Seeing Red

The proposed route for Baltimore's Red Line. Click here for a bigger picture.

I like to use public transportation. I like the freedom of leaving my car at home or in a parking lot far from the hectic downtown area and taking a train or bus into a city and roaming its streets, hopping on and off the train, and soaking up everything a city has to offer. This is largely why I love traveling to Europe, where you can get around major cities with ease. Most European cities have comprehensive subway systems, street trams, and buses that are easily laid out, cheap and simple to use. And getting from city to city in Europe is also cheap and easy, compared to America where Amtrak has a monopoly and can charge expensive prices for tickets.

So it sucks for me that I live in Baltimore, where the mass transit options are limited. Even worse, there seems to be a bias against mass transit in Baltimore. People here in Maryland love their cars, which explains why Maryland is currently the fifth worst state for traffic gridlock in America according to UrbanTrekker. The light rail is commonly referred to as the "loot rail" and it seems like the local bus has been left to the bottom rung of society according to the middle class.

That said, the light rail and subway are crowded on Sundays when the Ravens are in town. If the light rail does one thing well, it ushers thousands of fans to M&T Bank Stadium with ease. But during weekdays, ridership drops to 34,000 a day. The subway has 57,000 riders a day, making the total ridership of rail-based mass transit in Baltimore approximately 91,000 for a city with 600,000 residents and a metro area of more than 2.6 million people, meaning that only 3% of the Baltimore metro population regularly uses rail-based mass transit in Baltimore.

The Maryland Mass Transit Bias (I shall dub this the MMTB) is probably the biggest reason for the low ridership, but there are other factors to consider as well. The light rail only serves suburbs north and southwest the city leaving the entire eastern side of Baltimore County without a rail-based line to get downtown. The subway serves only the upper-west side of Baltimore County (Owings Mills), and terminates at Johns Hopkins University, which is centrally located in Baltimore. If the subway continued east down the Route 40 corridor to Rosedale or Essex, it would open a much needed line to and from the east side of the city.

Another inconvenience: the light rail makes frequent stops as it travels through the downtown area of Baltimore. And although traffic lights are programmed to turn red for the train as it gets close, riders can still wait at traffic lights on the light rail as if they were sitting in their car. After Ravens games, I've seen traffic police holding up trains while cars and pedestrians cross over Howard Street. This is unacceptable. The common rule of thumb is for mass transit to have right of way over everything -- especially cars. This is just another reminder of where mass transit is in the Baltimore pecking order.

And while the subway doesn't have to deal with the city traffic, it does suffer from long waits between trains on weekends. On weekdays it looks like both the light rail and the subway run on 10-15 minute schedules, which is common for a city the size of Baltimore. It would be nice to see the city recognize the increased demand for trains after major sporting events, however. Waits for subway and light rail trains can take longer than 20 minutes.

All of this brings me to the meaning of this article (sorry for taking so long to get to it) -- the Red Line. The Red Line is a proposed east-west light rail track that starts at Security Square Mall on the west side of the city and runs through the city on the Route 40 corridor, including the center median on the infamous "Road to Nowhere" -- a section of Route 70 that was built before the extension of Route 70 to I-95 near Caton Avenue was halted back in the early 1980's. The Red Line would then travel underground through downtown Baltimore and return to street level as it traveled through Fells Point and Canton where it would either terminate in Canton or continue east to Dundalk.

In short, the Red Line would bring Baltimore mass transit options up to where it should be for a city this size. It would give residents who live west of the city in Howard and Carroll Counties a way to get downtown via a station at the Route 70 park and ride and open that much needed line to the east side of Baltimore County.

Right now, I use the light rail for Ravens and Oriole games. If the Red Line were built, I would be able to drive down from New Market on Route 70, park at the lot at the end of the highway (where the current park and ride lot is located) and hop onto a train for easy access to the downtown area. I'd never have to get off Route 70. And neither would many other people who come down the Route 70 corridor for Ravens games or work, which would go a long way in alleviating traffic on the congested 695 Beltway.

