SPRING BREAK, Complete With Snow In North Mississippi

Because of the Spring Break holiday, I won't be writing for a week or so. I'll be in Charleston, SC soaking up the 60-degree rays. Here's a preview of whats coming when I get back:

- Favorite Courtroom Scenes On Film

- Analysis of the All-American Football League Teams

- Reviews of Hot Rod, No Country For Old Men, and Gone, Baby, Gone

Thats just a taste of the excitement coming up. Stay tuned.

.:Anderson

"There Will Be Blood"

Daniel Plainview is an oil man; on that you will agree. He is joined by his son and partner, H.W. Plainview. Daniel Plainview is also a driven, competitive, murderous man bent on his singular success at any cost. It is this drive that both motivates and haunts Plainview, and this film is his story, from beginning to end, and his successes and failures across those years.

Before I get too far into the review, let me say that I expected to leave saying that There Will Be Blood is my new favorite movie of all time. I didn't. There have been countless reviews of the movie lauding it as "an achievement in greatness of the highest order". This won't be one of them. What I will say was that TWBB is a remarkable feat by an incredible director, headed by one of the greatest performances by an actor that I have ever seen. Even through all that, I still left the theater feeling like it was less of a complete movie than other highly-reviewed movies of the same Oscar season (No Country For Old Men, namely). It would be unfair to compare TWBB to normal movies. It is not a normal movie. TWBB deserves its place among great films, but it wouldn't top those lists. It was a fantastic film, don't get me wrong, but one that deserves its fair share of criticism just the same.

The movie was, however, a great accomplishment in filmmaking for P.T. Anderson. I have been a PTA fan since Magnolia (one of my favorite films or all time), and have enjoyed everything he's made. PTA is a skilled director with an eye for amazingly picturesque scenes. Every second of this film could be frozen and preserved as a picture, it was that stunningly beautiful. The shots are obviously considered carefully and PTA hits a homerun with his artistic vision. It is a tragedy that he was overlooked for the Best Director Oscar this year, even if I didn't think the film was Best Picture. He deserved it.

Speaking of deserving an Oscar, Daniel Day Lewis won the Oscar for Best Actor as soon as the film ended. I can't imagine a performance more perfectly executed, and no other actor stood a chance this year. Truly an amazing performance, DDL didn't have me completely convinced until the last scene of the film. He was good up to that point, but he was great after it. Take my word for it: his depiction of Daniel Plainview is worth the price of admission a few times over.

The movie is, essentially, Citizen Kane. Instead of newspapers, we have oil. But the basic story arc is the same: rise from nothing, succeed at all costs, fortune brings downfall. The difference between TWBB and No Country For Old Men was the most basic of differences: one (TWBB) is based on characters and the other is story-driven. TWBB does not have a particularly engrossing story, but the development and interaction between the characters is what drives the film. In NCFOM, the pursuit and the resolution of the story create excitement. It all depends on what you prefer in a film, but both employ their different strategies brilliantly.

The unmentioned hero for this movie is Jonny Greenwood from Radiohead, who organized and composed all the music for the film. The music makes the movie, plain and simple. It fits perfectly and complements every scene. PTA puts music even places where other films would be silent, and the effect is constant suspense. The movie balances noise and silence perfectly (the first 20 minutes have no dialogue) and the music composer must be one of the first to be congratulated.

After all that, I liked the movie. I didn't love the movie, but I will purchase it when it is released. It is definitely good enough to travel to the theater to see, and worth seeing a few times. Bottom line: whether you like TWBB more than any movie ever made or not, its a great film from an immensely talented director that deserves the positive praise it has received.

ROTTEN TOMATOES GRADE: 91% critics, 83% viewers

ANDERSON ELLIS GRADE: A

Mavs On TV Tonight

The Mavs play the Rockets tonight, but Dirk Nowitzki won't be playing, thanks to his AWESOME takedown of Andrei Kirilenko the other night. In case you missed it:



I mean, I don't know what I like more than watching two big Europeans beating the hell out of each other. I haven't been this excited since Ruslan Chagaev and Nikolay Valuev beat the fuck out of each other.



Note: I don't speak Russian, so I have no idea what's going on in this post. I actually don't watch boxing too much, I just wanted to post the most ridiculous video of big white dudes, and boxing seemed appropriate.

Worst NBA Trade of 2008?

