The Brooklyn Cyclones have given students from all over New York the opportunity to create a jersey that the team will wear at an upcoming game! The winner will also throw out the first pitch at the game where the Cyclones will wear their new threads. One of these junior designers is Brooklyn’s own Liana Albano of Northside Catholic Academy in Williamsburg! Check out her home run caliber creation above and place your vote at the Cyclones’ contest website.

Go Liana!

With the news that Hollywood is thinking about launching a new version of “The Wizard of Oz,” TB9 unleashes an all-out assault on the horrifying trend that is the “remake.”

Warner Brothers is reportedly interested in remaking the 1930s classic “The Wizard of Oz.” Two ideas are being mulled over, including one that features Dorothy’s granddaughter returning to Oz to fight the forces of evil. You read that right, folks. You just can’t make this stuff up.

I’ve had all I can stand and I can’t stands no more! To all the moronic Hollywood executives out there in la la land: stop raping my freakin’ childhood! I guess we can add creativity to the list of things that have gone bankrupt in California over the last few years.

What in the hell has happened to historical perspective? Has Hollywood become so dull and uninspired that the only way a movie gets made these days is if it’s a remake? Horror was the first genre in which we saw these “new visions.” Flicks like “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” and “Dawn of the Dead” led the way for this new remake trend and you know what? They weren’t that bad. But what’s happened now is they let it get out of control – they’ve even remade classic horror properties like “Halloween,” “Friday the 13^th” and the upcoming “A Nightmare on Elm Street.”

Over the last few years, here are just some of the horror movies that were remade or share the same name as the original: “Halloween,” “Friday the 13^th,” “A Nightmare on Elm Street,” “The Hills Have Eyes,” “Last House on the Left,” “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” “The Wolfman,” “The Crazies,” “My Bloody Valentine,” “Dawn of the Dead,” “Sorority Row,” “Prom Night,” “Black Christmas,” and to an extent, even Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland” is a remake, albeit a bastardized one that should have never seen the light of day. (Another thought for another day)

The virus is spreading – more genres are beginning to reboot franchises and remake movies that aren’t even two decades old. Over the last few months, we’ve gotten word of restarts for film series’ like “Spider-Man” and “American Pie.” Are they really going to remake “American Pie?” The first movie came out just over ten years ago! More importantly than that – unlike “Spider-Man,” it’s not like “American Pie” is an established franchise. When they wanted to make the original “American Pie,” they could have just remade “Porkys,” right? At least they went out of their way to create new characters. Folks are lazy now – instead of thinking of original ideas, they simply attach themselves to ideas that already worked and hope for the best.

Let’s go back to “Oz” for a second. When I was a kid, my mother first introduced me to the original movie. While I don’t watch it every day, I can honestly say there’s definitely an emotional connection that can be had from watching something your parents did. I’ll definitely show my future children the original, as well. All these remakes do is further the notion that newer is always better and create totally unnecessary generational divisions.

When done correctly and after a certain period of time, remakes or newer versions of classic properties can be worthwhile. For instance, “Star Trek” was absolutely fantastic, and the recent Robert Downey Jr. version of “Sherlock Holmes” was entertaining as well. It goes without saying that what Christopher Nolan has done with the Batman character over the last half-decade is truly the greatest triumph in the short history of the “comic book movie” genre. However, the time between original and remake is becoming shorter and shorter and in some cases, it’s just not worth trying to recapture what the made the originals so special. “The Wizard of Oz” is certainly one of those cases.

Let it be known that I’m definitely leaving out some titles that are being remade, and that’s because there have to be at least thirty to thirty-five remakes we’ll be seeing over the next five years or so. What the hell Hollywood?! What the hell.

That said, I’ll see you guys in 2022 for the “Avatar” remake in Digital 4D Highest Definition featuring All-5-Sensovision.

As social networking tools expand, are they putting us in danger? A brief look at upcoming features Facebook looks to offer users as well as the spike in popularity of location dependent social networking tool foursquare. Check out more after the break.

Are social networking tools becoming too invasive? At an upcoming developer’s conference, Facebook is expected to announce the addition of location services for their users. In other words, now you’ll be able to tell people not only what you’re doing, but where you are when you’re doing it. The concept is hardly cutting edge, as sites like foursquare have been doing it for some time now. Nevertheless, the bold steps these social networking tools take means less privacy and potential danger for the user.

Please Rob Me!
As the popular site Please Rob Me (pleaserobme.com) points out, location services can also potentially leave your home open to burglary. If you’re at a friend’s house for a party, you can “check-in” at the house, and potentially spread his address all over the internet. Thankfully, if it the location hasn’t already been submitted for public consumption, foursquare also provides the option of checking-in without publishing an address. If you check in elsewhere, it also means that you aren’t at home. It’s an invitation for trouble.

