Search the Community
Showing results for tags '1984'.
Found 19 results
-
I ventured into Eden Center and promised myself to try a couple of small places inside the Eden Center. Hai Ky Mi Gia specializes in soup noodle. You get a choice of toppings (shrimp, mixed seafood, roast duck, roast quail, or pork), shrimp cracker, Chinese chives, tiny bits of rendered pork fat, and lettuce over yellow noodle or rice noodle, with the soup either laddle on top of the noodles or served on the side. The usual condiments of bean sprouts, hot sauce, and lime are available on the side. The result is a bowl of delicious warm Vietnamese Ramen that costs around $7.50. Nha Trang specialized in Nem Nuong Nihn Hoa ($7 for 4 rolls), these are summer rolls with lettuce, mint, grilled pork sausage, and crispy fried wonton wrapper served with a strange sauce that I can't decipher (bits of garlic, pork, and peanut in a sweet sauce).
-
This is so much better than the second-best film-streaming service I've discovered that it stands alone on the podium. Nobody knows about it; I watch it nearly every evening. It is far-and-away the greatest resource for film lovers ever assembled in one place. It costs $10.99/month or $99.99/year, and is worth five-times that much for the right viewer. Yes, I said that - does anyone else agree?-
- 1
-
-
- New York
- New York City
- (and 5 more)
-
I think after yesterday's performance, Mad Max merits his own thread. "Max Scherzer Flirts with Perfection, Striking Out 16 Along the Way" on nytimes.com "Max Scherzer Pitched One of the All-Time Games Today" by Rohan Nadkarni on deadspin.com "Max Scherzer Allows Hit to Carlos Gomez in 7th to Loser Perfect Game" on espn.go.com
- 36 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Missouri
- Chesterfield
- (and 6 more)
-
The points per game say it all: 2003-2004: 21.0 2004-2005: 20.8 2005-2006: 26.9 2006-2007: 28.5 2007-2008: 25.7 2008-2009: 22.8 2009-2010: 28.2 2010-2011: 25.6 2011-2012: 22.6 2012-2013: 28.7 2013-2014: 27.4 2014-2015: 24.2 2015-2016: 21.4
-
The first time I saw LeBron James play was on the nationally televised high school game against Oak Hill Academy. Before the game, then-announcer Bill Walton came right out and said that James was 'the best high school player he had ever seen.' In that game, James scored 31, with 13 rebounds and 6 assists; yet, only went 12-25 from the field. There were moments of greatness, but the incredible pressure of national TV had clearly compromised his performance. No longer. "History! LeBron Nets 61, Heat Top Bobcats, 124-107" by Tim Reynolds on abcnews.com In a career-high scoring effort, James shot 22-33 from the field, including his first *eight* 3-point attempts. He scored 25 points in the 3rd quarter alone. James makes greatness look easy - he dominates without looking like he's dominating. Who do you go with right now, James or Durant? It's so nice having both to see, to witness. Career stats
-
This may sound ridiculous, given that he's 16-years older than I am, but Jim Palmer was actually somewhat *after* my time as a baseball fanatic (at ages 7-12, I knew more about baseball than I know now, and I was something of a prodigy) - Palmer really didn't hit his stride until halfway through "my prime." I had always thought that he was something of a prima donna, but after watching the video I'm going to present to you, I think I was wrong - he had a very difficult childhood, having been adopted at birth, having lost his beloved adoptive father, Mo Wiesen, at age 9, and having gone from being named Jim Wiesen to Jim Palmer when his beloved mother, Polly Wiesen, married actor Max Palmer in 1956 - this child had three fathers by the time he was eleven! And he had legitimate, career-threatening injury problems from 1967 through 1969 - I always thought he was just a self-pampering person, but I was dead wrong - if you watch this video, you'll see just how much he loved his three parents, both adoptive-, and step-; he never knew his biological parents, but he isn't affected by that in the video (titled, "Jim Palmer - The Making of a Hall of Famer,," and narrated by legendary Orioles broadcaster, Chuck Thompson). He was an All-State athlete in three sports, and yes, he is somewhat cocky, and maybe even a bit "self-aware" when it comes to his athletic talent (and his looks don't exactly hurt), but given the gifts he had, he comes across, primarily, as a loving, devoted son to me - I never knew! In Game 2 of the 1966 World Series, Jim Palmer pitched a four-hit shutout against Sandy Koufax, in what was to be Koufax's final game ever. In the process, the 20-year-old Palmer became the youngest person ever to pitch a shutout in a World Series game - a record which stands to this very day. On Aug 13, 1969, a day after I turned 8-years old, Palmer pitched his only no-hitter: an "ugly" game, as he puts it, with 11 strikeouts and *9* walks! But it was good enough for a no-no against the expansion Kansas City Royals (one of four expansion teams in 1969, the very first year of the League Championship Series (the Royals would exact their revenge in the 2014 ALCS)). Palmer is also the only pitcher ever to win a World Series game in three different decades, and he did it the hard way - beginning in 1966, and ending in 1983. I'm so glad I watched this video - I always respected Palmer; now, I really, really like him as well.