For sure, the days (and hours) leading up to the February NBA trade deadline were exciting, especially to nerds like me who enjoy trades and front office stuff as much (or more, sometimes) than the actual games. Just about every team in contention in the West and a few in the East made moves to shore up their rosters before the year-end push. Who won and who lost this flurry of trading? Lets take a look, two weeks after the fact.

SAN ANTONIO
Trade: SA gets Kurt Thomas from Seattle for Francisco Elson, Brent Barry and 2009 first round pick

Result: San Antonio is doing what they always do: wait until everyone thinks they are out of it and then come from nowhere to win everything. They did it last year and they're doing it again. While everyone is distracted with the LA's and Jason Kidd trades, the Spurs just keep cranking out wins. I don't know if Kurt Thomas will be the reason, but San Antonio will do just fine going into the playoffs.

On The Other Side: Seattle has Kevin Durant. I actually didn't know they had any other players. I thought the team folded up after Gary Payton left and then started back this year. My bad.

PHOENIX
Trade: PHX gets Shaquille O'Neal from Miami for Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks

Result: Phoenix has just gone down the crapper, haven't they? You'd think bringing Shaq to a team would help them out, especially when Marion seems to have been poison to the Suns chemistry, but you'd be wrong. Since the trade, Phoenix is 6-6 and desperately trying to miss the playoffs. I think someone convinced Phoenix management that Shaq would intimidate other teams into respecting the Suns down low, but instead they just push his old ass around. He's only good for like 20 minutes a game, and Marion's defense is sorely missed. I'd say Phoenix is the loser of the trades this year.

On The Other Side: Miami is just hurting, period. Marion couldn't help too much or hurt too much either. He's a good player and will be around longer than Shaq would. As long as the Heat can keep Wade in Miami, they'll be fine from this trade. If they can't, then the countdown begins until Marion demands a trade from South Beach.

ATLANTA
Trade: ATL gets Mike Bibby from Sacramento for Anthony Johnson, Tyronn Lue, Shelden Williams, Lorenzen Wright and a 2008 second round draft

Result: Who cares? Atlanta isn't in the race, and neither is Sacramento, so this trade was pretty much worthless. However, it is always nice to see a team abandon their first round draft picks so early (Sheldon Williams), especially when the loser in question is from Duke. Priceless.

On The Other Side: It's Sacramento. I have no idea.

DALLAS
Trade: DAL gets Jason Kidd, Malik Allen, and Antoine Wright from New Jersey for Devin Harris, DeSagana Diop, Trenton Hassell, Moe Ager, Keith Van Horn, a pair of draft picks and cash

Result: Still uncertain. Some Mavs fans think it was brilliant, and some are still mourning the loss of Devin Harris. The Mavs are 4-4 since the trade, but that has to be looked at a little more closely. The 4 teams they beat were MEM, MIN, CHI, and SAC (not the strongest) and the teams they lost to were NO, SA, LAL, and UTA (some of the strongest). The question is: would Dallas have won any of the games the lost without Jason Kidd? In some instances, he kept them in the game. My opinion is that the Jason Kidd trade will end up being a good thing for Mavs fans, but it might not be enough to bring the ring they all want. And that's not Kidd's fault, but simply a result of the West this year. Too strong.

On The Other Side: NJ is happy with Harris. The kid scored a ton of points his first game there. He's not really a point guard, but Vince Carter isn't really either, so they'll confuse each other and score 150 points per game for years to come.

HOUSTON
Trade: Houston gets Gerald Green from Minnesota for Kirk Snyder, a 2010 second-round pick and cash

Results: Doesn't matter. Green won't play for Houston. Everyone thought Houston might be finished when Yao went down, but they've won like 20 games straight without him, so everyone might be wrong. I'd have serious doubts in a coach who messed with the chemistry Houston has going on right now. He won a slam dunk contest, though, so it can only be good to have him coming off the bench, right?

On The Other Side: I haven't paid attention to Minnesota since the KG trade. They play Rashad McCants, my least favorite basketball player ever. I won't even watch their games. So I don't know.

LA LAKERS
Trade: LA gets Pau Gasol from Memphis for Kwame Brown, Javaris Crittenton, Aaron McKie, the draft rights to Marc Gasol, and first round picks in 2008 and 2010

Result: LA would seem to be the favorite among many in the press to win the West now. Kobe just needed a big man to keep him happy, and a hurt Andrew Bynum wasn't cutting it. Now, if Bynum comes back relatively healthy, they really could be a force in the West come May.

