Coming Soon!!!

New features are coming soon. Premeiring this week will be The Fount of Useless Information Book Review. You may have noticed the "What am I reading" link on the sidebar. As I finish the books listed there I will post a review on the site. For all reviews I post on the site (books, movies, etc.) I will use the same scale:

3 Stars: Highly Recommended

2.5 Stars: Recommended

2 Stars: Recommended with Reservations

1.5 Stars: (Shrug) Ehh…

1 Star: Not Recommended

0.5 Stars: Avoiding Is Recommended

0 Stars: Avoid at All Costs

Until later...

Temporary Bachelorhood

MK had to go out of town, so I was left here alone for the weekend. This left me with quite a quandary. What was I supposed to do with myself? I knew I was going to miss some work next week, so I would need to go to the office for a while, but that still left the evenings to deal with. So, I thought I would do what any self-respecting single man would do. Eventually, I decided that was a bad idea and headed to the video store instead.

To pass a weekend alone, I would need a movie. No, a movie and a video game. Of course, I would need sustenance too, but we can't discuss that because the mention of tortilla chips, Twizzlers or Mountain Dew might actually make me sick right now.

I browsed the video store for a while and eventually decided on one movie, Shaun of the Dead, and one game, The Getaway:Black Monday. I can enjoy the increasing realism of games over the past few years. (I'm not going to get into a discussion of the potential dangers of that, since I am a 28-year old adult with no mental deficiencies that would prevent me from distinguishing between fantasy and reality. I am fully aware that what happens on the Playstation is just a bunch of pixels on a screen.) Unfortunately, I don't think that some game developers are aware that it would be beneficial to improve more than just the realism of the game. The games should be entertaining, first and foremost. Sadly, the team behind TG:BM seemed to miss this. Endless cutscenes, cockney accents, F-bombs and a map of the actual streets of London do not a good game make. I would have found the game much more enjoyable if at least some of the time designing this game, which was meant for people to play, had been spent making the game playable. I think this may have been only the second time I have returned a game well before its due date simply because I couldn't see any circumstances in which I would spend any more time playing it.

Ok, that leaves me with the movie. Shaun of the Dead is an interesting concept. It is at once a horror film about zombies, a spoof of horror films about zombies, and a romantic comedy. It even manages to get a little social commentary in the mix as well. I had heard many things about this before it came out in the theaters, and of course when it did play in theaters, it didn't play here (remember yesterday's rantings). I was worried that my expectations might be a bit too high from all of the hype before it finally reached video. Nope, not an issue at all. I laughed out loud for a large portion of the film. (Remember, it's just me and the dog this weekend, so I'm in the house alone laughing hysterically.) I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. It is a zombie film, so there's a good bit of blood and gore, as well as a few good scares along the way, but more than anything it's just great fun. I also noticed that it got in a few shots at another recent British zombie flick, 28 Days Later, which were pretty stinkin' funny. I would recommend this to anyone who would usually want to see a zombie horror movie, and to many people who wouldn't. Finally, for any of you out there who are wondering after seeing this movie: Since my dog was watching along with me, I can tell you that Big Al was wrong. Dogs can look up.

Until later...

Ever wonder why things like Christmas With the Kranks manage to be number 1 at the box office?

MSNBC has an excellent article by Eric Lundegaard about the disconnect between movies people like and movies gaining wide release. Mr. Lundegaard goes through some of the movies released this year and compares the type of release given to the movie with the rating of the movie, based on the Tomatometer of Rotten Tomatoes, a site that compiles many critics reviews to give an overall opinion of the film. Each review is either fresh or rotten and the percentage of "fresh" (i.e. positive) reviews is given as the films Tomatometer score. For example, if you were planning to go see Alone in the Dark this weekend, its appallingly bad score of 1% fresh (66 rotten reviews, 1 fresh) should tell you that it might be best to stay away. Obviously there are a few flaws in using this system to evaluate movies, and Mr. Lundegaard addresses many of them in his article. The point, however, remains the same. For every Incredibles that gains a wide release, the movie studios inflict a dozen Catwoman or Kangaroo Jack clones on us. At one point he uses the example of Garden State (88% fresh, and it gets my seal of approval as well), which did not have a wide release and made just under 27 million dollars. Thirty-five movies were given a "very wide release" (over 2000 screens) and made less money (and oh, by the way, most of them sucked). What would have happened if a movie like Garden State had been given a wide release?

