I haven't discussed an alcoholic beverage in a while, so here we are. One of the liquor stores near me has quite an extensive cider selection, including some foreign ones. When I saw they had four flavors of a Swedish brand of cider, from the Abro Brewery, I quickly bought one of each. In all, I tried the pear, the mango raspberry, the passion fruit, and the strawberry lime kinds, all of which were under the Rekorderlig brand.
The Abro Brewery (or Abro Bryggeri, with a small halo diacritical mark over the "A" in Swedish), has been around since 1856. It was started by Lieutenant Per W. Luthander. It's grown to be the 5th largest brewery in Sweden, accounting for 6% of the total alcohol sales, and 10% of the beer sales. Their annual output is 56,000,000 liters. Abro also exports to 23 countries worldwide. (I'd list at least some of these, but I couldn't find a specific country list of these 23.) Their Rekorderlig line dates back to 1996. Other than the kinds I had, they also make a spiced apple and wild berry flavors. According to the internet, "Rekorderlig" is a Swedish word meaning, "real, proper, genuine, or down to earth." There was also a online video about how to pronounce the word. Somewhat disappointingly, it was exactly how it looks like it would be pronounced, at least to this English speaker. Abro also sells soft drinks and mineral waters, along with their main product, beer.
1) Rekorderlig cider, pear flavor: All of these came in 11.2 ounce/330 milliliter cans, and contained 4.5 % alcohol. This one was a very pale yellow color. I should mention that I don't particularly like pears as a fruit, or a general flavor. Therefore, I was pleasantly surprised about how decent this was. Nicely tart, very palatable. I give it a grade of B-.
2) Rekorderlig cider, mango raspberry flavor: This one had a pink color. Nice odor. I could taste both advertised flavors. Very good. B+.
3) Rekorderlig cider, passion fruit flavor: Clear color. Also very good. Pleasantly tart. Another slight surprise, given how passion fruit isn't a favorite fruit/flavor of mine, either. B+
4) Rekorderlig cider, strawberry lime: Red hue. Really tasty. Cool mix of the strawberry sweetness and the lime tartness. Very enjoyable. A.
So overall I was very impressed with the Rekorderligs. Even the flavors I don't normally like turned out pretty well. I highly recommend these to folks who like ciders.
Abro Brewery is located in the small Swedish town of Vimmerby. Vimmerby is arguably most famous for its association with children's author Astrid Lindgren (1907-2002). She was born in a village very near to Vimmerby, and lived and worked there for part of her life. Lindgren is fondly remembered for many book series, such as the Bill Bergson series, the Emil of Lonnebergen series, the Karlsson-on-the-Roof series, and, most famously, the Pippi Longstocking series. Many television shows and movies have used these books as a basis. And part of me is very curious about the Karlsson series. Does Karlsson stay on the roof the WHOLE time, over all the books?!
On a writing note, I have an update about the psychological horror anthology I mentioned two weeks ago, which will feature one of my stories. It will be titled, "Shadowy Natures," after a Edgar Allan Poe quote. The cover will be presented very soon, too, so stay tuned. For those Poe obsessives, the quote was about instinct being superior to reason. Or, "the boundary line between instinct and reason is a of very shadowy nature." This was part of an essay, "Instinct vs. Reason--A Black Cat," which appeared in "Alexander's Weekly Messenger" in 1840, and given its title, may have been a precursor to Poe's famous 1843 story, "The Black Cat."
Saturday, December 28, 2019
Saturday, December 21, 2019
Underrated Horror Gems--"Christmas Evil"
It's been a little while since I talked about a movie, so I thought I'd rectify that. Also, I'm being seasonal here, with a Yuletide-themed film, as one can tell from the title. In my opinion this is one of the best Christmas horror movies. But, sadly, this low budget 1980 release wasn't a big success, and is only a little-known cult movie. So I'll do what I can to increase its visibility some. I'll follow my usual template of a short, spoiler-free synopsis, then a long, spoiler-rich recap, then a discussion of some of the film's strengths and themes, and end with some information about the cast and crew.
Harry Stadling likes Christmas. Actually, that's not strong enough--he LOVES Christmas, and Santa in particular. His home is festooned with Christmas and Santa decorations and toys. He even tries to embody Santa, both literally and figuratively. His career is Christmas-y as well, as he works at a toy factory. Alas, his coworkers, and his family, and his neighbors in general don't share his enthusiasm, and extreme dedication. Which bodes poorly for them--this is one Santa who does more than leave a lump of coal in the stockings of those who appear on the Naughty list.
(SPOILERS AHEAD UNTIL MARKED) "Christmas Evil" opens on Christmas Eve, 1947. Two young boys, Harry and Phil, watch as Santa comes down the chimney, eats the treats they've left for him, and then gives them their presents. However, later Harry sneaks downstairs and sees something alarming--Santa and his mother are engaging in sexual activity. Harry is extremely traumatized. Next the audience is told that it's the present, in 1980. Harry is now a middle-aged man, who lives alone in a house covered in Christmas and Santa decorations, and toys. He even sleeps in Santa-style pajamas. Then it gets even stranger. We see Harry on the roof, spying on the neighborhood children with binoculars. He knows all their full names, and carefully writes downs their deeds in thick books marked "Good Girls and Boys 1980" and a corresponding "Bad" one.
Then we see where Harry works, at the Jolly Dream toy factory. Harry has recently been promoted from the toy assembly line to a middle management, foreman-like position. His coworkers clearly find him strange, and pathetic. One of them, Frank, takes advantage and manipulates Harry into working for him by saying he has a family function. Later, Harry peers in the local bar window and hears Frank bragging about how he fooled Harry, how he lied to him. After this we see Harry spying on a family, as a father plays with his kids, and then later makes love to his wife. The next day it's seen that this father was his brother Phil. Phil thinks Harry is lame, and buffoonish. His wife tries to get him to treat Harry in a nicer way. But it doesn't really matter, as Harry calls and says he won't be coming over for Thanksgiving dinner. Periodically, we also see Harry acting bizarrely and obsessive.
Moving on, Harry is making a Santa suit, and he also paints a sleigh on his van. He's continuing his monitoring of the neighborhood kids. One night Harry goes over to the house of a "bad" boy and scares him from the bushes outside. The scene then shifts to the Jolly Dream company Christmas party. Harry acts weirdly, and doesn't connect with his coworkers. He's interested in a company plan to donate toys to a nearby hospital for mentally challenged children, but he's disappointed when the company executives don't seem to really care about it. Harry leaves the party, and then steals many toys off the assembly line.
It's now Christmas Eve. Harry, dressed as Santa, delivers gifts to his nephews. Then he drives to the Willowy Springs Children's Hospital, to deliver more toys. After some initial suspicion, the staff unloads the bags of toys, and happily thank "Santa." Then Harry drives to the church where the Jolly Dream executives are attending a night service. Outside, on the stairs, some young people tease and taunt Harry a little. He replies by brutally killing three of them with a toy soldier and a toy hammer before driving away. Next Harry spies on a local neighborhood Christmas party. Some men see him, and pressure him into coming inside. Harry gives the kids gifts, and dances with the party goers. All have a good time. The scene shifts again, quite dramatically. Harry sneaks into Frank's house. Frank's kids hear him, but are placated when they see it's "Santa" leaving gifts. However, Harry then goes upstairs and confronts the sleeping Frank. Harry murders Frank, using the present bag to partially suffocate him, and finishes him off by cutting his throat with a Christmas decoration. Then Harry flees.
It's now Christmas Day. Phil is upset, as Harry has missed Christmas, which he's never done before. Phil notes how odd and emotionally crippled Harry is. The news reports detail the Santa slayings. Harry wakes up in his van, drives to the empty Jolly Dream factory, and then destroys toys, since they weren't made properly and respectfully. The police, meanwhile, are investigating the murders, and are using "Santa" lineups. Harry calls Phil and acts strangely, almost as if it's a farewell message. Later, Harry is driving around, and gets his van stuck in the snow. He walks around the neighborhood, carrying his sack of toys. Some children approach, and happily accept his toys. Their parents, though, are troubled, and suspect that Harry is the killer Santa they've heard about from the news. One parent tries to attack Harry with a knife, but drops it when a kid interferes. The kid then gives the weapon to "Santa." Harry brushes past the parents, cutting and wounding several along the way. The parents form a mob and angrily follow the fleeing Harry. Harry manages to drive away, and goes to Phil's house. Phil confronts his brother, knowing what he's done. Harry accuses Phil of not believing in, or wanting Santa. In a frustrated rage, Phil throttles Harry, and then he drags his unconscious brother into his van. Harry wakes up abruptly, punches Phil, and drives away. However, the crowd of people catches up to him, and he drives off a bridge embankment to avoid them. As Phil watches, the van appears to magically fly away, as if it were Santa's sleigh.
Let's get the obvious out of the way--"Christmas Evil" isn't for everyone. The moments of action, excitement, and violence are few, and mostly in the second half of the movie. Viewers with short attention spans will probably be bored. But, I think the slow pace is kind of the point of it--it shows the lonely, pathetic life of the main character. It's a meditative character study of a desperate, severely mentally ill man. Harry does kill his share of people, but in no way is "Christmas Evil" a slasher movie. Of all the movies I've discussed on my blog, this one is surely the most acquired taste. So those potentially interested in seeing it for the first time are so forewarned.
I believe the major theme of "Christmas Evil" is that childhood trauma can cause arrested development. Seeing his dad as Santa having sex with his mother clearly is the most important, and devastating event in Harry's life. It's kind of a "two-fer" on important life lessons--that his parents are sexual beings, and that Santa is not real. Probably every child is confused, and initially repulsed when they learn what sex entails, and that their parents had to have engaged in such behavior. Similarly, most kids in the Western world (at least those that grow up in the Christian tradition) are puzzled and then a bit upset to learn that Santa is not an actual real figure. But, crucially, nearly all children make their peace with these revelations, and accept them, and mature normally. Harry obviously did not. Nothing we see about him indicates that he's ever had a normal sex life, or presumably any sexual outlet. He's doomed to a solitary, asexual existence. But it goes further. He doesn't ever have any semblance of a normal platonic social life. He has no friends, and his time spent with his brother is strained and awkward, only done by Phil out of obligation. Harry seems friendly with the neighborhood kids, but only in a surface way that's not meaningful. None of his underlings, peers, or bosses at Jolly Dream respect or like him. Which makes sense, since Harry is unable to interact with them except on the most basic, businesslike level. Harry is basically a seven year old child stuck in a middle aged man's body.
Then there's the whole Christmas and Santa fixation. Harry reacted to learning that Santa isn't real in a bizarre way, by trying to embody Santa's identity, and to even become a quasi-Santa. Seemingly every part of his free time is spent on Christmas and Santa-like pursuits. We don't see it, but this clearly is a year-round thing--those Good and Bad Girls and Boys books are thick, meaning he's spying on the neighborhood children all year. And those Christmas toys and decorations are surely kept up all year as well. In essence, Harry's very identity has been subsumed by the character of Santa. Since the "Santa" he knew and loved turned out to be only a human being, his father, Harry seemed to devote his life to becoming an idealized version of Santa. At the expense of his entire life. The ideals of Santa, and Christmas, are mostly positive. Being extra charitable, and nice, and generous are all things we should do. But as we become adults we also recognize the world's realities, and practical limitations, of both people and situations. Life isn't a fairy tale, and adults have to learn how to compromise, and do the best they can. Harry, though, lives in a fantasy world of black and white, and tolerates no human frailties and mistakes.
Which ends up making Harry a somewhat sympathetic character. He's not a typical evil character at all--his intentions are good, even noble. He genuinely helps out a lot of people, by helping them celebrate the holiday season and by directly giving many children gifts, including the hospital kids mostly forgotten by the rest of society. But, the other side is huge--he brutally kills four people, and injures several others. The character of Frank is a bit of an oafish asshole, but his crimes didn't warrant being murdered. And the three young people at the church were even more innocent--their "crime" was just some moderate teasing. The people Harry injures at the end aren't guilty of any "sin"--they're trying to protect their children from what they think is a crazy psycho killer (and they're right!). So Harry is clearly deranged, and should certainly not be walking the streets as a free man. But despite his massive flaws, we in the audience still kind of want him to succeed, and get away (at least I did). He has a moral code, and means well. Unfortunately, Harry's insane, and can't stop himself from committing awful acts of brutal violence. My point is, he's not like Michael Myers, or Jason Voorhees, or Freddy Krueger, or most other cinema killers. You're afraid of him, and dread what he'll do, but you have some pity for him, and rather like him at the same time. Which makes Harry Stadling different, and interesting to watch. That's the central tragedy of the film. If Harry had just gotten significant psychiatric help as a child, maybe he could have moved past his trauma and lived a normal, happy existence.
Another thing I appreciated about this movie was its weird and abrupt tonal shifts. We go from seeing Harry do the good deed of giving toys to the needy hospital children, to the murders of the three church goers, to celebrating a neighborhood Christmas party, and making adults and more kids happy, to giving Frank's kid's presents, to then viciously slaughtering Frank, with a Christmas decoration, no less! Sometimes dramatic tonal shifts don't work in a movie, and interfere with the movie's point, but here I think it does. It leaves the viewer surprised, disturbed, and not sure how to react. Harry's good, then he's evil, then he's good again, then evil, back and forth--what to believe about him?
The music helps set the macabre scene, too. It may be stock music, given the movie's tiny budget, but whoever made it, it works. There are frequent odd, jangling tones which are appropriately unsettling. The violence and gore are sparse, as I mentioned before, but when they're done they're pretty effective, in a low budget way. Mostly quick glimpses, but convincing. Also, the look of the movie seems to benefit from the lack of funds. It all makes it seem more realistic, and correct for this movie. Something really bright, and slick-looking, wouldn't appear right for this morbid, depressing story. Its squalid, gritty feel, with a fair bit of scratches on the film stock, makes it seem like you'e watching something real, and horrible. (To be fair, my copy of "Christmas Evil" is a cheap version, as it's a combo Diamond Entertainment DVD which also includes 1973's low budget "Silent Night Bloody Night." Maybe the subsequent, larger market releases are more polished, and therefore somewhat less effective in this way.)
It's worth discussing the ending as well. I didn't realize until I did a little online sleuthing that the ending is ambiguous, almost "Inception" or "Total Recall" like. Mainly, what happened? If you review the ending moments carefully, you can hear a crashing or even explosive noise after Harry goes off the road. It can be interpreted as the sound that Phil makes as he falls down the snowy hill, through some debris and garbage, but it doesn't seem to match up right. Therefore, some viewers think that Harry's van just crashed and burned, and that he died. And that Phil's look of awe and surprise is not seeing the van fly, but the shock of seeing his brother die horribly. Which, when I think about it, does seem more reasonable. During the enfolding of the movie, there aren't any other instances of the supernatural, or magic, making Harry's Santa-like flight at the end unlikely Also unearned and weird--how could he "become" or "be" Santa if he's also a killer? (Unless actual Santa is strict, and a punisher, kind of an Old Testament-y or even Krampus-y like figure.) So, my new interpretation is that in reality Harry did crash and die, but in his dying mind he flew off, becoming Santa, fulfilling his purpose. But obviously what each viewer believes is up to them, since it's purposefully vague.
(END OF SPOILERS--SAFE FOR EVERYONE) Alas, "Christmas Evil" (which was originally titled "You Better Watch Out," and at one point was known as "Terror in Toyland") was a dismal failure at the box office. I'd report exact figures, but I couldn't find them--suffice it to say that this movie with a budget of only $850,000 was probably not profitable. It also got generally negative reviews at the time, from both professional reviewers and horror fans, many of whom wanted and expected a typical slasher film. Which is probably why writer/director Lewis Jackson's resume on IMDB is so empty. He wrote and directed "The Deviators" (aka "The Deviates"?), a comedy, in 1970, and did the same for 1974's "The Transformation: A Sandwich of Nightmares" which is a horror movie. Both of these appear to have been lost, and possibly rarely or never shown in theaters or on television. Apparently "The Deviators" was "edited into" another movie called "Forbidden Under Consent of the King" in 1972, but I don't really know what that entails. IMDB also lists him as being the associate producer and production manager for the 1974 X rated comedy "Lialeh," and as the associate producer of the 2003 horror flick "The Ghouls." But that's it. A shame, since I think he had talent as both a writer and director.
Given its budget, there weren't any huge stars in "Christmas Evil," but some of them have had decent, relatively busy acting careers. Brandon Maggart, who played Harry, was in such films as "Dressed to Kill" (1980), "The World According to Garp" (1982), and "Spiritual Warriors" (2007), and was on the television shows "Brothers" (1984-89), "Newhart" (1983), and "L.A. Law (1993). Harry's brother Phil is busy character actor Jeffrey DeMunn, probably most recognized for appearances in such movies as "The Hitcher" (1986), "The Blob" (1988, see my post on February 2, 2019 for more on that film), "The Shawshank Redemption" (1994), "The Green Mile" (1999), and "The Mist" (2007), and on such television productions as "Citizen X" (1995) and "The Walking Dead" (2012). The small role of Mrs. Garcia (one of the "bad" kid's moms) was played by Patricia Richardson, who was in such movies as "C.H.U.D." (1984), "Ulee's Gold" (1997), and "Black Box" (2012), but is surely most known for television's "Home Improvement" (1991-99). One of the men who pressured Harry to go into the neighborhood Christmas party was portrayed by Mark Mogolis, who was in such films as "Dressed to Kill" (1980), "Scarface" (1983, see my post on March 3, 2014 for some discussion about that film), "Glory" (1989), "Tales from the Darkside" (1990), "Ace Ventura: Pet Detective" (1994), "Requiem for a Dream" (2000), and "Gone Baby Gone" (2007), and in such television shows as "Oz" (1998-03) and "Breaking Bad" (2009-11). Raymond J. Barry (Detective Gleason), was in movies like "The Goodbye Girl" (1977), "Year of the Dragon" (1985), "Born on the Fourth of July" (1989), "Falling Down" (1993), "The Ref" (1994), and "Training Day" (2001). Finally, Danny Federici, who was part of Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band, had a tiny role as the accordion player in the band at the neighborhood party.
In conclusion then, if you're looking for a methodical, disturbing Christmas-themed horror movie, you might really like "Christmas Evil." It's not a fun, party movie, with lots of jump scares and gross-out violence, but it's effectively creepy, and darkly comic at times. Outrageous and notorious film director John Waters is a big and vocal fan, and even participated in the commentary on the movie's DVD release a while back. As far as Yuletide horror movies go, I think it's among the best, which would also include the original version of "Black Christmas" (1974, I can't comment on the remakes, one of which is in theaters as I write this, since I haven't seen them), "Krampus" (2015, the one starring Toni Collette and Adam Scott), and "Gremlins" (1984, admittedly more of a comedy/horror movie, but still). And for a messed up, so-bad-it's-good offering, 1989's "Elves."