The problem is this: people don't want the Red Line built, namely people in Edmonson Village and Canton, who don't want a train running through their neighborhoods. These people are referred to as NIMBY's (Not In My Back Yard), and they are the biggest obstacle in getting most mass transit lines built, whether in Baltimore or Budapest. As with most mass transit opposition, crime, noise and inconvenience are the biggest concerns.

According to the Red Line's Facebook page, the Red Line would bring 10,000 jobs to Baltimore. There is also a link to a short video about Seattle's most recent light rail line, and how it's been a major part of helping the redevelopment of some of the city's isolated neighborhoods. This is commonly referred to as "Smart Growth", connecting isolated communities to the downtown area and building new communities around mass transit stations. Common examples of Smart Growth are only a short ride from Baltimore, in Bethesda, MD and Rosslyn, VA. Yet in Baltimore, Smart Growth is mocked and shunned while mass transit is commonly linked to crime and the decline of neighborhoods.

The link between crime and mass transit is commonly used by detractors of mass transit, but never officially proven. And in the cases of Edmonson Village and Canton, neighborhoods where crime is the number one reason against the Red Line, mass transit already exists -- it's called the local bus.

So ironically, the Red Line has gotten caught up in red tape. With the economic downturn, the Red Line has been put on the back burner for the time being, along with other civic improvement plans, such as a new arena. It's disappointing, really, to see a city fail to take advantage of options and strategies that could transform it into something better. It costs money, sure, but the long-term payoff is always worth it.

In the meantime, I'll cross my fingers and hope that some real progress on the Red Line takes place. Until then, this fan of public transit is seeing red.

Christian Bale -- Good Actor?

I am ripped, yes, but I am not that good of an actor.

Do you consider Christian Bale a good actor? I don't.

Sure, he's in good movies, but think about some of the recent movies he's been in...and how poor his performance has been in them.

I watched Public Enemies last night, and I really enjoyed it. Johnny Depp was good as John Dillenger, and Tommy from Snatch was a great Baby Face Nelson. But Bale as Depp's foil was just "meh". His 1930's era Chicago accent was bad. Come to think of it, Bale has several problems with his voice in movies.

In Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, his grumbly Batman voice was horrible...even fans who loved those movies were critical of Bale's voice. In Terminator Salvation, again he went for a gruff voice which came off as monotone, and ultimately lead to many people criticizing his flat performance. And in Enemies, his voice sounded like Fred Armisen impersonating Barack Obama on Saturday Night Live.

Bale does have a knack for picking solid scripts and working with established directors. Chances are, when Bale is in a movie, it's going to be good, which is why many fans hopes were raised when he joined Terminator Salvation. But Bale's participation in Salvation was an ego-trip. He signed on to play John Connor, who originally had a three-minute role at the end of the film. So Bale demanded the role be fleshed out, and it was, ultimately rendering the Connor part of the film irrelevant compared to the role of Marcus (Sam Worthington), which was the driving narrative force behind Salvation.

Bale is often shown up by other actors in the same movie, too. In The Dark Knight it was Heath Ledger. In 3:10 to Yuma it was Russell Crowe (although Ben Foster upstaged them both). In Terminator Salvation it was Sam Worthington and Anton Yelchin. And in Public Enemies it was Johnny Depp and Tommy from Snatch. This happens so often because Bale is a one-note actor and can't breathe any depth into his roles.

To be fair, Bale has done some good work as an actor. His performance in American Psycho was both dark and humorous. Bale's flatness actually worked in that role. And in Rescue Dawn, Bale did a wonderful job portraying a POW who escapes captivity and makes a run for it in the harsh jungles of Vietnam, all while on the verge of suffering a mental breakdown. It's probably Bale's best performance in a career of mediocrity. Bale is also known for taking on physically demanding roles. In The Machinist he lost 80 pounds and shed lots of weight for Rescue Dawn. He's also put on weight and gotten ripped for other roles.

