Snipes Shows Fangs via Tax Fraud

Reuters is reporting that actor Wesley Snipes has been charged with tax fraud. According to the report, Mr. Snipes illegally claimed refunds of over $12 million. Apparently, Snipes was involved with two other men in a tax scheme where they conspired to claim said refunds under the guise of 2 for-profit commercial enterpises. As of Tuesday afternoon, Snipes' whereabouts were unknown.

It never ceases to amaze me when SUCCESSFUL celebrites get all caught up in obviously inane and retarded lawbreaking schemes. Sure, I can understand it when some rather obscure director amuses himself by being a prostitute, or a former chart-topping singer gets pulled over for speeding and is caught with narcotics--but this guy is NOT a has been! It's not like we're talking about Topdd Bridges here--this is Wesley Snipes! For crying out loud, Wesley, what the hell were you thinking? You made $13 million for Blade 3 alone--what in God's name do you need to extort the U.S. Government of $12 over 6 years for?

True, it's not like he got caught calling cops "sugartits," but this certainly comprimises his credibility. Ok, well maybe "Blade 3" did that already, but this definitely doesn't help matters. Why do I have the sinking feeling his next gig is going to be skin product infomercials and/or autograph events with Pete Rose?

Man Robs EB Games; Grabs 'Cheapo' 360

The Dallas Morning News is reporting that Dallas police are looking for a man who robbed an EB games at gunpoint.

The man, who was the last remaining customer in the store, pointed a revolver at two employees and demanded money. He left with an undisclosed amount of cash, an X-Box game system and two games.

The sad part is that, according to Kotaku, the guy made off with the dreaded CORE xbox 360 system. Burn! Dude. You really have to check the box before you walk out. I mean, really--now you'll have to go back to EB and get the hard drive, membership to Live, etc... talk about suckage.

In this guy's defense, however, I have to think he's probably running on pure adrenaline, so decisive shopping is probably far down the to-do list. In fact, something tells me he probably grabbed a couple of Gamecube games by accident. Actually, when you think about it, how did he get the games anyway? They keep them behind the counter, right? Are you telling me that--after looting the register--this guy took the time to discuss what games to get for his system? God only knows how long that discussion lasted, since most register jokeys at EB can be charming fanboy know-it-alls. Honestly, I sometimes wish I had a gun when I was making a LEGAL purchase there.

All we can say is thank goodness no one was hurt. The police are asking for tips, but let's be honest: when this guy gets home and figures out he grabbed the GREEN box, chances are he'll be down at Target or Software Etc. looking for a wireless controller and hard drive. Just look for the really ticked off guy trying to return "Lord of the Rings Battle For Middle Earth." "The guy at EB said it would rock!"

Wacky waving inflatable arm flailing tube men!

One of the best things about being on "hiatus" from blogging is that you get to wait out new technologies/web content until it's matured, so that you can reap the harvest of them for your own twisted purposes when you get back to blogging months later.

Case in point: YouTube. When this blog was being updated often months ago, You Tube wasn't quite as saturated in the public consciousness. Months later, it is, and all we can say is, "yipeee!" OK, enough of that.

Do you watch Family Guy? No? Then you're obviously on crack and/or a mental deficient. For the rest of you, here is one of the funniest clips you'll ever see. Enjoy!

Don't forget to check out the "wacky waving inflatable arm flailing tube men" page at ytmnd here, or this Al Harrington "advertisment" page here.

How to Fix the Yankees--Ask Questions Later.

It's a sad, sad day when we have to re-launch this blog with the terrible analysis of the most recent Yankee debacle, but it has to be done. True, it would have been nice to post a throwaway commentary on some celebrity wrongdoing, or the random display of a Lindsay Lohan or Beyonce picture, but priorities are priorties. So gird your loins and check yo' self--because this will be a bitter pill to swallow.

The New York Yankees' loss to the upstart Detroit Tigers (whom are very hard to hate, although we can try) has vibrantly illustrated the shortcomings of this franchise in the last few years. You all know the laundry list: overpaid all-stars, over-the-hill starting pitching, lack of gritty role players, lack of youth on the team, lack of a team concept, etc... we all know them by heart, and each one was a major factor in this past weekend's demise.

What makes this year different is that, for a short time, the Yankees had returned to the Yankees of the late 90s for a short time this summer, thanks to (unfortunately) various injuries. During this period (which I like to call "the golden months"), the Yankees WERE a team. They WERE gutty and gritty. They WERE winners. Sadly, all of this was whisked down the drain in August, when the Yankees became the 2004 team, and left the 1996 team permanently in the past as a memory.

