The new Amazon Prime Video web series Afsos is supposedly based on a novel whose author remains unidentified. Was Golpur Goru Chaande ever committed to the page or is it a joke, like the fake disclaimer that precedes the Coen brothers 1996 cult movie Fargo (This is a true story. The events depicted in this film took place in Minnesota in 1987. At the request of the survivors, the names have been changed. Out of respect for the dead, the rest has been told exactly as it occurred.)

Keep wondering. Meanwhile, there is no ambiguity about who is driving Afsos, which has unusual subject matter that makes it vastly different from other shows on streaming platforms. The irreverent series has been created by Anirban Dasgupta and Dibya Chatterjee and written by them along with Sourav Ghosh. Director Anubhuti Kashyap deftly navigates the peaks and troughs of a black comedy with lashings of existentialism and a penchant for alternative history. The cast is stellar, with the always-watchable Gulshan Devaiah in pole position as the man who doesnt want to live but is simply unable to die.

Devaiahs Nakul is a serial suicide attempter who has failed despite his best efforts. His therapist Shloka (Anjali Patil) ladles out life-affirming cliches (Quitting is not an option, Nakul!), but he is unmoved. Nakul contacts the merciful duo at the Emergency Exit agency to organise a hit on himself. Emergency Exit, which helps people reach their makers faster, is run by Maria (Ratnabali Bhattacharjee) and Vikram (Ujjwal Chopra) out of a trailer somewhere in Mumbai and has Fargo signs all over, presumably as a tribute to the Coens macabre vision.

The task of liberating Nakul from his agony is handed to the single assassin on the agencys payroll (the operation is as lean as it is mean). This grim reaper is better known by her surname, Upadhyay, and she would win the Employee of the Year award hands-down once she takes on an assignment, she will fulfill it, even if the client has a change of heart.

Upadhyay (Heeba Shah) carves notches on her hand representing her kills, but she is somehow unable to finish off Nakul. The answer has everything to do with the quest for immortality represented by Fokatiya (Robin Das), a sadhu from Uttar Pradesh. Fokatiya believes that he holds in his palms amrut, or elixir, the same fluid of eternal life written about in the holy texts. The inspector Bir (Akash Dahiya) from Uttarakhand thinks that Fokatiya is a killer. The suited-booted scientist Goldfish (Jamie Alter) predicts that by 2054, humankind will have conquered death and will live forever.

Nakul, meanwhile, chooses his side of the debate and decides that he wants to live after all. Upadhyay is unmoved. Weapons are discharged. Declarations of love are made. A police investigation gets underway. Fokatiya arrives in Mumbai, as does inspector Bir and a mysterious tourist (Danish Sait).

The game of who gets to live and who dies is a familiar one. The makers of Afsos, which is always meant to be taken lightly despite tackling metaphysical themes, have an added challenge who cares? It helps that the characters are sharply etched and mostly superbly performed, and that the deadpan comedic tone remains more or less consistent throughout the eight-episode run. When Fokatiyas elixir doesnt work as expected, a laidback Mumbai police inspector has an excellent response: its a matter for the consumer court, he says.

Theres no shortage of imagination here, only a familiar tendency to keep the strangeness coming at all costs. A track involving Shloka and the granite-hearted Upadhaya carries on for far too long, just like the series, which expands its scope to include urban legends and conspiracy theories. The regrets include the underutilisation of the talented Akash Dahiya, Danish Saits silly fake Russian number, and the underserviced Nakul-Shloka romance, which is among the reasons Nakul chooses to try living over dying. Gulshan Devaiah and Anjali Patil make a fine pair, but their connection gets lost as the chase for the man who will live forever wanders on, about and off course.

Follow this link:

In Amazon web series Afsos, black humour and a high body count on the road to immortality - Scroll.in

Grimware Games has announced its new 2.5D action platformer, Ghost Knight: A Dark Tale. This new action platformer will be using Unreal Engine 4, and you can find its announcement trailer below.

The game is set in a toon dark fantasy world, where a mad king, in search for immortality, opens portals to a dark dimension. Players must traverse an epic land of undead, demons, witches, and beasts to stop the mad kings misled quest.

Unfortunately, Grimware Games has not revealed any additional details. As such, we dont know when this new platformer will come out. We also dont know the platforms for which it will release. My guess is that it will hit all major platforms, but thats just me speculating.

Anyway, well be sure to keep you posted about its progress. Until we have more to share, you can go ahead and enjoy the following trailer!

See more here:

Ghost Knight: A Dark Tale is a new 2.5D action platformer, powered by Unreal Engine 4 - DSOGaming

South African retailerRaru has recently listed a new product that suggestsa Cyberpunk 2077 themed Xbox One controller is in the works. The discovery was first found by a Reddit user, who shared a screenshot of the website that refers to "Microsoft - Xbox One Wireless Controller - Cyberpunk 2077 Limited Edition (Xbox One/Windows 10)", though there are no images that accompany the information.

Talking about Raru, it is a reputable retailer in Africa, which meansthisinformation is likely notfake. Additionally, we are not surprised seeing gaming peripherals being themed in Cyberpunk 2077 skins as the release nears.

The product description on the page only suggests that it is a standard Xbox One controller, though I still hope that Microsoft comes up with a futuristic and dystopian skin for the controller itself.Now that the possibility of anXbox One controller themed with the game's skin has been found, it also suggests that a Cyberpunk 2077 limited editionXbox One console could be on the way. However, there isn't any information about whether a PlayStation variant is in the works or not.

Since we are on the topic of Cyberpunk 2077, developer CD Projekt Red has delayed the game's launch to September of this year. The game was originally set to release in April, but due to some polishing work that neededto be done, the game had to bedelayed.

Cyberpunk 2077 is an open-world, action-adventure RPG game set in a fictional Night City.Night City is a megalopolis obsessed with power, glamour and body modification. You step into the shoes ofmercenary outlawV, who is going after a one-of-a-kind implant that is the key to immortality.Cyberpunk 2077 lets you customize your characters cyberware, playstyle, and skillset. Your choices in the game will shape the world around you.

Cyberpunk 2077is set to launch on PC, PS4, and Xbox One in September.

More here:

A Cyberpunk 2077 Themed Xbox One Controller Could Be On Its Way - Player.One

Author photo by Emily Tobey

If you are not already experiencing "climate dread," the feeling that you're living in a slow-mo ecological apocalypse that you're powerless to stop, then Jenny Offill's latest novel, Weather, will fill you to the brim with it.

Granted, your capacity to care about "climate dread" may be reduced if you're currently suffering from rent-hike dread, hospital-bill dread, getting-shot-by-the-cops dread, and inability-to- retire dread, and that diminished capacity may prevent you from diving into Offill's sustained meditation on the subject. However, if you are a little curious about it, her black humor and occasionally deep insights will keep your eyeballs glued to the page in search of a cure.

Weather has much in common with Offill's last book, Dept. of Speculation. Both enjoyed lots of pre-publication love on social media from the New York publishing industry's tastemakers. Both present a domestic fiction using literary collage, a technique popularized most recently by nonfiction writers/poets such as Maggie Nelson and Claudia Rankine. And both are overhyped but still very much worth a read.

In Weather, Offill places the reader in the mind of Lizzie, a librarian in the big city with a supportive partner and a "gifted and talented" kid in school. In short, diaristic, pithy but breezy paragraphs, we learn that Lizzie spends a lot of time caring for her brother as he struggles with addiction, worrying about her child's future on a doomed planet, and reflecting on the pleasures and temptations of married life. When she takes a side gig answering e-mails for her former writing teacher's doomsday podcast, her focus on climate dread and prepping for the end-times begins to consume her, and the narrative gains steam.

Fans of NYC dinner-party zingers and stumbled-upon profundities will appreciate Offill's contributions to the field. Some of the funnier moments in the book come at the expense of wide-eyed businessmen whose devotion to technology allows them to escape the cold reality of a warming planet. "These people long for immortality but can't wait ten minutes for a cup of coffee," Lizzie's mentor quips at one point. The more profound moments arrive in Lizzie's fervent search for new perspectives to combat her growing dread, though these new perspectives aren't always comforting:

"Young person worry: What if nothing I do matters?

Old person worry: What if everything I do does?"

Though some of Offill's jokes and profundities can feel a bit pat, the overall structure of the book is greater than the sum of its parts, offering readers the pleasure of looking back through a diary and realizing that all our apparently disparate anxieties may fall under the umbrella of the larger one: fear of extinction.

Weather suggests that climate dread is its own crisis, a collective psychological block preventing us from taking the action necessary to stave off ecological collapse or, at the very least, to manage it more effectively.

Though fiction can allow us to diagnose this problem in all its messy human nuance, Offill knows it can never give us the cure. To that end, she concludes her story with an obligatory note of hope that lies outside the book itself, literally a website URL: http://www.obligatorynoteofhope.com. The site appears to be a place where climate-dreaders, or people who caught the disease from the book, can connect and take collective action to dig each other out of the doldrums.

Read the rest here:

Jenny Offill's Novel Weather Looks at "Climate Dread" with Humor and Plenty of Gloom - TheStranger.com

Easily one of the best horror movies of last year,Mike FlanagansDoctor Sleepis now available on VOD platforms, as well as 4K Ultra HD and Blu-ray. The release includes the highly anticipated extended Directors Cut, which is 3-hours long (180-minutes), compared to the 152-minute theatrical cut.

Bloody Disgusting has (2) Blu-ray copies +Digital for some lucky readers to enter and win. All you have to do is fill out the below form. Winners will be chosen at random. No PO boxes. U.S. only.

Doctor Sleep is an adaptation of Stephen Kings same-titled novel as well as a sequel to Stanley Kubricks The Shining. Ewan McGregorleads the cast as an adult Danny Torrance, withRebecca Fergusonas Rose the Hat,Kyliegh Curranas Abra Stone, andAlex Essoeas Wendy Torrance.

InDoctor Sleep, still irrevocably scarred by the trauma he endured as a child at the Overlook, Dan Torrance has fought to find some semblance of peace. But that peace is shattered when he encounters Abra, a courageous teenager with her own powerful extrasensory gift, known as the shine. Instinctively recognizing that Dan shares her power, Abra has sought him out, desperate for his help against the merciless Rose the Hat and her followers, The True Knot, who feed off the shine of innocents in their quest for immortality.

Forming an unlikely alliance, Dan and Abra engage in a brutal life-or-death battle with Rose. Abras innocence and fearless embrace of her shine compel Dan to call upon his own powers as never beforeat once facing his fears and reawakening the ghosts of the past.

See the original post:

WIN a Copy of 'Doctor Sleep' with the Director's Cut on Blu-ray + Digital! - Bloody Disgusting

From when does one read the shma in the evening?Opening words, Mishnah and Talmud

Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is One.

