So far
this year, I’ve probably seen a few less movies than normal. It always works
like this in the early months of the year – when there isn’t as much that
really interests me, and I get lazy, and don’t go to the movies as much as I
may like. I also get caught up in other aspects of popular culture. This
weekend, for the first time I can recall, I didn’t see any movies. This is
because the two nights I usually watch them – Friday and Saturday – I did other
things – Friday was the heartbreaking final game for my beloved L.A. Kings, who
fell to their arch-rival San Jose Sharks, and Saturday, my wife and I headed to
Toronto to see If/Then at the Princess of Wales theater. With nothing much else
to write about this week, I thought I’d do an all-encompassing post on what has
been distracting me from movies – the Kings, various TV Shows, some musicals
and a few books (I’m on my 29th of the year – well ahead of my goal
of 52 for the year). I’m sure I’ll be back soon enough with more movie reviews
– Jeremy Saulnier’s Green Room is supposed to hit theatres this week and I
really want to see Key and Peele’s Keanu as well. Until then, some thoughts on
everything else. (Warning, this became WAY longer than I thought – feel free to
skip if you like – I wrote it to give myself something to write about this
week).
TV Shows
Game of Thrones (Season 6 Premiere) – I was
late to Game of Thrones – my wife and I went back and watched the first five
seasons last summer/fall – and to be honest, I’m not a huge fan. It’s a decent
show, and has had some great moments, and I can watch Peter Dinklage do
anything – but the violence against women in the show is tough to take – there is
just so much of it, and much of it has been mishandled. It’s also a show where
not all that much seems to happen – I feel like we’ve been waiting for Daenerys
to actually try and get the throne forever, and other characters seem to just
wander around not doing anything for a season at a time. In all honesty, if my
wife didn’t want to keep watching, I probably would have given up – not because
it’s not good, but because there is only so much time in the world – which is
why there are quite a few TV shows I’m sure I’d like that I have never gotten around
to. The Season 6 Premiere was this Sunday, and, it basically didn’t do anything
to change my feelings on the show. Basically the episode spent its entire
running time setting everything up, but didn’t do all that much. Maybe Season 6
will make me a believer, but overall, I’m pretty lukewarm on the show, and I
don’t see that changing now – even if they’ve cast some great actors (Ian
McShane and Max von Sydow) for this season – which couldn’t hurt, considering
that there are a lot of bad performances in this show.
The Walking Dead & Fear the Walking
Dead (Season 6 and Season 2) – I didn’t watch The Walking Dead
Season 1 when it was on – I binged those episodes over the course of a weekend
right before Season 2 – but since then, I’ve watched it as they air. It’s
always been a hit or miss show – always been one where some episodes are
amazing, and then they follow those up with a lot of filler. Quite often, it
seems like the show adds a lot of padding episodes – ones where not a lot
happens, just to fill out their seasons. But I’ve always defended the show, to
a certain extent, because the highs were high enough to justify the lulls. No,
I’m not going to claim I’m not going to watch Season 7 because of the idiotic
cliffhanger finale of Season 6 – but I do think I’ll stop defending it so much.
The 90 minute finale was long and drawn out – and while there were moments of
tension, it did become overly repetitive. I did think Jeffrey Dean Morgan’s
portrayal as Negan was quite good – and then they had to go ahead and botch the
landing thoroughly and completely. Season 6 – especially the back half – had its
moments (the episode of Carol and Maggie being held hostage, and then killing
their way out, was one for the ages) – but it often felt like a long, slow tease
for Negan’s arrival. There were episodes where nothing happened. There were
silly and stupid moves on the part of writers – the way they handled Glenn’s “death”
which was truly stupid, and didn’t fool anyone. To build all that up, and then
not pay it off was bound to make people angry. But to build it all up, then
give us Negan, and then just withhold one piece of the story – who he killed –
was idiotic. No, despite what Scott Gimple and company said this was not “the
end of this season’s story” and that season 7 is about that death and
aftermath. This was about manufacturing a cliffhanger – which can be fine when
done right. It’s cheap storytelling – and considering how often The Walking
Dead went to this well in Season 6 – the finale, Glenn and dumpster, even the
penultimate episode when Daryl was “shot” tells me that the writers are running
on fumes now, and don’t really know what to keep doing. The Walking Dead was
never a great TV show – but it’s often been a very good one. I fear that’s no
longer true going forward. How they handle this storyline going forward – and whether
they’ve learned anything from the fan and critical reaction to the finale
(which has been almost universally negative) will determine if The Walking Dead
is creatively bankrupt or not.