We're not going to analyze all that went wrong with the last 3 weeks of this season--including the playoffs. Instead, we need to address the matter at hand: FIXING what's wrong, and getting the Yankees back to being a team we actually ENJOY watching.

With that in mind, the following is a list of issues that need to be resolved, explored or rectified, in a loose order of importance. Clear your mind and ignore the knee-jerk reactionaries out there, because THIS is the path to a better team.

1) Think long and hard before firing Torre - The brass in Tampa thinks that this is the quick fix. They claim that Torre should be held responsible because he did not prepare his team for the playoffs, and/or he fiddled too much with the lineup in the 4 games. While there may be some truth to this, there is more that needs to be explored here. Torre is NOT the crux of the problem.

Quite possibly the most glaring issue with the Yankees in the last month of the year was the re-insertion of Matsui and Sheffield into the lineup. True, Matsui seemed to flow right in there, but was it necessary to rush him? And as for Sheffield, there was absolutely NO REASON to get him back on the team. He was, and continues to be a sourpuss who can't think about anything besides home runs when he's at bat. He was NOT coming back next year (news flash), so why bother? Who cares if he was to stew and yell and whine like a baby if he wasn't on the roster? Screw him! There was no reason to expend the energy getting him back and forcing first base on him--he was done and no one wanted him...

...Except George and the brass. And that's exactly why he was back in the lineup. One could make the case that Torre wanted nothing to do with Sheffield, and quite possibly Matsui, too. The team was rolling along with great role players, some youth in Cabrera, and some timely hitting from the veteran Bernie Williams. Deep down, Torre wanted to keep this feeling going, but he doesn't sign his own checks, so when Mr. 'Warm and Fuzzy' Sheffield was forced on him, Williams and Cabrera got used to their new role: riding the bench.

Now, the geniuses in Tampa think that Torre should be blamed for this. But there is more at work here: The spectre of Lou Piniella is looming in the background, and his window of availability will close fast due to his demand. Because of this, a move to let go of Torre might happen, even if it isn't justified. The problem is that this year, more than any other, the Boss can actually make a somewhat solid case for firing Torre. In other words, there would be less of a backlash this year than any other time he's thought about it. These two factors may indicate that this is the moment to make the change to a new manager.

All we ask as Yankee fans is to consider everything before making such a move. There is no guarantee that a hot-headed Piniella is going to have any better effect on this team than the calming Torre. Torre is also a proven commodity in New York for 11 years, dealing with the million-dollar personalities that many could not. He deserves better than a quick exit. One last note: The hiring of Piniella may make the next point impossible--so be careful

2) Alex Rodriguez Must be Liquidated - I really wanted to like this guy. I really did. When he was being booed by the peanut gallery, I tried to defend him. The man is quite possibly the best all-around player in baseball, and he had an MVP year last year. But the facts are facts: When the pressure is on, when the time is nigh, and when--simply put--he needs to step up and deliver, he NEVER does. At least not in pinstripes. Enough is enough.

Enough of the errors. Enough of the choke jobs at the plate. Enough of the finger-pointing. Enough of the excuses. Enough of the sappy SI interviews. Enough of the shirtless forays in the park. Enough of A-Rod. Get him out at any cost.

But how? It's actually a little easier than one might think. Remember that Texas is still paying for some of his contract. Also remember that, as part of any trade, the Yankees will undoubtedly pick up some of this contract as well. Lastly, there are at least several fairly big market teams who would be MORE than willing to insert a hall of famer into their lineup. Think about it: The Cubs would love this guy, not to mention the White Sox. What about the Angels? Back to back with Guerrero would be quite a one-two punch. Even a team like San Francisco--which has no bats once Bonds goes--would be quick to jump at the chance. The important thing is to get YOUNG, MAJOR LEAGUE LEVEL, PROVEN PITCHERS in return. There is no substitute.

What's the roadblock? A-Rod's pride. He has a no-trade clause in his contract, and, even more importantly, he's too proud to have the blemish of failure in NY on his resume. Sure, if he goes elsewhere and leads a team to a World Series trophy, that blemish will be harder to spot. But, if he doesn't, it will always be the lead line in his epitath when he retires. The hardest part of ridding the team of this cancer is getting past this problem--but it can and SHOULD be done, as quickly as possible.

