Do Overs

[sadie65]

http://www.journaltimes.com/articles/20 ... 885782.txt

Groundhog Day: We all need a `do-over' sometimes
By Ben Bromley

We don't get too excited about Groundhog Day in Wisconsin. We figure we're getting six more weeks of hard winter, no matter the predictions of Phil in Punxsutawney or Jimmy in Sun Prairie. And that's if we're lucky: We can only hope we won't find ourselves hiding Easter eggs in snow drifts in April.

Still, I was thinking the other day about the holiday and the movie "Groundhog Day,'' in which Bill Murray lives the same day over and over again. (He must have felt like Steven Seagal, who has spent a career making the same movie over and over again, only with different titles.) In "Groundhog Day,'' Murray lives one day repeatedly until he gets it right. What a blessing it would be to revisit certain moments in life and do them over. Like taking a mulligan after a tee shot that, instead of heading straight toward the pin, nearly decapitates an unsuspecting groundskeeper near the maintenance shed. It would be like when we played baseball in the front yard as kids: Whenever somebody hit a fly ball that got lodged in a tree branch, the play was ruled a "do-over.'' If only the rules of life were as simple as those of child's play. Imagine the missteps we could avoid if only we could back up and call for a do-over.

How I wish I could revisit that fateful moment when, as a high-school freshman, I selected a pair of glasses frames. At the time, I thought they looked handsome. In retrospect, I realize the lenses were the size of picture windows. When it rained, I needed windshield wipers from a Peterbilt to clear my sight lines. This could explain why girls avoided me as if I were carrying the avian flu.

Of course, my loneliness also could be blamed on the mullet I was sporting. Or the acid-washed jeans I wore, ripped at the knee and rolled tight at the ankle. The thing is, those looks were considered cool back then. I was in good, if poorly dressed, company. So perhaps no fashion do-overs are necessary.

Maybe it's best to save one's do-overs for adulthood. What husband out there wouldn't like to revisit the moment he actually answered honestly when asked whether a certain pair of jeans made his wife's butt look big? Or when he was foolish enough to answer at all when asked what, if anything, he would change about his wife?

Many of us wish we could go back in time and - rather than answering such questions - flee the scene, rush to the bathroom and lock the door behind us as if we were about to hurl. And then hope the subject wouldn't come up again. (I plan to test this strategy when asked, "Could my mother come to stay with us? It will only be for a few weeks ...'') Fortunately, our faux pas occur in private. Celebrities are the ones who really need do-overs.

We could let Ben Affleck do over the day he signed on to star in "Gigli.'' And give the president a chance to go back to that aircraft carrier and take down the "Mission Accomplished'' banner before beginning his speech about how the war in Iraq had been won.

We could let Billy Bob Thornton and Angelina Jolie do over the days they had each other's names tattooed onto their skin. And let the Titanic's architects rethink the number of lifeboats to be included in the ship's design.

Speaking of disasters, we could let Coca-Cola executives rethink the release of New Coke. Same goes for the suits at ABC who green-lighted "Cop Rock.'' We could let Mike Sherman go back and call for a blitz on fourth-and-26. We could advise Styx to think twice about releasing "Mr. Roboto.'' And former President Clinton, allow me to suggest that you use this opportunity to advise your staff not to hire that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

Of course, it's easy to point out all these gaffes in retrospect. (Good thing, too, because pointing out other people's gaffes in retrospect is what we columnists do best.) It's so much easier to look back and evaluate the past than it is to predict the future. That is, unless you're Punxsutawney Phil or Jimmy the Groundhog.

If you think this week's column should be declared a do-over, tell Ben Bromley so at: bbromley@capitalnewspapers.com

[bugsymalone]

Well, that "do over" of Mr. Roboto would not, it turns out, have been wise. That song opened a lot of doors for Styx later on in their careers. In fact, it gave them new life.

Cute article, Sadie. I enjoyed reading it.

(Not even gonna START with my list of "do overs." )

Bugsy

[ek88]

In fact, it gave them new life.

How exactly so? I'm just asking out of curiousity, I'm not trying to start anything. I guess when I think of a song of giving a band new life, I feature it revitalizing their career, not preceding a 7-year hiatus from new music.

[bugsymalone]

In fact, it gave them new life.

How exactly so? I'm just asking out of curiousity, I'm not trying to start anything. I guess when I think of a song of giving a band new life, I feature it revitalizing their career, not preceding a 7-year hiatus from new music.

I was thinking in terms of the highly rated, much praised VW Golf ad. It brought a whole new round of attention to the band and its music.

The phrase "Domo arigato" is almost always followed by the inevitable follow up --"Mr. Roboto", entering the American lexicon as such.

The song is ubiquitous, finding its way here, there and everywhere.

I feel this very ubiquity keeps Styx in the public eye.

Maybe not "new" life so much as continued life.

MHO here only.

Bugsy

[ek88]

Fair enough, bugs! Thanks