Tuesday, June 21, 2011

The Killing Season Finale Failure

Now, I hate Bill Simmons. I have for years. Hell, in 2008, I wrote an article in which I called him a “self-aggrandizing ass clown”. I still stand by those words; however, he occasionally makes good points. His article on the season finale of The Killing is a perfect example. It pretty much took the wind out of my sails on the literary smack-down I was going to lay on the episode. I will try and keep my points brief now.

The finale was a kick in the nuts (or for you ladies, a punch in the baby maker). I made a lot of excuses for this show over the past few episodes. I should have been put on payroll as a show apologist (you know, like all those people who still fawn all over Glee). When it started, I loved the three interwoven stories. They all compelled me, made me not upset when they moved from one story to the next. Then, it started to drag, where the only storyline I wanted to see was the police storyline, but only if I didn’t have to deal with Linden’s family issues.

I think I gave up during the episode “Missing”. It was hard to justify the episode at all. It was 45 minutes of Linden and Holder trying to track down her idiot kid. Um, don’t you have a murder to solve? The show finally dissolved to the point where I was only watching for the identity of the killer and any scene with Holder. That guy cracked me up. Plus, he was the only character I actually cared about. I got sucked into his storyline and nearly cheering for him when Linden pretty much anointed him a good detective. Then, the skullduggery started.

I actually liked the second to last episode, with Linden in Richmond’s home office, seeing her email continually pop up, and then Richmond shows up at the door. Classic stuff that made me want to watch the finale right then and there. However, I knew at that point that he didn’t do it. It was too easy. While watching the finale and seeing the noose tighten around Richmond, I kept thinking to myself that this is a very anti-climatic finale. With ten minutes left, I figured one of two things was going to happen. Either Richmond was the killer and the story would be lame or we wouldn’t know who the killer was and enrage the fan base. At this point, the lame ending would have been better.

I hated the fact that Holder’s betrayal came out of left field. I mean, with most major plot twists, you can look back and be like “how did I miss that?!” With this, you were thinking “huh?” After Holder’s confession of being a former addict and every sketchy thing being explained, there was no indication he wasn’t straight. Let me say that again, there was NO INDICATION HE WASN’T STRAIGHT! So, the only thing I know now is that Linden and Richmond didn’t kill Rosie. After that, it’s a crap shoot. Hell, thanks to the closing scene, we don’t even know if Richmond will survive; consider the writers had Belko rip off Jack Ruby. It’s like the writers were stuck with how to end it and were watching the History Channel, and then an idea struck.

Oh yeah, one more thing. Shame on the writers for having Mitch leave her husband and kids. That makes absolutely no sense. Did they even accurately explain why she did it? Or at least give us a reasonable explanation? I know the thought is that she needs to fulfill her dreams and that everyone gets on without her, but are you serious! Her sister is playing mom for a few weeks until she gets past the crippling depression. Sis is a stopgap, not a replacement. You think the family might need their mother? Of course, Mitch is the whole reason her husband is in jail, but that’s beside the point.

You know, that sad thing about all this was that Seamus and I were talking about the possibilities of a second season. I didn’t think it would work because it would capture the characters that helped make this season good. You couldn’t have an election as a backdrop. You couldn’t rely on the budding friendship/partnership of Holder and Linden. You couldn’t rely on Michelle Forbes being Michelle Forbes. They would need to reinvent the wheel. Well, now they don’t have to.

Instead, they are going to beat a dead horse and drag out this storyline for another season. I would have been apprehensive about reinventing the wheel, but would have come in with an open mind. Now, I’m going to be going into season 2 already pissed off and that’s not what you want. Nothing good can come from this and there really isn't any way to salvage it.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Winners and Losers of the Stanley Cup Finals

Oh man, the Bruins won the Stanley Cup last night. Like most of the city of Boston, I watched most of it (missed maybe the last 5 minutes of the 1st period due to class). Instead of writing about last night’s game and trying to flush out “Luongo choked” in a full article, I figured I would break down the winners and losers of the Stanley Cup finals. Canucks fans beware; I am a Bruins fan and a bit of a homer. You have been warned.

