SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

atlasmb It has been more than 8 years since a review of this show was posted. In that time, things have changed.Tony Reali is still the host. Some of the old guard still peddle their viewpoints on plasmas 1-4. But my, how things have changed.The original idea was to present a diversity of ideas, from various columnists and sportscasters around the country. Usually featured are writers from Boston, New York, Washington, Chicago, Miami, Denver, Los Angeles, or Phoenix. They usually cover the professional sports teams in their city. This geographical spread assures that the opinions of "homers" will be balanced by other opinions.In recent years, the show has apparently sought more diversity among its panelists. That is to say they represent a wider representation of the cultural diversity of America, based upon race, gender, and sexual identity. This does not mean there is greater diversity of opinion. In fact, the opposite is true. Not just on this show, but on virtually all shows, we now hear nearly uniform views about issues that are political (and more of them are). Sponsors fear backlash from special interest groups. The network fears the loss of sponsors. The newspapers and television shows that employ the panelists fear negative publicity. As a result, you may get differences of opinion about what is going to happen on the playing field, court, or ice, but when it comes to stories about player behavior, for example, the panelists only differ in the degree of their opinions, falling over each other to condemn what ESPN wants them to condemn. And they toe the "company line" in asserting that all athletes in the news should be regarded as role models (despite Charles Barkley's view).The only other problem I have with the show is that the panelists, like many sports writers elsewhere, tend to advocate for behavior by athletes that makes their jobs easier. This means they like athletes (or coaches) who act erratically, who give fiery opinions, who give "color" to the game by wildly celebrating, by being combative. Personally, I would rather they advocate for good sportsmanship. This means good behavior, respect for your competitors, and a respect for rules of the game.Despite what these talking heads tell us, the athletes are not always right in their battles with team owners. And the sports leagues are not always wrong when their opinions differ from athletes. And sports can be about more than athletes getting as much money as possible in the shortest possible time period. I happen to like most of the panelists on this show. I just wish the debates were not so homogeneous.

Jared Rasmussen This show is probably the best sports show on television. When you get tired of the repetitive Linda Cohn or John Andersen commentary on SportsCenter, or you don't like all of the shouting involved with "Pardon the Interruption," you may want to give this show a shot.Woody Paige is very funny and has some great banter with Jay Mariotti, Michael Smith, Tim Cowlishaw, and the like. The guys who return day after day are some of the best debaters on television and are very amusing. Even the ones, like Bob Ryan or J.A. Adande, who pop up every once in a while are amusing. The obscure ones like Adam Schefter or Mark Kiszla are not that entertaining, but thankfully, they rarely come up.Max Keller was borderline annoying, but he is no longer on the show. Although I miss the "Disembodied Voice," the Tony Reali era is more entertaining than the previous one. All in all, this is a very entertaining show. It can hold my attention better than "PTI" because of the scoring, and it is less repetitive than the same old commentary on SportsCenter's top plays. This show is so fast-paced and interesting that, once you become a fan, you find it irresistibly funny and hard to turn away.

Hancock_the_Superb When I started watching this show in the fall of 2003, like many people I originally watched it as a lead-in to "Pardon the Interruption". I was entranced by the hilarious cast of characters, including the smarmy-but-kinda cool Max, the exceptionally obnoxious Disembodied Voice (Bill Wolff), and, of course, the Immortal WOODY PAIGE! Until early February, everything was good as gold, and this show was challenging PTI for my favorite sports show, until Max left and Tony "Stat Boy" Reali came in as a seemingly temporary replacement (though six months later he's still around. . . THE HORN!). To be honest, I can stand Stat Boy, though he doesn't have Kellerman's sense of humor, and his sparring with Woody isn't anywhere near as entertaining as Kellerman's. But Max's leaving was merely an indicator of what was to come. When Max began his "I, Max" for FSN, Michael Holley and the Disembodied Voice eventually left. But Woody and Jay, the backbones of the show, remained. There was the Dream Team of Woody, Jay, Bill Plaschke, and Michael Holley, disrupted of course with the latter's leaving, but Bob Ryan/Michael Smith were good, and the Dallas guys were okay in small doses. Woody remains extremely entertaining, with his indescribably wacky sight gags (eating a raw steak onscreen? His talking toy parrot?) and dead-on humor, while Jay, though annoying, at least provides a good counterpoint to Woody (who didn't laugh when they showed up together at the Super Bowl, on what I believe was Max's last show?).However, let me bring you up to speed on the current situation (as of 8/12/04): Now Woody and Mariotti are going to disappear for a month, covering the Olympics. Add to that the fact that Plaschke hasn't been seen in a few weeks now, and it's obvious that there's no earthly reason to watch this show for a good while. It's going to be a long month . ..So I'll classify ATH into three eras: the Kellerman Era, the Post-Kellerman Stat Boy Era, and the Current Situation. And my ratings for this show go thusly: (on a scale of 1 to 10) 9.5/7.5/4

Barry Moore A pathetic attempt to be "in your face" and repeat the success of the far superior Pardon the Interruption, also on ESPN. Max Kellerman, quite possibly the single most annoying host of any show this side of Ryan Seacrest, does his level best to show that the special education programs in this country have him as a success model.The basic premise of the show, is to have Kellerman score the comments of various newspaper writers from around the country. The more outrageous and annoying, the higher Max scores them. One thing you will learn from watching this show is the reason none of these guys went into television. Some of the ugliest, most poorly spoken humans to ever live on the planet are presented here. It is amazing how these college educated, men (mostly) can be completely devoid of any speaking skills.It was being on shows like this, that pretty much cost the once great Boston Globe reporter, Bob Ryan any credibility. He got so used to trying to be as obnoxious and stupid as possible, that he made degrading and idiotic comments about a basketball players wife. Mr. Ryan forgot to restart his brain after working on this show.Around the Horn got some of the worst reviews ever when it first premiered, all of them deserved. ESPN ignored the pleas to remove this abomination, apparently because the ratings were pretty good. What I figure is the show is on late enough in the afternoon that the mouth breathing troglodytes with Neilson boxes are too drunk to bother changing the channel.Avoid this crap. Dont reward the dumbing down of America by watching this show.