chasfh

Oh, good lord, Tork, really? https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/mlb/tigers/2026/03/15/from-framber-valdez-to-spencer-torkelson-to-riley-greene-detroit-tigers-flash-spring-muscle/89166860007 The Tigers jumped all over Yankees right-hander Luis Gil Sunday and didn’t stop. Torkelson’s three-run homer got the party started in the first inning, sending a changeup over the left-field wall. “This last week my swing has felt great,” Torkelson said. “But I fell into that spring training trap where you are trying to make sure your swing is dialed and you kind of forget you need an approach to hit.” Torkelson, for as good as his swing felt, came into the game hitting .160 with two extra-base hits. “I was like, what the heck is going on,” he said. “I wasn’t really hitting with any plan. I came in with a plan today. So that was reassuring.” Tork admits he didn't have a plan for hitting until yesterday? His mental game has been off the entire spring? Maybe he's the best we have at first base today, but I don't think I have much hope long-term for this guy anymore. It seems like he's trying to skate by on his innate talent. Unless he changes my mind this year, I'm all for moving on from him before his three years are up. Some will disagree, I'm sure.

I couldn't get it off last night ...

Well, I'm glad you don't see him as that. Makes me feel loads better. 😉

Cobb would totally nail “you can’t handle the truth!” Can he do the smarmy charm we see in the Gitmo scene? That’s the only part that gives me pause. I was weighing both Robert Mitchum and George C. Scott for the role as well. I think Mitchum can do the Gitmo scene really well, but I am unsure about whether he can do the courtroom scene effectively, so I’ve been leaning toward Scott, but I don’t have a firm conviction on the role yet. Natalie Wood is a great actress and definitely easy on the eyes, although she was also only 23 in 1962, coming off of West Side Story in which she played a vulnerable and emotional teenager. Galloway needs to project professional competence, military bearing, and controlled determination. She’s fighting to be taken seriously in a male-dominated world, so she can’t be too emotional or vulnerable. She needs to seem buttoned-up and authoritative first and foremost, with passion showing through strategically. Given that, I like Shirley MacLaine for Galloway. She was 28 that year, had more of that no-nonsense, “I’m here to do a job” quality while still coming off as warm and determined. Warmth is the part where I feel Demi Moore lacks just a bit in 1992, so I think if you could port 1962 Shirley to 1992 to play that role instead of Demi, she would actually be better at it.

I don’t think Lancaster could do Kaffee because the character is a brash young hotshot lawyer coasting on his father’s name, and Lancaster is almost 50 years old in 1962. Too old, too authoritative for a boy-to-man arc. Lancaster as Jessep is a legitimately good fit. Cold and controlled, could be physically intimidating, could convey the quality of absolute righteousness, had the star power. He’s on the short list, I think. Rethinking the Tony Curtis for Kaffee idea on the fly here: Cruise brings a kind of upper middle class Harvard energy to the role of, again, a hotshot pretty boy coasting on his dad’s name. Tony Curtis is definitely a pretty boy, but he’s also a brash, Bronx-accented, indeterminately-ethnic working-class guy fighting for everything he’s got. I think you’d have to lose the WASP-y nepo baby angle to shoehorn him into the Kaffee role. is that OK for the story? If not—if we must keep that angle—then Newman is just right for it. He has the genetics, the charm, the ability to be both cocky and vulnerable, and the dramatic chops for the transformation the story calls for.

I hadn’t thought of Tony Curtis, but I agree he would have been on the call list.

See, that’s the worst part: as Alarmist Non-sense, this is actually plausible. It’s more than just me blowing off steam.

I definitely would have gotten put out of the eighth-grade spelling bee on that one!

I am seriously starting to wonder that since he's 80 and basically going to die soon, he's decided that if he has to die, then nobody else can live beyond him. The chances he pushes the button on the way out the mortal door are decidedly above zero.