So what is it about Christian Bale that gets people excited? Surely it's not his acting ability. It's his good decisions. When Bale is in a movie, chances are, it's going to be good. Also, being a good looking guy with rigid features doesn't hurt.

So I, as well as millions of other moviegoers, will still continue to see Christian Bale on the big screen. And despite his obvious lack of acting ability, I still consider him a good actor because he chooses good scripts and occasionally turns in a good performance.

The biggest rivalry going today...

Yankees & Red Sox?

Nope.

Duke & UNC?

Wrong.

Ravens & Steelers?

Think again.

Republicans & Democrats?

DING! DING! DING!

I love it when people criticize sports fans. They say "you're cheering for spoiled athletes who make millions". And when you think about it, being a devoted sports fan is kind of funny. You're basing your happiness or despair on the accomplishments of others. People you've never met. People who wouldn't give you the time of day if you met them on the street.

But for some reason, political fans get a pass. And if you ask me, political fans are a million times worse than any sports fan. Well, most of them.

Here's why.

Have you see the Barack Obama picture where he's painted as the Joker? The word "Socialism" is printed beneath the picture.

What is the point of that picture? What does it accomplish?

Nothing!

It's no different than the bumper sticker of Calvin pissing on a Ford logo. Or a Steelers logo. It does nothing but incite hatred and ignorance. It's an avatar for a group of fanatics who feel they must align with one side of the political spectrum. God forbid they try to stay centered, or think for themselves. Nope. If you believe in one ideal, you have to believe in all the others that go along with it. It's like ordering cable. You just want HBO? Too bad. You have to get two dozen other channels you don't care about and you have to pay for them too.

Heading into work today I saw a bumper sticker that read, "Independence Day: 1/20/2013".

It's the day that a Republican president would take office if they won the 2012 election. Maybe you remember the countless stickers saying the same thing about George W. Bush's last day in office. Both sides of the spectrum are guilty of the same hate-mongering. It's just the Republicans turn to spew their venom right now.

And unlike sports, where most athletes and fans can shake hands after a game before going their separate ways, in politics, there is no meeting in the middle. If you believe in something different than one group you're instantly labeled a communist, socialist, right-wing nutjob -- or my favorite -- un-American.

WTF is "un-American" anyway? What is "American" in the first place?

Listen to the talk shows. The hosts don't just preach to the choir -- they scream and yell at the choir. More flame-fanning. More hate-spewing. Where will it end? Nazi Germany? I don't think we're too far off to be honest.

Back to sports metaphor: The biggest problem with baseball today is that the Red Sox and Yankees are the two most popular teams, and the media has no problem whipping up the frenzied masses who follow these 2 teams. It's as if the media is telling sports fans to pick a side. Are you going to be a Red Sox fan or a Yankees fan? Because if you are a fan of another team, you're just wasting your time.

And it's the same thing with politics, except there are no other teams. You have to choose a side. Don't even think about staying in the middle.

That's why I try to stay out of it.

I'd much rather root for the "spoiled millionaires who cheat on their wives" than throw my support behind a spoiled millionaire who cheats on his wife while telling you not to cheat on your wife.

Muse @ Baltimore Arena

Am I a Muse fan? Kind of. I prefer the less theatrical Radiohead, of which Muse is endlessly compared. I think of Muse as a Radiohead-meets-Queen stadium band that is mostly good from a distance. Too much of the band at once wears me out. Singer Matt Bellamy's overtly political lyrics can grow tedious at times, and their operatic sound can get cumbersome. However in 2003, I was in love with the band's third album, Absolution, which satisfied my taste for computer space rock before I discovered the more subtle joys of Radiohead.

