The yoga must be working for Simmons

Double,

The original script was set 50 years in the future, with Kirsten Dunst's character as an old woman, trying to sell a manuscript called "Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind" to book publishers.

There were a ton of changes, but the end returns to Joel and Clementine, 50 years later, with Clem erasing her mind for 12th time or something and Joel wondering why. In other words - they were drawn to each other, could never make it work, and needed to have that knowledge to move on. Those who forget history...

The real ending has the beach scene on a loop, which I suppose suggests the same thing, but not really. Most people thought it was happy ending.

To read the script is to imagine a different movie. What Gondry came up with is definitely interesting, but different. Kaufman wrote more specific characters than Gondry chose to portray.

 

The Celtics-Knicks game is in a few days? I guess I got confused with the C's collapse against the Cavaliers. It happens.

So, I'm not defending him, but he's a writer, and he's not bad. I don't read him regularly but the last two times someone here has posted one of his pieces -- with the intent of it getting shredded -- I've read the whole thing and didn't think, "Geez, this guy stinks." In fact some of his writing reminds me of Hunter Thompson in terms of presenting ideas and arguing them with conviction, and to hell with those who agree or don't agree. So he interjects his writing with pop-culture references. So what. Look at the Anything Goes section here and it says much about all of us who post there. What are we doing? We're writing about popular culture, and trying to be funny about it most of the time.

Also, look at the things many of us at SportsJournalists.com post: how this coach sucks and should be sent to the rabid wolves, and how this coach is great and should be fast-tracked to the hall of fame, and how dare this athlete do this/that and yadda yadda. What we do here at SportsJournalists.com is the same thing he's doing.

 

But Simmons is not throwing Rivers to the wolves. He's acting as if the wolves have already eaten him. Furthermore when you post a gripe about a coach, you don't publish it on one of the most widely read sports news sites on the web. I don't care if Doc Rivers is a lousy coach, pretending that he has been fired already is classless and disrespectful. Its self-serving, classless columns like this that are the reason no one likes/respects Bill Simmons.

 

Since I'm the one who posted his latest column, I should probably pipe up here. I posted it so there could be a discussion about his attacks on traditional media and how bitter he is from being shut out from it and how great he thinks he is. I'm not questioning his writing style. His words don't inpsire me to be a better writer, but his actual syntax is clean and clear. And I like that he argues his points as if they are facts. Of all the kinds of persuasive writing, that one seems to work the best, especially when it infuriates people who disagree with him.

My problem with him is how he tries to come off as writing from the view of the regular fan, which is what he legitimately used to do, while at the same time trying to ingratiate himself with Hollywood. If that's what he wants to do -- be a screenwriter -- go do it. But he shouldn't keep hiding behind the Sports Guy schtick when it's clearly not who he is anymore or what he wants to be.

 

Good post, clever. I'm ignorant on the issue of his Hollywood hopes and dreams because I haven't read enough of his columns; I'd never heard of him until a few months ago when his name began popping up here on a regular basis. Are his attacks against "traditional media" full of legitimate rage or is he having fun at our expense and baiting readers to think he's jilted? Was he fired from newspaper(s)?

 

Great point.

 

Double Down,

Couldnt agree with you more. Great post. I'm scrambling for time right now, but I'm going to follow - up what you wrote later. Great, on - the - money takes!

 

This is from the middle of that column:

Look, it's never fun to write that someone should lose his job. By all accounts, Doc is a super guy -- that's the main reason both local papers and radio stations kept spinning his B.S. and enabled him to keep his job for this long. Just this week, the one local writer who understands basketball and all its subtle nuances -- the Globe's Bob Ryan -- endorsed Doc and absolved him of all blame. Here was his reasoning:

"And, yes, I'm a Doc guy. I can't help it. I've known him too long. I have too much respect for his intelligence, common sense and goodwill to abandon him in this hour of crisis. Do I know for sure that he can convey all the basketball he knows to others? No, I do not. But I know it's there, and I'd sure like to play for him (assuming he could use a 6-foot, 1-inch forward with 1965 post-up moves)."