3) Acquire Barry Zito - Part of the luxuries of being a Yankee fan is knowing the franchise has loads of money at its fingertips--money which always it re-invests into its on-the-field product, unlike other outfits. It's true: there will be many teams courting Mr. Zito (including the Mets), and his price will definitely go through the roof if he keeps performing as he did last week in the playoffs. The Yankees will have to drive hard to the hoop for this one, but the payoff will be worth it. Get it done.

4) Consider Parting Ways with Mike Mussina - Yes, its a tough decision to make, but it might be the right one. Mike Mussina is a very intelligent and hard-working athlete. He always gives a great effort and is usually dependable during the year. However, he may be more trouble than he's worth. Re-signing him will be costly--both monetarily and otherwise. Remember that Mr. Mussina is very finicky and must have all the stars in the universe aligned before he picthes well. Let's not forget this was the guy that complained about how pitching in Japan "threw him off" when he was 3 months into the season!

The other, more glaring problem with Mussina is his inability to get it done when it counts. Sure, he'll give you a steady 15 wins per year, but come playoff time, he seems to fold like a house of cards. In fact, aside from one brilliant start against Oakland years ago, the guy never gets it done when we need it most. As a Yankee fan, I'd rather have a pitcher who wins 13-14 games, but steps it up a notch in the post-season (David Wells, anyone?). Mussina is not a money pitcher, and, after 6 years in the Bronx, I think we can safely say he will never be. It may be time to set him free and re-invest that money elsewhere.

5) Inject Youth Into the Rotation - This needs to be done ASAP. Stop babying that proven prosepct Philip Hughes, and get him into the rotation for a full season. No reactionary demotions or moves, get him in there and KEEP HIM THERE. This franchise desperately needs the next Andy Pettitte, and while Wang may already be that, two is better than one, so get it done.

And while we're on the subject, let's get that Darrel Rasner in the rotation, too. The kid may not be a phenom, but he did go 4-0 in August and he might be able to hold his own. Why not give him a shot as a #5 starter?

The point is that the rotation NEEDS youth, and the Yankees have a bit of it already. Yes, Zito would be a great addition, but it might not even be necessary. Why not suffer through the growing pains of watching young pitchers like Detroit and Oakland did? Look where it got them!

What would be a fantastic rotation for next year? Pitcure this--and keep in mind that it's totally attainable: Zito, Wang, Johnson (if necessary), Hughes and Rasner (or another pitcher if necessary). It can be done. Take the chance. Do it.

6) Jaret Wright Must be Sent Packing - This is a no-brainer. He mgiht be a hard thrower and a competitor, but he's done. Too many injuries and not enough talent equals not a good pitcher. Of all the moves Cashman has made in the last few years, this is by far the worst, and here's the opportunity to rectify that. Nice knowing you, Jaret.

7) Melky Cabrera, Starting Left Fielder - Yes. You heard me right. If everything on this list is accomplished, this can and should be done. Matsui is a fantastic player, but let's face facts: The guy is no spring chicken, he's coming off an injury, and he's a terrible outfielder. Slide him into that DH role and everbody's happy. Even if Giambi is still on the team (which seems to be a foregone conclusion), he can stay at first and platoon at DH and Cabrera can rest every once in a while in left. The main point is to get YOUTH into this lineup and keep it there as often as possible on a day to day basis.

Picture this lineup: Damon, Jeter, Abreu, Giambi (if he's here), Matsui, Posada, Cabrera, *insert non-all-star third baseman*, Cano. Roll with it. 95 wins.

8) Consider Losing Giambi if Possible - Now, before you Yankee fans go nuts out there, just try to think objectively here. Yes, I actually like the guy. Even though he was a cheater, he did admit it, and he score major points by being acompetitor and taking Mr. Rodriguez to task for his shortcomings. But the fact of the batter is that he's really not a good first baseman, he can be extremely streaky, and he is riddled with injuries. The reality is that parting ways with Jason will probably be impossible, but if there's a way to do it, it might be the time, even though a part of THIS Yankee fan still thinks he's a good guy.

9) Role Players: Use Them - In 1996, the success of the team was largely dependant on the strategic use of roelplayers: Cecil Fielder, Charlie Hayes, etc... And--big surprise--the success of the Yankees THIS SEASON was also dependant on the use of role players: Aaron Guile, Nick Green, Andy Phillips, Craig Wilson. Thanks to the Yankee brass, the role players were left off the roster, in favor of the likes of Sheffield. Don't make this same mistake twice--get them back into the game and use them. Time and again, its a proven successful recipie.

