With the final expenditure reports from the recent student elections posted on the University Board of Elections’ Web site, it is good to see money is not everything in student elections. While some winning candidates spent significantly more than their opponents, others spent far less. The final numbers suggest a candidate cannot buy an election, thought outspending one’s rivals can be an advantage.

With these results in mind, UBE should consider amending its campaign grants program. If money does in fact talk, as these figures show, UBE should ensure everyone has a loud enough voice.

UBE has a budget of $3,000, part of which it dedicates to grants for candidates, UBE Chair Neha Kumar said. Currently, each race is grouped within a certain “tier” with other races with similarly broad constituencies. Each tier has a maximum amount its candidates can receive in a grant. Tier I, which consists of only the position of Student Council president, has a cap of $100. Each consecutive tier is allotted $25 less.

These amounts are significant, and each is certainly enough to fund an effective campaign in these races. But some candidates spent far more than these figures. One Student Council president candidate spent a cool $339.90. The average expenditures for a winning Honor Committee College representative was $157.95. UBE caps grants for that race at $75. UBE does not need to increase its grants to match the highest amount spent. Spending such high amounts seems mostly like a waste of a candidate’s money, and it is clearly not necessary to be competitive. Still, in races that have large constituencies, like any College race and Student Council Executive Board races, UBE should raise its cap to a more competitive amount.

The current rules also require a candidate to apply for a grant before voting begins. But much of the campaigning in UBE elections takes places after voting begins, sometimes because the slate of candidates is not finalized until two days prior. Candidates should be allowed to respond to their opponents’ spending by applying for grants during the voting process. A candidate might have planned on spending nothing, but when his opponent shells out several hundred dollars, those plans would likely change.

Finally, UBE should make the grant process more transparent by listing on its Web site which candidates were given a grant. This will discourage abuse of the grants by candidates who do not need the money. If a candidate accepts a grant and then spends his own money, that will be reflected in publicly available expenditure reports. Students likely would not appreciate this abuse and the candidate would perhaps be defeated.

The best scenario would be for candidates to limit their own spending voluntarily, but election history suggests this is unlikely. Those with money to burn will continue to spend it, and they should not be prevented from doing so. But candidates who cannot afford to compete with their opponents ought to receive the help they need — not because it is more fair to them, but because that will provide the University with the best possible elected officials.

And now the story of one hilarious TV show that lost its spot on the air, and the millions of fans who had no choice but to keep the show alive. That’s right, it’s Arrested Development. Most of you have heard of the Emmy Award-winning ex-Fox show, but not because of its popularity on TV — rather, because of its massive cult following that has grown among 18- to 24-year-olds across the country (and the world).

Arrested Development, the brainchild of Mitchell Hurwitz and produced (and narrated by) Ron Howard, aired on Fox Sunday nights from November 2003 to February 2006. Despite its loyal viewers, critical acclaim, numerous awards and recognition by Time magazine as one of the top 100 Greatest Shows of All Time, the ratings failed to climb, and the show was cancelled without being picked up by another network. (Although Showtime showed interest, it entailed a deal that would mean an overhaul in the writing, something Hurwitz wasn’t comfortable with.)

How could this happen? Many fans speculate that AD’s home network, Fox, was an inappropriate match for the show’s type of comedy. The Bluth family is brilliantly written and superbly cast. Loaded with witty banter, innuendo and multilayered jokes, the comedy of AD set the show miles apart from other Fox families (like the Simpsons and the Hills) and shows (like Cops and House). Jason Bateman, who plays the main character, Michael Bluth, is strikingly different from the random comedy of Peter Griffin, and few NASCAR fans would stick around after the race to watch AD. Fox’s specialty in sexy comedy, rather than witty satire, may have helped force the show’s premature demise.

The failure of the show on TV can only be complemented by its success on DVD. All three seasons are available on DVD and loaded with extras, behind-the-scenes footage and commentary by cast and crew.