On The Other Side: I guess Memphis was happy with the trade, but at this point, who really knows? Rudy Gay is their "franchise player" whenever he decides to show up, and they are still trying to trade Mike Miller. Any team that boasts Hakeem Warrick as one of their top 3 players is in serious trouble.

CLEVELAND-CHICAGO
Trade: CHI gets Drew Gooden, Larry Hughes, Shannon Brown and Cedric Simmons from Cleveland for Joe Smith, Ben Wallace and Chicago’s 2009 regular second round pick. Seattle also got someone, but whatever.

Result: This trade is pretty balanced. I've never been a Ben Wallace fan, but he'll help Lebron in Cleveland, and Gooden and Hughes will help Gordon, Heinrich, and Deng in Chicago. I don't think either of these teams particularly hurt or helped their chances to win it all; all the major pieces (Lebron, Deng) stayed in place, and they could fluctuate a little up or down, but this wasn't really a major trade to watch, regardless of how many players moved.

On The Other Side: Already did it. Read above, moron.

BOSTON
Trade: Sam Cassell bought out by Milwaukee and sign with Celtics

Result: Unknown. This isn't really a trade, but it affects one of the top teams in the NBA, so I included it. Cassell is a true point, which Boston doesn't have, but they've brought Rajon Rondo a loooooong way this season. I could see this hurting Rondo's development by showing a lack of confidence in the young guard. Cassell's got like 1 year left and Rondo is the future; do they really want to basically tell him that they don't think he can take them all the way? He might not like that too much.

On The Other Side: No other side. Milwaukee just blows.

Kyle Korver Is Scared Of... Rashad McCants?

WHY?

Anderson Rants: Ole Miss Crosswalks

Anyone who has driven on Ole Miss's campus around the time classes let out knows that Ole Miss has a serious pedestrian problem. The problem really stems from the legislature, who told Mississippians that pedestrians have the right-of-way at crosswalks without lights, ensuring that a flood of students is sure to walk carelessly into the street at every opportunity available.

But MY problem is the kids who decide they are too good for the crosswalks and walk around in the street like its a fucking public park. Those kids are the ones that get my goat. I want to grab them around the neck and say "you get to cross at the damn crosswalk whenever you please! Is that not enough?" And if I could verbalize exclamation points, there would be about 11 after those statements. Maybe 12.

My proposal? Honking at everyone who crosses at an undesignated place. I'll honk even if they are not impeding my progress. They need to know that it is not appreciated that they chose that spot to cross, regardless of the danger or inconvenience posed. My honking will alert them that they have committed an "Anderson Foul", and perhaps they will remedy their behavior next time. If I have to endure a few middle fingers in the process, that is just a risk I will have to take.

So next time you're crossing the street between crosswalks and a crazy person in a gray Camry starts honking like an idiot at you, you'll know its me. And you'll know that next time, I just might swerve to hit you.

Hillary Clinton Just Won't Go Away

Despite her 11 state losing streak (among mostly inconsequential states), Hillary Clinton showed up big on Super Tuesday II, taking home the prize in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island. Obama took Vermont, but did anyone really think he wouldn't? The seventeen people who vote in that state basically pick things based on what Ben & Jerry do, and Obama has a flavor, so naturally...

Still, the race between the two is a close one, with Barack inching a tiny lead (<200 delegates). The Clinton camp has thrown our the idea of a shared ticket, too, though that idea is a bad one for Obama. Clinton would have to be the first to serve as President, because would anyone think of electing Vice-President Hillary after 8 years of hearing her? No way.

But the big question is: With the Republicans ready to go with a candidate, will the Democrats hurt themselves for the general election by beating up on each other in the primaries? This morning, John McCain and the 'Pubs get to start working on how to win the Big Dance, and Hillary and Barack are still bitching over who gets to step up to the plate. In my opinion, the more the two hurt each other now, the more their squabbling will come back to bite them in November.

But that's just me.

Please Welcome Your 2008 Republican Presidential Candidate

March 4 Is The Next Big Day -- And Its Here!

So today is the big day. Today we find out if John McCain is a closer and if Hillary Clinton completely rat-fucked her bid when she took over her campaign. Texas and Ohio could strike death knells with both Huckabee and Clinton today. Let's keep our fingers crossed that both of those outcomes happen.