Onto
Fear the Walking Dead then. I liked the idea of the show when they announced it
– after all, the original series never really dealt with the immediate outbreak
and aftermath of the zombie apocalypse – as it didn’t pick up until Rick woke
up, when the world was already in the shit. I like the actors they cast as well
– Cliff Curtis, Kim Dickens and Ruben Blades are all excellent. Still, I found
Season 1 to mainly be a snooze – and Season 2 isn’t a whole lot better. I appreciate
they’re trying to do something different with the show – focus on a tighter
group of characters, not be so reliant on gore, etc. Yet, so far, nothing
really about the show has grabbed me that much. It’s hardly a terrible show –
but I almost didn’t even start watching Season 2 – and to be honest, if it
keeps being this dull, I probably won’t finish.
House of Cards (Season 4) – With two
kids under 5 at home, binge watching is not something my wife and I can do very
easily. It takes us months to get through most Netflix shows – even ones we
quite like (Jessica Jones, Orange is the New Black, Daredevil – although 4
episodes into season 2 of that show, and it’s a slog so far – although Elektra
just showed up, so I’ll be back for the next one). The one exception we have is
House of Cards – no, we cannot do it over a weekend, but a week, sure. The show
has always fallen into the realm of “guilty pleasure” – it’s more than a little
ridiculous and over-the-top. Yet the performances are so good, and it’s so
gleeful in the extremes its goes to, that I hardly care – and lap up every
season. Season 3 though was the weakest the series had done though, and I
started to worry that the series had run its course. Not to worry – Season 4
hit on all cylinders, and was, once again, the guilty pleasure it always has
been. Spacey and Penn are wonderful – of course – and it’s a pleasure to see
them work together, or against each other, as they constantly get painted into
a corner, and then try and get out of it again. You could argue that Season 4
ends with a cliffhanger – how the hell can Underwood get out of this jam – which is basically all his
previous jams becoming public – but that’s not really a cliffhanger so much as
a premise of the show. I’m not going to argue House of Cards is great art – but
its great trash, and to quote Pauline Kael on movies “they are so rarely great
art, that if you cannot enjoy great trash, there’s no point in going”. The same
is true for TV.
Better Call Saul (Season 2) – To me,
the best ongoing show on television right now is AMC’s Better Call Saul – which
just ended its second season, which was even better than its excellent first
season. It is true that I worried that the show would simply be a Breaking Bad
rehash – but what’s been interesting about it is that while the two series’
basically have the same outline, they are much different in tone – Better Call
Saul is much more low-key, much less cathartic than Breaking Bad – which often
gave the audience the relief of violence, and Better Call Saul hardly ever
does. Both series are about their main characters long, slow slide into
criminal behavior – selling their soul off a piece at a time. I do think that
Jimmy’s (a brilliant Bob Odenkirk) slide is more tragic than Walt’s though –
what became increasingly clear as Breaking Bad went along is that Walt was
always an asshole, he just finally allowed himself to become what he always
wanted to be in the first place. Jimmy though is a genuinely nice guy – yes, he’s
a little bit of a hustler and a conman, but generally a well-intentioned one.
If it weren’t for Chuck (Michael McKean) – his older brother who he cares for,
despite the fact that Chuck shows him little to no respect – Jimmy may have
actually been able to avoid what we know he will become. We continue to watch,
and wait for the inevitable – and at times, it is painful – sooner or later, we
know he’s going to do something with Kim (the wonderful Rhea Sea horn) that
will ruin her – and while we don’t want that to happen, we know it will. It’s
also been great to see Jonathan Banks’ Mike (how the hell he did not win the
Emmy for Season 1, I will never understand) going through his own slide. He’s
on a parallel path to Jimmy, occasionally crossing, and he provides what little
violence the show has, and once again, it’s a sad slide. Banks is always a
pleasure to watch – even when he’s doing nothing. It is true that Better Call
Saul is a spinoff, and it has never really escaped the shadow of Breaking Bad –
but the fact that is true, and it’ still one of the very best shows on TV is a
testament to how good Breaking Bad was – and how good this is.