With all due respect to Ryan, the greatest basketball writer of my lifetime … what the hell does that even mean? He's your friend, so you can't admit that he's a bad coach and you need more time to evaluate him? Nearly 200 games wasn't enough? Come on.

This speaks to a whole 'nother issue: When I started writing columns for my old Web site and built a miniscule base of loyal readers, the local establishment (the Globe, Herald and WEEI) pooh-poohed me in a variety of ways. At first, they played the "nobody's reading him" card. Once it became apparent that some people WERE reading me, they switched to the "he doesn't matter, he doesn't come into the clubhouse card," which was funny because I wanted to infiltrate the clubhouses. Unfortunately, this was the late '90s -- when you told someone you wrote an Internet sports column, they reacted like you were selling knives door-to-door. Really? You get paid for that? I didn't have a chance in hell of getting a press pass from any local team. Not being allowed in clubhouses was the best thing that could have happened -- it forced me to think outside the box, write from the fan's perspective, try to anticipate potential column ideas before everyone else and offer something different from newspapers. In time, I came to realize that you didn't need a press pass to write an entertaining column about sports. So thank you, everyone who blackballed me.

The point about Bob Ryan is legit. Ryan shouldn't allow his friendship with Doc Rivers keep him from doing his job. But it's the long paragraph where Simmons reveals his bitterness. To regular, fanboy readers I wouldn't think that paragraph means a whole lot, other than to make them feel good about themselves because they don't read newspapers and are being told they have no reason to. To those of us with journalistic backgrounds, it smacks of bitterness, a similiar kind of bitterness many of us feel because it's very difficult to break into a major market. Well, Simmons is making who knows how much -- $500k? $1 million? -- while writing for an internationally read Web site. I work for a small newspaper that has no sense of direction and has idiots who have no idea how to communicate with each other running the show, so I'm not going to feel bad for him.

As for him getting fired from the Boston Herald, I don't believe that he did. He has written that was covering high school sports, got fed up, put his friends' names in the transactions column, quit, bartended and then started his Bostonsportsguy Web site, which eventually led to his spot with ESPN. I could be wrong on a few details, but that's the gist I got from reading him regularly.

 

Here's why Marie Antoinette is so interesting.

See, he has a legitimate point, and it oughta speak to a lot of writers on this Web site: Clearly Marie was talented, stuck in a preps and notes job, looking at a couple years of boot-licking and crummy assignments, feeling like he was better than that, and wanting to do something about it. Which he did. And of course nobody respected a voice not attached to a name of a newspaper, a guy working for himself.

But now Simmons works for Disney/ESPN. He can every access he wishes. To persist as a hermit is just childish.

To use a Marie analogy: Remember Vito from Godfather II. Fanucci puts him out of a job in the grocery store. So Vito makes his own wad with Clemenza and Tessio. But Vito doesn't pout about Fanucci - he kills Fanucci. And just make his point even clearer, he returns to Corleone and kills that Don, too.

Marie, is he really had the sand, would face the blackballers with the big ESPN name and simply outwork them.

And that ends the stupidest post I. Have. Ever. Made! Guess I wasn't cut out to be Bill Simmons.

 

He made something happen for himself. Fuck, he's got an international audience when once he was strapped to the prep sports desk in Boston. Good for him. And I don't feel slighted by his sentiments about being poo-poohed by "traditional media."

Now, nobody likes a gloater -- haha, Globe and WEEI and the rest of y'all bitches, look at me, I made it, so lick my shwetty, size of Texas balls! -- and he could learn to ween said obnoxiousness out of his writing. Or, maybe, it's a hook he wants Internet readers to latch onto. Who knows. Love him or hate him he's got personality, and his words elicit emotion from the masses.

 

I just wanted to point out that Boston LA and New York are three places...not two like you said. If you're going to be mean spirited towards someone don't make yourself look like an idiot.

I honestly think Simmons is trapped in an alternate universe where the only two places that exist are Boston, L.A and New York. I really could care less if Doc River's is fired as coach of the Celtics. Honestly, does anyone outside of Boston care if Doc River's is fired. Does anyone outside of Boston care about anything Simmons writes about?
[/quote]

 

[/quote]

That point was made three pages ago. Fetch me a beer, newbie.