Paul Newman has died

It is a sad day for Movie fans the world over as the AP news agency is reporting that Paul Newman passed away last night aged 83. He had been battling cancer for a number of years. Newman was most famously know for his roles in "The Hustler", "Hud", "Cool Hand Luke" & "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" and after numerous nominations he finally landed an Oscar for his performance in "The Colour of Money" where he reprised his role of Fast Eddie, first played in "The Hustler"

Shying away from a pretty-boy image, Newman studied Method acting under Lee Strasbourg and became quite simply one of the finest actors of his, or any, generation. He was an iconoclast on screen and a devoted family man and racing car enthusiast off it, he was both a driver and Team owner.  He married his second wife, Joanne Woodward in 1958 and memorably stated"Why go out for a hamburger when you have steak at home?" or when asked about the difficulty's within his marriage stated bluntly that "Marriage is like a toaster or VCR, in my family if something is broke you fix it, you don't just throw it out and get a new one"

He is as famous for his charity work as he is for his movies, with "Newman's Own" dressing donating all profits after to tax to various charities, which to date has provided an estimated $200m to various organisations including the Hole in the wall gang, a summer camp for seriously ill children. He once quipped "The embarrassing thing is that the Salad dressing is out grossing my films!". 

It is hard at this stage to objectively quantify the impact Newman had in film but, for, example you can draw a direct line from the insouciant rebel of Butch Cassidy and notably, Cool Hand Luke right through to the likes of Johnny Depp's captain Jack Sparrow and Robert Downey Jr (pretty much everything)

Today the world has lost more than just another screen performer. Today the world has lost something far rarer, a substantial Icon, a common man who in his professional life had the touch of the divine, and a man who when asked about his extra curricular charity work seemed confused that it was made out to be anything unusual and just stated "Some people are lucky and some people are not so lucky and those that are have a responsibility to help other who are less fortunate.

Paul Newman once said his one fear was that his epitaph would be "Here lies Paul Newman, who failed because his blue eyes turned brown", he need not have worried his epitaph and his legacy will be far greater than a humble man like himself would want to admit.

Paul Newman

1925-2008

Indiana Jones and the Movie we didn't need

Well, it's finally out. After 19 years since the last installment and with fan's all around the world practically begging for it's release, it's now here, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and....well it's as disapointing as that title is unwieldy.Let's get the big one out of the way, Harrison Ford although a older & a bit slower is still Indy, no if's but's or maybe's. With whipcracks and wisecracks he is still the man to fill the fedora. I won't go into the plot but needless to say that it leads our intrepid hero on an adventure into the jungle (Peru) and along for the ride is Mutt, played by Shia LaBouef, who may or may not be Indy's son. Back in also is Karen Allen as Marion. The Nazi's are replaced by the commie's!And here in lies the problem. Lucas is back. Ford is back. Spielberg is back, the movie references "Raiders of the lost Ark" both in tone and characters whilst trying to update the movie from the '30's to the '50's. However despite the success of the update (when faced with death Indy is asked for his last words, his response "I like Ike") the film is not giving itself a chance as constantly referencing the finest movie in one of the finest Trilogies only shines an even bigger spotlight on this movie's inadaquacies.George Lucas annouced himself satisfied with the idea behind the story aroun 2 years ago stating that he had a "MacGuffin poeple would believe in" (MacGuffin being the item that propells the movie, think the Ark in the first, Sankara Stones in Temple of Doom and the Holy grail in the final movie) however the MacGuffin is frankly laughable.So, an aging Indy and poor central idea and some chanracters with literally nothing to do (Ray Winstones character-Mac-could lawfully be called Basil Exposition if Austin Powers had not thought of it first) it's sounds all bad but alas there if you can mine through some of the more tedious aspect and also the shocking ill-conceived ending there are some treasures to be found, some cracking dialogue, neat effects, an expanded off screen history for Henry Jones Jnr (He was in the OSS andfought in WW2!) and Cate Blanchett is wonderfully hammy as the villian of the piece.Go see it. Enjoy what you enjoy, disregard the parts you don't. It's a distant fourth out of four for Indy but then deep down no matter how much we wanted it to be as fun as Raiders/Temple/Crusade it was never going to happen.The 19 years have not done the movie any favours as expectation became insatiable but despite all this remember "It's not year's honey, it's the mileage"

Roman's epic quest has failed

Now that the dust is beginning to settle on last night's Champions League final, and on the fall from grace and redemption of two opposing marquee names, Didier Drogba and Cristiano Ronaldo respectively, it is time to look at Manchester United's achievement in the context of Chelsea's rise to upper echelon of both English and European football.

Roman Abramovich's wealth and his subsequent rebuilding of Chelsea from a well liked, essentially local club, to what some may see as some despotic faceless empire is a well worn one but it is interesting to look at where Chelsea's failing this season actually lie. The African cup of nations is usually blamed for Chelsea's somewhat, by their high standards, indifferent start to the Premier League season and although there is some truth in it as regardless of results a team which has been deprived of the aforementioned Drobga along with Salomon Kalou, Michael Essien and John Obi Mikel is bound to endure a tough stint whilst battling it out with United, Arsenal and to a lesser extent Liverpool. If you examine Chelsea's season however the African Cup of Nations provides a neat cover for the root cause of the problems which currently threaten to devour Chelsea from within, namely the manner in which the club has been run since Abramovich decided to invest so heavily.