Curiously enough, the DVDs, not the show itself, were what helped the show gain its popularity and cult status. If you know any AD fans, you’ve heard them quote the show ad nauseam. Since the episodes are all on DVDs, it means constantly rewinding to catch hilarious G.O.B. lines and continuously watching favorite episodes over and over again to see what was missed. This habit, not unique to AD fans but paramount nonetheless, reinforces the clever writing and colorful cast of characters, thus instilling a deeper sense of appreciation for the show. No matter how many times you’ve watched Buster get his hand eaten off by a seal, or how many times Tobias paints himself blue to audition for the Blue Man Group, it’s still really funny.

So funny, in fact, that you can find applications on Facebook that generate random AD quotes to put in your profile, and whole Wiki pages just for popular AD quotes. Even on paper (or a computer screen), G.O.B. Bluth yelling “Lookit banner Michael!” is still hilarious.

The end of 2007 brought some promising news: A movie is still in the works. AD fans will recall that the show ended with Maeby approaching Ron Howard with pitch for a show, to which he suggested a movie. In December 2007 Bateman told MTV that the movie is not dead. And, since the writers’ strike has officially ended, development on a script may not actually be arrested after all.

The funny thing is, to a diehard AD fan, this is pretty good news, but nothing to hold our breath about. Sure, we’ll take some new material, but even if a movie doesn’t come out, we’d be just as satisfied watching the same episodes over and over again (and again and again).3

It turns out Jack Black and Mos Def didn’t have a “rewind” monopoly this past weekend. The box-office topper Vantage Point could have as easily been titled Be Kind Rewind: Political Thriller Edition. Vantage shirks good old-fashioned linear progression, although this is far from typical Tarantino anachronism (both in practicality and artistry). The film tracks six characters through roughly a 30-minute period. It locks you, as the title suggests, into the vantage point of one of the six before freezing, zipping back and starting the scenario afresh with a different face. It’s a clever-enough concept, but the film flounders between exploring the tropes of its unique selling point and going for more traditional action-flick thrills.

Sigourney Weaver gets things off to a promising enough start as a GNN (yes, that’s ‘G’NN) newscast director covering an anti-terrorism summit in Spain. When Weaver ignores pleas from a reporter to show “both sides of the story” and cover a protest outside the summit, the de facto moral is introduced — stories change drastically depending on the extent of the perspective you’re offered.

Unfortunately, this is as revelatory as Vantage gets. Soon the summit, headlined by U.S. President “Ashton” (William Hurt), hits the expected and explosive derailment. In the ensuing rewinds and character hops the perspective-play becomes little more than a half-baked pressure cooker. Whenever the tension or action hits a certain pitch, the fade-to-white rewind inevitably kicks in. Far from leaving you thirsting for more, the character swaps tend to bring any intensity to a screeching halt. Just when you consider caring about a character or situation, it’s suddenly shelved for a much less interesting one.

Which brings me to the film’s other glaring fault: extremely uneven performances from a bloated cast. Weaver, along with Dennis Quaid, cast as a troubled Secret Service agent, and Hurt’s president, offer admirably watchable performances. Things devolve from these three, and most notably with Forest Whitaker. Whitaker almost can’t help but be a good actor. His character, however, is such a one-note throw away — he spends his 20 minutes alternating focus between a little girl and a camera – there’s precious little depth to force into the showing. The film’s next most notable star, Mathew Fox (perhaps better known as Jack of Lost), does his best “look, Ma! I can do movies too,” but his acting range only spans the emotional jumps between cocky, worried and manic.

Then there’s the rest: a Spanish cop (Eduardo Noriega) and a smattering of terrorists. Noriega seems to have wandered in off a Spanish soap opera, and the terrorists are almost completely flat villains. The lack of any antagonistic depth proves especially apparent in a film that purports to ride on “multiple perspectives.” Vantage never divulges a clear rational behind the terrorists’ on-screen wickedness (they’re terrorists; of course they don’t need motivation!). They’re cold. They’re calculating. They’re scary. That’s about it.