The People vs. O.J. Simpson – No one
was more surprised than I was that The People vs. O.J. Simpson ended up being
the best thing on TV this year. I assumed that this would be a trashy piece of
tabloid exploitation – but it ended up being a fascinating, well made,
extremely well written and acted series, using the infamous Simpson trial to
examine racism, misogyny, celebrity, violence and much more in 10, distinct
episodes. This is not a show built for binging – each episode has its own arch,
and its own emphasis, even as they each served the larger series. You will not
see a better performance on TV (or perhaps anywhere) this year than Sarah
Paulson’s excellent portrayal of Marcia Clarke – who has never been portrayed
as sympathetically as she has been here. That doesn’t preclude the excellent
work by Courtney B. Vance as Johnny Cochrane – nailing the showmanship, but
also what lied behind that, Sterling K. Brown’s brilliant, understated work as
Christopher Darden (the scene he shares with Vance in the finale – where they
are both right, and both wrong, is a highlight), Connie Britton’s one episode master
class, and even the three more divisive performances – David Schwimmer is
wonderful as Robert Kardashian (I loved the diner scene, and cannot think of
anyone else being able to say the words Uncle Juice with such conviction), John
Travolta as Robert Shapiro, who become an outsider in the show, and the legal
team he assembled, and Cuba Gooding Jr. as Simpson himself – particularly in
the final moments of the series, where he realizes he won’t go to jail, but
that he’ll never get his life back either – he is now a pariah. Whether this
creative team will be able to repeat the success with Season 2 – about Hurricane
Katrina (which, considering Treme, and those two long Spike Lee docs, I’m not
sure there’s much left to say – although I would have also thought that about
O.J. Simpson) remains to be seen. But for one season anyway, they nailed it.
Broadway Shows
I would
love to see more live theater – plays or musicals – but with two kids, and
living in Brantford, it’s not really possible. On our last trip to New York
(more than 5 years ago now) – by wife and I saw five productions in four days –
musicals Next to Normal, Promises Promises, A Little Night Music and American
Idiot, and a play, David Mamet’s Race – and had a great time. With two kids
though, it’s not possible to jet off to New York – or even see much in Toronto
(who slate doesn’t always interest me anyway) – but there are two musicals I’ve
experienced, in different ways, recently.
Hamilton (Soundtrack) – No, I
haven’t seen the musical yet – my wife says we will even if we have to kill
someone, but who knows when. I have listened to, and become obsessed with the
soundtrack though – which is brilliant. But by now you either a) already know
this b) are refusing to listen to the soundtrack until you see the show or c)
are sick and damn tired about hearing about a show you cannot see. I have a lot
of sympathy for those final two views, so I won’t say much else except a
ranking of my top 5 songs 5. My Shot 4. You’ll Be Back, 3.Washigton on Your
Side 2. Yorktown (The World Turned Upside Down) 1. Wait for it (so yes, I
prefer act 1 to act 2).
If/Then (Toronto Production) – Out of
all the musicals I have seen on stage, Next to Normal was easily my favorite (I
saw it twice) – and it’s one of my wife’s favorites as well. So even if the
reviews of If/Then, the latest from the creative team behind Next to Normal, on
Broadway were mixed we decided we should check it out when it came to Toronto.
And no, If/Then is nowhere near as good as Next to Normal – the songs are
largely forgettable, and the production is trying way too hard. And yet, it
still made for an entertaining night at the theater. Often compared to the
movie Sliding Doors (although I prefer the comparison to Lionel Shriver’s great
book The Post Birthday World) – the play follows a woman, just out of a 12
year, childless marriage in Phoenix, who returns to New York. From there, her
life splits into two – one where she gets a job in city planning, and one where
she doesn’t, but meets and falls in love with a doctor just back from
Afghanistan. There are other characters – her boss who she may be in love with,
her best friend (Anthony Rapp), who is bisexual, but kind of in love with her
and miserable in one half, and in love with a man in the other, and a lesbian
couple, who are just there as a sounding board for the main character (played
by Idina Menzel on Broadway, and Jackie Burns in the production we saw). The
first act is rather lightweight, forgettable but enjoyable – the highlight
being the amusing song “What the Fuck?”