Abramovich wants the things money simply cannot buy-history, tradition & respect. It is an admirable quality that he wants these things and at time's his philanthropic nature in terms of grass roots football in his native Russia is overlooked, even derided, but looking at the way he has decided to pursue his dreams shows that he is first and foremost a businessman (and a bloody good one at that) not someone who comes from a footballing background.

Firstly he understood that the Chelsea debt was an issue, no problem-paid. He wanted the club to be a self sufficient separate entity rather than suckle at his teat so he poached Manchester United Chief Executive Peter Kenyon, who was to go on to say Chelsea are in a "League of 1". He had also invested heavily in the playing staff whilst Claudio Ranieri was manager bringing in the likes of Duff, Geremi, Makelele, Crespo & Veron. Now from the Russian billionaire's perspective it was sit back and watch the trophies come in. When it didn't happen, Ranieri was sacked and replaced by you know who. Again the investment was huge, the difference this time was trophies came, and kept coming. It was in or around this time Abramovich decided that the youth policy needed work, Frank Arnesan was brought in from Spurs-however his role was never fully clear, and later Avram Grant was brought in from Portsmouth, again his role not clear. These appointments ultimately served to undermine Mourinho and were the first Domino in what would bring sustained success crashing to a halt.

He wanted history, tradition & respect and he wnated them now. He managed to undermine one of the best managers in the game, brought in players that the manager did not choose nor want. He wanted history, tradition & respect. He turned Chelsea into a buzzword for opulence, the noveu riche, all money and no class. He wanted history, tradition & respect....now he had decided that he wanted these thing but wanted them hand in hand with "style"...exit Mouniho, enter Grant.

In the same period look at Manchester Utd. They were dominating the domestic League and consistently underachieving in Europe, 1999 aside. They too fell prey to a billionaire who wanted to diversify, wanted to live out some fantasy of being at the helm, guiding a team to domestic & European honours. A billionaire who left his son's in charge, who had a worrying tendency to call the club a "franchise" a word that still sticks in the throat of some supporters. Malcolm Galzer controversially bought Manchester Utd and in the process saddled the club with a debt larger than Old Trafford. Ticket prices increased, however, and here is the crunch, the club were left to be run by people who know how to run a football club. Malcolm Glazer, nor his sons Avram nor Joel took any hand act or part in player selection or transfer dealings, outside of signing the cheques. There were of course dissenting voices, a hard core group of fans broke away and formed FC United so disillusioned with the way they club had been purchased by the Glazers and there is still a worry that with the level of the debt the club may have to offer up some of his leading players to satisfy the twin gods of increasing interest rates and financial institutions affected by the sub prime market, looking to restructure the deal and re coup as much as they can as fast as they can.

Which brings us back to the two star names. Drogba and Ronaldo. Having scored 41 goals this season it seemed churlish to insist that Ronaldo was no more than a slayer of mere mortals and could not elevate his game to stand in the Pantheon of the greats. Last night he put in a very effective performance that may not on it's merits completely dispel the concern but has certainly bought him enough time to improve in an attempt to try and live up to the hype surrounding him. Don't forget he is only 23 and his best years are surely yet to come. Whether he will move in the summer to allow the Glazer's enjoy their summer whilst not worrying too much about their outstanding debt remains to be seen, but what odds he stays for another 2 years and then moves?, what odds that Man Utd can discover another player of his talent or at least another player as effective? What odds United will continue to bring players into the club that fit with vision of how the game should be played, a vision first borne 50 years ago and cemented over the last 21 years under Sir Alex Ferguson? What odds that Manchester United will continue to operate the way a club should? short odds indeed.

Now what about Drogba? A player who in his recent Autobiography has stated he did not want to move to Chelsea from Marseilles, that he cried upon signing the contract that he wanted to leave on a number of occasions within his first two seasons? Drogba is not by any means the root cause of problems at Chelsea but he highlights it more than anyone else. He has let his own fans down countless time's with his mastering of the dark arts (as has let it be said, Ronaldo) his apparent lack of desire, his recent admittance that he never wanted to move to SW19 and his overall demeanour strike you as a man that does not enjoy his game but cannot tear himself away from the financial incentive to continue.

Roman Abramovich wanted history, tradition and respect. He spent £24 million on Didier Drogba, on his day the best centre forward on the planet. Didier Drogba who admits the money was too good to turn down. Didier Drogba who has become one of the most despised men in football by fans. You cannot engineer history, mould tradition nor buy respect. You have to plant the seeds, let them breathe, nurture them when the soil is too acidic an threatens to burn them up. You put the time in, you wait, you get your rewards.

In his mission to secure history, tradition and respect an far Roman Abramovich has failed.