Harry Stadling likes Christmas. Actually, that's not strong enough--he LOVES Christmas, and Santa in particular. His home is festooned with Christmas and Santa decorations and toys. He even tries to embody Santa, both literally and figuratively. His career is Christmas-y as well, as he works at a toy factory. Alas, his coworkers, and his family, and his neighbors in general don't share his enthusiasm, and extreme dedication. Which bodes poorly for them--this is one Santa who does more than leave a lump of coal in the stockings of those who appear on the Naughty list.
(SPOILERS AHEAD UNTIL MARKED) "Christmas Evil" opens on Christmas Eve, 1947. Two young boys, Harry and Phil, watch as Santa comes down the chimney, eats the treats they've left for him, and then gives them their presents. However, later Harry sneaks downstairs and sees something alarming--Santa and his mother are engaging in sexual activity. Harry is extremely traumatized. Next the audience is told that it's the present, in 1980. Harry is now a middle-aged man, who lives alone in a house covered in Christmas and Santa decorations, and toys. He even sleeps in Santa-style pajamas. Then it gets even stranger. We see Harry on the roof, spying on the neighborhood children with binoculars. He knows all their full names, and carefully writes downs their deeds in thick books marked "Good Girls and Boys 1980" and a corresponding "Bad" one.
Then we see where Harry works, at the Jolly Dream toy factory. Harry has recently been promoted from the toy assembly line to a middle management, foreman-like position. His coworkers clearly find him strange, and pathetic. One of them, Frank, takes advantage and manipulates Harry into working for him by saying he has a family function. Later, Harry peers in the local bar window and hears Frank bragging about how he fooled Harry, how he lied to him. After this we see Harry spying on a family, as a father plays with his kids, and then later makes love to his wife. The next day it's seen that this father was his brother Phil. Phil thinks Harry is lame, and buffoonish. His wife tries to get him to treat Harry in a nicer way. But it doesn't really matter, as Harry calls and says he won't be coming over for Thanksgiving dinner. Periodically, we also see Harry acting bizarrely and obsessive.
Moving on, Harry is making a Santa suit, and he also paints a sleigh on his van. He's continuing his monitoring of the neighborhood kids. One night Harry goes over to the house of a "bad" boy and scares him from the bushes outside. The scene then shifts to the Jolly Dream company Christmas party. Harry acts weirdly, and doesn't connect with his coworkers. He's interested in a company plan to donate toys to a nearby hospital for mentally challenged children, but he's disappointed when the company executives don't seem to really care about it. Harry leaves the party, and then steals many toys off the assembly line.
It's now Christmas Eve. Harry, dressed as Santa, delivers gifts to his nephews. Then he drives to the Willowy Springs Children's Hospital, to deliver more toys. After some initial suspicion, the staff unloads the bags of toys, and happily thank "Santa." Then Harry drives to the church where the Jolly Dream executives are attending a night service. Outside, on the stairs, some young people tease and taunt Harry a little. He replies by brutally killing three of them with a toy soldier and a toy hammer before driving away. Next Harry spies on a local neighborhood Christmas party. Some men see him, and pressure him into coming inside. Harry gives the kids gifts, and dances with the party goers. All have a good time. The scene shifts again, quite dramatically. Harry sneaks into Frank's house. Frank's kids hear him, but are placated when they see it's "Santa" leaving gifts. However, Harry then goes upstairs and confronts the sleeping Frank. Harry murders Frank, using the present bag to partially suffocate him, and finishes him off by cutting his throat with a Christmas decoration. Then Harry flees.
It's now Christmas Day. Phil is upset, as Harry has missed Christmas, which he's never done before. Phil notes how odd and emotionally crippled Harry is. The news reports detail the Santa slayings. Harry wakes up in his van, drives to the empty Jolly Dream factory, and then destroys toys, since they weren't made properly and respectfully. The police, meanwhile, are investigating the murders, and are using "Santa" lineups. Harry calls Phil and acts strangely, almost as if it's a farewell message. Later, Harry is driving around, and gets his van stuck in the snow. He walks around the neighborhood, carrying his sack of toys. Some children approach, and happily accept his toys. Their parents, though, are troubled, and suspect that Harry is the killer Santa they've heard about from the news. One parent tries to attack Harry with a knife, but drops it when a kid interferes. The kid then gives the weapon to "Santa." Harry brushes past the parents, cutting and wounding several along the way. The parents form a mob and angrily follow the fleeing Harry. Harry manages to drive away, and goes to Phil's house. Phil confronts his brother, knowing what he's done. Harry accuses Phil of not believing in, or wanting Santa. In a frustrated rage, Phil throttles Harry, and then he drags his unconscious brother into his van. Harry wakes up abruptly, punches Phil, and drives away. However, the crowd of people catches up to him, and he drives off a bridge embankment to avoid them. As Phil watches, the van appears to magically fly away, as if it were Santa's sleigh.
Let's get the obvious out of the way--"Christmas Evil" isn't for everyone. The moments of action, excitement, and violence are few, and mostly in the second half of the movie. Viewers with short attention spans will probably be bored. But, I think the slow pace is kind of the point of it--it shows the lonely, pathetic life of the main character. It's a meditative character study of a desperate, severely mentally ill man. Harry does kill his share of people, but in no way is "Christmas Evil" a slasher movie. Of all the movies I've discussed on my blog, this one is surely the most acquired taste. So those potentially interested in seeing it for the first time are so forewarned.
I believe the major theme of "Christmas Evil" is that childhood trauma can cause arrested development. Seeing his dad as Santa having sex with his mother clearly is the most important, and devastating event in Harry's life. It's kind of a "two-fer" on important life lessons--that his parents are sexual beings, and that Santa is not real. Probably every child is confused, and initially repulsed when they learn what sex entails, and that their parents had to have engaged in such behavior. Similarly, most kids in the Western world (at least those that grow up in the Christian tradition) are puzzled and then a bit upset to learn that Santa is not an actual real figure. But, crucially, nearly all children make their peace with these revelations, and accept them, and mature normally. Harry obviously did not. Nothing we see about him indicates that he's ever had a normal sex life, or presumably any sexual outlet. He's doomed to a solitary, asexual existence. But it goes further. He doesn't ever have any semblance of a normal platonic social life. He has no friends, and his time spent with his brother is strained and awkward, only done by Phil out of obligation. Harry seems friendly with the neighborhood kids, but only in a surface way that's not meaningful. None of his underlings, peers, or bosses at Jolly Dream respect or like him. Which makes sense, since Harry is unable to interact with them except on the most basic, businesslike level. Harry is basically a seven year old child stuck in a middle aged man's body.
Then there's the whole Christmas and Santa fixation. Harry reacted to learning that Santa isn't real in a bizarre way, by trying to embody Santa's identity, and to even become a quasi-Santa. Seemingly every part of his free time is spent on Christmas and Santa-like pursuits. We don't see it, but this clearly is a year-round thing--those Good and Bad Girls and Boys books are thick, meaning he's spying on the neighborhood children all year. And those Christmas toys and decorations are surely kept up all year as well. In essence, Harry's very identity has been subsumed by the character of Santa. Since the "Santa" he knew and loved turned out to be only a human being, his father, Harry seemed to devote his life to becoming an idealized version of Santa. At the expense of his entire life. The ideals of Santa, and Christmas, are mostly positive. Being extra charitable, and nice, and generous are all things we should do. But as we become adults we also recognize the world's realities, and practical limitations, of both people and situations. Life isn't a fairy tale, and adults have to learn how to compromise, and do the best they can. Harry, though, lives in a fantasy world of black and white, and tolerates no human frailties and mistakes.
Which ends up making Harry a somewhat sympathetic character. He's not a typical evil character at all--his intentions are good, even noble. He genuinely helps out a lot of people, by helping them celebrate the holiday season and by directly giving many children gifts, including the hospital kids mostly forgotten by the rest of society. But, the other side is huge--he brutally kills four people, and injures several others. The character of Frank is a bit of an oafish asshole, but his crimes didn't warrant being murdered. And the three young people at the church were even more innocent--their "crime" was just some moderate teasing. The people Harry injures at the end aren't guilty of any "sin"--they're trying to protect their children from what they think is a crazy psycho killer (and they're right!). So Harry is clearly deranged, and should certainly not be walking the streets as a free man. But despite his massive flaws, we in the audience still kind of want him to succeed, and get away (at least I did). He has a moral code, and means well. Unfortunately, Harry's insane, and can't stop himself from committing awful acts of brutal violence. My point is, he's not like Michael Myers, or Jason Voorhees, or Freddy Krueger, or most other cinema killers. You're afraid of him, and dread what he'll do, but you have some pity for him, and rather like him at the same time. Which makes Harry Stadling different, and interesting to watch. That's the central tragedy of the film. If Harry had just gotten significant psychiatric help as a child, maybe he could have moved past his trauma and lived a normal, happy existence.
Another thing I appreciated about this movie was its weird and abrupt tonal shifts. We go from seeing Harry do the good deed of giving toys to the needy hospital children, to the murders of the three church goers, to celebrating a neighborhood Christmas party, and making adults and more kids happy, to giving Frank's kid's presents, to then viciously slaughtering Frank, with a Christmas decoration, no less! Sometimes dramatic tonal shifts don't work in a movie, and interfere with the movie's point, but here I think it does. It leaves the viewer surprised, disturbed, and not sure how to react. Harry's good, then he's evil, then he's good again, then evil, back and forth--what to believe about him?
The music helps set the macabre scene, too. It may be stock music, given the movie's tiny budget, but whoever made it, it works. There are frequent odd, jangling tones which are appropriately unsettling. The violence and gore are sparse, as I mentioned before, but when they're done they're pretty effective, in a low budget way. Mostly quick glimpses, but convincing. Also, the look of the movie seems to benefit from the lack of funds. It all makes it seem more realistic, and correct for this movie. Something really bright, and slick-looking, wouldn't appear right for this morbid, depressing story. Its squalid, gritty feel, with a fair bit of scratches on the film stock, makes it seem like you'e watching something real, and horrible. (To be fair, my copy of "Christmas Evil" is a cheap version, as it's a combo Diamond Entertainment DVD which also includes 1973's low budget "Silent Night Bloody Night." Maybe the subsequent, larger market releases are more polished, and therefore somewhat less effective in this way.)
It's worth discussing the ending as well. I didn't realize until I did a little online sleuthing that the ending is ambiguous, almost "Inception" or "Total Recall" like. Mainly, what happened? If you review the ending moments carefully, you can hear a crashing or even explosive noise after Harry goes off the road. It can be interpreted as the sound that Phil makes as he falls down the snowy hill, through some debris and garbage, but it doesn't seem to match up right. Therefore, some viewers think that Harry's van just crashed and burned, and that he died. And that Phil's look of awe and surprise is not seeing the van fly, but the shock of seeing his brother die horribly. Which, when I think about it, does seem more reasonable. During the enfolding of the movie, there aren't any other instances of the supernatural, or magic, making Harry's Santa-like flight at the end unlikely Also unearned and weird--how could he "become" or "be" Santa if he's also a killer? (Unless actual Santa is strict, and a punisher, kind of an Old Testament-y or even Krampus-y like figure.) So, my new interpretation is that in reality Harry did crash and die, but in his dying mind he flew off, becoming Santa, fulfilling his purpose. But obviously what each viewer believes is up to them, since it's purposefully vague.
(END OF SPOILERS--SAFE FOR EVERYONE) Alas, "Christmas Evil" (which was originally titled "You Better Watch Out," and at one point was known as "Terror in Toyland") was a dismal failure at the box office. I'd report exact figures, but I couldn't find them--suffice it to say that this movie with a budget of only $850,000 was probably not profitable. It also got generally negative reviews at the time, from both professional reviewers and horror fans, many of whom wanted and expected a typical slasher film. Which is probably why writer/director Lewis Jackson's resume on IMDB is so empty. He wrote and directed "The Deviators" (aka "The Deviates"?), a comedy, in 1970, and did the same for 1974's "The Transformation: A Sandwich of Nightmares" which is a horror movie. Both of these appear to have been lost, and possibly rarely or never shown in theaters or on television. Apparently "The Deviators" was "edited into" another movie called "Forbidden Under Consent of the King" in 1972, but I don't really know what that entails. IMDB also lists him as being the associate producer and production manager for the 1974 X rated comedy "Lialeh," and as the associate producer of the 2003 horror flick "The Ghouls." But that's it. A shame, since I think he had talent as both a writer and director.
Given its budget, there weren't any huge stars in "Christmas Evil," but some of them have had decent, relatively busy acting careers. Brandon Maggart, who played Harry, was in such films as "Dressed to Kill" (1980), "The World According to Garp" (1982), and "Spiritual Warriors" (2007), and was on the television shows "Brothers" (1984-89), "Newhart" (1983), and "L.A. Law (1993). Harry's brother Phil is busy character actor Jeffrey DeMunn, probably most recognized for appearances in such movies as "The Hitcher" (1986), "The Blob" (1988, see my post on February 2, 2019 for more on that film), "The Shawshank Redemption" (1994), "The Green Mile" (1999), and "The Mist" (2007), and on such television productions as "Citizen X" (1995) and "The Walking Dead" (2012). The small role of Mrs. Garcia (one of the "bad" kid's moms) was played by Patricia Richardson, who was in such movies as "C.H.U.D." (1984), "Ulee's Gold" (1997), and "Black Box" (2012), but is surely most known for television's "Home Improvement" (1991-99). One of the men who pressured Harry to go into the neighborhood Christmas party was portrayed by Mark Mogolis, who was in such films as "Dressed to Kill" (1980), "Scarface" (1983, see my post on March 3, 2014 for some discussion about that film), "Glory" (1989), "Tales from the Darkside" (1990), "Ace Ventura: Pet Detective" (1994), "Requiem for a Dream" (2000), and "Gone Baby Gone" (2007), and in such television shows as "Oz" (1998-03) and "Breaking Bad" (2009-11). Raymond J. Barry (Detective Gleason), was in movies like "The Goodbye Girl" (1977), "Year of the Dragon" (1985), "Born on the Fourth of July" (1989), "Falling Down" (1993), "The Ref" (1994), and "Training Day" (2001). Finally, Danny Federici, who was part of Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band, had a tiny role as the accordion player in the band at the neighborhood party.
In conclusion then, if you're looking for a methodical, disturbing Christmas-themed horror movie, you might really like "Christmas Evil." It's not a fun, party movie, with lots of jump scares and gross-out violence, but it's effectively creepy, and darkly comic at times. Outrageous and notorious film director John Waters is a big and vocal fan, and even participated in the commentary on the movie's DVD release a while back. As far as Yuletide horror movies go, I think it's among the best, which would also include the original version of "Black Christmas" (1974, I can't comment on the remakes, one of which is in theaters as I write this, since I haven't seen them), "Krampus" (2015, the one starring Toni Collette and Adam Scott), and "Gremlins" (1984, admittedly more of a comedy/horror movie, but still). And for a messed up, so-bad-it's-good offering, 1989's "Elves."
Saturday, December 14, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Jamaican Spiced Bun, Plus a Writing Announcement
As I think I mentioned before, the So It Is African Market near me doesn't just carry African products--it also has food and drinks from the Caribbean. Which makes sense, since a relatively high percentage of Caribbean inhabitants have African ancestry. Anyway, today I'll be covering the Jamaican spiced bun, or spice bun, from HTB, also known as the National Baking Company and the Continental Baking Company. (I know this is confusing--more on that later.)
The Jamaican spiced bun is a variant of a sweet bun, and as such it's simply a sweet bun made with more spices. The spices can vary, but the most common ones are cinnamon, nutmeg, coriander, allspice, saffron, "mixed spice," and mace (which is made from the seed covering of the nutmeg seed, and isn't related to the self defense spray, which takes its name from the medieval club weapon). What makes the Jamaican variant special is that it's usually made with molasses instead of honey. And, the island tradition is to eat it as the "bread" for a cheese sandwich. The most famous kind of sweet bun is the hot cross bun, which has the cross made of icing on top, and is often eaten around the Easter season. It appears that one good way to start an argument among food historians is to ask when the hot cross bun was developed. Some sources said it dates back all the way to ancient Babylon. Others credit the 6th century Greeks. Some think it was a British monk named Brother Thomas Rodcliffe at St. Albans Abbey, around 1366. Still others claim it was another (unnamed) English monk in the 1100's, or, alternately, in the 1600's. The spiced bun, though, can be safely guessed to have been invented later, probably in the 1600's or 1700's, since before that the myriad spices needed weren't commonly available in much of Europe. And the Jamaican take on it was also in the 1600's, after the British established control of Jamaica.
As for the manufacturer, I had some problems learning about them. The label of the bun I bought reads, "Baked by Continental Baking Company, Ltd., 43 Half Way Tree Road, Kingston, Jamaica." But the National Baking Company is said to have the exact same address, so presumably it's a part of the same firm. The HTB part is apparently a brand name. I found an official online company website, but when I clicked on it my computer warned me that the connection was not private, and attackers would seek out my personal information, passwords, etc. So, clearly I didn't want to suffer that nightmare, so I didn't go to the website. However, another (safe) online article gave me some background, which I assume is accurate. It reported that the National Baking Company was started in 1952 by a Karl Hendrickson. And that his father had a bakery located in the oddly named community of Maggotty, St. Elizabeth, Jamaica in the 1920's. The current owner is Gary "Butch" Hendrickson, and he was recently elected to the Private Sector Organisation part of the Jamaican Hall of Fame. The company is reported to be very charitable, so good on them for that.
Continental Baking Company, National Baking Company, HTB spice bun: Came in a wrapper, and was 340 grams/12 ounces. Looked like an un-iced, brown loaf of bread. Except for salt it didn't list the specific spices used. It was sweet and pretty good. I ate it plain, and didn't need butter or anything. Not a huge taste, but fairly good nonetheless. I liked it overall. Although I wish I'd known about the traditional way of eating it as part of a cheese sandwich--maybe that would have made it a more special experience. Anyway, I recommend it.