10) Pray for Randy Johnson to Retire - Well, this one depends on fate. We can only hope the gods of baseball shine down and make this possible. The guy's a great competitor, but I think we all need to wake up and smell the end-of-career coffee. He's had way too many injuries, and he doesn't have the arm he used to have. The worst part is that he refuses to adjust to this like his contemporaries Pedro, Glavine and Smoltz. They have all learned to let go of what they can no onger do, and adjust to using new ways to get batters out. Johnson still thinks he's in Seattle. He's not. Maybe he should fly back... to get a nice cup of coffee.

That's it. A nice 10-step program to curing the Yankee ills. If followed, Yankee fan can enjoy a young, gritty fun-to-watch team that will be a force to be reckoned with. Yes: there is a chance that they may not be a powerhouse that plows its way to October. But, what the brass in Tampa fails to see is that Yankee fans CAN LIVE WITH THAT, as long as they try and play hard! If the Yankees had kept Cabrera and Williams in the lineup this year, and lost to Detroit in a closely played, hard-fought 5 game series, the publich would have been a little more receptive to the loss. Next year, if the staff and lineup is younger and more exciting, the city of NY will be more than happy to live with a few growing pains. Remember: it's not "rebuiding." Consider it a kind of "re-thinking."

So get to it, Yankees. You have your mission. We don't need an all-star at each position, we need players who strive to BE all stars at each position. It's that hunger that will get us a ring next year, and it's hard to be hungy when you are always stuffed at the buffet of overpriced contracts.

Oscar Improves, But Will Anyone Care?

Every year at this time, American eyes are glued to their TV sets for the only event that draws all of us together aside from the Superbowl: The Academy Awards. For decades, men, women and children have loved to escape from their normal workaday lives to live vicariously through the glitz and fame of Hollywood: Watching their favorite actors and actresses win for the films that made them stand up and take notice of all year long-- cheering and crying alongside them as they take the stage to grasp that golden statuette as they go down in history. After last year's train wreck of an Oscar presentation, the theme for the 78th Academy Awards was "A Return to Glamour." With that moniker, one would have hoped this year's Oscars would get us back to the feelings we all had in the golden age of filmmaking. And while the presentation itself felt more like an Oscar show than last year's, the overall event and it's award recipients produced an unavoidable sense of forgetability.

This can be attributed in part to the show's host, Jon Stewart. Truth be told, he actually did a pretty admirable job, thankfully devoid of heavy-handed politcal commentary, and fairly funny overall. However, his performance was nervous, timid, stilted and uncomfortable for most of the evening. Many of his jokes--particularly the ones that opened the show--were flat and produced only "polite" laughter. He did a little better as the show went on, but never really looked at home in the role of host. His best contributions were undoubtedly the fake "politcal ads" that he had a hand in producing, but, unfortunately, those cannot carry an entire Oscar broadcast.

When Chris Rock made a mockery out of the Awards last year, he was criticized for not having any tangible respect or connection to the 100-year-old industry that was being celebrated. On top of that, his jokes were out of place and his presentation was altogether off. Job Stewart was a definite improvement, but he did share one criticism with Rock: A lack of a real "feel" for the history of film. His praises for films after each montage and nomination felt forced and dishonest. After "Totsi" won, for example, he said, "that was really a great film," but did he really see it? For that matter, did he really seem honest in his appreciation for the groundbreaking, landmark films shown in the many montages during the show? Maybe, maybe not.

Like last year, the producers of the Oscars felt it was necessary to find a "younger, hipper" host that would attract a new audience. The fact of the matter is that every Oscar show gets the same amazing rating no matter who the host is--and a younger, hipper host does NOT mean bigger ratings (Chris Rock actually produced LESS ratings for the Oscars last year). It will be interesting to see if Jon Stewart actually had some sort of effect on viewership this time around, but the outlook is doubtful doubtful.

All in all, Mr. Stewart did his best, and if given another chance at the job, he might be much more comfortable and entertaining. Last night, however, he definitely seemed a little out of his element. Whether this is his fault, the writers' faults, or the fault of those who chose him, the result was the same: A somewhat forgettable hosting job.

Which brings us to the nominees and winners themselves. Let's be honest: The best Academy Awards are the ones where the films/performances nominated are both popular AND fantastic. Of course, this is becoming more and more of a rarity in the world of film, but it does actually happen now and then. This group of nominees, however, will never be mistaken as such. This does not mean that any of the awards were not deserved: quite the contrary. The problem is that, while they were excellent performances and films, one has to admit that the majority of Americans didn't see them. And we're not talking about Joe Shmoe WWF fan who saw Wedding Crashers four times, we're talking about almost every type of moviegoer: from average fan to film afficianado. The fact is that many of the nominees were largely unknown, and it showed.

