I didn't note it last time, but Blondie's Reward was a somewhat tiresome entry in the series. I only saw part of it (and saw a bit of it before). Still, it's another case of him messing up after his boss shouldn't have trusted him in the first place. I think it gets a bit better as it goes along.
This week was Blondie's Secret (another dubious title though there is one at the very end) involving shenanigans about trying to keep Bumstead from going on vacation. This time it is his abilities that drive the plot. His boss actually wants him around.
(One movie review book talks about "bumbling crooks." A co-worker is the person who steals their luggage. Two other crooks are involved in another subplot. As usual, the subplots run together at the end.)
The film overall is paced okay. It is interesting (and nice) to see Bumstead shown to actually have some talent. This did arise in another film, where crooks hire him as a dupe to draw up plans. His plans turn out to be superior to his old firm's plans. These films perhaps suggest one reason he is kept around in the firm, even if he is such a goofball mess-up.
The latest film also has the dog Daisy playing an important role. A rather not too-hard-to-predict bit of trouble arose from one of the pesky neighbor boy's schemes.
The dog (and her pups) as well as morning meals (and someone, not always Dagwood, running into the mailman) are basic standards in these films. The film also brings out a famous Bumstead sandwich.
Overall, it is an average late entry but is relatively painless, and the "want Dagwood" bit makes it interesting.
More Mets
How did they do that exactly? How did they make it clear that they "didn't plan on competing"? Parity is such these days that if you are "competitive," you are "competing" for a playoff spot. A team hoving around .500 will be in competition for a wild card spot.
They didn't plan on competing for the 2023 playoffs. Other than that, what exactly did they do to harm their 2024 chances? Scherzer was addition by substraction. A few trades cut decent players, including an older good reliever who was gone at the end of the year anyhow.
The only move that could affect 2024 was washing their hands of Verlander. Verlander is over 40 and was hurt / not himself until midseason. They received a good prospect back. Mr. Q. is healthy too, knock on wood, providing a good starter. And, of course, Diaz is due to close.
The Mets m.o. has been to sign some decent short-timers, including the latest, Sean Manaea, who received a two-year deal (28M, player opt-out at the end of the season). Looks like he was paid 10M last season with decent returns, underlining how much it costs to get talent these days.
The team thus has two reasonable top of the line starters (one on a short deal) along with a bunch of back-end options. They signed three of these sorts of starters, including a reclamation project from the Yankees.
An outfielder from the Yankees was also signed. They are also starting to pick up relievers. I expect to see them pick up one or more relievers stand out in the future. Then, there will be a decision to sign a DH or rely on one or more of the in-house options. Nothing very exciting.
2024 should be "competitive" but not for the division. The Mets will look to have their young talent develop. The team is not "on the verge" as such. So, I'm not appalled here. They should work toward firming up what they have. Spending money on big contracts is dubious until they show they can win.
Mets fans have a reason to be upset at year-after-year futility. Nonetheless, the "tanking" business or "worse than last year" (how? a mediocre team can get mid-70s wins; Diaz alone might help them win a few more games) is tiresome. A winning culture is a long-term thing.
Anyway, I think lower expectations (without feeling hopeless) will make the season more enjoyable.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your .02!