As a movie buff in "fly-over country", I hate this system. Because I live in Michigan, but not in Detroit, I have to watch Racing Stripes instead of Hotel Rwanda or Meet the Fockers instead of Sideways? This is absurd. We deserve more choice. Give people the option, and they will choose good movies. I'm not saying it's always going to be that way; plenty of people liked Meet the Parents, after all.

If you happen to be bored, go read some of the reviews of the aforementioned Alone in the Dark. It's not too often reviews will make laugh out loud. Here are just a few of my favorites:

"Saying Uwe Boll’s Alone in the Dark is better than his 2003 American debut
House of the Dead—possibly the worst horror film of the past decade—is akin
to praising syphilis for not being HIV. " Nicholas Schager, Slant Magazine

"Trying to rehash this plot is like trying to describe Jackson Pollock
painting while drunk." Peter Croatto, filmcritic.com

"Alone in the Dark is no better than whatever you might pick up while wearing a blindfold at Blockbuster, even if you happen to reach into a trash can." Jack Mathews, New York Daily News

"Never trust a movie that opens with a written introduction scrolling by that's longer than the collected works of Tom Clancy." David Hiltbrand, Philadelphia Inquirer

And my favorite:
"The three stars have seen better days, but I'd like to think they could still do something classier and more dignified than this. Like gay porn." Rob Vaux Flipside Movie Emporium

After reading these reviews, I think it might be worth the $8.00 to go see this.

Until later...

Guest Blogger

My loyal readers (or more likely loyal reader) may have noticed I missed blogging at all yesterday. Unfortunately, I'm not really feeling up to blogging today either. Today's post will feature a guest blogger. Read what he has to say and discuss amongst yourselves. Just don't expect him to respond. He said it a couple millennia ago.

To lead people, walk beside them... As for the best leaders, the people do not notice their existence. The next best, the people honor and praise. The next, the people fear; and the next, the people hate... When the best leader's work is done the people say, 'We did it ourselves!'

Lao Tzu

Where There's Smoke, There's Fired!

No that's not a typo in the title line. A company here in Michigan has implemented a policy that allows the company to fire employees for smoking even if they do so on their own time and property. In fact, they are testing employees for nicotine and have already fired four employees for refusing the test.

Guess what, they are not alone in their quest to rid their company of smokers. Our local community college has a hiring policy, which became effective 01 January 2005, stating that tobacco users will not be considered for full-time positions.

Folks, I am not pro-tobacco, not even slightly. I do not smoke or use any form of tobacco, nor do I think I could ever feel ok about working for a tobacco company. I even hate being around people who are smoking. However, I find both of these policies to be absurd.

The reasoning behind these policies is that smoking causes higher medical claims, which in turn causes higher cost for benefits, and that smoking increases the number of days lost to sickness, which in turn decreases productivity. As always, it's all about the money.

This isn't the same as banning smoking in public places. No one is forcing his cigarette smoke on you while you try to enjoy a meal in this case. Companies are firing or refusing to hire people for doing something legal on their own time, in private.

I understand the argument the companies are making, but I disagree vehemently with them on this. I have two issues regarding the logic behind these decisions.

First, if the issue is that smoking increases the cost of health insurance at your place of business, why not simply take that into account when putting together a benefits package? If there is an increase that is due to each of the smokers on your company's insurance, charge a higher premium for those that smoke. This is essentially a universal policy with life insurance. Smoking=higher risk=higher chance of the insurance company paying out=higher premiums. Why not take care of your problem by increasing the health care premiums rather than firing people for their habits? Besides, is it really cost efficient to pay for nicotine testing, firing people, hiring replacements, training replacements (what happened to that loss of productivity thing we were so worried about?), having some employees dedicating a large portion of their time to the program and dealing with the ill-will that will be brought on your company all to avoid an increased health insurance premium?

