillard ("La Vie en Rose") 'cause she wasn't acting in English. Julie Christie was good in "Away from Her" (about a guy who runs away from his aging mommy) but Oscar male voters like young chicks, not 60-year-old ladies no matter how attractive or talented. Cate Blanchett has no chance for "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" because who wants to see a movie about Elizabeth Taylor? And this was an odd casting choice anyway since Blanchett doesn't much resember Taylor. Laura Linney played Jane in "The Savages" (I forget who was Tarzan), but Tarzan movies don't win. That leaves Ellen Page to win for her role as a Greek goddess in "Juno"; mythology movies are always popular.

I am confused; Michael Clayton got yet ANOTHER nomination this time as supporting ACTRESS for his/her role in "Tilda Swinton." I think s/he'll be disqualified when they do the testosterone test. They won't give the nod to Saoirse Ronan in "Atonement" because they don't know how to pronounce her first name. Rube Dee I'm sure was great in "American Gangster" but Al Capone biopics are so yesterday. Amy Ryan was probably really good in "Gone Baby Gone," but movies about runaway children are depressing. So that leaves Cate Blanchett to win, and she probably won't show up to collect her statue for her role in "I'm Not There", about an absentee landlord in 18th century Wallachia.

Now to turn to best picture. As previously explained, Hollywood's old men won't vote for "No Country for Old Men." Slasher flicks don't win, so good bye "There Will Be Blood." Apparently, Michael Clayton had himself turned into a movie too; that will confuse the Oscar voters. "Atonement" got some good reviews, but I don't see the attraction to watching some old person confessing to a priest and working on her rosary for 90 minutes. So "Juno," with its epic battle scenes between the Greek gods and the titans, wins it all.

Now for Best Dirctor. Michael Clayton gets ANOTHER nomination for directing a film called "Tony Gilroy." Never heard of him, won't win. You know the problems with "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood." Julian Schnabel was nominated for "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" but I don't see a movie about an aquatic insect winning anything. So give it to Jason Reitman for "Juno."

Now for a couple of the "other" categories. Look for the statue for achievement in cinematography to go to Roger Deakins for "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford", coincidentally the ONLY movie nominated for ANY Oscar that I have managed to see so far. For best documentary, I like "Taxi to the Dark Side," about the shuttle service from Kazakstan to the Dark Side of the Moon, a service that has gotten surprisingly little attention. For best foreign language film, I'm sure there will be a winner but I can't pronounce any of them. Look for "Beaufort," the Israeli entry - "Beaufort" is Hebrew for "We Like Oscar Voters." And for best original screenplay, I think "Ratatouille" will win if only because it is the first-ever recipe to be made into a feature film.

So, log onto your favorite betting website (illegal in America, sorry) and place a ton of cash on the above.* You'll thank me.

* Disclaimer: not responsible for you losing your mortgage betting on Oscar picks. Try a wiser investment, like the horses.

Sorry

It was an interesting week in Canberra. The new Parliament met for the first time since the elections. And Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, as promised, made "Sorry" the first order of business.

"Sorry" to the tens of thousands of aboriginals who as children were snatched away from their families to be raised in special schools and orphanages, a policy that lasted into the early 1960s.

The whole question of whether or not to apologize for this was a political football. But I thought Rudd did a good job, apologizing for the pain and dislocation it caused but without demonizing people who often thought (wrongly) that they were doing this for the good of the children. It was a moving day in Canberra and around the country; Rudd's speech was screened on the lawns of Parliament here in Canberra and in public venues all over Australia, drawing very large crowds to watch. I was touched particularly by the reaction of many older Aboriginals.

Aboriginal Australians on average live in deep, deep poverty, possibly even worse than some of the poorest Indian reservations in the US. One statistic I think really drives it home - life expectancy for Aboriginal Australians is 17 years less than for other Aussies.

So "sorry" doesn't end their problems. But it is a good step.

What's So Tough About This?

The Washington Nationals made an interesting deal with top pitching prospect Jack McGeary, who wanted to go to Stanford. "Pitch for us in the summer, and we'll give you a big bonus ($1.8 million) and pay for your tuition at Stanford."

A savvy deal by the Nationals, and McGeary agreed. Fine. But why does this article describe this as such a tough prospect?

The gist of it: McGeary studies during the school year - apparently a heavy course load. During spring break, he goes to Florida and works with Nationals coaches. And during summer, he'll pitch for a Nationals minor league team.

In other words - McGeary goes to school full time, works during his spring break, and works during the summer. The only difference between THAT and what I did is that I also worked DURING the school year (often 40+ hours a week) and I got a lot less than $1.8 million for it.

I don't begrudge him the money - nobody held a gun to Jim Bowden's head and I generally don't mind about pro athletes making big bucks. It's a free market. But McGeary's plan only seems like a tough deal to the average sports journalist or baseball player who is used to nice long vacations, plenty of free time, and university classes (if any) like "Theory of Coaching Badminton" or "How to Interview A Jock."

I still remember what a relief it was to graduate and get a full-time job - because a 50-hour work week is easier than working 30-40 hours AND taking a full load of classes. McGeary will have it easy.