Check out CNN.com's "Guide to March 4" to clarify whats going on today, but here are the Cliff's Notes:

(1) Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas and Vermont hold primaries today
(2) 370 Democratic and 256 Republican delegates are at stake
(3) Obama has 1,369 delegates (pledged: 1,184 superdelegates: 185) and Clinton has 1,267 delegates (pledged: 1,031, superdelegates: 236)
(4) McCain has 1,033 total delegates (pledged: 967, unpledged RNC: 66) and wins in Texas and Ohio would put him over the required number to win the nomination

The website then breaks down the four states individually. Check it out.

I HATE BEING RIGHT

As I said on February 28, Brett Favre is calling it quits this year.
The game just won't be quite the same without him.
Damn you, Randy Moss, for not going to Green Bay and keeping the magic alive.
Oh well. At the risk of getting my man-card revoked for a while, I'll miss you, Brett.

Fox Sports
ESPN.com
Sports Illustrated
CBS Sportsline

Recent CD Purchase

For the first time since somewhere around my junior year of high school ('bout 8 years ago), I bought a new CD, Ingrid Michaelson's Girls and Boys. I bought it for my girlfriend, but we listened to some of it tonight, and it's pretty solid. Chill, melodious, folksy, piano singer/songwriter. Heard that Old Navy commercial about "share my sweater"? That's her. Most of the songs are the same, but they're pretty good. Check out the song "Breakable" here on the blog and her website to hear more. Enjoy.

A Perfectly Good Morning, Ruined

I spent the morning listening to oral arguments in front of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and I am, of course, kidding about the title of the post. It was very interesting and has made me appreciate the biting wit of Jolly, the appropriately named sitting judge.

I got there early to get a good seat, as the law school told me via email that the overflow seating would be in Moot Courtroom II. I make it a point not to go into Moot Courtroom II, as it is reserved for second-rate courtroom experiences. At the risk of my only 3 readers thinking that I might started actually writing about law stuff (not gonna happen), here are the four cases I saw:

United States v. Seymore
Can any part of a financial account jointly held by a married couple can be exempt from a writ of garnishment when restitution has been awarded in a criminal case?

Ugh. Financial stuff. It makes my eyes roll in the back of my head. But the arguments presented were fairly interesting. The lower court awarded half of the account (in this case, it was stocks) to the wife of the criminal, and the government appealed to the Fifth arguing that the lower court judge abused his discretion. The defendant (Seymore) made a policy argument which was pretty convincing, saying that in order to protect her money, the woman would have had to divorce the criminal, and that the court shouldn't be willing to make divorce the only safe way to preserve financial assets. The lower court bought it, and basically said that there is equitable entitlement to a jointly-owned account even without a legal ownership right.

Prediction for the Fifth: AFFIRM. I think the Judges will affirm this one. I think the policy argument was strong enough against the Government's attempt to prove the absence of ownership interests to compel them to affirm. The only thing they might get stuck on would be the precedent of establishing an entitlement right without law to back it up. Still, its the fair thing to do, and law is all about fairness, right?

Retractable Technologies, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories
Can an arbitration agreement be interpreted as mandatory on both parties if the contractual language in the arbitration clause says "may institute arbitration" instead of "shall" or "must"?

The best part about this case was that it was a completely semantic argument. The lower court found that the contract's "may" was ambiguous, allowing them to review the negotiations for clarification under the Parol Evidence Rule (Remember 1L year? Contract law... niiice.) The lower court saw that both parties had agreed that the "may" would imply "may", not "must", and the lower court held that the arbitration was not binding. Here, Abbott Labs argues that the "may" is not ambiguous at all and that parol evidence cannot be looked at. Instead, the court must find that the "may" means "must" under pseudo-similar caselaw from 1960.

The best part was that my boy Jolly got into it with the appellant, saying that he was trying to make "may" mean "shall" and eliminate "may" from the English language altogether. Hilarious, dog.

Prediction for the Fifth: AFFIRM. The sentiment from the panel was obvious from the questions. The judges had a hard time stomaching the argument coming from the appellant saying that there was no ambiguity. Basically, parol evidence clearly shows that the parties wanted one thing, and the appellant tried to argue that they wanted something else and that the court couldn't look at the other evidence to prove it either way. It didn't fly.