Two final tidbits about the spiced bun, and its ingredients. One, I learned that nutmeg is psychoactive in large enough doses, and in huge amounts it can cause serious health problems and even death in some cases. So don't try a "nutmeg challenge" or anything. Also, there is a version of the hot cross bun whose history is well established. The Sonoma Bakery in Sydney, Australia started making a "not cross bun" in 2012, with an "S" written on it in icing rather than the "X" cross. Since 2014 the Ferguson Plarre Bakehouses has similarly makes a type with a smiley face atop it instead of the cross. At first I thought these were just fun wordplay, innocent variations on the traditional hot cross bun for laughs. However, then I read about how it was more serious than that--some people were offended that bakeries were selling hot cross buns too early, way before the Easter and Lent season. There were even protests by folks thinking it was disrespectful. So these compromises were the result.
Moving away from food, I'm happy to announce that one of my short stories, "Lemonade," has been selected for an anthology of psychological horror stories (or non-supernatural scary tales). This as of now unnamed anthology will be published by the Dark Ink portion of AM Ink Publishing. The cover is due to be picked by February, and the book itself is slated for an early September of 2020 release. As always, I'll provide an image of the cover, the title, the list of contributing authors, the story blurbs, etc., as I get them. So stay tuned.
The Jamaican spiced bun is a variant of a sweet bun, and as such it's simply a sweet bun made with more spices. The spices can vary, but the most common ones are cinnamon, nutmeg, coriander, allspice, saffron, "mixed spice," and mace (which is made from the seed covering of the nutmeg seed, and isn't related to the self defense spray, which takes its name from the medieval club weapon). What makes the Jamaican variant special is that it's usually made with molasses instead of honey. And, the island tradition is to eat it as the "bread" for a cheese sandwich. The most famous kind of sweet bun is the hot cross bun, which has the cross made of icing on top, and is often eaten around the Easter season. It appears that one good way to start an argument among food historians is to ask when the hot cross bun was developed. Some sources said it dates back all the way to ancient Babylon. Others credit the 6th century Greeks. Some think it was a British monk named Brother Thomas Rodcliffe at St. Albans Abbey, around 1366. Still others claim it was another (unnamed) English monk in the 1100's, or, alternately, in the 1600's. The spiced bun, though, can be safely guessed to have been invented later, probably in the 1600's or 1700's, since before that the myriad spices needed weren't commonly available in much of Europe. And the Jamaican take on it was also in the 1600's, after the British established control of Jamaica.
As for the manufacturer, I had some problems learning about them. The label of the bun I bought reads, "Baked by Continental Baking Company, Ltd., 43 Half Way Tree Road, Kingston, Jamaica." But the National Baking Company is said to have the exact same address, so presumably it's a part of the same firm. The HTB part is apparently a brand name. I found an official online company website, but when I clicked on it my computer warned me that the connection was not private, and attackers would seek out my personal information, passwords, etc. So, clearly I didn't want to suffer that nightmare, so I didn't go to the website. However, another (safe) online article gave me some background, which I assume is accurate. It reported that the National Baking Company was started in 1952 by a Karl Hendrickson. And that his father had a bakery located in the oddly named community of Maggotty, St. Elizabeth, Jamaica in the 1920's. The current owner is Gary "Butch" Hendrickson, and he was recently elected to the Private Sector Organisation part of the Jamaican Hall of Fame. The company is reported to be very charitable, so good on them for that.
Continental Baking Company, National Baking Company, HTB spice bun: Came in a wrapper, and was 340 grams/12 ounces. Looked like an un-iced, brown loaf of bread. Except for salt it didn't list the specific spices used. It was sweet and pretty good. I ate it plain, and didn't need butter or anything. Not a huge taste, but fairly good nonetheless. I liked it overall. Although I wish I'd known about the traditional way of eating it as part of a cheese sandwich--maybe that would have made it a more special experience. Anyway, I recommend it.
Two final tidbits about the spiced bun, and its ingredients. One, I learned that nutmeg is psychoactive in large enough doses, and in huge amounts it can cause serious health problems and even death in some cases. So don't try a "nutmeg challenge" or anything. Also, there is a version of the hot cross bun whose history is well established. The Sonoma Bakery in Sydney, Australia started making a "not cross bun" in 2012, with an "S" written on it in icing rather than the "X" cross. Since 2014 the Ferguson Plarre Bakehouses has similarly makes a type with a smiley face atop it instead of the cross. At first I thought these were just fun wordplay, innocent variations on the traditional hot cross bun for laughs. However, then I read about how it was more serious than that--some people were offended that bakeries were selling hot cross buns too early, way before the Easter and Lent season. There were even protests by folks thinking it was disrespectful. So these compromises were the result.
Moving away from food, I'm happy to announce that one of my short stories, "Lemonade," has been selected for an anthology of psychological horror stories (or non-supernatural scary tales). This as of now unnamed anthology will be published by the Dark Ink portion of AM Ink Publishing. The cover is due to be picked by February, and the book itself is slated for an early September of 2020 release. As always, I'll provide an image of the cover, the title, the list of contributing authors, the story blurbs, etc., as I get them. So stay tuned.
Saturday, December 7, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Gooseberries
This was yet another find from the India Bazaar supermarket in Stratford, NJ. It was a can of amla murabba, or gooseberry preserves. In this case, it essentially meant fruit in a syrup solution. Not ever having partaken of such a thing, I of course snapped this right up.
Gooseberries are a further example of a food with somewhat mysterious origins. They are known to be native to much of Europe, the Caucasus region, and North Africa. However, some sources claim that a subspecies is native to North America. Whichever is true, gooseberries are now grown in the U.S. and Canada, and in other parts of Asia, including India. Although unlike most fruits, they don't thrive in areas with too hot a climate. Gooseberries are also related to black currants, and can even be crossbred with them.
The origin of the berry's name in English is controversial as well. Many folks think that this name is a corruption of various other languages' words, such as the Dutch word "kruisbes," or the German word "krausbeere," or the French word "groseille." However, the Oxford English Dictionary opines that the answer is much more simple; that the berry was named after the large honking bird. Furthermore, reportedly in the 19th century "gooseberry bush" was slang for pubic hair, as in, "babies are born under the gooseberry bush." Alas, this amusing term hasn't appeared to have survived up into the present day. (At least as far as I know. Admittedly I haven't been up on current slang expressions since about 1990.)
Gooseberries tend to be greenish or yellowish when unripe, and reddish-purple when ripe. Their size can vary, ranging from about the size of a pea up to about the size of a small chicken's egg. This is also an unusual fruit in that it's eaten more commonly when unripe. Consumers seem to prefer the tarter flavor that the younger berries have. As to how they're eaten, many people eat them raw, as is, but others cook them into desserts, such as pies and crumbles. Or they are used to flavor waters, sodas, and milks. Or made into teas, wines or jams.
As is also fairly frequent with my post topics, some people think that gooseberries have potent health benefits. A little online research turned up claims that these berries can help treat diabetes, inflammation, cardiovascular disorders, neurodegenerative diseases, colds, fever, liver and hair problems, high cholesterol, pain, and even cancer. But, I have to be a broken record once again, and state that actual scientific evidence for these claims is lacking at this time. Nutritionists agree that gooseberries are good for you--they have relatively low levels of cholesterol, fat and calories, and they have a decent amount of Vitamin C and fiber, for example--but don't without your chemo or your doctor proscribed medications in favor of them just yet.
As for the manufacturer, the Pachranga Foods company, there wasn't much on their official website. Pachranga started in 1925, and operates out of Panipat, India. According to the photos on the can I got, evidently they are owned and/or run by two gentlemen, named Late Shri Murli Dhar Ji and Shri Manohar Lal Dhingra. (The writing for these names was very small, and I wasn't positive where some words ended and the next began. So apologies if I've rendered their names incorrectly.) The company specializes in my different kinds of pickles, of various fruits and vegetables, along with a few sweets, such as carrot, rose petal, harar, and apple preserves.
Pachranga Foods, amla murabba (gooseberry preserves): The can they came in was 1 kilogram, or about 35 ounces. The berries themselves were large, being about 4 cm. (about 1.5 inches) in diameter, and greenish in color. They had a firm, chewy texture, with a large brown pit in the center. They were okay. A bit bland, but the syrup obviously helped make them sweeter. I happened to give these to my parents to try, and they really loved them. But I thought they were just mediocre.
Finally, from 1912 to 1966 there was a federal ban against cultivating gooseberries in the U.S. This was because they were susceptible to a fungus that would spread to, and kill, white pine trees. However, since 1966 states were allowed to repeal this ban if they wanted, and some have. But even those that do usually mandate that the gooseberries be grown well away from white pine trees, just for safety's sake.
Gooseberries are a further example of a food with somewhat mysterious origins. They are known to be native to much of Europe, the Caucasus region, and North Africa. However, some sources claim that a subspecies is native to North America. Whichever is true, gooseberries are now grown in the U.S. and Canada, and in other parts of Asia, including India. Although unlike most fruits, they don't thrive in areas with too hot a climate. Gooseberries are also related to black currants, and can even be crossbred with them.
The origin of the berry's name in English is controversial as well. Many folks think that this name is a corruption of various other languages' words, such as the Dutch word "kruisbes," or the German word "krausbeere," or the French word "groseille." However, the Oxford English Dictionary opines that the answer is much more simple; that the berry was named after the large honking bird. Furthermore, reportedly in the 19th century "gooseberry bush" was slang for pubic hair, as in, "babies are born under the gooseberry bush." Alas, this amusing term hasn't appeared to have survived up into the present day. (At least as far as I know. Admittedly I haven't been up on current slang expressions since about 1990.)
Gooseberries tend to be greenish or yellowish when unripe, and reddish-purple when ripe. Their size can vary, ranging from about the size of a pea up to about the size of a small chicken's egg. This is also an unusual fruit in that it's eaten more commonly when unripe. Consumers seem to prefer the tarter flavor that the younger berries have. As to how they're eaten, many people eat them raw, as is, but others cook them into desserts, such as pies and crumbles. Or they are used to flavor waters, sodas, and milks. Or made into teas, wines or jams.
As is also fairly frequent with my post topics, some people think that gooseberries have potent health benefits. A little online research turned up claims that these berries can help treat diabetes, inflammation, cardiovascular disorders, neurodegenerative diseases, colds, fever, liver and hair problems, high cholesterol, pain, and even cancer. But, I have to be a broken record once again, and state that actual scientific evidence for these claims is lacking at this time. Nutritionists agree that gooseberries are good for you--they have relatively low levels of cholesterol, fat and calories, and they have a decent amount of Vitamin C and fiber, for example--but don't without your chemo or your doctor proscribed medications in favor of them just yet.
As for the manufacturer, the Pachranga Foods company, there wasn't much on their official website. Pachranga started in 1925, and operates out of Panipat, India. According to the photos on the can I got, evidently they are owned and/or run by two gentlemen, named Late Shri Murli Dhar Ji and Shri Manohar Lal Dhingra. (The writing for these names was very small, and I wasn't positive where some words ended and the next began. So apologies if I've rendered their names incorrectly.) The company specializes in my different kinds of pickles, of various fruits and vegetables, along with a few sweets, such as carrot, rose petal, harar, and apple preserves.
Pachranga Foods, amla murabba (gooseberry preserves): The can they came in was 1 kilogram, or about 35 ounces. The berries themselves were large, being about 4 cm. (about 1.5 inches) in diameter, and greenish in color. They had a firm, chewy texture, with a large brown pit in the center. They were okay. A bit bland, but the syrup obviously helped make them sweeter. I happened to give these to my parents to try, and they really loved them. But I thought they were just mediocre.
Finally, from 1912 to 1966 there was a federal ban against cultivating gooseberries in the U.S. This was because they were susceptible to a fungus that would spread to, and kill, white pine trees. However, since 1966 states were allowed to repeal this ban if they wanted, and some have. But even those that do usually mandate that the gooseberries be grown well away from white pine trees, just for safety's sake.
Saturday, November 30, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--A Mexican Cheese
It's time I revisited my favorite food--cheese. Which is, of course, a very common food type around the world. Except, I suppose, in areas where lactose intolerance is the norm, such as South America (especially Southern South America), Africa (especially Sub Saharan areas), and Southern Asia (particularly in the Southeastern parts). Anyway, I found this cheese in my local Shop Rite supermarket. It's a traditional Mexican cheese called cotija.
The history of cotija is pretty vague. The name is from a town in the state of Michoacan. However, its inception date, and the inventor's name(s) I couldn't discover. Cheese wasn't produced in Mexico until after the Spanish arrived, with their cows, sheep, and goats, and long years of cheese making techniques, so at its oldest cotija is still less than 500 years old.
Cotija is a hard cheese. Young versions are often compared to Greek feta cheese in texture, and aged versions are dry and crumbly, similar to the Italian Parmigiano Riggiano (aka Parmesan). In fact, cotija is sometimes referred to as the "Parmesan of Mexico." Cotija is intensely salty, in part to help preserve it in Mexico's usually hot climate. Traditionally it's made from raw cow's milk, and aged 3-12 months. Some commercialized variants add an enzyme to speed up the process, which also affects the flavor slightly. The traditional kind is also called the "cheese of the mountains," as the cows are fed mountain grass, and the cheese itself is often made in higher elevations. One of cotija's most distinctive attributes is its resistance to heat--unlike most cheeses, it doesn't melt when cooked, it only softens slightly. Therefore, it's often grated upon soups, pastas, and salads, or stuffed into tacos and enchiladas.
Typically I'd now tell you some brief information about the manufacturer, which in this case is Que Gusto. Alas, I'm unable to provide much, due to the terseness of the official company website, and lack of other online data. The company website only lists the other cheese it makes (fresco, Oaxaca, and blanco), and some recipes. It doesn't even list a location! Moving on, the distribution company, J.V.M. Sales Corp., out of New Jersey in the U.S., is similarly mysterious. It's been around since 1983, and specializes in imported cheeses, which are said to come from Italy. I assume that the cotija cheese is an exception, since producing a traditional Mexican cheese in Italy, and then bringing it back to the U.S., seems extremely convoluted and weird, instead of buying it from Mexican cheese mongers, or at least Mexican-American dairy farmers in the U.S. But who knows?
Que Gusto! cotija: Came in a 283 gram/10 ounce package. Color was whitish. Odor was similar to Parmesan. Had a hard, crumbly texture. I had it plain, and on crackers. The flavor was pleasantly sourish and tangy, with a good amount of salt. It was very good. And the nickname is correct--it did taste a lot like Parmesan, which is a compliment. I definitely recommend cotija, as it's a more than respectable cheese.
In closing, I'll briefly discuss some other traditional Mexican cheeses. Oaxaca is a version of string cheese. Fresco is a semi-soft, farmer's cheese. Chihuahua is a soft white cheese available in braids or balls, and is connected with Mexican Mennonites. Panela cheese is made from skim milk, so it's very low in fat and cholesterol. Mexico also makes a loose cheese similar in texture to cottage cheese or ricotta, called requesan. Finally, back on August 29, 2015 I discussed a Spanish cheese, Manchego. Mexico makes a variant of this, too, using cow or goat's milk instead of the traditional sheep's milk.
The history of cotija is pretty vague. The name is from a town in the state of Michoacan. However, its inception date, and the inventor's name(s) I couldn't discover. Cheese wasn't produced in Mexico until after the Spanish arrived, with their cows, sheep, and goats, and long years of cheese making techniques, so at its oldest cotija is still less than 500 years old.
Cotija is a hard cheese. Young versions are often compared to Greek feta cheese in texture, and aged versions are dry and crumbly, similar to the Italian Parmigiano Riggiano (aka Parmesan). In fact, cotija is sometimes referred to as the "Parmesan of Mexico." Cotija is intensely salty, in part to help preserve it in Mexico's usually hot climate. Traditionally it's made from raw cow's milk, and aged 3-12 months. Some commercialized variants add an enzyme to speed up the process, which also affects the flavor slightly. The traditional kind is also called the "cheese of the mountains," as the cows are fed mountain grass, and the cheese itself is often made in higher elevations. One of cotija's most distinctive attributes is its resistance to heat--unlike most cheeses, it doesn't melt when cooked, it only softens slightly. Therefore, it's often grated upon soups, pastas, and salads, or stuffed into tacos and enchiladas.
Typically I'd now tell you some brief information about the manufacturer, which in this case is Que Gusto. Alas, I'm unable to provide much, due to the terseness of the official company website, and lack of other online data. The company website only lists the other cheese it makes (fresco, Oaxaca, and blanco), and some recipes. It doesn't even list a location! Moving on, the distribution company, J.V.M. Sales Corp., out of New Jersey in the U.S., is similarly mysterious. It's been around since 1983, and specializes in imported cheeses, which are said to come from Italy. I assume that the cotija cheese is an exception, since producing a traditional Mexican cheese in Italy, and then bringing it back to the U.S., seems extremely convoluted and weird, instead of buying it from Mexican cheese mongers, or at least Mexican-American dairy farmers in the U.S. But who knows?
Que Gusto! cotija: Came in a 283 gram/10 ounce package. Color was whitish. Odor was similar to Parmesan. Had a hard, crumbly texture. I had it plain, and on crackers. The flavor was pleasantly sourish and tangy, with a good amount of salt. It was very good. And the nickname is correct--it did taste a lot like Parmesan, which is a compliment. I definitely recommend cotija, as it's a more than respectable cheese.
In closing, I'll briefly discuss some other traditional Mexican cheeses. Oaxaca is a version of string cheese. Fresco is a semi-soft, farmer's cheese. Chihuahua is a soft white cheese available in braids or balls, and is connected with Mexican Mennonites. Panela cheese is made from skim milk, so it's very low in fat and cholesterol. Mexico also makes a loose cheese similar in texture to cottage cheese or ricotta, called requesan. Finally, back on August 29, 2015 I discussed a Spanish cheese, Manchego. Mexico makes a variant of this, too, using cow or goat's milk instead of the traditional sheep's milk.
Saturday, November 23, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--A Vietnamese Soft Drink
This one's a bit convoluted. It came from the So It Is African Market, which I've referenced before. Which, as the name suggests, mainly sells products from African nations. However, it also has some Caribbean wares, or products used by those with Caribbean ancestry. The drink I had is from Vietnam, but it was distributed by an American company which specializes in Hispanic, Caribbean, and Spanish cuisine. The beverage in question was the guanabana/soursop juice drink from Iberia.