Ken is totally getting mugged right now. LOLZ!
With the advent of these location-dependent social networking tools, users also leave themselves open for physical harm. Did you anger somebody you know lately? Make sure they’re not following your every move on foursquare. One moment you could be tweeting about this awesome new pizza place you found, and the next you could need an ambulance. It’s a lot harder to write 140 character blurbs about your day when you’ve got a broken arm.

Predator’s Paradise
If the internet made it easier for sexual predators to find their prey, these location dependent services can make it a cakewalk. Predators can look at who is checking-in at the mall and find out if it’s worth taking a trip over there to “bump” into someone they may have met online.

While these tools may have their appeal from a marketing standpoint, there are also frightening ways they can be exploited by people with bad intentions. As always, be sure to keep a tight grasp on your social media presence, or you could leave yourself open for the unthinkable.

By Kevin Korber

Like most film obsessives, I place more stock in the Academy Awards than I really should. Mostly, I think I do this out of some innate desire to have something to complain about, and since the Academy is well-known for making at least one egregious misfire per year with the awards it gives out. Quite honestly, I would not have had a lot to say last year had Mickey Rourke’s harrowing performance in The Wrestler been snubbed in favor of rewarding Sean Penn’s above-average performance in Milk as a political statement.

It seems, though, that I was not alone in my distaste for the Academy Awards; there were plenty of people who voiced their dissatisfaction with the show’s steadily declining ratings each year. What the Academy determined, however, was that this was the result of a long standing problem that the general public has had with the Oscars: the films that are nominated for the top prizes are often films that the general public has never seen or heard of before. Though this is, I think, largely an exaggeration based on the perceptions that the Academy is run by film snobs (which they kind of are) and that the general public are morons (which they kind of are), it was safe to say that none of the five films nominated last year had a wide enough release for the general public to even care about them.

Oscar’s solution? Invite more people to the party.

This year, the Academy decided to nominate ten films for Best Picture, instead of the normal five. As a result, you have the acclaimed-yet-little-seen arthouse fare that the Academy normally likes (The Hurt Locker, An Education, A Serious Man, Up in the Air) sitting well-received films that were very popular (Avatar, District 9, Up, Inglourious Basterds). Even with the nominee field expanded to ten films, the lead up to the ceremony has been about two films alone: Avatar and The Hurt Locker.

As a way to draw interest in the show, the Academy are geniuses in implying that the Best Picture is down to those two films. (It also offsets the fact that the other major categories have all but been decided, but more on that later.) Not only does it create an interesting David vs. Goliath dynamic, with Hurt Locker coming in with a small budget and excellent critical word-of-mouth and Avatar having not only cost close to a billion dollars, but having recouped that cost on ticket sales alone. On top of that, there’s also the much-addressed matter of Hurt Locker director Kathryn Bigelow being Avatar director James Cameron’s ex-wife. However, the new format for the nominees could result in neither film walking away with the top prize this year.

You see, when the Academy changed the number of Best Picture nominees to ten, they also changed the way in which the winner is selected. In most of the categories, the voters are asked to pick one nominee out of the five options given. With Best Picture, there’s been a switch to a preferential ballot: basically, the voters rank the nominees from favorite to least favorite. Whichever film gets the least #1 votes after one count is eliminated, and the votes are counted again and again until a consensus pick is reached. Where this complicates things is that the most polarizing films mathematically get eliminated. Theoretically, those films that get a large amount of number 1 votes could also get an equal amount of “least favorite” votes, and with the hype surrounding the two films now, it’s entirely possible that there are voters who will give short shrift to both Avatar and The Hurt Locker simply because they’re sick of hearing about them. (I know that sounds immature, but the people who are voting are no less human than any of us.) The same could be said about Precious, the Sundance sweetheart that polarized when it came out. Ditto for District 9, a sci-fi film in a contest that never liked sci-fi films, and Up, which most voters will probably be content with just giving the Best Animated Film statue to. The Blind Side also gets discounted here, seeing as it was the most critically disliked of the ten films and equally as polarizing as any of the other mentioned films. In this possible scenario, which film could be the dark horse that rides to victory? Look no further than the fast-talking director with the big chin.

When it comes down to it, should the Academy decide to ignore the mountains of hype for both Avatar and The Hurt Locker, I would say the most likely candidate for an upset is Inglourious Basterds. Aside from Tarantino having the power of the Weinstein Company’s Oscar-campaigning machine behind him, he did make a startlingly complex, performance-driven piece of work, the kind the Academy tends to like. Setting the film up as a (sort of) historical drama set in World War II helps his case here, as does their perception of Tarantino as a prodigal son, a talented wunderkind who created a masterpiece back in 1994, only to go wander around in the genre film tribute wilderness for a decade before coming back with what is arguably his best work since the masterpiece he created in 1994.