So when I saw that Muse would be coming to Baltimore's 1st Mariner Arena along with Silversun Pickups on March 3rd, I decided to see them in person. Their style of loud-guitar driven rock would surely sound great live, and Silversun Pickups aren't a shabby opening act either. Plus I wanted to drag my friend Tim to a live show, since his live music experiences usually come from cover bands. It was time to show him what the real thing sounds like.

Silversun Pickups did a breeze forty minute opening set, featuring their better known hits like "Substitution" and "Lazy Eye". They played the fluffer role for the crowd nicely.

But everyone was here to see Muse. And they didn't disappoint.

They kicked off with the song "Uprising" from their newest album, The Resistance, and then segued right into the title track from the album. The band then cherry-picked songs from their last 4 albums, ranging from "Plug-in Baby" from 2001's Origin of Symmetry, "Hysteria" and "Stockholm Syndrome" from 2003's Absolution and "Starlight", "Supermassive Black Hole" and "Knights of Cydonia" from 2006's Black Holes and Revelations.

The stage design was impressive, featuring three "skyscraper" screens that featured video and images throughout the show. There were three small stages in the middle of each skyscraper where a member of the band stood, and they were able to be raised and lowered throughout the show. The laser show was worth the price of admission alone. Best. Lasers. Ever. And another cool stylistic wrinkle were huge eyeball beach balls that were dropped into the crowd. When popped, confetti exploded from them.

The band sounded great, and the sound at the 1st Mariner Arena still compares nicely to other large venues in the area. It's nice to see Baltimore getting some better shows that would usually go to Washington, DC or Philadelphia instead.

I caught the light rail at Nursery Road instead of driving into the city at rush hour and paying $20 for parking in a garage that is notorious for long back-ups after shows let out. Like the arena, the light rail is routinely criticized for not serving the city to its potential, but last night I was very pleased with the entire experience.

Muse rocked the house, and I went home to watch the Maryland/Duke basketball game that I had recorded. Maryland won.

All in all it was the perfect evening.

82nd Academy Awards Preview

Believe it or not, the Academy Awards are just a couple of days away. Am I the only one finding it hard to stop writing 2009 on things?

The year seemed to zip by...but not from the amount of quality movies. Overall, I thought 2009 was a weak year for movies, and ironically, the Academy expanded their Best Picture field to 10 movies in a year where they would have been hard pressed to pick 5 movies that really deserved to be nominated.

I do like the decision to nominate 10 films, as it does give acclaim to more commercially successful movies that wouldn't have been nominated had the field still included 5. But, even though there are 10 best picture nominees, there are probably 7 or 8 films that don't stand a chance of winning, making the expansion a moot point.

And let's face it, the move to 10 nominees is about increasing the Oscar TV rating, which have been slumping over the last several years. The Academy is hoping that fans of more commercially successful films such as Avatar, The Blind Side and Up will tune in.

There still were some really good movies in 2009. And most of them were actually nominated for Best Picture. But what I found lacking in 2009 were the amount of standout performances. Only Christoph Waltz from Inglourious Basterds really jumps to mind when I think of great performances of the year. Maybe Mo'Nique from Precious gets in there too. But George Clooney was George Clooney again in Up in the Air. Did he really need to be nominated? Seeing Jeff Bridges nominated for Crazy Heart is cool, since the performance is very close to his performance as The Dude in The Big Lebowski, a role he wrongly wasn't nominated for. But Bridges can play those roles in his sleep by now. And oh yeah, Meryl Streep was nominated for like the 82nd time in a row. Big surprise there!

But enough rambling. Let's take a look at the important categories.