Second, and more importantly, if we can start firing people for smoking because that increases health care costs, where do we draw the line for other activities? After all, smoking isn't the only thing that causes people to use health insurance more or miss work more. Should we begin firing people for being overweight? There is a preponderance of evidence that obesity is a contributing factor to many health problems, any of which could cause an employee to miss work or dare to make insurance claims. What if any employee has a pre-existing health condition that will cause them to occasionally miss work and go to the doctor? Oh, that's different because it's not a choice? Well, one could argue that obesity usually is, but for now we'll just assume that neither of these are choices employees make, and therefore shouldn't be compared. What about one choice that typically causes employees to make insurance claims for enormous amounts and causes employees to miss huge blocks of time: pregnancy? How much does the insurance company have to pay out for a hospital birth? Visits to the OB's office before the birth? How much time is missed during pregnancy? How much time do people take for maternity leave? How much time do mothers and fathers take off because the kids are sick or have an appointment here or there? I hope I don't have to convince anyone out there how despicable the concept of firing an employee for choosing to have a child would be. While I agree that there is a huge difference between pregnancy and smoking, my problem is that once we begin to accept one, we are that much closer to the other.

My 0.015 Euros (two cents ain't what it used to be) for companies worried about health care costs increasing due to smoking: Educate don't terminate.

Until later...

There's No Place Like...

Home Court? Ok, I haven't talked much (i.e. at all) about sports on here yet. I've pretty much just discussed my nerdish tendencies, but tonight that has to change. The University of Wisconsin came into tonight with a 38-game winning streak on their home court. Tonight's game was against the current number 1 team in the country, the University of Illinois Fighting Illini (my alma mater). Ok, so we have the undefeated, top-ranked team going for their 20th win against the 19th-ranked team going for their 39th consecutive home win. Stage set? Right. Let's get to it.

Normally, I wouldn't watch a game that doesn't even start until after 9:00, but this is a big game. The commentators on ESPN (why has no one banned Dick Vitale from television yet?) even said that tickets were going for over $1000 on eBay. So I decide to watch the game, knowing that there is good chance the Illini's undefeated season will end tonight, and that if it does I will be furious with myself for staying up.

Fortunately for me and all who have to interact with me tomorrow, the Illini won. Wisconsin's home streak is snapped. The Illini's winning streak is intact. Though the Illini won by 10, the game was incredibly close, and exciting throughout, with Illinois going on a 14-1 run in the last four and a half minutes to finish it off. Unfortunately, it's now well past my bedtime, so I'll have to leave the remainder of the celebrating for tomorrow.

Until la...Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

It's All About 'Cue: Part I

I promised to cover the varying forms of barbecue in a future post. Well, as the saying goes "the future is now", or "there's no time like the present" or some other meaningless cliché that horrid motivational speakers spout.

I'll just run over the basics of each of the main forms of barbecue. I'll give pros, cons, personal preferences and a little background for any barbecue neophytes out there. For the sake of today's post, we will assume there to be three main versions of barbecue: Ribs, Brisket and Pulled Pork. Unfortunately, I don't have the time or knowledge to discuss forms outside of the predominant styles in the Southeast-Midwest-Southwest United States...and don't even try to convince me about including chicken on this list. :)

First up, ribs: Ribs are, obviously, made from the meat on and around the ribs of an animal, specifically pigs or cattle. For this discussion we are sticking with pork ribs, not only because they are my preference, but also because if you have beef ribs, there's a reasonable chance that they were baked and glazed with barbecue sauce rather than actually barbecued (but no guarantees). Ribs can have a great flavor when done right, but there are as many ways to cook ribs as there are rib shacks in Memphis. First, you have to decide on a style of ribs (St. Louis, Baby Back). Now decide the specifics on how to cook them (and no, Tony Roma, boiling is not an option here). Finally, wet or dry? (Know your audience when answering this one, as the wrong choice may result in physical violence.) Lots of choices, and very few wrong ones. A great rack of ribs has a nice, smoky, meaty flavor and meat that is tender, but not so overdone or soggy that it falls off the bone. Sadly, however, many racks of ribs have been spoiled by poor preparation. Even when done perfectly, ribs are still meat on the bone and, when eaten by hand as tradition dictates, quite messy. Messy or not ribs are going to be hard to beat.

Next up in the queue (Get it? The queue, like the 'cue...as in barbecue...Oh, never mind. I'll try again)

Next time: Brisket and why it should be punishable by law to turn it into corned beef.

Until later...

BBQ Withdrawal

It's the middle of winter in Michigan, so I have plenty of reason to complain about the weather. I had to shovel my way up the stairs to the driveway, before I could even start to clear the driveway off and try to get the car out of the garage. I could easily babble on about this, but you know what? That's not my complaint about living in Michigan, at least not in this post.

