FRED Entertainment

August 18, 2006

Scrubs Blog: Bill Lawrence Interview

Filed under: Scrubs Blog — UncaScroogeMcD @ 5:34 am

 

scrubsheader1.jpg

-By Ken Plume

A few weeks back, we got the chance to catch up with Scrubs‘ creator/executive producer Bill Lawrence. Not only did we chat about the upcoming 6th (and final?) season, but also about the internet-driven resurrection of his pilot (with Neil Goldman & Garrett Donovan), Nobody’s Watching. Since we spoke, NBC has revived Nobody’s Watching for a series of webisodes that could eventually lead to a slot on the network’s schedule.

————————————————————-

billlawrence.jpgKEN PLUME: I guess you’ve got a new appreciation for the internet now.

BILL LAWRENCE: I do, man. That’s what I’ve been spending all my time on, is trying to re-launch that show.

KP: So, who isn’t talking to you about that story at this point?

LAWRENCE: (laughing) You know what I think?  I think it must be that people are poised, ready, and looking for some way that the internet has a direct effect on television and entertainment, because so many people wanted to do this story – and what was fascinating about it was that everybody had their own specific angle, as if it was holstered up and waiting, you know?

KP: The zeitgeist of it all.

LAWRENCE: Yeah, it’s that, and it’s also people that A) want to write articles about the demise of network television or B), how networks are always behind the trends or C) how testing is really archaic and doesn’t work.

KP: So what’s the biggest agenda that keeps presenting itself?  What’s the one that recurs more often in the conversation?

LAWRENCE: The one that recurs the most out here is people wanting to as always write a slanted article towards how dumb network executives are. And so that’s the minefield I have to be careful about.

KP: That’s a rather awkward thing for you to deal with.

LAWRENCE: Yeah, ’cause it’s always, you know, “These guys don’t have opinions of their own and they pass over shit that’s good.”  So many stories have come at me from this angle about, “Here’s a pilot that – just because of the internet – has now been well reviewed by most of the top critics in the country, and yet the WB put on ‘this’ instead.  How dumb is David Janollari?” And you’re like, “Ha ha.  I don’t know what I want to say about that.”

KP: Well, let’s see, can we talk about this over here?

LAWRENCE: Yeah, I know. Exactly. So that’s always the diciest one.

KP: There’s an irony in the pilot itself.  You could say that the entire future of these two characters was actually created by a forward-thinking network executive.

LAWRENCE: Yeah! (laughing) And by the way, the premise is so… god, I use the word ‘meta’ just ’cause other people have, too. It makes our head spin sometimes, ’cause obviously, you know, when we get to redo the show we’re gonna make the internet, what’s been going on here, a component of it. The only thing that we didn’t do in that original pilot is the power of viral video. The internet doesn’t exist in the pilot that’s on YouTube, and when we get to make it again for network, we’ll probably add that element.

KP: You have professed in the past to not be terribly net savvy…

LAWRENCE: You know what dragged me in, is this. Without a doubt, the best thing for me is working on a comedy staff in which there’s people in here ranging from age 24 to age… to me.

KP: You’re talking like an old man.

LAWRENCE: There you go, exactly. But the reality of comedy rooms right now is that even if you’re an internet neophyte like myself, the day starts with people sharing viral stuff and funny stuff they’ve seen online and printouts of articles that they’ve read, and so even I have gotten to the point that I’m texting people back and forth with my phone. I’ve been dragged kicking and screaming into this century, and I would even say on some level, one of the reasons that we took so long to do this with Nobody’s Watching, is that it felt like serendipity.  You know, because if someone had put Nobody’s Watching on YouTube before I had witnessed first hand how quickly these things spread – like with “Lazy Sunday” and everything like that – I would have never personally had the foresight to call up a publicist, hire them, and say, “Hey, someone put this on YouTube. Can we generate some heat behind it and see what happens?”  So in that sense, I’m glad it didn’t happen until now.

KP: Well, next thing you’ll be talking about them bringing in their rock and roll and their pong and their tab collars…

LAWRENCE: I was dragged kicking and screaming.  You know what the problem was? I gotta tell you, one of the reasons I hid so much from the internet is – and I think that it’s dangerous for like-minded personalities like myself – I’ve gone almost overnight from somebody that, you know, doesn’t spend a lot of time doing that to somebody who’s wife had to go into the family room last night at 4 in the morning and lecture him to stop playing hearts with people.  You know what I mean? Because for an obsessive personality, it’s endless 24-hour entertainment, whether it’s watching shit or actually playing your favorite card game against a bunch of people that you can talk smack as you go against them.  It’s not a healthy thing for me if I want to spend any time with my children.

KP: You’ve pretty much reached 1995, is what you’re saying.

LAWRENCE: Exactly.

KP: But Christa’s pretty net savvy, isn’t she?

LAWRENCE: Christa, my wife, is obsessed – and that’s why it’s available to me. One of our couple arguments is that once the kids are down, her unwinding – especially being a music freak – is all about her updating her library and searching for music.  For me to be such an idiot, we don’t even have a stereo in our house. It’s all played from my wife’s computer.

KP: But that’s just practical.  When you have that many songs, you can’t put them on CD anymore.

LAWRENCE: No, exactly, and the funniest part of it now, too, is that not only is this thing a huge time suck for me, ’cause I’m sucked in, but it’s opened up a whole new topic for my wife and I to argue about, because now that I actually know how to do this and how to use it, I suddenly think I should have a say in what music we play – all the stuff that was working smoothly before because I didn’t know how to do it is now causing semi-serious marital stress!

KP: So you’re getting all uppity now is what you’re saying.

LAWRENCE: Yeah, man, you know – like before, Christa would jokingly say, “Yeah, go ahead, do whatever you want…” and I’d be like, “I don’t know how.”

KP: “Where’s the button?”

LAWRENCE: Exactly.

KP: You talked about hearts – what other addictive things have you found? What’s the website you can’t not hit?

LAWRENCE: You know what the biggest thing for me was, there’s not only YouTube, but there’s another one – you know Break?

KP: Yes.

LAWRENCE: I think one of the scary things about a comedy writer is if you’re successful, you start to get so removed from your real life, and that’s when you start to run into people going, “Hey, I saw this episode of Friends two years ago, you could do a story like that.”

KP: Isn’t that the case of any creative person, where you run the risk of reaching a disconnect?

LAWRENCE: I think it is.  It’s why I was so impressed by Mel Brooks being able to do The Producers. You know, to stay current, ’cause I think there’s a period when he was hip and so funny and then people were like, “Oh, this is getting hacky and dated,” and then he made a comeback, which is so cool.  And for me personally, everything that I’m drawn to – aside from playing hearts and poker and wasting time – is about going to websites and seeing the shit that has grabbed the public zeitgeist, comedy-wise.  Not only is it hysterical, but it’s actually kind of an angle for me of what people are cracking up about now.

KP: Do you find that it’s a constant concern, particularly when you’re on a long running show, that you can become cocooned within that writers’ room, and just producing that show?

LAWRENCE: I think it’s a long-running concern – not so much specifically even with the show, but with what you do for a living… which is, you know, if you’re successful as a comedy writer, the inevitability is you lose touch with reality simply out of financial success, and spending 99% of your time around Hollywood people who, let’s face it, aren’t the rest of the world. I got that lesson once in a really valuable way from a friend of mine. I told him that he should go see the movie The Player, and he had kids at the time, and he had to get a sitter for his night out.  I loved that movie.  And the next day, I played a message on my message machine, and it was just him going, ‘Hey – fuck you.”  And I’m like, “What do you mean? I love that movie!”  He goes, “Look, pass this around to your friends.  Nobody but you guys gives a fuck about movies about movies.  And no one cares about TV shows about TV shows except you.”  And I was thinking about it, and over the years, my favorite show – like, I loved Larry Sanders.  One of my favorite shows on Earth. I really stayed tight with my friends that aren’t in the entertainment industry back on the east coast, and none of them watched it. So the reality is the cocoon thing is much wider than just your show.  It’s that you become so detached in success and in what you do for a living out here. The clichés exist for a reason.  People sitting around at dinners and talking about nothing except who’s in what movie, and how much that movie made and who’s doing what project.  One of the cool things about the internet is it’s immediate gratification on seeing not only what’s going on in the world, if you’re news minded, but what’s making people laugh.  We were talking about shit like that today. I went on Giant Magazine, which has a list of top ten viral videos right now, and there’s one that it’s just a fuckin’ animated banana singing this song, “It’s Peanut Butter and Jelly Time.”  And I now have to play that for half an hour chunks for my kid to dance.  That’s A.  And B, one of the things we got – which is interesting because I watch so much TV – is a show that I would never watch, but the Maury Povich show has this one hilarious clip in which… it’s everything that’s wrong with television, and it’s all over the internet, which is they bring a guy on who a woman claims to be the father of her unborn baby, and they give a DNA test to him.  On the Maury Povich Show, they make a big moment, almost like the Oscars’ “and the winner is,” and it’s basically, “And anyways, we’re here – live – to tell you that you are… not the father.”  And then the guy starts, in an impromptu way, to do this giant exuberant dance as the audience claps for him while his wife is inconsolably crying in the background. And it is so painful, and so painful and funny to watch, that we’re immediately like, “How could we do something that inappropriate on this show?” and trying to figure out how to essentially crib it, you know?

KP: Give an end zone dance to an inappropriate moment?

LAWRENCE: Exactly.  I gotta tell you man, it’s partly… it’s due to you guys.  The first time I realized the power of this stuff, because I obviously was a neophyte, was the boost that Scrubs got when we did that air band thing and Turk dancing, and how quickly it spread, in many ways stemming from the site that you were working on for us, and it just was kind of a shocking to me. We got more feedback on that from people that hadn’t seen the show that were like, “Oh, I’m gonna check this out.” And I’m like, “Wow.” It’s weird… even more than just somebody catching a TV show and the old traditional water cooler word of mouth, you know, one of the most downloaded things on the NBC site was Donald Faison lip-synching and dancing to the Poison song. It went everywhere.

KP: It was a surreal moment getting that phone call shortly after you guys came back in January, from Randall (Winston, executive producer), calling to thank me because he believed that there was a ratings boost, and not the deterioration that NBC thought would be there, because of the blog.

LAWRENCE: I wholeheartedly think so.  The other thing that I’m watching now, with an eye toward business, is the guys at Lost, who I think are really savvy, and are turning this kind of into the “Lost experience.”  You know, ’cause the traditional summer reruns – which keep people hooked on their favorite shows by tuning into the ones they missed and re-watching the ones they loved – is gone. It’s been replaced by reality TV and by people – you know, they don’t need a rerun when they can just purchase it on ITunes.  And the fact that these guys at Lost are making this very savvy effort to keep the show progressing and alive and the interest piqued on the internet is just fantastic to me. And it’s one of those things that really feels like a trend that if TV falls behind it and doesn’t take advantage of it and ends up chasing its tail like it usually does – you know, ’cause television has a long, long, long pattern of trend chasing… “Hey, Friends worked – let’s see seven copies of Friends“… long after people are sick of that. But it seems like, for a change, that TV is catching on when it needs to.

KP: I think it’s the very nature of the way the internet is, in that nothing dies.  There’s work that someone might have done 30 years ago that will suddenly appear as a clip.  It’s like trading baseball cards.  Count yourself lucky you haven’t discovered BitTorrent yet…. which I know some of the guys in your office have.

LAWRENCE: Yes, they have. I feel right now – which is cracking me up – that my wife, computer, and my TIVO are in a weird battle for my attention.

KP: When are you having that showdown?

LAWRENCE: I know, exactly, right?

KP: You know, you have characters now that are gonna be entering that. You have Turk and Carla about to enter that whole arena…

LAWRENCE: Yes.

KP: Maybe now is the time to actually launch the storyline about him setting up that web page.

LAWRENCE: That would be funny…

KP: But there is a power to what happened with Nobody’s Watching. You’ve said in the past that you know who leaked it.

LAWRENCE: Oh yeah… Yeah.

KP: It’s that power that someone can now wield to essentially say, “No, I’m not taking this lying down – I’m gonna go and take it to the people.”

LAWRENCE: Well, there’s two things.  One is that you would not believe, in television especially, that if your show gets rejected – no matter what the quality of it – it has, in the past, been such a brick wall.  And I’ll tell you why – and it’s what’s fascinating – is executives have such a short life span.  They really gotta be protective… you know, they have families, too, and they have to protect their jobs as much as they can. And one of the things that we ran into with Nobody’s Watching that I’ve never experienced before… and when I say this, I’m not being self-aggrandizing, because I made plenty of pilots that, if they turned up on YouTube, it would make me miserable, because it would make me look like I don’t know what I’m doing…

KP: Come on, you’ve got to name one!

LAWRENCE: I’m not gonna happily name the shows that I did that sucked.

KP: Don’t worry, they’re probably already out there.

LAWRENCE: Yeah, I was about to say.  Well, that’s the other good thing, man, is that it’s not… I think eventually, not only me, but other people get burned, too, ’cause it’s not a Shangri-la, man.  People do not pull their punches on the internet.  That’s one of the things I like about it.  But the really weird experience with television is – so we made this pilot, we thought it was really good, we thought it was going on, they flew us out there, all that shit. And when they said no, we turned our attention to using what little clout we had to get them to release it to us so that we could put it on elsewhere, thinking… you know, “What’s fine about this is, yeah, it’s not gonna be on the WB.  Who gives a shit, ’cause so many people have said that they liked this show.  Different networks, network presidents, etc., and the trades said it was the hot pilot, and all that stuff.  This’ll be cool ’cause we’ll just get to put it on whoever wants to pay the most money for it.”  And what we ran into was this kinda archaic system out here that once your show’s been rejected, people are very candid in saying, “Hey man, look, the odds of a TV show succeeding, even if they’re good, are so slim, that as an executive I can’t fail with a TV show that wasn’t even good enough for the WB, because if it does anything other than becomes a hit, I’m gonna look like an idiot.”  So we ran into this weird wall of other networks going, “Yeah, you know, this is a funny show, I might like it, but if I put it on and it doesn’t work, whoever’s going after my job is gonna be saying, ‘This idiot spent millions of dollars on a show that wasn’t even good enough for the WB to pick up.'”  And while it’s understandable, it was very frustrating.  And so, many people – even our agents – reached the point that they were like, “Will you guys stop with this thing, it’s dead.  This is how TV works.”

KP: It’s got the scarlet letter upon it.

LAWRENCE: And so this all happened for us, that once somebody put it on YouTube, our initial reaction was like, “There’s like 4,000 people in the first week.” And we would go on there and we read comments, and it was just nice, slight vindication, because people didn’t have the same notes that the WB had.  They didn’t have the same response and we felt like, “Hey, look, we aren’t idiots.  A lot of people like this.” And then we sat around, and what motivated us to hire a publicity firm was the sole desire of going, “Hey, let’s see if we can find a way that it wouldn’t be stupid for a network president to take a chance on this show.”

KP: A way to save face…

LAWRENCE: Yeah.  Because to tell you the truth, the reason that this archaic testing… you know how they test TV shows – they take it out to the valley and they sequester 40 people that they give $50 to, and ask them leading questions about a show…

KP: So it’s jury duty.

LAWRENCE: There’s no correlation between good testing and success or bad testing and failure. You know, one of the things that all TV writers like to talk about, Seinfeld, was one of the lowest testing pilots ever. One of the highest testing pilots on NBC, the highest testing pilot on NBC that year that Scrubs premiered, was Emeril.  You know, and so you’re like, “Well, if everybody knows it doesn’t correlate to success or failure, why do we do it?” And the reason that they do it is to justify decisions.  You know?

KP: So they have a fall back.

LAWRENCE: “Why’d you put it on?”  “Look at the testing. The testing was through the roof.”  “Hey, this show’s really good – why didn’t you put it on?”  “Well, the testing sucked.  No one’s gonna like it.”  And so we came to the conclusion, if testing really exists for the reason of justifying decisions – giving people the opportunity to save face – stirring up some publicity about this and seeing what reviewers and people really think is such a better form of testing.  And that was our motivation in the first place. I think, “Why wouldn’t the network take their comedy pilots and their drama pilots and put them on a website and let the people decide which are the best ones to put on TV in the fall?”

KP: What were the notes that you got from the WB?

LAWRENCE: Well, here’s the best thing for us. I’ll say it now, even though most of the comments on YouTube were positive, there was a lot of negative critique that’s so much more valuable than the fake testing notes.  Like, the biggest note we got from the WB that was one of the issues that they said for ultimately not picking the show up, was it was way too complicated a premise.  Impossible for the viewing public to understand.  So much so… and by the way, when you’re a writer, all you want to do is get your show on, so you start to believe this.  “Wow, it’s so confusing!”  We didn’t have any money to make a credit sequence.  We were gonna make a credit sequence that explains the entire pilot, to try and calm the network’s fears – so, like, “Look!  Every week in the credits we explain to everybody how this show works!”  And we didn’t have the money to do it, so if you look at that bootlegged copy on YouTube, after the cold open there’s this black card that says, “Very cool explanatory credit sequence to come later.”  And then we looked through the 9,000 some odd… and by the way, we ready every one of them… You know, the 9,000 some odd critiques and comments on YouTube, and not one said, “Wow, this is too confusing.  I didn’t understand it.”

