For those unaware, Mason Raymond’s arbitration ruling is set to be handed down later today. This is important for a number of reasons: first, there is a lot of anxiety over exactly how much Raymond will end up with in his arbitration award. Atlanta Thrashers forward Clarke MacArthur ended up with a $2.4M award last week, a rather substantial contract for someone who only notched 16 goals and 35 points last season. The Thrashers chose to walk away from the ruling, something which Mike Gillis could do if he were so inclined. So, whether or not Raymond stays with the club and how much he’d cost were he to stay will be known today.

I personally expect that Gillis will accept whatever the arbitrator hands out, barring a completely insane ruling (which I don’t think will happen.)

The other reason as to why today is so important is that Mason’s ruling will let Gillis know exactly how much money he has left to spend. The Canucks have been in a sort of a holding pattern ever since July 1st when they picked up Dan Hamhuis and Manny Malhotra. It’s been expected that Kevin Bieksa will be moved before training camp, Sami Salo’s recent injury notwithstanding. Raymond’s arbitration award will likely be the domino that sets into place the rest of whatever moves Mike Gillis will be making this offseason.

Will the Canucks see more free agent signing(s) to round out the bottom six? Will Bieksa simply bring back picks and/or prospects in any prospective deals or will there be something more substantial on the table? Very unclear until Raymond’s arbitration award is handed out.

As for the decision itself. I know some folks are concerned over how much exactly Raymond is going to get. There were comments made by Raymond’s agent, JP Barry, on the Team 1040 last week that supposedly has Raymond looking in the neighborhood of $3.5-$4.0M. Taking the MacArthur decision into consideration and it’s understandable how the Canucks could be footing the bill to a rather heavy caphit.

But I don’t think that’s going to be the case, for a couple of reasons. The first is that Rick Dudley, the GM of the Atlanta Thrashers, apparently didn’t make much of a case at MacArthur’s arbitration hearing. Depending on what rumors you listen to, Dudley wasn’t even present at the actual hearing itself. So, it’s hard to render a fair decision when one side doesn’t take the time to lay out a decent argument against giving a ton of money to a player. Gillis has made it very clear that he thinks very highly of Mason Raymond (see his post-Ballard trade comments at the draft if you don’t believe me) and will be coming out swinging for his hearing.

The second reason is that the criteria for what is and isn’t allowed as ‘evidence’ for arbitration hearings is very particular and limited. Since the Thrashers walked away from the arbitration award, JP Barry can’t point to his contract and say ‘Raymond deserves a similar award.’ All the anxiety over MacArthur’s contract being a factor can go away, in other words.

And, okay, fine. Let’s assume that MacArthur’s ruling shows that the arbitrators this offseason are going to be siding with the players rather than the GMs. Hold on, let me put on my tinfoil hat. Okay, that’s better. Even assuming that, this brings me to my third point: Clarke MacArthur made $1.4M last season. While the cap hit of $2.4M doesn’t seem to match up too well with MacArthur’s own performance, MacArthur was only seeing a $1.0M raise over his last contract, or a 70% increase.

Looking at Mason Raymond, he made $800,000 last season. In order to get the $3.5-$4.0M contract JP Barry is hoping for, we’d have to see Raymond get a 400-500% increase in salary which, even in the world of professional sports, seems a little too optimistic in my mind.

Take a look at Kyle Wellwood, the only other player who went to arbitration who is comparable to Raymond. Wellwood had several seasons of being a 40 point player and had his best season as a goal scorer in 08/09 with the Canucks. He went to arbitration and only saw a $200,000 raise. Again, I’d argue that Mike Gillis will have been prepared and made a solid case for what he thinks Raymond should get.

Which brings me to my last point. There is a solid case that can be made against Raymond getting that dreaded $3.5-$4.0M contract. He’s young and unproven at being a consistent NHL contributor. Yes, he did put together an impressive season this year: 25 goals and 53 points and yes, he has improved every year he has been with the Canucks.

But consider this: of those 25 goals, only 8 were scored in the last 41 games of the season, and he only went on to score 3 goals in 12 playoff games. Consistency is the one major issue with Raymond. If you look at his point totals from 07/08, his rookie year, to 08/09, there is an increase in games played from 49 to 72, but only a 2 goal difference in points totals.

Keep in mind: I’m not bagging on Raymond here, I’m simply pointing out that he isn’t quite yet deserving of that big money contract. I imagine that he’ll end up with an award between $2.75-$3.0M. A rather substantial pay raise, but it’s one I think he’s deserving of given the gains he has made and the potential he shows.

We’ll see.

Despite Canada Day being a national holiday, Mike Gillis was hard at work for the Canucks, with 4 players getting signed to deals. Interestingly enough, this wasn’t a disappointing July 1st in terms of fan expectations: Mike Gillis said he was going to go out and find another defenseman and upgrade the bottom six and that’s precisely what he did.

Dan Hamhuis is clearly the centerpiece in today’s free agent signings. Hamhuis turned down more lucrative contracts in order to sign with the Canucks. The $4.5M/6 year deal looks pretty good, too. Hamhuis is 27, so his deal would take him until he’s 33. He also has potential to put up points: his rookie season saw him tally 38 points total.