As I think about it, Robert Ryan could work as Jessep. My question is, could he do the charming twinkle in his eye at the same time while being menacing like Nicholson?

By the way, I just saw a picture of Jason Robards in 1962, and he looks a lot like Hugh Laurie!

I think Newman is the only real fit, really. Even thought he was already 36 that year, he could still came off as young and swaggering, like Tom Cruise was in the role. I don't think of Jason Robards that way. He may not have been that much older than Newman, but he seemed a lot older, more introspective and melancholy. The role needs a cocky, boyish energy, fast-talking, charming, glib. Kaffee is an immature nepo baby and I think Newman can pull that off. Now, Robards for Markinson? That I could see.

OK, I am going to throw this out there as a potentially fun thought exercise. This comes off a conversation I had with a couple buddies of mine and we talked about it for at least an hour running, it was so interesting to contemplate. Maybe we have some fun with this here—maybe it goes nowhere. Let's see. I believe most of us are big fans of the movie A Few Good Men. One of the all-time great courtroom scenes of all time, but really, just a terrific story all the way through, written and performed terrifically when it came out in 1992. Now: imagine A Few Good Men is going to be filmed not in 1992, but in 1962. Who are the actors you cast for it? Why 1962? It was considered pivotal, watershed year in the evolution of Hollywood, often cited by film historians as a "last gasp" of the classic studio system and a crucial transition point toward the "New Hollywood" era. While the industry was facing a downturn due to television competition, 1962 produced a remarkable confluence of artistic, commercial, and critically acclaimed films that challenged existing convention. There was even a book written about the importance of 1962 in the evolution of Hollywood. And, of course, a lot of the greatest films in history came out in 1962: Lawrence of Arabia. The Manchurian Candidate. To Kill a Mockingbird. Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? The Longest Day. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Even the James Bond franchise was launched in 1962 with Dr. No. Definitely one of the greatest years in Hollywood history. An epic like A Few Good Men would totally fit into the year that was 1962. So: who do you cast in it? I think it starts with Paul Newman as Lt. Daniel Kaffee (aka the Tom Cruise part.) What do you think?

De Jesus is killing it for Venezuela against Japan.

Or someone at the Times fat-fingered an extra 0 into the story and someone on the ball caught it and corrected it. Occam’s Razor.

coulda stopped here

I don’t see where the NY Times says anything about operating in waters deeper than 56,000 feet. I do see where the Democratic Underground website says that.

The 1974 American League probably came the closet. The Orioles had the best record at 91-71 (.562), the Angels the worst of 68-94 (.420), and a whole lot of clustering around .500, especially out west. The 1983 NL was almost identical, with the Dodgers through the Mets occupying almost the exact same numbers, and the 1968 NL was also pretty clustered, especially beyond the Cardinals. That 1968 NL “race” might be a pretty good indication of how the league table format, versus the divisional format, really fails the business in September once the one and only pennant race is already wrapped up: from an average attendance of 19,182 the week of June 19-25, patronage cratered to an average of 7,775 for the week of September 18-24. The 1909 National League probably had the highest STDEV. The third place Giants were 18.5 games behind, fourth-place Reds were 33.5 behind, and three different teams were 55+ games behind, with the Doves (yes, the Doves) bringing up the rear at 65.5 games behind the first place Pirates, who nevertheless still needed seven games to dispatch the Tigers in that Series.

Is this is the Alarmist Non-sense point? Are we there yet?

If some of my Canadian acquaintances are any indication, they don’t care to hear me say I don’t like Trump either. They prefer I just shut the **** up and wear my guilt by association like a cilice.

lol "hopes"

Wait until they still stiffing the families of their survivor benefits because their loved ones' deaths are off the books.

Straight from the horse's mouth: they were behind the Paramount deal.

"The Rothschilds" ... I haven't heard about them pulling on the control levers of the world since, like, 1918.

Trump is almost certainly ... ahem ... making a killing on Russian stocks lately.