KP: In fact, they probably all thought the title card was a joke.

LAWRENCE: Yeah.  And nobody had any problem following it. In fact, I would even say, to take it further, that testing 50 people that are actually willing to give up their Friday or Saturday to sit in a room in the Valley for 50 bucks and talk about a TV show – I don’t think that’s your viewing audience.  I think testing from people that have taken the time to download something and watch 27 minutes of it and then talk about it is so much more true and valuable that we actually… to be candid, there’s a couple of negative through lines… there’s a couple of negative criticisms that we saw in numerous comments, even from people that liked the show, that actually meant something to us, and when we get to do this again we’re gonna address them.  The main one being, if you read a lot of them, even the people that really liked the show responded to the kind of loose style, in that it seemed kind of improvy and, like The Office, that people were not really acting and ad-libbing, and they all responded negatively to the one or two little sections that seemed very overly scripted like a sitcom. And that makes some sense.  It’s supposed to be a hip, edgy, fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants show, and when we redo this pilot, we’re gonna take those scenes and make them less scripted and let the actors riff with the audience more, and kind of not be in that traditional sitcom dialogue format.

KP: If there’s one criticism that I had of it, it was exactly that.  I loved the premise, it just it seemed almost like it was too similar to what you were making fun of at the beginning, with According to Jim, or those type of shows.

LAWRENCE: Yeah.

KP: I mean, Larry Sanders really is your perfect model for that in-front-of-the-camera sort of thing, in that you have these two different worlds that are the same world.

LAWRENCE: Yeah.

KP: And Nobody’s Watching didn’t seem like it had that looseness.

LAWRENCE: And there’s two scenes in particular… and the amazing thing is, when you change a pilot – you change like one, two big things and the whole thing changes.  And for us, there’s two big scenes that were on the soundstage shot multi-camera style that were very scripted, and that the guys… ’cause if you look at some of the scenes that we shot later and the single camera stuff where we let all the actors riff, and the scenes that the actors are obviously ad-libbing, turning to the audience and saying, you know, screaming “You tell me” and stuff like that…  That stuff really works, and the scenes that seem incredibly like, “Wow, that could have been taken from any sitcom…” will go away.

KP: Honestly, one of the things I was really hoping for, a show that I loved and I hoped this would sort of be a new spin on that, was It’s Gary Shandling’s Show. 

LAWRENCE: Yeah.

KP: It’s so close, yet different from that – but still using the hip awareness of the fact that anyone can be a TV star today.

LAWRENCE: Yeah. Which is true, by the way.

KP: Again, look at YouTube. Anyone can be a sensation.

LAWRENCE: Not only that, but that most reality shows are comedies. If you watch the most successful reality shows – when people say, “Wow, there’s a great cast on Survivor…” translation: “There’s a crazy guy and the dynamic with him and the other people and the dialogue they have, while very real, is incredibly funny.”  Because otherwise no one’s interested.

KP: I can imagine, in a future episode, meeting the mad editor who has to put together this mess for air.

LAWRENCE: Oh, without a doubt.

KP: That was the only thing that struck me in the thing, was that it just seemed very mannered, wen obviously you could tell the actors were waiting to break out, and you, the writers, were trying to break out.

LAWRENCE: Yeah. But one of the cool things about this, too, is I find that that information that I got from real people responding is so much more valuable than the bullshit stuff. If you read network testing, it’s “He’s not handsome enough.”  “I don’t like her hair.”  “It’s complicated.” It’s all bullshit, you know, and it’s stuff that real TV viewers don’t care about.

KP: Also, there’s performance anxiety, I’m sure, for people who are paid 50 bucks and think “Oh, well, I can have an opinion on everything. I might as well nitpick.”

LAWRENCE: There’s also, you know – I mean, this is me being a biased TV producer – the other thing that people traditionally use testing for is you get in a standoff with the network… “I think that this actor sucks,” and I say, “I think this actor’s really good,” and then they’ll go to testing, and if you’re there, the guy will go, “Yeah, but isn’t this actor not great when it comes to the emotional stuff?”  Well, basically they ask questions to support the things that they already believe.  And it turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

KP: What kind of criticism is more damaging to you?  What really is like a knife to you?

LAWRENCE: Oh shit… You know what? I think I’ve reached the point that very specific criticism doesn’t… it’s really hard for me, ’cause the stuff doesn’t really hurt my feelings anymore.  I think the only thing that could really get me is if something that I believed had merit – like I never thought Nobody’s Watching was perfect, but man, I will gladly put it up next to every single new show that was picked up that year, comedies… none of which survived, mind you.  Except maybe the War at Home.

KP: I think that’s walking wounded.

LAWRENCE: Yeah, and I’d be confident that people like yourself, even if they had issues with it, would go, “Well, that’s one of the best of those.”

KP: Well that’s the other thing about the mentality today, is that there’s not even time allowed for a show to evolve.

LAWRENCE: Not only that – what we’re talking about is even before that, you know, when I was talking about the death of a sitcom – this is what’s amazing to me…  As a writer, if you do a play, you workshop it – you’ll take it to a regional place, you’ll write new scenes, you’ll add a new act break, you’ll change dialogue, you keep going, and then when it’s ready, you fuckin’ put it on Broadway. You know what I mean?

KP: Right.

LAWRENCE: A pilot… and even movies now, by the way, ’cause I was just doing this with one… You’ll rewrite it, you’ll rewrite it, you’ll cast it, you’ll shoot it.  If it doesn’t work, they’ll put more money into it and go shoot new endings and a new thing and a new this and a new that.  With TV shows, you make it – and say that the network, for whatever reason, goes, “You know what? This pilot doesn’t really work for us.”  There’s never an opportunity to go next year, “Hey, remember that thing last year that I did that no one’s ever seen? You liked this actor, you liked a lot about it, you thought this worked.  I have been continuing to work on this and I think it’s a lot better now, and would like to have that be my show.”  You will never get a yes.  The answer is always, “Yeah, that’s dead.”  And it’s amazing to me that they would rather spend their money on, instead, “Why don’t you give us a new idea that we haven’t seen the actors, and we haven’t seen anything, and we don’t know how it’s gonna turn out at all.”  I would think that the one that they thought had some good stuff about it is much further along and it has a better shot at being great, you know what I mean?

KP: Right – if you’re gonna give a shot anyway, why not let be the one that already has a good chunk of work done?

LAWRENCE: Yeah.  I mean, I’m looking at this with Nobody’s Watching.  Here’s an example: NBC studios signed both Neil & Garrett, the guys that wrote it with me, and one of the lead actors of it, to holding deals because they liked them so much from this pilot. And so my attitude is like, “If you guys like these guys so much from this show that didn’t get on the WB, but you personally liked it so much that you’re gonna invest millions of dollars in these three guys to work for your company from now on, why wouldn’t you want us to continue working on this show that made such a great impression on you?”  “Well, ’cause the WB rejected it.” It’s very weird, man, and that was all before the internet helped us out.

KP: So what are you hearing now, post-internet?

LAWRENCE: Well, I’m gonna get this show on television, you know?  We’ll find out if it’s on NBC on Thursday.  Kevin Riley’s coming back from vacation.  He’s been very supportive and cool and keeps moving the meeting up as more and more press happens.  We keep getting calls going, “Okay, instead of next week, it’s now the day I get back.” And the funniest thing – because I’ve pitched tons of TV shows before – I’m going to the network president on Thursday to talk about whether or not we’re going to do this show, but I’m going to be late because I’m on CNN Showbiz Tonight and then Neil is gonna have to leave early ’cause he and the cast are on the Carson Daley show.  Which is hysterical to me. 

KP: At this point, just to get the original cast, you need a character death on Prison Break.

LAWRENCE: Exactly – but you know what?  To me, like when you talk about really expanding… ’cause I simply held back in some things creatively because we had been convinced it’s so confusing.  But fuck that, you know? I mean, I wouldn’t change the character, I’d keep him in the pilot.  Anybody that’s on a show is allowed to do three guest spots.  I’ll have him do his three guest spots on this show, and if we can’t work something out with Prison Break or his character hasn’t died or if that show’s still on, then instead of Jeff Tucker it’ll be Kevin Smiley.  They’ll hire somebody new. It’ll get promoted upwards.

KP: In fact, that can be your first internet tie-in – Find The New Friend.

LAWRENCE: Exactly….

KP: Send in your YouTube videos…

LAWRENCE: Without a doubt.  If you’re really gonna expand the premise, I think you gotta just look at it that as long as those two guys that are buddies in real life are the core of this and this is really just a buddy show, who gives a shit about all that other stuff.  I think that’s part of the fun – letting people help us make creative decisions.

KP: And the existing pilot is essentially a pilot for whatever the next iteration is.

LAWRENCE: Yeah, without a doubt.

KP: It’s not gospel at this point…

LAWRENCE: No, not at all.

KP: When you look at what’s possible with the internet now, has it changed your thinking in how you approach work?

LAWRENCE: It has, because I think that… and I was guilty of this as well, but I think that network television has been too many years of people crossing their fingers and going, “Gosh, man, I hope the networks get huge again.”  And A, that’s not gonna happen.  My father has 160 channels.  That’s one sign.  The other sign is every young kid in my family – they don’t even have the same background. Like, when I was a kid, all I remember was the three big networks.  You’re watching CBS on Monday nights.  Kids don’t even have a concept of the big networks.  The younger people, if the show they like is on Discovery, they’re watching Discovery. If it’s on Comedy Central, they’re watching Comedy Central.  They don’t differentiate between network TV and their 150 channels.

KP: It’s just numbers on the box…

LAWRENCE: Right.  And because of that, the cool thing about there being so many different outlets for media is that there’s so many different opportunities for creators and people and writers and actors and performers to do stuff. The down side is that the burden of getting people to check out your show initially, which is 90% of the battle.  Your show’s survival is on two things – people coming to it initially, and then they stay based on quality.  In the old days of network TV, getting people to come to your show initially was by however well they promoted it on their own network – “Hey, Must See Tuesdays on NBC!”  That’s over.

KP: You can’t assume that anyone’s watching the network to see those.

LAWRENCE:  You can’t.  And you can’t assume that, with so many options, that there’s any synergy left between, “Hey, the people that like Scrubs are also gonna like this weird show on another night and we’ll promote Scrubs then and that’ll make them watch…” It doesn’t work that way anymore.

KP: But that’s where the net steps in.

LAWRENCE: Yes.  That’s also a clear example of why the most successful promotion for Scrubs and the most successful lead in for Scrubs was when we aired back-to-back episodes.  You know, because the only correlation that worked was, “Hey, look, people that like Scrubs also like Scrubs.”

KP: Took them how many years – five years to figure that out?  I have to admit, I was quite happy about that… because I had run up against a lot of problems trying to pitch the idea of doing the Scrubs blog, internally.

LAWRENCE: Yes.

KP: So it was kind of wing and a prayer, believing it would work, in spite of the company going “Well, whatever.  Whatever you want to do. We’re not gonna pay you anything for it.”  So it was a labor of love. Luckily, you latched onto it and everyone there, like gangbusters, latched onto it.  And I hope everyone had a good time doing it.

LAWRENCE: You were so cool, by the way.

KP: I’m glad it took off the way it did.  One of the big things, when you talk about maintaining a through line, was to try and get a clutch of material to carry through the summer. We’ve been running the audio commentaries that you guys did pre-break, to keep Scrubs out there.  To keep a through line where people see that the show is not gone in any way.

LAWRENCE: This is gonna sound delinquent, but we actually… the meeting we had right before lunch, and why I was a little late on the phone call, was partly ’cause I saw that I was talking to you today – and it was me taking the blame – but I sat down with the writing staff and said, “Guys, I’ve slightly dropped the ball, because I’ve concentrated so much both online and publicity-wise on the presence of Nobody’s Watching, that we had a big rally cry today to make sure that we don’t drop the ball on keeping Scrubs alive for the next few months ’til it comes back on TV.” Not only that, we hired a group of young savvy people… I mean really young for us, early 20s, that are so into this and came to the show with such quirky ideas about stuff, that we’re also planning on coming up with some fun content, too, even if it’s just… it’s very weird.  Part of the thing that we’re taking advantage of here, Ken, is that when I first started, you just had to be funny in college and you would come out here and get a comedy writing job. And now there’s so few comedy writing jobs… and all you would do is write a spec script and go be funny in a meeting and hopefully get work.  But now, these kids that I was hiring, they all have their own things on MySpace, they all make their own short films, they all trade these videos that they do. They’re so active in this, it’s one of the reasons we brought them into it.

KP: When you look at it, on the Scrubs blog side of it, what do you see as the major push a year into it, as what to what we should concentrate on?

LAWRENCE: For me right now, you know, the biggest thing that we’re gonna do is… this is gonna sound too general, ’cause I’m gonna try and sound too clever… I just want to make sure that everybody knows A, you know, that the show’s still alive, and we’re still aggressive about it, and then B, the thing that we’re considering here is really selling that this is the last year. 

KP: Right.

LAWRENCE: You know, because, quite honestly, if that changed, I think fans would be happy, but we’re going in towards the writing staff thinking about “It’s the last year,” and so because of that, a lot of the stuff that we’re talking about ranges from how should we end this stuff up, you know? How does this show finish, where are we taking these characters – to be a retrospective thing, since it’s the last year… What were our favorite moments? What were our favorite jokes? What were our favorite things… you know what I mean?  And I think that’s kind of… I think it’s a thing that the people that are big enough fans to go onto the blog and check it out will respond to.

KP: The thing is, when you look at that, it’s gonna be an impossible task to try and reassemble the group after the fact.

LAWRENCE: Yeah.

KP: But while everyone’s there, that’s the time to really grab all the stuff, grab all the recollections…

LAWRENCE: And that’s what I thought would be cool, because if you notice, we got the idea ’cause sometimes shows that are doing DVDs way after the fact… like, Seinfeld ran into this big issue, that the DVDs became big after they were gone, and then they were trying to get all these people come back and talk about what moments they loved, and it was tough because they were already so removed from it.

KP: Right.  You don’t get that visceral impact.

LAWRENCE: Yeah. For us, with this immediate internet presence… to me, to be shooting little videos of cast members talking about – “Is it weird that this might be the start to the last year?  How does it make you feel going into this?  How are you…” I think that’s kind of cool to actually watch that as it happens, rather than in the past, where the only thing that you ever see is that cheesy Entertainment Tonight piece with people cutting a fake cake and saying goodbye and crying.

KP: And the days of a photo-op like that are even past.

LAWRENCE: Yeah.

KP: The internet takes the need for that away.

LAWRENCE: Without a doubt. And I’m also gonna be… and I didn’t do this last year, which is last year the two staff writers I said, “You guys are gonna do blogs on what it’s like to start here and stuff like that.”  And I left it at that, I think in part because, quite honestly Ken, I didn’t realize the power of all this stuff.  And this year, with the three new people I hired, what I’m gonna do is essentially make it their job… not that writing a blog is their job, but the creative aspect of this is the job and I’m gonna hold them accountable for it. I’m gonna make it the job for these kids, which’ll be great.

KP: I’m there…

LAWRENCE: Yeah, but you don’t have to be this way, because one of the things I hope you can tell, is not empty words, but I’ve realized not only by my recent thing with Nobody’s Watching, ultimately by what I think the boost for the show was from you guys, the value of this, and I got a track record completely from a self-centered place, and when I think something’s incredibly valuable, I pounce on it. You can see it happening right now with how much publicity and how much shit we’re doing with Nobody’s Watching.  I can do the same with this.

KP: And as you know, whatever you guys need, don’t hesitate to ask.

LAWRENCE: Awesome.

Melonpool Quickcast #9: Twilight at 20,000 Feet?

Filed under: Melonpool Quickcast — admin @ 5:03 am

melonpool.gif

-By Steve Troop

-By Steve Troop
Based on Steve Troop’s classic webcomic of the same name, the Melonpool Quickcast features puppet versions of Troop’s alien cast, who are desperately trying to make heads or tails out of Earth culture.

Melonpool9Prev

Submitted for your approval: An alien and his dog take a seemingly insignificant airplane voyage to a destination known… as the Twilight Zone… or is it?

Check out the Nightgig Gigcast featuring behind-the-scenes info as well as about the future of these Quickcasts!

Don’t forget to comment on this and other Melonpool Quickcasts over at the official Melonpool Quickcast Forum!

Mayberry Avatar Ralph Avatar Sam Avatar Sammy Avatar Roberta Avatar

Melonpool Quickcast #9: Twilight at 20,000 Feet?:

  • Large (560 x 420 – QuickTime – 20 MB)
  • Small (320 x 240 – QuickTime – 10 MB)

Take Me Home Blog #6 – WHY YOU AIN’T HAPPY (if you are, disregard this)

Filed under: Take Me Home Blog — UncaScroogeMcD @ 4:36 am

 

takemehomeheader.jpg

  

PROLOGUE: EUROPE, 1300’s.
We knew our place, didn’t we? You had your kings, your peasants, butchers, blacksmiths. It was all pretty cut and dry. Then along came that blasted Renaissance and ruined everything! And you know what, in my opinion, was one of it’s most appalling effects? The belief that we can be MORE! We don’t have to bake bread just because we’re the baker’s son! Nay! We can be a blacksmith if we want to! We have that freedom! And thus, THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS was born!! Little did we realize that freedom, as it was being presented to us, came with quite a few constraints.

HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA. PRESENT.
The epicenter of that noble pursuit. People come to this, the second largest city in the United States, to pursue their passions. Actors, musicians, drag queens. Following dreams (what is America without them?). Here, there is no limit to happiness.

AND HEREIN LIES THE PROBLEM.
Here’s what they don’t tell you on the “Freedom: Hell Yeah!” brochure: everyone ELSE gets their freedom, too; they can be a butcher, a blacksmith. And pretty soon millions of people are sharing your same dream. Applying for the same job. And if you’re going to have even a shot at that job, you’d better be great.

AMBITION MAKES ME LOOK PRETTY UGLY.
The majority of our twenties and thirties are spent focusing on this confounding need to get ahead. I myself go out for over a hundred acting roles every year. I get three. At best. And that’s considered pretty good, by Hollywood standards. But to be quite honest, it’s not enough for me. I want more. I am, afterall, a red-blooded Amer.I.CAN. There is no ceiling in my neverending quest for MORE. If I just had a little MORE! What endless joy! I could finally be content, just like that one guy. What’s his name? Oh, yeah:

MEL GIBSON. ARRESTED FOR DUI IN MALIBU, CA.
Okay, maybe the guy’s just off his rocker. Maybe he’s simply an anti-semitic drunk (as if that’s “simple”). Either way, I think we owe Mel a big round of applause. We now have a glimpse of what happens when you finally have EVERYTHING. You’ve seen the mug shot. For whatever reason, Mel got trashed, made some ethnic slurs, spouted some threats to a man in uniform, and got arrested. In one night, he managed to do what took Mr. Cruise months to show the world: that at the top, at the very pinnacle of “success” lies MORE unrest, more unhappiness. It’s side effects are a keen self-delusion and, in Mel’s case, chemical dependency. Is this what we’re pursuing?

I AM NOT A FAILURE. EXCEPT IN MY OWN WEAK HEART.
I bring this up, possibly, to quell the recent disappontment I’ve been facing. Losing our investors on “Take Me Home” was difficult, but I think it’s best to see it as only a process. It is not the end, it is not the beginning. If we’re going to continue with this film, which we most certainly are, I can’t let the lows OR the highs get the best of me.

I expected things to happen quickly for this movie. Because they have not, I have a choice: 1. I can beat myself up for not pursuing it hard enough, OR
2. I can accept wherever we are in the process.

Why is #2 so hard to achieve? Are we simply wired to want MORE, NOW? I’m not sure. But to make this project simply about the end result (the finished film) would be a shame. There’s too much living to be done in the meantime.

-Sam Jaeger

jaeger.jpg

Weekend Shopping Guide 8/18/06: The Big Giant Head

Filed under: Shopping Guides — UncaScroogeMcD @ 4:15 am

weekendshopping.jpg

The weekend’s here. You’ve just been paid, and it’s burning a hole in your pocket. What’s a pop culture geek to do? In hopes of steering you in the right direction to blow some of that hard-earned cash, it’s time for the Quick Stop Weekend Shopping Guide – your spotlight on the things you didn’t even know you wanted…

As Vicki Dubcek gives birth to the Big Giant Head’s big alien baby, the absentee father (William Shatner) makes a return visit as the Solomons try and sort out exactly how to deal with their leader, the deadbeat dad. The 5th season of 3rd Rock From The Sun (Anchor Bay, Not Rated, DVD-$39.98 SRP) is a comedic cornucopia, and is one of those rare comedies that holds up tremendously well as the years go by, never betraying its age. I can watch John Lithgow mug all day long… And considering I had a marathon viewing of this box set in one sitting, I did. Sadly, all we get this go round is bloopers – hopefully the next set, the show’s final season, will pull out all the stops.

Amazing to think, but it’s been nearly 5 years since The Kids in the Hall began coming out on DVD, but with the release of the show’s 5th season (A&E, Not Rated, DVD-$59.95 SRP), it all comes to an end. Even though the Kids were beginning to drift apart, you can see very little of the stress in the episodes themselves. The 4-disc set contains the final 21 episodes, and a best-of compilation featuring an audio commentary from the Kids. You can purchase the set directly from www.kidsinthehall.com.

As much as I love most of the Hanna-Barbera cartoons of the 60’s and their classic theme songs, my absolute favorite is Hong Kong Phooey (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$26.98 SRP), the number one super guy who” getting his complete 31-episode on DVD, complete with a retrospective documentary, commentary on a trio of episodes, and a complete storyboard from the episode “The Batty Bank Gang.” Also getting the complete series treatment is Magilla Gorilla (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$44.98 SRP), which is packed with bonus material including rare footage of Hoyt Curtain and Bill Hanna performing the theme song, an interactive interview gallery, and the archival behind-the-scenes special Here Comes a Star. Sadly, though, no one in quality control thought to actually present the episodes uncut (they’re missing the classic opening and closing sequences) and the print quality is atrocious. Here’s hoping for a disc exchange in the very near future.

For me, the eighth season of The Simpsons (Fox, Not Rated, DVD-$49.98 SRP) marks the end of the show’s golden period and the onset of its decline. It was the last season to feature truly classic episodes (in particular, the introduction of Homer’s archenemy, Frank Grimes). In the seasons after this, the writing staff would dip into the derivative well, and our favorite family would become merely walking jokes – as opposed to the surprisingly deep characters that had been developed in the early years. As usual, this latest set is packed with commentaries for every episode, deleted scenes, illustrated commentaries, promos, a featurette on the Simpsons house, an introduction from Matt Groening, and more.

Every generation has its own delightfully oddball kiddie show that appeals to both tykes and adults – the 50’s had Beany & Cecil, the 60’s has Soupy Sales, the 70’s had the Krofft’s, the 80’s had Pee Wee’s Playhouse, and the 90’s had The Weird Al Show (Shout Factory, Not Rated, DVD-$34.98 SRP). Hosted by Weird Al Yankovic, it definitely owes much of its whacked-out sensibility to its predecessors, but sadly lasted on 13 episodes –all of which are collected in this 3-disc et, featuring commentary from Weird Al, animated storyboards, galleries, a look at the development of the “Fatman” cartoon, and more guest stars (including Barenaked Ladies, Dick Clark, Patton Oswalt, Michael McKean, Fred Willard, just to name a few) than you can shake a stick at.

Much in the same historical vein as Deadwood, HBO’s Rome (HBO, Not Rated, DVD-$99.98 SRP) dramatizes the rise of Caesar in pre-Empire Rome through the eyes of soldiers Lucious Vorenus and Titus Pullo, beginning with a victorious Rome post-the conquering of Gaul that is already beginning to show cracks in the firmament of the once-great Republic. A riveting story, I can only hope we get a second season. In addition to all 12 episodes, the 6-disc set features 8 audio commentaries, an interactive onscreen historical guide, a featurette on episode 11’s gladiator sequence, a featurette on episode 10’s triumphant arrival of Caesar, a behind-the-scenes featurette, a look at the culture of ancient Rome, a character guide, and more.

First off, let me say that I am very, very happy with the fact that we have finally gotten a comprehensive edition of Apocalypse Now, containing both the original cut as well as 2001’s Redux version. The 2-disc Apocalypse Now: The Complete Dossier (Paramount, Not Rated, DVD-$19.99 SRP) also features an audio commentary on both cuts from Francis Coppola, the lost “Monkey Sampon” scene, deleted scenes, an outtake of Brando reading the entirety of T.S. Eliot’s “The Hollow Men”, featurettes on the sound design and filmmaking, a cast member reunion, and more. What disappoints me, though, is we still do not get the wonderful documentary Heart of Darkness, shot during production by Coppola’s wife. A terrible loss to an otherwise great release.

You know, even the lackluster episodes of The Jeffersons still make me laugh heartily, which I think owes more to growing up with reruns of the show on my local DC station than the quality of some of the scripts in later seasons, particularly the show’s fifth (Sony, Not Rated, DVD-$29.95 SRP). With The Jeffersons, though, you had a cast that could spin comedy gold out of any line, and that went for everyone from Sherman Hemsley and Isabel Sanford to Marla Gibbs and Roxie Roker… and Franklin Cover and Paul Benedict, too). The 3-disc set features all 24 episodes, but still no bonus features to be had.

Warner’s fast and furious catalogue releases are getting to the point of being overwhelming, but there’s no denying that their level of quality has remained consistently good, featuring nice transfers and an unbelievable amount of bonus materials, including commentaries, vintage shorts, classic Warner cartoons, and more. The two latest screen icons to get their own “Signature Collection” are James Stewart and Ronald Reagan (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$49.98 SRP each). The Reagan collection features Kings Row, The Hasty Heart, Storm warning, The Winning Team, and Knute Rockne All American (which gave America Reagan’s nickname, “The Gipper”). The Stewart set packs six flicks in, including The Spirit of St. Louis, The FBI Story, The Naked Spur, The Stratton Story, The Cheyenne Social Club, and Firecreek.

I’m a sucker for documentaries about obscure events in American history, and I definitely think the subject of The March of The Bonus Army (PBS, Not Rated, DVD-$14.99 SRP) qualifies as such, as it focuses on the march of over 45,000 World War I veterans on Washington in 1932, who sought the “bonus” promised them for their military service, and set up a shanty-town near the Capitol. Eventually refusing their demand, they were driven out of Washington at sword point by General Douglas MacArthur and his officers Dwight Eisenhower and George Patton, and their camp was literally burned to the ground. In 1936, Congress finally paid the bonus – but not after a sad chapter in U.S. history worth knowing about.

Is it PC? Not in the least, but I still love Hogan’s Heroes, the fourth season of which has hit those little shiny spinny things (Paramount, Not Rated, DVD-$38.99 SRP). Colonel Hogan and his ragtag band of POWs continue to fight the good fight behind enemy lines and under the monocled eye of Colonel Klink (the always wonderful Werner Klemperer). The 4-disc set features all 26 episodes.

Featuring amazing archival performances, rare interviews, obscure footage, and critical analysis of their early years, Origin of the Species: Led Zeppelin – A Critical Review (Sexy Intellectual, Not Rated, DVD-$19.95 SRP) is a must have for Zep fans.

Although never a huge hit, Grounded For Life (Anchor Bay, Not Rated, DVD-$19.98 SRP) was a quirky, dependable sitcom that deserved more attention and a longer run, as it managed to meld the sensibilities of both Roseanne and 3rd Rock From The Sun into a beautiful amalgam that rarely disappointed (and Donal Logue was a great lead as the patriarch of the family Finnerty). The 2-disc 3rd season set features all 13 episodes (including 2 that never aired on The WB), plus audio commentaries on 6 episodes.

Okay, is it odd that, while checking out the complete fourth season of Full House (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$29.98 SRP), I couldn’t take my eyes off Dave Coulier’s mullet? It’s almost like it had a life of its own. Didn’t anyone ever tell him that he wasn’t a man who could pull off a mullet (few can, save for Swayze in Road House. Creepy… And I feel dirty for being mesmerized by its tacky power.

One by one, all of the shows attempting to capitalize on Lost‘s sci-fi mystery niche met a similar fate last season, including Surface (Universal, Not Rated, DVD-$49.98 SRP). Lake Bell stars as oceanographer Laura Daugherty, whose discovery of a massive creature lurking in the ocean depths leads her on a worldwide chase that may have deeper ramifications than just uncovering a new species… Or it would have, if the show had lasted longer than 15 episodes – all of which are featured on this 4-disc set, which includes deleted scene and a look at the special effects.

Remington Steele‘s adventures come to a close with the release of the complete 4th and 5th seasons (Fox, Not Rated, DVD-$49.98 SRP), featuring all 27 episodes plus select episode commentaries and four featurettes. Even though it began to wane towards the end, I still loved the show.

So there you have it… my humble suggestions for what to watch, listen to, play with, or waste money on this coming weekend. See ya next week…

Nocturnal Admissions: Critical Condition

Filed under: Nocturnal Admissions — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:52 am

 

nocturnalheader2.gif

As some kind of evidence that the studios are taking critics less and less seriously, or at least a certain kind of critic, there is the recent case of Eric D. Snider, a Portland, Oregon based internet critic who got in trouble with Paramount. This, along with the absence of a “critics screening” of  Snakes on a Plane, and several think pieces on critics in recent newspaper columns and around the internet, hint at coming harbingers of great change. 

By a complicated happenstance irrelevant to the results, Snider ended up attending the  World Trade Center junket held in Seattle, and then went on to write a devastating “insider’s” account of the experience at his website, a column which then became a national story when Media Bistro covered it.

Paramount struck back at Snider, first demanding that he take down the column, and then deciding that they could do without Snider all together, banning him from all future Paramount screenings. In addition, the company that represents Paramount in Seattle and the Northwest market went further, banning Snider from the other studios the firm represents, including Dimension, Miramax, and The Weinstein Company.

What with Willamette Week reviewer Becky Ohlsen pelted with a pie by a disgruntled theater operator, Portland is becoming the No Man’s Land of critic bashing. In this case, though, it’s not clear what Paramount has against Snider’s essay, beyond surprise at the fact that typical junketteers are rarely eager to bite the hand that so lavishly feeds them.

But still, if a studio invites a freelance writer, you open yourself to lumps of spice as much as lumps of sugar, and Snider’s  original column , “I Was a Junket Whore,” is at times wildly funny and insightful about the junket process (although the title should have been “I Was a Junket Whore for a Day”), while also mean spirited and a tad naive, and frankly, something that has been done before. Paramount may have been miffed at the fact that Snider names names, especially of lower level PR publicists who are simply doing their job, pens poison portraits of stars “off camera,” as it were, and talks about that most taboo of topics, money.

David Poland weighed in with some dire warnings about what Snider may have “done” to other freelancers, which was followed by a lively talkback with posters contributing both for and agin Snider (for more details on Snider and his interesting past, consult his Wikipedia citation ).

Worse for Snider is that he is presumably one of several potential candidates for the film reviewer’s job at  Willamette Week, recently vacated by David Walker, and where Snider is already a freelancer.  But as a recent column shows, Snider is  unrepentant. It is unclear how  Willamette Week will react to the prospect of a first string reviewer banned from advance screenings and publicity material for a fifth of the films released to the city, but who knows, they might like that kind of spunk. Perhaps Paramount should have just thrown a pie in his face. Lord knows it would have been an expensive one.

Snider’s case is only the most recent manifestation of the ongoing “crisis” in the movie reviewing world. Newspapers, themselves dinosaurs, are dumping some of their older critics, and studios are increasingly skipping the press screening stop in a film’s trajectory to the screen, the most recent example  Snakes on a Plane. In the past, you’d see maybe two or three films a year withheld from the press, “always a bad sign” to the reviewers that the studio at least thought they had a dog. Now, there, there is about one a month.

Well, I for one think that the studios should drop all critics and not screen their films for any of them. Let the critics pay and see the films the first weekend like everyone else.  Ban Snider, and all the rest of us, too.

I say this as a working reviewer. I have grown sick of the radio tie-in advance screenings anyway, and don’t go to them anymore. But I always secretly had reservations about the idea of the studios offering up free screenings in the hopes that we would write positive reviews.

Without that largesse, reviewers would be truly and unambiguously independent. And a newspaper or a web site’s owners could pay the ticket costs, so the reviewer wouldn’t be “losing” anything. Also, the reviewer would be seeing the film with people who really wanted to view it, not with passholes there only for the free t-shirt and bragging rights. Cost conscious studios would save millions a year by canceling these screenings and even dropping the junkets, although they would probably have a jones over the evaporation of puff pieces in every publication from Vanity Fair to Parade (whose reporters get special treatment, anyway).

And subtracted from the “news” angle of a movie’s release, reviews could be written and read more as thoughtful cultural criticism rather than rushes to judgment. There is an invisible divide of mutual contempt between film writers and the film industry and the average man on the street, who usually sides with “business,” i.e., the producers, rather than critics, who are interested, or should be, in art. These are two (or three) different sets of peoples, with different agenda, goals, and responsibilities, and they rarely truly interact. I say take this opportunity of a critical “crisis” to raze the promotion-industrial complex and start over.

 

 

Trailer Park: A little bit of that sticky icky…

Filed under: Trailer Park — admin @ 3:46 am

By Christopher Stipp

Archives? Right Here…

It’s odd but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a trailer that’s marked quite as tellingly that there was some “modification” of sorts going on with it.

I speak here of the trailer for EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH. Now, by the time the original trailer was released I was all over this fairly well-covered flick’s promotional materials. The trailer, the very first incarnation, was fairly disappointing. It’s a whole lot of disappointing. It was ass.

