I WROTE THIS POST IN 20 MINUTES...SEE IF YOU CAN TELL

The Hangover Part II

My Grade: C-

This is an unnecessary movie. Some of my friends (Dave, I'm calling you out) would argue the FIRST Hangover is also unnecessary. I disagree. These movies are basically gross-out sitcoms for people who appreciate a dark sense of humor and recognize that in the world today, loutish, infantile men have become the norm instead of the exception. Better to make fun of them than to try to make sense of them.

All that being said, The Hangover Part II really is unnecessary. It is not nearly as funny as the first one. Moving the movie to Thailand doesn't make it more exotic...it feels vaguely exploitative. Repeating the same hijinks and moving them to a new location isn't giving the audience more of what it wants....it is being lazy. Frankly, all of the funniest scenes in this movie felt like either a) Zach Galifinakis/"Alan" improvisations or b) throw away moments. (Admittedly, I laughed pretty hard at those moments, but they came separated by long moments of queasy silence.) I really hope they don't make another one, but if they do, I might see it if they make Galifinakis the prospective groom and put him front and center. The prospect of Alan getting married might almost be worth dragging one's carcass to see them rehash this premise once again. Almost.

The NBA Finals

Ain't karma a bitch, LeBron? I'm no Mavericks fan (far from it), but seeing the way the series played out couldn't have been more satisfying given the entitled, self-satisfied way the overrated LeBron James has handled himself practically since Day One in the League.

The other thought about The Finals--okay, I didn't watch it wire-to-wire, but NBA basketball is a pretty lame product these days if these really are the two best teams. Maybe a lockout will do the NBA good? It better...since it is inevitable anyway.

The Colorado Rockies

They are pretenders and sellers, not winners and buyers. After 65 games, you really are what your record says you are. And that saddens me, because I really like a lot of the players and they do try hard. They're just not very good. They have four guys who are All-Stars (or who should be All-Stars: Tulo, CarGo, Helton and Jhoulys Chacin) and a bunch of journeymen or not-quite-there prospects. And if anyone can figure out Ian Stewart, who was supposed to be the next Graig Nettles or Scott Rolen at third base, please give them a Ph.D. and have them call GM Dan O'Dowd.

The Rockies will make their usual thrilling late summer run, but they will have more losing streaks than winning streaks and unless Ubaldo Jimenez remembers how to pitch at home, the Rockies will finish 82-80 (give or take three games either way) and the ever penurious Monfort Brothers will be moving a lot of "supporting cast" to try and rebuild around CarGo and Tulo. It will be interesting to see if anyone has the patience to sit through it again.

The Best Shows on Television

Next week, around the time the Emmy nominations are announced, I'll do my annual list of what I think the best shows and performers on television really are. I can say that last week I finally watched the first few episodes of BREAKING BAD (2008) on DVD, which had been a show that eluded me, and I think that it might have the greatest pilot episode I've ever seen. If I taught screenwriting, I might use it as an example of how to take an outlandish premise with potentially unlikeable or unbelievable characters and make it riveting and believable. I have a feeling the rest of the series doesn't quite hold up (even fans of the show tell me it can be overly reliant on the brilliant Bryan Cranston in the lead role), but kudoes to Vince Gilligan doing such a great job setting the whole thing up. I'm jealous, haha!

My time is up. Thanks for the vine. And remember that friends don't let their monkey smoke or do drugs.

Peace...

MAYOR HANCOCK, WE HARDLY KNEW YE...

So...Denver elected a new mayor this week. Do you miss John Hickenlooper yet? Any chance he can do double-duty?

I'm not going to throw Mayor-elect Michael Hancock under the bus until the full story is revealed (if it ever gets revealed). But as we learned with the Anthony Weiner case, if a story looks bad, smells bad and on the surface doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, then there's probably something pretty unseemly going on. Sometimes it's not raining--you really are just getting pissed on.

When Hancock says, "There are very good reasons why my phone number would be [on the call list of a prostitution service] that I'm not prepared to go into now," you do wonder what exactly those very good reasons would be. I am 100% sure that if someone pulled up my cell phone records, there wouldn't be any escort services showing up on the list of either outgoing or incoming calls. Unless my phone number got cloned somehow, but then my bill would be a lot higher than it is and I would investigate it. Mayor-elect Hancock isn't even saying this. If I understand him correctly, he's not denying that he called these numbers, but he is saying he was framed. He won't allow The Denver Post and 9News full access to the phone records, but he maintains (for now) that he didn't hire prostitutes from this service between 2004 and 2006.

Kind of sounds like, "I did not have sexual relations with this woman." Until he did, if you know what I mean? I guess sometimes, Sex Happens.

Full disclosure: I voted for Hancock twice, both in the initial election and the runoff. I also seriously considered James Mejia, Chris Romer and Doug Linkhart. Ultimately, I probably considered Romer the least, because it felt too much like he was trying to ride into the mayor's office on his Daddy's coattails, because he was the only candidate in the campaign to consistently go negative and because he didn't seem to have very well thought out answers to some of the questions about his vision for the city that some of the other candidates had. Would he have been a bad mayor? Probably not.

I voted for Hancock not because he is a fellow African-American, but because a) I liked his personal story and b) I preferred somebody who knew the inner workings fo Denver's city government first hand, which Hancock certainly would, based on being the City Council president. Would Michael Hancock be a bad mayor if he actually gets to serve? I question his judgement and his trustworthiness, of course, but since being honest and being judicious with where you put your penis doesn't seem to disqualify any men from elected office, it also is probably not an indicator of how effective Hancock could be at managing the city's machinery.

Does anyone else think we would have fewer controversies like this if we had more women in elected office? I mean, I think Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann are dangerous idiots, but I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have to worry about the unnecessary distraction of a sex scandal with either one of them in office. The possession of both power and a penis seems to be an irresistable and damaging combination for too many men. This is nothing new. Pharaohs, Roman emperors, kings, popes, presidents, congressmen, MPs, mayors, councilmen--all have a history of mingling political leadership roles and sexual profligacy from the dawn of time. It is not likely to change any time soon either. The entire world is one big frat house.

Here's what I'd like to see happen: I would like to see Hancock and his team stop dragging their feet and hemming and hawing and allow access to the phone records. I would like Hancock to come out and tell the truth, or as much truth as he can keeping mindful that the people of Denver don't need to know every detail, but that we do deserve to know if he has done any wrongdoing. Don't try to hide behind the bromide of "for the good of my family" or "the media is dragging my family through the mud", because that obviously wasn't part of the thought process if and when Hancock solicited prostitutes. Then--and this is the tough part--if he did pay prostitutes for sex and then tried to cover it up he needs to resign and there needs to be yet another mayoral election. This time, if Romer runs again, I may even vote for him. (Unless it was his team that was responsible for leaking Hancock's connection to the brothel. Which seems highly possible.)

What are the odds it will all actually play out this way? Don't hold your breath.

Peace...

(Here is the link to the most recent Denver Post story about Hancock and his alleged ties to the "Denver Players Club": http://www.denverpost.com/ci_18252064

DISCLAIMER: Also, this is an opinion posted on a personal blog. Despite my [admittedly tangential] ties to 9News, I am in no way connected to any part of the investigation and reportage of this story and my views DO NOT reflect those of 9News, Gannett, The Denver Post or anyone else connected to any of these organizations.)