Given that Nashville was a bit of an offensive black hole, it’s possible Hamhuis could ‘bounce back’ offensively. In that case, his deal would be looking like a steal. Hey, it could happen: both Mikael Samuelsson and Christian Ehrhoff have had very good seasons within the Canucks system, so odds are looking good for Hamhuis.

Even if Hamhuis ends up continuing with his usual points production I still like the contract. Waiting on Willie Mitchell could have really hamstrung the team and the Canucks were desperately needing another reliable defensive defenseman. Mitchell’s cap hit when he signed 4 years ago was $3.5. Going with contract inflation, a $1M increase for a younger player who has some potential upside isn’t that horrible in my mind.

Hamhuis’ arrival has also all but signified the end of Kevin Bieksa’s days in Vancouver. That alone should be cause for celebration amongst Canucks fans.

Manny Malhotra is the other big signing. Now, with all due respect to Pierre McGuire, but I think he’s out of line with the comments he made about this signing and the impact that it will have on Cody Hodgson. McGuire flat out said that the Canucks clearly don’t want Hodgson and that the youngster should be requesting a trade.

I think that’s a little much: Hodgson, as talented as he is and as big of a fan of him that I am, is untested at the NHL level. Throwing him into the deep end and expecting him to sink or swim is a bad idea unless you’re a generational talent like Crosby or Ovechkin. Far better to bring him along slowly. With Malhotra, the Canucks are getting a reliable, veteran bottom six center who improves the Canucks faceoffs, penalty kill and (ugh) truculence. Huge upgrade on Kyle Wellwood, given that the Canucks really didn’t need offensive output from him, and a great insurance marker in case Hodgson has some growing pains.

Additionally, the Canucks strengthen their center depth with Malhotra, something which I think is vitally important for teams looking to do some major damage in the playoffs. A center core of Henrik, Kesler, Malhotra and Hodgson looks pretty good to me, even if Hodgson ends up playing on the wing.

Then there’s Joel Perrault, another bottom six guy who was signed to a one way deal for $510,000. Perrault has spent the last couple of seasons in the AHL and I’d imagine that this is a very Jason Krog like move: if Perrault can’t make the Canucks he either bolts back to Switzerland (where he had a deal signed already) or goes down and helps out the Moose. I’m hoping Mario Bliznak beats out Perrault for the fourth line center spot and Perrault spends his time in Manitoba, but we’ll see.

Finally, there’s Jeff Tambellini, the final Canucks free agent signing of the day. It’s been confirmed that he was signed to a 2 way contract, so I imagine that he’ll be Moose fodder: he’s had several opportunities to try and make the Islanders and was outperformed by Robbie Schremp. On the other hand, Tambellini is a 30+ goal scorer in the AHL, so I imagine that this is Gillis’ way of replacing Grabner for the Moose. Not bad when you look at it that way, although if he can come through as a reclamation project, he’ll be an incredibly savvy signing.

All in all, a good day for the Canucks, especially as the Blackhawks continue to get rid of their assets, San Jose not making any significant moves and the Flames continue to be operating upon the basis of a man deep in the delirium of an ether binge.

So Mike Gillis and the Vancouver Canucks opted to make a deal with the Florida Panthers. Unlike the Indiana Jones franchise, it seems that making yet another trip to the well has paid off for the Canucks, as they obtained defenseman Keith Ballard and forward prospect Victor Oreskovich in exchange for Steve Bernier, Michael Grabner and the Canucks 1st round pick in this year’s draft.

Many folks are screaming bloody murder over the deal, believing that the Canucks were ripped off or overpaid. I will admit that I was initially one of those folks, although I will attribute that to my being a fan of Grabner and being a little irrational when hearing that the Austrian had been traded. Having given it some more thought, though, I actually really like the deal. Broken down, it makes a lot of sense and isn’t as bad as one would think.

Let’s take a look, shall we?

Assets Coming In

With Willie Mitchell sitting on the injured reserve this past season and with no real immediate help in the Canucks farm system available, it was clear that the Canucks were desperately needing to upgrade their backend if they were wanting to continue being the Stanley Cup contenders that their fans want them to be. Even if Willie Mitchell is no longer feeling post-concussion symptoms, and I’m skeptical as to how close to 100% Mitchell is given the timing of his announcement, the Canucks still needed to upgrade the backend in the worst way.

Enter Ballard. Although he isn’t a gigantic Norris candidate that can also put up points (and really, who outside of Chara, Pronger and perhaps Myers would qualify?), he is a physical, fast skating forward who is more than capable in his own end. His skillset alone should be making fans happy as he is almost exactly what folks were hoping and praying Gillis would pick up at the trade deadline. Throw in the fact that he is signed for another five years and has a cap hit of $4.2M and fans should be rejoicing that Gillis picked him up.