This simple sentence in the Hebrew Bible, known by its first word as the shma (hear), is also the first subject addressed in the Talmud and the first biblical verse taught to Jewish children. It is, at once, the most famous affirmation of Jewish belief and the most misunderstood. To appreciate this paradox, we must begin with the text itself, two of whose three brief sections make up a key element in Moses string of passionate valedictory charges to his people in the book of Deuteronomy. Here is the first section (6:4-9), in which the greatest of prophets sums up Jewish theology:

Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is One. And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thy heart. And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

From the words urging that this teaching be recited when thou liest down, and when thou risest up came the central inclusion of the shma in, respectively, the evening and morning liturgy. And yet, in reciting it, Jews for millennia have added another sentence immediately after the first, and before proceeding to the rest. It is a sentence that appears neither in Deuteronomy nor anywhere else in the Bible and that, notably, is recited in a hushed tone, thereby signaling that it is both a part of and apart from the shma prayer as a whole:

Blessed be His glorious sovereign Name, for ever and ever.

Needless to say, the addition of this sentencethe exact date of its inclusion is unknowndid not evade the gimlet-eyed exegesis of the talmudic sages, who were struck by its oddity. Why is it there in the first place, and, if it is part of the liturgy, why not recite it aloud? In responding, the Talmud tells a tale, according to which the shma originated not with Moses but long before him: with his ancestors, and specifically with one of the biblical patriarchs and his family.

The story goes like this: at the end of his days, Jacob, as described in Genesis, gathers all twelve of his sons around him. Feeling his life and his powers of prophecy slipping away, he expresses concern that one of his children might abandon the Abrahamic mission (something that had already occurred with a child of Abraham himself as well as with a child of Isaac). Seeking to reassure their father on this point, his sons address him by the covenantal name bestowed upon him by an angel (Genesis 32: 22-32). The rabbis explain:

His sons said to him: Hear, Israel our father, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One. They were saying that just as there is only one God in your heart, so, too, there is only one in our hearts. At that moment Jacob our father, [reassured that all of his children were righteous], replied in praise: Blessed be His glorious sovereign Name for ever and ever. (Psaim 56a)

For the rabbis, Jacobs relieved exclamation linked the Almightys eternity with his own. That is to say: Gods name will be blessed forever because Jacobs family will serve Him forever. Now included in the shma prayer, this same sentence links Gods immortality with the posterity of every Jewish family. Because the words are not actually those of Moses, the rabbis stipulate that the sentence is to be voiced quietly.

This rabbinic story and its accompanying explanation have been embraced in Jewish law as the normative foundation for the shma as it has been recited until today. Even Maimonides, who so often reads talmudic tales as other than literal, included the ruling in the Mishneh Torah, his code of Jewish law.

In short, in the recitation of the shma, two different statements from two different moments in biblical history are being made simultaneously. In one and the same act, Jews quote the words of Moses speaking to the people of Israel and then the response to the twelve sons by their father Jacob, the original Israel. In the first, the shma is a theological-political statement; in the second, it is an assurance of Jewish continuity. The first is philosophical, the second familial; the first is public and ceremonial, the second private and emotional. Even as Hear O Israel is being sounded aloud, Jews quietly reaffirm their solidarity with the patriarch and his children.

That latter commitment is reenacted with particular force and poignancy in the longstanding practice of reciting the shma before sleep at night. For Jewish parents putting their children to bed and saying it together with them, few rituals are more powerful. At that moment, we are uniquely aware that our children will not always be small and safe under our protection, and that one day we in turn will become dependent on them, and on the family they perpetuate, for our own immortality. As Rabbi Norman Lamm once put it, in saying the shma aloud and then, quietly to ourselves, blessed be His glorious sovereign name for ever and ever, we, just like Jacob, and together with our own progeny, play our part in ensuring that Gods name will continue to be blessed here on earth.

And therein lies another lesson, this one about the nature of Judaism itself. For this purpose, we can compare the Talmuds tale about Jacob and his sons, about the recovery by a dying Jewish patriarch of his familys immortality, with the account of another famous deathbed scene in the ancient world.

In that account, related by Plato in the Phaedo, the Greek philosopher Socrates finds himself on the brink of death in an Athenian cell, attended by his students, pondering his legacy, and reviewing with them the great issues that had long absorbed his mind, not least the immortality of the soul. Serenely he assures these students that he welcomes his impending, self-inflicted death by hemlock as a release from the bonds of physicality that are the curse of earthly humanity. Freed from the constraints of the body and its passions, Socrates hopes for an afterlife happily occupied with the contemplation of eternal verities.

One could hardly imagine a starker contrast between two men. Socrates is wholly absorbed in his students and in his own immortal soul; he seems utterly uninterested in his family, calmly dismissing his wife and their baby son with nary a tear or emotional farewell. Jacob, the father who in creating and rearing faithful children has united his physical life with his spiritual legacy, commands those children to bear his lifeless body to the Holy Land. By rooting it in sacred soil, he will have prepared the way for the eventual return of his offspring to their national home.

As Eric Cohen has written, for all its renown, the death of Socrates seems less fully human than the death of Jacob, which unites the private drama of father and sons with the public drama of Israels beginnings as a nation. Just so; and in contrasting these two very different deaths, Cohen also points to one of the central differences between Greek and Jewish civilization.

In Aristotelian texts, the family merely provides preparation for service to the polis, and the great-souled man embodies the ideal of excellence. Plato goes farther, having Socrates declare in his Republic that in the truly just city, the philosopher-king will produce anonymous offspring whom he will pointedly not raise as his own lest he thereby compromise the universal compassion for all citizens that justice requires.

This, to a Jew, could not be more distant from Gods explanation for his choice of Abraham: For I have known him, that he will command his children and household after him, to keep the ways of the Lord, to perform righteousness and justice (Genesis 18:19). For Jews, the domain of the family is where the blood bond and the spiritual bond are joined, where transmission takes place, where children are taught about the God of their fathers, where the realm of the truly sacred and the truly human conjoin.

The Greek world is not the Jewish world; even attempts to find similarities reveal more about the differences. Take, for example, the frequent likening of the Passover seder to the Greek symposium. Both meals involve a choreographed series of imbibings and a discussion of philosophical and theological subjects.

And yet: would a Greek symposium welcome children, much less focus on them? Is a single child to be found in Platos Symposium? On the contrary, we find the best and the brightest of Greek society: Socrates is there; Alcibiades is there, physicians and philosophers, scholars and statesmen are there. No one has brought his progeny; to do so would ruin the conversation.

The ritual of the seder, for its part, though it may seem superficially Greco-Roman, is actually the inverse: it is all about children and family. In the Haggadah, philosophical inquiry is balanced by imaginative storytelling and covenantal re-creation. Father and mother teach children about the Almighty taking to Himself a people, and in going to sleep the children joyously respond: Hear O -Israel-Father, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.

This, finally, returns us to the opening question of the Talmudfrom what time may one recite the shma in the evening?and its seemingly technical answer: from the time that the priests enter to eat their trumah.

The reference in the final word is to the end of twilight, when the priests of the Temple are once again permitted to partake of food they may eat only while ritually pure. But if thats when recitation of the shma can begin, what is the last point at which it can still be recited? Here a debate emerges, with three opinions followed by a story:

Until the end of the first watch. These are the words of Rabbi Eliezer.The sages say: until midnight. Rabbi Gamliel says: until the dawn comes up. Once it happened that [Gamliels] sons came home [late] from a wedding feast and they said to him: we have not yet recited the [evening]shma. He said to them: if the dawn has not yet come up, you are still bound to recite. . . . Why, then, did the sages say until midnight? In order to keep a man far from transgression. (Brakhot 2a).

The children of Gamliel, arriving after midnight but before dawn, and therefore assuming that, since the law accorded with the sages, they could no longer fulfill their obligation, are informed by their father that the sages established midnight only as an ideal deadline, in order to encourage early recital; but as long as dawn has not occurred, the commandment can still be obeyed.

Stop for a moment and consider who is telling this story. The author of the Mishnah is Rabbi Judah the Prince, a grandson of none other than Rabbi Gamliel. Judahs story therefore concerns his own father and uncles interacting with their father. This small succinct story thus shares a subject with the shma itself: the subject, that is, of familial fidelity.

Where, Rabbi Judah is asking, is true wisdom to be found? Gamliels sons have been to a drinking party: the term is often rendered as a wedding, but no textual evidence supports such a reading. More likely, in the Greco-Roman world in which the Mishnah was composed, it referred to a symposium, an event at which, by the lights of that culture, true sophistication and wisdom were to be found. Yet, for these aspiring young rabbis, the symposium has caused them to forget the central obligation of Jewish life. They arrive home thinking that the deadline has passed and contritely confess that they have failed.

At that point, new wisdom is transmitted from parent to child: it is not too late. In the darkness before dawn, this family can still give full-throated voice to the foundational words of Jacobs sons to their father Israel: Hear O Israel-Father, the Lord our God, the Lord is One.

That is why the practices and regulations surrounding this sentence, than which no other sentence is more powerful, are the very first matter taken up by the rabbis of the Talmud, and why it is the sentence occupying so central a place in every evening and morning prayer service, the sentence proclaimed in their dying breath by martyrs throughout history, the sentence repeated in gratitude and joy with children as they drift off to sleep, the sentence uttered as one prepares to bid farewell to this world, sanctifying the Lords name for ever and ever.

Original post:

The Mysteries of the Sh'ma - Mosaic

One of my favorite definitions of love I discovered in RZAs book The Tao of Wu when I was a 20-year-old living in New York City. At the time, I felt about the Big City the way Toni Morrison wrote about it in Jazz: it was the paragon of love, and I looked to it for wisdom and guidance. Several years later, on an old, wooden, John Alden schooner, the definition developed even sharper meaning when my new partner read it aloud.

Love, like water, dissolves you then resolves you. It breaks down your ego and puts you back together again properly.

Love is surely boundless and limitless, but also irrational equal parts vulnerability and strength. Perhaps love really is the true philosophers stone a catalyst for transformation, turning anything to gold and whistling to you from the doorways of immortality. People who exude love are apt to give things away. They are, in every way, like rivers; in other words, they stream. Do you ever notice when you start giving things away you keep getting more? To give love is to receive it.

In the Greek language, there are six different words for love: eros, or sexual passion; philia, or deep friendship; ludus, or playful love; agape, or love for everyone; pragma, or longstanding love; and philautia, or love of the self. While the English language only has one, this Valentines Day, and/or Galentines Day, we asked islanders to share what love means to them.

And lets face it, whether you love it or hate it, Valentines Day just seems unavoidable.

Community responses:

I read this somewhere once and it really resonated, Everyone carries old baggage, love means helping your loved one repack.

Someone knowing your favorite flavor of Gatorade and getting it for you when you need it the most and without being asked.

