Monthly Archives: December 2015

General

My my…

I really, really don’t like to get into politics on this site.  I mean, most authors use their blog to talk about their latest works and promote them.  I do as well, though not as much as I could.  Frankly, I prefer to do so when I have concrete news to tell you regard a new work…more specifically when it nears completion/publication.

Getting back to politics, of late I find the whole thing so damn depressing.  A few years back when George W. Bush was president and pundits were ripping him and his policies, conservative mouthpiece Charles Krauthammer stated that Bush’s opponents were suffering from “Bush derangement syndrome”.  In other words, they could not see past their hatred of the man to more reasonably look at his policies.

However, there is little doubt that many of Bush’s policies, including the disastrous (and arguably justified by outright lies) decision to invade Iraq, the pathetic response to Hurricane Katrina, and the way the economy crashed during his watch, created a sense the critics were more right than “deranged”.

When Mr. Bush left office there were very few -and that goes for today as well- who spoke kindly about his term in office.  Rather than defend him, most in the Republican Party or those who espouse conservative values, chose to ignore his time in office and, instead, focus venom on the current officeholder, Barack Obama.

And yet, if there is any case of a “derangement syndrome”, it would have to be regarding Obama’s term in office.  Say what you will about his time in office but at least we have had a continuously improving economy, health care legislation (good or bad, the fact is that we are one of the last of the first world countries to move in this direction and we should applaud this legislation even as we work to make it better), and no new (idiotic) wars.

Before you start screaming, let me say this: Is all milk and honey?  Absolutely not.  There are many things I’ve felt Mr. Obama should have done but hasn’t.  At times I feel he is too meek and wish he had (yes) George W. Bush’s backbone.

But what bugs me the most about the people who so despise Barack Obama’s presidency is the fact that they don’t realize he, like Bill Clinton before him, are most akin in policy to yesteryear’s Republicans.

Indeed, the patron saint of today’s Republicans, Ronald Reagan, would probably be derided as too leftist to these new conservatives which goes to show just how far the right in this country have moved.

Most worrisome to me is the level of hate they project.  At a family dinner, I was amused to learn, and subsequently mentioned, the news that during a Republican Jewish Coalition speech Republican Presidential contender Ben Carson (no brain surgeon…oh, wait) talked about Hamas yet referred to them, over and over again, as…Hummus.

Yikes.

When I mentioned this, my relative almost jumped down my throat, first saying something to the effect of “well, I hope they (I’m assuming Hamas?) are insulted by being called that” before realizing what Mr. Carson said was yet another boneheaded line (of which there are more) and defending him by absolutely ignoring what he said and focusing instead on just how much Obama has ruined this country.

The wide-eyed hatred spewed was, frankly, startling, as was the lack of specifics as to just how Mr. Obama had ruined the country.

Naturally, I’m not the first person to go to a family function and get involved in a political spat nor will I be the last, but I was surprised at just how much this individual bought into the conservative Obama “derangement”.

As I already mentioned, there most certainly are things to criticize about Mr. Obama’s presidency (as there are for most presidencies), but I don’t and can’t see his failures as being anything on the level of “disastrous.”

There is no moral to this story and there is no clever conclusion to offer except this quote, which I’ll reproduce here from memory and therefore may not be verbatim, regarding the current state of Republican candidates for presidency:

“I hope one day the candidates turn to face the camera and say ‘April Fools!’.”

General

This is weird…and amusing

It also seems like a Monty Python sketch:

2014 Name of the Year Regionals

I suppose we’ll be getting the 2015 nominees soon but, come on, how can you not like people with names such as…

Dr. Loki Skylizard (this is an actual name, though according to the article the man came up with it when he was 9 years old and his parents were crazy free-wheeling enough to allow their children to choose their own names).

and

(name removed at the request of the name-inee)

And I thought my name was bad…

General

December 7

As strong a memory as 9/11 is for those who witnessed the event either live or via television back in 2001, there was another equally shocking event that galvanized the nation and which occurred on December 7th.

Today marks the 74th anniversary of Pearl Harbor Day.  On this day in 1941 the Japanese attacked the U.S. military base on Hawaii in the hopes of critically injuring the U.S. fleet and therefore have free reign on the Atlantic Ocean.