Darkness starts creeping in late in act 1, and takes over large parts of
act 2. I appreciated what they were going for here – asking the rather clichéd
question as to whether it’s possible to have it all (the great job, the great
marriage, kids, etc) and giving it an optimistic outlook at first, and not
nearly so much to end things. They don’t quite pull it all off though, and
unfortunately, the production is really rather shallow. The penultimate musical
number – Always Starting Over – is a showstopper however, and although I
imagine Menzel was even better on Broadway, I have to say Burns is a more than
capable substitute for Toronto audiences. No, If/Then is not Next to Normal –
which, after all, is the rare musical to win a Pulitzer Prize for Drama (the
last until, of course, Hamilton) – but it’s still a decent night at the
theater.
Books
I read
– a lot – because I basically commute on a train for two hours a day, and have
nothing else to do (I listen to Podcast – next section – but pretty much only
when I’m at work). I’m up at 29 books for the year so far, and here are some
highlights.
You/Hidden Bodies – Caroline Kepnes – I
hadn’t heard of Caroline Kepnes’ 2014 book You, until earlier this year (I
think it was on one of those lists of “If you liked Gone Girl…” which I usually
ignore, although I love Gone Girl) – but when I did read it, I pretty much
loved it. On the book jacket, one review calls its main character – Joe
Goldberg – a cross between Holden Caufield and Patrick Bateman – and that’s an
excellent description. The book is told from Joe’s POV – as he works at a New
York Book Store, decrying the stupidity of those around him. It’s there that he
meets the beautiful Beck, an University student, who he falls in love with, and
will do ANYTHING to get her, and keep her. He cyber stalks her (and has access
to her e-mail, etc) – and will eventually kill for her as well – something he
has done in the past. You is a disturbing book, as it traps you inside Joe’s
mind, and you really do feel for him to a certain extent – the people he kills,
and even Beck, do seem annoying or do betray him in some way – but then you
realize you’re only seeing things from Joe’s point of view, and the fact that
you agree with him is disturbing. The follow-up book, 2016’s Hidden Bodies,
could be called Joe Goes to Hollywood – is that is precisely what he does – he
finds another woman, and more people to kill that are in his way, and the sick
dance continues – where you root for Joe and see his POV, and then are
disturbed by it. Kepnes is a good writer, and I’m fascinated to see where Joe
goes next – the novel ends on a cliffhanger, so a third book is all but
guaranteed (although, I think, that perhaps it should end – before Joe really
starts to repeat himself). As it stands, these two books are disturbing,
entertaining and a fascinating look at misogyny and murder.
In the Lake of the Woods – Tom O’Brien – This is
a book I had not heard of, but our good friend Joe Goldberg from You
recommended. It’s easy to see why Joe loved the book – the main character in
the book also stalks the woman he loves, but in a more traditional way. The
book is about a Vietnam vet turned politician, whose career is derailed when
his role in the My Lai massacre is exposed. In the days after suffering a
humiliating primary defeat, he and his wife retreat to a remote cabin in
Minnesota – and a few days later she disappears. The book has three different
kinds of chapters. The most traditional is a third person narration – although
not the normal, omnipotent narrator, but a writer, who admits his own
obsessions and biases, and what he doesn’t know. The second are the Hypothesis
chapters, where the writer spins various theories about what happened. The
third is Evidence chapters, which is basically interview segments with some of
the players involved. O’Brien weaves the past and present together – and never
does solve the central mystery (be warned those who insist on closure) but has
written a masterful book – the best I’ve read so far this year. Yes, the book
is two decades old, but it’s brilliant, so if you haven’t read it, do so.