My man is constantly willing to grow, boundless in his dedication, handsome obviously, tall (I love that) and he makes me laugh.

Acceptance, companionship and safety. Her intelligence.

Love is the essence of life, the means to our well being, and the key to happiness. Without love and the love of family we are empty vessels in a world that is desperate for it.

Love itself is infinite and has many forms. Love for my partner means honesty, knowledge of self, commitment, passion, respect, help me up when Im down, big dreams, someone to come home to, someone to laugh with, someone to wipe the tears away. All the challenges and woes of daily life in this world can be made bearable when met with some Love and Compassion.

In the simplest terms, love is acceptance (as opposed to fear which is rejection); it is attraction, not repulsion, inclusion, not exclusion, an open heart as opposed to a closed one. True love is unconditional. And it is a spectrum from the spiritual (the intuitive and intellectual knowledge that we are connected) to the physical (the arousal and euphoria one feels in every cell of the body, not merely the genitalia). Alan Watts has a great lecture on the Spectrum of Love, by the way.

Love is listening. To listen means to love, we listen to who or what we love, it entails being receptive and open, listening with an open heart not just hearing with your ears.

I think the English language does not have enough words to appropriately break out the different versions and levels and depth of love but to avoid being unnecessarily pretentious I believe love should be totally and completely Selfless, honest about everything and never afraid to be honest, non-proprietary and lacking any need to own or control. To me, its a friendship that you can share your entire soul and life with facing fear head-on and fighting jealousy and envy and living to let the person you love be all of themselves.

The thing about love is it can often feel elusive, but in my humble opinion, it is in fact the pulse of the universe. The English language is sorely lacking in vocabulary to describe the many facets of love but I think the attributes are the same regardless of the nature of the relationship. For me, its something like this: an acceptance of the other persons choices, dreams, and struggles; the ability and willingness to be vulnerable and truly seen by another; a fierce desire to protect each other in whatever capacity the other needs; nourishing each others inner lives with food, affection and a desire to deeply understand one another.

More:

What love means |... - Journal of the San Juan Islands

1987 vampire movies Near Dark and The Lost Boys are both great in different ways, but the former tends to get brushed aside in favor of the latter. Outside of perhaps the ghost, demon, and zombie, vampires are the monster with the most movies and TV shows made about them. There's something naturally alluring about vampirism, with its ability for those turned to live forever, perform inhuman physical feats, and often possess supernatural powers that allow for easy mental manipulation. Some vampires can even shape-shift at will.

Of course, there are certain downsides to vampirism, with the most obvious being the need to consume blood to survive, presumably via the killing of humans. Immortality can also kind of be a drag, especially if one opts to fall in love with or become friends with a mortal person they will one day have to watch die. Being a vampire is a bit of a double-edged sword, and Near Dark and The Lost Boys both alternately represent opposite sides of that coin, displaying both the seductive power and freedom offered by the condition, and its not-so-pleasant side effects.

Related: Stephen King's Salems Lot Changed Vampire Movies

Since they came out in the same year, it's common for horror fans to end up discussing both Near Dark and The Lost Boys when talking about the vampire movies of the 1980s. Unfortunately, Near Dark doesn't seem to get nearly the level of respect as The Lost Boys, and that's not fair.

To be clear, Near Dark being better than The Lost Boys doesn't make the latter a bad film. It's a lot of fun, and has a rocking, 1980s party atmosphere. At the same time, the story is kind of superficial, and the movie is often more concerned with being visually arresting than delving into its characters. The vampire group in Lost Boys is also a bit too large, with everyone not played by Keifer Sutherland or Jami Gertz basically blending together. The makeshift vampire family in Near Dark is much more memorable on an individual basis, with the wild and unpredictable big brother Severen (Bill Paxton), the wise but vicious father figure Jesse Hooker (Lance Henriksen) and mother figure Diamondback (Jeanette Goldstein), the unwilling child Homer (Joshua John Miller), and the sweet but forlorn Mae (Jenny Wright).

There's also the protagonist that finds themselves becoming a vampire after falling for a beautiful female bloodsucker in both films. The Lost Boys' Michael, as played by Jason Patric, really isn't given much to do outside of brood and be scared. Near Dark's Caleb, as played by Adrian Pasdar, actually begins to care for and about his new family, and for a while, accepts that his new lot in life is to be part of their ranks.

Finally, as a horror film, Near Dark is much more effective. Lost Boys often diffuses its best horror bits with laughs, while Near Dark takes things quite seriously, and doesn't hesitate to get gory and harsh. The score by Tangerine Dream is also excellent, providing a moody, dreamlike feeling to the proceedings. Near Dark also features a novel cure for vampirism, involving a blood transfusion, while The Lost Boys mostly sticks to normal lore. The Lost Boys is and was a blast, but when it comes to the better 1980s vampire film, Near Dark wins.

More: Where Are They Now? The Cast Of The Lost Boys

Saw: Amanda Young Became The Main Killer In Dead By Daylight

Michael Kennedy is an avid movie and TV fan that's been working for Screen Rant in various capacities since 2014. In that time, Michael has written over 2000 articles for the site, first working solely as a news writer, then later as a senior writer and associate news editor. Most recently, Michael helped launch Screen Rant's new horror section, and is now the lead staff writer when it comes to all things frightening. A FL native, Michael is passionate about pop culture, and earned an AS degree in film production in 2012. He also loves both Marvel and DC movies, and wishes every superhero fan could just get along. When not writing, Michael enjoys going to concerts, taking in live professional wrestling, and debating pop culture. A long-term member of the Screen Rant family, Michael looks forward to continuing on creating new content for the site for many more years to come.

Read the original here:

Near Dark Is a Better 1980s Vampire Movie Than The Lost Boys - Screen Rant

I didnt know Kobe. But I watched him playAnd I loved him.

A schoolteacher once called a radio talk show to complain that Kobe Bryant made 40 times as much as she did, to which the host replied, Yeah, but nobody pays to watch you teach.

Brutal, yes, but also true.

And a lot of people, myself included, paid a lot to see Bryant play.

Little did I know that the one and only time I saw him in person, would be the last. I saw him lifting weights at the Golds Gym mother ship in Venice, California, when he still had that geeky beard and wasnt yet Celebrity Kobe.

Related: The House That Mamba Built: Kobe Bryant, More Than An Athlete

I didnt say a word to him, because in LA, the only way to treat famous people is to pretend you dont see them. Before he became a petulant celebrity, he embodied creativity, spontaneity, and freedom with his play above and below the rim.

Sometimes his coach would chastise him for making a particular play, and Bryant would respond, sincerely, that hed had no idea of what he was going to do before he did it.

And now hes gone.

Poof.

In a foggy Malibu mountain breakdown.

And its one of those things that you struggle to believe is true.

The standard response is that his passing, at 41, shouldnt matter so much to the rest of us.

He didnt teach school, after all.

He was an athlete.

As if being an athlete were something that somehow didnt matter.

He brought excitement and pride to tens of millions, including a whole lot of teachers.

And now hes gone.

So why should it matter so much to those who never met him?

To those over whom he flew in his private helicopter from his Newport Beach home to his workplace in Los Angeles, the Staples Center, to those who never saw him play in person?

Why is that tens of millions of people will never forget the moment they looked at their phones and saw the headline that he was gone?

For the answer, I would turn to one of the most important books I ever read, The Denial Of Death by Ernest Becker, published in 1973 and awarded the Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction the following year.

Becker wanted to understand the fascination people have with celebrities, and he wanted to understand why we tore down celebrities not long after we worshipped them.

He wrote that human beings are half god-like, because of our ability to create, and half-mortal, and that we were reminded of our limited time on earth every time we went to the bathroom.

He called humans gods who s.

Celebrities have more power than the average person, he wrote.

They are richer, prettier, more talented, more famous, morewell, more everything than the rest of us.

So we attach ourselves to them, as fans (a word we forget is short for fanatics), as patrons, moviegoers, voters, followers, or worshippers.

By so doing we believe, we can achieve our greatest goal:immortality.

And then when we discover that these celebrities are human, like us, with feet of clay to go along with their feats of strength, we become angry, and we turn on them.

Kobe Bryant lived long enough into the social media era to be vilified by those who didnt like his egotism, his immaturity (good luck to anyone world-famous at 17), the way he essentially broke up the Lakers by factionalizing the locker room and getting Shaq traded, the dismissal of his sexual assault trial in Eagle, Colorado, the tough guy tattoos he got in his silly quest for street cred, or the goopy, mawkish, public apology to his wife afterward (replete with a $3 million diamond ring apology gift, according to reports).

I actually saw Kobes first Lakers game after the case was dismissed, a preseason affair in Orange County, California.

Thousands of fans, including children, were wearing Bryant jerseys, and whooping and hollering for him, indicating that a whole lot of people werent bothered in the least by anything he had allegedly done in the hotel room back in Colorado.

Bryant upended Beckers theory, because, despite all the negatives, he never lost the admiration of millions who may not have achieved immortality through him but never turned on him for his failing to provide it.

And now Kobe has done the one thing an individual can do to insure immortality for himself and his admirers:dying young, doing an utterly Kobe-like thing, helicoptering his daughter, Gianna Maria-Onore Bryant to her basketball practice.

Related: Like Father, Like Daughter: Gianna Bryant Was a Basketball Star on the Rise

I will tell you my truth.

I loved Kobe Bryant, the early, exuberant, unguarded Kobe, who knew he was going above the rim but had no earthly idea of what grandeur he would create once he got there.

And now he will spend eternity in the same place: above the fray; above the criticism; above the rim.

No, I didnt know Kobe.

But I watched him play.

And to you reader, I loved him.

Go here to read the rest:

How Kobe Bryant Discovered the Path Towards Immortality - Grit Daily

Some moments embed themselves in your memory. Most people can remember where they were during 9/11the dreadful day thousands of American lives were lost in several terrorist attacks.

Yesterday was one of those moments for me.

Besides my family, my life tends to orbit around three Bs: the Bible, books, and basketball. I love NBA basketballat times, much to my wifes chagrin. As our ministry team closed our worship services yesterday, one of our members delivered me the news: Kobe Bryant died in a helicopter accident.

My stomach dropped. I had more questions than answers.

As the tragic story unfolded, I learned that Bryants 13-year-old daughter, Gianna, and seven other people also lost their lives in the accident. I felt numb all day. I didnt know what to feel.

When the numbness subsided, one thought plagued my mind. What is it about the tragic, untimely death of iconic men and women that causes a collective lament from people from various religious, ethnic, and social backgrounds?

Three things about Kobes life and legacy ring true. And I think they are informativeespecially for believers.

The Changing Narrative on Black Fatherhood

As a father, my heart hurt that Bryant could no longer continue to nourish and develop his growing relationship with his daughter.