It’s not all bad. When Vantage finally embraces the more regular pacing of an action movie it offers a pretty spectacular car chase and it gets a few points for grazing some political hot buttons. Just don’t expect too much. For all its visual showboating and plot mix-ups the film boils down to one overarching perspective: It’s all from the eyes of a cheap political thriller.3

I interviewed Stephen Malkmus — ex-Pavement frontman, indie-rock poster boy and U.Va. graduate — Monday during a conference call with several other school newspapers. The call was intended to get the word out about his new Jicks album, Real Emotional Trash. The exciting part: I got him to go on a lengthy tangent about his years here at the University. Plus, when I introduced myself as a Cavalier Daily writer, he said, “Wahoowa.” Too bad I didn’t hear it.

tab: On the new album, we’re getting a credit to the Jicks, something that was left off of 2005′s Face the Truth. So is there a change in the group’s participation, and does it feel like you’re playing with a real, official band again?

Stephen Malkmus: It does. This record was more like, go to the rehearsal studio and have a go. Just play off the walls, play off each other. And the one before that, that you were talking about – Face the Truth – it was more just demos. There were a few songs that I would call Jicks songs, but maybe three-quarters were invented on the tape reel. And they were like fleshed-out demos. I played a majority of the instruments and made decisions about the recording style. So this was more, I would say, everybody’s chipping in, and everybody’s playing what they want to play. And it’s rendered by a recording engineer in a real studio. It’s kind of a traditional rock ‘n roll lineup.

tab: I’m going to preface this question with an apology — I hope it’s not too annoying. But, coming from a student newspaper, I have to ask at least one question to satisfy the narcissistic tendencies of my audience — you know, one to make the Virginia students feel cool. But are there any particularly interesting memories from your time at U.Va. that you can relate to us?

SM: Yeah, of course. [Laughs.] Let’s see. The first year I got there — I was from California and didn’t know anybody, so that kind of sucked — and then they put me in the old dorms, and I was in the basement, so there were only four other guys — or six other guys down there. It was like boy-girl floors. So that first year it was really hard to get to know people. Of course, the girls — that was nice, they’re right there, and everyone’s trying to experiment, if you know what I mean [laughs], so that was fun. And later, I never joined a frat, which was also difficult, somewhat, because it was quite Greek, you know, in the ’80s — it probably still is. But it takes a little time to find your friends outside of that system. It really took me until like my third year to really find my people amidst that whole, giant place. And a lot of them were a year younger than me, too … So, this is all kind of vague, but around the radio station at WTJU we had kind of a golden moment where there were really a lot of crazy people that worked at that radio station, built on this sort of admiration of this band called The Butthole Surfers, and we just really had fun down there in that radio station — drank a lot of beer down there, had our own run of the place — it was open 24 hours, you know. And I listened to a lot of music there. So that was really fun, you know, I crashed a lot of frat parties, and I don’t know what else really happened — [laughs], a lot of shows, a lot of good bands came through town, and I survived, got a history major, got out of there.

tab: Alright, great. Thanks.

SM: I thought it was pretty fun, but, you know, it’s hard to, uh … I’ve heard that some people love it, and others feel a little bit wigged out by the young Republicans or something, you know? I don’t think that’s the time you’re supposed to be a Republican, but apparently at U.Va. they exist.

tab: They’re around, yeah.

SM: And it’s fine if you’re 40 or — well, it’s really never fine — but if you’re 50, I guess. [Laughs] … I went to some good basketball games, too, and football games. That was really fun, going to Mem Gym. And the football team wasn’t that good yet, but it was just starting to come out of the real, real doldrums, which it was always in for 50 years. I liked the sports — going to the sporting events, too.

tab: Alright, great.

SM: Alright, sorry to everybody else.

(Check out the rest of the interview at http://www.uwire.com/stephen-malkmus-interview/.)3

Upon delving into Atlas Sound’s debut album, one is redirected into a new realm — one that emphasizes feeling rather than visual aesthetics. The solo side project of Deerhunter’s Bradford James Cox, Atlas Sound’s premier attempt has utilized its medium and created an album that is, quite literally, for the visually blind but orally present.