The origin of guanabana (aka soursop, graviola, and several others) is unknown. It's somewhere in Central America, South America, or the Caribbean, but that's as detailed as we can get. This plant needs a hot and humid climate. Currently though, it's grown around the world in places with just such an environment. Including Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, and of course, Vietnam. Soursop is in the same genus as cherimoya, which I covered in my November 15, 2014 post. The fruit has a fun and distinctive look to it, having a green, spiky rind, a whitish pulp and large black seeds. Aside from being eaten raw, it also is commonly used in drinks, candies, sorbets and ice creams. Consumers often claim that its texture is like a banana, its odor is like a pineapple, and its flavor is similar to an apple, and strawberry, with an additional citrus tinge. Nutritionally the fruit has decent amounts of Vitamins B1, B2 and C. Other health effects are controversial, or just conjectural at this point. Some alternative medicine practitioners claim that soursop can fight cancer. But, as usual, scientific evidence for this is lacking, thus far. On a more worrying note, there may be a link between soursop and Parkinson's Disease. It contains a neurotoxin called annonacin, which may be the cause. Paw paws and custard apples also have this substance. So maybe don't eat this fruit frequently, to be safe.
As is often the case, I wasn't able to find out anything about the Vietnamese company which produced the drink. The only info was about the distributing company, Iberia. Iberia has been around since 1930. The firm has been bought out several times by other companies, but as of 2019 it's owned by the Brooklyn Bottling Company, or the other BBC. Iberia markets essentially every main food type--meat and fish, grains, vegetables, oils, seasonings and sauces, juices, waters, milk, pasta, snacks, desserts, and cookies. And, religious candles, for some reason.
Iberia guanabana/soursop juice drink: Came in a 500 ml./16.9 ounce can. Ingredients were 35% soursop juice, water, sugar, citric acid, ascorbic acid, and soursop flavor. The color was slightly whitish. The flavor was milky, with some sourness. Overall it wasn't bad, but also not especially great. Sorry to be wishy washy, but it didn't have a very distinctive taste. Maybe if you're a big fan of the fruit you might also really enjoy this drink.
The origin of guanabana (aka soursop, graviola, and several others) is unknown. It's somewhere in Central America, South America, or the Caribbean, but that's as detailed as we can get. This plant needs a hot and humid climate. Currently though, it's grown around the world in places with just such an environment. Including Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, and of course, Vietnam. Soursop is in the same genus as cherimoya, which I covered in my November 15, 2014 post. The fruit has a fun and distinctive look to it, having a green, spiky rind, a whitish pulp and large black seeds. Aside from being eaten raw, it also is commonly used in drinks, candies, sorbets and ice creams. Consumers often claim that its texture is like a banana, its odor is like a pineapple, and its flavor is similar to an apple, and strawberry, with an additional citrus tinge. Nutritionally the fruit has decent amounts of Vitamins B1, B2 and C. Other health effects are controversial, or just conjectural at this point. Some alternative medicine practitioners claim that soursop can fight cancer. But, as usual, scientific evidence for this is lacking, thus far. On a more worrying note, there may be a link between soursop and Parkinson's Disease. It contains a neurotoxin called annonacin, which may be the cause. Paw paws and custard apples also have this substance. So maybe don't eat this fruit frequently, to be safe.
As is often the case, I wasn't able to find out anything about the Vietnamese company which produced the drink. The only info was about the distributing company, Iberia. Iberia has been around since 1930. The firm has been bought out several times by other companies, but as of 2019 it's owned by the Brooklyn Bottling Company, or the other BBC. Iberia markets essentially every main food type--meat and fish, grains, vegetables, oils, seasonings and sauces, juices, waters, milk, pasta, snacks, desserts, and cookies. And, religious candles, for some reason.
Iberia guanabana/soursop juice drink: Came in a 500 ml./16.9 ounce can. Ingredients were 35% soursop juice, water, sugar, citric acid, ascorbic acid, and soursop flavor. The color was slightly whitish. The flavor was milky, with some sourness. Overall it wasn't bad, but also not especially great. Sorry to be wishy washy, but it didn't have a very distinctive taste. Maybe if you're a big fan of the fruit you might also really enjoy this drink.
Saturday, November 16, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Shoofly Pie
Today I'll be discussing some cuisine of my people--shoofly pie, a traditional Pennsylvania Dutch dessert. Ha! I'm just kidding, poking fun at my facial hair choice of large porkchop sideburns, which resemble the no-mustache-but-full-beard arrangement common amongst the Amish and Mennonite men. For the record, I do have some German ancestry, but I haven't been able to identify any Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry.
First off, most people assume that Pennsylvania Dutch just means the Amish and Mennonites. Which is an exaggeration--many members of this group are more modernish Lutherans, or German Reformed. Meaning they don't dress only in black, avoid most modern technology, and necessarily be pacifists, etc. Moving on, the history of shoofly pie isn't definitive. Some claim it's a dish created by Pennsylvania German immigrants in the late 1700's or early 1800's, based on what ingredients (molasses, brown sugar, flour, lard, egg, spices) were less perishable, more available. However, food historian William Woys Weaver has his own theory, which he covers in his 2013 book, "As American as Shoofly Pie: The Foodlore and Fakelore of Pennsylvania Dutch Cuisine." Weaver says the roots of this pie were molasses cakes developed for the U.S.A.'s Centennial celebration, in 1876. By the 1880's bakers had added a pie shell to enclose the dessert, to make it easier and less messy to eat. Other possible precursors are a treacle tart (a pie made from syrup, basically) and Jenny Lind cake, a gingerbread-based cake. And then there's the name. Most people think that it's literal, that bakers working with outdoor ovens would have had to chase away flies attracted by the sweet molasses of the pie. However, Weaver's explanation is more elaborate, and to my mind, more amusing. He claims that in the 1870's and 1880's there was a popular traveling circus act which featured a boxing mule named Shoofly (perhaps after the folk song?). Shoofly was trained to stand up on his hind legs, and wear boxing gloves on his front hoofs, and he would compete against a horse. (Left unsaid is if his opponent wore boxing gloves too, or stood on its hind legs, etc.) Anyway, because this mule was so popular, various food companies were inspired to name brands after him, so there was soon a Shoofly molasses, Shoofly flour, etc. Since some of these were ingredients in the pie, folks started using the brand name as a title for the dessert. (Of course, proof in the form of advertisements, or surviving Shoofly brand food containers would help settle this debate. Maybe they're in Weaver's book.)
Shoofly pie (also rendered shoe fly pie, or shoo-fly pie) is an interesting concoction. It's basically a coffee or crumb cake atop a molasses layer, in a pie shell. There are two major types--wet bottom or dry bottom. The former has a moist, gooey molasses base, while the latter is dryer, and more cake-like. A Montgomery pie is a cousin to shoofly, only it has a buttermilk top, and lemon juice added to the bottom. Sometimes shoofly pie has a chocolate icing layer on top, too. And no matter how it's made, the traditional serving method is warmed, with whipped cream on top. Aside from being a dessert, it's also commonly eaten at breakfast, washed down with black coffee.
Normally, I'm very specific about where I got the food I'm reviewing, and when. Alas, I'm unable to do so this time. I had shoofly pie for the first time when I was only about 8 or 9 years old, and I think it was homemade. Since, I've had it a couple of times as an adult, from restaurants as I recall. I believe I sampled the wet bottom type, as I seem to remember a moister, pecan pie-ish texture to it. I do clearly remember enjoying it, which makes sense due to my sweet tooth. Crumb cake is good, as is molasses, so mixing the two together is a winning combination. I should have taken advantage the last time I was in Pennsylvania Dutch territory a couple of years ago, but unfortunately I didn't. All in all, I certainly recommend shoofly pie, especially to fans of molasses. But it probably goes without saying that it should be only an occasional treat, because of its sugar content. And I wouldn't recommend it to diabetics, for obvious reasons. If you'd like to read more about Pennsylvania Dutch cuisine, you can check out my post on mincemeat pie (January 13, 2017), or my post on Amish cup cheese (April 22, 2017). Lastly, although whose version of this food is clearly subjective, many credit the Dutch Haven bakery in Soudersburg, Pennsylvania (near the town of Lancaster), as making the best commercial shoofly pie.
First off, most people assume that Pennsylvania Dutch just means the Amish and Mennonites. Which is an exaggeration--many members of this group are more modernish Lutherans, or German Reformed. Meaning they don't dress only in black, avoid most modern technology, and necessarily be pacifists, etc. Moving on, the history of shoofly pie isn't definitive. Some claim it's a dish created by Pennsylvania German immigrants in the late 1700's or early 1800's, based on what ingredients (molasses, brown sugar, flour, lard, egg, spices) were less perishable, more available. However, food historian William Woys Weaver has his own theory, which he covers in his 2013 book, "As American as Shoofly Pie: The Foodlore and Fakelore of Pennsylvania Dutch Cuisine." Weaver says the roots of this pie were molasses cakes developed for the U.S.A.'s Centennial celebration, in 1876. By the 1880's bakers had added a pie shell to enclose the dessert, to make it easier and less messy to eat. Other possible precursors are a treacle tart (a pie made from syrup, basically) and Jenny Lind cake, a gingerbread-based cake. And then there's the name. Most people think that it's literal, that bakers working with outdoor ovens would have had to chase away flies attracted by the sweet molasses of the pie. However, Weaver's explanation is more elaborate, and to my mind, more amusing. He claims that in the 1870's and 1880's there was a popular traveling circus act which featured a boxing mule named Shoofly (perhaps after the folk song?). Shoofly was trained to stand up on his hind legs, and wear boxing gloves on his front hoofs, and he would compete against a horse. (Left unsaid is if his opponent wore boxing gloves too, or stood on its hind legs, etc.) Anyway, because this mule was so popular, various food companies were inspired to name brands after him, so there was soon a Shoofly molasses, Shoofly flour, etc. Since some of these were ingredients in the pie, folks started using the brand name as a title for the dessert. (Of course, proof in the form of advertisements, or surviving Shoofly brand food containers would help settle this debate. Maybe they're in Weaver's book.)
Shoofly pie (also rendered shoe fly pie, or shoo-fly pie) is an interesting concoction. It's basically a coffee or crumb cake atop a molasses layer, in a pie shell. There are two major types--wet bottom or dry bottom. The former has a moist, gooey molasses base, while the latter is dryer, and more cake-like. A Montgomery pie is a cousin to shoofly, only it has a buttermilk top, and lemon juice added to the bottom. Sometimes shoofly pie has a chocolate icing layer on top, too. And no matter how it's made, the traditional serving method is warmed, with whipped cream on top. Aside from being a dessert, it's also commonly eaten at breakfast, washed down with black coffee.
Normally, I'm very specific about where I got the food I'm reviewing, and when. Alas, I'm unable to do so this time. I had shoofly pie for the first time when I was only about 8 or 9 years old, and I think it was homemade. Since, I've had it a couple of times as an adult, from restaurants as I recall. I believe I sampled the wet bottom type, as I seem to remember a moister, pecan pie-ish texture to it. I do clearly remember enjoying it, which makes sense due to my sweet tooth. Crumb cake is good, as is molasses, so mixing the two together is a winning combination. I should have taken advantage the last time I was in Pennsylvania Dutch territory a couple of years ago, but unfortunately I didn't. All in all, I certainly recommend shoofly pie, especially to fans of molasses. But it probably goes without saying that it should be only an occasional treat, because of its sugar content. And I wouldn't recommend it to diabetics, for obvious reasons. If you'd like to read more about Pennsylvania Dutch cuisine, you can check out my post on mincemeat pie (January 13, 2017), or my post on Amish cup cheese (April 22, 2017). Lastly, although whose version of this food is clearly subjective, many credit the Dutch Haven bakery in Soudersburg, Pennsylvania (near the town of Lancaster), as making the best commercial shoofly pie.
Saturday, November 9, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Tuna from Ghana
This is actually my third blog post about a product from Ghana. (The others were about a Ghanaian candy on April 13, 2016, and a Ghanaian soft drink on October 13, 2018.) It's another So It Is African Market find. And while the company which owns and distributes this tuna is American, the fish itself is a product of that African nation.
The company which produced this canned tuna was Pioneer Food Cannery, Ltd., which to add to the cosmopolitan nature appears to be Thai. However, I wasn't able to find out much of anything about this firm online. So, therefore, I'll focus on what I could learn, which was about the overall parent company, StarKist. StarKist was created in San Pedro, California, in 1917 by a Croatian immigrant named Martin J. Bogdanovich and some unnamed partners. Originally the company's name was the French Sardine Company. By 1942 the company marketed under the StarKist name, though, and by 1953 the company title formally switched to StarKist. StarKist has been bought out by other businesses several times over the years. Heinz acquired them in 1963, and then Del Monte did so in 2002. And, finally, in either 2006 or 2008 (sources differ), Dongwon Industries of Korea became the owner.
I'm sad to report that StarKist has some skeletons in the closet. A class action lawsuit was filed in 2015 claiming that the company had deliberately under filled 5 ounce cans of tuna. By September of 2019 a settlement was reached, and consumers received coupons or small payouts. More dramatically, StarKist, along with its giant competitors Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee, were guilty of felony price fixing. Chicken of the Sea cooperated early with prosecutors, so they got off with no fine. But Bumble Bee had to pay a fine of $25,000,000, and StarKist $100,000,000. Reportedly Bumble Bee's fine was lower because it was thought that the company would have gone bankrupt if it was forced to pay the larger fine.
Anyway, here's what I thought about the food itself:
1) StarKist tuna flakes, in sunflower oil: Came in a 170 gram can. Eaten plain it tasted like regular canned tuna. Otherwise I had it mixed with mayo as a sandwich on 10 grain bread. And it tasted like regular tuna once again, only oilier. (I usually have tuna packed in water.) I didn't detect a difference in the "flakes" rather than the usual shredded chunks of tuna. So overall I thought StarKist tuna flakes were okay, and made for a solid tuna sandwich. I prefer the tuna packed in water, but this was alright. And to be fair I've never noticed much of a difference in canned tuna brands--they all pretty much taste the same. Fresh is better, but canned is acceptable.
Finally, when the average person hears "StarKist," they probably think of the company's corporate mascot--a cartoon anthropomorphic tuna fish named Charlie. Charlie was created by Tom Rogers of the Leo Burnett ad agency back in 1961. (I read that "Vampira" portrayer Maila Nurmi claimed that actor James Dean drew a prototype of Charlie on a napkin at a coffee shop in Hollywood before his official birth, but this appears to be a weird myth.) Burnett's agency also produced the Pillsbury Doughboy character, the lonely Maytag repairman, and the Jolly Green Giant and Sprout mascots. Anyway, Charlie the Tuna was voiced by a television and Broadway actor Herschel Bernardi (until his death in 1986), and the signature tagline of the advertisement was a narrator telling the character "Sorry Charlie." Going further into this character's minutia, I learned that the bachelor Charlie actually had a love interest for a short time in 1991, with the "Premia" character, who was used to promote StarKist's Chunk Light Tuna brand. Also, the tiny town of Charleston, Oregon has had a Charlie the Tuna statue since 1968. Unfortunately some rowdy teens stole and burnt the statue in 2008, but the townspeople pooled their resources and a replacement statue was quickly erected.
The company which produced this canned tuna was Pioneer Food Cannery, Ltd., which to add to the cosmopolitan nature appears to be Thai. However, I wasn't able to find out much of anything about this firm online. So, therefore, I'll focus on what I could learn, which was about the overall parent company, StarKist. StarKist was created in San Pedro, California, in 1917 by a Croatian immigrant named Martin J. Bogdanovich and some unnamed partners. Originally the company's name was the French Sardine Company. By 1942 the company marketed under the StarKist name, though, and by 1953 the company title formally switched to StarKist. StarKist has been bought out by other businesses several times over the years. Heinz acquired them in 1963, and then Del Monte did so in 2002. And, finally, in either 2006 or 2008 (sources differ), Dongwon Industries of Korea became the owner.
I'm sad to report that StarKist has some skeletons in the closet. A class action lawsuit was filed in 2015 claiming that the company had deliberately under filled 5 ounce cans of tuna. By September of 2019 a settlement was reached, and consumers received coupons or small payouts. More dramatically, StarKist, along with its giant competitors Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee, were guilty of felony price fixing. Chicken of the Sea cooperated early with prosecutors, so they got off with no fine. But Bumble Bee had to pay a fine of $25,000,000, and StarKist $100,000,000. Reportedly Bumble Bee's fine was lower because it was thought that the company would have gone bankrupt if it was forced to pay the larger fine.
Anyway, here's what I thought about the food itself:
1) StarKist tuna flakes, in sunflower oil: Came in a 170 gram can. Eaten plain it tasted like regular canned tuna. Otherwise I had it mixed with mayo as a sandwich on 10 grain bread. And it tasted like regular tuna once again, only oilier. (I usually have tuna packed in water.) I didn't detect a difference in the "flakes" rather than the usual shredded chunks of tuna. So overall I thought StarKist tuna flakes were okay, and made for a solid tuna sandwich. I prefer the tuna packed in water, but this was alright. And to be fair I've never noticed much of a difference in canned tuna brands--they all pretty much taste the same. Fresh is better, but canned is acceptable.
Finally, when the average person hears "StarKist," they probably think of the company's corporate mascot--a cartoon anthropomorphic tuna fish named Charlie. Charlie was created by Tom Rogers of the Leo Burnett ad agency back in 1961. (I read that "Vampira" portrayer Maila Nurmi claimed that actor James Dean drew a prototype of Charlie on a napkin at a coffee shop in Hollywood before his official birth, but this appears to be a weird myth.) Burnett's agency also produced the Pillsbury Doughboy character, the lonely Maytag repairman, and the Jolly Green Giant and Sprout mascots. Anyway, Charlie the Tuna was voiced by a television and Broadway actor Herschel Bernardi (until his death in 1986), and the signature tagline of the advertisement was a narrator telling the character "Sorry Charlie." Going further into this character's minutia, I learned that the bachelor Charlie actually had a love interest for a short time in 1991, with the "Premia" character, who was used to promote StarKist's Chunk Light Tuna brand. Also, the tiny town of Charleston, Oregon has had a Charlie the Tuna statue since 1968. Unfortunately some rowdy teens stole and burnt the statue in 2008, but the townspeople pooled their resources and a replacement statue was quickly erected.
Saturday, November 2, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Belgian Biscuits
Lately I've been doing a lot of posts about my initial experiences with various countries' edibles and drinkables. This isn't the case today. I've done at least one about Belgium's wares (see my February 24, 2018 post, about Belgian beverages), and this is another. Also, unlike many of my recent posts, the products discussed here weren't bought at an exotic grocery--these were found at my local Shop Rite supermarket. Anyway, the three biscuit types were all from the Lotus company, specifically the Biscoff, Dinosaurus, and Biscoff To Go cookies.
