Green Man Brewery's Porter

Let's get started with the beer.

First up, I have Green Man Brewery's Porter.  Green Man Brewery started out inside Asheville's Jack-of-the-Wood pub.  A few years ago, they got their own place and are now selling their beer throughout North Carolina.  There are two things to know about Green Man: they have an awesome logo and they make some great beer.  

This is a truly wonderful porter.  As you can see from the picture, it has a rich dark color.  It is a creamy delight with a hint of chocolate.   Once you finish, you'll be reaching for another.

Stats:
Green Man Brewery
Asheville, North Carolina
ABV: 6%
IBU: 40

What is a craft beer?

What is a craft beer?  A simple question with a complicated answer.

We have to start somewhere, so let's start with the Brewers Association's definition.  The Brewers Association defines a "craft" brewer as small, independent and traditional.  Each one of those requirements is subject to considerable disagreement.  Most people would probably think a brewer that brewed 6 million barrels--the equivalent of approximately 990 million 12oz. bottles--is a large brewery.  But, as is often repeated, the Boston Beer Company, which makes Samuel Adams and sold approximately 3.4 million barrels of beer in 2013, meets the BA's definition of "small."  Thus, Samuel Adams qualifies as craft beer.

"Independent" is defined as less than 25% ownership by an entity that is not itself a craft brewer.  This keeps out some of the obvious fakes.  Ask the next person you see drinking a Blue Moon or Shock Top whether he or she is drinking a craft beer and the person is likely to say "Yes."  But Moon is owned entirely by SABMiller and Shock Top by AB-InBev.  Thus, neither are craft beer, regardless of how they are marketed.  While the big beer companies have developed in-house "craft" beers, they have also purchased some outside "craft" brands.  For example, Chicago's Goose Island Brewery was once a darling of the craft beer scene and is still heavily marketed as a craft beer.  However, it is owned by AB-InBev.  Poof!  It is no longer craft beer.  (Note that there is still an independent Goose Island brewpub in Chicago.)  Things are also confusing with the Craft Brewer's Alliance, which sells Redhook and Kona.  Certainly a brewery with the name "Craft Brewer's Alliance" makes craft beer!  But AB-InBev owns over 35% of the Craft Brewer's Alliance.  Thus, it is not craft beer.

Now we come to "traditional."  Most of us can probably agree that a strawbeer-a-rita malt beverage should not be considered beer, let alone craft beer.  But what about Yuengling, the oldest American brewery?  Previously, the BA's definition of traditional kept out breweries that used adjuncts, such as corn, in their beer.  Thus, Yuengling was not a craft beer because it uses "non-traditional" ingredients--corn.  However, the Brewers Association changed its definition of "traditional" in 2014.  Now, "traditional" is defined as "A brewer that has a majority of its total beverage alcohol volume in beers whose flavor derives from traditional or innovative brewing ingredients and their fermentation."  This recently modified definition now recognizes that adjunct brewing is traditional.  We will see if Yuengling joins the Brewers Association.

To summarize, under the Brewers Association's definition Samuel Adams is craft beer, Blue Moon is not, Goose Island was once but is no longer craft beer (unless you are drinking a Goose Island beer that was brewed at the independently owned brewpub in Chicago), and despite being the oldest American brewery in existence Yuengling did not meet the definition of "traditional" beer until 2014.  As you can see, this definition leaves some confusion about what is and what is not "craft" beer.

In a recent article, Imbibe concluded "craft" is a shorthand for taste and freedom.  I tend to agree that the term "craft beer" is more of a shorthand for what is expected of the beer than what the beer actually is.  The term has become synonymous with a tasty and high-quality product, which is why the megabreweries are trying hard to coop the term for their use.  A wide spectrum of beer sits under the umbrella of craft beer and we cannot rely solely on that term to distinguish what is and what is not a "good" beer.