The shocking attack, however, turned out to be Japan’s biggest miscalculation.

Not only did the attack formally bring the U.S. into the Second World War -there were many politicians and prominent personalities railing against joining the war up to that point- but the attack itself, as harrowing as it was, wasn’t as successful as the Japanese hoped it would be.  The U.S. fleet wasn’t crushed and, as history attests, our nation was more than able to contain and eventually defeat the Japanese advance.

Admiral Yamamoto, the architect of the attack, reportedly had second thoughts regarding the action and came to realize it was a big mistake.  One of the most famous quotes linked to him (though there is no hard evidence he said it) is that the attack on Pearl Harbor “Awoke a sleeping giant“.

Way, way back when I was in Hawaii, I made it a point to visit the Arizona Memorial.  As others have noted, there is still oil coming from the sunken ship.  But the experience, in the end, was both haunting and sad.  One immediately realized, upon arriving at the memorial, the number of people lost to this attack as well as those who were soon to be lost in the war that followed.

I haven’t been to New York since 9/11 but I suspect the same feelings must fill visitors to the site of the Twin Towers.

There are great wounds left upon the land and tributes to the same.  The wounds of December 7th and the war that followed, through the passage of time, have led to healing.  Perhaps one day the same can be said for 9/11.

General

A little bit more on self-driving cars…and their effects

Found this fascinating article:

Driverless Cars Could Spell the End of Domestic Flights

What’s fascinating about the article is not only the impact such vehicles would have for domestic flights, but another thing I hadn’t considered: The effect on Hotels and reststops/restaurants along a commonly used route.

The crux of the argument is this: In the future, when we have self-driving/driverless cars, the vehicles may no longer resemble what we commonly think of when we think of cars.

Imagine there is a fleet of “rentable” long distance vehicles (you wouldn’t need to own one of them). You decide one weekend that you’d like to go to, say, a beach some five or more hours drive away.

You pull out your smartphone and call in the vehicle once you have all your and your family’s gear ready.  The vehicle arrives and you put away your suitcases, etc. and get into the driverless car.

What you have inside the car is like a small room.  The car’s seats fold down to make beds and you have a screen (or several!) available for entertainment.  Should the trip be a very long one, you can order your car at night and sleep in while the driverless car takes you to your destination.

You wake up/arrive at your destination refreshed and ready for fun instead of tired of driving all that way.  If you’ve “rented” the car for several days, it will sit waiting for you.  If not, you may use a Hotel and after you’ve had your vacation, call in another car to take you back home.

Which brings us back to the article above.  Why use an airline for relatively short flights when you can use a driverless vehicle?  If, say, you want to take a trip from New York to Atlanta or Atlanta to Miami and are loathe to spent most of the day driving, you might take a flight.

In the driverless future, however, you finish up your work, head home, grab your bags, and call in a driverless car to take you to your destination.  The interior of the car will be comfortable and filled with entertainment or work options.  You are essentially in a bedroom or an office on wheels and don’t have to worry about the trip at all.

No ticket/boarding passes, no checking in luggage, no driving seven plus hours…

On the minus side: Yet more job disruptions.  The Hotels that may lie in the middle of longer trips and service people who need a rest stop will of course be impacted, as will restaurants.  Given our move toward electric cars (which I believe will also happen), there will come a time when gas stations will no longer exist, replaced (perhaps) with charging stations.

As for airlines, they’ll have to contract their services.  Airlines will continue to exist but they will deal with longer trips.  And think about it: What will be considered a “short” trip?

If the theoretical uses of driverless cars are taken to their limit, we might have driverless cars running in specific highway type lanes at better than 100 miles per hour.  Now say you wanted to go from Miami to New York or 1089 miles.  If you had a self-driving vehicle that managed 100 miles (or more!) an hour, you’re looking at a trip of 10 hours.

Let’s return to that vacation scenario I mentioned: You get home, pack your bags, have a meal, and summon a driverless car.  Let’s say you’re in the car by 8 pm.  That means if we have a car capable of speeds of at least 100 miles per hour, theoretically you could be in New York ten hours later, or by 6 am the next day.