Garnering rave reviews from critics, Let the Blind Lead Those Who Can See But Cannot Feel is the first from Atlas Sound, brainchild of Deerhunter’s lead singer. Cox, an intriguing character, has said to Pitchfork Media, “I just do my s***: I don’t give a f*** if people like it, I don’t give a f*** if they don’t. We’re not going to be rock stars … What the world needs now is noise in a pop song. The world needs to give in a bit to psychosis, to the mentally ill.” And that’s exactly what he’s done with Let the Blind, leading critics to call it one of the year’s best albums thus far. Mixing a persistent, passionate sound with poignant lyrics, Let the Blind introduces audiences to a more desperate Cox, with almost a hint of psychosis lingering in the back of your mind as you lose yourself in Cox’s overpowering noise — for lack of a better word.

After going on hiatus with Deerhunter in 2007, Cox took his experience with the band — a self-described “ambient punk” sound — to create a complete album of noise pop in tune with that original ideology.

The album starts out with “A Ghost Story,” a disarmingly innocent recording of a young boy telling his ghost story set to music. Setting the tone for the rest of the album, this piece creates an overall mystical, haunting affect.

The entire album seems to be a sounding board for Cox, whose inner dialogue is revealed throughout the 14 tracks. Many of the lyrics are wistful and sad, conveying the listener through lost love and addiction. An overriding character in the album is Lockett Pundt, Cox’s best friend, album collaborator and source of lovelorn despair. Three songs explore Pundt’s effect on Cox, from their first meeting in “Winter Vacation” to Cox’s refusal to deal with Pundt’s new relationship with a girl. Instead of dealing with the pain, Cox turns to drugs in “Ativan” to sleep the issue through. Other songs look to articles and folk stories for their inspiration. My personal favorite, “River Card”, is based on a Puerto Rican short story, “There’s a Little Coloured Boy at the Bottom of the River.” The overall sound is enchanting, and the lyrics stick in my head until I can see the little boy falling in love with his reflection and jumping in (reminiscent of Narcissus myth). Ending with the title track, Cox leaves his audience with a lyric-less track, one that returns to the haunting sound “A Ghost Story” introduces. The album sticks solidly to its intent by turning full circle, drawing the listener in by tugging in his ears.

Ultimately, the sound reminds one of stumbling into a My Bloody Valentine album rather than a Deerhunter spin-off. While Cox’s wailing is present, there is less upbeat pop and more mystical noise. As Cox’s crooning blended into the feeling of the music floating around my head, I can only imagine what he will concoct next. His mind is sharp, his lyrics enchanting, and, despite his refusal to conform to indie-rock stereotypes, he has won over the music world with his oral imagery and invasive sensations.3

In a way, I wish I hadn’t signed on to review Be Kind Rewind. Not because it provoked me to throw popcorn at the screen in disgust or because my editors are breathing down my neck about the timeliness of this article. It’s because I’m nervous.

I’m nervous that my commentary isn’t going to do the movie justice. I’m nervous that nothing I write will convey what I felt when watching Jack Black and Mos Def recreate Ghostbusters with a camcorder and homemade props and I’m nervous that the meaning of the verb “to swede” will be lost in translation on its journey from the big screen to the columns of the Cav Daily. I’m nervous that the tired adjectives we movie critics so often employ are never going to illustrate the offbeat chemistry that the movie’s cast shared, and I’m nervous that people won’t appreciate the innovative humor trademark of Michel Gondry, who also helmed Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. I’m also nervous about my upcoming Intro to Media Studies midterm, in case anyone was wondering.

For those of you thinking, “Maybe this smart-ass should have been studying for that very exam instead of going to the movies,” you haven’t seen Be Kind Rewind. As I settled into my cushy seat on the left side of the theater with a couple pieces of Christian’s pizza in a to-go box, I soaked in the knowledge that the payoff for not studying would be far greater than if I had decided to stay back at dorms with my nose in a book. But just now, as I reflect on the opening scenes of the film, the problem I face when trying to tackle this movie review is flaring up again like a bad rash– there are no words to describe the one-of-a-kind plot this movie has.