What’s that? You mean that his cap hit is not an albatross hanging from his neck? I’d argue yes. While he does become the Canucks highest paid defenseman, it’s not by a significant amount and it’s not something that should be held against him. Regardless, even if the Canucks plan was to sign a free agent defenseman July 1st, they’d be paying at minimum $4.2M or more for a contract. For reference, the top UFA defensemen this offseason are Sergei Gonchar (who is reportedly looking for a deal north of $5M/year), Dan Hamhuis (who has been rumored to be seeking a deal in the $4.5M range),  Paul Martin (who was making $4.5M this past season) and Anton Volchenkov (who will more than likely be receiving a deal that pays him $5M+/year.) No matter how you slice it, the Canucks were going to have to pony up some cash to upgrade the blueline.

Interestingly, Ballard’s contract has a limited no-trade clause. Starting last July, he had to list 7 teams which he would accept a deal to. Assuming he didn’t further waive his NTC, that means he liked the Canucks enough to include them on his list last off-season, which is a good sign, as hopefully he’ll enjoy playing here.

Unfortunately, I don’t know a whole lot about Victor Oreskovich beyond the fact that his name is more annoying to spell than mine. I do know that his addition to the Canucks roster DOUBLES the total number of people named Victor that are on the Canucks payroll. Oreskovich joins Victor de Bonis, who is the team’s Chief Operating Officer. I guess you could say that Oreskovich’s impact is immediate, as he’s already given the Canucks a pair of ‘vic’-tories.

That was horrible and I apologize. More seriously, Oreskovich is a big man who likes to hit. Depending on how you look at it, he’s either an upgrade on perennial AHLer Pierre Cedric Labrie, who was moved at this year’s trade deadline, or a downgrade on Steve Bernier. Depends on what part of his skillset you want to obsess over. I’m unsure where he’ll end up, but Gillis did state in his presser after the first round that ‘our third line can’t be constituted with guys who are goal scoring players’ translated that means the Canucks bottom six will be more rough and tumble and less finesse and flash this year, which means he’ll probably be getting a shot.

Also, both players have connections to Vancouver: Ballard played under Canucks assistant coach Rick Bowness in Phoenix and Oreskovich is familiar with Dave Gagner, Director of Player Development for the Canucks.

Assets Going Out

Steve Bernier, despite my defending him over the course of the past season, wasn’t meeting expectations and his $2.5M contract made him a liability. While I don’t think he was as bad/inept as people were making him out to be (he did play most of the season injured or WAS injured) he had slipped down into the bottom six and was underperforming relative to what he was making. Not a good combination and I think most people are happy to see him gone.

Michael Grabner, on the other hand, has captured the attention of most Canucks fans. Unfortunately, there really wasn’t a lot of room on the roster for Grabner: with the Sedins, Kesler, Samuelsson and Burrows all occupying fulltime spots in the top six and with Mike Gillis intending to get Mason Raymond signed to a deal, there wasn’t any room to slot Grabner in, especially if you go with Gillis’ comments about not wanting goal scorers on the third line. Factor in players such as Cody Hodgson and Jordan Schroeder, both of whom have higher potential than Grabner, and it’s clear that Grabner got lost in the shuffle. Unfortunate, but he’ll be getting a very real chance to shine down in Florida, which is probably the best possible situation for him.

Finally, there’s the 25th selection who ended up being Quinton Howden. I know it’s incredibly rash to render judgment on a player who just got drafted, but based off of what Bob McKenzie and Pierre McGuire were saying, Howden looks like he’s going to be a bit of a project and will take some time to develop. That’s of no benefit to the Canucks, who are clearly in ‘win now’ mode. I do appreciate that the Gillis made some aspect of the deal conditional contingent on whether or not certain players were available.

So the NHL Awards were tonight and Henrik Sedin just won the Hart. I’d just like to take the time to say…

Check out what I wrote back in January if you don’t believe me!

I should have some stuff up on Friday for the NHL Entry Draft, as well. Til then, I think I’m just going to bask in the awesomeness of Hank’s Hart trophy.

There was talk about the newfound purpose and focus the Canucks had and that they weren’t merely happy to have made it to the second round. Unfortunately, it didn’t do them a whole lot of good as Chicago slowly but surely took them over and curbstomped them.

By Game 3 things were largely decided. I wrote earlier that the Canucks needed to essentially nut up or shut up for Game 4 and show that they had the mental resiliency to bounce back and not take stupid penalties or let crappy officiating dictate things. Well, they came up with that 1 game too late, but by then, it wasn’t a matter of IF the Hawks could finish off the Canucks but when.

Yeah, I sound like a real fairweather fan here, but I’ll argue that the Canucks performance left a lot to be desired in the last couple games of the series. There were a number of problems dating back to the Kings series that served as huge warning signs.

The biggest for me? Alain Vigneault and the rest of the coaching staff’s decision to sit back and not do much about the penalty kill for three days. In the playoffs three days is a lot of time and taking that long to try and correct or address something could spell disaster.

I’m not necessarily arguing that the Canucks would’ve beaten the Blackhawks had they practiced three days earlier. Maybe getting on it earlier could’ve stomped out a problem before they started, maybe not. What I am arguing is that there seemed to be a real lack of preparation or evidence of a solid game plan with the Canucks, particularly against Chicago, a team they should’ve written a book or two on.