-
This guy is from another world - I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone use the court - not side-to-side, but back-to-front - more effectively, and I'm certain I've never seen anything like Dustin Brown's jumping two-handed backhanded robo-kill shot.
-
I saw the movie, and it was one of the worst films I've ever seen - In this interview with Charlie Rose, David Foster Wallace said the editors butchered the film to the point where it was incoherent.
-
My brief, initial impressions of replacing Stuart with Noah: risky, but potentially brilliant. Risky, because the American audience - though it *thinks* it was hungering for intelligent, educated, well-informed, political satire, was possibly hungering merely for intelligent, educated, well-informed, political satire from an *American point-of-view*, and Noah's much-more-global perspective might be a little *too* educated for the American mass viewership. I'm pretty sure it's what *I* want (Hell, take Jon Stewart, and throw several languages and ethnicities into the mix, and blend it all with Africa, Europe, Asia, Australia, and POW! You have the perfect satire, if, if, if, Trevor Noah can pull this off with the fearless bravado that the great Jon Stewart so masterfully did for 16+ years - oh my goodness Stewart was excellent in this role!) I have two polar-opposite scenarios in my mind: 1) Trevor Noah raising American audiences up to his level. Viewership will sink at first, simply because there is nothing like this on television. If Comedy Central can withstand the pressure of declining ratings (and if Noah sticks to his guns, ratings *will* decline in the short-, perhaps medium-term), this could be looked upon as one of the most brilliant moves in the history of television, and The Educating Of America. 2) Trevor Noah dumbing down his routine to conform with the current level of American viewership, which may result in an *increased* audience at first, mainly due to curiosity, but will ultimately die a slow death because this will be going against Noah's grain, and he won't be able to pull it off. If this show is to be a long-term success with Noah as host, American viewers will need to raise their game - and you know what? It's the same way I feel about this website, because I refuse to dumb it down to pander to boneheads just so I can get a larger audience. *The audience can educate themselves and come up to our level*, or they can go read Eater and The Washington Post. We have the chance to become the world's leader in political satire; not just for American politics, but for World politics. Let's do it, Damn It! Why shouldn't we better ourselves? Stewart was awesome, but I have to think that even *he* would be in favor of this as a long-term strategy. I'm as excited about this visionary selection as I am the Nationals signing Max Scherzer. Yes, it's one hell of a gamble, but what truly great thing isn't?
-
Esperanza Spalding - wow. Just listen. Just. Precious (studio) Precious (Live) Apple Blossom (so great, so inventive) - I love, love, love this one. So, if y'all have not figured it out yet, I love music in almost all of its forms. I let my ears do the listening. -
It's ironic that Martin Niemöller died in 1984. First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
-
Andy Kaufman is someone I describe as a "Performance Artist," and is one of the most polarizing personas in all of show business. Nevertheless, to anyone who insists he didn't have aspects of comedic genius (and I'm the first to admit his acts could turn out to be failed mind fucks), I present to you, "Mighty Mouse":
- 6 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- New York
- New York City
- (and 12 more)
-
This YouTube video is over 80-minutes long, but it tells an amazing story of something I'd never known before - one day, on May 19, 1984, Michael Larson won $110,237 by figuring how to beat the system on CBS's game show, "Press Your Luck." It wasn't a scandal, because there was nothing illegal about it. It is an amazing story of one person outsmarting an entire network, and there was nothing they could do to stop him. I've never seen the movie, "Quiz Show," but I can't imagine that's any more interesting than this is. May 19, 1984 - "Press Your Luck" Episode on CBS featuring Michael Larson
-
There is a great opportunity tomorrow and Sunday to gain free admittance to some of the lesser-known DC museums that normally charge a fee for entry. It's the Dupont-Kalorama Museum Walk. Participating venues this year include the Christian Heurich House, The Anderson House, the Phillips Collection, and others. There is a free shuttle that makes regular stops at all of the venues throughout the weekend, but I find that most of them are within reasonable walking distance of one another. If you haven't visited any of these museums or it's been awhile, I think it would be well worth your time (and again, free admission to all of the participating museums tomorrow and Sunday). -
FYI, Flutie is part Lebanese....while having absolutely nothing to do with this topic, he has likely enjoyed his fair share of kibbeh nayyeh in his lifetime. Although, as unbreakable records go, it is unlikely another part-Lebanese quarterback will win a Heisman.... -