Be Kind Rewind is about an eccentric named Jerry (Jack Black) whose brain becomes magnetized and in turn erases all the movies in his friend Mike’s (Mos Def) video store. But to satisfy loyal customers, the duo starts on the impossible task of re-creating the movies that were lost. Unexpectedly, these customers are impressed by the duo’s efforts and want to see more. Thus, the store begins taking remake requests, and the cash comes flowing in. However, the beginning of Be Kind Rewind regales the viewer with facts about a 20th-century jazz musician named Fats Waller. In fact, this Fats character is at the center of the entire flick. How the hell do you explain that?

You don’t. Or at least I’m not going to. Hopefully curiosity will get the better of you and you’ll flag down a taxi and tell the driver to get his ass to the Downtown Mall, and fast. I won’t leave you completely in the dark, though. What about those people called actors? Jack Black, God bless his soul, brings all of his versatile skills to the table — er, the rental store counter — for his hilarious turn as Jerry. Mos Def’s low-key (yet still funny) turn as Mike serves as the perfect foil to Black’s role as an over-the-top nutjob. Danny Glover and Mia Farrow are in supporting roles, and Sigourney Weaver and Paul Dinello make cameos. You can’t ask for a more diverse, better balanced cast.

Yet while the list of featured players is impressive enough, my favorite part of Be Kind Rewind is the insanity. The movie fakes reality and also asks you to suspend it. Again, very typical of a Gondry film. There are a couple sane characters, such as the movie exec who shuts down the piracy business, or the new apartment complex developer who wants to tear down the decrepit video store building. However, these characters represent the most depressing facets of reality. They take the fun out of the dysfunctional.

So that’s all for this week. I’ve done my best to convince you to see this incredible movie, and if you decide not to, then it’s your loss. Got to run to my Media Studies discussion, though — the depressing reality of midterms beckons.3

Cinematheque presents Never Back Down

March 12, Cinematheque will sponsor an advanced screening of Never Back Down and a talk with director (and Charlottesville native) Jeff Wadlow. Wadlow’s latest film tells the story of Jake Tyler (Sean Faris), a rebellious teenager who moves to a new school and is unwittingly thrown into an underground Fight Club-esque world. Determined to exact his revenge against the school bully, Jake begins taking lessons from a Mixed Martial Arts master (Djimon Hounsou). As he develops a newfound appreciation for the martial arts form, he will learn not only how to fight, but also how to live. Admission is free, and the film will start at 7 p.m. in Newcomb Theater.

–by anne larimer hart

In case you missed it…

The 80th Academy Awards were staged this past Sunday and, for the most part, awards were doled out in pretty predictable fashion. Daniel Day-Lewis was named Best Actor for his work in There Will Be Blood and Javier Bardem snagged Best Supporting for No Country for Old Men, respectively. No Country also picked up the awards for Best Picture and Best Director (Joel & Ethan Coen). However, Marion Cotillard shocked favorite Julie Christie and picked up Best Actress for her role as singer Edith Piaf in La Vie En Rose. Tilda Swinton, who starred in Michael Clayton, also beat out tough competition to win Best Supporting Actress. Interestingly enough, none of the four acting award winners were American.

–by david replogle

Latest trip to Middle-earth stalled

To those anxiously awaiting the release of the newest film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s beloved The Hobbit, you may need to put your Elven cape back in the attic for the time being. New Line Cinema, which will be co-producing the film with MGM, has encountered a $150 million lawsuit — from Tolkien’s estate. This is the latest hiccup in the production of The Hobbit, which is slated for releases in 2010 and 2011 (there will be two Hobbit films). If production continues, it will start filming in 2009 and will be directed by Guillermo del Toro and produced by Jackson and Fran Walsh.

–by anne larimer hart

It started with Saved by the Bell. During those seemingly innocent Saturday morning reruns, the idea was planted in our impressionable young minds that high school was a magical land full of exciting situations and charming, thoughtful boys. We saw Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and thought that we couldn’t wait to get older so that we could finally be cool.

Charlie Bartlett is the newest film to make the grass seem greener. Even though it may be painful to see that amazing high-school experience you never could have had up on the silver screen, believe me when I say that it’s worth it — because it hurts so good.