It could be seen in the way the Canucks got off of their game from Game 3 onwards. Daniel Sedin in particular was looking particularly surly and off his game, although other players were taking stupid penalties and costing the team. It could be seen with AV’s decision to bring back Ryan Johnson, who had missed over a month of playing time and put him out into the faltering penalty kill unit, opting to place a fourth liner making over a million dollars (and one who had been a fantastic disappointment in his time with Vancouver) out there in lieu of the Sedin twins, who had volunteered their services and had actually helped improve the penalty kill. It showed with AV’s decision to place Demitra in the press box and elevate Jannik Hansen to the second line…all while keeping Michael Grabner out of the mix, despite his showing some promise both in the limited minutes he had in the playoffs and with Ryan Kesler and Mason Raymond in the regular season…both of whom had rather disappointing playoff performances.

Roberto Luongo also faltered, especially when it counted. Watching the game last night, every goal was scored on the breakaway or on an odd-man rush. One of them being shorthanded. No matter how you slice it, last night was an absolutely disappointing performance from the Canucks star goaltender and has many fans nervously tugging their collars and wondering just what precisely has management gotten themselves into with this new super long contract.

And you know? I want to be positive and optimistic about things. It’s almost assured that the Canucks are going to be seeing an upgrade on their backend this offseason. Probably the biggest weakness of the Canucks was in the form of the defense: having Andrew Alberts, Kevin Bieksa and Shane O’Brien eating up significant minutes was a recipe for disaster, as evidenced last night. The good news is that there are pieces available to Mike Gillis to make a move for a defenseman: there’s goalie prospect Cory Schneider, plus some depth to Canucks forwards. Mason Raymond could be potentially moved with both Michael Grabner and Cody Hodgson knocking on the door. Gillis has most of his draft picks also at his disposal for next season (missing the second and third for the upcoming draft) so there’s some stuff there.

The Canucks do have a bright future ‘down on the farm’, too. Although Vancouver is still hurting from the loss of Luc Bourdon and lack the high level talent on the blueline that a player like Bourdon could’ve become, there are some promising players in the system, notably Jordan Schroeder, who went pro at the end of his NCAA year this season, defenseman Kevin Connauton, who jumped over to junior hockey this season after also playing in the NCAA and defenseman Yann Sauve who went to the Q Finals with the Saint John Sea Dogs. There’s also the aformentioned Cody Hodgson and a few other players kicking around the system.

Finally, there’s the fact that there are several Canucks who are up for awards for their work in the regular season. While it’s nice to get recognition for Canucks players, I’ll spin this in a way by saying that win or lose, Ryan Kesler and Henrik Sedin should use their fantastic regular seasons as motivation to perform better in the playoffs. Probably wishful thinking here, buuuuuuut it’d be nice to see some newfound motivation in the Canucks next season.

All that said, I’d like to say congratulations to the Chicago Blackhawks and wish them all the best going into the Western Conference Final. I know it may sound treasonous, but being a long suffering fan of the Canucks, I can’t help but empathize with a team that had to suffer for so long under the yoke of former owner Bill Wirtz. Dude didn’t televise Hawks home games locally because he thought it’d help drive ticket sales, didn’t enjoy spending money on the team and was just a real prick of an owner.

Anyway, I’m rambling now. I’ll probably have a few pieces linked up on Canucks prospects, the draft, free agency and some other assorted stuff over the summer, but that’ll be about it. I hadn’t really blogged heavily on the Canucks before midway through this season and had a ton of fun, so I should be back again next season.

Forewarning: Despite being a geek and a bit of a comic book nerd I’ve never really sunk myself into Iron Man all that much. I’m somewhat familiar with the character, most of it dealing with the 80s version of Tony Stark/Iron Man.  So if my understanding is fundamentally flawed, sorry. Also, I do have a Canucks post in the pipeline. I’d just like to take a little while to get away from the sting of having been eliminated. Probably a little later tonight, okay?

So I had caught Iron Man 2 the other day and it was an interesting flick. How interesting could a run of the mill summer action flick based on a comic book title actually be? Well, given that I am a gigantic fan of The Dark Knight and everything Christopher Nolan did with that particular film and the first Iron Man flick, I had to say that I was hoping for more good things.

The question for me, though, after watching Iron Man 2 was whether the film was a poorly constructed neoconservative’s wetdream or a clever satire on American foreign policy/militaristic attitudes that was limited due to the film’s subject matter.

There is a third option, of course: I’m fucking overanalyzing the hell out of the film, so keep that one in mind as I go through this review.

It’s hard not to try and ascribe any sort of political meaning to Iron Man 2. The inclusion of a subplot involving the American government makes it really hard for a viewer not to try and create any sort of political entanglements, whether they were intended by director Jon Favreau or not. And, okay, fine, I can appreciate that the involvement of the US government is a plot device with regards to the Iron Man suit and the potential threat it poses to world safety but there are two problems specifically with that.

The first is the inclusion and involvement of SHIELD in the film, who are operating with their own separate interests in mind. I thought that perhaps SHIELD’s involvement with the US government would have explained some of what they were doing in relation to Tony Stark and Stark Industries (specifically the insertion of Scarlett Johansson’s character into the company), but nope. As a result, the viewer is forced to assign more importance to the government’s role in the film, personified with the (appropriately?) named Senator Stern.