My review today reflects the first trailer and, believe you me, I had to do extensive hunting on the Interwebs just to link right to the original as the studio behind the picture have done a pretty good job in replacing all remnants of it. It’s the weirdest thing because you take a look at the trailer listings on QuickTime.com and you see all the flicks all gathered together all nice and neat and then, bam, sticking out with its parenthesis is a nice little (Revised) indicator. Now, there are other trailers that have had a little revision but do I give two shits about OPEN SEASON’s trailer getting a little makeover? Nope.

I am, however, very interested in finding out what was changed from this motion picture starring the one woman who I know a lot of dudes are waiting to see hit the wall with great impact. Call be curious, call me bi-curious if you like, but I did a little hunting and found it wasn’t Jessica Simpson that was accentuated differently, it was Dane Cook. Cook was, instead of being on the same wedding cake tier as Dax (How The Hell I Keep Getting Parts Is A Mystery To Even My Agent) Shephard, elevated to the top layer and it seems to be a movie, now, of singular proportions: it’s a Cook/Simpson production. Whereas the first trailer kind of made it an open field for the person who would ultimately win the affections of Simpson the second trailer kind of concedes that there isn’t anyone alive that would believe Dax would ever be the one who she ends up with.

The movie evolved, in a matter of 2+ minutes, from being this wacky ensemble comedy to being a singular romantic comedy starring two of the biggest things to happen to Proactiv acne wash and MySpace. It’s a curious thing that there really isn’t any way to track the changes, to watch the evolution, of filmic advertising like this but I’m helping, nay, inviting, those who give a crap to check out both trailers and tell me what you think. I’m genuinely curious to get the opinion of those who can see how you can tell seemingly divergent stories with the same material. I guess, perhaps, it’s a function of the editorial process but it’s one that caught my eye and I felt like I wanted to share the consternation with someone else.

And speaking of frustration who else here just wants to see SNAKES ON A PLANE and get it over with?

It’s almost as if it’s this song that’s been stuck in there and it needs to be purged. I don’t know one way or the other if I am actually going to check out the cinematic event that some have said has defined the zeitgeist of the YouTube generation. Now, I don’t think I’d go that far but I will say, in all fairness to this flick’s production, that you just can’t put a price tag on the talents and comments some bloggers have given freely to this movie’s eventual delivery to the box office. Sure, you know all about it but who has really been doing the pimping, the studio or geeks who are doing the work for the studio?

And good for the them.

I would plunder nerds for all they’re worth too and it sounds like Samuel L. Jackson had himself a good idea of what he was doing when he signed on for this picture. The audio was collected just weeks ago from the San Diego Comic-Con and I do hope at least a couple of you click the link below to get an insider’s view of what in the hell Sam was thinking when he said “Fuck Yeah!” to this movie. You can think one way or the other about the film, groan as you realize how bad we need to just all collectively stop talking about this B-movie and get on with our filmic lives but this movie is a legitimate entry into the marketing hall-of-fame and I couldn’t agree more with fellow columnist Widgett Walls that I hope this movie does a financially better opening weekend than SUPERMAN RETURNS; it would be a great cap to this summer movie season.

So, enjoy the audio here of Samuel L. Jackson and Kenan Thompson; the latter of whom you can hear in great garbled detail just going off to some distant land where syllables, their meaning or auditory volume have no place. If you’d like to hear Kenan drop what may be the twist at the end of the movie without so much as a moment’s hesitation on his part I invite you to just stick with it and listen.  

Roundtable interview with Samuel L. Jackson (MP3 Format)

Roundtable interview with Kenan Thompson (MP3 Format)

EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH (2006)

Director: Greg Coolidge
Cast:
Jessica Simpson, Dane Cook, Efren Ramirez, Dax Shephard, Andy Dick, Tim Bagley, Brian George, Harland Williams
Release: October 6, 2006
Synopsis:
Enter Zack Bradley (Dane Cook) and Vince Downey (Dax Shepard), two ultra competitive Super Club workers whose ten years of employment have resulted in drastically different career paths. While Vince ““ with the aid of his trusty sidekick Jorge (Efren Ramirez) — has advanced to become head cashier and winner of 17 consecutive “E of M” awards, Zack is the ultimate slacker whose scruffy appearance and laid back attitude has made him popular with his colleagues, but kept him stuck in the lowly ranks of the store’s box boys. The duo’s longtime rivalry comes to a bitter head when Amy (Jessica Simpson) ““ a beautiful new cashier with a reputation of only dating “Employee of the Month” winners ““ transfers to the store, immediately becoming the object of both Zack and Vince’s affection and often comical gamesmanship.

View Trailer:

* Large (Windows Media. The *FIRST* trailer that started it all)

* Large (QuickTime. Noted “Trailer 2a”; whatever the hell that means…)

Prognosis: Negative. What a thankless, wretched, mind-numbing, soul-sucking, pride-swallowing thing it is to have to work retail at a retail store.

No, we’re not talking about having to navigate the perils of telling a customer that she looks fabulous in size seven chinos when it’s clear that m’lady needs to get a pair twice as large just to get sale. We’re talking here of having to work where consumables of all varieties are for sale. Where no one is above having to take the trash out or lifting cases of dog food or cleaning out the women’s crapper, including cleaning out and disposing of the used sanitary napkin holder.

Yeah, working in an environment like this for ten years makes me entirely suspicious of a woman like Jessica Simpson being able to hack it but this is the movies, right? Right. And working on that premise I guess I also have to assume she’s a legitimate actress as well. Sigh.

That said, I do appreciate the ease of which this trailer glides us into the misfit-run location this movie takes place in as it establishes, right from the start, that Dane is going to be the nice guy of the picture. Dax is, just as quick, established as the nemesis. There isn’t spectacular about this, there isn’t anything particularly remarkable about the laughs that are supposed to be induced by these two geeks. I know that what you’re supposed to be thinking after seeing the two of these comedic giants rip it up is that this is going to be a totally awesome fun-fun time at the movies. But, no, wait!

Cue “Gone Daddy Gone” by the Violent Femmes and slow-mo the camera as Jessica Simpson looks like humping the nearest phallic symbol.

Now, I’m no great storyteller, I seem capable of only critiquing the shortcomings of others, but the subsequent moments of Dane and Dax vying for the sensual attention of People Magazine’s Least-Likey-To-Engage-In-Manual-Labor are pretty bad. The premise of these two guys competing for the affections of a woman who gets all sorts of bothered at the idea of being with the man who becomes Employee of the Month is kind of, well, not very funny.

I’m really trying to be generous with noting little things during the second 2/3rds of this thing which are actually amusing, not feeling anything for the tennis ball being fired at Cook’s crotch, not really getting into the slapstick of a guy checking out groceries so hard that he falls off his feet, not especially keen over the gag where Dax finds his car put up onto a really high shelf inside the store, but there just isn’t anything to grab a hold of in this thing.

I am buoyed, though, at the romantic moments that we’re given between Cook and Simpson. While there isn’t anything ground-breaking I am thankful that the movie doesn’t look like a complete disaster. The two of them do seem to have something and it’s here where I think I got it: Dax is poisoning the well.

The moments where he’s on screen I am really not smiling and, when he’s not, I am a lot less surly about the potential of the movie. I wish I could say that this is an attempt to be amusing but I am feeling pretty sure that there is homogenously nothing that great about his comedic stylings. Not a one. He’s an albatross. Sure as I am about anything. Swear to God.

CHILDREN OF MEN (2006)

Director: Alfonso Cuaron
Cast: Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, Charlie Hunnam, Michael Caine, Chiwetel Ejiofor
Release: September 29, 2006
Synopsis: CHILDREN OF MEN envisages a world one generation from now that has fallen into anarchy on the heels of an infertility defect in the population. The world’s youngest citizen has just died at 18, and humankind is facing the likelihood of its own extinction. Set against a backdrop of London torn apart by violence and warring nationalistic sects, CHILDREN OF MEN follows disillusioned bureaucrat Theo (Owen) as he becomes an unlikely champion of Earth’s survival. When the planet’s last remaining hope is threatened, this reluctant activist is forced to face his own demons and protect her from certain peril.

View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)

Prognosis: Positive. I missed this panel at the Comic-Con.

I didn’t know anything about this movie’s existence before seeing the trailer here and now I wished I had stuck around to find out more.

Sometimes using talent from a film to do a narrative voiceover isn’t really the brightest thing to do, I can tell you that this may have something to do with why Fox Animation packed up shop shortly after the dismal Barrymore/Damon/Pullman/et al. packed up their crap and left Arizona, but Clive has proven that since CROUPIER he has a unique attraction with his pipes and it’s no different here.

“I can’t really remember when I last had any hope”¦”

The opening scenes are dismal. The cinematography delicately presents the moment that Clive is stuck in with the kind of presentation that makes you believe that he really is a man who has lost any sense of hope for anything beyond a secretive moment in a bathroom john with the latest issue of Mammories Monthly. This is about the time when Clive lets us in on the fact that women stopped having babies and about when people start pelting the crap out of the train Clive is riding.

Fast forward to 2027.

While it’s not quite as bleak as BLADE RUNNER, and not quite as Crest Whitestrip bright as Tom Cruise’s MINORITY REPORT, the way we start to discover the world that Clive is living in is by news report. We’re completely consumed by the Breaking News story about the youngest living male who ends up kicking the proverbial bucket. People are glued to the TV sets, Clive doesn’t really seem to care and I am just trying to wrap my head about what’s going on here. I love the tempo, I appreciate the slow dissemination of information and I like the minimalist score behind it all.

Then, SNAP, the ensuing explosion whips your attention away. It made me flinch, actually. I deserve a couple hits on the fleshy part of my arm for that. Good job.

“Our civilization is in chaos”

While Michael Caine offers the sage-like introspection about trying to help us all get a grip on how the world has gotten to the point where people are living in a police state the thieving of Clive by some super women’s lib organization seems like a great way to cut through the whole logical idea of helping a brother out by being clear as to why I should plop my money down. I’m actually impressed here with Julianne Moore, a feat that should surprise no one, but the fact that she is trying to get Owen’s help to get some little girl to some logistical point in this odd land hurts more than helps the cool factor of this film.

As a side note, while I really do appreciate the quick tempo music that pipes in when Clive’s lame existence goes south and when you are using cards to tell people what flicks the director has done before dropping his HARRY POTTER installment just incites laughs from me. It’s his movie and the marketing people can put in there what they want but just watch it go by then try and tell me you don’t find that amusing as all hell.

The subsequent moments of this trailer speed the thrust of the storyline right between our eyes but I’m not sure I still understand. It looks like a visually gripping movie and it’s plot seems to border on the intelligent side of wanton human destruction that’s going on. If I had to choose between this and anything else opening this weekend I would have no quandries about seeing this flick just based on the trailer.
THE FOUNTAIN (2006)

Director: Darren Aronofsky
Cast: Hugh Jackman, Rachel Weisz, Ellen Burstyn, Sean Gullette
Release: November 22, 2006
Synopsis: The Fountain is an odyssey about one man’s thousand-year struggle to save the woman he loves. As a 16th century Conquistador, a modern-day scientist, and a 26th century astronaut, he searches for the secret to eternal life.

View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)

Prognosis: Where’s the passion from the teaser because it’s not here. I saw the money that was being asked for when it came to purchasing original art from THE FOUNTAIN graphic novel and I passed.

Quickly.

Really, there wasn’t even a moment’s contemplation. Kent Williams’ artwork captures the mood of what the thrust of this story is really all about and I can see why that not even pawning a used car would’ve been good enough to purchase a set of his pages.

After I finished with the book a couple of weeks ago, I just couldn’t stand idly by as people gushed over the finished film, I can say I was properly primed for Aronofsky’s vision.
I just don’t see why there is such a disconnect between me and the new trailer. I am just not feeling the passion between the pages that the novel evoked.

The teaser, for my free money, is just exquisite. At a very high level it gives you a taste of what this film could be, without telling you what it is, but it performs its job without so much as a wasted moment. But people were confused. The potential audience, people who don’t spend their waking hours on the web pages of Internet movie sites, would need more, though, I get that. What I don’t understand is the hollowness of the information that we’re given.

As things open, as it does in the book, on an ancient temple, the lightning and foreboding vibe that is supposed to be present just isn’t there; we’re too far removed from what’s happening. We’ve got an old guy working on the ground like some crazed latter-day gardener, sifting though the mud and soil like he’s looking for some truffles, and he’s telling us about a tree that will help you live forever if you drink its sap. Awesome. The problem is that the scene doesn’t feel as dire as it should be for a man on a mission like this.

“What if you could live forever?”

Okay, I’m all about cribbing the font style of the LORD OF THE RINGS but the rhetorical question of me wanting to live forever seems awfully disingenuous when we don’t know the reason why we should even care about anything that’s being shown thus far. We’re nearly a third of the way through this thing before Rachel Weisz, looking positively radiant, feeds us the brick that should’ve slam dunked us from the beginning. Hugh Jackman, looking all scraggly and haggard, and the queen have an instant connection and the moment they share is positively perfect. That’s what makes the misstep of the opening so shitty. You could’ve flipped the sequences without so much as missing a beat but we press on. Hugh presses on.

“2000 A.D.”

You believe what’s going on. You can feel the love between these two people as Hugh seems genuinely distressed and angry by the obvious implication here that there is something physically wrong about his wife. We establish that he’s a doctor, that he has found something that may help, but there is a feeling that a lot is squeezed into 2000 A.D. that it’s hard to keep track of all the variables of what’s happening here. I know because the book told me but the average schmoe has a lot to chew on in this time period.

“2500 A.D.”

Here is where things get a little trippy. Ok, a whole lot of trippy. I won’t even bother to try and break down what’s happening in this era but I don’t think anyone could in the seconds we’re given to digest things. It’s very metaphysical but, again, I think this just confuses people as to what in hell is happening. I can’t blame them.

“All flesh decays”¦”

The final moments, the ones that rely heavily on 1500 A.D., actually feel more cohesive than the whole. You can get the idea that this about living forever but if you can’t help me understand why I would need to see this confusing movie then why even spend the money on it? Yes, 35 million isn’t like the original budget but give this movie a fighting chance to make it all back.

BABEL (2006)

Director: Alejandro González Iñárritu
Cast:
Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Gael Garcia Bernal, Koji Yakusho, Elle Fanning
Release: November 17, 2006
Synopsis: Armed with a Winchester rifle, two Morrocan boys set out to look after their family’s herd of goats. In the silent echoes of the desert, they decide to test the rifle”¦ but the bullet goes farther than they thought it would.

In an instant, the lives of four separate groups of strangers on three different continents collide. Caught up in the rising tide of an accident that escalates beyond anyone’s control are a vacationing American couple (Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett), a rebellious deaf Japanese teenager and her father, and a Mexican nanny who, without permission, takes two American children across the border. None of these strangers will ever meet; in spite of the sudden, unlikely connection between them, they will all remain isolated due to their own inability to communicate meaningfully with anyone around them.

View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)

Prognosis: (GASP!) Very Positive. I had a friend in high school who had parents that went to Morocco.

I didn’t really understand why they went. The husband and wife had a modestly sized photo sitting on their large television which showed them dressed in traditional Moroccan garb as they sat in what looked like a multi-carpeted space and were sitting down on the floor. Didn’t look like much fun and I had visions of them having to endure the gastronomical goulash that Indiana Jones had to in TEMPLE OF DOOM; beetles, spiders and anything else that would’ve been swatted away here in America looked like it was fair game, literally, while it was washed down in tea cups the size of shot glasses. Yup, I was pretty damn cultured.

It honestly doesn’t help this trailer that I am thinking Brad and Cate are consuming the exact same thing I thought my friend’s parents had to eat while in Morocco. Seriously. Although, since I became a pretty hardcore devotee of IN THE ARMY NOW I’ve been able to allow myself to imagine that camels are Morocco’s prime source of getting to one place to another. Public education, people.

Now that we’ve gotten his out of the way I am a fan of this movie’s opening.

The music immediately grabs my attention. Brad and Cate really do seem like a couple but you know as this exchange is going on he’s thinking about Angelina and how crazy that chick is and why he just listen to his boys and just stone cold kick it in Malibu but is, instead, having to check his blood for parasites every other week while his crazy woman holes herself up in a place that doesn’t have running water but has all the available malaria he wants.

Anyway, back to the 4th wall of seeing Brad’s visage and being taken out of the moment when I see him here.

Before getting confused about why Gael Garcia Bernal all of a sudden shows up, I get a rather perverted, but much appreciated (high five”¦), shot of a couple of Japanese girls from behind as they sashay in this short skirts. Huh? Don’t know why, don’t care and am just happy being ignorant about what’s actually going on here but when a little kid lifts a rifle and takes a pot shot at a touring bus that is holding Pitt and Cate, Cate getting one right in the chest (makes me remember my youth and the wrist rocket that has no doubt changed a few lives, accidentally of course), I get it.

It’s one of those butterfly flapping its wings/how the world can change, kind of esoteric things, type of stories. I like Brad’s complete disorientation to try and help his lady but no one speaks his language (silly American), and how these events kind of all come together in a way that is really quite satisfying by the trailer’s end, but nothing can take away from the moment when the audience really gets at what this movie is aiming to do.

For all the easy shots at Brad this seems like another gem where Brad, unlike his bat shit crazy friend Cruise, is able to take exciting material and let it speak for itself, not inject his own spin on how it should come across.

