Steve Carell Needs A Break From The Big Screen

I just saw "Get Smart" yesterday and while I thought the movie was alright, I wasn't incredibly impressed. Usually, when I come out of the theater, I want to talk about what I just watched--not so much, this time. Anyway, I think part of the problem is that Steve Carell is doing way too many movies right now. If he stays at this pace, he's going to lose his "funny" kind of like Jim Carey, Will Ferrell or Ben Stiller have tended to do. I guess there's only so much "funny" one person can have. I just hope that "The Office" doesn't become un-funny because of this. Anyway, while "Get Smart" has a few good one-liners and a couple humorous scenes, it's not Carell's greatest. What I did like about it, though it had a few sexual inuendos, was that for the most part, it was clean. I'm just glad Carell isn't getting too raunchy. I really liked "Dan In Real Life"; it was a wholesome film that I'd watch again. In the end, as an ardent fan of Steve Carell, I'd ask him to consider taking some time off so that he doesn't get burnt out and so we don't get burnt out on him. Come on Mr. Carell, "get smart" and take a breather.


  1. I liked it, but you're right that it wasn't terribly impressive or meaningful.

    Anyway, your blog's new look is great, but why do you have it only show one post at a time?

  2. Ken,

    As for the one post at a time, there are a few reasons:

    1. for those w/dial-up, it allows the site to load faster.

    2. i figured, if i'm going to have the calendar archive w/the titles of each daily post in view, then why leave more than one post up at a time?

    3. it makes the site look cleaner (i think).

    4. i often write lengthy posts and nobody's going to want to read a lengthy post and then other lengthy posts. heck, most don't even read the full length of the lengthy posts. so, one'll do.

    those are the main reasons. i guess i would ask: why not?

    glad you find the new layout helpful.

  3. Just one "why not?": it adds clicks, and I hate clicking more than I need to (I don't think I'm alone in that either). That's why I usually follow your blog through Google Reader rather than directly, even though I prefer the latter method (I'm old fashioned that way).

  4. Ken,
    definitely food for thought. i'm glad readers are giving me feedback. just for kicks, how many posts would you recommend i leave up? thanks.

  5. I'm no expert on such things (so take this with a large grain of salt), but here are a few thoughts...

    Ten posts is average, but it mainly depends on how frequently you post; if you don't have just one, you'd probably want several days worth showing (i.e. not just two or three posts). If only one post is visible, people know they have to click to see any content they may have missed, but if more than one is showing, returning readers (if they are anything like me) will be more likely to simply read or skip down until the last post they recognize, making them less likely to click "previous posts." It's a trade-off either way, since people who come to your main page are more likely to read more than one post if they don't have to click to do so, but fewer will click to read posts they missed, so anything that has already fallen off the main page is less likely to be seen.

    In other words, don't change just because I'd prefer it; others may disagree with me, and you probably get more pageviews per visit, and a better sense of which posts are being read, the way you have it now. But it might be worth looking at your bounce rate; if the majority of visitors to your main page leave without clicking on, it might be worth changing.