I grew up in the South, so barbecue has always been a large enough portion of my diet that it may as well be its own food group. In the town I lived in while going to high school, barbecue joints were the only thing more common than Churches of Christ, and I'm still not sure which one was approached with greater religious fervor. Like I said, barbecue was a big part of life there. In fact, I assure you this won't be the last time I talk about barbecue on this site.

Here's my issue: There is nowhere, and I mean nowhere, to get decent barbecue around Kalamazoo. It's bad enough to suffer through the winter, but at least we know summer's coming. Summer is beautiful here, even though it may only last 30-45 days each year. The lack of barbecue lasts all year long, except for one weekend a year. You see, one weekend each August, the city of Kalamazoo plays host to Ribfest. Several rib vendors from around the country come and sell ribs and compete to see who has the best ribs. Now ribs may not be my barbecue preference (I'll cover that subject another day), but I still end up looking forward to Ribfest for most of the year. I even go more than one day during the weekend, so that I can try the ribs from all of the vendors. It ends up being a fun weekend, but it unfortunately just serves to remind me that I can't get it any other time.

I can handle the cold. I can handle the snow. But I'm not so sure I can handle the lack of barbecue much longer. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have snow to shovel.

Until later...

Yes, I watch VH1

I was watching part of "I Love the 90's: Part Deux" on VH1 last night, and saw something interesting. One of the people giving his commentary on the pop culture of the 90's (specifically 94 and 95 in this case) was Bill Simmons of espn.com. That's right, the Sports Guy was on VH1.

For those of you who aren't familiar with him, Bill Simmons writes for Page 2 on espn.com as well as for ESPN the Magazine. He typically refers to himself as the Sports Guy, and to his wife as Sports Gal. In fact, when I first started my blog, MK wanted to have a clever moniker like the Sports Gal, but unfortunately, I'm not that creative. Simmons writes about all sorts of things from reality TV to 80's movies to the difference between living in LA and Boston...and oh yeah, sports. I love reading his columns, but I have to wonder when he's going to change his name to Pop Culture Guy. Truth in advertising you know.

ESPN has finally (well, several months ago, finally) given him an entire page for his various articles, cartoons, quotes and now he even has his own intern. I wonder if I could get a blogtern? Probably not unless I teach my dog to type.

Anyway, Simmons writes good stuff and always makes me laugh. If you haven't checked him out yet, do it now.

On that note: a couple of site updates. I recently posted an email section in the sidebar so that you can email me if you have anything to say outside of the comments section. Also, today is the site-premier of the links section. If I feel that something deserves your attention on a regular basis, I'll post a link there.

Until later...

The Notorious P.I.G.

Around two years ago, my wife and I decided to try to lose some weight. At the time I was pushing three bills. I wasn't there yet, but I was certainly closer to 300 than 200. In fact, at my heaviest, I was closer to 300 than I was to 250. Over the course of several months and with the help of several modifications to our eating habits, I dropped a decent amount of weight. Fast forward to today, and I have put back on some of that weight. I'm not up as high as I was two years ago, but I've gained back much more than I would care to admit. I'd like to think that I'm just bulking up for the winter, but since I don't get to hibernate, I don't think that excuse works.

This week I started being much more careful again. We originally lost weight using the Weight Watchers plan, so I know it works for me. The real problem is finding that motivation within myself to get started. Once I make it through those first few days and fight off the cravings for fried things, ice cream and chocolate (not all together, mind you), it becomes more routine.

Why am I telling you this, you ask. It's all about accountability. If I tell you about it, I have to keep going. I can't just quit if I have a responsibility to you, my faceless denizens of netdom. After all, I can disappoint myself--I've been doing it for over twenty years now--but I can't stand to let anyone else down, even if I have no clue who they are.

That said, I think I'm going to go order a pizza. :)

Until later...

Ack. There is no emoticon for what I am feeling right now.

I've been meaning to talk about this since I watched this Sunday's episode of the Simpsons but just haven't taken the time until now. (The quote in the title has nothing to do with this other than that it is from a Simpsons episode, and it makes me laugh.)