While I did not care for Kobe Bryant as a player, I admired him in his retirement as a father. His active involvement in his daughters lives and his presence after missing special moments because of a rigorous NBA schedule was refreshing.

Our country is rife with mischaracterizations about black fatherhood. Kobe had joined the litany of NBA Black father ambassadors to help shape and change the false narrative of fatherlessness in Black and Brown communities.

We lost the opportunity for Bryants story as a father to play out. But we are also reminded of ordinary, everyday, working Black fathers who put the same effort and love into their childrens lives.

It is no secret that we live in racialized times. Dont get trapped in talking point tales that undermine image-bearing men and women. As believers, let us make sure we continue to believe the best about others and not perpetuate stereotypical views that alienate brothers and sisters in the faith.

The Importance of Passion and Drive

As a Christian, I prayed earnestly that those involved had heard and believed the gospel and that my passion for gospel proclamation would never wane.

Bryant was one of the hardest working players in his sport. And it paid off for him. His passion for the game of basketball led him to study it more than any other player in modern history. He didnt want others to remember him as a disinterested member of the NBA, but as an ambassador.

He also served as an ambassador for the womens gamehelping the basketball community acknowledge and honor the work women put in on and off the court. Down to his last game, that passion never wanedhe scored 60 points in his final game.

What about our gospel passion and drive? Temporal trophies and legacy drove Bryants passion. Gospel work tells another story. Gospel work impacts eternal destinies.

Even for veteran Christians, its easy for the passion and drive to subside. It is easy to plod along in life without having shared our message of hope with those around us. My prayer is that Bryants misguided passion for NBA crowns leads us all to a renewed passion for our eternal crown (1 Cor. 9:25).

The Myth of Immortality

As a 41-year-oldthe same age as BryantI was reminded of the words of the writer of the Psalmist: Teach us to number our days, that we may gain a heart of wisdom (Ps. 90:12).

In many ways, Bryant appeared immortal. He won five NBA championships and multiple NBA MVP awards. Bryant is going to be an inductee in the basketball Hall of Fame this fall. A mere two years into a new entertainment venture, he won an Oscar Award.

The news of his death shocked the conscience because he oozed invincibility. Many of us scrolled and refreshed our social media timelines yesterday because we found it hard to believe the news. But we may have missed an important moment.

As we peered through the windows of social media, many of us neglected to turn our gaze to the mirror of introspection.

We believe in our immortality, too. Or at least we live that way. We dont maximize the moments with our children the way we should. We procrastinate and put things off because theres always tomorrow.

Why? Because thinking of our mortality makes us reshape our priorities. And reshaping our priorities brings us face-to-face with the reality that we are more selfish than wed like to admit.

National tragedies lead to national conversations. But the most important conversation we all need to have in light of yesterdays news is an internal one.

Have you looked in the mirror of your soul lately? If not, step away from the window for a moment, let the truth of your mortality wash over you, and allow Gods grace to numberand shapethe rest of your days.

John C. Richards, Jr. is a thought-leader, gifted teacher, and gifted writer/speaker. He currently serves as the Pastor of Assimilation at Saint Mark Baptist Church in Little Rock, Arkansas. He is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Christian Leadership from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and previously served as Managing Director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College.

Read the original post:

Kobe Bryant: Reflections on Fatherhood, Passion, and Immortality | The Exchange | A Blog by Ed Stetzer - ChristianityToday.com

The Tiger Trail of Auburn is Auburns walk of fame, a stretch of sidewalk that owes its existence to the walk of fame 40 years older in Hollywood, California. The names on plaques along the Tiger Trail are both familiar and lesser known, and refer to men and women from close and far. Like Hollywood has their superstars on the silver screen, Auburn has their own on the field, court, pitch, pool and gym.

The Tiger Trail began over two decades ago as a joint venture between the Auburn Chamber of Commerce, Auburn University Athletics and the City of Auburn. The project was started in 1995 as a way to honor Auburn athletes.

It was primarily made up of a group of men who were retired at the time, said Mayor Ron Anders, who has been involved with the program for several years in different capacities. The primary person was Ken Brown.

Brown was, at that time, retired after a career with Alabama Power and serving on the Auburn City Council, Anders said.

It was really his brainchild to create a kind of Hollywood Walk of Fame in downtown Auburn, Anders said.

Browns brainchild soon became reality as the first granite plaques were placed in the concrete in 1995. The inaugural class was large compared to a typical induction class now; 13 former athletes, coaches and administrators were honored, among them football coach Ralph Shug Jordan, football and baseball star Bo Jackson and football star Pat Sullivan.

Typically, induction classes consist of roughly five to six members, Anders said, depending on the Chamber of Commerces budget for the project for that year costs of the plaque as well as the induction ceremony must be taken into consideration for each inductee.

So keeping in mind the number of inductees that the budget allows for each year, a process of deciding who will be one of the distinguished few for that years induction class begins. That responsibility is left in the hands of a small group of people the Tiger Trail selection committee.

The group is made up of fewer than 10 individuals from both the private and public sector who serve for a term.

Exactly who is on the selection committee, however, is kept secret. The Auburn Chamber of Commerce doesnt give out the names of the committee members, said Auburn Chamber of Commerce Vice President of Communications and Marketing Jennifer Fincher.

The groups privacy is protected to prevent people from lobbying members of the selection committee to induct a certain member of Auburn athletics, Anders said.

Weve never wanted the Tiger Trail to be a political process, Anders said. We wanted it to be everything but a political process.

In the past, Anders has served as a member of the selection committee, but is not sure what his level of involvement will be in the future. However, the mayor of Auburn is always involved in the installation ceremony at the least, Anders said.

Bill Ham, who served as mayor until Anders was elected in 2018, helped with the ceremony, as did Mayor Jan Dempsey, Hams predecessor.

The committee typically only has two or three meetings per year, at which committee members go through a process of nominating who they feel is representative of Auburns history. Committee members then debate and vote according to their own research, due diligence and experiences, Anders said.

The candidates who receive the most are then honored in that years induction class. A ceremony is held and the selected candidates name and accomplishments are immortalized in the sidewalks along College Street and Magnolia Avenue.

While the trail was intended to serve as a unique way to honor Auburn athletes, coaches and administrators, it has also benefited the community in other ways.

This trail is another reason for people to come to downtown Auburn to shop and be a part of our community either as a visitor, alumni or resident, Anders said. It was certainly an economic development, community development mindset behind doing this.

Over the years, its become clear that maintenance is required to keep the plaques in good shape.

We have not had a Tiger Trail since Ive become the mayor, Anders said. What weve done is weve had a number of broken stars downtown because of all the construction, and weve got some of that construction behind us, so what weve tried to do is get some of those plaques replaced, so weve been focused on doing that. Its easier if we dont add six more to the list.

However, the tradition is expected to continue in the future.

Were certainly planning to continue on with the Tiger Trail here in 2020, Anders said.

The rest is here:

Fame, immortality and a paw: The Tiger Trail - The Auburn Plainsman

No quarterback in the NFL playoffs this year looked as lifeless and disconsolate as Tom Brady. If you somehow construe Brady as a sympathetic character, you might feel relieved that the loss in the Wild Card round shielded him from future embarrassment. For the record, the 20-13 defeat yielded Brady 20 completions in 37 attempts for 209 yards, zero touchdowns, one interception and 5.6 yards per attempt.

Of course, Brady is hardly a sympathetic character. Indeed, hes more than just one of the most dominant quarterbacks of all time. He is, in fact, every guys fantasy. Especially if the guy is an adolescent. Hes tall, good looking, a winner, has so much money that he could run for President, and, yeah, theres that super-model thing.

So when Brady says he plans to be an NFL hero for years to come actually, he uses the word quarterback, but thats just a code word we shouldnt be surprised. Hell be 43 in August, which makes him the Methuselah of pro quarterbacks. But age, after all, is just a number.

Remember, facts no longer matter, so even though age is just a number is a palpable lie, its OK to believe it. Plus its Brady.

You might also ask: can a man have more than it all? Is Brady kidding us or himself? What exactly are we looking at? Is it arrogance? Hubris? Self-delusion? Greed?

Maybe all of the above. But one thing seems evident: Brady is looking for something far more than a seventh Super Bowl ring. If I had to guess, Id say that his aging body is chasing the tail of immortality.

You can hardly blame him. In fact, Brady and his mentor, Bill Belichick, deserve nothing less than our undying adulation. Look in any record book and there they are. And yeteven if this past season was just an anomaly, there is no denying the fact that they are the past. The future belongs to the likes of Lamar Jackson, who just turned 23; and Jimmy Garoppolo, who is 28 but had to wait until he found life after Brady before he could prove that he, too, is Super Bowl ready. Then there is Patrick Mahomes, who, at 23, doesnt even have to get better in order to become the greatest quarterback of all time.

The celebrated author, contrarian, wit and atheist Christopher Hitchens, as he was dying of cancer, wrote a book called Mortality. In which he wrote: As with the normal life, one finds that every passing day represents more and more relentlessly subtracted from less and less.

Brady probably doesnt see his career that way. But I cant help but wonder if sometimes he feels like he is. Clearly, he cant imagine life without football. Hes already shopping around for his next team. Hell be an unrestricted free agent for the first time in his career, but from where I sit, his view isnt so expansive any more.

Granted, he didnt have much to throw to this year, but that didnt seem to matter nearly as much in the first half of the season. It was the second half that betrayed an anxious, middle-aged man. Damn, hes got a great head of hair, but its whats under it that matters. In the nine games before the bye, the Patriots averaged 30 points; afterward, and including the Tennessee disaster, the Patriots averaged just over 20 points.

Brady has been the Patriots starting quarterback for 19 seasons but finally you can see the fear in his eyes. He spent much of the year flinging the football into the ground at the mere hint of malicious contact. Nobody in their right mind could blame him for a bunker mentality, yet it was a surprise to note that even with another championship looming on the horizon, he was no longer willing to leave the pocket and risk bodily harm in exchange for a first down.

The NFL is no country for old men. In fact, for all the leagues bluster, there were even more concussions in 2019 than there were the year before. Players have figured out that the penalties for using their helmets to concuss an opponent are relatively mild. Theres even one clown T.J. Watt, the Pittsburgh defensive end who goes around punching anyone holding the ball under the guise that hes trying to cause fumbles. Hell break ribs and mangle hands and perhaps even cause permanent brain damage before his career is over, but the league doesnt seem motivated to put a stop to it. That has to be harbinger of a dangerous future for quarterbacks in their mid-40s.

Bradys determination to play forever reminds me of a lot of losing gamblers Ive known. When things go bad, they never back off; they just double down. Pretty soon theyre chasing their money and wishing theyd quit at the top of their game.

Not that Brady is going to go broke. It seems that he has a new hustle these days: The TB12 Method. Which happens to be the name of the book he sort of wrote which celebrates his recipe for eternal muscles, if not eternal life.