In short, know more about your beer than merely whether it is "craft" beer.  Where is it produced?  Who produces it?  Is the brewery locally owned?  The answers to these questions do not necessarily lead to a "good" beer, but at least you will know more about what you are drinking.

Beers Beside the Big Bend: An Introduction

We are fortunate to live in such times as these where there are is such an abundant choice of beer.  Not since Reconstruction have there been as many breweries in the United States as there are today.  The hegemony of mass produced beer has been broken!  We are free of the Budweiser-Miller dichotomy and can enjoy an endless assortment of beers produced by breweries across the country! It is refreshing to see people--even casual beer drinkers--taking an interest in local breweries and supporting small businesses.

When I first tried a beer, a Budweiser, I asked "Why would anyone like drinking beer?"  Things changed as I aged.  I found a fondness for beer and started exploring.  That exploration started with what was in my local grocery store, which happened to be mostly Coors, Miller or AB products.  For a while I trudged through Coors Light, Miller Light, MGD, Miller Genuine Draft, and Ice House.  Then my taste started to refine a bit and I turned to Rolling Rock, Newcastle, Honey Brown, and Smithwicks.  Then it was on to Yuengling and Samuel Adams.  These two beers turned into a gateway into a new world: the world of craft beer.

That world is what this blog is about: My exploration of the world of craft beer.  With all the new and innovative craft breweries it is a great time to be a beer drinker!

Briefly, I am not setting out to find the "best" beer.  What I consider a "good" beer may not be what the next person considers a "good" beer.  It is all up to the individual's choice.  I will admit that I am not partial IPAs, which puts me on the outside of the more-hops-the-better trend.  Accordingly, very few IPAs or hop-centric beers are likely to appear in the following posts.  I tend to prefer browns, porters, and stouts and you may see more of those than anything else.

Let's get started...

Bond, A Ranking.

Fifty years have passed since Sean Connery appeared smoking a cigarette with his mocking "Bond, James Bond" in Dr. No.  Countless lists have rated the subsequent movies with the usual suspects at the top and at the bottom.  Here is one more.

If there is one thing that we can agree on is that no one agrees on what makes a good Bond movie.  It, like everything else that is ranked according to what is "best," is subjective.  James Bond is not Jason Bourne, John McClane, John Rambo, or any of other muscle men out there.  He is a spy and Bond movies should be a spy movie with a taste of action.

My methodology looks at several factors:  (1) plot, (2) villain/henchmen, (3) Bond girls, (4) acting, and (5) how is has held up over the years.  A good plot is one that is able to be followed (not full of holes) and somewhat reasonable (not absurd).  A good villain is one that engages Bond and has a diabolical plot that is somewhat reasonable (destruction of part of the planet v. destruction of the whole planet).  A good Bond girl is one that is easy on the eyes and is an assistant to Bond (not one he just beds and moves on from).  The marks of a bad Bond:  absurd plot, unconvincing villain, and weak Bond girl.

I have ranked the movies in groups of five and not individually.

Explaining Some of the Choices:

In the First Five, I included some of the obvious choices of From Russia With Love and Dr. No.  Perhaps it is too soon to add Skyfall into the top five Bond movies but it does a wonderful job slowing things down and returning to the mystery/thriller vibe that is a hallmark of a spy movie.  Skyfall is in the top five for two reasons:  the layered richness and Judy Dench.  Finally, Dench gets to show what an amazing actress she is and rises to become a Bond girl on a different level.  Skyfall appears to have numerous allusions to previous movies such as:  ex-MI6 villain (Goldeneye), thrown knife in the back (For Your Eyes Only / Octopussy), personalized grip on gun (The Living Daylights), assault on manor home (The Living Daylights), meeting assassin in Macau (The Man With The Golden Gun), bombing at MI6/Vauxhall Cross/ tie adjustment (The World Is Not Enough), and underground MI6 (Die Another Day).