It's an interesting thing to see your industry get lambasted on the Simpsons. For those who missed it, a quick recap: Mr. Burns cuts prescription drug benefits at the nuclear plant to save money. Eventually, other organizations follow suit, and essentially no one in Springfield is able to get medicine anymore. Several clips are shown of the response from the medical community on the news, including Dr. Hibbert decked out in all promotional material advertising various drugs. He is eventually joined by a group of women who dance using poles that look like pill bottles and have a pharmaceutical company's name emblazoned across the back of their shorts. Homer and Grampa Simpson go to Canada to smuggle cheap drugs back into the US, but are eventually caught. When Smithers falls ill, Mr. Burns helps get more drugs from Canada (If he cut out the prescription benefits, the drugs are expensive not illegal, so why didn't the billionaire just buy them? Don't ask.) and, finally realizing how important the benefits are, restores prescription drug benefits to all full-time employees. Homer, entering the kitchen at the end of the episode: "Good news, Burns made me a free-lance contractor."

As I've said in both my profile and in earlier entries, I work for a pharmaceutical company. I personally may not have agreed with all the view points in the show, but the bottom line is that it was hilarious. Making fun of my livelihood or not, I laughed at this episode more than many of the recent Simpsons. I love that this show has the ability to use humor to make a point and spark discussion. I love that after all these years, the show is still able to look at our society and satirize some of the most current issues. I love that, even though the main part of the show was talking about drug companies, with the ending they pointed out the flawed HR policies of so many companies in all industries.

Needless to say, the workplace was buzzing on Tuesday (Monday was MLK day, remember?). After talking to several people, it seemed that I wasn't the only one that was more interested in the fact that it was funny than that both sides of the issue weren't addressed.

I won't get into the arguing the merits of the episode. Some things I may agree with, and others not so much. Regardless, I'm not going to sit here and be a pharmaceutical industry apologist. That's neither my style nor my point. I have no problem admitting that things are not perfect, and anyone who would tell you that about his industry would be a fool. Jonathan Swift once said, "Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own." Not so, Jonathan. I looked into that glass, saw my own face, and it was funny.

Until later...

An Exercise in Futility

I am going to attempt to keep my blog apolitical as much as possible (I do, however, reserve the right to change my mind at any point), but today I am going to discuss a couple of political issues, but since I will be any equal-opportunity ranter, I feel no remorse about doing so.

Tomorrow a "protest" is supposed to occur. All people who do not support the war are being called upon to not spend any money tomorrow. Don't buy gas, don't buy groceries, don't buy anything. I'm not going to sit here and tell you or anyone else what to think of the war. I just want to say that I hate the idea of this protest. I find it both pointless and tasteless. Why, you ask.

First of all, the idea that a single day where people do not buy anything will make any difference is absurd. If you wish to actually impact anything, you must make an actual change. This follows the same logic as the recent "Don't buy gasoline" day. Even if no one bought gas on that day, everyone still ended up buying the same amount. If no one goes out and buys groceries tomorrow, do you think that everyone is going to go hungry? Obviously not, people will buy groceries (and everything else they need) on another day. What has been proven? Nothing.

For the sake of argument, let's assume a point can be made. What is that point, and who is on the receiving end of it? If you stop buying all goods and services tomorrow, how much will it impact the administration you believe is waging an unfair war? Not too much. If all of a sudden, money stops flowing into grocery stores and restaurants and little Mom and Pop hardware stores, do you think that will change the situation in Iraq? The direct impact is going to be on your friends, your neighbors, your coworker's kid trying to pay his way through college, the people closest to you. Why should you harm them for the sake of making a point that may or may not even be noticed? Is it the fault of all of these people that we went to war? If the current administration makes decisions you don't like, should you take it out on the person that lives across the street? This is the same logic that led the "Freedom Fries" lunacy recently. The people in favor of going to war with Iraq were screaming for bans of all things French or German. Stop drinking French wine and eating French cheese. Don't go visit Germany. Their governments dared to oppose the opinion of our own, and people felt the need to punish the vineyard owner who may or may not even share her government's opinion and the dairy farmer who may or may not even be a supporter of his current elected officials. Why punish those with whom you have no disagreement?

On the flip-side, we have the nearly-ubiquitous "Support Our Troops" ribbons. It seems that almost every other car I see on the road has at least one of these, be it a magnetic ribbon affixed to the side or a sticker on the rear window. Are we to think that, aside from being the aesthetic equivalent of gum on the underside of one's shoe, the ribbons are to imply that anyone not showcasing them is not supporting the troops? They would seem to be saying something like that. Oh, I see. They're about "raising awareness." Of course, because no one is actually aware that there is a war going on and citizens of our country and others are dying everyday. After all that's never on the news.