The second reason, though, is the incorporation of political symbols in the film. The most blatant comes early on in the film with the subversion of Obama’s ‘Hope’ campaign poster: As Tony Stark, Robert Downey Jr. has a rather lengthy scene where he carries around a take off to the ‘Hope’ poster. Instead of Obama’s portrait it is Iron Man’s visage, with Iron Man replaced below it as the text. Cute.

There are other instances, as well, although none as blatant. I particularly liked the scene where Stark uses what looks like a prototype of Captain America’s shield to prop up some machinery of his in his workspace. More on that in a second.

Which makes me wonder what is going on in the film. On the one hand, you could see the Iron Man ‘Obama’ poster as being a gleeful potshot at Obama. Folks aren’t interested in wishy washy things like ‘hope’ or ‘change’ or ‘healthcare.’ They are more interested in a nuclear deterrent. A strong, powerful (and, American!) figure who can keep the world in check and maintain peace. They need him and the Stars and Stripes (this is where Captain America’s shield comes in) rely on this mythical being. This is a subject that is repeatedly hammered into the viewer’s head throughout the film: Iron Man is a symbol of peace. By being incredibly powerful and capable of instilling fear in nations throughout the world he is capable of maintaining the status quo. Powerful stuff and all the justification for the continuation of America’s military industrial complex, right?

Well, maybe not. Take Stark’s insistence that the Iron Man suit ‘isn’t a weapon.’ Despite it being a completely laughable statement, you have to wonder if perhaps there is a more altruistic approach being taken here in the film. Perhaps the film is trying to challenge the military-industrial complex that plagues American politics, most specifically the Iron Triangles that exist in the American system and is examined within the context of the film vis-à-vis Justin Hammer and the Department of Defense. Perhaps the subversion of the Obama poster that I referred to earlier is a cheeky way of arguing that things do need to change. Perhaps not by letting one guy walk around in a walking nuclear reactor and dictate foreign policy, but perhaps there is a need for change from the dangerous and clearly villainous practices of Justin Hammer et al.

Then again, perhaps the film is trying to state that the efforts of the peace loving left and folks like Obama attempting to try and bring about real change and reformation within America is as hopeless as trying to break the Iron(man?) Triangle, so sod off.

See what I mean about this film being potentially undecided about what it is trying to say?

It gets further complicated when you look at some of the other stuff that was going on in the film. The biggest thing for me was the sheer amount of glass breaking going on. Many, many sheets of glass are shattered without thought through pretty much all of the film’s battle sequences. I understand that, LOL, comic book movie and that there has to be some suspension of disbelief going on in a film. I’m really not trying to be the guy that nitpicks the hell out of a movie (probably too late for that, right?) but when there’s something that, to me, is so blatant it does interfere with my enjoyment of the film and makes me wonder: is this sloppy film making or was there a reason behind it.

And I mean, yeah, okay. Name a comic book film where property values aren’t driven through the floor due to some titanic slugfest. There’s not too many. However, I will state that most of these comic book films either carefully manage the potential risk that is posed to innocent civilians where it becomes a non-issue. I like to call this the Power Rangers/Godzilla Effect where, despite innumerable skyscrapers and tall buildings getting pounded into dust literally no one dies and given the nature of what you’re watching it’s acceptable because that disconnect has already been made.

Conversely, the threat to innocent people is made a part of the plot. Take, for instance, the Spiderman films. The first two have innocents getting threatened with serious harm as a result of the fight going on between Peter Parker and the villain du jour and Spidey has to do that whole great power/great responsibility thing that is a part of his character. This concept gets partially subverted in Spiderman 3, as the bulk of the fights occur in uninhabited places (sewers/subway tunnels and an abandoned construction site late at night.) It makes sense with Spiderman: protecting innocents is sort of his thing and is a part of the character. Same deal with The Dark Knight: the whole film is about the consequences of Bruce Wayne’s/Batman’s actions and the impact they have in Gotham. There are the copycat Batmen as well as folks like the Joker arriving on scene and upping the ante. Given how Favreau set the table at the beginning of the film, I was expecting to see a similar exploration in Iron Man 2

It doesn’t make as much sense as in, say, the Incredible Hulk, where he’s running around tearing apart tanks like they’re made out of tissue paper and hurling them around. People are probably fucking dying horribly here but it’s glossed over. Fair enough.

So in Iron Man 2, where Tony Stark is served with a subpoena and has to show up at a Senate hearing regarding his armor suit and the moral implications of letting one guy run around with this dangerous weapon/non-weapon. You start to think that perhaps morality and consequences of Tony Stark’s actions may enter into the equation. That there is a very real risk that he could be putting tons of lives at risk because of his shortsighted and reckless behavior. I mean, Stark is portrayed as being nothing but reckless, impulsive and stubborn. That’s essentially who he is in these films and, like most good films, you’re probably going to see a character arc going on with the main protagonist and lead character.