BEST PICTURE

What's nominated (picks in bold represent the movies nominated if the field was still five): Avatar, The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, Precious, A Serious Man, Up, and Up in the Air.
What should have been nominated: Star Trek lacked the political messages in District 9, but Trek was much more fun. Crazy Heart should have been nominated in place of The Blind Side which was basically an overly sentimental made for TV movie that happened to feature a solid performance by Sandra Bullock. And while the first 15 minutes of Up was on par with the best of any nominee, the second half of the film was your typical Disney goofiness. I would have liked to see (500) Days of Summer or Sugar in its spot.
What will win: Avatar won the Golden Globe and still might be the favorite based on its technical achievements, financial success and treehugging political message, but my money is on The Hurt Locker, which has been gaining steam in recent months thanks to the buzz surrounding director Kathryn Bigelow, who is only the third female director nominated for Best Director.
What should win: I enjoyed The Hurt Locker, but I absolutely loved Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds. His alternative take on WWII was a funny and suspenseful film that featured the most tense scene of 2009, and possibly, of all time (basement bar scene).

BEST DIRECTOR

Who's Nominated: Kathryn Bigelow, James Cameron, Lee Daniels, Jason Reitman, Quentin Tarantino.
Who Will Win: Kathryn Bigelow. I think the Academy will make a statement (and history) by giving the statue to a female director for the first time ever.
Who Should Win: James Cameron. He created the technology used in Avatar, from performance capture to the next generation 3-D. And while Best Director is not a technical award, Cameron created the world in Avatar, he didn't just hand off the special effects to someone else. His stamp is all over this film.

BEST ACTOR

Who's Nominated: Jeff Bridges, George Clooney, Colin Firth, Morgan Freeman, Jeremy Renner.
Who Will Win: Jeff Bridges with Renner the second horse in this race.
Who Should Win: Jeff Bridges. His performance gives Crazy Heart its...crazy heart. Yeah, I just said that.

BEST ACTRESS

Who's Nominated: Sandra Bullock, Helen Mirren, Carey Mulligan, Gabourey Sidibe, Maryl Streep.
Who Will Win: Sandra Bullock. It was a good performance by an actress who has been the same in pretty much ever role she's ever had and made a ton of money in 2009. She's the hot pick.
Who Should Win: Gabourey Sidibe. Her performance in Precious was raw, heartbreaking and uplifting all at once.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Who's Nominated: Matt Damon, Woody Harrelson, Christopher Plummer, Stanley Tucci, Christoph Waltz.
Who Will Win: Christoph Waltz. He was the one standout performance of the year.
Who Should Win: Christoph Waltz. He was the one standout performance of the year.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Who's Nominated: Penelope Cruz, Vera Farmiga, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Anna Kendrick, Mo'Nique.
Who Will Win: Mo'Nique. Her performance as a despicable inner city mother in Precious is good we can't allow ourselves to sympathize with her when her character finally sees the error of her ways.
Who Should Win: Mo'Nique.

So there you have it. Do you agree with my picks? Let me know in the comment section below.

They don't make 'em like this anymore

I've always been kind of fascinated with the Italian horror movies of the 1970's and 1980's but never really followed that up by actually watching them. After all, you can watch all of the films' famous gory bits on You Tube these days and the movies themselves are infamous for incoherent plots, bad acting, and even worse dubbing.

So why waste the time?

Anyway, a friend lent me his copy of Lucio Fulci's The House by the Cemetery the other day so I popped it in last night while fighting the urge to watch I Love You, Man for the twenty-third time this month. I really need to stop watching that movie.

The plot, if you can call it one, is simple. A family moves into a house near Boston so that the father can continue some research that was put on hold when his colleague mysteriously killed his mistress and then hung himself. But little do they know that a zombie doctor is living downstairs in the basement, murdering his victims so he can harvest their organs to stay alive.

And while THBTC commits all of the sins of Italian horror (incoherent plot, bad dubbing, etc), it still manages to be a good and creepy little movie. These Italian horror movies are known first for their gore, and THBTC doesn't disappoint in that regard. But perhaps the second best aspect of Italian horror films are their atmosphere, and THBTC nails the dreamy and creepy atmosphere that most modern horror movies have forgotten about.