As hard as I know some would like to believe I have been having a nice relationship going with this trailer. I think it’s story is very much germaine to today’s politics and even science fiction variables wherein it’s posited that should one person set in motion one simple event its effects are far-reaching to those who wouldn’t otherwise see the connection.

 

 

Comics in Context #142 – San Diego 2006 – Driven From Dreamland

Filed under: Comics in Context — admin @ 3:44 am

 

comicsincontext2.jpg

 

The following events took place between Thursday, July 20, 7:00 PM and Friday, July 21, 12:00 AM.

There is so much going on at any point during the San Diego Con that I can’t possibly see everything I’d like to see. In fact, since Comic-Con posts its schedule on its website over a week before the con starts, before I go I work out my own schedule, deciding what I should see among the many possible choices.

For example, I was tempted to see the panel promoting Who Wants to Be a Superhero?, Stan Lee’s new reality show (which would debut the following week on the Sci-Fi Channel), but decided against it since it was on at the same time as the Warner Brothers Pictures panel featuring Superman Returns director Bryan Singer, whom I had never seen in person. Moreover, having no particular interest in reality shows, I doubted that I’d like this one.

I’m glad I went to see Singer, but after the Con was over, I ended up watching each episode of Who Wants to Be a Superhero?. The show was more fun than I’d expected, and as New York Times critic Virginia Heffernan observed in her August 3, 2006 review, it actually deals with serious ideas.

I am particular interested in the way that Stan Lee defined being a superhero on the show. One contestant, Iron Enforcer, seemed to have modeled himself on a certain strain of superhero from the 1990s: he wire an enormous gun on one hand, and was accused of using steroids to amplify his musculature (which he did not deny). Stan Lee repeatedly instructed one contestant, Iron Enforcer, that “Superheroes don’t kill people; they save people.” It is primarily because Iron Enforcer didn’t share that philosophy that Mr. Lee expelled him from the heroes’ ranks in Episode 2, and then, significantly, recruited him to become the show’s first supervillain, a role that Iron Enforcer (renamed Dark Enforcer) eagerly embraces.

And just how would Mr. Lee’s rule that superheroes do not kill apply to Wolverine? The Punisher? Cable? The Spectre? Even Wonder Woman following her recent murder of Maxwell Lord?

But wait, there’s more. In Episode 3 Mr. Lee tested the contestants’ determination to protect their secret identities. Most of them failed the test, and Mr. Lee expelled one of them, Monkey Woman, who revealed her real name to a stranger without even being asked. Mr. Lee informed the contestants that superheroes never reveal their secret identities, and, as examples, told them that Clark Kent and Peter Parker would never give away their other identities.

So, presumably Episode 3 was made before Mr. Lee found out that Spider-Man publicly revealed his secret identity in Marvel’s current Civil War series.

For that matter, by the end of Episode 3 Mr. Lee is telling the contestants that one of the main virtues of a superhero is “self-sacrifice,” and that a superhero would never turn against his fellow superheroes. And just how does Civil War, in which Iron Man and his allies side with the government against Captain America and his allies fit Stan’s standards?

It’s all very interesting, as I said. It’s also satisfying for me to see Stan Lee on his television show upholding standards for superheroes that the comics increasingly disdain.

Moreover, like so many other reality shows, Who Wants to Be a Superhero? strikes me as being a glorification of that signature feature of the contemporary American economy, downsizing. Like shows such as Survivor, Who Wants to Be a Superhero? begins by gathering contestants into a community; in this case, they live together in a secret headquarters called the Lair. In Episode 3 Stan Lee tests them by asking each of them who he or she thinks ought to be expelled next. Most of the contestants pass the test by refusing to turn against the others and offering themselves as the sacrificial lamb instead (hence Mr. Lee’s theme of self-sacrifice). When Mr. Lee expels Tyveculus, other contestants are upset, since they clearly liked and even admired him. You might think that among the virtues of superheroes are teamwork and a sense of duty and devotion to one’s community. But the show has no room for any of that: the community must be destroyed. The boss must whittle the group down until only one remains to be declared the victor.

This is not how, say, Professor Xavier runs the X-Men. It’s as if when Captain America took over leadership of Stan Lee’s new Avengers team of Hawkeye, Quicksilver and the Scarlet Witch back in the mid-1960s, he decided that after each adventure he’d fire one of them until only one was left. Avengers Disassemble!

THURSDAY 7:00 PM

With 21st century pop culture aggressively celebrating the end of community, it’s rewarding to see the opposite argument being made. So, following Mark Evanier’s interview of Jerry Robinson at Comic-Con, I walked over to Room 6B for “ASIFA Presents: Dream On Silly Dreamer.” (As a former English teacher I know the title should have a comma, but it doesn’t.)

Later I looked up ASIFA’s website and discovered that the acronym stands for Association International du Film d’Animation, or the International Animated Film Association. Please note that while there is an international association of animation professionals, and American comic strip artists have the National Cartoonists Society, there is no national organization for American comic book professionals, despite past efforts to establish one.

As for Dream On Silly Dreamer, this is a forty minute documentary which chronicles how the Walt Disney Company stopped doing hand-drawn (“2D”) animation, the artform that founder Walt Disney and his colleagues had taken to such heights, and laid off most of the company’s animation professionals in the process.

What struck me watching the Comic-Con screening of this documentary were the many, continual parallels between the events it records and the Boom and Bust in the American comic book industry in the 1990s.

cic-dream on.jpgDream On Silly Dreamer begins on a note of quiet but nonetheless cutting irony, using that favorite device from the opening of classic Disney animated films, the on-screen storybook, from which characters come to animated life. More specifically, Dream On‘s opening alludes to the traditional start of Disney’s animated Winnie the Pooh featurettes (an opening that has been dropped in more recent Pooh pictures), with the storybook set in a cozy room with playthings, and an unseen narrator with a mellifluous voice. In this case the animated character is a boy who represents a typical animation professional who loves Disney animated films as a child and dreams of working for the animation studio one day. This, of course, is no different from the many comics professionals whose imaginations were fired by the DC and Marvel comics they read growing up. And Dream On‘s animated opening makes clear that disaster awaits its “silly dreamer.”

The film’s story starts in the mid-1980s, when corporate Disney banished animation from the very building in Burbank that Walt Disney himself had constructed for the animation staff. (One of the documentary’s interviewees, ink and paint artist Carmen Sanderson, started at Disney in the 1940s and hence knows whereof she speaks when discussing the days when Walt was alive. Despite her name, she’s no relation to me, as far as I know.) The animation department was shunted off to a trailer park in Glendale. Management was treating the creative artists poorly, but the animation pros remained dedicated to their work. Characteristically, these creative people had gotten into the business not to make big bucks, but out of their love for the artform. One interviewee asks in the film, “How many people can say that they’re paid to do what they love to do?”

In the service of their art, the Disney animation professionals worked incredibly long hours, as they recall in the film, not as complaints but with palpable nostalgia. And it would not have taken much for management to make them feel appreciated. Onscreen interviewees happily recall how, when the films they worked on early in Michael Eisner’s reign as head of Disney were successful, management would give them special caps and jackets as perks. (It’s like the way we used to get free Marvel and DC comics, or get invited to the companies’ annual Christmas parties.)

Starting with The Little Mermaid in 1989, Disney animation began a renaissance, producing a series of films that were both critically and commercially successful. With films such as Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast (1991), and Aladdin (1992), Disney Animation was turning out a string of triumphs not unlike Pixar’s ongoing parade of successes. The colossal, unexpected commercial success of The Lion King in 1994 demonstrated that animated features could earn as much as live action blockbusters. (Here I am reminded of how first issues of certain comics in the early 1990s would sell millions of copies.)

With this boom in Disney animation (which paralleled the boom going on simultaneously in comics), top animation professionals benefited financially. Disney animation pros would get extraordinarily big bonuses, enough to buy a new car. (This reminds me of two of my friends in comics, who used immense royalty checks to make a down payment on a house, knowing that this was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.) When Jeffrey Katzenberg, the executive who oversaw animation, was driven from Eisner’s Disney, he co-founded DreamWorks and set up a rival animation studio there. Now DreamWorks, as well as other studios seeking to make Lion King-level money by getting into animation, were competing for the services of top Disney animation pros. (Would DreamWorks Animation be the counterpart of Image Comics in the 1990s, then?)

The Eisner administration built a brand new building for the animation department in California, presumably as a reward and tribute for the department, but characteristically designed it without consulting the animators themselves as to what they needed. (I would be surprised if Marvel editorial had been consulted on the layout of their most recent facilities.) In the film one animation staffer describes the new building as “a postmodern gas chamber.”

Leading animators were offered enormous salaries, and started getting agents and lawyers. (Although in one of the film’s most telling anecdotes, an animator recalls asking to make in one year what Eisner made in an hour, and Disney wouldn’t pay him that much!) Naturally, newly enriched animators spent their money; as in the comics boom, no one seems to have acted as if this would all come to an end.

But so it did. Dream On does not delve into the question of whether or why Disney Animation may have lost some of the creative imagination that energized the now-classic films of its renaissance, or whether there were now so many animated features being produced by Disney, DreamWorks and other competitors that the market was becoming glutted. But Dream On does contend that now that animated films had proved they could make so much money, corporate Disney installed “creative executives” (who, the film suggests, were not so creative) to micromanage the process of making these movies. (I think of Marvel executive Bill Jemas’s taking such a strong hand in the creative process during his short-lived reign there.) Just as new Marvel executives had inflated expectations for comics sales, based on the boom, Disney executives expected their animated films to rival the grosses of The Lion King.

At the same time corporate Disney insisted on grinding out as much animation as possible. A particular source of complaint are Disney’s many mediocre direct-to-video sequels to its animated classics, which are regarded as “weakening the brand.” Sounds like all the 1990s spinoffs of successful books like X-Men and Spider-Man, doesn’t it?

While new Disney animated films fell short of corporate expectations, Disney’s new partner Pixar was achieving blockbuster successes with its computer animated features. As this column has noted in the past, corporate Disney decided that the fault was not in themselves but in the medium. Hence, as Dream On records, on March 25, 2002, Thomas Schumacher, who was then Disney’s president of Feature Animation, held a meeting at the Burbank animation building to inform the staff that most of them were being laid off. The animation department was being downsized to a single unit, which ended up doing only CGI animation. As the documentary states, Disney’s animation studios in Burbank, Paris, Tokyo, and Orlando were all closed: “1300 dreamers gone.”

Many of the reviews of Dream On Silly Dreamer that I’ve read run the same quotation from interviewee Jacki Sanchez, who was an in-betweener at Disney. It’s so good that I’m going to run it, too: she says she told Disney management about animation that “You have the London Philharmonic at your disposal and you want to turn it into a boy band.”

One interviewee in the film says, “I’ve never seen a place devastated as much as I have the last few weeks.” I have, having witnessed two of Marvel’s major downsizings in the 1990s, and having been the victim of the second. These were other examples of creative personnel taking the fall for the mismanagement by corporate executives.

One of the interviewees says in the film, “I will do everything in my power not to go to the real world.” This is familiar, too: it is a professional’s determination not to leave the creative artform he loves, and to find a way to continue participating in it. It’s what I feel about comics.

Towards the end of Dream On, there is a shot that alludes to the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), with “2D” animation equipment crated up for storage. It turns out that some animators ended up buying their own animation tables from Disney. The corporate mindset never conceives that its current decision–no more “2D” animation–might someday be reversed.

But in fact, with Pixar’s John Lasseter now in charge of Disney Animation, hand-drawn animation may be making a limited comeback. Following the screening of Dream On Silly Dreamer at Comic-Con, there was a panel to discuss, among other things, whether there is now a happy ending to the saga of “2D” animation at Disney. The moderator was Larry Loc, of ASIFA-Hollywood’s board of directors, and the panelists included Dream On’s writer/director Dan Lund, its producer Tony West, and a number of the film’s onscreen interviewees, including Jacki Sanchez, artist Kris Heller, animator John Tucker, and several others. (Unfortunately, from where I was sitting in this large room, I couldn’t see the cards with the panelists’ names, so I won’t be able to name some of the speakers I quote below.)

Loc began by asking the panelists what they were doing now. The answers reminded me yet again of what happened to the generation of comics professionals who experienced the Bust of the 1990s. Some panelists were back at Disney, either on staff or as a freelancer: one had only returned to Disney six weeks before. Tony West said he did work at a small animation studio in Orlando. Dan Lund was working on videogames for Microsoft but said he was still “looking for work.” One of the people now freelancing for Disney admitted to being “out of work more often” than working. One panelist was still at Disney, where he had been “trained in digital animation.” but hoped he could soon return to working on “2D” animation there. In contrast, the next panelist said the “studio wanted to train me in digital,” but he “realized I drew all my life” and retired instead.

What effect will Lasseter’s arrival have on Disney Animation? Panelists’ reactions ranged from cautious to enthusiastic optimism. One panelist said the mood at Disney Animation was “depressing” when he left, but that “the mood is a lot different now,” and there was “some hope” with Pixar people in charge. He said there was now talk of Disney doing a 2D animated film that would be “paperless but drawn.” (It was later explained that this meant drawn on a computer.)

The retired animator labeled CGI an “evolution of puppetry” and contended that drawn animation is a “different artform.” He thought that Lasseter wanted to do 2D animation and that the “studio will turn around.”

Yet another animator next guy said that “John [Lasseter] is bringing back a lot of traditional values” and “has real passion for animation,” adding that a “lot of that passion has been sorely missing for the last five years.” Referring to the documentary, this panelist commented that “people who animate on paper have a passion. When I animate I have a connection between my soul and that paper. It’s quite different between that mouse and that monitor. It’s real hard to feel connected then.” (I wonder if CGI animators feel differently about this.) This panelist seemed caught between optimism and caution, saying he “thinks we’ll get that passion back” but also “I hope it’s coming back.”

Casting caution aside, another panelist said he was “really excited about what I’m reading and hearing” and hoped that “Lasseter will be the “savior” of the animation industry. Jacki Sanchez said simply, “God bless John Lasseter.”

Intriguingly, the panel revealed that some footage from the 1980s that had been incorporated into the documentary had been shot by Lasseter, and that Lasseter had never admitted he had been fired from Disney until after he had taken over Disney Animation.

Loc declared that it was “a gutsy thing to do” to make Dream On. “It was quite a risk” for both the filmmakers and the interviewees who appeared in it, since, Loc said, they could have been “blackballed. . .forever.” Loc spoke about the great Disney animator Bill Tytla (animator of Chernobog the demon in Fantasia‘s “Night on Bald Mountain” [1940], among other triumphs), who was blackballed for his role in the 1941 Disney strike and “spent the rest of his life trying to get back into Disney.” (But later during the panel discussion Sanchez commented before answering one question, “I’m already blackballed.”) Loc even said he thought that Dream On “had a small part” in bringing about Lasseter’s new role at Disney.

Loc opened up the discussion to questions from the audience. One audience member made the familiar argument that Pixar’s great success is not because audiences prefer “3D” to “2D” animation, but because Pixar is better at crafting stories than Disney has recently been. Jacki Sanchez responded that they “would repeat this over and over” but the argument “fell on deaf ears.” She asserted that “people were creatively shackled the last few years we were there,” and that the “creative executives” were “in charge.”

On the subject of Disney’s direct-to-video sequels to past animated films, Loc disparaged them as “electronic babysitters for the kids.” Sanchez added that “Disney loves” the videos since they’ve “already got the character designs” and the other concept work from the original films. “It’s like pure profit,” she said, “and they don’t really care. . .that they’re going to be bad.” (Now I find myself thinking of the way that Warners Animation recently recycled Bruce Timm’s character designs for the dreadful direct-to-video Superman: Brainiac Attacks.)

Towards the end of the panel Dan Lund was asked why he made Dream On Silly Dreamer. Lund’s answer was that “Disney doesn’t seem to value their own history the way we do.” (Do I have to mention this is yet another parallel to comics?) He began shooting the film even before the layoffs were announced in the Schumacher meeting, since he could see the end coming. Lund compared what he was doing to Steven Spielberg’s interviews with Holocaust survivors, to preserve their memories. Lund said that he wanted “to record memories of good times before people only thought about layoffs.”

Lund noted that the Disney layoffs occurred around the same time that Seinfeld and Friends came to an end, to great fanfare in the media. Lund said that he “saw no tribute to Disney animators” who were leaving, so he made the film “not to save animation or to embarrass Disney,” but “to remember how lucky we were.” Lund said, “We had a great ride.” He also said that “If we didn’t throw ourselves a party, nobody would.”

Lund and West are selling DVDs of Dream On Silly Dreamer, complete with added special features, and you can find out more at www.dreamonsillydreamer.com. Quick Stop editor Ken Plume wrote a perceptive review of their documentary at our old website, as you can see at http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/571/571987p1.html.

And I wonder when and if somebody will do a book or documentary about the rise and fall of the Baby Boom generation of comic book professionals.

THURSDAY 8:30 PM

Entering Room 20, Comic-Con’s second largest panel room, I came face to helmet with a gun-wielding Imperial Stormtrooper, who ordered me to keep moving down the aisle. Other Stormtroopers stood along the stage, keeping watch over the entering fans. The Stormtroopers really aren’t all that different from Comic-Con’s own security squad, the Elite red shirts.