Moore v. Lightfoot, Guyton
Can a correctional officer or committee member be held legally/financially responsible for injuries sustained to an inmate due to a personal decision/decision of committee not to move inmate after a move request?

In this case, a convicted sex offender complained to an officer that his life was threatened by three other inmates and requested a transfer to another wing of the prison. The officer headed a committee to review the request, and recommended a move to another committee, which then chose to move one of the threatening inmates rather than the threatened. The plaintiff inmate was returned to general population, where he was eventually injured in a fight with one of the remaining reported inmates. Plaintiff argued that the failure of the defendants to move him after his request directly resulted in his injuries.

The lower court found that there was no immunity for the officer and held both the committee member and the officer responsible. The defendants appealed.

At first, I thought the court would eat up the qualified immunity argument. Can an officer really be held responsible for a decision his committee makes? A decision that they are supposed to make? But when the appellee started talking, it became very apparent that the officer, et al., knew the danger to the man and threw him back into general population anyway. Its hard to say that there is no responsibility for someone sworn to protect the incarcerated if you feel as though they didn't do their job reasonably.

Prediction for the Fifth: AFFIRM. The last thing said by Judge Benivides was something to the effect of "they knew the danger, they knew what would happen, and they put him back anyway? How could they not be responsible?" If you didn't think it was over before, at that point, you knew.

Southwest Bell Telephone Co. v. City of Houston, TX
Is a local ordinance that forces a telecom company to move off public land without reimbursement for manditorily shared property by competing companies discriminatory or anti-competition?

Sorry, I know that question is a convoluted one, but the case made about that much sense to me. I don't like contract stuff, and I don't like government and legislation, so I pretty much glossed over for this one. But from what I gather, Bell used public land for wires and such, and Texas law requires them to share whatever they put on public land with their competitors. But a local Houston law is forcing them to move, and the relocation costs cannot be transferred to the companies that are sharing their facilities because the contracts for that usage are already in place. So Bell is arguing that the ordinance singles out dominant companies (discrimination) and makes it hard for them to compete in the local market (anti-competition). Thats about all I can do for you; I pretty much zoned out for all the arguments and stuff. It was really boring.

I know that the lower court found for Texas and basically said that the ordinance was perfectly fine. They also dropped all the state issues and left a very narrow scope of issues for the court to look at.

Prediction for the Fifth: AFFIRM. The problem that Bell has is that most of their arguments are for the state courts, not the federal court. Most of their complaints stem from the ability of the local government to impede a contract and supercede state law. Judges Benivides and Barksdale seemed particularly unwilling to accept this case as a federal one, so it'll probably get affirmed just because the judges don't wanna deal with it coming back up again.

So that's it. That was WAAAY more information than you wanted, but I spent 3 hours in the courtroom listening to it, so you can read it for a few minutes. Geez, stop being so selfish for once. And I'm not going tomorrow so you're off the hook, but I might go Wednesday, so get the excitement train started up.

Justice -- Live And In Person!

This week, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is convening at Ole Miss Law. Come see the three-judge panel hand down decisions on cases you never thought you'd sit quietly to see decided. It will be ridiculously boring, and I can't wait!!

9 AM Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday in Moot I at the Law School.

Be there.

Matt Drudge Really Is A Douchebag

Apparently, for 10 weeks Prince Harry had been deployed on the front lines of Afghanistan. The Royal Family brokered a deal with the British news outlets to keep the information under raps for fear that the enemy would target the Prince's unit simply to try and harm him particularly. News outlets new this information and sat on it for ten weeks. Why? Because there was no reason for anyone to know, and its release would inevitably bring increased danger to an already perilous group of British soldiers and to the Prince. And now Harry is home in Britain, yanked from Afghanistan to the envy of thousands of international soldiers, because Matt Drudge posted the news on his site.

I am a fan of The Drudge Report. I even have a link to his site on this very blog. I appreciate that Matt is the first to post news that other outlets pass on, and the first to put something controversial on his top line. I also like that he kills both Conservatives and Liberals, even though his site shows an obvious slant one way. But I don't like this move. There was no reason to post this news on the site other than to simply be the only person doing it. I am not a more informed person because I now know that Prince Harry was on the front lines. It is information for information;s sake, simply published to get publicity for his own site. And for someone who has built his (sketchy) reputation on posting news that people "need" to know, he missed the boat on this one.

Truth From Explosm.Net