On Her Majesty's Secret Service is often misunderstood on the basis of George Lazenby's one-time performance (as are the Timothy Dalton movies).  It offers such a wonderful exploration into Bond as a man and a test of his skills in such close proximity to his nemesis.  We get to see Bond fall in love and then suffer loss.  Casino Royale does this nearly 40 years later, but OHMSS did it first and everyone apparently forgot about it.  The location in a secret ski resort is exotic but believable.  While the movie does break the fourth wall and is a tad long, it is enjoyable to watch.

The Middle

The Second and Third Five all include movies I find to be strong Bond movies.   Goldeneye has a strong positive association for me and is an enjoyable movie.  Too bad Brosnan did not have another outing as strong as this one.  I enjoy Tomorrow Never Dies, with the remote control 7 series and chase scene with the R1200C, but it just doesn't captivate you like some of the others.  The villain becomes down right annoying as does the unkillable henchman.

The Living Daylights is a great Bond movie to me.  I enjoy the Cold War intrique, Dalton's performance, the chase scenes and the Bond girl.  I enjoy Dalton's departure from the Moore era's emphasis on cartoonish plots, double entendres, and corny humor.  He gives Bond hard edges that are more fitting to the literary version.

Live And Let Die is another Bond with a positive association for me and is why I rate it higher than others.  Yes, it has a tendency to be slow and the villain literally explodes.  However, it sends Bond into a world he will never return to...New York City.  (Bond returns to California and Florida in A View to A Kill and License to Kill, respectively.)  It takes on some of the racial tensions of the era.  It includes a great boat chase and one of the best, if not the best, theme songs by Sir Paul.

Quantum of Solace grows on me each time I watch it.  It is a Bond for the ADHD and Jason Bourne (the movies) crowd.  I don't know why they had to make it so jerky as there is a decent movie laying underneath.  The vilain is compelling as he masterminds his way around Bond and contrives a truly sinister plot...drought.  Finally, no one wants to blow up the world!  The Bond girls are terrible and the oil scene with Ms. Fields is just a forced allusion to Goldfinger.

The Fourth Five

The Man With The Golden Gun it has Christopher Lee has Francisco Scaramanga, who is a villain that

engages Bond on multiple levels.  But it is so slow moving that I just can't rate it much higher.  The solar energy tie in is dated and forced.  Not to mention the reappearance of Sheriff J.W Pepper.  Why is he on vacation in Asia?  He should have stayed in Louisiana and in Live and Let Die.

The last time I tried watching You Only Live Twice I couldn't finish it.  So what if it is Connery, it's a bore.  Little Nelly is great and that is about it.

The World is Not Enough could arguable be one of the worst Bond movies (and is at least in the bottom  five).  The World is Not Enough has a great opening sequence, character development of M, the last appearance of Q, and a comparatively reasonable plot.   These traits, mostly the one about a reasonable plot, distinguish The World is Not Enough above the bottom three.

The Bottom

It is easy to see that Moonraker, with its absurd pseudo-Star Wars money grab plot, is among the worst Bond movies.  We are talking about a movie with a French villain who wants to poison the entire world from a space station that no one noticed he was building (and happens to be bigger than than thing

Moonraker (1979) 

anyone has ever built in space) and a Bond girl, who is a CIA agent/astronaut, with the name Holly Goodhead.  Not to mention the existence of a bunch of space shuttles---with space lasers to boot.  Aren't these things expensive?  Weren't only five ever built?  You can imagine the team sitting around with a scrip in hand and watching Star Wars thinking "How can we turn this in to that?"  One guy speaks up, "A space battle with lasers!"  Another one says, "Yeah! That's awesome but what do the space ships look like?"  The other guy says "The American space shuttle!"  Another disappointment with Moonraker is the appearance of Michael Lonsdale as Hugo Drax.  Oh, what a waste of talent!  We won't get to see this much wasted talent until A View to A Kill (a movie that requires no explanation about how bad it is).  Moonraker's redeeming qualities are Jaws (pun intended), several excellent stunts (opening, cable car, and the zero gravity scene on the space station), and the best double entendre ("I think he is attempting reentry.").