Years ago, Brady fell in with a body coach, Alex Guerrero, who helped Brady develop pliable muscles that are damned near impervious to injury. Not everyone swears by this amazing new method, or, for that matter, Guerrero himself.

Muscle pliability, it seems, isnt actually a thing.

The New York Times review of the book noted as much.

Mr. Brady and Mr. Guerrero have not conducted or published clinical trials of muscle pliability, the reviewer stated. Neither has anyone else. On the huge PubMed online database of published science, I found only one experiment that contains the words pliability and muscles, and it concerned the efficacy of different embalming techniques.

I have to admit that when I perused Bradys website, I wasnt entirely convinced. On the other hand, Im an enfeebled old guy who got a stiff neck just from writing this column. In fact, as I paged through the catalog of Bradys amazing products, the trademarked TV12 Vibrating Pliability Sphere start to look like the cure to at least two or three of my many ailments. Its just that it kind of looks like a tire that wobbles, and Ive got one of those on my 20-year-old Camry.

Read the rest here:

GELFAND: on Tom Brady and Immortality - Zone Coverage

Share this article:

Kobe Bryant will be remembered above all as a stellar athlete and highly devoted family man. Thats because he survived what was clearly his darkest hour an allegation by a 19-year-old hotel clerk in Colorado that he raped her.

The alleged incident occurred June 30, 2003, in a hotel room at the Lodge & Spa at Cordillera in the Rocky Mountains town of Edwards. The woman who made the allegation was working as the front-desk clerk and accompanied Bryant on a tour of the property. She later went to his hotel room, where she said he raped her.

Every time I said `no, he tightened his hold around me, she told police, according to court documents obtained by The Daily Beast.

Afterward, she told police that Bryant warned her that the encounter is just between the two, the two of us, nobody is gonna know about this, youre not going to tell anybody.

The 24-year-old Bryant was charged with one count of felony assault in a case that took 14 months to be resolved. In the end, the accuser decided not to testify and prosecutors dropped the case Sept. 1, 2004. A civil suit brought by the accuser in August 2004 was settled out of court in March 2005.

A day after the alleged rape, Bryant underwent knee surgery in nearby Vail. His accuser reported the incident to the Eagle County Sheriffs Department, and investigators searched his hotel room for evidence.

Bryants attorneys said DNA evidence suggested she had sex with someone else in the hours after the alleged rape and before a medical the exam was conducted, although prosecutors denied it. Bryant was charged with one count of felony sexual assault July 18th. With his wife, Vanessa, at his side, Bryant held a news conference at Staples Center, admitting that he committed adultery but denying he had assaulted the 19-year-old.

I sit here in front of you guys furious at myself, disgusted at myself for making a mistake of adultery, he conceded.

After nearly a year of discovery and pretrial hearings, Bryant entered a plea of not guilty on May 11th, 2004. As the case moved toward a trial, the accusers determination to pursue a criminal trial weakened once she added libel attorney Lin Wood to her team. He believed a criminal trial would not end well for her.

Later, there was another significant concession from Bryant.

Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did, he said in a statement. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter.

For a time, he lost endorsement campaigns, including with Nike, which he resumed serving as pitchman in July 2005.

The rape allegation episode would resurge once again, in 2018, when 17,000 people signed a petition demanding he be stripped of his Academy Award nomination for his animated short, Dear Basketball.

Bryant won the Oscar anyway but was dropped from an Animation jury over the accusations.

Kobe Survived his Darkest Hour on His Way to Immortality was last modified: January 27th, 2020 by Contributing Editor

>> Want to read more stories like this? Get our Free Daily Newsletters Here!

See the rest here:

Kobe Survived his Darkest Hour on His Way to Immortality - MyNewsLA.com

When Kobe Bryant died, as with any iconic persons death, people said the tragedy should be a reminder of lifes fragility. That it should be a memento mori, a sign we could be gone at any second. A warning to push us to cherish the important things in life our family, friends, passions, and beauty of the world and not to waste energy on inconsequential things. The constant knowledge of how sudden life can end is a tool to energize us into living a better and more clear life.

This reminder is effective because it comes in flashes, often when public icons die. Its only in those flashes we can truly wrangle with death. We periodically look up at the sword of Damocles to remind us that its there, but we cant live while staring and thinking of it falling. Its not that we forget our mortality, but that keeping it present in our minds is an impossible task while living.

In the movie Troy, Brad Pitts Achilles says, The gods envy us. They envy us because were mortal, because any moment may be our last. Everything is more beautiful because were doomed. You will never be lovelier than you are now. We will never be here again.

The idea that the doomed state of life makes the beauty of it more profound is a beautiful statement, but if the gods envy us for our mortality, I think we also envy them for their immortality. If not for ourselves, then at least for the ones we love.

In The Iliad, it wasnt Achilles who knew the burden of his own mortality, but his mother Thetis, a goddess of the sea. She was immortal and he wasnt. She knew from a prophecy that when he chose to go to war, his life would be brief. She spends her time trying to please and soothe her son, making each moment as sweet as possible before his doom, but also trying, as she did when she first dipped him in the river Styx, to save him.

When he begged her to plead with Zeus on his behalf to cause misery to the Trojans after Agamemnon dishonored him, she accepted his request after saying:

My child, why did I rear you, cursed in my child-bearing? Would that it had been your lot to remain by your ships without tears and without grief, since your span of life is brief and endures no long time; but now you are doomed to a speedy death and are laden with sorrow above all men; therefore to an evil fate I bore you in our halls.

Thetis is anguished by Achilles mortality more than Achilles could ever be. Their moments together are sweet because she loves him, but she is also bitter from the knowledge that there wont be many more.

Of course Achilles had to know he would eventually die. He was human and a warrior, he had killed people. He had seen and caused death. But he is most human in that he is only aware of death in the abstract.

Unless it has a set time and place, death is impossible to grasp. It is both near and far. It could come at anytime, and we know that, but the potential suddenness and finality of it is against life, which is full of second chances and change. Random, sudden death is so antithetical to the way humans see their lives, with death as the closing of the book, that the thought I could die in the next minute is repulsive.

The potential of sudden death can be considered only for a brief moment, before being pushed away. Otherwise, the terror of the thought would be paralyzing. Achilles could go out and fight, pout and rejoice, love and live, cherish and waste moments, because he saw himself alive in that immediate moment and the next. He eventually does die, but when Odysseus praises him in the underworld, Achilles doesnt opine on the beauty of his doomed time in the world. He rebukes his friend:

Glorious Odysseus: dont try to reconcile me to my dying. Id rather serve as another mans labourer, as a poor peasant without land, and be alive on Earth, than be lord of all the lifeless dead.

We wake up everyday and make plans for the future, and not just for what is immediate and urgent plans that are often inconsequential, as if our lives are not doomed. We continuously project ourselves into the future, as Achilles must have. Helene Cixious writes in Stigmata that we feign immortality, and we have to:

Outside, I know, but fundamentally I dont believe, everything we think we dont think, thats because were alive, we inhabit the country of the living; that which is beyond, outsidewe dont have the heart to believe. We cant believe in death in advance, it remains inadmissible. Our immortality is: not-believing-in-death.

This disbelief makes itself apparent when someone who we care about does suddenly die. We think there must be a mistake, that its a hoax. Its all a bad dream, and when we wake up, things will return to what they should be. A person we love couldnt possibly be gone, it must be another. We keep hoping that by denying the event, we can make it unreal. It takes a long time for reality to settle in.

When I first read the news of Bryants death, I looked at the headlines reading Kobe Bryant has died in a helicopter crash and thought that it was an absurd statement. The more I read it, the more nonsensical it seemed. It was a thing that was possible, but didnt feel tangible.

When we accept the truth, we go on to celebrate everything our loved one did in their short time. And there is an intensity to their time that get colored in postmortem because of how short it was, but I think thats how we have to reconcile with death, as Odysseus tried to do. Beauty is not a quality that potential disaster adds to life; its what were left with when the physical presence of the person who we miss is gone. If Bryant had lived to be 100 and continued to try to do well, his life would have been even more beautiful. If he had been immortal, even more so. At least for us. The way it would have been for Thetis with her son.

Bryants stature added another layer of disbelief to his death. Bryant is someone who is seen as an icon to millions. Though we can never be immortal, we do create gods all the time. We turn people like Bryant into superheroes, into beings who are transcendent of humanity. Great athletes like him are rarely ever just athletes, they become symbols, ideas, myths. Theyre as immortal as we could possibly be. For these people, a sudden death seems beneath them. Bryant, who was larger than life, dying from a negligible accident. It is incomprehensible. If he, of all people, is vulnerable to that possibility, then the rest of us are even more so.

Yet Bryants death doesnt really bring the concept of sudden death any closer. It is still only possibly, but not entirely, real. Bryant died in a helicopter crash. Not many of us will ever find ourselves in that situation. We may walk outside, get in cars, cross the street during traffic, and toy with our mortality in more familiar ways than getting into a helicopter, but while we know the potential of sudden death, its hardly ever in the forefront of our minds.

Willful ignorance of fatal danger is the only way we can go through each day and imagine ourselves in the next one. And when we do lose people we care about suddenly, the celebration of their lives is followed immediately by the greater grief of their extinguished presence. Celebration is only a small comfort. What we are often left with is a deep helplessness and sadness.

What then? What can save us from this omnipresent and terrifying possibility of death? Im not sure there is an answer, but I like the idea of feigning immortality. Not living with the constant knowledge that any moment could be our last, but that death, until it comes, doesnt matter at all it has nothing to do with life.

I think of how Bryant trained and played, how he wasnt afraid of the big moments or failure. And how that attitude came from a defiance of finality rather than an acceptance of it.

My colleague, Tom Ziller, wrote that Bryant played as if there was no tomorrow, but I think he has it backwards. Bryant behaved as if there were infinite tomorrows. While he played basketball, he did so obsessively, but then he moved on to other pursuits, and imagined himself doing even more in the future. When asked why he wasnt afraid of taking the last shot, he said: Theres an infinite groove. Whether you make the shot or miss it is inconsequential.

Its not the potential of an end that creates beauty or urgency, its the possibility of a future. Life is all about tomorrows, about growth, continuance, and change, about dreams. Death is repulsive because it is not life. It can never get closer than its abstract form, and it shouldnt. It is true we are powerless before it, but until the event of death, it is also powerless before us.

Read more:

Kobe Bryant lived without fear of death - SB Nation

Originally featured in the Netherlands magazine, if you like this youll love our work in print. Thick matte card, stunning photos, original art and the best writing around. Support our independent journalism.

.

From the outside looking in, its a strange concept, but just how close the Netherlands came to winning the 1978 World Cup hasnt left too noticeable an imprint on the national psyche, or at least certainly not in the same way as the failure to prevail in 1974 has.