Again, you were not driving.  You might well have spent a few hours catching up on movies or listening to music then sleeping in the driverless car’s bed.

When you wake up, you’re in New York and at your destination, fresh and ready to have some fun or get to work or what-have-you.

As I’ve said many times before, the future of the self-driving car is a fascinating one.  Let’s see how it all works out…

Music

Scott Weiland, RIP

Fame is so fleeting.

The other day while looking around Amazon.com I noticed there was a deluxe edition release, to coincide with its 20th anniversary, of Alanis Morrissette’s Jagged Little Pill.

For those who weren’t around at the time, the best description one can make regarding the explosion of sales, interest, and radio play from the songs on that album and at that time was very much akin to the current release of Adele’s 25.  But unlike Adele, Alanis Morissette appeared to come out of nowhere and each new song pulled from that album did just as well, or better, than the last.

Mrs. Morissette continued her musical career -even to this day- but none of her subsequent releases captured the public’s imagination quite like Jagged Little Pill.

That decade, the 1990’s, were also the era of “grunge” rock and Nirvana was arguably at the top of the heap though there were other bands whose style was looked at as in Nirvana’s “vein”.  Some had modest success, others none at all.  One of the bigger bands to emerge during that time and in Nirvana’s wake was Stone Temple Pilots.

Their first album, released in 1992, was Core.  Featuring Scott Weiland on vocals, the album was a hit and featured songs such as Plush…

…and Creep…

Their follow up album, Purple, featured what to me is their absolutely best song, Interstate Love Song.  I recall driving around one day and listening to a local radio station.  It played this song and I was enraptured by it.  I didn’t have the -gasp!- CD at the time but resolved at that moment to buy the album the first chance I had.  When the song reached its end, I was bummed.  I wanted to hear it again!  Incredibly, when the DJ came on after the song was over, he said: “Sorry, I have to hear this again” and proceeded to play the song a second time!  One of the few times in my life a wish was granted…

The group would release a third album in 1995 titled Tiny Music…Songs From The Vatican Gift Shop, which featured songs such as Lady Picture Show…

The band was a great success but bad things were happening behind the scenes.  It was becoming common knowledge that lead singer Scott Weiland had drug problems.  In fact, after the release of that third album the band went on something of a hiatus, reformed, then eventually divorced themselves from Mr. Weiland and re-formed with another singer.  Mr. Weiland would go on to sing for Velvet Revolver and, at the time of his passing, The Wildabouts.

He was only 48 years old.

I go into this history not to diminish Mr. Weiland and the troubles he faced but rather to recall the joy he and his band gave me with those initial three albums.  While I admit I wasn’t that big of a fan of Mr. Weiland’s post-STP work, those three albums worth of songs, and most especially Interstate Love Song, are near and dear to me.

Therefore it’s a great pity to hear that someone who gave you so much joy is gone.  Mr. Wieland was a great talent, this is true, even if he was also faced difficulties in his personal life.  My condolences to his family and friends.

As for me, I’ll go play Interstate Love Song once again.  Then maybe repeat it a few more times.

Rest in Peace, Mr. Weiland.

Movies

Batman v Superman Dawn of Justice Trailer #3

Aired last night (featuring Ben “the bomb” Affleck!):

What has me the most curious are the various comments from people.  While there are those who like what they saw, there is soooo much hate directed at this film…a film that hasn’t even been released yet!

Why is that?

I suppose in part its leftover feelings toward Man of Steel.  I can understand if you were disappointed with the film and, given the fact that the same director returned for this film, you’re pessimistic.

But have the clips/trailers released so far been that bad?

Really?

So I’m thinking maybe we’re dealing with something else.  Way back when there was this whole “Marvel vs. DC” mentality.  There were comic book fans who absolutely refused to read DC comics because Marvel comics were “the best”.  When the current wave of superhero movies came out, there was little doubt the Marvel movies this time around were doing very well for themselves, with some minor exceptions.