The Stormtroopers onstage finally gave way to Steve Sansweet, head of Lucasfilm fan relations, and the annual “Star Wars Fan Film Awards” ceremony commenced. I had attended these awards back in 2003 (see “Comics in Context” #5) and had been surprised at how much fun I had. I had been somewhat concerned that short films inspired by Star Wars might prove too obsessive, too downright (dare I say it) geeky for my taste. I shouldn’t have worried: both in 2003 and this year, the best of the prize winners were genuinely inspired, inventive and funny comedies. In fact, the sharpness of the satire indicates that the filmmakers have enough perspective on the Star Wars mythos to keep from toppling into stereotypically fannish blind devotion to the material.

Among my favorites at this year’s awards was the winner for “Best Commercial Parody,” Blue Milk, directed by William Grammer (which you can see at http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/571/571987p1.html). In it Princess Leia, as a small child (complete with her awful headphones hairstyle from Episode 4), touts the planet Tatooine’s Bantha Blue Milk. Already a political firebrand (So that’s how she became a senator in her teens!), little Leia launches into a tirade against the Empire’s own brand of Blue Milk, until some Imperial Stormtroopers intervene. Sci-fi fascism can be funny.

Both the Audience Choice Award and the George Lucas Selects Award went to Pitching Lucas, directed by Shane Felux (http://www.atomfilms.com/af/content/pitching_lucas). The latter award was once again announced from on high by Lucas himself, appearing on an enormous videoscreen. (I have just noticed that Mr. Lucas’s initials are GL, in a coincidental link with a certain comic book series.)

No, Pitching Lucas is not about baseball in space. In it, Lucas (portrayed by a lookalike actor) meets with several men in business suits whom Dream On Silly Dreamer might characterize as creative executives. Each of these suits in turn “pitches” a proposal for a TV series based on the Star Wars mythos. As we see in brief clips of the proposed shows, each is a cheesy ripoff of a 1970s TV series: The Sith Million Dollar Man, DIPs (based on CHIPs), and George’s Angels. Lucas reacts by calmly subjecting each Hollywood hack to a form of death from his Star Wars movies.

Pitching Lucas is not only amusing and imaginative, but also has some serious themes. Obviously, it skewers the mediocre mindset of executive-think, and it pays humorous tribute to the real George Lucas’s refusal to compromise his creative vision. Moreover, as stated on this short’s website, “we get a glimpse into the director’s dark side.” Maybe Felix intended Pitching Lucas merely as a joke, but it serves as a reminder that not only the heroism and ideals but also the violence and villainy in the Star Wars movies are products of Lucas’s imagination. After all, he did choose to center the new trilogy on Darth Vader. In Pitching Lucas the title character effectively becomes Vader and even Jabba the Hut, complete with his retinue, including the first of the women I’d see at this year’s Comic-Con in Leia’s slave girl costume.

One of my favorite shorts in the 2003 Award ceremony was director Trey Stokes’ Pink Five, in which Stacey, a Valley Girl type, pilots one of the Rebel fighters during Episode 4’s conclusion, but is so self-obsessed that she is virtually oblivious to the warfare all around her. Pink Five won the George Lucas Selects award three years ago, and since then Stokes and actress Amy Earhart, who plays Stacey, have collaborated on three more Pink Five shorts, all of which were shown at this year’s award ceremony. In fact, Sansweet made clear that the finishing touches were put on the latest Pink Five short only hours before the ceremony began.

The successive Pink Five shorts take Stacey further through the original Star Wars trilogy, in which her exploits parallel and parody those of both Luke and Leia. Hence, in Pink Five Strikes Back (2004) Stacey gets her own training from Yoda on Dagobah, and in a concluding preview of the next short, appears in Leia’s now-iconic slave girl outfit (earning well-deserved wolf whistles from the Comic-Con audience). When Pink Five Strikes Back quotes Yoda and Obi-Wan’s celebrated exchange from The Empire Strikes Back that there is “one other” hope for the Rebellion besides Luke, it now seems they’re talking about Stacey!

Moreover, the Pink Five shorts take on a similar relationship to the real Star Wars movies as playwright Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead has to Hamlet. In both cases the audience sees a classic work through the perspective of one or more minor comedic characters. The Pink Five series shows us what might have happened “offstage” during Lucas’s films, just as Stoppard invents new scenes that purportedly take place during or between the scenes Shakespeare shows us in Hamlet. In each case the new perspective transforms epic drama into farce, and makes familiar characters look rather more foolish than they do in the original works. Luke, Leia and Han never appear onscreen in the Pink Five shorts, but Yoda, the ghost of Obi-Wan, the Emperor and even Darth Vader do, losing considerable gravitas but becoming funny in the process. One of the high points of comedy is the Emperor and Vader’s befuddled reaction when Stacey informs them that Leia is Luke’s sister.

So far Stokes and Earhart have taken two shorts to parody Return of the Jedi: Return of Pink Five, Vol. 1 (2005) and Return of Pink Five, Vol. 2, which debuted at this year’s ceremony. These are less consistently funny than the original short, in part because Stokes and Earhart have become much more ambitious. The shorts have become more elaborate visually, with persuasive recreations of costumes and sets, a convincing Yoda, and additional actors playing Obi-Wan and other familiar characters.

The later shorts also aim to construct more of a storyline and to give Stacey a less superficial characterization. Now Stacey claims to be Han Solo’s girlfriend, although it is unclear whether her relationship is merely a figment of her hyperactive imagination. Hence, Stacey is so peeved at Princess Leia (whom she dubs “Princess Hairstyle” at one point) that she is willing to get even by collaborating with the Empire (hence her meeting with Vader and Palpatine). However, it seems that Stacey has good instincts that lead her into aiding the Ewoks in their forest battle against Imperial forces. The best gags in the later shorts rise to the height of those in the first, including Stacey’s discovery of the vulnerability of all the Empire’s war machines that should have been obvious to all of us on first seeing the original trilogy.

For various reasons, including length and the use of professional actors, the Pink Five shorts are no longer part of the Star Wars Fan Film Awards competition. But Stokes and Earhart appeared onstage to present their latest short out of competition and to receive a special prize, brought out by a young woman wearing Stacey’s costume from the first Pink Five. (Earhart turns out to be genetically suited to playing a pilot: she is related to Amelia Earhart.)

Return of Pink Five Vol. 2 ends with the onscreen message that it is to be continued in Return of Pink Five Vol. 3, so there is still more to come. And you can find more about the whole Pink Five series at http://www.trudang.com/pinkfive/.

Dream On Silly Dreamer was about the corporate destruction of an artistic community, but I noticed that part of its Comic-Con audience was particularly enthusiastic, and i assume they were fellow animation professionals, who had come out to support the film. Corporate decisions can’t put an end to the bonds of friendship and shared views among individuals.

Similarly, the Star Wars Fan Film Awards impress me as being another celebration of community: an enthusiastic audience and talented filmmakers, who, in this case are actively being encouraged by Lucasfilm. This is what I like to see.

THURSDAY 11:00 PM

With the close of the Star Wars Fan Film Awards ceremony, I headed out of the Convention Center and easily found a taxi outside the San Diego Marriott next door.

FRIDAY 12:00 AM

I got back to my own hotel, the Coronado Island Marriott Resort in time to watch Martin Short’s appearance on the Late Show with David Letterman.

Awaiting me after a night’s sleep was my first venture this year into the San Diego Con’s humongous Hall H, as you shall see next week.

Copyright 2006 Peter Sanderson

August 17, 2006

Music for the Masses: August 17th, 2006

Filed under: Music for the Masses — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:28 am

 

musicmasses1.jpg

What’s up, Quick Stoppers?  Double A here and I’ve got some good news and bad news for you.  First. . .the good news.  M.C. is on vacation right now, so you Pearl Jam fans need not worry about anyone poking fun at mumbling Eddie and One Trick Pony’s.  Nope.  You’re not going to get one joke about [INSERT RUDE PEARL JAM JOKE HERE] this week.  Not gonna happen.  You see, apparently M.C. heard some rumors at Comic Con and, as a result, has headed back to California in search of  Walt’s frozen head (read: he’s going to Disneyland).  He’s always said that he “has the heart of a small child,” but I just assumed he was referring to whatever the fuck that is in that jar of Formaldehyde on his desk.  

m4m-august17-disney.jpg

Oh, and if you’re reading M.C?  I hear it’s buried under the “Pirates of the Caribbean” ride.  So, at any rate, while he’s away. . .umm, well, that’s the bad news.  Are you ready for this?    Perhaps you should sit down. . .maybe get a little comfort food in your tum-tum’s.  You see, with M.C. gone, I’m left to hold down the fort here at Music for the Masses.

Now, just hold on a minute there, kiddies.  Don’t go getting your panties in a wad.  I’m not here to change things up a whole bunch and you’re not going to get 3 rap reviews.  Sure DMX came out with a new one, but really, who cares?   Exactly.  See. . .I’ve just discovered something vastly better, or should I say re-discovered something better.  Much like Leonard Nimoy, for a while I have been in search of something.  Get it?  That was a reference to his show called In Search of”¦ where he, you know, searched for stuff. 

m4m-august17-nimoy.jpg

Anyways, in a desperate attempt to get back a piece of my childhood, I have been searching for anything and everything that I can get my hands on for the group that is credited with giving me my interest in rap music:  The Fat Boys.  Yes I know that it’s kind of odd, but as an impressionable young man with a slight weight problem The Fat Boys opened up a whole new world musically.  Without them I would never have moved into Run DMC.  I would have never listened to early Beastie Boys.  And I certainly wouldn’t have picked up Vanilla Ice’s To the Extreme.  Wait, I probably shouldn’t have admitted that.  Oh well, what’s said is said.  What follows is somewhat of a review and somewhat of a retrospective.  Friends, I give you The Fat Boys.

m4m-august17-fatboyscolor.jpg

1983 was a year full of ups and downs.  Two classic tales came to an end in M*A*S*H and the original Star Wars Trilogy but other franchises such as the A-Team and the first of the Vacation films were there to pick up the slack.  Musical wise, two of the great bluesmen in Muddy Waters and Slim Pickins passed on paving the way for new “musicians” Michelle Branch and William Hung.  With all that going on, enter three young men from Brooklyn, Mark “Prince Markie Dee” Morales, Darren “Human Beat Box” Robinson and Damon “Kool Rock-ski” Wimbley, who called themselves Disco 3.

Entering the renowned Coca-Cola/Tin Pan Apple rap contest at the radio City Music Hall, Disco 3 easily won on the strength of Robinson’s beat boxing.  Legend has it that the boys originally entered the contest solely to win the second place prize of a new stereo, but eagerly accepted the recoding contract that came with the win.  With the studio time in hand, Disco 3 unleashed the track “Reality” on the unsuspecting world.  Touring in support of their new release, the groups manager was shocked when he was presented a 350 dollar hotel bill for “extra breakfasts.”Â  Jokingly the manager suggested that Disco 3 should take the name The Fat Boys.  I guess you can tell what happened next.  

The Fat Boys first album, The Fat Boys was released in 1984, and is arguably their best album.  Featuring the classic songs “Fat Boys” and “Jailhouse Rap” this album showed that while the group leaned toward the comedy side of the genre, the boys could actually rap.  The beats were simple but great and added a bit of fun to the intentionally funny rhymes.  The best song on the disc though is “Human Beat Box.”Â  You’ve probably head someone beat boxing, but I can tell you, you haven’t really heard it till you hear the master do it.  And Robinson was indeed the master.  

m4m-august17-fatboysalbum.jpg

The groups second album The Fat Boys Are Back came out a year later, offering up the same type of wackiness that the original release had.  This time out though, the Boys brought in some outside influences to help the music out.  The reggae infused and aptly titled “Hard Core Reggae” and the rock styled and even more accurately titled “Rock-N-Roll” fill out an album that also features another Human Beat Box showcase.  While The Fat Boys Are Back is not as good as the first album, it is still a fine album which shows The Fat Boys were still firmly in their element.  That same year the group made their first foray into another medium, playing roles in the 1985 movies Knights of the City and Krush Groove.

After the group’s next album Big & Beautiful failed to cause any waves, many critics started proclaiming that the group was done.  But in 1987 the Boys made a big splash, and yes, that pun was intended.  1987 saw the release of two Fat Boys projects, the album Crushin’ and the group’s first staring roles in the movie Disorderlies.  Disorderlies introduced the group to a whole new audience that snapped up the album, giving the group their only platinum selling disc.  Seriously, who could forget the video for the single “Wipeout”?  Fat guys on surfboards in front of green screens?  Pure gold!

Riding the high from Crushin’ and Disorderlies The Fat Boys released Coming Back Hard Again, their last album that could be called a success.  Featuring another cover in “Louie, Louie”, the album mostly stayed true to what the group had done in the past… make fun songs that anyone can get into.  The highlights of Coming Back Hard Again are “Big Daddy’ and “Pig Feet,” both of which point out the obvious that the group really, really likes to eat.

But, much like the aforementioned fat guy on a surfboard, the ride didn’t last long.  The 1989 album On and On is described as a “rap-opera.”Â  Sadly, the music buying public didn’t understand what was going on, and the album tanked quicker than Mel Gibson at a swanky Hollywood party.  The failure of On and On signaled the end for the group and the three members went their separate ways shortly after.  Still yearning to entertain the masses, Robinson and Wimbley got back together long enough to record 1991’s Mack Daddy.  The new incarnation of The Fat Boys tried to shy away from their past success and opted to try out a new sound that was obviously influenced by the likes of Public Enemy and other rappers of that time.  While the disc wasn’t bad – the song “Tonight” is really good - but the album just didn’t have the same magic that the group had previously had. 

m4m-august17-fatboysb&w.jpg

In 1992, Morales had marginal success with his solo album, Free, but he has had bigger success as a producer working with Mary J. Blige, Destiny’s Child and Mariah Carrey.  After Mack Daddy, Wimbley dropped off the radar, only to surface again in 1995 when he, Robinson and Morales began working on a Fat Boys reunion album.  Unfortunately that project never saw the light of day.  On December 10th of that year, Robinson died of a heart attack, thus ending The Fat Boys. 

Over the years there have been a few Best of”¦ albums, but the only one of merit is 1997’s All Meat No Filler.  This album is truly a greatest hits album.  Every song on this album is worthwhile.  There are a few problems with it, though.  First of all, there are several songs that didn’t make the cut that should have been included, most notably “Pump It Up” and “Rock-N-Roll.”Â  Secondly, this album is damn near impossible to find.  It has become my holy grail.  I have scoured several used records all over the country and have yet to find it.  Even the magic machine that is the internet has failed to provide me with this album.  Sure, you can find whatever sick and twisted porn you want, but the second you try to find music, you get shut down faster than I did on prom night.

Well folks, I hope you enjoyed this walk down memory lane.  Do yourself a favor – if you never listened to The Fat Boys, search them out.  They are truly one of the greatest acts of their generation.  Oh, and they made me the man I am today”¦ here’s an artists rendering.

m4m-august17-fatalbert.jpg 

Send your maps to Disney’s head, review copies, presents and assorted hate mail to:

M.C. Bell
P.O. Box 1222
Arvada, CO 80001

 

The Fred Hembeck Show: Episode 68 – Mock the Vote

Filed under: The Fred Hembeck Show — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:20 am

 

fredhembeckheader.jpg

Have you checked the news lately?

Yeesh – we’ve got over-heated politicians going on the tube, blithely anointing the recent mid-east conflict as the beginning of the long dreaded World War Three, and airlines are suddenly confiscating your toothpaste in the name of safety (hah! – tell it to your cavities)! Makes you long for the good ol’ days, doesn’t it?

A word of caution – don’t be TOO hasty.

Back on Election Day, 2003, I wrote up the following not-so-fond-reminiscence, a little thing I called…

“Dr. Strangemouth – or, How I Learned To Eavesdrop And Fear The Bomb”

It’s Election Day – what say we talk politics, okay?

WAIT! WAIT! Get your itchy little index finger away from that mouse – it’s not what you think. Yes, we most assuredly have our own political biases here at Hembeck.com, true, but – well, how shall I put this? Probably the overriding one is that all – or, okay, to be fair, merely most – of the folks who take up the political profession as their life’s work seem to spend most of it beholden to the various moneyed concerns who provided the necessary finances to propel their candidacies in the first place, while our dear friends, the politicians, in turn try their doggone darnedest to convince the public that – gee whiz! – it’s actually the little people’s best interests that they actually have at heart. Uh huh. Cynical? Yup, you betcha, but hey, after all these years, just try convincing me otherwise. Partisan though I may be at times, that’s still the way I feel deep down inside even about “my” guy, whoever he – or she – happens to be at the time.