Instead, we see a drunk Iron Man skeet shooting at his birthday party, shooting glass and metal plates from what looks like 10 feet away from his unprotected guests. I’ve worked in restaurants and bars before and breaking a glass simply by dropping it can have all sorts of disastrous results: glass is one of those mythical substances that can get just about anywhere and can be really dangerous. Yet here we see Iron Man pulverizing some dangerous materials literally right in front of a crowd of people. I was really expecting someone to get it in their eye or get hurt somehow and have this be a pivotal moment for Stark’s character, but nope.

Which makes you wonder if there’s a greater meaning to all of these scenes that have wholesale destruction (and a lot of glass getting broken) and the political undercurrents of the film. Is Favreau poking fun at the war hawks who are all ‘WAR IS GOOD, KILL ‘EM ALL’ by saying that they’re like Stark and don’t think of the consequences…or is he just going ‘this will look really cool, roll it.’ It’s probably the latter, but still.

And, okay, let’s assume that there was some sort of message getting inserted into the film, a very basic WAR IS BAD/GUBBMINT SHOULD STOP KILLIN PEOPLE message, as evidenced with Justin Hammer (the film’s main villain) being a scummy military contractor who doesn’t place a great deal of importance on things like safety (evidenced with the shoddy design of the suits he’s trying to produce) and has shacked up with a Russian (Boo! Hiss! Evil Commie!) It’s hard to reconcile the shocking amount of blatant misogyny going on in the film.

Hoo boy, yeah, I went there. But I mean, when you have lines like:

“I call it ‘the Ex-Wife.’” (Regarding a bullet that seemingly destroys everything in its wake…but is then proven to be utterly impotent and useless when finally deployed against a…strong masculine target.)

“Did I lose both kids in the divorce?”

Whatever Bill O’Reilly was going on about regarding Pepper Potts, A WOMAN, being made CEO of Stark Enterprises.

In addition to a ton of male gaze (the camera shifts downwards numerous times, both when utilizing Stark’s point of view, but also in more neutral shots) it’s really weird to reconcile what’s going on. And, okay, if the use of misogyny is meant to portray Hammer in a negative light, why is it that characters on both sides are falling into this? Is it done merely to titillate (yes, probably) and am I again overreaching here? I don’t know, but the decision to have lingering shots focusing on the T&A of the female characters was a conscious one and I think does a disservice to not just the females in the film, but also Stark, who has always struck me as being more of a ladykiller and less of a mega-rich frat boy.

Now, all that said? I did enjoy the movie very much. I did think the action sequences were a little ‘meh’, which I think is problematic of having 2 characters in superpowered invincible suits slug away at each other, so hopefully the hints of seeing the Mandarin in Iron Man 3 will be realized. Loved the acting from just about all of the characters. RDJ kills it at Stark, Sam Rockwell is amazing as Justin Hammer and I really like the take on him compared to the 80s version I know (which is basically stereotypical 80s executive: a mashup of a Captain Planet villain and Michael Douglas’ character from Wall Street.) Gwyneth Paltrow, who I usually cannot stand as an actress (no real discernible reason) was great as Pepper and Mickey Rourke was convincing as The Evil Russian.

And of course Scarlet Johansson. While I thought she specifically suffered a lot from the male gaze I was speaking of earlier, I loved her character and thought she did a great job as Black Widow. I thought her action sequence right near the end was awesome. She’s not going to win any Academy Awards for her performance, but I thought she did a great job. Would’ve been even better had SHIELD’s involvement been fleshed out a bit more and if she hadn’t suffered from such blatant objectification (subtle objectification is fine, hurrrrrr), but I’ll take what I can get.

Good film, but if you’re overly analytical or prone to noticing things like me, it’ll probably leave your brain going into overdrive.

The talk going into this series is that the Canucks ‘wanted’ the Blackhawks, who ousted them last year in the playoffs. There was talk from the Canucks that they weren’t going to let Byfuglien bother them and they were going to take a measured, disciplined approach.

Well, it’s easy to maintain the facade of control and discipline when you never relinquish it, like the Canucks did in Game 1. It’s also easy when you’re in a hard fought game and are playing well, like in Game 2. (Sidenote: apologies for the lack of an update after Game 2.)

The real test to character/discipline/whatever comes not when things are going swell, but when everything is going to hell and things are crumbling down around you.

Like, say, Game 3 tonight. If it was supposed to be a character test for the Canucks, well, they failed miserably. Burrows taking a stupid penalty in the second was the beginning of the end for the Canucks and was the lowpoint in a game that saw the Canucks become a skating metaphor to Weezer’s ‘Unravelled (The Sweater Song.)’

Too many dumb scrums, including usually characteristically cool players like Daniel Sedin getting mixed in and the Canucks mettle seemed to wilt as the Blackhawks continued to press. On top of that, despite looking solid in the first period, the Canucks powerplay continued to be ineffective and it is something that desperately needs to be fixed if they want to have any hope of advancing past Chicago.

The Canucks cannot get caught up in the officiating or pointing fingers away from their own performance: the Canucks had their chances on the powerplay tonight and just haven’t been able to convert. Ryan Johnson was playing like the player I’ve been criticizing him for being. Dude was on the ice for 2 goals against, one of them being a powerplay goal that came 6 seconds in to the man advantage. Also of note is that Ryan Johnson only took 1 draw tonight, which came off of the aforementioned powerplay goal. Not a good sign when your highly vaunted faceoff/penalty kill specialist is taking turns sucking and blowing.