During this period of time we’ve had a large assortment of Marvel movies and, from DC, the completed Nolan trilogy of Batman films and Man of Steel.  I enjoyed the Nolan Batman films though I considered them flawed.  I also enjoyed many of the Marvel films and consider Captain America The Winter Soldier one of the absolute best superheroes ever made.  Even as I say this, for the life of me I can’t understand what people found so good about Guardians of the Galaxy (hated that film, sorry!).

What I’m trying to say here is: I take each new movie as it comes, even as I (paradoxically) fear that we may eventually -perhaps very soon- reach a (ahem) supersaturation point.

I have yet to see Man of Steel (though I have the BluRay) and can only judge Batman v Superman based on the trailers/clips.  And based on that…I’m digging what I’ve seen so far.

In this newest trailer, I like the interactions between the characters.  I laughed at the way Lex Luthor gets between Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne and (without him knowing it?) presents what I’m assuming is the plot of the movie in his small soundbite.  Lex notes how he “loves to introduce people” then states of Clark “you wouldn’t want to get into a fight with him”.

You can accuse the writers of going for cheesy, but I’ll be damned if I didn’t find it…fun.

So many people lamented the dour tone of Man of Steel and the seemingly equally dour tone of this movie as presented in the previous trailers and clips.  And now, when a commercial hints to the possibility that the film may have a light/humorous touch as well, they jump on that and say the dialogue is ridiculous.

Has the whole Marvel vs. DC thing spread to the movies as well?  And of those people who express the most vitriol against this not-yet-released film, will their opinion change when they see the entire film?

More importantly, could it change?

For all I know, Batman v Superman might wind up being a terrible film.  But based on the trailers and clips I’ve seen so far, I’m optimistic.

Movies

Phantoms (1998) a (very) belated review

1 Comment

When one thinks of the movie 1998 movie Phantoms, I suspect its more for this very funny self-referential line delivered by one of the movie’s stars, Ben Affleck, in the film Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back:

“Affleck was the bomb in Phantoms“.

Funny stuff and one suspects that Mr. Affleck (given how his character in this scene takes down the critically acclaimed Oscar winning -for him!- film Good Will Hunting just beforehand) doesn’t think all that much of Phantoms and/or his acting in it.

I have only a vague recollection of Phantoms coming out in theaters back in 1998.  I didn’t see it then because I had read the 1983 Dean Koontz novel the movie was based on a couple of years before and found that although Mr. Koontz’s story started off extremely well, its second half/resolution proved a big disappointment.

Why see the movie version of a novel that disappointed you?

I nonetheless caught bits and pieces of the movie on TV in the intervening years and found what I saw neither terribly bad nor incredibly good…even though the film did indeed feature the “bomb” presence of Mr. Affleck.

The other day one of the cable stations was airing Phantoms and I decided to finally sit down and watch the whole damn thing.  By now enough years had passed and my distaste for the novel’s conclusion had evaporated and I could watch the film “fresh”.

And what I saw wasn’t all that bad.  That’s not to say the film, except for that great Ben Affleck quote, is a “forgotten” masterpiece in horror.  It isn’t, but its a decent enough time killer.

The plot of the movie (as with the book) goes like this: Dr. Jennifer Pailey (Joanna Going) brings her younger sister Lisa (Rose McGowan) from L.A. to the quiet and small town of Snowfield, Colorado.  There is tension between the siblings but it is forgotten very quickly when they arrive in town and find that it appears completely deserted.

There is absolutely no one to be seen and when the sisters get to their house, they find a corpse and realize something very sinister is afoot.  Soon, they are joined by some deputies who have just arrived in town (including Mr. Affleck and Liev Schreiber playing a whacked out weirdo Deputy).

Eventually the group is also joined by Dr. Timothy Flyte (Peter O’Toole looking shockingly old and frail…I can’t help but wonder if he was experiencing some health issues while making this film).  Flyte is a disgraced academic scientist who is now forced to write for a “National Enquirer” type rag wherein he espouses theories of a mysterious creature that lives underground and may be responsible for the disappearance of entire cultures/cities/groups of people in the past.

Guess he was on to something, no?