Movie Freak – Owen Glieberman/Better Living
Through Criticism – A.O. Scott – More relevant to movies are
these two books by movie critics. Owen Gleiberman’s Movie Freak is a more
traditional book, where the former EW critic recounts his life and obsession
with movies from his childhood to today – as well as offering a glimpse inside
EW during his time there, and his own life, where it’s safe to say, he wasn’t
always a very good person. The book recalls Roger Ebert’s Life Itself –
although not as good or as deep, but anyone who likes Gleiberman (who was one
of the first critics I read, during my time as an EW subscriber in the late
1990s, and who I kept up even after I stopped getting the magazine delivered),
it is a lively and entertaining read. You cannot say the same about A.O.
Scott’s Better Living through Criticism, which isn’t the easiest read, but it
is a vital and important one about the nature of criticism, and why it’s so
important. In an era where film critics – and really, critics of all kind, are
becoming an endangered species, Scott lays out the history of criticism, and
why it matters in a fascinating way. It is a must read.
Podcasts
I was
late to Podcasts – like many, I think, I didn’t pay too much attention to them
until season 1 of Serial made it completely impossible to ignore them. I loved
that season, and since then, I’ve started listening to more and more of them.
The Podcasts I listen to basically break down into four categories – True
Crime, NPR, Entertainment and Comedy. So a few quick words on each.
True Crime – I have
admitted my love of shows like Dateline in the past, as well as many True Crime
Documentaries and Series, as well as books. Yes, I think there is a line that
some cross between informative and exploitive – and that’s certainly true of
Podcasts as well – I’ve sampled a few other True Crime Podcasts, and stopped,
because of this. But the good ones are great. I quite like Generation Why, in which two friends go over a case – either famous
or not, and offer their own opinions on it. I don’t really care for it when
they venture outside of the True Crime realm, for mysteries like aliens or
Bermuda Triangle, or whatever – but that’s just me. One I’ve started listening
to recently that has a similar format – True
Crime Garage – can also be quite good (I could stand with a little less of
them telling me how much they like the cut of someone’s jib, but that’s a small
part of it). I think I disagree a little more with them as well – I think there
may be a few more factual inaccuracies that I noticed, but they are relatively
new – and I think they continue to get better, so I’m sticking with them. Two
other new ones that I have varying opinions on are Casefile – a great New Zealand based podcast. It is informative,
disturbing and really well done – and one of the best things about it is that
because it’s based in New Zealand, you get different cases than the others (for
instance recently, at three of the other True Crime podcasts had an interview
with Juan Martinez, prosecutor of Jodi Arias – and yeah, he’s an interesting
guest, but no, I didn’t need to listen to three or four different interviews
with him). CBC’s Someone Knows Something
seems to me to be a deliberate attempt to replicate the success of Serial,
focusing on one case, week after week. What I cannot help but think though is
that there really isn’t much to talk about in this one case – the whole thing
seems awfully padded. It’s interesting, and I’ll keep listening, but it’s far
from great. For something (at least occasionally) lighter, Criminal, is quite good. Yes, it can get dark, but often they have
less serious crimes (episodes recently have been about a poisoned tree and
missing whiskey) – and they’re fairly short (25 minutes) – and well researched.
True Murder with Dan Zupansky is
referred to by many of the other podcasts as the Godfather of True Crime
podcasting – and his weekly show, where he interviews the author of a true crime
book, is endlessly interesting – the quality varies with the guest to be sure,
but it is an essential true crime podcast. My favorite though is probably Sword & Scale, which is a bi-weekly
podcast that delves into one case each episode, and finds some of the most
disturbing ones imaginable. If you never want to sleep again, listen to Episode
20, and a variety show host/puppeteer on Christian Television and his online
activities. Sword & Scale has typically stayed away from the more infamous
cases – and delves a little deeper than most – which is probably why it’s my
favorite.
NPR Podcasts – Like
any good liberal (hell, I’m a liberal Canadian, putting me fairly left on the
political spectrum in America – although oddly, I haven’t really responded to
Bernie Sanders, and find myself rooting for Hilary Clinton – but hell, it’s not
my country – vote for who you want), I like NPR and their Podcasts. Their
newest is Embedded, and I’ve liked
what I’ve heard enough to keep listening. It’s a weekly, about half hour show,
where the reporters dig into one story, by, yes, embedding with those involved.