The Lotus company dates back to 1932. It was started by the Boone brothers--Jan, Emiel, and Henri. Jan seems to have been the chef/cookie inventor, so evidently Emiel and Henri handled the bookkeeping, or marketing, or something. Apparently their initial inspiration was to make biscuits for breakfast, and speculoos for St. Nicholas Day celebrations (on December 5th). Speculoos biscuits are a traditional type of special shortcrust cookies, which are thin, crunchy, and usually shaped like various forms, like an elephant, a farmhouse, or a ship. These biscuits are made in Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, Austria, and Luxembourg. However, the brothers' most popular item was their Biscoff biscuits, noted for their caramelized, crunchy, and unique flavor, often dunked in coffee. In fact, the name of this biscuit is a combo of these--the "Bis" is from "biscuit," and the "coff" from "coffee." Other Lotus products include gingerbread biscuits, Breton French butter cookies, French shortbread biscuits, spreadable cookie butter, infant/toddler treats, and cookie-flavored ice cream. The firm boasts about 1600 employees, and is sold in about 50 countries worldwide, including the U.S., much of Europe, Chile, China, and Korea. In the 1950's Lotus started individually wrapping Biscoff cookies, which was quite popular with consumers, but presumably disliked by trash collectors and environmentalists. The website claims that 6,000,000,000 Biscoff biscuits are made annually, and enjoyed on all 7 continents. So unless the Lotus company is exaggerating, scientists in Antarctica also chow down on them, huddled in their bunkers, trying to avoid The Thing's awful tentacles.
1) Lotus Biscoff biscuits: These are roughly rectangular cookies, about 7 cm. by 3 cm. (about 2.75 inches by 1.25 inches), brownish in color, with scalloped edges. "Lotus" is embossed on each one. These were just okay. Crunchy. Not that sweet.
2) Lotus Dinosaurus cookies: These were slightly bigger--about 3 inches by 2.25 inches (about 7 cm. by 5 cm.) chocolate on one side, light yellowish brown cookie on the other, shaped like a stegosaurus dinosaur, obviously. Again, kind of disappointing, as they were alright, but not great. Even with the milk chocolate coating on half of it.
3) Lotus Biscoffs to go: This kind consisted of 7 cm long (about 3 inches) yellow breadstick-like rods which you dip into a small tub of brown cookie butter. The butter itself looks like peanut butter. The rods are very plain by themselves. However, they're pretty decent when dipped. Better than the other two biscuit kinds.
So, in summation, I wasn't dazzled by the Lotus biscuits/cookies. As has happened before, I tend to find European cookies to be less sweet than the kinds I really enjoy. I'm too familiar with overly sugary American style cookies, I suppose. To be fair, since I despise coffee, both as a beverage and a flavor, I didn't dip the Biscoffs in that liquid, since that would have automatically made me hate the results. I would try some of the Lotus ice cream, though. Finally, I did kind of like the Biscoff commercial I saw on the website. It features of bunch of coffee mugs which jump off a shelf and then climb a counter to get at a guy's Biscoffs. They do so in a "World War Z" pyramid-style fashion. It was sort of creepy when I (over) thought about it, in a fun sort of way.
The Lotus company dates back to 1932. It was started by the Boone brothers--Jan, Emiel, and Henri. Jan seems to have been the chef/cookie inventor, so evidently Emiel and Henri handled the bookkeeping, or marketing, or something. Apparently their initial inspiration was to make biscuits for breakfast, and speculoos for St. Nicholas Day celebrations (on December 5th). Speculoos biscuits are a traditional type of special shortcrust cookies, which are thin, crunchy, and usually shaped like various forms, like an elephant, a farmhouse, or a ship. These biscuits are made in Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, Austria, and Luxembourg. However, the brothers' most popular item was their Biscoff biscuits, noted for their caramelized, crunchy, and unique flavor, often dunked in coffee. In fact, the name of this biscuit is a combo of these--the "Bis" is from "biscuit," and the "coff" from "coffee." Other Lotus products include gingerbread biscuits, Breton French butter cookies, French shortbread biscuits, spreadable cookie butter, infant/toddler treats, and cookie-flavored ice cream. The firm boasts about 1600 employees, and is sold in about 50 countries worldwide, including the U.S., much of Europe, Chile, China, and Korea. In the 1950's Lotus started individually wrapping Biscoff cookies, which was quite popular with consumers, but presumably disliked by trash collectors and environmentalists. The website claims that 6,000,000,000 Biscoff biscuits are made annually, and enjoyed on all 7 continents. So unless the Lotus company is exaggerating, scientists in Antarctica also chow down on them, huddled in their bunkers, trying to avoid The Thing's awful tentacles.
1) Lotus Biscoff biscuits: These are roughly rectangular cookies, about 7 cm. by 3 cm. (about 2.75 inches by 1.25 inches), brownish in color, with scalloped edges. "Lotus" is embossed on each one. These were just okay. Crunchy. Not that sweet.
2) Lotus Dinosaurus cookies: These were slightly bigger--about 3 inches by 2.25 inches (about 7 cm. by 5 cm.) chocolate on one side, light yellowish brown cookie on the other, shaped like a stegosaurus dinosaur, obviously. Again, kind of disappointing, as they were alright, but not great. Even with the milk chocolate coating on half of it.
3) Lotus Biscoffs to go: This kind consisted of 7 cm long (about 3 inches) yellow breadstick-like rods which you dip into a small tub of brown cookie butter. The butter itself looks like peanut butter. The rods are very plain by themselves. However, they're pretty decent when dipped. Better than the other two biscuit kinds.
So, in summation, I wasn't dazzled by the Lotus biscuits/cookies. As has happened before, I tend to find European cookies to be less sweet than the kinds I really enjoy. I'm too familiar with overly sugary American style cookies, I suppose. To be fair, since I despise coffee, both as a beverage and a flavor, I didn't dip the Biscoffs in that liquid, since that would have automatically made me hate the results. I would try some of the Lotus ice cream, though. Finally, I did kind of like the Biscoff commercial I saw on the website. It features of bunch of coffee mugs which jump off a shelf and then climb a counter to get at a guy's Biscoffs. They do so in a "World War Z" pyramid-style fashion. It was sort of creepy when I (over) thought about it, in a fun sort of way.
Saturday, October 26, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Impossible Whopper vs. Whopper
While watching sports on television recently--I can't recall whether it was an NFL game, or the MLB playoffs--I actually found myself paying close attention to a commercial. Which is weird for me--usually I read a book or magazine during the ad break, or use the bathroom, or at the very least pay the television screen no mind. (I know many (most?) U.S. viewers have TiVo, or the like, and may fast forward through all commercials, but in my Luddite household we don't have that technology.) Anyway, it was for the Impossible Whopper, from the Burger King fast food chain, which is their meatless burger. After test marketing it in several locations, this product was made available worldwide in early August of 2019. I was intrigued. Only a few days later I brought home both an Impossible Whopper, and its, "Possible," regular, original meat-ed kin. To do a proper comparison.
As it turns out, meatless burgers have become a bit of a trend in the restaurant world recently, even with fast food establishments. To mention just some of them, Carl's Jr., The Cheesecake Factory, Red Robin, A & W, Hardee's, Dave & Busters, and TGI Fridays all have one. Even the (in)famous White Castle does! You may be asking, "What about McDonald's, the undisputed king of burgers?" Well, they're trailing behind a little. They have a meatless burger being sold in Germany currently, called the Big Vegan TS, and reportedly a meatless chicken nugget variety somewhere else in Europe, but nothing in the U.S. thus far. Probably this will change if the Burger King Impossible Whopper, or the other chains' meatless burgers are huge successes, I suppose. There seems to be two main kinds of meatless burger sold by these places--a pea protein-based one (called a Beyond Burger), and a wheat/potato/soy protein-based kind, usually referred to as an Impossible Burger.
The makeup of the Impossible Whopper is complicated. DNA from leghemoglobin from soybean roots is first extracted, and then fermented with genetically engineered yeast, somewhat similar to the brewing process of certain Belgian beers. This is called the "heme." This heme is then combined with potato protein, coconut oil, sunflower oil, methylcellulose, and food starch to make the actual burger patty. Originally, in 2016, the recipe also included wheat. However, by 2019 the wheat was phased out. Therefore the Impossible Whopper is now billed as gluten-free. Which, of course, is only the case if the patty is eaten without the bun. There's been some controversy in the vegetarian/vegan community about the burger, though. Because unless the customer asks specifically, the Impossible Whopper is cooked in the same broiler with its meat-ed cousins. Meaning some contamination would occur. So bear that in mind if you're strict about such things. Also, Burger King usually puts mayo on the burger, so if you're vegan you'll have to ask that it be left off, along with no cheese, too. Speaking of dietary restrictions, the Impossible Whopper is certified Halal and Kosher.
Anyway, here's what I did.I tried to make it as scientifically valid as I could, without getting too nuts. Meaning the experiment was single blind--I had someone cut up each burger into quarters, and then I ate each piece separately, and predicted which one it was. After I was finished with both, I compared my list with what was actually served. Alas, Burger King hadn't put ketchup on the burgers, so I did need to take the top bun off every sample and apply this condiment. I did though, try to do this quickly, and without looking as much as possible. Since each Whopper had lettuce, onions, tomatoes, mayo, and cheese on it, I didn't get a good look at the patty. I also avoided much or any contact or conversation with my server, to avoid a "Clever Hans" type break of scientific accuracy. Before I started I thought this test would be relatively easy. I've had several meatless burgers over the years (see September 14, 2014 post), and always found them to be distinctively different than meat-ed ones. Even the meatless burgers I thought tasted okay still were markedly different. However, to my shock, I had enormous difficulty telling the Impossible Whopper apart from the regular Whopper. So much so that I just gave it my best guesses. The results were telling. The first four samples I got wrong, and the last four I guessed right. Or, basically, it was a coin flip.
So, a reader might be saying, "The Impossible Whopper is a success! He couldn't tell the difference between it and the kind made with beef." And yes, in that way the Impossible Whopper was a success, at least to my taste buds. Kudos to the Burger King chefs and food scientists--the heme and starch and such really mimicked the meat. But, important caveat--both these burgers weren't great. They were both mediocre at best. As far as burgers go, I much prefer those from White Castle, or Red Robin, or Fuddruckers, or Five Guys, or Wendy's, or......you get the idea. Even McDonald's burgers are better. All in all, if you'r a fan of the Burger King Whopper, you might well enjoy the Impossible Whopper as a change of pace. Or if you've recently become vegetarian or vegan (assuming you get them to prepare it separately, etc). And it wasn't terrible. So even if you're not a huge fan of Burger King, you might want to give it a try, for an experiment, or a goof. But my recommendations for the Impossible Whopper (and the regular kind) must be only lukewarm.
Finally, if you're thinking about having the Impossible Whopper because it's healthier, well, that's only slightly true, sort of. It actually has more carbs and sodium than the beef kind. Also, the burger's calories, fat, and saturated fat totals are lower, but only by a little bit--630 vs. 660, 34 vs. 40, and 10 vs. 12, respectively. Moving on, I guess extracting DNA from roots is expensive, as the Impossible Whopper was pretty pricey--both kinds of Whopper were over $5.00. (For the single burgers--I didn't get a value meal.)
As it turns out, meatless burgers have become a bit of a trend in the restaurant world recently, even with fast food establishments. To mention just some of them, Carl's Jr., The Cheesecake Factory, Red Robin, A & W, Hardee's, Dave & Busters, and TGI Fridays all have one. Even the (in)famous White Castle does! You may be asking, "What about McDonald's, the undisputed king of burgers?" Well, they're trailing behind a little. They have a meatless burger being sold in Germany currently, called the Big Vegan TS, and reportedly a meatless chicken nugget variety somewhere else in Europe, but nothing in the U.S. thus far. Probably this will change if the Burger King Impossible Whopper, or the other chains' meatless burgers are huge successes, I suppose. There seems to be two main kinds of meatless burger sold by these places--a pea protein-based one (called a Beyond Burger), and a wheat/potato/soy protein-based kind, usually referred to as an Impossible Burger.
The makeup of the Impossible Whopper is complicated. DNA from leghemoglobin from soybean roots is first extracted, and then fermented with genetically engineered yeast, somewhat similar to the brewing process of certain Belgian beers. This is called the "heme." This heme is then combined with potato protein, coconut oil, sunflower oil, methylcellulose, and food starch to make the actual burger patty. Originally, in 2016, the recipe also included wheat. However, by 2019 the wheat was phased out. Therefore the Impossible Whopper is now billed as gluten-free. Which, of course, is only the case if the patty is eaten without the bun. There's been some controversy in the vegetarian/vegan community about the burger, though. Because unless the customer asks specifically, the Impossible Whopper is cooked in the same broiler with its meat-ed cousins. Meaning some contamination would occur. So bear that in mind if you're strict about such things. Also, Burger King usually puts mayo on the burger, so if you're vegan you'll have to ask that it be left off, along with no cheese, too. Speaking of dietary restrictions, the Impossible Whopper is certified Halal and Kosher.
Anyway, here's what I did.I tried to make it as scientifically valid as I could, without getting too nuts. Meaning the experiment was single blind--I had someone cut up each burger into quarters, and then I ate each piece separately, and predicted which one it was. After I was finished with both, I compared my list with what was actually served. Alas, Burger King hadn't put ketchup on the burgers, so I did need to take the top bun off every sample and apply this condiment. I did though, try to do this quickly, and without looking as much as possible. Since each Whopper had lettuce, onions, tomatoes, mayo, and cheese on it, I didn't get a good look at the patty. I also avoided much or any contact or conversation with my server, to avoid a "Clever Hans" type break of scientific accuracy. Before I started I thought this test would be relatively easy. I've had several meatless burgers over the years (see September 14, 2014 post), and always found them to be distinctively different than meat-ed ones. Even the meatless burgers I thought tasted okay still were markedly different. However, to my shock, I had enormous difficulty telling the Impossible Whopper apart from the regular Whopper. So much so that I just gave it my best guesses. The results were telling. The first four samples I got wrong, and the last four I guessed right. Or, basically, it was a coin flip.
So, a reader might be saying, "The Impossible Whopper is a success! He couldn't tell the difference between it and the kind made with beef." And yes, in that way the Impossible Whopper was a success, at least to my taste buds. Kudos to the Burger King chefs and food scientists--the heme and starch and such really mimicked the meat. But, important caveat--both these burgers weren't great. They were both mediocre at best. As far as burgers go, I much prefer those from White Castle, or Red Robin, or Fuddruckers, or Five Guys, or Wendy's, or......you get the idea. Even McDonald's burgers are better. All in all, if you'r a fan of the Burger King Whopper, you might well enjoy the Impossible Whopper as a change of pace. Or if you've recently become vegetarian or vegan (assuming you get them to prepare it separately, etc). And it wasn't terrible. So even if you're not a huge fan of Burger King, you might want to give it a try, for an experiment, or a goof. But my recommendations for the Impossible Whopper (and the regular kind) must be only lukewarm.
Finally, if you're thinking about having the Impossible Whopper because it's healthier, well, that's only slightly true, sort of. It actually has more carbs and sodium than the beef kind. Also, the burger's calories, fat, and saturated fat totals are lower, but only by a little bit--630 vs. 660, 34 vs. 40, and 10 vs. 12, respectively. Moving on, I guess extracting DNA from roots is expensive, as the Impossible Whopper was pretty pricey--both kinds of Whopper were over $5.00. (For the single burgers--I didn't get a value meal.)
Saturday, October 19, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--3 Indian Soft Drinks
Just so there's no confusion, this post will be about drinks from the country of India, and not those enjoyed and manufactured by Native Americans. On that note, Happy (slightly belated) Indigenous People's Day! As you might expect, I got these three beverages from that great grocery store I recently "discovered", India Bazaar in Stratford, NJ. The ones I'll talk about are Sosyo mixed fruit drink from the Hajoori company, Ashoka mango milk from KFPL, and the Nature's Best Kashmiri soda (spicy soda).
Alas, I wasn't able to find out much of anything about the KFPL company, such as from an official company website. The distribution company was ADF, for American Dry Fruits, which in addition to Indian cuisine also distributes Mexican and Mediterranean fare. ADF started in 1932. The mango milk drink is a canned version of a mango lassi, the common smoothie-like drink in basically every Indian restaurant. The drink was a product of India, though.
Similarly, I wasn't able to learn anything about the Nature's Best firm, and just a bit about the distributor. The distribution company was IGS, short for Indian Groceries & Spices, Inc. This business was started in 1971 by Shirish Sanghavi, and it distributes Indian, or Indian-style pickles, spices, rice, flour, oil, ghee, and other drinks to the U.S. and Canada. Nirav is one of their brand names. However, spicy soda, or Masala soda (Masala means "spice mix"), is hugely popular in India, especially during hot times of the year. It's a common street vendor drink, and has several variants. One, called "nimbu," is a spicy lemon or lime flavored drink. Masala soda itself is made with a combination of regular white salt, black salt, cumin, amchor (dried sour mango), ginger, tumeric, black pepper, chili pepper, mint, and/or dried pomegranate seed powder. Black salt (aka kala namak) is salt infused with sulfur, which provides its distinctive pungent, eggy odor and flavor. Not surprisingly, big corporations have tried their hands at these drinks, and even Coke and Pepsi sell version of spicy soda in India.
The Hajoori company dates back to 1923, started by a man named Abbas Rahim Hajoori. Hajoori decided he wanted to make an Indian soft drink to compete against the U.K.'s Vimto (see my June 9, 2013 post for more about that drink), so he created his own fruity soda. It went through a couple of name changes: For a while in the 1950's it was called Socio, reportedly after the Latin word for social, socious. However, the moniker eventually reverted back to Sosyo soon after. The Sosyo brand is evidently huge in India, and is considered the country's traditional, flagship brand. The company even has drink stands called "The Sosyo Cult." Hajoori itself markets over 100 different drinks, including various fruit flavors, their own Kashmiri spicy soda, an energy drink, and bottled water. They export to many nations, including South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, Zambia, Switzerland, the U.S., Canada, New Zealand, and Australia.
1) Hajoori Sosyo mixed fruit drink: Came in a small, 250 mL (8.45 ounce) can, and was a brown color. Contained a small amount (7%) of apple juice, and 3% lemon juice. This was was just mediocre, or "meh." I found its sweetness a bit cloying. Alright, but not exceptional.
2) KFPL badam mazaa, mango milk drink: Was a yellowish color, and came in a 180 mL (6.08 ounce) can. Drink was 88% cow milk, and apparently no actual mangoes--it was listed as "nature identical flavor (mango) .08%." It also had almonds in it. I should say I adore mango lassies, so I was hopeful going in. And this canned version didn't disappoint--I really enjoyed this drink quite a lot. Very tasty.