Just like with the protest issue above, this is being approached the wrong way. We don't need to raise awareness of the troops; I assure you everyone is well aware of their situation. You want to support the troops? Good, so do I. Stop spending money on ribbons that serve no purpose except to make someone more money. If all the money spent on these ribbons were collected, how much would there be? How much good could be done with it? How much support could be given to the troops in the form of needed supplies?

Whether we are talking about a protest that is at once too small in scale and too broad in scope or a ribbon affixed to the side of one's vehicle, we are talking about the same thing. People looking for a way to make a big point and a big change by doing almost nothing. This is why I chose the title "An Exercise in Futility" today. Change is difficult, my friends. If you want something done, you must be willing to do something about it. There is no quick fix.

Sorry for today's ranting. Tomorrow we should return to our regularly scheduled programming: Pointless, soap-box free ramblings.

Until later...

These are my confessions...(with apologies to Usher)

Fortunately, (unlike Usher) my confessions have nothing to do with impregnating a woman I hardly know. And while I am on that subject, am I the only one that thinks that Confessions Part II has the one of the strangest premises ever for a hit song? A song entirely about confessing not only infidelity, but that you've cheated enough that you got your "chick on the side" pregnant? Seriously? What's next? Confessing that your mistress gave you chlamydia? Oh well, sorry for the digression. On to my confessions for the day.

Part I.

I am a snooze-aholic. When my alarm goes off in the morning, I simply cannot get out of bed right away. OK, maybe I should rephrase that, because I can and do get out of bed. You see, to prevent the repeated snoozes, I have placed my alarm clock across the room. My original thought was that if I have to get up, walk around the bed and across the room I would be awake enough that I would simply stay up and start getting ready. Riiiiiight. This morning, I hit the button at least six times. I have a very serious problem, but the twelve step program just leads me to the snooze button.

Part II.

Tonight is the first episode of the new season of American Idol, and I promised myself that I would not watch again. During the first two seasons, I watched quasi-religiously. Near the end of the second season, I decided that I needed to stop. I wasn't going to watch at all in season three, but everytime I think I'm out they pull me back in. I eventually gave up near the end of the season and was convinced (again) that I wouldn't watch anymore. I'll give you one guess as to what is on in the background right this very moment. Yep, you got it.

Here's the problem: I look back at the previous shows and realize that I simply don't care who wins. I am not a huge fan of most of the music performed on the show, and I have not ever purchased, nor is it likely that I will ever purchase the music of any idol contestant. So why do I watch and keep watching? After a few episodes, I'm committed and can't handle not knowing what happens even if I don't care. The thing that draws me in first is the auditions, and I don't mean the good ones. I start watching because it's hard to believe that that there are people out there that misguided about their own abilities and because it's so easy to laugh at these same people. That's right, I'm confessing right here, right now that I only watch this show to laugh at the poor talentless people getting their dreams shattered on national television? I don't care about the people that are any good. I don't care about the people that succeed. I only care about the people who have lost all contact with reality and are willing to make complete fools of themselves for a chance at "stardom." Does that make me a bad person?

YES! As a matter of fact, I think it does!

Until later...

Holiday! Celebrate!

Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and I am off work. So is the Post Office and probably your bank.

I'm not going to complain about having a day off of work, nor will I complain about having a day to honor the work of Dr. King. I think both of those are wonderful things, and I would like to see both of them more often. I won't, however, pretend that I understand the way we honor people with days like today. Would you like to celebrate a leader of the Civil Rights movement? Don't do anything for day. How about for the veterans of wars or those who have given their lives in service to our country? Three-day weekend, baby! How should we properly show appreciation for the work force of our nation? By not working, of course.

Like I said, I'm not complaining about the holiday or the day off of work. I'm merely suggesting that if these days (Martin Luther King Day, Veteran's Day, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Presidents' Day, etc.) are important then maybe, just maybe, we should try to find something better to do to ensure that those we are supposedly remembering do not end up forgotten, save for a single day when we all get to sleep in.

Until later...

Allez Cuisine!!

Tonight was the premier of Iron Chef America on the Food Network...Wait...

Before you continue reading, let me remind you that I did warn you in my profile that I am a nerd. I just wanted to make sure that we were all clear on that before I went any further. Ok? Let's resume.