Rob Rensenbrink came to within the width of an Estadio Monumental goalpost from pure footballing immortality. An inch further to the right and the Oranje would have become the sixth different winner of the World Cup, rather than Argentina. Rensenbrink would have joined a special collection of players to have scored a World Cup-winning goal, and he would have finished the tournament as its leading scorer.

By the finest of margins, Rensenbrink was deflected away from immortality, as he instead arguably so drifted into a world of under-appreciation in his home nation. Apart from in the Low Countries of Belgium and the Netherlands, and among football hipsters the world over, Rensenbrink is widely forgotten.

He is a peculiarity. Strikingly gifted with skill to burn, he was blessed with a wonderful left foot and bewitching close-control which saw him drift past defenders as if they werent there, an ability that sprang from a dribbling style which gave him the rare propensity to be able to take a ball right into the face of opposing defenders before changing direction at the last second. Unpredictable, dangerous and, at his peak, impossible to play against, he should be far from forgotten.

Born in Oostzaan, almost nine miles to the north of Amsterdam, Rensenbrink slipped through the prolific Ajax net, instead finding his way into football with city rivals DWS. Essentially on an amateur footing despite gracing the top flight, and enjoying occasional forays into the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup, DWS were never likely to contain Rensenbrinks talents for a prolonged period.

In the summer of 1969, at the age of 22, a year after making his international debut, it was the ideal time for Rensenbrink to move on from DWS. The inexorable rise of Ajax had gained pace, having just contested their first European Cup final, while their bitter rivals Feyenoord, who had won the Eredivisie title, were just a year away from going one better in the 1970 final against Celtic.

Read | Willy Dullens: the Dutch talent many thought couldve been better than Cruyff

While Ajax had been interested observers in Rensenbrinks development at DWS, they were a club blessed with an abundance of left-sided attacking options. Favouring a position on the left-hand side of the forward line, yet equally adept as an out-and-out left winger, Rensenbrink was under no illusions that Ajax had the continually blossoming Johan Cruyff and the legendary Piet Keizer in the two positions he could occupy.

Feyenoord also monitored his progression and there were tentative inquiries. As reigning champions, however, they elected to rest on their laurels to an extent. The brilliant but slowly ageing Coen Moulijn, a player who drew comparisons to Stanley Matthews, was deputised at times by the wonderful Wim van Hanegem. Again, Rensenbrink would have had his work cut out to displace some formidable figures from the Feyenoord line-up. Yet, in retrospect, Rensenbrink would have been the perfect long-term successor to Moulijn.

In the summer of 1969, an entirely different path was taken by Rensenbrink and he would never again kick a ball in competitive anger within club football in his homeland.

Frans de Munck, a former international goalkeeper for the Netherlands, had been appointed as the new coach of Club Brugge that summer, and spotting an opportunity to step in where both Ajax and Feyenoord wouldnt, he swooped for the services of Rensenbrink.

At the Stade Albert-Dyserynck, Rensenbrink took the change of environment in his skilful stride. The Brugge that Rensenbrink joined was essentially sitting upon the eve of greatness. Their solitary league title had been won almost half a century earlier, but from the mid-1960s they had risen to become an increasing thorn in the sides of both Anderlecht and Standard Lige.

Scoring goals on a regular basis during his debut season in Belgium, Rensenbrinks new club finished runners-up to Standard in the league and swept to domestic cup glory. A near miss on the title followed in 1970/71, combining with a run to the quarter-finals of the Cup Winners Cup.

The summer of 1971 proved pivotal for Rensenbrink. Board member Constant Vanden Stock departed the club, only to resurface at Anderlecht. Utilising their friendship, Vanden Stock coaxed Rensenbrink to Brussels, from where he would go head to head with his former club for most of the domestic honours on offer throughout the remainder of the decade, as Standard fell away.

Read | Johnny Rep: the natural Total Footballer who weaved his way into legend

Brought in by Georg Keler the man who had given Rensenbrink his international debut as part of a number of sweeping changes at the club, Anderlecht narrowly edged out Brugge in a tense battle for the title, and defeated Standard in the cup final to clinch the domestic double.Alongside his compatriot Jan Mulder and the Anderlecht legend Paul Van Himst, it was the added attacking potency this triumvirate provided to the team that enabled Rensenbrink to help break the hearts of all those involved with his former club, as his new employers took the title on goal difference.

It was a dream start to life with his new club. However, the following season proved a more difficult one, as Mulder jumped at the opportunity of a summer move to Ajax, while Van Himst struggled for form. It meant that Anderlecht relied on Rensenbrinks talents far more than they had during the previous campaign. This was offset by the gradual emergence of another precocious talent in the shape of Franois Van der Elst.

An inconsistent start to the defence of their title and an early exit from the European Cup meant that Keler departed the club before the year was out. Brugge swept to the title, and while collective form was hard to attain for Anderlecht, Rensenbrink was still scaling individual heights. Despite their problems in the league, the cup was retained as once again Standard were beaten in the final.

Out of sight and out of mind, Rensenbrink was on the outside looking in when it came to the national team, despite his fine performances for Anderlecht. He hadnt represented the Netherlands since departing DWS. In his absence, and despite the elevated club performances in European competition of both Ajax and Feyenoord, the Netherlands had failed to qualify for the latter stages of Euro 72.

Rensenbrink continued to apply himself to the Anderlecht cause. Under his new coach, Urbain Braems, playing alongside the prolific Hungarian striker Attila Ladinszky, and with the added support of the increasingly effective Van der Elst and the slowly ageing yet ever-dangerous Van Himst, Anderlecht reclaimed the title.

It was during the 1973/74 title-winning campaign that Rensenbrink made his return to the national side, initially recalled by Frantiek Fadrhonc, the man who led the Netherlands to World Cup qualification, before being replaced for the finals by Rinus Michels.

Read | Johan Neeskens: more than just the other Johan

Rensenbrink was viewed as the inside man, given that they were sharing a group with Belgium. When the two nations met in November 1973 in the decisive game at the Olympic Stadium in Amsterdam, the Netherlands knew a draw would be enough for them to reach the finals in West Germany. Intriguingly, Rensenbrink was up against four of his Anderlecht teammates on a dramatic night when a combination of fine goalkeeping and profligacy in the penalty area kept the Belgian goal-line unbreached.

Controversy and drama abounded when, in the last-minute, Rensenbrinks Anderlecht teammate, Jan Verheyen, stroked home what appeared to be a perfectly good winning goal. As the Netherlands defence stepped forward while defending a free-kick, Verheyen had been gifted the freedom of the penalty area. Played onside by at least three defenders, his legitimate goal was erroneously disallowed. By the finest of margins, the Total Football of 1974 might never have been given the opportunity to bloom.

In West Germany, Rensenbrink, for so long on the periphery of the national side, now took on a vital role. Michels opted to start him in all but one game, fielding him ahead of Piet Keizer. Rensenbrink, not involved in the Ajax-Feyenoord-PSV power struggle, was blessed with a remit of freedom that not everyone within the squad could match.

Some fine support performances, inclusive of a vital goal against East Germany during the second-round group stage, helped edge Michels and Cruyff towards the World Cup final. When Rensenbrink was on the receiving end of some painful challenges during the de facto semi-final against Brazil, a game marked by the breathtaking football ofOranje, and the brutality of Brazils approach, he was forced to hobble away from Dortmund with huge doubts over his fitness for the final.

Despite passing a fitness test on the morning of the final, in the heat of battle within the Olympiastadion in Munich, Rensenbrink was noticeably off the pace. Had the Netherlands not yielded the early lead they took, then maybe he would have been given further time in the second half. Trailing 2-1, however, Michels could afford no passengers and Rensenbrink was replaced by Ren van de Kerkhof. Had he been fully fit, it might have made the difference between success and failure.

Rensenbrinks importance to the national team intensified over the next few years, helping them to the finals of Euro 76, where they were denied the opportunity to face West Germany in a rematch of the World Cup final by the eventual champions Czechoslovakia.

Read | When Ajax didnt want Johan Cruyff he left for Feyenoord and won the double

By the time Johan Cruyff walked away from the international game in the autumn of 1977, Rensenbrink had inherited the role of chief creator in the side that Ernst Happel took to Argentina. Happel, coach at Feyenoord when they passed up the chance of signing Rensenbrink, deployed him on the left of a three-man forward line, in a loose adaptation of the formation his Feyenoord had won the European Cup with.

With Johnny Rep at the tip, Van de Kerkhof on the right, Rensenbrink to the left, and backed up in midfield by Johan Neeskens and Rensenbrinks Anderlecht teammate Arie Haan, they were a side which lacked the conductor supreme in Cruyff, but instead produced a more balanced and direct variant of play that still embraced sublime vision and skill.

During the span of time between the World Cups of 1974 and 78, Rensenbrink had cultivated a love affair with the Cup Winners Cup at Anderlecht. Molenbeeks shock title win of 1974/75 was followed by a hat-trick of successes for Brugge. While Anderlecht conspired against themselves domestically, in Europe they excelled. The club reached the Cup Winners Cup final in three successive seasons, defeating West Ham in 1976, losing to Hamburg in 1977 and dismantling Austria Vienna a year later. It was during this period that Rensenbrink attracted unfair criticism, that he would raise his game for the big occasions but become unreliable against the lesser teams.

Despite the title eluding them, Rensenbrink, alongside Haan and Van der Elst, made Anderlecht one of the most dangerous and feared sides in Europe. He scored twice in both the 1976 and 1978 finals, performances which enhanced his reputation and in turn raised expectancy levels.

In Argentina, he was in imperious form. A hat-trick against Iran was followed by further goals against Scotland and Austria. Combined with the drive and explosive finishing of Rep and Haan, the Netherlands rolled to the final.Rensenbrink came to within the width of the goalpost at El Monumental from pure footballing immortality.

At the age of 31, it proved to be a watermark moment. Within a year he had played his last game for the Netherlands, while his Anderlecht career ended in 1980 with what was essentially a trailing off, ending his playing days with short spells in the NASL and in France with Toulouse.

Rensenbrink, a man who never went into coaching, remains locked within that vivid moment when he hit the post with only seconds to go in the 1978 World Cup final. He remains a man under-appreciated by many in his homeland, and one often forgotten by football generally. Regardless of that, he will always be a man who hypnotically owned the ball, one who so very nearly inherited the world.

By Steven Scragg @Scraggy_74

Read More:

Link:

Remembering Rob Rensenbrink: the overlooked Dutch master who came within inches of immortality - These Football Times

I married into my husbands family decades ago. We have one child together, whom I adore. The rest of the children are from his previous marriages. I get along superficially with all of them. I make conversation and act interested in what they have to say. I tell them I love them when they say it to me. Generally, they have treated me very well, and I think they actually do love me. But I do not have any real feelings for them. I have never wanted much contact with people. Having interactions with all of them over these years has been painful for me. I fantasize about severing contact with his family once my husband dies. Is my pretending to care about them unethical? Name Withheld

The Roman poet Martial wrote an epigram, absurdly simple and curiously haunting, in which he declared: I do not love you, Sabidius, nor can I say why./This much I can say: I do not love you.

