Brimstone

Well,: according to Jackson's Facebook page, it's a trilogy. What isn't clear is where the material is coming from. How much of the Return of the King notes have they already incorporated into the Hobbit films? Will it essentially be Hobbit I, Hobbit II, then RotK notes, or are they actually stretching the Hobbit into three films? Do they already have the footage, or will they be bringing everyone back to complete it? Also, are they really deciding this five months before the first movie hits theaters?

I recently reread the LOTR books and rewatched the movies. Parts of the adaptations have aged wonderfully; other parts, not so much. I'm wondering what a Hobbit trilogy will give us. I'm concerned we'll wind up with more sprawl than depth.

Wow. That is sick and wrong on quite a few levels. That said, were time travel possible, rich sickos would probably utilize the technology for similar purposes.

I didn't know what to think when Lost brought in time-travel a few years back, but they developed it over a couple of years, and I could see how it worked into the grand scheme of thing: secluded island, mysterious energy source, fringe science--I bought it. The mythical good/evil stuff was dropped on us during the last episode of last season, and they're integrating those elements as they're concluding the entire storyline. It's too much in too short of a time. "Locke played backgammon in the first episode" is not a valid justification; a few black and white tokens over the course of six years is not enough to sell it.

I was also bugged when they saw the four-toed foot at the end of the second season and didn't say anything about it until Season 5. During one of their interminable walks from one side of the island to the other, why couldn't someone have said--just once--something like, "Hey, so, we saw this big statue-thing when we tried to sail around the island. Watch out! Sonic fence!"

The first season was great, the second was really good, the third redeemed itself with its second half, and the fourth and fifth seasons had moments both amazing and filler-ific. Overall, it's been a great show; I'm just disappointed with its endgame.

Are you guys still watching this? Last week was an amazing backstory episode, complete with retro-style opening credits and music--oh, and a healthy amount of reveals. I love the pace of the show: a lot happens during each episode, and some of the biggest mysteries from the first season have been revealed/confirmed before the end of the second.

I have an idea about what's going on . . . but if no one here is watching it, then I'll keep the theory to myself and cry softly into my cat's fur. Until tomorrow. When the show's on.

After which, I'll resume crying into the cat's fur.

Oh, and I watched the first episode of Fringe last night. I don't know how I missed it last year or for most of this one: I think it started off on a bad night, and we didn't have DVR until fairly recently.
Anyway, it is pretty great, and I can already see that He Who Was Denethor will be immensely quotable.

Ben was a throwaway character, and the numbers were just thrown in to give Hurley and Rousseau something to talk about; also, Jack was supposed to die in the first episode, leaving Kate to lead the castaways.

On the other end, the "tailies" were meant to shake up the show--to the point that there is a rumor that Mr. Eko was supposed to fill the role currently being filled by Locke. Much of season 2 was devoted to that group, yet Bernard is the only tailie who is still alive. Niki and Paolo were supposed to be major characters but were rejected by the fans and quickly killed off.

It seems that everything the creators planned has gone wrong, but every time they've run with a happy accident, it's gone well.

It was shown in RealD. I don't remember how much extra we paid, but it was probably a couple of dollars. They asked us to drop our glasses into a recycle bin after the show, but I kept mine; I'm not exactly sure why. And you're right: we were sitting three or four rows from the back, and it looked great. The last 3-D movie I saw was Beowulf, and it didn't do anything for me--but I think that movie had more working against it than where my seat was.

Dammit, though, I'm a gambling man. I'm sure I'll watch it.

I never did see Wonka, though . . . maybe I'd be more wary of this project if I had.

I'm glad I waited until today to see Avatar because it managed to meet all of my expectations. It was the first 3-D movie I've seen that didn't look like a moving ViewMaster image--a series of flat layers. The movie screen looked like a window: the foreground objects and people were fairly ordinary-seeming, but the background went back and back and back--unlike the previews, which seemed to place characters and objects about midway into the theater. I'm not sure which I like better.

It does seem as though Cameron was so wrapped up in the visuals that he nearly forgot about the other aspects of a film. It may be a visual medium, but there is more to it (or should be more to it) than visuals.

The story was simple, but so was that of Star Wars. Where Avatar went wrong is that its innovation stopped at its visual effects. I could have dealt with the "plot"--which was probably pitched as "Cowboys and Indians fight the Vietnam War, only now it's in space"--and even with the we've-been-here-before characterization of the Na'avi if not for the ridiculously cliched Marines, or mercenaries, or whatever they were. I cringed every time the 22nd-Century soldiers made 20th-Century references (such as "We're not in Kansas anymore"). It was just lazy, and yes, every single should-have-been dramatic moment was telegraphed several scenes in advance.

That said, I knew what I was getting myself into, I enjoyed the three hours I spent in the theater, and I'll still tell people to see the movie--especially if all they're into it for is to "see" a movie.

There it is.

Yes, I'm the narrator. I love the grindhouse/B-movie-style narration; glad you do, too.