And since I’ve been sort of dancing around it, let’s talk about the officiating. Yes, it was garbage last night. But that’s not any different than the rest of the playoffs with other teams. Yes, the fifth goal shouldn’t have counted, if you compare Halak getting breathed upon by (I think) Mike Knuble in the Capitals/Habs game to what happened to Luongo. Yes, you could argue that the Blackhawks got away with a ton of interference all over the ice. You could also say that the Canucks got away with a missed too many men call or that Ryan Kesler was lucky he didn’t get called playing with a broken stick and put his team 2 men down.

Basically, what I am trying to say is that the officiating has been horrible in just about every game of every series this year. It is frustrating to watch, whether you are a fan of a team or not. Complaining about it, while it may make you feel better about the loss, isn’t going to do a whole hell of a lot.

The Canucks need to buckle up, focus on getting back to playing ‘disciplined’ and attempt to regain control of this series. Get the powerplay working, channel those emotions into on-ice results, not useless trashtalk. Forget about making a big deal of the officiating and just focus on playing.

The worst possible thing that Alain Vigneault could do is try and match ‘truculence’ with ‘truculence.’ I thought it was a mistake to take Michael Grabner out of the lineup, I also thought it was a mistake to dress Ryan Johnson. Darcy Hordichuk took the pregame warmup but did not play. I really hope that is as close as he gets to seeing action in the playoffs, because that is not a war the Canucks want to start waging.

The Canucks looked the best last night when they were forechecking and skating hard. You aren’t going to get that with Hordichuk and/or Johnson out there. You’re also going to have a huge defensive liability if you have a fourth line of Hordichuk/Johnson/Rypien eating up icetime. If Hordichuk is dressed for Game 4, I’m not going to be too positive of the Canucks chances of winning the series.

Against the Blackhawks?

The same Blackhawks that resulted in the Massacre at the Madhouse last playoffs, where Chelsea Dagger played the Canucks right out of the playoffs?

Where Dustin Byfuglien was this out of control rampaging monster that the Canucks couldn’t hope to contain him?

And the Canucks won 5-1?

Wow.

I know that this isn’t ‘fan faithful’ of me to say, but I was bracing for a loss last night. It was the first game of a series that has a lot of history between both sides and it was on home ice for Chicago. I was ready for it.

Apparently the Canucks didn’t get that memo. I mean, you get a goal from every single line, plus an additional goal from your blueliners. Hard to complain about that when everyone’s producing. And hey, I predicted that Raymond was going to show up in this series over at the Canucks Corner pre-series blog and he’s off to a good start: his efforts at keeping the puck in led to the first goal from Ehrhoff and he ended up banging in a goal of his own to boot. Not a bad first game from a guy who was very quiet for the series against the Kings.

Also? I think it’s safe to say that Roberto Luongo is ‘back’ or he’s ‘in form’ or whatever term you’d like to use to describe his play. I had speculated before the playoffs started that the only thing effecting Luongo’s play may have been mental issues to do with the Olympics. Now that the games matter he’s been solid or better. Tonight’s game was probably his best game of the playoffs as he was beat on a 5 on 3 powerplay goal. I’d argue that there was a late whistle to factor in there as well, but I’ll trust that the referee had better sight of the puck than I did.

It’s really strange. For a series that was hyped as being full of emotion and unfinished business and rivalry and yadda yadda yadda you really couldn’t detect it. I Was surprised with how much room the Blackhawks were giving to the Canucks offense…the Sedins especially. Contrast with the Kings game where you’d find LA players all over players as they gained the zone. Any room Henrik, Daniel or anyone else wanted in the offensive zone they had to fight for. Contrast that with last night’s game where Kyle Wellwood was having no problems passing and shooting the puck and you have to wonder what the hell is going on with Chicago. I know folks are saying that Eager and Burish will be in for Game 2, but I can’t see them bringing enough of a physical edge that the Canucks will wilt.

And before I start getting carried away, there is still a ton of hockey to play in this series. While winning Game 1 was a surprise, it’d be even more surprising if the Blackhawks were to simply roll over and die. They’re going to be back with a vengeance Monday night and I’d expect a much tougher game from them. So yeah, I’m not planning the parade or anything just yet.

Beyond that, I’m loving the effort from our blueline. Don Cherry had an orgasm on air over Bieksa taking the hit from two Hawks players in order to make a play, but I have to say it’s insane how much Bieksa has stepped up his play in the playoffs. He’s pinching and joining odd man rushes but he is also making it back and is playing well in his own end. During the regular season Bieksa was a disaster out there, making bad decisions to pinch and the such. It’s great to see that he (along with SOB, but everyone’s been singing his praises, so I’ll shut up) has been playing really well.

And hey, let’s say something about Andrew Alberts real quick. He’s becoming a surprise out there on the ice. A very solid game from him. I speculated before that it may have just been adjusting to a new system and some bad luck and I’m glad to see that he’s continuing to play well (ie, his first game back after Baumgartner AND Rome both went down with injuries wasn’t a complete fluke.)