Its not the most obvious candidate for immortality, but it persists because it speaks to the way that not loving someone, like loving someone, is seldom something you can explain. Sometimes affecting affection can, in time, make the affection real; sometimes, as youve discovered, going through the motions leaves the heart unmoved. But is the pretense itself wrong?

Its conventional to say, Very well, thank you, in response to How are you? on the phone, even when you have a cold. Thats not dishonest; its merely polite. Replying to family members who say they love you with I love you, too can be merely conventional in the same way. Isnt pretending to be fond of people you have to spend time with a better and more generous tack than being cold and distant? We know all too well the odious alibi invariably offered for some cruel remark: Im just being honest.

It sounds as if your real problem is that you arent naturally sociable, and so your involvement in family gatherings over the years has been more burden than pleasure. Given that youve pulled it off for decades, you evidently dont have an incapacitating social-anxiety disorder. And youre certainly not the only person who sometimes feels like running away from family gatherings and hiding out. Yet plainly its harder for you than for most: I was struck that you describe your interactions with the stepchildren not as tedious but as painful.

People will understand if you choose to spend more time on your own if you become a widow. But theres no point, at this stage, in telling everyone what your real feelings are in dropping truth bombs, to use the aptly military metaphor. Despite your lack of affection toward your stepchildren, you clearly have some measure of regard for their feelings, and youre right to. Another concern is that cutting yourself off from the world in widowhood (your adored child aside) can lead to depression. Your adjustment to life without your husband will probably go better if you dont lose touch entirely with family and friends. Even introverts, as a rule, benefit from some human connection. So perhaps you can find a way to reduce interactions you find unpleasant without ending them altogether. Create a life that suits you, but in doing so, try to minimize the injury you do to others.

I work in the music department at a large university. Im frequently sent job postings to distribute to the students. Yesterday, I received a posting from the director of a nearby community music school looking for female piano teachers and female voice teachers. I responded to the director indicating that it is illegal to post a job advertisement that includes a reference to gender, as gender is not a bona fide occupational qualification when it comes to teaching music. The director responded that a majority of the job listings are gender-neutral but that, in this case, he is hiring to replace a female teacher whose roster has requested a female instructor as the replacement.

The director offered to reword the posting and asked if I could distribute a description that included no reference to gender. While I would like to provide work opportunities for the students in my program, I feel that I might be ethically implicated in the directors problematic hiring practices, because he communicated his intentions to me, even if the female only distinction doesnt make it into the distributed job listing. What is my best course of action? Rob G.

Whether something counts as a bona fide occupational qualification (B.F.O.Q.) is a complicated question best left to the lawyers. I have no doubt theyd side with you, though. Few gender-based exemptions to Title VII have been granted, and they typically involve concerns about bodily privacy in prisons, hospitals and the like. You and the music-school director ought to comply with the law.

But putting aside the legalities for a moment, it can be challenging ethically to decide whether a preference in hiring is objectionable. Here, the decision was guided by the preferences of an existing roster of students, not by the directors own tastes. Courts have taken a dim view of arguments for gender discrimination based on customer preference, and the same may well apply here. And yet this preference strikes me as less troublesome than a preference for, say, a white woman, which would be difficult to view as having nothing to do with hostility to nonwhite people. In general, partiality for those of certain identities is morally less troublesome than hostility to people of other identities and yes, this is a coherent distinction. It matters, too, if there is a general background of unfair discrimination against people of one identity in finding jobs in a certain field, in which case favoring people of that kind can be a contribution to meeting an injustice. (Perhaps because my primary- and secondary-school piano teachers were both women, Id be surprised to learn that women face particular prejudice in this particular field.)

Being a woman could be morally, if not legally, a B.F.O.Q. if the students came from a religious tradition that prohibited them from spending time with men outside their own families and would simply cease coming if a man showed up. What would be the point in hiring a teacher whose students will simply disappear? Here, there would be a trade-off between accommodating an irrational injustice toward a qualified man and allowing these women the benefit of instruction.

But such circumstances surely dont apply in this case, so youd be justified in saying that youll run the ad only if the director undertakes to consider candidates of any gender. If a woman gets the job, you may feel that the men didnt get a fair shot. But you cant be sure of it. Having made the point, you can hope that the director will recognize that you were right and that what he ought to have done was to make the case to the students that their preference was unreasonable.

And now that youve been sensitized to the issue, you might consider trying to keep track of whether those using your services consistently favor one gender or other in their appointments. As you recognize, whats important in the field of justice in employment is what people do, not just what they say.

Read more from the original source:

Should I Pretend to Love My Stepchildren? - The New York Times

We may as well face facts. This season is going to difficult for us all. Liverpool are going to win the Premier League and well never hear the end of it. Whilst Chelsea have been busy creating history, Liverpool have been fondly reminiscing (except for the odd Champions League trophy) about theirs. The last time they enjoyed being the top team in England, barely any of the current squad were born.

For the mass media, Jurgen Klopps side winning their first-ever Premier League is the stuff of dreams. The season is barely halfway through and already Liverpools record-breaking team are being lauded on every newspaper back page and click-bait site going.

But with just 23 Premier League games gone Liverpools goals conceded record already equals the 15 goals Chelseas impressive back-line let in during the whole of the 2004/05 season. games in that season and Chelsea had conceded just eight goals.

It was Jose Mourinhos first in charge and that success was built on a solid spine through the team. Chelseas transfer team had been busy during the summer bringing in Petr Cech, Ricardo Carvalho and Didier Drogba. They joined Claude Makelele, Frank Lampard and John Terry already at the club.

Drogbas offensive impact in that first season was much less than it would eventually become. However, he still put in the yards defensively. He was able to attack the ball as effectively in front of his own goal as he was the oppositions. Add those five other players up the middle of the pitch into the mix and the rest were free to create the 72 goals that would see Mourinhos side triumph in Englands top league for the first time in 50 years.

Out of the 38 games Chelsea played in the Premier League in 2004/05 they kept clean-sheets in 26 of them.

By todays standards that was an incredible achievement and one unlikely to be repeated by any team in the uber-competitive Premier League that we now have. Week-in, week-out, Chelseas back-line locked out attack after attack.

To the rest of the leagues jealous fans, it was boring Chelsea. To Blues fans it was manna from heaven.

Eleven games ended in 1-0 wins for Joses team. There was a satisfaction borne out of confidence in knowing that, once ahead, victory would almost certainly follow. With few goals the difference in any game, from the beginning of the season through mid-October, the Blues only defeat occurred when Manchester City won 1-0 at the City of Manchester Stadium. Following that, there was a run of nine games up to Christmas that saw Chelsea score 29 goals and concede just six.

Chelsea may have been boring when they needed to be, but they were far from being the park-the-bus type of team the haters would have us believe they were.

John Terry, Ricardo Carvalho, Claude Makelele and Petr Cech formed that impenetrable diamond that was so pivotal in keeping clean sheets. Also featuring in the full-back positions during the season, and taking a large amount of credit, were Paulo Ferreira, Glen Johnson, Wayne Bridge, Robert Huth and William Gallas.

The season before, Chelsea came second to Arsenal in what is regarded as one of the Premier Leagues finest achievements. Arsene Wengers side went unbeaten in the league through all 38 games. Even the Invincibles as theyve come to be known, conceded 26 goals during the course of the season.

Chelsea were just one goal away from matching Arsenals invincibility. It was a player who later joined Chelsea, Nicolas Anelka, who scored the goal that thwarted them.

Had the game taken place today, the VAR may have kept Chelsea on course for true greatness. Anelkas goal was a penalty, awarded by Howard Webb after Paulo Ferreira clumsily bundled the Frenchman over. The initial foul began outside the penalty area, and once in the box Ferreira could have been dismissed for being the last man.

Liverpool could equal Arsenal and become Invincibles. However, given that theyll have the league won by Easter, it seems unlikely. Competitive levels will drop and they could still be vying for Champions League glory.

In fact, Chelsea could beat them in the penultimate matchday of the season, but with the league won it wont really matter. Theyll have their excuse of not having to win the game to get the title in the bag.

Its not that bold a statement to say no one will ever beat Chelseas record of letting in just 15 goals throughout the course of a season.

To date, the nearest was Jose Mourinhos side the following season, conceding 22 goals. Manchester United equalled that a couple of years later. Chelseas back-line in that season was as good as invincible is ever likely to be in the Premier League.

The likes of John Terry, Ricardo Carvalho and Co. will forever remain the true invincibles, but of course, no one will bother with that once Liverpool are Champions.

Read more:

Chelsea: Liverpool proving the immortality of the Blues truly invincible record - The Pride of London

Apart from the date that the next season is coming out the trailer doesnt show much other than the fact that it is coming. With Anthony Mackie leading the way the second season is set to appear this coming February and will be featuring the popular actor as one of the main characters that will be driving the story. According to Scott Snowden of Space.com the second season was approved back in 2018 and has been in the process of being made and released for some time now. Its safe to assume that with each show and movie coming out these days that producers are wanting to be as exacting and as careful as they can since quite often the fans are the deciding factor as to whether a project will succeed or if it might be time to go back to the drawing board. So far with Altered Carbon the general interest of the public has been great enough to keep it around, and while the details of the second season arent being given out in a flood there is just enough to reason that it could possibly be aiming to outdo the first season or at least keep up the intensity that people came to enjoy.

The overall story of Altered Carbon has to do with the idea of achieving a type of immortality, as Dan Girolamo of Screenrant mentions, by downloading their consciousness into cortical stacks that are then able to be transferred to another body that will allow them to live again with the added benefit of experience and learning gained over a lifetime. Its pretty obvious that there are plenty of moral implications to go with this idea since the whole matter of immortality is something that people have been arguing over for some time since the human condition is one that is seen to be anything but conducive to such a concept and the idea of using a blank body, or a sleeve, is bound to be abhorrent to many. Thankfully due to the sleeves and stacks and how they appear to be interchangeable in such an easy way, its not too hard to figure out why Mackie would be cast in the role that Joel Kinnaman helped to make popular since the manner of switching out one sleeve for another was bound to become an easy out and way to explain to people just how this is possible and how it can be made to happen in a way thats easy for the audience to accept.