3) Nature's Best, Nirav, Kashmiri soda (spicy soda): This one came in a plastic bottle (300 mL/10.1 ounces) and was a brownish hue. What an odd experience! Spicy soda was one of the weirdest soft drinks I've ever had, with a unique flavor. It tasted like some crunchy snack food. No sweetness at all, just savory. But here's the thing--it worked. It had its own special charm, and I loved it. I will definitely seek this kind of soda, and this particular brand, out again. Congrats to the soft drink makers of India--what an amazing idea for a beverage. Spicewise, the listed ingredients were cumin and salt, and I don't know if this was regular salt, or the black, kala namak sulfur kind.
Therefore, all in all I was favorably impressed by these Indian drinks. Two of them were at least very good, and even the weakest one was still alright. Plus it was neat to try something different in a soft drink (for two of them, at least). Most countries just have their similar versions of cola, or various common fruit flavored soft drinks, so it was refreshing to have something off the beaten path. I'll definitely buy the mango milk and spicy soda drinks again, and look to try other company's takes on them as well.
Alas, I wasn't able to find out much of anything about the KFPL company, such as from an official company website. The distribution company was ADF, for American Dry Fruits, which in addition to Indian cuisine also distributes Mexican and Mediterranean fare. ADF started in 1932. The mango milk drink is a canned version of a mango lassi, the common smoothie-like drink in basically every Indian restaurant. The drink was a product of India, though.
Similarly, I wasn't able to learn anything about the Nature's Best firm, and just a bit about the distributor. The distribution company was IGS, short for Indian Groceries & Spices, Inc. This business was started in 1971 by Shirish Sanghavi, and it distributes Indian, or Indian-style pickles, spices, rice, flour, oil, ghee, and other drinks to the U.S. and Canada. Nirav is one of their brand names. However, spicy soda, or Masala soda (Masala means "spice mix"), is hugely popular in India, especially during hot times of the year. It's a common street vendor drink, and has several variants. One, called "nimbu," is a spicy lemon or lime flavored drink. Masala soda itself is made with a combination of regular white salt, black salt, cumin, amchor (dried sour mango), ginger, tumeric, black pepper, chili pepper, mint, and/or dried pomegranate seed powder. Black salt (aka kala namak) is salt infused with sulfur, which provides its distinctive pungent, eggy odor and flavor. Not surprisingly, big corporations have tried their hands at these drinks, and even Coke and Pepsi sell version of spicy soda in India.
The Hajoori company dates back to 1923, started by a man named Abbas Rahim Hajoori. Hajoori decided he wanted to make an Indian soft drink to compete against the U.K.'s Vimto (see my June 9, 2013 post for more about that drink), so he created his own fruity soda. It went through a couple of name changes: For a while in the 1950's it was called Socio, reportedly after the Latin word for social, socious. However, the moniker eventually reverted back to Sosyo soon after. The Sosyo brand is evidently huge in India, and is considered the country's traditional, flagship brand. The company even has drink stands called "The Sosyo Cult." Hajoori itself markets over 100 different drinks, including various fruit flavors, their own Kashmiri spicy soda, an energy drink, and bottled water. They export to many nations, including South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, Zambia, Switzerland, the U.S., Canada, New Zealand, and Australia.
1) Hajoori Sosyo mixed fruit drink: Came in a small, 250 mL (8.45 ounce) can, and was a brown color. Contained a small amount (7%) of apple juice, and 3% lemon juice. This was was just mediocre, or "meh." I found its sweetness a bit cloying. Alright, but not exceptional.
2) KFPL badam mazaa, mango milk drink: Was a yellowish color, and came in a 180 mL (6.08 ounce) can. Drink was 88% cow milk, and apparently no actual mangoes--it was listed as "nature identical flavor (mango) .08%." It also had almonds in it. I should say I adore mango lassies, so I was hopeful going in. And this canned version didn't disappoint--I really enjoyed this drink quite a lot. Very tasty.
3) Nature's Best, Nirav, Kashmiri soda (spicy soda): This one came in a plastic bottle (300 mL/10.1 ounces) and was a brownish hue. What an odd experience! Spicy soda was one of the weirdest soft drinks I've ever had, with a unique flavor. It tasted like some crunchy snack food. No sweetness at all, just savory. But here's the thing--it worked. It had its own special charm, and I loved it. I will definitely seek this kind of soda, and this particular brand, out again. Congrats to the soft drink makers of India--what an amazing idea for a beverage. Spicewise, the listed ingredients were cumin and salt, and I don't know if this was regular salt, or the black, kala namak sulfur kind.
Therefore, all in all I was favorably impressed by these Indian drinks. Two of them were at least very good, and even the weakest one was still alright. Plus it was neat to try something different in a soft drink (for two of them, at least). Most countries just have their similar versions of cola, or various common fruit flavored soft drinks, so it was refreshing to have something off the beaten path. I'll definitely buy the mango milk and spicy soda drinks again, and look to try other company's takes on them as well.
Saturday, October 12, 2019
Underrated Horror Gems--"Dog Soldiers"
A few months ago, on July 20, 2019, I talked about a werewolf movie that I really enjoyed--"Ginger Snaps." In it I happened to mention the other werewolf movies which I think are the best ones, including the subject of today's post, "Dog Soldiers". Which, as the title suggests, I don't think gets its due. Anyway, I'll follow my usual pattern of a brief spoiler-free synopsis, followed by a longer, spoiler-saturated recap, and conclude with a discussion of some of the movie's strengths and themes, and then a bit of info about the cast and crew.
A small squad of English soldiers are sent on weekend maneuvers in an isolated part of Scotland. It's some war games for the six of them. However, the area they're in is infamous for mysterious disappearances of hikers and campers. The squad eventually meets up with another group of military men, and learn a disaster is going on. Someone, or somethings, are hunting them, and it's for real. The survivors make it to an isolated farm house, where they make a last stand against their inexplicable enemies. More surprises occur, and more deaths. Will anyone be alive when dawn breaks?
(SPOILERS AHEAD UNTIL MARKED) "Dog Soldiers" opens in the Scottish wilderness, where a happy couple is camping. After an exchange of gifts, including a silver letter opener, the man and woman retreat to their tent and begin to have sex. However, a furry arm reaches in and pulls the woman out, and after a bloody struggle, does the same to the man.
The action abruptly shifts to North Wales, where a man is running from soldiers. It's Private Cooper, who is being tested by a Special Forces group, led by Captain Ryan. Cooper fails the initiation when he refuses Ryan's order to kill the tracker dog. After a break of four weeks, we're back in the remote Scottish forest, as a helicopter drops off six men--Privates Cooper, Spoon, Terry and Joe, led by Corporal Bruce and Sergeant Wells. As this is just an exercise the squad is equipped with blanks for their rifles. Cooper tells his mates that the area they're in has seen many travelers disappear, with only pools of blood left behind. The audience learns a little about the men--Bruce is a cynical intellectual, Spoon is very gung-ho, Joe is obsessed with football, and Sergeant Wells is a very tough, but caring leader. After a dying cow falls off a cliff into their camp, the men are uneasy. The next day they find the camp of the Special Forces unit they were "battling." It's a mess--destroyed and abandoned equipment, lots of blood and gore, but no bodies. Except for Cooper's old nemesis, Captain Ryan, who's wounded but alive. Ryan is in a raving panic, and the squad's attempts to call for help using their communication equipment fails. They do manage to locate live ammo for their guns, though, as the Special Forces unit was fully armed. As they move through the woods in the fading sunlight, half-dragging Ryan, enemies appear. In their flight Bruce accidentally impales himself on a tree branch, and then is brutally finished off by large furry beasts. Wells is also severely wounded by a weird attacker, but Cooper manages to drag him away. The squad races to a road, while having a firefight with the odd creatures pursuing them. Luckily a vehicle appears on the road, and the men are able to get in just ahead of the monsters. The driver takes them to what she says is the only home in the area, an isolated farm house.
At they enter the men find the house empty, but obviously only recently abandoned. The driver, Megan, says she knows the family that lives there. She also says the nearest town is four hours away. Just as the men regroup and decide to drive to the town, they find Megan's Land Rover is destroyed, and then it explodes. The men retreat back inside ahead of the enemies. Most of the men board up the doors and windows, while Cooper and Megan treat Well's wound by pushing his intestines back in, and supergluing the wound shut. Megan says she's a zoologist, and that she came here two years before. Ryan, meanwhile, has changed dramatically, as he's completely calm, and his wounds are almost miraculously healed up. The men are suspicious, and tie him up. An attack by the beasts is barely beaten back, although Terry is pulled out by them. Megan admits that she knows Ryan, as he hired her to learn about werewolves. An attempt to get the other vehicle in the barn goes awry, as Joe is killed just as he drives it near the house. The men interrogate Ryan, and he reveals that their maneuvers were an attempt to capture a werewolf, as a possible biological weapon. Well's team was the bait, and considered expendable. Ryan changes into a werewolf, and flees by jumping out a window. The men realize that the werewolves are the family that lives in the house they're in. Well's wounds are very healed too--he knows that he's changing into a werewolf as well. Megan suggests that the werewolf pack will be in the barn, so they get the vehicle into it, and burn the barn down using gasoline and Molotov cocktails. As they make it back inside, Megan reveals that this was a diversionary trick--she's a werewolf too, and let the others into the house using the back door. None were in the barn. Spoon flees into the kitchen, and is eventually killed by the werewolves. Wells and Cooper go upstairs, and after a battle they break through a bedroom floor into the kitchen below, which is now vacant. Wells forces Cooper into the cellar, giving him a roll of film that they've shot of the werewolves. Wells stays behind, as he's changing. He manages to explode the house, and the werewolves, by igniting the oven's gas line. Down in the cellar, Cooper has survived the blast, but Werewolf Ryan attacks him. As Cooper runs around the cellar he sees many bodies of earlier victims, and some of their belongings. Cooper stabs Ryan with the silver letter opener, and then shoots him dead when the silver incapacitates Ryan. The final scenes are Cooper walking out of the destroyed house with the only other survivor, the family's pet dog. Newspaper clippings and photos tell us that he successfully proved that werewolves exist to the outside world.
First off, when we're discussing a movie about werewolves, the obvious question is "Do the werewolves look good, and convincing?" And I think the answer is clearly, "yes." The filmmakers used the common scheme of hiding the werewolves for the first half or so of the film. You see them only in quick glimpses, or only parts of their bodies. However, later you do see them more clearly, and their entire bodies, and they hold up impressively. Mostly, in my opinion, because they're real actors, in real werewolf suits. Sure, films laden with CGI monsters would be able to show the werewolves more, and doing more, even elaborate activities, but to my eyes they don't look real--they invariably look cartoon-y and video game-ish. Give me an actual, elaborate, latex-y, costume, coated in physical slime and blood. The other special effects are well done too--there are many gunshots, and explosions, and they're all convincing. The blood and gore (often in the form of people's intestines) shots are similarly strong and disturbing. So despite their "less is more" strategy, and the overall low budget, the werewolves in "Dog Soldiers" seem creepily plausible.
Another common question is, "What traditional werewolf tropes does the story use, and which are made up for it?" For the most part, the werewolves in this movie are quite traditional. They're turning, it appears, because of the full moon, and they show a weakness to silver, and fire/explosions. Otherwise, though, they're extremely tough--bullets and blades, and even boiling water hurt them, but they heal up quickly from these wounds. A person afflicted with lycanthropy seems helpless to change, with an exception I'll get into later. Probably the biggest difference in the "Dog Soldiers" werewolves is their intelligence, which seems identical to when they're in human form. They're not dumb beasts--they destroy the vehicles to trap the soldiers, and one of them is able to fire a gun back at the men. Plus the usual chain of events is followed, in that if a person is wounded, but not immediately killed by a werewolf bite or clawing, they will become one themselves. Another difference seems to be their feeding habits. Several human bodies are being aged in the family's cellar, and were probably in the cooking stew, meaning the family (named the Uaths), appear to be eating human flesh even while in human form. This also means that several (most?) of the soldiers were inadvertent cannibals, too, as they're seen eating the stew, with its unidentified, pork-like meat base.
Arguably the most interesting, and mysterious character is Megan. She's doesn't provide much background information, and what she does say may be embellished, or even completely fabricated. It's safe to assume she joined the werewolf clan recently, but the circumstances are muddled. Was she a zoologist studying something in the area, and then accidentally got bit and turned? Or did she go there intentionally to study werewolves, and possibly even wanted to be turned? Her relationship to Captain Ryan is unclear, too. Did she do into the Scottish wilderness in the first place because she was hired by Ryan, or did he contact and use her after she'd been turned? And what were her motivations? It's implied that she wanted to leave the Uath family, and was hoping that the military had a cure for her werewolf-ism. Or perhaps she was trying to escape, which is why she wasn't hunting with her "family" as a werewolf during the attack on the military squads. Although, of course, escaping wouldn't solve her problems, as the next full moon would see her turning into a beast somewhere else, or at least strongly tempted or compelled to do so. Also, how was she able to resist the full moon as long as she did? Captain Ryan and Sergeant Wells appear to turn against their will--are they helpless because they're brand new werewolves? Can you learn to resist? It sure seems so in Megan's case. She only gives in and changes after she's given up hope that the soldiers will save her somehow. We can learn some other things about what happens as well. It seems like once you change into your werewolf form, you're locked into it until dawn. Otherwise the Uath family would presumably have done the obvious trick of resuming their human forms, gaining entrance to their house, and then attacking the troops from inside once the time was right. (Also, the family name is a clue to their nature. In Gaelic "Uath" means "dread, terror, solitary, or alone," and also, "hawthorn" or the letter "h.")
Going on, the Uath family's actions seem foolish, in retrospect. (And, as usual, I realize their actions were surely crafted by the writer/director so the movie would be more interesting, and exciting, but I'm referring to the logic within the story itself.) Taking an occasional hiker a few times a year would be okay, since people do go missing in the wilderness sometimes under normal circumstances. But taking out an entire military group is a terrible, self-defeating idea--even if they'd succeeded in killing everyone, the military would surely investigate heavily after that. Especially since some in the Special Forces knew they were trying to capture a werewolf. And keeping human bodies, and the victim's possessions in their house would also be clear evidence against the family. Were they that arrogant? Or does their blood lust as a werewolf overcome their intelligence in some ways? This is especially dumb assuming that Megan told them about Captain Ryan, and his team. They should have lived off cows for a few months or years, until the rumors and suspicion died down.
One of the movie's influences, aside from the siege-like plot of "Night of the Living Dead," and "Zulu," is the "Alien" series. The Special Forces, like like the evil Weyland-Yutani company, are bent on capturing werewolves for use as military bio-weapons at all costs, including innocent soldier's lives. Although, evil as their plan is, at least it makes more sense then trying to use Aliens, (or velociraptors, from the "Jurassic World" movie). These werewolves could be effective, if properly controlled. They're able to be human for most of the time, so they could infiltrate an area like a regular human spy. Then, once turned, they are extremely formidable--unlike those other creatures I referenced, they're invulnerable to most common weapons. Also, they appear smarter than those other two creatures, too, even while in monster form. So, yes, this plan, at least the way it was implemented, was evil and unethical. But at least it had a chance to work. I don't know enough about writer/director Neil Marshall's political beliefs, to figure out if he's possibly anti-military, or at least anti-Special Forces, and that's why he wrote them the way he did. It could also be that it was just a way to tell the movie's story, of course. Either way, it works. I can't recall another movie which pitted trained soldiers versus werewolves. (On that note, I recommend the book, "The Wolf''s Hour," by Robert R. McCammon, which concerns a werewolf who works as a spy.)
(END OF SPOILERS--SAFE FOR ALL READERS) English director/writer Neil Marshall has had an up and down career. "Dog Soldiers" (2002), was his first movie, and is generally well regarded, and his sophomore effort, the claustrophobic, women-in-caves film "The Descent" (2005) was even more lauded, and successful. Alas, his subsequent movies haven't been as respected. "Doomsday" (2008), "Centurion" (2010), and the recent "Hellboy" remake (2019), have mostly underwhelmed (I've only seen, and disliked, "Doomsday," but haven't heard good things about the others). He has, though, directed well respected episodes of several big television shows, such as "Game of Thrones" (2012, 2014), "Black Sails" (2014), "Hannibal" (2015), and "Westworld" (2016). So hopefully he'll rebound, and start making very good movies again. Of the actors, "Cooper" portrayer Kevin McKidd is probably best known for roles in such films as "Trainspotting" (1996), "Hideous Kinky" (1998), "De-Lovely" (2004), and "Hannibal Rising" (2007), and major roles in the television shows "Rome" (2005-07) and "Grey's Anatomy" (2008-). Sean Pertwee (Sergeant Wells), the son of a former "Dr. Who" Doctor, was in such films as "Leon the Pig Farmer" (1992), "Event Horizon" (1997), "The Prophecy: Uprising" (2005), "Devil's Playground" (2010), and "Howl" (2015). The evil Captain Ryan was played by Liam Cunningham, who was in such movies as "First Knight" (1995), "The Card Player" (2004), and "Clash of the Titans" (2010), but is surely most recognized for playing Ser Davos Seaworth in "Game of Thrones." Emma Cleasby (Megan) has appeared in films like "Doomsday" (2008), "F" (2010) and "Soulmate" (2013). Finally, one of the werewolves (there were only three full suits) was played by Ben Wright, who's more of a stunt performer. Some of his jobs in this career were in "Sherlock Holmes" (2009), "Skyfall" (2012), "Kingsman: The Secret Service" (2014), "Spectre" (2015), "Avengers: Age of Ultron" (2015), "Solo" (2018), and television's "Game of Thrones" once more.
So, if you're looking for a good werewolf movie during this Halloween season, or even during the rest of the year, I heartily recommend "Dog Soldiers." It has a simple, but effective story, good acting, great special effects and gore, and even a couple of laughs to break the tension. And good disturbing scenes, too. Check it out.
A small squad of English soldiers are sent on weekend maneuvers in an isolated part of Scotland. It's some war games for the six of them. However, the area they're in is infamous for mysterious disappearances of hikers and campers. The squad eventually meets up with another group of military men, and learn a disaster is going on. Someone, or somethings, are hunting them, and it's for real. The survivors make it to an isolated farm house, where they make a last stand against their inexplicable enemies. More surprises occur, and more deaths. Will anyone be alive when dawn breaks?
(SPOILERS AHEAD UNTIL MARKED) "Dog Soldiers" opens in the Scottish wilderness, where a happy couple is camping. After an exchange of gifts, including a silver letter opener, the man and woman retreat to their tent and begin to have sex. However, a furry arm reaches in and pulls the woman out, and after a bloody struggle, does the same to the man.