Beyond that, Joel Quenneville may be in over his head against Alain Vigneault and Antii Niemi isn’t looking particularly good at this juncture. It’s like he can’t handle anything that goes top shelf. Should he really start to struggle the Blackhawks may be in a lot of trouble: beyond the 20 minutes he logged last night in relief, Huet hasn’t played in a month. Not a good position to be in.

Game 2 is on Monday! Woop woop.

During the Los Angeles Kings series, I suggested on Twitter that folks wanting to talk about the series could use a series hashtag, an idea that came to me during the Olympics and World Juniors, when folks were coming up with ‘official’ hashtags for each game. Anyway, I suggested #Regicide and it caught on.

Anyway! That’s not important. What’s important is that the Canucks are in the second round and we’re in dire need of a series hashtag. So dire, in fact, that the Vancouver Canucks are offering up a stick that’s been signed by the team for the person who is successful at coming up with one! How do you get in on that? Well, easy,

- Come up with a hashtag. It should be something witty, humorous or smack talking. Poke fun at the Blackhawks, Chicago or their players. Just remember to keep it short, so it’s easy to use! Examples: #BlackhawksDown (c/o @7thCanuck0, #DaggerChelsea (c/o @taryneliza_beth) and #ToKillAHawkingBird (c/o @nucksandpucks.) Don’t like ‘em? Come up with your own!

- Send it to @VanCanucks. Since the Canucks are the ones who are gonna be deciding the winner, that’s who you should send your hashtag ideas to! @VanCanucks will pick the top 5 and you guys can then vote on the best one at Canucks.com.

For more info, you can also check out Brian Wawryshyn’s post over at Canucks Corner

I gotta write about tonight’s game, though. First off, I’d just like to get something out of the way really quickly. Some of you may have noticed I participated in a roundtable over at Canucks Corner. In that roundtable, I made a couple of predictions. Regarding the Canucks, this is what I wrote on April 14th (scroll down to 8:47 or so):

“Canucks in 6. Luongo will have 1 bad game but look solid throughout the rest. Sedins and Samuelsson lead the way offensively.”

Let’s see.

Luongo had 1 bad game (and was pulled) and looked solid throughout the rest.

Samuelsson leads the Canucks offense and leads the NHL in goals scored and is looking like a (VERY EARLY) Conn Smythe candidate (then again, so is Sidney Crosby.)

Daniel is third in NHL points, fifth for assists and second for the Canucks.

Henrik is third in scoring for the Canucks and third in assists.

To be fair, I did predict Jonathan Bernier was going to step up, which didn’t happen. But Quick did falter.

I also wrote,

“I also think hockey poolies are going to be frustrated with Frolov.”

1g, his only point in the entire series. I know he’s young and it was his first time, but jeez, you had a worse outing than Ladislav Nagy had against the Canucks in the 06/07 playoffs (1g,1a) and that was a low scoring affair. Pretty weaksauce!

So, let this be a lesson to anyone who may happen to work for a West Coast hockey team and may just so happen to besmirching my good name. I CAN use my powers for good. Anywho…

I had been saying for a while I was willing to be patient with Luongo and his play. I pointed to the Olympics and also said that sometimes, goalies just happen to go through slumps. I wanted to see if he’d show up for the playoffs. I loved the big goalline save he made in Game 1 (helped in part by Michal Handzus being a dummy and celebrating early, mind) but did Luongo ever show up tonight. Several Mount Olympus sized saves and a compete level that would have Al Pacino’s character from Any Given Sunday drooling in envy.

A great game, for the most part. While it’s frustrating that Burrows and Raymond didn’t have a fantastic series, I’d like to think that it’s in part due to the relative size of the Kings in comparison to them. Both of them are in the 6′0-6′1″ and 185-188 lbs range while the Kings have numerous players over 6′3″ (Handzus and Modin are both 6′4″) and are on the heavier side of the scale. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Samuelsson, who is 6′2″ and 218, enjoyed more success on the Sedin line than Burrows did.

It’ll be interesting to see how Burrows and Raymond come out against likely second round opponents Chicago, who have forwards and play a game that are more suited to Burrows and Raymond.

I also spoke about Alberts. Injuries had him back in the lineup and I thought he played a lot better and actually had some big clears on the penalty kill, too. That said, his misplay with the puck resulted in Luongo’s The Save and it looks like Alain Vigneault was none too pleased with his antics, as he got only seconds of icetime in the third. I’ve said before it may have just been a matter of adjusting to systems play and getting rid of bad habits with Alberts and he seems to be getting better as time goes on. Very interested in seeing him next season.

Beyond that, I’m loving both Steve Bernier and Shane O’Brien’s play in the postseason. SOB has been asserting himself well for the most part. His ‘Are you not entertained?!’ bit on Friday was a little much in the eyes of some, but it’s the playoffs. You gotta completely throttle your opponent.

Bernier’s just been playing a simple game, capitalizing on his chances, and playing a sound defensive game. Glad he’s picked the right time to start contributing.

I’ll have more on the second round once their opponent is confirmed (probably Chicago!) Also, looks like the Canucks are going to be set to play on Thursday, so keep your schedule open!