I also quite like the NPR Politics Podcast,
despite my being Canadian, because American elections always fascinate me
(perhaps because I can be a dispassionate observer) – and they are doing great
work on this one. Planet Money is a
favorite of mine as well – 20 minute pods about various economic issues (I am
an accountant after all). Pop Culture
Happy Hour could fit into the next section as well – but this weekly roundtable
talking about, you guessed it, Pop Culture moderated by the great Linda Holmes,
is always interesting – even if I have no interest at all in what they are
talking about. The granddaddy of them all is This American Life, which I adore. For a while, after Serial, I
went back listened to most of the back catalogue of This American Life
episodes, and it really is quite amazing – a document of the last 20 some odd
years in America.
Then
there is Serial, season 2. Like the
rest of the world, I was addicted to Season 1 – but not so much season 2. I
think it was a savvy move to not try and replicate season 1 – not really do a
True Crime podcast, and not concentrate on a case where the facts are really
under dispute – we all know what Bo Bergdahl did, the real question was why,
and whether he was responsible for any American deaths. I still listened every
two weeks to the new Serial, but was hardly obsessed with it the same way I was
with Season 1. I think the move to every other week was deadly – it killed any
momentum the show had – I honestly forgot when they were coming out. Still, it
was a very good, very informative Podcast. Had Season 1 not come out, than
Season 2 would probably look better? I will still be there for Season 3 (which
was originally scheduled – I think – for Spring 2016 – although with the move
to every other week on Season 2, I don’t know if that’s still the case).
Movies
Not
surprisingly, another area of Podcast I listen to are movie related – I’ve
basically settled on four, after trying out quite a few (and finding many
rather annoying for one reason or another. Basically, if it’s part of the
“Filmspotting Network”, I’ll listen. The original Filmspotting with Josh Larsen and Adam Kempenar and Filmspotting SVU with Matt Singer and
Alison Wilmore, are insightful, funny and offer a good conversation about
various films – the original focusing more on what in theaters, and SVU on
what’s on demand. Josh and Adam are more likely to disagree and have (good
argument) but Matt and Alison are more likely to make me laugh – and perhaps
discover some smaller films on demand (it’s where I first heard about Karyn
Kusama’s excellent The Invitation) a few years ago. Yes, I could stand both
podcasts to be shorter – running 90 minutes, at least, is a little long, but
for the most part, I’m down with both. My favorite of this group though is the
newest one – The Next Picture Show – where
four critics of the late, great film site The Dissolve get together and do two
podcasts in one week (and take the next week off) – one focused on an older
film, and one on a newer one that is somehow connected (by genre, theme, etc)
to the older one. Keith Phipps, Tasha Robinson, Scott Tobias and Genevieve
Koski are the group now (producer Koski stepping in for Rachel Handler, who got
a job in New York) – and their conversations into classic films are quite good
– framing them in a new light, especially when compared to what came next. The
one issue I have with this Podcast is sometimes, they hop on movies too close
to release – for example, this week they have paired John Carpenter’s 1976
masterpiece Assault on Precinct 13 with Jeremy Saulnier’s Green Room – which
won’t have even hit Toronto by then, let along most places. I’m going to do my
best to see Green Room this week – but I’m certainly not go to listen to a 45
minute Podcast devoted to a film I am dying to see, and want to go into as fresh
possible.
The
best movie podcast out there – in fact one of the best podcast period is You Must Remember This by Karina
Longworth, who delves into Hollywood’s past, telling stories of their dark
history. The highlight of this podcast is certainly the 12 part series Charles
Manson’s Hollywood – which takes a different look at Manson and his crimes and
his connection to entertainment than I’ve seen anyone else do. She’s followed
that up with a very good series entitled MGM Stories, and is currently in the middle
of a series on the Hollywood Blacklist. Before that, there was a series called
Star Wars – about what Hollywood stars did during WWII. The earliest episode
are – not surprisingly – a little spottier. They were basically stand alones
about one star or another – although there are some real gems in there as well.
In short, if I was making a list of my favorite podcasts – the one that I
listen to as soon as it drops – this may well be my current favorite.