After he is expelled from his latest private school for making fake IDs, Charlie Bartlett (Anton Yelchin) enrolls in the local public high school, which is run by the overworked Principal Gardner (Robert Downey Jr.). Charlie catches the eye of the principal’s daughter, Susan (Kat Dennings), but he isn’t having much luck making friends. Charlie’s polite and friendly manner, however, inspires his classmates to open up to him, making Charlie the school’s unofficial psychiatrist. Charlie manages to find a place from himself at the school, dispensing advice, “prescribing” pills and solving problems for the student body.

Considering that the characters face no consequences for their actions, the premise of Charlie Bartlett isn’t very plausible. Fortunately, the film’s cast is more than capable of making it seem believable. The whole film rides on Yelchin’s shoulders, and he carries the weight very well. A lesser actor could have made Charlie’s quest for popularity into some kind of self-involved power grab, but Yelchin brings an open-heartedness to the character that makes Charlie someone the audience wants to succeed. Yelchin’s performance is energetic and hilarious, making the movie what it is. He is definitely someone to watch.

Veteran actors Hope Davis and Downey Jr. should be proud to add Charlie Bartlett to their already impressive resumes. As Charlie’s well-meaning mother, Davis steals every scene she’s in. Downey Jr. isn’t too likeable, but he makes Gardner’s struggle with alcoholism and his dealings with rebelling students credible.

Thanks to these strong performances, the film’s true strength comes from the actors. As I mentioned before, the plot of Charlie Bartlett isn’t exactly realistic. As so many Hollywood productions do, it takes place in a magical world where every teenager is resourceful and motivated. In this alternative universe, students are able to put aside their clique alliances and mobilize to defeat the oppressive adults in the blink of a montage. In reality, most teenagers would rather play Guitar Hero than unite to fight The Man.

Luckily for us, Charlie Bartlett doesn’t live in our world. He lives in that fantasy teen-comedy universe where he can perform for our entertainment. Despite the plot’s unbelievability, Charlie Bartlett is a funny and optimistic film and a pleasant way to spend an afternoon.3

For most people, the word “documentary” does not necessarily bring the word “fun” to mind. And why would it? When I think of documentaries, I think of the boring movies we had to watch for history class that everyone fell asleep to. But do they have to be so boring? Here’s an idea that may sound crazy, but bear with me. Let’s change the subject of these films to groups like The Rolling Stones, Radiohead and Metallica. Doesn’t sound so boring now, does it?

University-sponsored radio station WTJU (91.1 FM) has begun hosting a free Rock and Roll Movie Night every Monday at 8 in Olsson Hall. For you College students, Olsson is in the E-School. Ask an Engineering student if you don’t know where it is.

University grad student and WTJU DJ Nick Rubin is the man behind this initiative. He began this series to promote the station and believes the diversity in the film series reflects the variety of music on WTJU. There’s jazz, rock, alternative – all sorts of genres can be found in both the film series and on WTJU. In addition, Rubin said the series so far has been a very communal experience – it’s the kind of environment where you can have a conversation with the person next to you without bothering others. What films are going to be playing at this series? I’ll preview them for you.

On the Monday we get back from Spring Break, WTJU will show two documentaries about the world of heavy metal. The first film, Heavy Metal Parking Lot, is pretty much 15 minutes of walking around a parking lot outside a 1986 Judas Priest concert. Are there mullets, cheap beer and hilarity? Of course there are! It’s metal, dude. Everything you’d imagine about an ’80s heavy metal fan is manifested in this 15-minute documentary. The second film is the critically acclaimed and controversial Metallica: Some Kind of Monster. This documentary chronicles the experiences of the band from the departure of bassist Jason Newsted to the release of their album St. Anger. The album wasn’t very good, in my opinion, but the documentary is great.

The series will show the Sundance Film Festival Grand Jury prize winning DiG! March 17. The movie tells the story of two ’90s bands — The Brian Jonestown Massacre and The Dandy Warhols. The frontmen of these two bands, Anton Newcombe and Courtney Taylor-Taylor, respectively, start out as friends, but over the years begin to grow apart. Newcombe is a rock ‘n roll purist who lives the rock-star life on drugs and hates “The Man”, while Taylor-Taylor figures out how to navigate the corporate world of the music industry to become successful.