I mean, there's a freaking tomb in the floor of the house! How freaking creepy and awesome is that? Also, the house is located right next to a cemetery (hence the title, duh) and horror movies can always use more cemeteries. Perhaps the film's best scene is when mother and son are searching the basement for proof that the child just saw the head of his dead babysitter roll down the stairs (yes, I just wrote that). As they are searching the basement, the killers' eyes pop out of the darkness. It's something you don't expect and while it doesn't cause you to jump out of your seat like the loud jumps that most horror movies employ these days, it does send shivers down your spine.

THBTC is a relic from an era when film makers wanted to genuinely scare you, not treat the movie as if its a roller coaster ride. And that's what I miss about these kinds of horror movies.

But despite as much as THBTC gets right, it gets as much wrong. I mean really, how can the filmmakers ignore such blatant inconsistencies?

Take for instance the family's babysitter, cleaning up the blood from the previous night's murder. The mother notices the sitter cleaning the blood and just asks "what are you doing?" I don't know about you, but if I woke up to find a massive blood smear on my floor, leading to the basement, I'd call the freaking cops! After that scene, I started thinking that maybe the sitter was a protector of the zombie doc, but then she gets killed. There goes that theory!

The film's ending is also a mind-F of the worst kind. We're lead to believe different things throughout the film (is the little girl real?) but at the end, nothing is explained or made clearer. A quote at the end of the movie, attributed to poet Henry James, is actually Fulci's, and does nothing but make the proceedings even more confusing.

But let's be real. We don't watch these movies for the seamless film making. THBTC is basically a prono. You can watch the best parts on line. After all, why sit through all the exposition when all we want to see is people fucking?

So do I recommend THBTC? Not exactly. If you find yourself bored by today's horror movies and miss the atmospheric creepers from the past, check it out.

But I would recommend Ti West's The House of the Devil to a fan of film in general, as it's just a great movie, and not just something for fans of cult movies.

Beach House

Beach House's third album, Teen Dream, received a 9 out of 10 rating from Pitchfork.

Hailing from Baltimore, I've found it difficult to get into the city's musical offerings. Occasionally my musical tastes mesh up with quasi-Baltimore act Animal Collective, but most times I shrug off their nauseating repetitiveness which is basically Caucasian vegan Baltimore club music, circa 1994, when DJ Boobie was still making mix-tapes.

That is until Beach House arrived on the scene. Their self-titled 2006 debut caught my ear when I heard "Master of None" on Sirius radio. However, their first two albums were downtrodden and difficult to sit through in their entirety. Instead, I opted to be a fan of the band in small doses. "Yeah, Beach House, they're from Baltimore. I like a couple of their songs, and I want to like them, but..."

Then came Teen Dream, officially released last Tuesday, despite having been leaked last November. The wait was worth it. Teen Dream is by far the band's best album to date.

Beach House, made up of French-born Victoria Legrand and Bmore native, Alex Scally, push their core minimalist sound to the limit in Teen Dream, resulting in an album of more movement and layers. The band previously consisted of Legrand on vocals, Scally on guitar, and a drum machine rivaling the cheapness of the one that Terrance Howard's character found in Hustle & Flow. Now, there is a drummer (I think, or they bought a better sounding drum machine) and organ-sounding keyboards at the band's disposal. They make great use of the new wrinkles, but this is still very much a Beach House record.

Thematically, Teen Dream evokes the 80's as seen by a depressed teenager who watches too many John Hughes movies. I mean, come on...it's dream-pop at its best. But I've never experienced so much beautiful sadness on an album. In that regard, Beach House isn't for everyone. Despite it's revamped sound, this is still a slow album, one that takes it's time getting to where it wants to go, and even in some cases, still takes too long getting there.

And in a year that looks to be filled with new albums from some of my favorite bands (The Walkmen, Arcade Fire, The National, Stars, Radiohead, etc.), it's ironic that an album that I wasn't expecting comes out of nowhere and hit me so hard.

Teen Dream is going to be tough to wake up from.

You can check out their album at lala.com here.