Comedy
Finally,
my last two podcasts fall into the comedy category – I guess. There is no doubt
that Judge John Hodgman is a comedy
podcast – a weekly case, or docket clearing, by Hodgman who rules on all
matters great and small, and which makes me laugh more consistently than just
about anything else these days. The other is WTF with Marc Maron – which has become a standard. Not every WTF is
great – it does depend wildly on the guest – but you can never tell which one
will be. I learned this when I nearly skipped the David Spade episode a while
back – thinking I couldn’t care less about David Spade, and it turned out to be
one of the best recent episodes. So even though I care nothing about Steve-O –
I’ll at least give his most recent one a listen.
The Los Angeles Kings
I’ve
put my beloved Kings as the last entrant, since it is the furthest thing from
movies on this list, so you’re more than welcome to simply skip it. I love the
Kings – and I have since I was 6, when they acquired my favorite player – Wayne
Gretzky. There were A LOT of horrible years after Gretzky left. All that
changed a few years ago, when the Kings actually became good. They’ve made the
playoffs in six or the last seven years, won two Stanley Cups (the first in
Franchise History) alongside another run to the Conference Finals in there. For
a three year stretch – between 2012-2014 – the Kings won two cups, 10 playoff
round and 41 Playoff Games, and could rival the Chicago Blackhawks for the
closest thing to a dynasty the NHL can now produce in the Salary Cap Era. Now,
two years later, the Dynasty talk is done – and the questions as to whether the
Kings are all that good anymore are real. That is because in the last two
years, the Kings have won zero playoff rounds, and only one playoff game. Yes,
they had their best Regular Season in quite a while, leading their division for
most of the season, before blowing it in the last week 9thatr shootout loss to
Winnipeg, meaning they had to play San Jose instead of Nashville, looms large
right now). But the question remains about the Kings – what happened, and can
they recover?
The
answer to the first question – what happened – really is quite simple. GM Dean
Lombardi has talked about valuing loyalty in his team, and that is precisely
what he has done. He handed out big contracts to Dustin Brown, Jonathan Quick
and Marion Gaborik, and just recently to Anze Kopitar, alongside Jeff Carter’s
large, long-term contract (that he acquired), and Drew Doughty’s – which he
signed before the first cup run, and smaller multi-year deals to the likes of
Matt Greene, Jake Muzzin and Alec Martinez. He refused to buy out Mike
Richards’ contract after the second cup run – preferring to believe Richards
would regain his form, and letting the amnesty buyout period go away, before
getting himself in a lot of trouble the next year – demoting Richards to the
AHL, trying to find someone, anyone to take him, and then “terminating” his
contract under strange circumstances, which involved throwing Richards under
the bus (which didn’t, and doesn’t, sit well with me – Lombardi aired Richards’
demons to try and justify himself, which is the opposite of loyalty to me).
The
biggest problem the Kings have had though is simple – ever since Slava Voynov
proved himself to be a horrible human being, by being charged with felony
domestic violence, eventually pleading no-contest, serving some (not nearly
enough) jail time, and “self-deporting” (before he could be actually deported),
they Kings have struggled with their depth on the blue line. Don’t get me wrong
– there are things that are FAR more important than hockey – and domestic
violence is one of them, and I am glad that Voynov is no longer a L.A. King or
an NHL player (and no, I didn’t like much of what Lombardi had to say about
Voynov during the season long legal process, and was embarrassed to be a King
fan when they allowed him to practice with them – resulting in a fine). But,
the truth is, Lombardi had a plan for defensive depth, and Voynov being an
awful person screwed it up – and Lombardi hasn’t been able to fix it in two
years.
This
was the main reason why the Kings lost in 5 to the San Jose Sharks – there were
others, but this was the main one. As long as the Kings could ice Doughty,
Muzzin and Martinez on the backend, they could get away with everyone else – as
soon as Martinez was hurt in Game 1, their lack of depth hurt them, Luke Schenn
(who, I cannot imagine being back next year) was supposed to be a replacement
for the injured Matt Greene – playing a few minutes a night as the sixth D-man
– giving him top 4 minutes was, to put it mildly, not good. Lombardi’s decision
to re-acquire Rob Scuderi at the trade deadline was also a head scratcher – the
Pens and Hawks had already given up on Scuderi this year, and even if all the
Kings had to give up was Christian Erhoff – who never fit in L.A. – Scuderi
still has a year left on his deal after this one, and Erhoff didn’t. Scuderi
did what he could in the playoffs – but he’s clearly not the same player he was
a few years ago, when he was one of the Kings best d-men. Jamie McBain wasn’t
awful in the series – but he wasn’t really good either. And Brayden McNabb was
fine – nothing more or less.