Anyway, Phantoms’ story plays out like a cross between Alien and The Andromeda Strain.  You have your mysterious/unbeatable monster who’s hunting people down one by one and you also have the town whose inhabitants mysteriously perish, along with a “scientific” resolution to the problem.

The movie presents some good shocks but isn’t overwhelmingly gory.  There are also several very effective creepy moments sprinkled throughout.

On the minus side, there are also plenty of logical holes in the story.  One of the bigger ones: Why exactly does the creature leave certain people alive, especially after they’ve served their purpose (I’m trying to dance around SPOILERS)?  And if we are to believe the creature is capable of doing what it does, why would it allow our heroes any movement, especially the ability to find a way to defeat it?  I suppose what I’m really saying is this: Dean Koontz created a creature that was simply too powerful to be defeated in any logical way.

There are also too many characters populating the film.  When an author writes a novel, they have as much time and space as they desire to breathe life into their characters.  Unfortunately, when producing a film, you have a limited amount of time to tell your story and sometimes streamlining characters/events helps to tell a more effective story in the allotted time.  In the case of Phantoms, one of my complaints is that it felt we were dealing with too many characters.  While, I have nothing against either Joanna Going or Rose McGowan or their acting within this film, Phantoms might have been more effective film if it merged their two characters into one.

Anyway, the bottom line is this: While not the greatest horror film in the world, Phantoms is among the better adaptations of Dean Koontz novels.  If you’re in the mood to see Ben “the bomb” Affleck as the hero in a horror film, you’ve certainly come to the right place.

Movies

National Board of Review’s Best Film of 2015 is…

…Mad Max Fury Road?!

When word came out this movie was elected best film of the year (you can read the entire article and find the other award winners here), I was…I don’t know.

I like MMFR.  However, as much as I like it (and you can read my full review of the film here), there were things about it that didn’t work for me and I mentioned them in my original review.  Nonetheless, I came away liking the film and recommending it.  I further noted the best Mad Max film remains Mad Max 2 aka The Road Warrior.  Even to this day I find it hard to sit through that movie’s final chase sequence as it is both incredibly brutal and emotional.  Characters I’ve come to love perish in that final chase and, to prove how damn effective that film was, I can’t bear seeing them die.

That’s a movie that (excuse the language) has you by the balls.

Interestingly, many of the comments following the National Board of Review’s decision to name MMFR the best film of the year have shown there’s a deep schism between the film’s admirers and detractors.  Those who love the film really love the film while those who don’t openly wonder just what it is others saw that was so great in it.

Which means I fall somewhere in the middle.  I’ll be honest: I don’t know if MMFR deserves to be considered the best film of 2015.  On the other hand, I haven’t seen any of the others on their list, which are:

Bridge of Spies
Creed
The Hateful Eight
Inside Out
The Martian
Room
Sicario
Spotlight
Straight Outta Compton

As with all things, one’s feelings for a work of art are deeply personal.  I thought MMFR was a very good film that didn’t quite live up to the high ceiling director George Miller set with Mad Max 2/The Road Warrior.  That doesn’t mean I think MMFR is “bad”.  Nonetheless, I suppose I’m closer to the detractor side than in agreement with the National Board of Review.  MMFR is a very good film but the best film released this year?

I don’t know about that.

C’est la vie.

Movies

Found in Time (2012) a (mildly) belated review

I absolutely love the concept of time travel and feel it makes for some wonderful storytelling.  In fact, of the short stories I’ve written, my favorite is Dreams Do Come True, which happens to be a clever (IMHO!) take on time travel/revenge.

I’ve heard it said never to write a time travel story, that so many people with incredible talent have taken on the subject that the likelihood of you doing something original and/or interesting with a time travel story is virtually nil.

I don’t agree though I can see the point.  There have been an awful lot of time travel stories made and, as with all things, many of them are at best forgettable and at worst terrible.

But when they’re good…

Found in Time (2012) is a very low budget time travel film that, I take it from the closing credits, was made through crowdfunding.  The low budget, for the most part, doesn’t hurt what we see with one major exception (I’ll get to that in a bit).

The plot of the film, in some ways, reminded me of the oddball structure of Terry Gilliam’s Twelve Monkeys, even as the central plot doesn’t come close to Gilliam’s apocalyptic urgency.