The bullet effect is coming. I'm not sure if I should layer on '60s-Batman BANG! bursts, or laser or bullet effects. The rubber-band gun didn't make a full appearance in the trailer, but, well, that's what you get when you start off with a $27 budget in a drama account that no one knew existed until they went digging for it (the school has somehow had a drama class, but hasn't staged anything, for fifteen years).

As for the laughing, as may be expected, the blooper reel is bound to be about three times as long and four times as funny as anything in the movie.

I hope you meant "hack" in the most positive way possible. In any case, I'm the best editor they have, so there it is.

Knowing what we had to work with, I tried my hardest to keep it on the "awesomely bad" side rather than the "just plain awful" side. I won't say anything else yet (don't want to spoil it, you know). The final product is bound to be . . . interesting. If it ends up being a minor cult classic, or MST3K-worthy (a boy can dream), then I'll have accomplished something.

It has been a loooooong time since I've posted on here, and what better way to rejoin the boards than with some shameless self-promotion?

Since the last time I posted, I received my teaching license and got a job at a small-town high school. I wound up with a drama class of a whopping six--count them, six--students. We decided that a movie project would be more feasible than a stageplay (considering different schedules, use of extras, etc.) and we wrapped principal photography on Friday. Here's a link to the B-movie-inspired teaser, which I cut today.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXnR7yyvvtU

I'd love to hear your comments and to pass them on to my students. They'd really dig having an international fanbase.

I'm sure you've heard this by now, but here it is:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01222008/news/...dead_916418.htm

When I got it in a text message, I thought it was a joke; alas, it is not.

Sigh. Just when it looked as though an actor from this generation was showing some real talent.

Well, it's already been said, but ... yeah. Way to go.

And thank you both for helping me to make up my mind. I had just sat down in my shop and started thinking, Do I want a cigar tonight? Now I have a reason. Not that I need one.

Anyway, again, congrats. You've managed to create a life and to give her a good set of parents. Way to go.

I hope she enjoys her triple citizenship.

I once heard that if a baby were to continue developing at the same rate as it does the first month or so in utero, then at the time of birth, it would be approximately the size of the sun.

So good luck with that. You know, the whole apocalypse-thing.


An Irish father, American mother, both expats living in New Zealand -- as my dad would say, the baby's not going to know how to dress.

But seriously, folks: congratulations, and I'm glad to finally be able to fully return to the boards -- certain people with a last name similar to Tara's may or may not have spilled the news to me about a month ago. Just maybe, though -- I'm not saying anything definite. It's just nice to be able to post and not risk stealing anyone's thunder.

The Good: Overall, Bloodlines is a fantastic game. The haunted-house quest is very atmospheric and more than a little creepy. Depending on the gender and clan of your character, the game itself changes: some quests become simple, others much more difficult, NPCs friendly to one clan are downright hostile to others, and so on. Because of this, the game is re-playable, which is something I look for in a computer game. It is especially interesting to play as a Malkavian: the captions are in a different font, the dialog choices are goofy as hell (but perceptive and revealing), the background television seems to be speaking to you ...

The Bad: The game was not ready for release when it was released; from what I've gathered, the company that produced it was on the verge of disappearing and threw it into the market with a plethora of game-stopping glitches. Such as: conversations that loop with no end in sight; maximum of 10 save files, so if a friend or, say, your wife is also playing a character, one of your games may simply drop off and disappear forever; and my favorite, the game crashing to the desktop just as you finish one of those levels.

But there is relief: the last time I checked, gamebanshee.org provided links to patches written by the designers of the game, who seem to be intent on "finishing" the game after all. The patches only affect new files, so make sure you patch the shit out of it before playing. The patches stabilize the game, fix some inconsistencies in the dialog and story, diversify the baddies ... anyway. Patch it, play it, enjoy it.

The werewolf "fight" sucks. Not much to do about that one. Sorry.

Just click here; it should speak for itself.

From Wikipedia, RE: The Sarah Connor Chronicles:

"A number of crew from the Terminator films are involved in production though, including Joel Kramer (Stunt Coordinator), Mario Kassar and Andy Vajna (Producers). David Nutter also directed the pilot of and assisted in developing James Cameron's Sci-Fi television show Dark Angel."

So we may not have Cameron, Hamilton, Schwarzenegger, Biehn, or even Furlong (or Stahl, Loken, or Danes), but hey: At least Nutter and Vajna have each other.

That is all.

I'm liking Christian Bale more and more; I really dig Christopher Nolan's work; and Michael Caine is ... well, he's Michael Caine. That said, I thought that the Prestige was good, maybe even quite good, but wasn't the God's gift to cinema that all the reviews made it out to be. On the other hand, I was expecting the Illusionist to be a total piece of shit, and it was actually watchable.

David Bowie as Tesla, though -- that was amazing. Nearly as interesting a casting choice as Bowie as Pontius Pilate in the Last Temptation of Christ, which also featured Willem "Green Goblin" Dafoe as Jesus.

Where was I?