The
concerning thing going forward is that this team clearly needs to add a top
4-defenseman if they’re going to be great again. But how will that work?
Doughty, Muzzin and Martinez area all under contract for next year – so far so
good – but then again so is Scuderi and Matt Greene (who may, or may not, come
back). Then there’s McNabb, not to mention Gravel and Forbert, who they used on
occasion. One assumes, they’ll let McBain and Jeff Schultz (who they have used
occasionally) go. But where is a top 4 defensemen going to fit. They’ve locked
themselves down a little bit.
They
also need to improve their forward depth as well. Despite the playoffs, I still
think Kopitar, Gaborik, Carter and Toffoli are fine in your top 6 – and while I
shudder at another long term contract, if they resign Milan Lucic, he fits as
well (for now – please don’t let it be a 8 year contract though – anything
longer than 3 is really risking it in my mind). That still leaves a spot open.
Can Tanner Pearson finally lock it down? The Kings had Dwight King play there
in the playoffs and that did not go well. The bottom 6 also needs some work.
Gone will be Vinny Lecavlier – who played quite good for the Kings since coming
over, making their biggest need up front a third line center. No, Trevor Lewis
(who is UFA), Andy Andreoff or Nick Shore are not going to get it done there.
And the rest of the bottom six – Dwight King, Kyle Clifford, Nic Dowd, Jordan
Nolan, etc are all useful players – but not much else. A shakeup there wouldn’t
be a bad idea (but keep Lewis – I love Lewis).
The
biggest question mark is Dustin Brown. There were a lot of people – myself
included – who didn’t like the long-term contract he got when it was signed –
he was already trending downward at that time, and it’s continued. And he’s
going to make nearly $6M a year until 2022. That’s WAY too much for a third
line winger. Can the Kings find someone to take Brown, and what will the return
be. Best case scenario is that they have to take a problem contract back – but
maybe it’s a problem contract on a player who can be more useful for the Kings.
(For the record, I don’t have a problem with Jonathan Quick – yes, the back
breaking goal in Game 5 against Pavelski was a muffin – but overall, I don’t
think he was the reason the Kings lost the series).
Will
Lombardi actually do this though? That’s the question. Lombardi has already
gone through a few different “eras” as GM of the Kings – when he took over, and
the Kings sucked, he was all about stock piling draft picks and prospects, and
signing “bridge” players until those picks and prospects were ready. When the
Kings got better, he was about adding players to make them go from good to
great – Dustin Penner, Mike Richards, Jeff Carter, Marion Gaborik. Lombardi
seems to think he’s still there – handing out those loyalty contracts to his
players, and trading away picks and prospects for the likes of Andrej Sekera
(who helped the kings – though not enough) and Milan Lucic (who was good for
the Kings – but good enough to justify what they gave away for him?). What
Lombardi needs to be now is heartless. He needs to trim the fat, and bring in
some new blood. The Kings do not need a rebuild – I’m not talking about tearing
it down to the ground – but they need a retool. For an example, they need to
look at the team who just beat them – the San Jose Sharks. While the core of
the Sharks team – Thornton, Pavelski, Burns, Vlasic, etc. – hasn’t much changed
since the Kings reverse swept them in 2014 (take out Niemi in net, and add in
Jones) – they are still a very different team than that one. They had 10 new
players on the team that beat LA compared to the team that lost to them. GM
Doug Wilson has made his mistakes over the years – like every GM does – but
he’s made smart decisions to replace the depth around that core, and that
helped them. That is what LA needs to do. If they do that, then yes, I think
the Kings can be a great team again. A Cup team? Maybe, maybe not – there’s so
much that goes into being a Cup team – including luck – that you cannot
control. But a team capable of more than the last two years? Definitely. But,
we shall see. The Kings have not played like themselves the past two years – or
perhaps, even sadder, they have. And this is just the new Kings.