Okay, the likelihood of Basterds walking away with the top prize is slim: most have already anointed The Hurt Locker to be this year’s winner by virtue of it winning almost every major award this year. As for the other categories, Kathryn Bigelow is a shoo-in to be the first female Best Director winner, Jeff Bridges will win Best Actor for a heartbreaking turn in Crazy Heart, and Sandra Bullock seems poised to win Best Actress for the over-budget Hallmark Original Movie The Blind Side. The Supporting Acting categories were effectively decided months ago, with Basterds’ Christoph Waltz and Precious’ Mo’Nique winning every major award for their (brilliant) performances.

Still, with the drama behind the Best Picture nominees and the higher likelihood of an upset, this year’s Academy Awards promises to be more interesting than in years past. One thing is certain: I will take it too seriously and I will find something about it that I can bitch about for a few months.

Ken Bruno brings you a quick news brief for Friday, including news about Ben Stiller and the release date of the long-awaited iPad!By Kenneth Bruno

A sketch lampooning Academy Award favorite Avatar featuring Sasha Baron Cohen and Ben Stiller was cut from the Oscar broadcast for fear of angering James Cameron. Cohen will not attend the awards in protest. Is it me, or does this sound like the beginning of James Cameron’s plan for world domination? His movies have made the equivalent of the GDP of a small country, I wouldn’t want to make him mad – maybe the dude has an army.

Despite the Academy’s move, Cameron insists he would have been fine with the spoof. Or so he says. Then, when we least expect it – the Terminator theme song is our new national anthem.

Source: NY Daily News

Speaking of world domination, Apple announced that the iPad had been pushed back several days, with the official release date now scheduled for April 3rd. Just some advice – if you want the iPad, don’t camp out, just pre-order the thing. Apple starts taking online orders on March 12th. The entry-level model is priced at $499.

Source: Engadget

Javier Vazquez - a name that has a left a sour taste in the mouths of Yankee fans all over the globe. Vazquez was the starting pitcher responsible for the worst Yankee loss ever – a 22-0 drubbing that came at the hands of the Cleveland Indians back in August 2004.

After Vazquez was shipped to Arizona in return for legendary southpaw Randy Johnson, Yankee fans were sure that Javy was just an unpleasant footnote in Yankee history. They were wrong. Vazquez has returned to the Bronx, eager to write his redemption story. But was he really all that bad?

Vazquez seems to have been grouped with Yankee failures such as Kevin Brown, Jaret Wright and the “American Idle” himself, Carl Pavano. But stats don’t lie – his first tenure with the Yankees was not as bad as any of the above mentioned flops. Let’s just remind you of some points that may change your mind about the 33-year-old right-hander.

He was an All-Star in 2004.
This fact is seemingly forgotten by a great deal of Yankee fans. Let’s repeat that so it sinks in: Javier Vazquez was an All-Star. Vazquez pitched in 18 games in the first half of 2004, going 10-5 with a 3.56 ERA.

Javy won 3 more games in the 1^st half of the season than 2004 AL Cy Young winner Johan Santana. His 10 victories also matched the number of wins Roger Clemens had in the first half of his Cy Young Award winning 2004 campaign.

He’s versatile.
While it cannot be argued Javy’s production dropped off significantly in the 2^nd half of the season, it was almost certainly due to well documented shoulder issues. Other than Vazquez’s first two seasons in Montreal and the 2004 campaign in New York, Vazquez has never pitched under 200 innings a season. His 2490 IP puts him in the top 10 of active players in the game.

2009 Cy Young Award Candidate
Javy had the best season of his career in 2009, going 15-10 for a 2.87 ERA. If he played on a better team last year, it is entirely possible he could have won 20 games – all but 1 of his losses was by 3 runs or less. He was not a leading candidate for the award, but he was in the conversation.

He’s not being asked to lead
Despite a 4.91 ERA in 2004, Vazquez tied with Jon Lieber for a team-best 14 wins. Back then, the team expected him to be the ace at the top of an aging pitching staff. Six years can make a big difference – Javy is now the veteran at the back end of the rotation. With the pressure to perform not as significant this time, the odds he has a successful season are in his favor.

Vazquez is nowhere near as horrible as some Yankee fans with foggy memories may lead you to believe. In fact, for the price they paid – a mediocre center fielder – Vazquez was a steal.

Besides, would you rather have either Gaudin or Mitre out there? I thought so.

On Sunday, an earthquake struck Chile – one that was even higher on the Richter scale than the one that left Haiti reeling. Where’s Jay-Z now? Where’s the group of entertainers that remade “We Are The World?” It was not this long before these highly visible individuals had set up channels that the general public could use to send relief to Haiti.