In many respects Die Another Day is the worst Bond movie.  It has a decent opening sequence that shows Brosnan has acting talent, Halle Berry as a Bond girl, and one of the coolest Bond cars ever.  Berry provides a fantastic update of the Honey Rider introduction scene but disappoints in nearly ever other way.  This is not her fault but the fault of the bad movie all around her.  The real problem with Die Another Day comes down to the absurd plot:  a North Korean who had gene therapy to look like a Western playboy, a satellite made out of diamonds (I saw that movie and it was called Diamonds Are Forever), a robot arm thingy that controls the diamond/laser/satellite, an ice palace, a henchman named "Mr. Kill," and a plan to blow up the DMZ between the two Koreas.  The over reliance on CGI makes the movie look dated just 10 years later.  Let's not, or try, to forget Madonna is in this movie.  The plot, presence of Madonna, and already dated feel pushes Die Another Day to the bottom.

A View to A Kill ranks as the worst in terms of plot (create an earthquake to flood Silicon Valley, um okay), acting (Roger said he was about 400 years too old for the part.  He was 57 and still too old.), and  Bond girl (Grace Jones as May Day is about as flat and uninteresting as they come, not to mention those crazy outfits she ends up in.).  Christopher Walken is a great villain and it is unfortunate he did not have a better movie to work with.

The List:

The First Five:

From Russia With Love

Dr. No

Casino Royale

On Her Majesty's Secret Service

Skyfall

The Second Five:

Goldeneye

Goldfinger

The Spy Who Loved Me

The Living Daylights

Live And Let Die

Third Five:

Thunderball

Licence To Kill

Diamonds Are Forever

Quantum of Solace

Tomorrow Never Dies

Fourth Five:

For Your Eyes Only

The Man With The Golden Gun

You Only Live Twice

Octopussy

The World is Not Enough

The Bottom:

Moonraker

Die Another Day

A View To A Kill

Last Orders

 Graham Swift's Last Orders won the 1996 Booker Prize and was subsequently turned into a film in 2001. The film is notable for David Hemmings' eyebrows. The term "last orders" comes from pub speak for last call, and for a dying man's wishes. Our dead man is Jack Dobbs (Michael Caine in the movie) and our cast is three of his friends and his son, Vince. Several inanimate objects and places are key members of the cast as well.

The shifting narration is unconventional and difficult to get into at first (or ever). The principle narration is from Ray, who is Jack's closest friend (if Jack only knew how close). The plot of the book moves along the group's trip from London to Margate to scatter Jack's ashes. While traveling there are numerous flashbacks that fill in the story and provide detail about the lives of the characters and their relationship with Jack and one another. Each of the group members is scarred and grieves differently.

Being American the English colloquialisms are unique, but build a common man identity for the characters beautifully. At times I felt like the characters where alive and talking right before me.

I found it confusing to have sections from the women's perspective mixed in at times. This problem may be a result of not having a clear understanding of who is who.  I kept forgetting whose daughter was who and whose wife was who. Hint: Vince sleeps with almost everyone's daughter. Needless to say the characters are interwoven in their relationships.

The Booker Prize seems to have an affection for books on grief: The Gathering, The Sea, and The Finkler Question (to some degree) to name some from the past few years. Amy, Jack's wife, appears to grieve the lack of relationship Jack had with his daughter, June, more than him.

This is a book I would strongly recommend to read in a few sittings. It is both a quick read, but by staying immersed in its world you will enjoy the book even more.

In the penultimate chapter we hear Jack's voice sharing the advice of his father:

"You got to keep a constant eye on the wastage, constant.
What you've got to understand is the nature of the goods.
Which is perishable".

This, to me, is that line that ties everything together.