Before anyone gets riled up at that comment, remember that we're not saying the films did not deserve to be honored. It's just a sad fact that, this year, the discrepency between popularity and artistic mertit was worse than ever. This, of course, is not the fault of the Oscar ceremony itself, and it's really not meant to be an indictment of the moviegoing public. Rather, it's simply an observation that this year's Awards were overwhelmingly forgettable because the films being honored were rather low on the consciousness radar.

The truth is that the Oscar Ceremony really excites the public when they have something to really root for or identify with. Unfortunately, the only film that really stood out as something that the public could latch on to and "ride the wave" of was "Brokeback Mountain." The other four nominees? Two biopics no one saw, a film about intolerance in L.A. that had minor success, and a bone thrown to Spielberg for a film that had a fairly uneventful run. All good films? Maybe so. But did anyone really care? Or did they just force themselves to care?

True, some people will say that this particular ceremony was defined by the highly publicized "upset"--the lesser-known "Crash" beating out the favored "Mountain." Maybe so, but this "stunner" doesn't seem to resonate with past Oscar upsets--such as when "Saving Private Ryan" was robbed by "Shakespeare in Love." The truth is that "Crash" (and "Brokeback," to an extent) never really reached that "higher level" we expect from Oscar-worthy films of the past. Yes, it was an unexpected upset, but years from now, it's shock value will probably linger only in the minds of the most devoted.

2005 can be seen as a strange dichotomy: A bad year for films because nothing worth nominating was popular? Or a good year because every nominee was a truly great piece of craftsmanship that didn't cater to the box office? Who really knows. Nevertheless, the end result was a ceremony that--upset or not--felt more like the Independant Spirit Awards rather than an Academy Awards. That's neither a negative or a positive: it's merely the truth.

On a more positive and technical note, the producers did make a conscious effort to speed up and/or streamline the program as much as possible, and that was a welcome change. Unlike last year, there were no childish and inane tactics used to shorten the telecast, such as speeches from the audience and having all nominees on stage. This year, speech lengths were strictly enforced, best picture clips were kept brief, and presentations were fairly crisp. Unfortunately, even with all of these improvements, the show still felt like one was wading through molasses.

After 78 years, the question for the Awards' producers is why they keep ignoring the things that WILL shorten the show in favor of performing wacky experiments in presentation that MIGHT shorten the show? For example: Is it really necessary to have FOUR montages honoring film noir, epics, etc? Why? If the idea was to keep the show grounded in the history of filmmaking, then maybe they should have chosen a better host, or nominateed more "classic" choices--because you can't have it both ways.

Furthermore, what is the obsession with musical performances? The producers of the Oscars need to realize that the public RARELY cares about songs from films. The fact is that many of the most popular songs used in films are ones that have been produced years beforehand. This year was a perfect example: Every nominee was dull and forgettable--even the so-called winner. Sooner or later, Oscar producers should realize that these songs should be presented via CLIPS and NOT perfromances. And, if they MUST use performances, then keep them short and simple. The interpretive performances of this year's nominees was not only time consuming, but nauseating.

In addition, it may finally be the time to eliminate certain awards from the telecast. Best animated short, live action short, and documentary short might need to hit the road. It's terrible, true, but for the sake of time and mental health, they may have to be the ones who take the fall for the betterment of the program. It's just something to consider.

Think of how smoothly the show would move without inane musical breaks, three less awards and only one or two montages: That's easily 30-40 minutes less of broadcast time right there. In an age where people tune in and tune out quicker than hummingbirds, the Acadamy Awards need to wake up and smell the future: Who's really going to sit through all of this--especially when, as said above, there's really nothing of huge interest that's nominated or winning?

In closing, the 78th Academy Awards were markedly better than last year, but there's still quite a bit of work that needs to be done. Unfortunately, the biggest problem with this year's broadcast was something that couldn't really be "fixed," and that's the lack of popular appeal for the majority of the films and performances nominated. Tomorrow, when the public wakes up and doesn't remember what they saw the previous evening, would anyone be surprised? If the ratings were lower than last year's event, will anyone be shocked? If years from now, no one remembers that "Crash" beat out the only film anyone really had any feelings for, will anyone really care? The answer is "no" to all three. For a multitude of reasons, and due to a vast array of factors, the 78th Academy Awards will be remembered for one thing: being forgettable.

Where's "Gladiator" when you need it?