What kind of attitude would you expect, after all, from some poor sap whose very first exposure to national politics had him totally convinced that if Richard Nixon DIDN’T win the right to kick his loafers off in the Oval Office, this future voter – and his entire family – was assured a horrible, gruesome death?!?…

Understand that we’re hearkening back – WAY back – to the initial run Eisenhower’s Veep made for the White House in the 1960 Presidential campaign. America had just cruised through 8 years of Republican rule thanks to the former World War Two hero, General Dwight D. Me? Well, I have absolutely no memories of the old soldier’s term in office, but Mom and Dad Hembeck sure did. Hitting the seven year mark several months before the odometer on the decade turned over, I eventually became superficially aware of the constant campaigning by the two candidates for the Big Job – Nixon, of course, and his Democratic opponent, some guy named John F. Kennedy (who was, for reasons I then couldn’t fathom, also called “Jack”…). The glitzy looking campaign buttons – red, white, and blue, of course – that we picked up at a mid-summer’s outing at a local fair did an inordinate amount towards informing my nascent political sensibilities. My parents, lifelong blue-collar workers who nonetheless stayed firmly and loyally on the Republican side of the aisle, naturally scooped up a handful of pro-Nixon paraphernalia, and I’ll be darned if Little Freddy himself wasn’t tremendously impressed by it! That man on the button seemed to have such a nice, pleasant smile! Fact was, he sorta reminded me of that OTHER man I liked, y’know, the funny one with the similar looking proboscis? Bob Hope, I think his name was…

Everything would’ve been just swell during the final months of this hard fought political contest in my insulated little corner of the world if only it weren’t for a chance remark I accidentally overheard one of my dad’s friends offer up whilst they were engaging in a discussion at our kitchen table one fateful night. But before we get to the specifics of the curious comment, allow me to tell you a little bit about the speaker in question…

His name was Turbish. That’s what everyone called him – Turbish, just Turbish. Years later, I finally found out that his first name was “Rowland” – which may well explain things. Anyway, he worked alongside my dad in the kitchen of the Suffolk County Infirmary, and was around my house, on and off, pretty much my entire young life. Even in the days after my dad passed on and I had the family manse dropped unceremoniously into my hands, Turbish would drop by unannounced. He was a nice enough fella, I suppose, though, frankly, he never really related to me as a kid. Nonetheless, I always found him sort of amusing. He spoke rapidly, always as if he were out of breath, AND in a high pitched voice! Picture, if you would, a cross between Ed Norton (NOT the actor, young people, but the patron saint of all sewer workers..,) and Barney Fife, and THAT’D be a decent approximation of good ol’ Turbish! And for someone who long ago had let go of the notion of employing a first name, he had this amusing affectation of referring to my dad as “Mr. Fred”! He was prone to exaggeration, but on that early fall day back in 1960, I was too young, too naive – and dare I say it? – too STUPID to know the difference between hyperbole and reality. And friends, it cost me. The price? My peace of mind (small as it may’ve been…)

Y’see, there they sat, yammering on and on about the upcoming election, and as usual, Turbish was doing the vast majority of the lip-flapping. Dad would occasionally interject a comment or two, generally to lower the exasperation level of the conversation, if for no other reason. He well knew his colleague’s proclivities, and always had a bucketful of salt at the ready. But to me, this fast talking, shrill, bespeckled man was an adult, and at that point in my social development, I took everything an adult said as gospel. Everything…

So imagine if you will my alarmed reaction when I chanced to hear THIS prime bon mot:

“Mr. Fred, I’m telling you, if Kennedy and the democrats get into the White House, the Russians’ll drop the bomb on us all by Thanksgiving!!”

The bomb? That would be one of the atomic variety, the likes of which we’d long practiced avoiding by – good plan! – crawling down under our desks at school. And the Russians? Communists, and America’s sworn enemy. We always seemed to be on the brink of total annihilation back in them good ol’ days, so, by golly, the high-pitched words of doom and devastation emanating from Mr. Turbish’s lips (kids still addressed adults as “Mr.” in those long gone times, for those of you who came in late… ) didn’t sound all that absurd. Not by a long shot.

Of course, they had no clue I’d been eavesdropping, and being the sort of family we were – i.e., minimal communication, if that – I certainly didn’t ask for further clarification from anyone. Nope, I just kept it to myself and worried. And rooted desperately – DESPERATELY, I tell ya! – for the man destined to one day be known as “Tricky Dick” to win, win, WIN! Barring that, I consoled myself with the notion that, even with the awful possibility of imminent destruction awaiting everyone just before the Thanksgiving turkey could be carved, I WAS, at least, guaranteed one last, glorious Halloween!…

Okay, so maybe I didn’t lose any actual sleep over the loose-lipped remark my shell-like ears had chanced upon, but even forty years later, I can still recall the overriding sense of dread I carried with me for over a month, as I internalized my own private countdown to doomsday. I did share my concerns with a close friend, who told me the whole thing was just a bunch of hooey (kids still said stuff like that in those days…). Of course, HIS parents were Democrats, so how could I truly trust anything they said? Weren’t they the problem, after all?…

No, the problem turned out to be my own gullibility. I went out Trick or Treating that Halloween and partied like it was, well, 1959, and then I held my breath as the adults went to the polls on the first Tuesday of November. The election? It was a close one, mighty close, but I think you all remember how it turned out. Yup, Nixon lost. No turkey for me – or anyone else in our soon-to-be-demolished democracy. But…

Then Thanksgiving DID come after all! AND it was followed in rapid succession by not only Christmas, New Year’s Eve and Day, the JFK Inauguration, but perhaps MOST importantly of all, my very own Birthday towards the end of January 1961! Glory be – I’d made it to age eight! Heck, we’d ALL made it!! Who’d a thot? I thereby learned a great and valuable lesson – political pundits, whether they’re smartly dressed on a Sunday morning talk show or sitting around your kitchen in their work clothes, the general rule of thumb is that they don’t actually know what they’re talking about, they just SOUND like they do!!

Well, as fate would have it, I soon became a big JFK fan – how could I not? Mort Weisinger seemed to feature him in just about every other issue of one of those fabulous Superman Family comics I had only recently started buying and collecting. And a few years later, when things really DID go sour – a little thing known as the Cuban Missile Crisis, history buffs – I remained blissfully and steadfastly unconcerned. After all, I’d already been through this drill, hadn’t I? You people weren’t gonna fool me TWICE! Little did I realize just HOW close the sky actually came to falling that particular time, but by then I was fully convinced of Kennedy’s extraordinary governing abilities. Even my parents and the excitable Mr. Rowland – G.O.P. lifers all – gravitated toward the charismatic young chief executive in those so-called days of Camelot.

As for Mr. Dick, the man I so desperately wished to be 1960’s winner – if only to assure my further existence on this happy little planet – well, come 1968, let’s just say my attitudes had, um, changed somewhat. At THAT point it was my equally desperate wish was for Nixon to LOSE, again so as to guarantee my remaining existence on this not-always-so-happy little planet for the then foreseeable future.

But that, folks, is ANOTHER story!…

Vote! Because, hey, you might as well.

Hembeck.com, Fred’s MySpace, or click here to send a personal message – I invite Republican and Democrats alike to pull the lever on any one or all three of these choices! And yes, Whigs too!…

-Copyright 2006 Fred Hembeck

August 16, 2006

Scrubs Blog: Writers’ Blog 2006 #1

Filed under: Production Blogs,Scrubs Blog — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:20 am
scrubsheader.jpg
scrubswritersheader.jpg

Good morning/afternoon/evening and thanks for reading the first official entry into the Season 6 writers’ blog.  We’re Andy Schwartz and Dave Tennant, two new Staff Writers working on Scrubs this year.  For the past two months, we’ve started to learn how the Writers’ Room functions; the construction of scenes, how jokes are pitched, and even the development of character arcs. 

Although only part of the staff for a short time, we’re also beginning to understand how the show runs.  Whereas we began the year pretty green, I think it’s safe to say we’ve matured into seasoned veterans.  So to help all you aspiring writers out there, we present a fly-on-the-wall perspective, revealing a few pages of notes taken in the actual writers’ room.

 

Our First Day of Work (6/14/06):
As Bill Lawrence and the other Writer/Producers detailed the upcoming season, we eagerly scribbled away, trying to catch even the smallest of details. 

01.jpg

Our Second Day of Work (6/15/06):
With one day under our belts, we’re still excited!!!!  A few day-dream distractions, but we’re ready for the rest of the season!

02a.jpg

Our Third Day of Work (6/16/06):

03a.jpg

-Dave Tennant & Andy Schwartz
Writers

 

 

Brat-halla #141: Norse Force – Jealousy

Filed under: Brat-Halla — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:05 am

by Jeffery Stevenson and Seth Damoose with colors by Anthony Lee

Larger Comic Version | ARCHIVES | OLDER ARCHIVES

Brat-halla #141: Norse Force - Jealousy

For extras, visit the Brat-halla Web site!

Check out the preview to the Image comic Jeff writes…

E-MAIL WRITER | ABOUT JEFF | ABOUT SETH | BRAT-HALLA BLOG | BRAT-HALLA FORUM | ARCHIVES

August 15, 2006

Quick Stop Contest #3: Princess Leia

Filed under: Contests — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:00 am

leia3.jpgYou want a chance to win the long sold out 1/4-scale Premium Format Star Wars Princess Leia figure from Sideshow Collectibles? And the Exclusive Edition of the Princess, to boot?

Well, do ya?

All you have to do is click on the big honkin’ link below, submit your entry, and hope the fickle finger of fate chooses you for this great prize”¦

 

CLICK HERE TO ENTER

 

The contest will run from Thursday, August 3, 2006, until Thursday, August 17, 2006. Be sure to check back after the contest closes when the winner will be posted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hot Rod Fred Flintstone

Filed under: Toy Box — admin @ 2:40 am

 

toybox1.jpg

I’m a big fan of cartoon lines.  Simpsons, Invader Zim, Ren and Stimpy…Hell, I even have Cow and Chicken stuff.  Everyone always talks about the likenesses on real people, and how tough it is to do, but the simple lines and easy designs of some of our best loved cartoons are just as difficult to do in three dimensions as any human likeness. 

Humans are already in three dimension.  They also don’t vary in scale and proportion just because they turned to one side or the other, and they don’t vary based on the individual animator working on them that day.  Perhaps most important, they don’t have a ‘style guide’ that must be followed, even when it hasn’t been accurate in a decade.

The classic Hanna-Barbera cartoons spanned many decades and many classics, from the Flintstones to Yogi Bear.  Mcfarlane Toys picked up the license last year, and has just released their first series of figures, including two Tom and Jerry sets, a Fred Flintstone, Quick Draw McGraw, and Hong Kong Phooey.  I reviewed this wave earlier this week over at MROTW, and today I’m covering the deluxe boxed set based on that old Bedrock madman himself.

 

toybox_081506_1.jpg

 

 This set is called Fred Flintstone in his Cruiser, although I think the name:

“Hot Rod Fred Flintstone”

is more befitting.  Or maybe Rat Fink meets Fred Flintstone.  Rat Flintstone?  Fred Flintfink?  You get my point.

Packaging – ***
This deluxe set, like most Mcfarlane deluxe sets, comes in a box with a large window.  The set is laid out in the interior tray for maximum display potential for the MIBers, and has some nice character specific graphics and text.  I also like the light colors and kid-centric pallette. 

 

toybox_081506_2.jpg

 

One of the advantages of boxes over cardback/bubble packaging is that it is usually more collector friendly, allowing you to remove the figure and set without destroying the packaging.  That’s not the case here, and you’ll be tossing this box as soon as you’ve freed him.

Sculpting – **1/2
When I was a kid, I loved Fred Flintstone.  The predecessor to cartoon dads like Homer Simpson and Peter Griffen, he bumbled his way through the stone age.  He definitely wasn’t a complex guy, and there were certain things he did – and didn’t do.

The deluxe boxed set depicts Fred drag racing in some sort of hot rod.  As I mentioned earlier, it has a prehistoric Rat Fink look to it, and unlike his regular car which was ‘motorized’ with Fred’s own feet, it has an engine of sorts.  More on that later.

 

toybox_081506_3.jpg

 

The sculpt is decent in terms of general detail, scale and quality.  These figures are probably supposed to be in the same 4″ scale as the recent Simpsons sets from Mcfarlane, and that works out pretty well with the Quick Draw and Phooey, but Fred does tend to be a bit on the tall side when placed with the others.  That is, if you could place him with the others.  Fred is permenantly attached to the seat of his hot rod.  He does have a full body however.

There’s as much small detail work as you could get into a cartoon figure, including some terrific stone texturing on the wheels and car itself.  My issue with this sculpt is not one of technical quality, but rather aesthetic appeal.

You see, this isn’t the Fred I remember.  I’m betting at some point in some later version of Fred, he actually drove a hot rod.  Perhaps it even looked like this.  But this isn’t an iconic look for Fred, something people will instantly recognize.  It’s like having your first Homer Simpson figure dressed up like Ganesh – sure, it happened, and you’d recognize Homer, but fans would be left wondering ‘huh?’.  That’s my major problem here.

The deluxe boxed set in the second series will have Fred in his traditional car with the family at the drive-in, betting the ribs delivered, right out of the old opening sequence.  It will also have an individual Fred figure with Dino, hopefully also from the opening sequence.  These are classic moments, and I’m betting I’ll be much happier with those two.  Your dinosaur mileage may vary.

BTW, why is the little pterodactyl tied on the antenna (an early version of Sirius radio?), and why does he have a cigar in his mouth?  I don’t remember any pterodactyl’s smoking cigars…did Fred have a pet pterodactyl in the later cartoons?  We may never have the answers to life’s most perplexing questions.

Paint – ***1/2
The paint ops on all the figures and this set are excellent, with only the barest amount of slop and bleed between colors.  These figures sport a much wider range of colors than the usual Mcfarlane figure, and the quality is up to their normal standards.

 

toybox_081506_4.jpg

 

There’s a little gloppiness in the skin tone in some spots, and some of the tougher colors have issues at the cuts between them, but these are all very, very minor.  I’m particularly impressed by the stone wash, and how well it worked on the car’s body, although there are a few issues with consistency between various parts (hood, body, interior of engine).

Articulation – *
The only ‘articulation’ on this set is the front hood, which opens to reveal the true source of power  a small green dinosaur with the usual white tusk on his nose.  It’s a nice feature, and works fine.

 

toybox_081506_5.jpg

  

You could say the rear wheels are articulated, since they do turn, but that’s more of the action feature and I’ll cover that in the later section.

Accessories – **
There are no traditional accessories with this set, although the car can detach from the base itself, and the antenna is a separate piece.  The detailing on both of these is terrific, especially the base, where the grass and dirt detail is amazing.

Action Feature – **1/2
Mcfarlane decided to add pseudo action features to all the figures in this line up so far.  The deluxe boxed set has ‘wheelie poppin’ action, which means that the rear tires can lock into three positions up off the ground.  There’s no real ‘action’ since you have to lift the car off the ground with your hand and pose it in a new spot, so it’s more of a display option than an action feature.

 

toybox_081506_7.jpg

 

The biggest issue with this feature is that Fred is sculpted to only look good in one mode – all the way up.  When the car is flat on the ground, he’s staring down at the hood, and with no articulation or ability to move him in his seat, he looks pretty silly.  That makes what appears to be an interesting display option not really much of an option at all.

Fun Factor – **1/2
This isn’t really designed as traditional ‘toy’, but it could hold up to most play.  Kids who are lucky enough to get Boomerang from their local cable company, or kids who watch way too many Fruit Pebbles commercials, will at least recognize Fred, and kids always love cars, right?  Obviously, that’s the conventional wisdom.

Value – ***
One thing that all Mcfarlane figures are – at least so far – is a great value.  For around $22, you’re getting a technically well sculpted, well painted, decent sized diorama type item.  That’s a solid value in a market where a twenty is getting you less and less with every release.

 

toybox_081506_8.jpg

 

Things to Watch Out for –
Not much.  In fact, there’s little change of damaging anything in putting the few parts together, and little chance of having problems with the action feature.

Overall – **1/2
If you look at these photos and think this is one great looking design for Fred, than you’re overall score is going to be much higher than mine.  I wasn’t expecting much in terms of accessories, articulation or even the goofy action feature, so my overall is based largely on paint and sculpt.  Because this is not an iconic look for Fred, and because it is their first attempt at him, I was disappointed in the design.  If you’re not, then this score will easily jump up another full star for you.

The best thing about this set for me is the apparant quality, especially in the paint.  The Simpsons line has been a bit of a disappointment in that regard, but the higher quality paint here means that the more traditional Flintstones set in the second series, and other characters like Yogi Bear and Captain Caveman, are more likely to be exceptional.

Scoring Recap:
Packaging – ***
Sculpt – **1/2
Paint – ***1/2
Articulation – *
Accessories – **
Action Feature – **1/2
Fun Factor – **1/2
Value – ***
Overall – **1/2

Where to Buy –
These are hitting Toys R Us stores, if you’re looking for a brick and mortar retailer.  Online options include:

Clark Toys has the deluxe set for $20, and the regular figures for $12 each OR if you’re buying the set, they have the best deal at just $50 for the full set of 5!

Amazing Toyz has the singles at $12, the boxed set at $22, and the set of 5 for $55.

CornerStoreComics also has the singles at $12, the set for $55, and the boxed set is at $23. You can also get all five and the boxed set for $75.