The film follows Chris (MacLeod Andrews) an oddball “psychic” vendor who lives in a weird pseudo-New York.  He lives with Jina (Kelly Sullivan) a girlfriend he intends to propose to while working on a street corner next to RJ (Derek Morgan) and, eventually, Ayana (Mina Vesper Gokal).

Psychic vendors, we learn, are people who have a unique talent for figuring out what others need and giving it to them.  RJ, for example, offers cups of coffee that he creates which help people with their current needs, whether it be humility or pep or strength, etc.  Chris, on the other hand, collects oddball items, from small rubber balls to postcards to string to rocks to (significantly) nails and magically knows when people will need these items.

Chris, as it turns out, is also stuck out of time.

His world moves illogically and he may suddenly find himself a day into the future or past.  Further, he eventually finds he can dictate the future based on his actions in the past.

As mentioned, he lives with Jina but, as we eventually find, she isn’t all she appears.  The whole “stuck outside time” problem Chris has sometimes causes him great headaches and he controls this by using drugs.  Jina insists he see a Psychiatrist specializing in people like him and, we find, she works in that field as well.

Is she with him because she genuinely loves him or is he a subject of her studies?  And what happens when Chris discovers he’s about to commit a crime…can he alter his past to allow himself a brighter future?

As I mentioned before, Found In Time is a very low budget affair but the lack of special effects is unimportant.  In fact, the one “effect” the movie does give us, a bizarre safety mask worn by the psychiatrists, is rather laughable and probably should have been discarded as it was truly unnecessary.

Instead, we’re given a film that features a bizarre yet recognizable New York setting and a society and characters that are intriguing enough to propel us through the film.

Is Found In Time a great work?  I don’t think it quite reaches that point.  The story is at times a bit confusing although after the viewer gets his/her bearing they should understand what’s going on but in the end what you’ve witnessed isn’t necessarily earth-shattering.

Still, Found In Time is an intriguing yet small film that dares to explore a well worn topic in a unique and interesting way.  While it may not be a great film, it is good enough to give a try, especially if you’re looking for something different.

Movies

That new Batman v. Superman clip/mini-trailer…

Here it is if you’ve been living in a rock for the past day or so and this is your first foray into the interwebs…

What to make of this?

Well, the look remains good.  I’ve not had any complaints against the look director Zack Snyder is going for.  Indeed, everything I’ve seen so far,including this far longer trailer…

…have looked pretty good.

Further, I’m excited to see, for the first time (ignoring the 1979 TV Legends of Superheroes) on the silver screen Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman –THE three best superheroes ever created which, IMHO, form the cornerstone of almost all superheroes that followed- together at last in a big budget film.

And yet, I have a terrible confession to make considering how much I love the characters: We may be reaching a point of superhero (ahem) supersaturation.

The mini-trailer/teaser presented above is interesting but I get the feeling it represents some kind of “dream” that Batman/Bruce Wayne is having.  From the bits and pieces I’m gathering in the longer trailer, it appears this movie is very much a continuation of the previous one.  In Man of Steel, Superman and General Zod essentially destroy Metropolis and, the critics/fans noted, must have caused the deaths of many thousands of people in their wake.

This movie takes that idea, which was essentially ignored in Man of Steel, and runs with it.  It would appear that Bruce Wayne witnessed the destruction and faced very personal losses when one of his buildings went down.  Needless to say, he isn’t coming into this film looking at Superman as a great savior.

Anyway, so are those small sequences of Batman in chains (come on, Batman would get out of those chains in seconds!) part of a nightmare Bruce Wayne has regarding what will become of Superman?  That he will use his powers to make himself a god (note the security guards who bow before him when he arrives) and therefore he has to be stopped?

Or could it turn out that this film isn’t as dour as it seems and that in reality it is a lighthearted tribute to the 1950’s comic books?  You know, where the “real” plot involves Mister Mxyzptlk and Bat-Mite uniting to mess with our heroes’ heads and having them fight each other before Wonder Woman pulls them out of their alien-made mess?

Nah.

But it sure would freak people out, no?