Tonight was the premier of Iron Chef America on the Food Network. I am a huge fan of the original so I was both excited and apprehensive about this new series. After seeing the first episode, I'm still somewhat conflicted about the whole thing. I'm not going to go point by point to break this down, but I will talk about a few things I like better and a few things I like less as well as share some of my thoughts on this specific episode.

I really don't get the new "chairman." Originally we had Takeshi Kaga (apparently a fairly accomplished Japanese stage actor) who played the eccentric rich guy perfectly: over the top, but only because it fit with the character. Now we have his supposed nephew whose major roles before this included the hero's Iroquois sidekick who was remarkably adept at martial arts in the highly overrated Le Pact de Loups (or The Brotherhood of the Wolf in the US) or playing one of the main roles in Double Dragon, which, for any of you who are IMDB fiends like me, is in the bottom 100 of all time according to that site. If his acting skills are always like they are on ICA, I wouldn't be surprised to see more of his movies in that not so distinguished list.

One of the changes that I really didn't like was the format. The original included most, if not all, of the background material at the beginning of the show. The remainder of the show consisted of the battle itself, which was shown as if it were a live sporting event. Commentary was given on what was happening at that moment and there was a sense of urgency to everything. Iron Chef America jumps almost immediately into the battle and is constantly interrupting the flow with background information and recaps. The sense of urgency is gone, and so is what made it feel unique.

It's very tempting to complain about the floor reporter who seemed to mispronounce everything, but I can't really compare since Ota was always dubbed into English and the person doing the voiceover certainly had plenty of time to get it right. Again going back to that lack of urgency, I really missed Ota breaking in with a "Fukui-San" a dozen or so times throughout the battle.

On the commentator(s), I wasn't sure what to think. In the original IC, we had a baseball announcer doing most of the commentary with Doc Hattori as the expert filling us in on all the details. On ICA, we have Alton Brown filling both of these roles. I actually really like Alton Brown (more on that another day, another blog), and I felt that he did a good job...but I still think he needed someone else to interact with a little more.

The biggest difference that I felt was for the better was the increased interaction with the chefs themselves. We got to hear them talking to their assistants, each other and the host. This rarely happened on the original IC.

Specifics on the episode from tonight: I have to admit that I was looking forward to this episode specifically for a couple of reasons. I spent a large portion of my formative years in the Southwestern US and both Southwestern and authentic Mexican cuisines hold a special place in my heart (or is it stomach).

I also happen to be a big fan of Rick Bayless. He has an absolutely wonderful show on PBS called "Mexico One Plate at a Time." If you haven't seen this yet, please check it out. He does a great job of not only showing recipes and techniques to make great dishes, but he also brings in the culture of Mexico that underlies all that wonderful food.

I have a couple of his cookbooks, and you would be hard pressed to find a better guacamole recipe than the Guacamole Clasico in his "Mexico One Plate at a Time" cookbook. I look forward to that everytime the tomatoes and avocados are good in the produce department.

Between Christmas and New Year, we met some of MK's family in Chicago and one of the places we ate during the trip was Frontera Grill, owned by Rick Bayless and his wife. I had enchiladas with a wonderful traditional Oaxacan mole and would gladly go back anytime.

I enjoyed seeing the two somewhat similar, yet very different chefs battle tonight, but I really wanted to see Bobby Flay stick with the neo-Southwestern style for which he is known. I guess I was expecting an all-out chile competition, rather than Flay's surprisingly eclectic collection of dishes.

Overall, I enjoyed the show, but it still can't compete with the original. And, yes, I lied. I did end up going point by point to compare. What else did you expect from me?

Until later...

Allow me to introduce myself

I suppose for a first post I should explain who I am. You could just click on my profile, but, realistically, would you bother? That's what I thought.

I am a 28 year old microbiologist working for "a major pharmaceutical company." (How Wheel of Fortune was that?) I have been married for about 6 and a half years (since May of 1998) to a wonderful woman (who I'll refer to as MK throughout the blog). Currently, we live in the Kalamazoo, Michigan area and spend our time complaining about the weather. We don't have kids yet. I feel I have enough responsibility right now taking care of a dog that is smarter than me, a bird that won't stop laying eggs, and a tortoise that should outlive me.

What else is there to know about me? I'm the guy that people go to when they have a random question they want answered. I may or may not know the answer already, but everyone knows that I'm just a little on the obsessive side and can't rest until I know the answer myself. My penchant for trivia is the source of the name of this blog. Until later...