I didn't mind Spider-Man 3. I didn't love it, but then again, I didn't love the other two, either. There were some issues unique to this one (Emo-Peter, cursory treatment of something as significant as an extraterrestrial substance, Venom just happening to drop by the alley in which Marko is hiding, Venom somehow knowing that Mary Jane calls Peter "Tiger," and so on), but most of Spider-Man 3's problems were shared by the first two movies. Among them:

1. Casting/Characterization. You would think that after 40-plus years of Peter Parker being a smartass, we'd be given a smartass Peter Parker -- instead, we're given a morose, woe-is-me moper via Tobey Maguire. About as bad is the casting of Mary Jane. Kirsten Dunst was a fantastically talented preteen when cast in Interview with the Vampire. Unfortunately, that was about the top of the mountain for her. Also, a big part of Mary Jane has always been the sex appeal -- not the daddy-never-supported me girl-next-door persona of the movies, but a mountains-of-red-hair, drop-dead-sexy fox. When she calls Peter "Tiger," Peter should think, "What the hell is she doing with me?"

2. "Comic" Relief. While watching each of the three films, I have winced whenever we get into the Daily Bugle building, particularly when J.K. Simmons appears on-screen. Cigar-chomping and surly. Right. We get it. The corny-as-hell intercom scene in Spider-Man 3 (banging the desk, startled, whenever his secretary buzzes in) drove me nuts. What was Sam Raimi thinking? "Geez, I hope no one forgets about my work on Hercules and Xena. I know! I'll put my brother in the Daily Bugle office, and the publisher will get really worked up when he pitches a completely unrealistic ad campaign! Groovy!"

3. Inverted Priorities. Marvel Comics have succeeded because of their comparative realism -- but in these flicks, this comes at the expense of kick-ass superhero escapism. I'm with Al: the endgame was awesome. Too bad it only accounts for twenty minutes of a two-and-a-half-hour movie.

A final comment to cap off this rant: Why is it that whenever a movie character gets above about ten feet, human speech is replaced by Jurassic Park roar-effects?

Well, that topic got killed quick. Thanks.

I see that 1984 is listed there as well ... as an English major, I am appalled at how many of the listed books that I haven't read (or, in some cases, heard of). That said, and at the sake of killing a sacred cow, the editor in me screams when I read:

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair."

Upwards of fifty words explicating the time, and yet no mention of the day, the month, the year, or what, in fact, is "the best of times" (I vote for 3:17 a.m.).

I currently am too lazy to find my copy of A Clockwork Orange, so that I could transcribe its opening. I was hoping to find it on Amazon with a "Search Inside" feature, but all I found was the cover art of the new paperback edition, which either is freaking brilliant or the worst cover ever. I really can't decide.

Clockwork Orange Cover

I was just staring blankly at my wall, thinking about how some books have really, really great opening lines.

(Yes, "bored" pretty much covers it.)

Sometimes the book fulfills that early promise; more often, though, it doesn't, and the reader feels increasingly suckered by that catchy opening.

I thought I'd attempt to make the boredom contagious and start a list of first lines that grabbed me. I'm not making any value judgments about what follows these lines, just throwing them out there as-is. In many cases, these are the lines that convinced me to buy and/or read the books.

Here are three, in no relevant order:

1. "The building was on fire, and it wasn't my fault." Blood Rites by Jim Butcher
2. "The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed." The Gunslinger by Stephen King
3. "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen." 1984 by George Orwell

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/30/...in2741142.shtml

A few thoughts:

1. Video games aren't exactly known for being physically demanding -- and soon it may not be necessary to twitch our thumbs to play.
2. According to the article, this technology is simultaneously being used to create better golfers and to forge Dark Lords of the Sith.
3. Seriously. Just walking around the office dressed like Darth Vader, attempting to ignite the saber with the Force. And I thought I was a geek.
4. Despite the Star Wars thing, these people have obviously never seen a science-fiction film. This is not going to turn out well.
5. I thought I had another one. Ah well.

On more of the guilty-pleasure front, Jim Butcher's Dresden Files are entertaining. The main character is a private detective and practicing wizard, and he goes up against faeries, werewolves, vampires, and the like throughout the series (I think the latest is the ninth book). He's done, I think, a very good job creating the world, not only working in wizard politics but doing different things with vampires and werewolves than I've seen before. The humor does frequently push the books dangerously close to "cheesy," but I've been enjoying them as respites from all the heavy stuff I have to read for school.

As for Rice: I didn't mind the first book, but couldn't get through Lestat. Ah well. To each their own.

I came across a book in middle school that listed what, in the past, were taken as sure signs of vampirism. In certain Eastern European cultures, being born on Christmas (as I was) makes becoming a vampire a pretty sure thing, with the added bonus that the lucky birthday boy may very well be a natural born werewolf during life. Well, I'm twenty eight now, and I only howl at the moon when I am really, really drunk, and my virtual lack of chest hair seems to rule out the whole werewolf-thing...

I'm kind of looking forward to undeath, though. I'll have to let you guys know what happens.