I watched Ken Burns' second documentary on American Life, "The Shakers: Hands to Work, Hearts to God" (1984), released three years after his fine "Brooklyn Bridge" (1981) documentary, and while I learned a lot, I thought it was somewhat dull in comparison with the Brooklyn Bridge (which I touch on here). Don't get me wrong: It was worth watching, but for Burns to be able to pick *any* American Historical topic, and to choose The Shakers seems obscure to the point of being odd. The Shakers were, quite literally, "Shaking Quakers," named as such for the ecstatic dances they would perform, falling into an almost hypnotic trance as they sang and worshipped - that, in and of itself, is fascinating, and would have been great to see, but other than one small drawing, and a five-second clip of an aging shaker demonstrating a move, there was absolutely nothing about the dancing - which I found inexplicable. When you hear "Shaker," you think Shaker furniture, and this film reveals why: They celebrated God by trying to achieve perfection in their work, which is why their work was of such high quality. I, personally, have shaker-style (ladder-back) dining room chairs, and I love them (E.A. Clore in Madison, VA, if anyone is interested in artisan furniture, but that's really going off on a tangent). To summarize, while I'm glad I watched the documentary, and while I learned something about Shakers, this came across to me as an opportunity lost. There were too many interviews with aging women (which may be intentional, as the Shakers are dying out very quickly, and may soon no longer exist), but these interviews, after awhile, became painfully dull. This is one of those things like reading "Walden" (1854): Yes, I'm glad I read it, yes, I'm a better person for having gotten through it - and I was largely bored the entire time. For Burns "completists," it's a must, but for someone in search of a great example of what Burns is capable of (and he is capable of fantastic, entertaining documentaries - he truly does have a gift), I would bypass this one - although I've only watched several of his works to date, I believe "The Shakers" will end up being one of his more obscure films. One thing that I vividly remember: a representative of the Shakers went to Washington, DC as the Civil War broke out, went directly to President Lincoln, and requested the right to passive dissent when it came to fighting, i.e., he was a conscientious objector. At first Lincoln declined, saying that these men were able-bodied, but he was finally talked into exempting Shaker males from participating in the war due to their religious beliefs - this is thought to be the first case of an exemption from fighting in a war due to religious beliefs in United States history - an important milestone. And they weren't just trying to worm out; they genuinely were against harming their fellow brethren; quite to the contrary, they would take in total strangers, and treat them as family. Sometimes, knowing full well that these strangers were merely seeking warmth during the winter - these people became known as "Winter Shakers," and you know what? They didn't care - they accommodated them anyway, with open arms. When thieves stole a portion of their crops, do you know what they did? They planted more seeds, figuring that a certain percentage would be lost to those desperate enough to steal food. These were good people who loved their fellow man, and went out of their way to be kind to them. If only the world had more people such as this.
-
Alberta Hunter was a wonderful jazz and blues singer in the 1910s to 1940s who had, like many black performing artists, more success in Europe than in the US. She made quite a lot of recordings. This one, "You Can't Tell the Difference After Dark," was recorded in 1935 but not released commercially at the time. It surfaced on the compilation of naughty blues and jazz recordings called "Copulatin' Blues," which was released some time in the 1980s and is available today on CD: This song was broadly suggestive, as were many of the recordings on the compilation. Others were downright filthy, and I encourage you to go out and find them. In the 1950s, Hunter abandoned her singing career and embarked on a career as a nurse. In the mid-1970s she re-emerged, in her 80s, recording the soundtrack for the offbeat Alan Rudolph film "Remember My Name," whose title song she wrote. (The movie starred Tony Perkins, Geraldine Chaplin, and Alfre Woodard, with whom I had gone to acting school.) She had an engagement of several years at a Greenwich Village club called The Cookery, where I caught her act sometime in 1977 or 1978. She sang one of her signature tunes, "My Castle's Rockin'," which she sings in this recording from a few years later: Here's a recording of the same song that I imagine she made in the 1930s: I loved her.-
- 1
-
-
- Singer
- Memphis Tennessee
- (and 7 more)
-
One of the greatest concert albums of all time, "The Johnny Otis Show Live at Monterey!", from the 1970 Monterey Jazz Festival, was once among the crown jewels of my LP collection. From that record, here is Esther Phillips, known in her early years as "Little Esther", with "Little Esther's Blues". She left us way too soon.
-
This is an email I sent to two of my friends last night: --- Okay, first let me get this out of the way: Amadeus was released when I was 23, and only just learning about the fine arts. I *LOVED* it. ... HOWEVER. Have either of you seen the Director's Cut?! OH. MY. GOD. If you haven't, do. It's 20 minutes longer (over 3 hours long), and contains a scene so shocking that my jaw dropped. What's *really* cool is that I've only seen the film once (29 years ago), and I recognize every single scene that wasn't in the original. 'I've *never* seen this before,' I say to myself. Even a brief 3-4 second scene at the beginning when they're rushing Salieri to the hospital is new - I'm sure it is. (*) But this one scene? OH. MY. GOD. It changes the entire movie. --- (*) I shouldn't have been so sure about that opening scene because I checked, and it's in both cuts. "Often wrong; never in doubt," Rocks.