In 1968, when The Rolling Stones were on top of the world, Mick Jagger had the idea to make a TV special and invite a bunch of the band’s famous friends to play on TV with them. The result of this is The Rolling Stones Rock and Roll Circus, which WTJU will be showing March 24. The Rolling Stones, along with The Who, Eric Clapton, John Lennon and Yoko Ono, Jethro Tull and other big-name rock stars perform in a circus tent for an invited audience in an extremely intimate atmosphere. As Nick Rubin put it, “When else are you going to see The Who, John and Yoko and Mick Jagger just hanging out? That could never happen today.”

Rubin also pointed out that with the magnitude of fame on the roster, “There’s no ego. It almost makes them look normal.”

In April the film series will present documentaries on Radiohead, Fugazi, Miles Davis and, of course, Spinal Tap. Rubin and WTJU also are looking to expand the series to include more than documentaries, with films dealing with music such as School of Rock. So, to recap, WTJU’s Rock and Roll Movie Night will be showing in Olsson Hall 120 Mondays at 8. It’s free. Come by yourself, or, even better, come with a group. It’s free. As Rubin put it, “It’s Monday night, what else are you going to be doing?” Did I mention it was free?3

It has been four years since the Virginia swimming and diving program swept the ACC Championship meets, capturing both the men’s and women’s titles in 2004. As the Cavalier men head into the second day of ACC competition in Atlanta, however, the possibility of completely dominating the conference once again is very real; the Virginia women already claimed their 2008 crown last Saturday.

Scoring 800 points during the four days of competition, the Cavalier women defeated North Carolina, the defending champion and this year’s runner-up, by a margin of 228 points.

“We were always confident we could win, but I do think we were a bit surprised by such a big margin,” senior Stephanie Glover said. “I don’t think we expected to dominate to the extent that we did.”

Indeed, by Friday morning, and with still a day and a half of racing left, the team knew that, barring some travesty, it would return home conference champion. At that point, Virginia had nearly three times as many swimmers competing in the final heats as the Tar Heels.

That knowledge took much of the pressure off Virginia. As Glover recalled, the team had a chance to really swim for fun. Meanwhile, Virginia coach Mark Bernardino worked to ensure the women remained focused and did not get carried away by their excitement.

“[Bernardino] outlined our goals and emphasized that every session, the score was still 0-0,” Glover said. “He made sure we wouldn’t get wound up that we were going to win because it would have been so easy to lose focus and fall off at that point.”

Although everyone could predict the final outcome early on, there were still individual titles to be both earned and defended. Freshman Liz Shaw dominated in the 200 fly, breaking the conference record she had set earlier in the dual-meet season with a new time of 1:56.07. The Cavaliers went on to sweep the event, with freshman Claire Crippen and junior Megan Evo placing second and third, respectively.

Although senior Jess Lewis, the 2007 champion in the 200 freestyle, failed to defend her title, she swam the last leg of Virginia’s winning 400 freestyle relay. The foursome, freshman Hannah Davis, Glover, Evo and Lewis, set a new conference record with their winning time of 3:18.69.

“It was the last event of the entire meet,” Lewis said. “We already knew we were going to win ACCs so it was all about swimming our best and going out with a bang for the whole team.”

Being crowned ACC champions was particularly special for the senior class. With Virginia having captured the 2003 and 2004 titles, Lewis, Glover, Amber Bialas and Julie McLaughlin entered their freshman year with high expectations of one day earning the distinction themselves.

“I am beyond thrilled, almost speechless,” Glover said. “Since coming to college it has been my dream to sing the ‘Good Ol’ Song’ at the end of the ACC meet. It is kind of surreal — especially how perfectly the whole weekend went — and I could not have asked for a better ending to my four years here.”

Indeed, from the women’s perspective, the only way to improve on the win would be for the men to capture the 2008 crown as well.

“It would show how much of a team we really are,” Lewis said. “Although we are technically two separate teams, we support each other in and out of the pool everyday. It would show what a quality team Virginia is as a whole.”