In the grand scheme of things – and it is absolutely horrible to even have to make this comparison – Chile may not have lost as many lives as Haiti. However, people did die. People do not have homes anymore. And yet the response from the people who can make the general public listen has been questionable, at best. No matter what they tell you, this is not surprising: celebrities will always do what is best for their public image first. After they’ve got that great publicity, though? They’ve done their good deed for a few years. You’ll see them again when (hopefully, if) a natural disaster occurs again a few years down the line.

At the end of the day, suffering is relative. But an all too large portion of the public treats relief like a fad – they’ve donated to their one cause for the year and that’ll be that. They’ve been conditioned to respond this way because that’s how their favorite celebrities respond.

- KB

Below are ways you can make your contribution to the relief efforts in Haiti and Chile. I understand that this is not CNN in terms of readership, but if one person reads this and makes a donation, then I’ve done my job.

How You Can Help Chile and Haiti:

Text “CHILE” to 90999 to donate $10 to the Red Cross

Text “HAITI” to 90999 to donate $10 to the Red Cross

HubSpot’s third “State of the Twitterverse” report generated buzz (not Buzz, Google; sorry) after they concluded that the rate at which new users were joining the social media phenomenon had slowed significantly. In the period they measured – October to March ’09 – new user sign-ups had dropped almost 10%.

But do not be alarmed Tweeters, the sky is not falling.

In fact, the millions of users that are already tweeting have become more engaged by Twitter. The average Twitter user, at the time this report was published, has 300 users following their 140 character blurbs, as opposed to 70 back in July. The number of accounts you follow has also grown exponentially – from 47 in July to 143 at the time HubSpot released their view of the “Twitterverse.”

Sad that you don’t have as many people reading your tweets as Ashton or Shaq? Don’t be – the average Twitter user has less than 100 followers.

Independent parties aren’t the only ones singing the praises of Twitter – data released by the company themselves pulled back the curtain on just how many tweets are sent per day. The total? A whopping 50 million tweets per day, or 600 tweets per second.

It appears that Twitter is learning from the mistakes of their awkward social networking uncle, MySpace. With deals in place with Google, Microsoft, and most recently Yahoo, they should be in good shape for years to come.

Even Conan O’Brien has joined in on the fun. No bitter 140 character assaults on Jay Leno yet, unfortunately.

**Cheap Plug**
Follow me on Twitter @KennethBruno

What do you think the future holds for Twitter?

-Ken

Accompanied by his mother Kultida, the world watched a repentant Tiger Woods address his friends and the media on Friday. The five minute statement was the first public address Woods had delivered since November, when a suspicious accident at Woods’ Florida home led to the revelation that the once squeaky clean golf icon had engaged in multiple extramarital affairs.

Woods addressed the reaction that the scandal had received from not only the media, but his family and friends. “Many of you in this room are my friends. Many of you in this room know me. Many of you have cheered for me, you worked with me, or you supported me. Now every one of you has good reason to be critical of me. I want to say to each of you, simply and directly, I am deeply sorry for my irresponsible and selfish behavior I engaged in,” he said.

Tiger also confirmed reports that he had received in-patient treatment for sex addiction for 45 days spanning from December to February.

He then addressed the children who have looked up to the golf star or who have benefited from his philanthropic endeavors. “My behavior has caused considerable worry to…most importantly, the young students we reach. Our work is more important than ever. Thirteen years ago, my dad and I envisioned helping young people achieve their dreams through education. This work remains unchanged and will continue to grow. From the Learning Center students in Southern California to the Earl Woods scholars in Washington, D.C., millions of kids have changed their lives and I am dedicated to making sure that continues.”

His tone turned from somber to stern, though, when addressing allegations that his wife Elin struck him with a golf club on Thanksgiving night. “Elin never hit me that night or any other night… Elin has shown enormous grace and poise throughout this ordeal. Elin deserves praise, not blame.” Woods also urged the paparazzi to take a step back from the heavy coverage of his family’s lives. “However, my behavior doesn’t make it right for the media to follow my two-and-a-half-year-old daughter to school and report the school’s location. They staked out my wife and they pursued my mom. Whatever my wrongdoings, for the sake of my family: Please leave my wife and kids alone.”

The superstar also denied rumors of PED usage and set no time table for his return to the game that made him famous. “I do plan to return to golf one day. I just don’t know when that day will be. I don’t rule out that it will be this year. When I do return, I need to make my behavior more respectful of the game.”

Tiger knows his road to redemption is long, and he made a plea to those who supported his career during better times. “…Today I want to ask for your help. I ask you to find room in your heart to one day believe in me again.”

There’s only one way we’ll believe in you again, Tiger: zip up, shut up, and win.

-KB