So far the plot appears to be taking off the end of the first season with Takeshi Kovacs in a new body but still on more or less the same path that fans from the first season can recall. In a big way Altered Carbon is the kind of show that takes a great number of elements from pop culture and slams them all together in a neat, compact showcase that becomes its own entity thanks to the alterations and reshaping of ideas thats becoming even harder as the years go by since so many ideas have come and gone and many of them are being recycled on a continual basis. David Griffin of IGN has his own opinion to share on the show. There are still plenty of stories out there yet to be told, but the trick at this point is to make them all unique in some way so that they can become a fan favorite in their own right or at least have a decent showing that will possibly be remembered and revisited at a later date. Keep in mind its taken two years for Altered Carbon to make a comeback to Netflix, a time in which the buzz has been evident but not quite as forceful as many other shows that have come along. In fact The Witcher was likely one show that managed to eclipse plenty of others when it came along since it even managed to overtake Disney+s The Mandalorian for a while as the two shows vied for dominance in a market where only the most popular is bound to stay the top spot for long. While Altered Carbon is indeed a popular show it hasnt quite managed to reach this distinction, but its been in a comfortable spot all the same.

The second season is bound to take on at least a few new directions given that Anthony Mackie is now on the scene and as weve noticed in many shows when the main actor is switched up there are many instances in which things can never be the same as the story has to change in order to accommodate. That can be a good thing however since bringing in a new experience and a new face can keep the ball rolling and keep it intriguing enough that people will want to come back and see just where the producers and the director are willing to go with this idea.

See the original post here:

What We Learned from the Altered Carbon Season 2 Trailer - TVOvermind

On the night before the Super Bowl, the 2020 Pro Football Hall of Fame class will be announced. After falling short in previous seasons, will former Pittsburgh Steelers guard Alan Faneca make the cut, and be enshrined to NFL immortality?

Faneca is most certainly deserving of a bust in Canton, as are all of the finalists on the list. In fact, it's those finalists that voters must be convinced of which Faneca ismore deserving.

Headlining this year's list are the following:

As with any list of football greats, its hard to discredit anyone from making this list. However, a minimum of four players must be selected, with a maximum of eight being picked to wear the gold jacket in August.

Embed from Getty Images

Among those 15 names are 2 linemen other than Faneca: Jaguars tackle Tony Boselli and Seahawks/Vikings guard Steve Hutchinson. I felt that last year may have been Faneca's year and that he was more deserving than former Jets guard Kevin Mawae, but if there's any year for Faneca to get the nod, it's 2020. With the Centennial class inducting former Steelers coach Bill Cowher and former Steelers safety Donnie Shell, the modern-era list is headlined by first-time eligible former Steelers safety Troy Polamalu.

That's a lot of Black and Gold, but it makes perfect sense to center the ceremony, as well as the accompanying Hall of Fame Game, around a Pittsburgh fan base within a short drive from the Hall's location in Canton, Ohio,

While all of the above players are well deserving of being Hall of Fame finalists, it's Faneca who stands head and shoulders above his offensive line peers. His 9 Pro-Bowl selections are the most of this group. His 8 All-Pro selections (7 first-team) are 1 less than Mawae (in both categories). He has a Super Bowl ring (the others never won one) and was named not once, but twice, NFL Alumni Offensive Lineman of the Year (2004, 2008).

In addition, Faneca was also named to the NFL 2000s All-Decade Team, and the Steelers 75th Anniversary Team.

During his first 10 years in the league he played with the Steelers, before rounding out his final three years with the Jets (2008, 2009) and Cardinals (2010). While in Pittsburgh, Faneca paved the way for Hall of Fame running back Jerome Bettis, Willie Parker (who has a Super Bowl record-holding longest run) as well as long forgotten names such as AmosZereoue andNajeh Davenport.

Considering his achievements, theonly thing that could hold him out another year is if no lineman is selected at all... which could certainly happen: no linemen were inducted in 2017. Packers great Jerry Kramer was inducted as a senior member in 2018, meaning no modern-era offensive lineman has been inducted in two years.

Furthermore,Redskins great Joe Jacoby failed to make the finalists list again this year (as well as in 2019) after getting close previously. (Jacoby is widely considered the greatest Redskins player who is not currently inducted into the Hall of Fame.)That's a shame, as the honor is long overdue for all of the players on this list.

Mawae was great for the Jets, and finally got his nod, but Fancea, Boselli, and Hutchinson continue to wait.

Boselli was the face of a new franchise with then expansion team Jacksonville. Hutchinson was great not only with one team, but two. And Faneca's best days were obviously with Pittsburgh but he also had Pro Bowl caliber years with the Jets.

Embed from Getty Images

Will a lineman be chosen this year? And if so, will it be Alan Faneca?

I believe the committee has to finally draw the straw of one of these linemen, and for Faneca to continually be a finalist since becoming eligible for induction, his time is coming: and if Polamalu is selected, I have no reason to believe Faneca wouldn't join him in the 2020 class.

I know that offfensive linemen are never "sexy" picks: whether it's entering the league and getting chosen for the Hall of Fame, there are no gaudy stats to point to in order to support their success.That's a shame too, because Faneca had in fact been a dominant player during his career. He paved the way for Ben Roethlisberger's early start, and Jerome Bettis' classic end: a true benchmark of his greatness, aside from the various accolades he acquired throughout the years.

Seeing how long many greats wait out for their names to be added to the immortal halls of Canton, Ohio, we have come to expect Faneca to wait a little while longer. Offensive lineman do "make it" but usually it's a short list with only one getting selected with each class.

However, this season appears to be as good as any. With the Steel City flavor added already, Faneca's selection would be the icing on the cake. His accolades are rivaled by no other lineman in this class and the only reason he would have to wait longer is if, in my opinion, the committee passed on picking an offensive lineman altogether.

That doesn't seem likely, at least under the given circumstances. Therefore, 2020 should be the year we hear that Alan Faneca will be immortalized in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Link:

Is this Alan Fanecas year to be named to the Pro Football Hall of Fame? - Steel City Underground

Just for the record, I voted for Derek Jeter, so dont blame me.

The former New York Yankees shortstop is a living legend, but Jeter still fell short of unanimous approval for the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. Proving you cant please all the people all the time, Jeter received 396 votes out of 397 voters, sending the baseball world atwitter on Twitter and elsewhere.

Whos the jerk? at least one online commenter demanded. Because voters are not required to make their ballots public (though most voluntarily do), the identity of Jeters naysayer remained anonymous, which he or she would be wise to maintain, unless egging is on this years home renovation plans.

Four theories exist for why anyone would deny Jeter an honor he so obviously earned. One is Yankee-hating, which didnt keep Mariano Rivera from becoming, in 2019, the first (and only) unanimous selection in the Hall of Fames 80-year history.

Maybe the voter cares only about home runs, of which Jeter hit only a modest 260. Some of those came at the biggest moments of his career. If thats the reason, the voter should be voting.

Jeter is also part of Miami Marlins ownership. Having stripped down the team and payroll to non-competitive levels, he has disillusioned what few Marlins fans are known to exist.

The other and most plausible reason is that some voters have always felt a player should not be elected in his first year of eligibility. There is no logic to that thinking, and its popularity has diminished, as proven by Riveras vote - though Jeters vote suggests there may be at least one holdout left.

Jeter says he totally doesnt care who dissed him. We shouldnt, either, if only because unanimous approval is turning into a modern expectation with no basis in history.

Is Babe Ruth a Hall of Famer? In 1936, the year after Ruth had retired and in the first Hall of Fame vote, 11 of the 226 voters didnt think so. Ty Cobb had the highest vote that year. Even he was left off four ballots.

Willie Mays was pretty good. He received 94.7 percent of the vote. Hank Aaron, whose 755 home runs is still the record if we dismiss Barry Bonds steroid-tainted 762, claimed 97.8 percent.

Hey, Red Sox fans, think Ted Williams earned a plaque? He was elected in 1966, but 20 of the 302 voters werent impressed enough (or didnt like him, or didnt want a first-time nominee to make it.) After Rivera, the closest unanimous votes have almost entirely been for players of recent generations - Ken Griffey Jr., (99.3 percent with three nays in 2016), Tom Seaver, Nolan Ryan, Cal Ripken Jr., and George Brett.

They are the only players ever to receive more than 98 percent. One of the most confounding votes came in 2014, when 16 of 571 voters left 355-game winner Greg Maddux off.

One guy said he refused to vote for any players from the Steroid Era - ignoring there was no question Maddux was clean. Not only did he pile up victory totals more attuned to 19th Century baseball than the 21st, he did it while competing against cheats.

And people wonder why folks dont like media, which supplies the voters through the Baseball Writers Association of America, to which I belong.

But how important, really, is a unanimous vote? How important is it to please everybody, or even almost everybody?

Losing two states in 1936 didnt stop Franklin Roosevelt from political immortality. Losing only one (ours) in 1972 didnt save Richard Nixon from ignominy.

If Jeters lost vote resulted from the not-the-first-time thinking, he wouldnt be the first. Basketball fans were amazed when Dominique Wilkins, who retired as the No. 6 all-time scorer in NBA history and was still ninth after the five-year retirement waiting period, wasnt elected to the Hall of Fame in his first eligible year.

Wilkins was elected in 2006, his second year. "'Nique,' you must have had a great year last year (while retired),'' Charles Barkley cracked.

Who cares who didnt choose Jeter? Id like to know the thinking behind the single votes cast for Brad Penny and J.J. Putz. I covered those guys, unaware I was in the presence of immortality.

The Baseball Hall of Fame remains one of the very few American institutions whose value remains cloaked of mythology. Most of our others have been stripped bare - politics, religion, entertainment and so on.

We see all their warts and human failings. We see those in baseball, too, but the sport still matters to enough people to push back against those failings (steroid use, sign-stealing cheating), rather than blandly accepting that since nothing is perfect, high standards are pointless exercises in pretense and futility.

Jeters selection is special because his career wasnt all about numbers, the likes of which can be spit out of a computer and define a mans lifes work as if it were a math equation. Modern defensive metrics didnt even exist when Jeter joined the Yankees in 1995. Today, they characterize him as an average or even mediocre shortstop.

If that explains the no voter, the voter never saw Jeter play. Those who did were not fooled by man-made statistics.

By missing unanimous acclaim, Jeter joins Ruth, Aaron, Williams, Mays and everybody not named Rivera in Cooperstown. He joins Carl Yastrzemski, whose 1967 season redefined Red Sox history - yet landed him one vote shy of unanimous Most Valuable Player selection, because one petulant Minnesota writer chose the Twins Cesar Tovar - who hit .267 with six homers and 47 RBIs (to Yaz .326-44-121) and whose team lost the pennant to Boston.

If we think greatness is measured by unanimous acclaim, we might remember Abraham Lincoln, who turned out to be a pretty good president. The fledging Republican Party must have known it; they nominated Honest Abe in 1860. Even if it they didnt do it until the third ballot.

Visit link:

Even Jeter (and Lincoln) couldnt please everybody (Viewpoint) - MassLive.com