Winner: Tim Thomas

What can be said about Tim Thomas that hasn’t already been said? It’s like he threw on the Superman cape before every game. He single-handedly kept the Bruins in every game by making some inhuman saves. He had the Conn Smythe sown up by the end of game 5, whether the Bruins won the cup or not. Remember, this was a guy who was being questioned about his style by most after game 2 and by one mentally deficient goalie after game 5. This is a big middle finger to all who questioned him.

Loser: Roberto Luongo

You know it’s bad that even after winning a gold medal; your fan base is still scared that you’ll fold like a lawn chair. Oh, did he fold. Did you see the look in his eyes after the goals that got scored on him (and there were a lot of opportunities)? He looked lost. Plus, he questioned Thomas’ style after game 5. Seriously? You allow 14 goals in 5 games and have the stones to question a guy who has given up 6 goals in the same period?

Winner: Nathan Horton - the symbol

As a symbol, Nathan Horton will forever be associated with this Stanley Cup. He is the Dave Roberts of the Boston Bruins. He shows up in the locker room after game 4, travels to Vancouver on game 7, even dressed and skated with the team after they won the cup. He was a rallying point, not just for the team but the fans. What happened to him made it very easy to root against Vancouver.

Loser: Nathan Horton – the player

Now, as a player, you have to feel for Horton. He was the lynch pin of the team through the playoffs. He scored the game winners in the game 7’s against Montreal and Tampa Bay. If the Bruins needed a goal, you have a feeling it would be Horton that came through. Due to the injury, he won’t be remembered for that.

Winner: Mark Recchi

At 43, he gets to go out on top. Now, he was questioned about his ability to get it done throughout the playoffs, but seemed to intensify during the first two games of the Finals. However, the 3 goals and 4 assists in the Finals were key, even getting an assist in game 7. He was a leader in that clubhouse and definitely what they needed for these playoffs.

Losers: the Sedin twins

Has a set of Swedish twins ever disappointed more than the Sedin twins? All Bruins fans heard about prior to the series was how great the Sedin twins were. Where the hell were they? Chara and Seidenberg made them a non-factor. It wasn’t just that. They had no heart. They took punches, didn’t fight back, and didn’t get backed up by any of their teammates. It’s just plain sad.

Winners: Kevin Bieksa and Raffi Torres

They were the only Canucks who seemed to be trying out there and the only Canucks who I actually feared after it was a foregone conclusion that the Sedin twins and Kesler decided to turn invisible. Bieksa was always scrapping and looked like he would wreck you if you tried anything stupid. Torres seemed to want to try and jump start the offense every time he was on the ice. They both get thumbs up from me.

Losers: Alex Burrows, Maxim Lapierre, and Aaron Rome

Three guys who can never, EVER, walk the streets of Boston without armed guards. Absolute punks of the highest order. Burrows is an idiot for biting Bergeron. Lapierre is a tool for taunting about the bite. And Rome! Don’t even get me started on Rome. It’s bad enough he severely injured someone on a blatantly obvious illegal hit, but they he opens his pie hole and says that he didn’t deserve to be suspended and the hit was borderline illegal. Ugh, I’m fighting the urge to lay down expletives right now.

Winners: Duck Boat operators in Boston

A Championship in Boston means one thing! A rolling rally! Put the whole team on duck boats, roll them through the city with the Cup, and bask in the glory. Basically it’s an excuse for people to start drinking before noon. As if you need a reason!

Loser: Boston Mayor Tom Menino

The doughy, semi-literate mayor of the city of Boston put the kybosh on a Bruins viewing party at the Garden last night. I guess he thought we were all from Vancouver or something (more on that later). He also asked bars in the area to stop serving alcohol by the second quarter and black out the windows so people couldn’t see inside. What is this, communist Russia! Although it will be funny to hear him struggle with players names. Every time he speaks, he battles to the English language…and loses.

Losers: The City of Vancouver

So, I was watching the postgame last night and they showed a shot of Vancouver. A car was flipped over and on fire. I thought all Canadians were laid back and chill with funny accents and good beer. Little did I know about the sleeping beast that lies below. I’m kinda scared to go there in August now. I’m not letting anyone know I’m from Boston, I’ll tell you that much. Stay classy Vancouver, stay classy.