The action abruptly shifts to North Wales, where a man is running from soldiers. It's Private Cooper, who is being tested by a Special Forces group, led by Captain Ryan. Cooper fails the initiation when he refuses Ryan's order to kill the tracker dog. After a break of four weeks, we're back in the remote Scottish forest, as a helicopter drops off six men--Privates Cooper, Spoon, Terry and Joe, led by Corporal Bruce and Sergeant Wells. As this is just an exercise the squad is equipped with blanks for their rifles. Cooper tells his mates that the area they're in has seen many travelers disappear, with only pools of blood left behind. The audience learns a little about the men--Bruce is a cynical intellectual, Spoon is very gung-ho, Joe is obsessed with football, and Sergeant Wells is a very tough, but caring leader. After a dying cow falls off a cliff into their camp, the men are uneasy. The next day they find the camp of the Special Forces unit they were "battling." It's a mess--destroyed and abandoned equipment, lots of blood and gore, but no bodies. Except for Cooper's old nemesis, Captain Ryan, who's wounded but alive. Ryan is in a raving panic, and the squad's attempts to call for help using their communication equipment fails. They do manage to locate live ammo for their guns, though, as the Special Forces unit was fully armed. As they move through the woods in the fading sunlight, half-dragging Ryan, enemies appear. In their flight Bruce accidentally impales himself on a tree branch, and then is brutally finished off by large furry beasts. Wells is also severely wounded by a weird attacker, but Cooper manages to drag him away. The squad races to a road, while having a firefight with the odd creatures pursuing them. Luckily a vehicle appears on the road, and the men are able to get in just ahead of the monsters. The driver takes them to what she says is the only home in the area, an isolated farm house.
At they enter the men find the house empty, but obviously only recently abandoned. The driver, Megan, says she knows the family that lives there. She also says the nearest town is four hours away. Just as the men regroup and decide to drive to the town, they find Megan's Land Rover is destroyed, and then it explodes. The men retreat back inside ahead of the enemies. Most of the men board up the doors and windows, while Cooper and Megan treat Well's wound by pushing his intestines back in, and supergluing the wound shut. Megan says she's a zoologist, and that she came here two years before. Ryan, meanwhile, has changed dramatically, as he's completely calm, and his wounds are almost miraculously healed up. The men are suspicious, and tie him up. An attack by the beasts is barely beaten back, although Terry is pulled out by them. Megan admits that she knows Ryan, as he hired her to learn about werewolves. An attempt to get the other vehicle in the barn goes awry, as Joe is killed just as he drives it near the house. The men interrogate Ryan, and he reveals that their maneuvers were an attempt to capture a werewolf, as a possible biological weapon. Well's team was the bait, and considered expendable. Ryan changes into a werewolf, and flees by jumping out a window. The men realize that the werewolves are the family that lives in the house they're in. Well's wounds are very healed too--he knows that he's changing into a werewolf as well. Megan suggests that the werewolf pack will be in the barn, so they get the vehicle into it, and burn the barn down using gasoline and Molotov cocktails. As they make it back inside, Megan reveals that this was a diversionary trick--she's a werewolf too, and let the others into the house using the back door. None were in the barn. Spoon flees into the kitchen, and is eventually killed by the werewolves. Wells and Cooper go upstairs, and after a battle they break through a bedroom floor into the kitchen below, which is now vacant. Wells forces Cooper into the cellar, giving him a roll of film that they've shot of the werewolves. Wells stays behind, as he's changing. He manages to explode the house, and the werewolves, by igniting the oven's gas line. Down in the cellar, Cooper has survived the blast, but Werewolf Ryan attacks him. As Cooper runs around the cellar he sees many bodies of earlier victims, and some of their belongings. Cooper stabs Ryan with the silver letter opener, and then shoots him dead when the silver incapacitates Ryan. The final scenes are Cooper walking out of the destroyed house with the only other survivor, the family's pet dog. Newspaper clippings and photos tell us that he successfully proved that werewolves exist to the outside world.
First off, when we're discussing a movie about werewolves, the obvious question is "Do the werewolves look good, and convincing?" And I think the answer is clearly, "yes." The filmmakers used the common scheme of hiding the werewolves for the first half or so of the film. You see them only in quick glimpses, or only parts of their bodies. However, later you do see them more clearly, and their entire bodies, and they hold up impressively. Mostly, in my opinion, because they're real actors, in real werewolf suits. Sure, films laden with CGI monsters would be able to show the werewolves more, and doing more, even elaborate activities, but to my eyes they don't look real--they invariably look cartoon-y and video game-ish. Give me an actual, elaborate, latex-y, costume, coated in physical slime and blood. The other special effects are well done too--there are many gunshots, and explosions, and they're all convincing. The blood and gore (often in the form of people's intestines) shots are similarly strong and disturbing. So despite their "less is more" strategy, and the overall low budget, the werewolves in "Dog Soldiers" seem creepily plausible.
Another common question is, "What traditional werewolf tropes does the story use, and which are made up for it?" For the most part, the werewolves in this movie are quite traditional. They're turning, it appears, because of the full moon, and they show a weakness to silver, and fire/explosions. Otherwise, though, they're extremely tough--bullets and blades, and even boiling water hurt them, but they heal up quickly from these wounds. A person afflicted with lycanthropy seems helpless to change, with an exception I'll get into later. Probably the biggest difference in the "Dog Soldiers" werewolves is their intelligence, which seems identical to when they're in human form. They're not dumb beasts--they destroy the vehicles to trap the soldiers, and one of them is able to fire a gun back at the men. Plus the usual chain of events is followed, in that if a person is wounded, but not immediately killed by a werewolf bite or clawing, they will become one themselves. Another difference seems to be their feeding habits. Several human bodies are being aged in the family's cellar, and were probably in the cooking stew, meaning the family (named the Uaths), appear to be eating human flesh even while in human form. This also means that several (most?) of the soldiers were inadvertent cannibals, too, as they're seen eating the stew, with its unidentified, pork-like meat base.
Arguably the most interesting, and mysterious character is Megan. She's doesn't provide much background information, and what she does say may be embellished, or even completely fabricated. It's safe to assume she joined the werewolf clan recently, but the circumstances are muddled. Was she a zoologist studying something in the area, and then accidentally got bit and turned? Or did she go there intentionally to study werewolves, and possibly even wanted to be turned? Her relationship to Captain Ryan is unclear, too. Did she do into the Scottish wilderness in the first place because she was hired by Ryan, or did he contact and use her after she'd been turned? And what were her motivations? It's implied that she wanted to leave the Uath family, and was hoping that the military had a cure for her werewolf-ism. Or perhaps she was trying to escape, which is why she wasn't hunting with her "family" as a werewolf during the attack on the military squads. Although, of course, escaping wouldn't solve her problems, as the next full moon would see her turning into a beast somewhere else, or at least strongly tempted or compelled to do so. Also, how was she able to resist the full moon as long as she did? Captain Ryan and Sergeant Wells appear to turn against their will--are they helpless because they're brand new werewolves? Can you learn to resist? It sure seems so in Megan's case. She only gives in and changes after she's given up hope that the soldiers will save her somehow. We can learn some other things about what happens as well. It seems like once you change into your werewolf form, you're locked into it until dawn. Otherwise the Uath family would presumably have done the obvious trick of resuming their human forms, gaining entrance to their house, and then attacking the troops from inside once the time was right. (Also, the family name is a clue to their nature. In Gaelic "Uath" means "dread, terror, solitary, or alone," and also, "hawthorn" or the letter "h.")
Going on, the Uath family's actions seem foolish, in retrospect. (And, as usual, I realize their actions were surely crafted by the writer/director so the movie would be more interesting, and exciting, but I'm referring to the logic within the story itself.) Taking an occasional hiker a few times a year would be okay, since people do go missing in the wilderness sometimes under normal circumstances. But taking out an entire military group is a terrible, self-defeating idea--even if they'd succeeded in killing everyone, the military would surely investigate heavily after that. Especially since some in the Special Forces knew they were trying to capture a werewolf. And keeping human bodies, and the victim's possessions in their house would also be clear evidence against the family. Were they that arrogant? Or does their blood lust as a werewolf overcome their intelligence in some ways? This is especially dumb assuming that Megan told them about Captain Ryan, and his team. They should have lived off cows for a few months or years, until the rumors and suspicion died down.
One of the movie's influences, aside from the siege-like plot of "Night of the Living Dead," and "Zulu," is the "Alien" series. The Special Forces, like like the evil Weyland-Yutani company, are bent on capturing werewolves for use as military bio-weapons at all costs, including innocent soldier's lives. Although, evil as their plan is, at least it makes more sense then trying to use Aliens, (or velociraptors, from the "Jurassic World" movie). These werewolves could be effective, if properly controlled. They're able to be human for most of the time, so they could infiltrate an area like a regular human spy. Then, once turned, they are extremely formidable--unlike those other creatures I referenced, they're invulnerable to most common weapons. Also, they appear smarter than those other two creatures, too, even while in monster form. So, yes, this plan, at least the way it was implemented, was evil and unethical. But at least it had a chance to work. I don't know enough about writer/director Neil Marshall's political beliefs, to figure out if he's possibly anti-military, or at least anti-Special Forces, and that's why he wrote them the way he did. It could also be that it was just a way to tell the movie's story, of course. Either way, it works. I can't recall another movie which pitted trained soldiers versus werewolves. (On that note, I recommend the book, "The Wolf''s Hour," by Robert R. McCammon, which concerns a werewolf who works as a spy.)
(END OF SPOILERS--SAFE FOR ALL READERS) English director/writer Neil Marshall has had an up and down career. "Dog Soldiers" (2002), was his first movie, and is generally well regarded, and his sophomore effort, the claustrophobic, women-in-caves film "The Descent" (2005) was even more lauded, and successful. Alas, his subsequent movies haven't been as respected. "Doomsday" (2008), "Centurion" (2010), and the recent "Hellboy" remake (2019), have mostly underwhelmed (I've only seen, and disliked, "Doomsday," but haven't heard good things about the others). He has, though, directed well respected episodes of several big television shows, such as "Game of Thrones" (2012, 2014), "Black Sails" (2014), "Hannibal" (2015), and "Westworld" (2016). So hopefully he'll rebound, and start making very good movies again. Of the actors, "Cooper" portrayer Kevin McKidd is probably best known for roles in such films as "Trainspotting" (1996), "Hideous Kinky" (1998), "De-Lovely" (2004), and "Hannibal Rising" (2007), and major roles in the television shows "Rome" (2005-07) and "Grey's Anatomy" (2008-). Sean Pertwee (Sergeant Wells), the son of a former "Dr. Who" Doctor, was in such films as "Leon the Pig Farmer" (1992), "Event Horizon" (1997), "The Prophecy: Uprising" (2005), "Devil's Playground" (2010), and "Howl" (2015). The evil Captain Ryan was played by Liam Cunningham, who was in such movies as "First Knight" (1995), "The Card Player" (2004), and "Clash of the Titans" (2010), but is surely most recognized for playing Ser Davos Seaworth in "Game of Thrones." Emma Cleasby (Megan) has appeared in films like "Doomsday" (2008), "F" (2010) and "Soulmate" (2013). Finally, one of the werewolves (there were only three full suits) was played by Ben Wright, who's more of a stunt performer. Some of his jobs in this career were in "Sherlock Holmes" (2009), "Skyfall" (2012), "Kingsman: The Secret Service" (2014), "Spectre" (2015), "Avengers: Age of Ultron" (2015), "Solo" (2018), and television's "Game of Thrones" once more.
So, if you're looking for a good werewolf movie during this Halloween season, or even during the rest of the year, I heartily recommend "Dog Soldiers." It has a simple, but effective story, good acting, great special effects and gore, and even a couple of laughs to break the tension. And good disturbing scenes, too. Check it out.
Saturday, October 5, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--A Nigerian Candy
Today it's back across the Atlantic once more, to the African nation of Nigeria. Specifically, the topic is the Trebor Butter Mint candy, from Cadbury Nigeria. As you might expect, this was another find from the So It Is African Market.
Cadbury, of course, is a behemoth of a company. I've talked about its products at least two times previously. Therefore, if you want a brief company history, see my post on February 3, 2018, which covered some British and Irish treats. Also, back on July 27, 2016, I discussed another Cadbury owned, Nigerian-made candy--Tom Toms. But, to add a few tidbits about the Nigeria Cadbury company, it is about one quarter locally owned by Nigerians--25.03%, to be exact. This affiliate was formally incorporated in 1965, after having been founded in the 1950's to source local Nigerian cocoa beans. Besides the Butter Mints and Tom Toms, Cadbury Nigeria also markets hot chocolate, regular chocolates, a mint/gum (Clorets), and Bournvita, a malted beverage.
Trebor Butter Mints: The candies were individually wrapped white ovals, about 1 inch by .5 inches (about 2.5 cm. by 1.5 cm.). Like the Tom Toms, they were lozenge-style--hard candies which dissolve slowly in your mouth. They had both their advertised flavors. The butter taste mixed with mint was weird to me, and a little off-putting. Overall they were okay? I guess? Sorry to be vague, but this candy was odd. I can kind of take them or leave them--they're not great, but not terrible, either. I guess they're an acquired taste.
As is my wont, I'll flesh this out a little with a few fun facts about Nigeria. It is the biggest country in Africa, based on population, which is estimated to be over 200,000,000 currently. Which makes it the seventh most populated country in the entire world. The Nigerian movie industry, nicknamed, "Nollywood," is reportedly the second busiest in the world, after India's "Bollywood." I saw a whole range of estimates for its average annual output of films, from 1,000 to 10,000. As far as famous Nigerians, or at least folks with significant Nigerian heritage, there's a bunch. In the world of music there's Sade Adu, winner of four Grammys. Also Shirley Bassey, probably best known for singing multiple James Bond movie themes. In the sport of basketball, specifically the NBA, there's Hall of Fame center Hakeem Olajuwon, Emeka Okafor, and the still active Andre Iguadala. To choose just a sampling of Nigerians who played in the NFL, there's Christian Okaye, B. J. Raji, Osi Umenyiora, and former Philadelphia Eagle Jay Ajayi. Nigeria's first, and only non-team winner of an Olympic gold medal was Chiome Ajunwa, who won the women's long jump in the 1996 Summer Games. Title belt holding boxers who were Nigerian include Samuel Peter (heavyweight division), and Richard Ihetu (aka Dick Tiger), a middleweight/light heavyweight. Arguably the most famous Nigerian actor is Chiwetel Ejiofor, who appeared in such films as "Amistad" (1997), "Dirty Pretty Things" (2002), "Serenity" (2005), "Inside Man" (2006), "Children of Men" (2006), and "12 Years a Slave" (2013). And finally, there's John Boyega, best known for playing Finn the Stormtrooper in the three most recent "Star Wars" movies, and also from "Attack the Block" (2011), "Detroit" (2017), and "Pacific Rim: Uprising" (2018).
Cadbury, of course, is a behemoth of a company. I've talked about its products at least two times previously. Therefore, if you want a brief company history, see my post on February 3, 2018, which covered some British and Irish treats. Also, back on July 27, 2016, I discussed another Cadbury owned, Nigerian-made candy--Tom Toms. But, to add a few tidbits about the Nigeria Cadbury company, it is about one quarter locally owned by Nigerians--25.03%, to be exact. This affiliate was formally incorporated in 1965, after having been founded in the 1950's to source local Nigerian cocoa beans. Besides the Butter Mints and Tom Toms, Cadbury Nigeria also markets hot chocolate, regular chocolates, a mint/gum (Clorets), and Bournvita, a malted beverage.
Trebor Butter Mints: The candies were individually wrapped white ovals, about 1 inch by .5 inches (about 2.5 cm. by 1.5 cm.). Like the Tom Toms, they were lozenge-style--hard candies which dissolve slowly in your mouth. They had both their advertised flavors. The butter taste mixed with mint was weird to me, and a little off-putting. Overall they were okay? I guess? Sorry to be vague, but this candy was odd. I can kind of take them or leave them--they're not great, but not terrible, either. I guess they're an acquired taste.
As is my wont, I'll flesh this out a little with a few fun facts about Nigeria. It is the biggest country in Africa, based on population, which is estimated to be over 200,000,000 currently. Which makes it the seventh most populated country in the entire world. The Nigerian movie industry, nicknamed, "Nollywood," is reportedly the second busiest in the world, after India's "Bollywood." I saw a whole range of estimates for its average annual output of films, from 1,000 to 10,000. As far as famous Nigerians, or at least folks with significant Nigerian heritage, there's a bunch. In the world of music there's Sade Adu, winner of four Grammys. Also Shirley Bassey, probably best known for singing multiple James Bond movie themes. In the sport of basketball, specifically the NBA, there's Hall of Fame center Hakeem Olajuwon, Emeka Okafor, and the still active Andre Iguadala. To choose just a sampling of Nigerians who played in the NFL, there's Christian Okaye, B. J. Raji, Osi Umenyiora, and former Philadelphia Eagle Jay Ajayi. Nigeria's first, and only non-team winner of an Olympic gold medal was Chiome Ajunwa, who won the women's long jump in the 1996 Summer Games. Title belt holding boxers who were Nigerian include Samuel Peter (heavyweight division), and Richard Ihetu (aka Dick Tiger), a middleweight/light heavyweight. Arguably the most famous Nigerian actor is Chiwetel Ejiofor, who appeared in such films as "Amistad" (1997), "Dirty Pretty Things" (2002), "Serenity" (2005), "Inside Man" (2006), "Children of Men" (2006), and "12 Years a Slave" (2013). And finally, there's John Boyega, best known for playing Finn the Stormtrooper in the three most recent "Star Wars" movies, and also from "Attack the Block" (2011), "Detroit" (2017), and "Pacific Rim: Uprising" (2018).
Saturday, September 28, 2019
Yet More Major League Baseball Trivia, Some About the Biggest Postseason Upsets
The regular season of Major League Baseball is just about over, so I thought I'd do another article on some trivia about it. I'll start with a list of the biggest upsets in the playoffs. Note that these cover the period between 1903 and 2018, since the postseasons before that were only quasi-official. Also, bear in mind that I determined this list based on the largest differences in winning percentages. Since MLB teams played a 154 game schedule from 1903-1960, and a 162 game schedule from 1961 on, I thought this was the fairest way. (You'll also note that because some games were rained out, and not always re-played, etc. that some teams occasionally play a game or two more or less than the 154 or 162 games in the regular season.) Anyway, here we go. These will go in inverse order, with the number #1 being the biggest upset, and so on. There were also several ties:
10) 1990 World Series--Cincinnati Reds (91-71, .562 winning percentage) defeated the Oakland Athletics (103-59, .636), for a difference of .074. And to the A's discredit, they didn't even win one game in the Series, losing 4-0.
9) 2011 National League Divisional Series--St. Louis Cardinals (90-72, .555 winning percentage), beat the Philadelphia Phillies (102-60, .630), for a difference of .075
8) (tie) 1987 American League Championship Series--Minnesota Twins (85-77, .525 winning percentage) over the Detroit Tigers (98-64, .605) for a difference of .080.
8) (tie) 2003 National League Divisional Series--Chicago Cubs (88-74, .543 winning percentage) beat the Atlanta Braves (101-61, .623), for a difference of .080.
5) (tie) 2006 National League Championship Series--St. Louis Cardinals (83-78, .516 winning percentage) beat the New York Mets (97-65. .599), for a difference of .083.
5) (tie) 2008 National League Divisional Series--the Los Angeles Dodgers (84-78, .519 winning percentage) defeated the Chicago Cubs (97-64, .602), for a difference of .083.
4) 1954 World Series--New York Giants (97-57, .630 winning percentage) beat the Cleveland Indians (111-43, .721), for a difference of .091. This Series was also a sweep for the Giants.
3) 1973 National League Championship Series--New York Mets (82-79, .509 winning percentage) beat the Cincinnati Reds (99-63, .611), for a difference of .102.
2) 2001 American League Championship Series--New York Yankees (95-65 .594 winning percentage) over the Seattle Mariners (116-46, .716) for a difference of .122. Granted, the Yankees had won the past 3 World Series at the time, and 4 of the last 5, so in that way it wasn't so surprising, but mathematically, it was the second biggest upset.
1) 1906 World Series--the Chicago White Sox (93-58, .616 winning percentage) defeated the Chicago Cubs (116-36, .763), for a difference of .147. In case you're wondering, this Cubs team had the highest winning percentage in MLB history for the period we're discussing. Also, that White Sox team was known as the "Hitless Wonders."
So, as you can see, anything can happen in a short series, even more so when they're best of 5, or best of 1.
Staying on the playoffs, obviously the named Most Valuable Players is almost always a member of the winning squad. However, every so often, a player on the losing side is so spectacular that they're designated the MVP. Here are the four times it's ever happened:
1) 1960 World Series, Bobby Richardson, second baseman, New York Yankees. This was the incredible Series that lasted 7 games, and ended with Bill Mazeroski's dramatic walk-off home run. However, Richardson was great, as he "slashed" (batting average/on base percentage/slugging average) .367/.387/.667, for an OPS of 1.054, with 2 doubles, 2 triples, 1 home run, and 12 rbis. Teammates Mickey Mantle and Whitey Ford would have been justifiable choices, too.
2) 1982 American League Championship Series, Fred Lynn, center fielder, California Angels. The Angels lost the five game series after leading 2-0, but Lynn wasn't the reason. He slashed a marvelous .611/650/.889, for an OPS of 1.539, with 2 doubles, 1 home run, and 5 rbi.
3) 1986 National League Championship Series, Mike Scott, starting pitcher Houston Astros. The Astros only won 2 games in this Series, both by Scott. He pitched two complete games, with 1 being a shutout. In 18 innings he only gave up 1 run, 8 hits, and 1 walk, for an ERA of .050, and a WHIP of .500, with 19 strikeouts.
4) 1987 National League Championship Series, Jeff Leonard, left fielder, San Francisco Giants. Leonard slashed .417/.500/.917, for an OPS of 1.417, and hit 4 home runs, and drove in 5. He also pissed off the Cardinals royally, with his slow, "Flaps Down" home run trots. Additionally, Leonard had a great nickname, given his un-smiley demeanor--"Penitentiary Face."
Moving on, I wanted to do a list of the guys who stole home in the playoffs. However, that's tough to do. Online research didn't provide this--even in 2019, some statistics aren't complete. Therefore, I'm listing what I could find. If any reader has more information, please let me know in a comment, and I'll update this. I did find a stat that steals of home have been successful 19 out of 70 times, so I guess I'm missing 12.
Steals of home in a World Series. (Note, most of these were parts of double steals, only Robinson's and maybe Cobb's were the more difficult, "straight" steals.)
1) 1906 World Series, George Davis, Chicago White Sox vs. Chicago Cubs, game 5.
2) 1909 World Series, Ty Cobb, Detroit Tigers vs. Pittsburgh Pirates, game 2.
3) 1955 World Series, Jackie Robinson, Brooklyn Dodgers vs. New York Yankees, game 1.
4) 1964 World Series, Tim McCarver, St. Louis Cardinals vs. New York Yankees, game 7.
5) 2002 World Series, Brad Fullmer, Anaheim Angels vs. San Francisco Giants, game 2.
As for all playoffs, in the American League the last guy to steal home was Elvis Andrus of the of the Texas Rangers, in Game 2 of the ALCS in 2010. In the National League, it was Javier Baez of the Chicago Cubs, in Game 1 of the NLCS in 2016.
Leaving the postseason, here's some trivia about one of the rarest plays in baseball, the triple play:
1) An unassisted triple play is incredibly rare, more so than even a pitcher's perfect game, as there have been 15 of the former, and 23 of the latter. The last one was done by Eric Bruntlett of the Philadelphia Phillies, vs. the New York Mets on August 23, 2009. He caught a line drive by Jeff Francoeur for out #1, then stepped on second base to get out#2 on Luis Castillo. Then he tagged Daniel Murphy, who was running toward second base for out #3. This was also only the second time that a triple play ended a game. Finally, this rare, good play made up for two Bruntlett mistakes--he'd committed two errors to enable Castillo and Murphy to be on base.
2) Only one guy has hit into a triple play on his last at bat in his major league career--the New York Mets catcher Joe Pignatano, on September 30, 1962, vs. the Chicago Cubs.
3) The record for hitting into the most triple plays in a career is 4, by Hall of Fame third baseman Brooks Robinson, who played for the Baltimore Orioles.
The record for most hits in a game is 9, held by a wonderfully obscure player, Johnny Burnett. Burnett played from 1927-35, and he accumulated a slash of .284/.345/.366, for an adjusted OPS of only 81 (100 is average). However, on July 10, 1932 vs. the Philadelphia Athletics he got 9 hits in 11 at bats, in an 18 inning game.
Another stat which isn't recorded that definitively is catcher's interference, wherein the catcher interferes with the batter, usually by hitting the bat with his glove during a swing attempt. The batter is then awarded first base, unless he wants the result of the play instead. Certain players seem to have a knack for getting this called, by waiting until the last minute before swinging. Here's the list of the best at it in their entire careers, as far as I can determine:
1) 31 times, Jacoby Ellsbury. And although he's missed the past 2 seasons with injuries, he may play some more, and add to this total.
2) 29, Pete Rose.
3) (tie) 18 Dale Berra.
3) 18 Julian Javier.
5) (tie) 17 Roberto Kelly.
5) 17 Carl Crawford.
5) 17 Andy Van Slyke.
Milt May appears to hold the record for committing catcher's interference the most times in a career, with 15.
Once again, this next record isn't entirely definitive, so I'll change this if I find out otherwise. But, that said, evidently only 1 pitcher has picked off 3 base runners in one inning. Tippy Martinez of the Baltimore Orioles took the mound on August 24, 1983, with a runner on first. It was a weird situation--because the Orioles had used most of their players already, they had outfielders playing some of the infield positions, and utility infielder Lenn Sakata catching, something he'd never done before. Therefore, the Blue Jays were aggressive with their leads, thinking Sakata wouldn't be able to throw them out on steal attempts. However, Martinez promptly picked off the first runner, who was caught in a run down near second. Then, a second batter reached first, and was again picked off by Martinez. Then, a third Blue Jay did the same thing. In the Orioles half of the inning, Sakata eventually won the game with a 3 run home run.
I'll wrap this up with two types of more progressive trivia. First, there's one woman who was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame, in 2006. That was Effa Louise Manley, who was an executive with the Negro Leagues, serving as a co-owner, owner, and treasurer. She was also a civil rights activist.
Staying with the Negro Leagues, unlike the Major Leagues, they had 3 women who played. It wasn't all altruistic and fair--the Negro Leagues in the 1950's were on the decline, and having women play was clearly at least in part a way to garner attention, and fans. (And, depressingly, due to Jim Crow racist laws these players reportedly had to often stay in brothels instead of hotels on the road.) But, by all accounts, the 3 women who did play were clearly talented. Alas, the Negro Leagues, despite being a pro league, didn't keep very good records, so I can't just list their relevant statistics. But I'll include what I did learn.
1) Toni Stone, second base, with the Indianapolis Clowns and the Kansas City Monarchs, 1953-54. One source said she batted .302 in her first season, the other .243. Apparently she batted .197 overall, in 71 at bats.
2) Mamie "Peanut" Johnson, pitcher, Indianapolis Clowns, 1954-55. The only stat I could find was that she had a won-loss record of 33-8. Won-loss record is a weak way to determine pitching effectiveness, of course, but it does suggest that Johnson was pretty good, though.
3) Connie Morgan, second base, Indianapolis Clowns, 1954. Supposedly batted .178 in 45 at bats.
That's it. Enjoy the postseason--maybe something unique, and incredible, will happen this year!
10) 1990 World Series--Cincinnati Reds (91-71, .562 winning percentage) defeated the Oakland Athletics (103-59, .636), for a difference of .074. And to the A's discredit, they didn't even win one game in the Series, losing 4-0.
9) 2011 National League Divisional Series--St. Louis Cardinals (90-72, .555 winning percentage), beat the Philadelphia Phillies (102-60, .630), for a difference of .075
8) (tie) 1987 American League Championship Series--Minnesota Twins (85-77, .525 winning percentage) over the Detroit Tigers (98-64, .605) for a difference of .080.
8) (tie) 2003 National League Divisional Series--Chicago Cubs (88-74, .543 winning percentage) beat the Atlanta Braves (101-61, .623), for a difference of .080.
5) (tie) 2006 National League Championship Series--St. Louis Cardinals (83-78, .516 winning percentage) beat the New York Mets (97-65. .599), for a difference of .083.
5) (tie) 2008 National League Divisional Series--the Los Angeles Dodgers (84-78, .519 winning percentage) defeated the Chicago Cubs (97-64, .602), for a difference of .083.
4) 1954 World Series--New York Giants (97-57, .630 winning percentage) beat the Cleveland Indians (111-43, .721), for a difference of .091. This Series was also a sweep for the Giants.
3) 1973 National League Championship Series--New York Mets (82-79, .509 winning percentage) beat the Cincinnati Reds (99-63, .611), for a difference of .102.
2) 2001 American League Championship Series--New York Yankees (95-65 .594 winning percentage) over the Seattle Mariners (116-46, .716) for a difference of .122. Granted, the Yankees had won the past 3 World Series at the time, and 4 of the last 5, so in that way it wasn't so surprising, but mathematically, it was the second biggest upset.
1) 1906 World Series--the Chicago White Sox (93-58, .616 winning percentage) defeated the Chicago Cubs (116-36, .763), for a difference of .147. In case you're wondering, this Cubs team had the highest winning percentage in MLB history for the period we're discussing. Also, that White Sox team was known as the "Hitless Wonders."
So, as you can see, anything can happen in a short series, even more so when they're best of 5, or best of 1.
Staying on the playoffs, obviously the named Most Valuable Players is almost always a member of the winning squad. However, every so often, a player on the losing side is so spectacular that they're designated the MVP. Here are the four times it's ever happened:
1) 1960 World Series, Bobby Richardson, second baseman, New York Yankees. This was the incredible Series that lasted 7 games, and ended with Bill Mazeroski's dramatic walk-off home run. However, Richardson was great, as he "slashed" (batting average/on base percentage/slugging average) .367/.387/.667, for an OPS of 1.054, with 2 doubles, 2 triples, 1 home run, and 12 rbis. Teammates Mickey Mantle and Whitey Ford would have been justifiable choices, too.
2) 1982 American League Championship Series, Fred Lynn, center fielder, California Angels. The Angels lost the five game series after leading 2-0, but Lynn wasn't the reason. He slashed a marvelous .611/650/.889, for an OPS of 1.539, with 2 doubles, 1 home run, and 5 rbi.
3) 1986 National League Championship Series, Mike Scott, starting pitcher Houston Astros. The Astros only won 2 games in this Series, both by Scott. He pitched two complete games, with 1 being a shutout. In 18 innings he only gave up 1 run, 8 hits, and 1 walk, for an ERA of .050, and a WHIP of .500, with 19 strikeouts.
4) 1987 National League Championship Series, Jeff Leonard, left fielder, San Francisco Giants. Leonard slashed .417/.500/.917, for an OPS of 1.417, and hit 4 home runs, and drove in 5. He also pissed off the Cardinals royally, with his slow, "Flaps Down" home run trots. Additionally, Leonard had a great nickname, given his un-smiley demeanor--"Penitentiary Face."
Moving on, I wanted to do a list of the guys who stole home in the playoffs. However, that's tough to do. Online research didn't provide this--even in 2019, some statistics aren't complete. Therefore, I'm listing what I could find. If any reader has more information, please let me know in a comment, and I'll update this. I did find a stat that steals of home have been successful 19 out of 70 times, so I guess I'm missing 12.
Steals of home in a World Series. (Note, most of these were parts of double steals, only Robinson's and maybe Cobb's were the more difficult, "straight" steals.)
1) 1906 World Series, George Davis, Chicago White Sox vs. Chicago Cubs, game 5.
2) 1909 World Series, Ty Cobb, Detroit Tigers vs. Pittsburgh Pirates, game 2.
3) 1955 World Series, Jackie Robinson, Brooklyn Dodgers vs. New York Yankees, game 1.
4) 1964 World Series, Tim McCarver, St. Louis Cardinals vs. New York Yankees, game 7.
5) 2002 World Series, Brad Fullmer, Anaheim Angels vs. San Francisco Giants, game 2.
As for all playoffs, in the American League the last guy to steal home was Elvis Andrus of the of the Texas Rangers, in Game 2 of the ALCS in 2010. In the National League, it was Javier Baez of the Chicago Cubs, in Game 1 of the NLCS in 2016.
Leaving the postseason, here's some trivia about one of the rarest plays in baseball, the triple play:
1) An unassisted triple play is incredibly rare, more so than even a pitcher's perfect game, as there have been 15 of the former, and 23 of the latter. The last one was done by Eric Bruntlett of the Philadelphia Phillies, vs. the New York Mets on August 23, 2009. He caught a line drive by Jeff Francoeur for out #1, then stepped on second base to get out#2 on Luis Castillo. Then he tagged Daniel Murphy, who was running toward second base for out #3. This was also only the second time that a triple play ended a game. Finally, this rare, good play made up for two Bruntlett mistakes--he'd committed two errors to enable Castillo and Murphy to be on base.
2) Only one guy has hit into a triple play on his last at bat in his major league career--the New York Mets catcher Joe Pignatano, on September 30, 1962, vs. the Chicago Cubs.
3) The record for hitting into the most triple plays in a career is 4, by Hall of Fame third baseman Brooks Robinson, who played for the Baltimore Orioles.
The record for most hits in a game is 9, held by a wonderfully obscure player, Johnny Burnett. Burnett played from 1927-35, and he accumulated a slash of .284/.345/.366, for an adjusted OPS of only 81 (100 is average). However, on July 10, 1932 vs. the Philadelphia Athletics he got 9 hits in 11 at bats, in an 18 inning game.
Another stat which isn't recorded that definitively is catcher's interference, wherein the catcher interferes with the batter, usually by hitting the bat with his glove during a swing attempt. The batter is then awarded first base, unless he wants the result of the play instead. Certain players seem to have a knack for getting this called, by waiting until the last minute before swinging. Here's the list of the best at it in their entire careers, as far as I can determine:
1) 31 times, Jacoby Ellsbury. And although he's missed the past 2 seasons with injuries, he may play some more, and add to this total.
2) 29, Pete Rose.
3) (tie) 18 Dale Berra.
3) 18 Julian Javier.
5) (tie) 17 Roberto Kelly.
5) 17 Carl Crawford.
5) 17 Andy Van Slyke.
Milt May appears to hold the record for committing catcher's interference the most times in a career, with 15.
Once again, this next record isn't entirely definitive, so I'll change this if I find out otherwise. But, that said, evidently only 1 pitcher has picked off 3 base runners in one inning. Tippy Martinez of the Baltimore Orioles took the mound on August 24, 1983, with a runner on first. It was a weird situation--because the Orioles had used most of their players already, they had outfielders playing some of the infield positions, and utility infielder Lenn Sakata catching, something he'd never done before. Therefore, the Blue Jays were aggressive with their leads, thinking Sakata wouldn't be able to throw them out on steal attempts. However, Martinez promptly picked off the first runner, who was caught in a run down near second. Then, a second batter reached first, and was again picked off by Martinez. Then, a third Blue Jay did the same thing. In the Orioles half of the inning, Sakata eventually won the game with a 3 run home run.
I'll wrap this up with two types of more progressive trivia. First, there's one woman who was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame, in 2006. That was Effa Louise Manley, who was an executive with the Negro Leagues, serving as a co-owner, owner, and treasurer. She was also a civil rights activist.
Staying with the Negro Leagues, unlike the Major Leagues, they had 3 women who played. It wasn't all altruistic and fair--the Negro Leagues in the 1950's were on the decline, and having women play was clearly at least in part a way to garner attention, and fans. (And, depressingly, due to Jim Crow racist laws these players reportedly had to often stay in brothels instead of hotels on the road.) But, by all accounts, the 3 women who did play were clearly talented. Alas, the Negro Leagues, despite being a pro league, didn't keep very good records, so I can't just list their relevant statistics. But I'll include what I did learn.
1) Toni Stone, second base, with the Indianapolis Clowns and the Kansas City Monarchs, 1953-54. One source said she batted .302 in her first season, the other .243. Apparently she batted .197 overall, in 71 at bats.
2) Mamie "Peanut" Johnson, pitcher, Indianapolis Clowns, 1954-55. The only stat I could find was that she had a won-loss record of 33-8. Won-loss record is a weak way to determine pitching effectiveness, of course, but it does suggest that Johnson was pretty good, though.
3) Connie Morgan, second base, Indianapolis Clowns, 1954. Supposedly batted .178 in 45 at bats.
That's it. Enjoy the postseason--maybe something unique, and incredible, will happen this year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)