Killer Toys doesn’t have this regular series listed yet, but they do have the boxed set of Fred in the dragster for $23.

Related Links:
I reviewed the full series of wave 1 earlier this week.

 

 

Party Favors: Slacker Shame

Filed under: Joe Corey's Party Favors — UncaScroogeMcD @ 2:37 am

 

partyfavors1.jpg

NEW YORK CITY – Am I a slacker with no shame? 

When female friends saw that title given to me on The Today Show, they were very upset. “They wouldn’t call a woman a slacker for doing what you do” was a constant complaint. And many friends said I wasn’t a complete slacker since I’m always working an angle. But isn’t working a bigger angle, the key to being a slacker? What’s a more slacker moment then working for the Today Show during a local shoot with Katie Couric and joking with the producer that someday I’ll be featured on the show?

I don’t mind being called a Slacker since I was a slacker when Richard Linklater was working on an oil platform. What makes me a slacker? Perhaps it’s because my 401K plan involves scratch and win tickets. Maybe it’s the fact that my resume contains more bankrupt companies than George W Bush’s career? Probably it’s because I don’t give a crap about making the Fortune 500. Mostly it’s cause I’m willing to make fun of the rich and powerful on Fox News. Ask Jack Welch if he likes my letters to Neil Cavuto.

And you may ask how can I not care about my retirement? Just look at all those Delta Pilots about to get sodomized as the company destroys their pension plan? Why should I buy into a fraud scheme? Wouldn’t it do me better to invest my cash in Chicago Cub World Series 2006 Champions merchandise? There’s nothing safe about the future so what’s the point of planning ahead for it? You’re gonna get screwed. All planning ahead does is make you work twice as hard when the time comes around.

You buy a house and figure it’ll last you for the rest of your life. And you live there for 40 years. Then the city decides that they want a McDonald’s Strip Mall on your property so they kick your ass off the land and pay you peanuts. And the Supreme Court says your screwed. And you discover that in the end, you can only afford to stay at a crappy condo in a crackhouse. Where’s your future now? What’s the point of caring?

I’ve spent enough time in old age homes. Let me tell you, have fun now while your knees still bend without pain. Enjoy the now.  Screw sucking up to assholes because soon you’ll be totting your own oxygen cannister. Live like a frickin’ human and not be steered like a dogmatic sheep. Don’t follow daily marching orders. Try to figure out what works best for you. The greatest words you may ever tell someone you don’t like is “I don’t need your shit. Goodbye.” Cause you don’t. And if another people tell these assholes to go fuck off, they might realize that people don’t like them no matter how powerful they are. Remember when you’re on your way up, you need to be nice to these people because these are the same people that might kick your ass in a dark alley. If you can’t be happy at least be smug.

I hope I didn’t come off as smug on that show. Cause I’m happy. The freakiest thought I had while watching myself and my wife on TV was that we were the only happy people during that timeslot that didn’t have to overcome a terrible situation. I kissed my wife twice and it wasn’t done to  get the folks at home to vote online for us to win a free wedding. I was happy just to be happy.

Although I wasn’t happy about Matt Lauer’s rant about hanging out in expensive coffeeshops. Not once did I talk about coffee. I don’t even drink coffee – I’m addicted to Big K’s Citrus Drop. I was preparing to go Tom Cruise on Lauer. i was going to buy a plane ticket and be hanging out with those two guys that lean against the fence at 30 Rock. And then I’d say, “Matt Lauer, You don’t know the history of coffeeshops! I do!” In fact I had a fling with a cute barista that worked at Cup of Joe. She got more than cup of this Joe. The strange thing was her sweat was caffeinated. But why don’t I hang out in coffeeshops after such a positive moment? A few years later, I was supposed to go out with an Australian barista gal, but before we could work out a date, she got knocked up by a yardgnome of a guy that was sleeping on her sofa after he got dumped by his ex-girlfriend. It’s such a painful memory that for months I couldn’t smell roasted beans without crying. Luckily all that now is a foolish lifestory because I have a wonderful wife who doesn’t mind me kissing her on morning television. She doesn’t like coffee.

Campbell Brown seemed to like the concept of a stay at home husband who wasn’t going to unload his work funk on her shoulders. I think she was hip to finding a Joe Corey for her condo. Did I already mention that I think it is foolish that the Today Show is importing Meredith Vieira? Campbell does a great job as a fill-in. And I’m not saying that because she defended me to Lauer. Although that helps. What was the point in bringing in Meredith? What happened to fresh faces in the morning? Did Jane Pauley spend a decade jabbering with Starzilla? Meredith is old enough for Willard Scott to wish her a happy birthday. And she will still be hosting Millionaire. But NBC wants to play it safe by grabbing a big name instead of introducing America to a new sunrise pal.

I did get a little unnamed source action from the Today Show. Remember my rant about how NBC needs to keep David Gregory down in D.C. to be a pitbull in the White House Press corp instead of using him to pinch hit for Lauer? Turns out that it is Gregory that demands the gig. Gregory needs to choose between being a morning goofball or a nightly journalist. He also needs to lay off visits with Don Imus. A little mystique is nice in a career. That’s why I don’t appear on reality TV. I like to control the angles. You’ve seen my wall of DVDs, but you don’t know the titles.

And for those of you who missed my moment in the sun, it’s all here at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TX4GRxVFYWE

ZITSTEASE

Brooke Shields is now pitching ProActiv for her acne. Will Tom Cruise get on her case for using drugs to get rid of zits? Will Tom announce that Matt Lauer doesn’t understand the history of pimples?

SPRAY THE GALS

I’ve noticed on body spray ad with Nick Lachey getting checked out by the ladies as he clicks away that there’s not a single bright, bouncy blond in the pack. Was that by design or fear of a lawsuit? Did he want to avoid being on the prowl for a Jessica Simpson clone? Or having to worry about Joe Simpson hitting on his new girlfriend?

I have decided to write a book called How to Make Your Marriage Last Longer than Nick and Jessica. I can safely make such a claim since mine has outlasted their vows. Here’s just a little hint: Don’t have reality show crews in your house at all hours.

JAYNE FEVER

When did going to the movies turn into “Meatless Fridays?” Sure there’s a charm to some of the theatrical twigs, but I like my women like my shampoo – Full Bodied! And thankfully Fox has put out the Jayne Mansfield Collection. She was an actress who didn’t mind playing up the sex kitten to keep your eyeballs on the screen. The set contains The Girl Can’t Help It and Will Success Spoil Rock Hunter? These two classic films were directed by Frank Tashlin, a former Looney Tunes guy who went into the world of live action. Mansfield is almost a cartoon the way she jiggles across the screen. The films deal with the worlds of rock music and advertising. Girl Can’t Help It features performances from Little Richard, Fats Domino, Gene Vincent, Eddie Cochran and Julie London. The Sheriff of Fractured Jaw is a slight comic western that is best known for being the first Western made in Spain thus becoming the birth of the Spaghetti Western.

It’ll be great when Hollywood decides to bring the boobs back on the screen and not hire them to work in the executive suites. The biggest plus for this collection is the A&E Biography is uncensored. So you get to see the big highlights from Jayne’s Promises! Promises!

SEXYBUTT?

Is Justin Timberlake really bringing “SexyBack?” This song sounds like it was stolen from an old Nintendo game soundtrack. Shouldn’t I be shooting Space Invaders while listening to the song? Strange that he would say that he had Lance Bass’s back when his old boybander declared he was gay. Is Justine howling about Lance’s SexyBack?

You know who is bringing Sexyback? Roxy Music. They’re returning with a whole new album. You want sexy? Put Avalon on the cd player. Music as smooth as your date’s undergarments.

Justin’s record might be sexy if your date is tone deaf.

There was a recent report that kids with sexually oriented songs on their iPods are more likely to have sex. When I was a big prog rock fan, I never got laid.  My bed was pretty empty when I had In the Court of the Crimson King on the turntable. During my English prog rock years, the nookie jar was empty. If you want your kids to hear “No” when asking for sex, buy them Yes’ Tales From Topographic Oceans. Soon as I moved beyond Emerson Lake and Palmer, it was like a bathing in Axe bodyspray. Ladies were all over me. Even though I’m married, I still keep my old prog rock albums hidden for fear of being cut off by the wife after she hears Tarkus.

SCREW THE EMMYS

I’m not too big of fan of Emmy awards . It’s all politics and popularity with this voting body. What’s amazing is how many great shows go without getting any major nominations. You can forgive the Oscars and the Grammys for blowing it because they are about one shot projects. Some films don’t have complete impact until a year or two after they’re released. But TV shows? They go on for years. So even if the Emmy goofs overlook a show in its first season or two, you’d expect they’d catch on by season three. So I ponder why shows like Oz, The Wire and Queer As Folk get shafted by these alleged voters? There’s so many great performers on these shows and they get zippo respect. How else do they explain Ellen Bursytn getting an Emmy nomination for being on the screen for 11 seconds? She gets Best Supporting actress for 11 seconds?

I’m thankful for the internet age because I’m not tempted to watch the show. I can just click over to E!’s website and check on who has won. And I can sit back and watch something worthy of my attention like reruns of Gene Simmons’ Family Jewels.

So while the Mediatric clones want to hype up these alleged awards, you should ignore them. The only good thing about winning an Emmy is that you can use the trophy to kill an intruder. It is not a child-safe award.

GENE’S BALLS

I’ve seen the first two episodes of Gene Simmons: Family Jewels and it was somewhat entertaining for a family reality show. Gene’s a major prick. He’s too goofy around his kids, sleazy around bimbos and vicious around industry folks to be embraced. I’d love to Gene hang out with my dad for a day. Not that it would be major entertainment. But it could turn into a Highlander competition for jerky dads.

For all Gene’s talk about liking to hook up with other women – which is the reason he refuses to marry Shannon Tweed, we’ve yet to see him disappear into a hotel room with a Hooters girl. I’m waiting for the moment that the daughter can’t reach dad’s cellphone while the camera shows a locked hotel room door. Is he going to be all talk about being able to seek pleasure with other women?

The show itself has two major things going for it. Son Nick Simmons is an amazing comic talent. He’s so comfortable playing himself on camera that he’s allowed to riff off his father without hesitation. It also helps that he might be the tallest TV son since Chip Cunningham on Happy Days. The second thing is that instead of solo interviews, they have at least two family members on the sofa talking about an issue. It’s good to see the reaction of other family members. Nick’s golden moment comes when he’s stuck on the sofa with Gene in full Kiss makeup. The son pleads for home viewers to adopt him away from his demon dad.

Worse comes to weird, Nick can expect a call from The Surreal Life. Not sure about his band breaking it big. Doesn’t help that Gene stole Nick Simmons and the Electric Chairs from Wayne/Jayne County and the Electric Chairs. There’s a feud going on now between Gene and Jayne. Jayne’s already pissed because her first band’s name was Jayne County and the Backstreet Boys. Although in Jayne’s case, Backstreet Boy was meant as a gay sex moppet nickname.

Will Gene and his crew make us forget the Osbournes? That’s a hard trick since the Osbournes were a walking disaster zone. Gene is too much in control. I do have to wonder why a guy with a band and custom built house doesn’t have a soundproof practice space/studio. And why his office desk doesn’t have a computer? How does Gene keep instant track of how many Kiss coffins have been sold in Japan?

BEHIND THE SCENES TYPING

For those of you wondering what I was typing in the Today Show piece, here it is:

What more can I ask for? How about those tickets to the Playboy Mansion? Although I’m probably still on the list for insisting that Hef has Ozzy’s control problems. And what’s up with this year’s Ozzfest turning into a craptaculatr? When I saw the tour,  it was Sabbath and Judas Priest and even Slip Knot – this year it’s a bunch of bands that I wouldn’t sell to my mother’s aunt for yardwork. Ick. Now the camera is up on my face and

SLIP ONS

The shot in Christina Aguilera’s “Ain’t No Other Man” where she puts on her high heels needs to go in the shoe fetish hall of fame.

NAKED TRAVEL

Now I can’t pack toothpaste in my carry on bag for plane flights? We should just show up at the airport naked and be forced to buy all new clothes at our destination.

PISS ON PARIS

Did I not predict that I could win the Tour De France with a bottle of clean urine? I enjoyed watching the X Games last week because half of the commentary on the events wasn’t taken up by discussions of doping and waiting for the winners to piss before they can talk to the press. Granted half of the people competing for X Games’ Gold couldn’t pass a piss test to get a job a 7-Eleven. But who cares? I want to see some death defying twirls. And Party Favors wishes Dave Mirra a speedy recovery from lacerating his liver. Isn’t that something that happens from drinking too much Goldschlager?

 

August 14, 2006

Interview: Maurice LaMarche

Filed under: Interviews — UncaScroogeMcD @ 6:42 am

-by Ken Plume

When it comes to the kind of subjects I get it into my fool head to interview, they generally tend to be choices that your average celeb-chaser would blink twice at and then move on, with little comprehension of the fascinating people and careers that exist outside of names like Pitt, Gibson, Cruise, or Hilton.

A few years back, I decided to begin interviewing cartoon voice actors. Spurred on by a love of animation and a deep respect for the often unsung actors who bring characters like Homer, Spongebob, Bugs Bunny, Ludwig Von Drake, Fry, Tigger, Huckleberry Hound (the list could go on, and on, and on), and many more to life, I set about doing in-depth interviews with as many voice actors (who would a) grant the request and b) not hang up) as possible.

Due to various delays and scheduling snafus, many of these in-depth pieces have sat on the proverbial shelf for the past few years, but are finally being presented here at Quick Stop.

The first interview from the vaults is with an amazingly gifted voice actor who an entire generation is familiar with as one half of Pinky & The Brain (the big-headed, world dominance craving Brain half), Maurice LaMarche. Suffice it to say, he’s had a fascinating and varied career, and I’d much rather leave it to the interview, and his own words, to tell you more…

——————————————————————-

mo-01.jpgMAURICE LAMARCHE: Hey, Ken. Maurice here.

KEN PLUME: It’s a pleasure to be speaking with you.

LAMARCHE: Nice to speak with you. I wanted to do this from the pool of my Beverly Hills mansion, but I realized I don’t have one.  I’m gonna have to settle for parking on a side street in Beverly Hills and pulling out a Cuban cigar.

KP: Aren’t there loaner pools for voice actors?

LAMARCHE: I don’t know.  I wonder if there are talent pools for voice actors, and I hope to find one.

KP: So you would you prefer Maurice, Mr. LaMarche, or just Sir?

LAMARCHE: Mo. Everybody calls me Mo.

KP: You’re Canadian, right?

LAMARCHE: I am.

KP: Born in the late 50’s…

LAMARCHE: Yes, 1958.

KP: Were you raised in Canada?

LAMARCHE: I was not farm raised or grain fed, but yes, I was raised in Toronto.  Actually, I started life in Toronto and then immediately, almost like right out of the maternity ward, we moved to a little town called Timmins, Ontario, which is where Shania Twain is from.

KP: There’s sort of a time warp aspect to the more rural areas of Canada.

LAMARCHE: Yes, but I left when I was four so it was still the hippest place going as far as I was concerned.  Except for the 25 degree below zero days in May.  But other than that, it was all I knew. But it did give me the hardy texture I have today in terms of dealing with cold and all… I mean, I still go out in shirt sleeves in, you know, 40 degree weather out here, and people marvel at it.  My blood was thickened at an early age.

KP: That’s as frigid as it gets in L.A., isn’t it?

LAMARCHE: Oh yes.

KP: What were the cultural aspects that you were exposed to at that time?  Canada at that time is a weird sort of cultural prism, and the elements weren’t exactly what we here in the U.S. would have had.

LAMARCHE: It’s a bit of a bubble, I’d have to say, culturally.  I think a lot of staying in. The most important thing to do when you were a kid in Canada was to somehow get home from school without freezing to death, and going right inside and watching afternoon television.  So you always got a healthy dose of Star Trek and Batman and the Commander Tom show, which was a local cartoon host show.  Lots of butter tarts, which are this gooey, very fattening food which are needed to put a layer of blubber on most of us so that we can withstand the cold.  A lot of pain, a lot of tourtiere, which is a French Canadian meat pie.  Just warm, fatty comfort foods, you know, once you get in the door.  And a lot of Hockey Night in Canada, which was very difficult for me, because I’m the only heterosexual Canadian male born without the hockey gene.

KP: How did that affect you growing up?

LAMARCHE: There are flaming drag queens in Canada that care more about hockey than I do. And I don’t know how the hell that happened because my father palled around with the Mahovlich brothers and Al Arbor in his childhood.  He was from Timmins, and that’s where they’re all from, and if it wasn’t for his height, he actually might have made at least the farm teams. He was very talented as a hockey player and a natural athlete, and could skate rings around people.  It was actually fascinating to watch. 

KP: So did you have issues with coordination?

LAMARCHE: I just didn’t care.  It just didn’t register.  Didn’t appear as a blip on my radar.  It was none of my business.  The game going on at the Maple Leaf Gardens was no more my business than the fight my neighbors five doors down were having.

KP: In Canada, that’s almost unpatriotic.

LAMARCHE: It is, absolutely, and I was ostracized.  Even from my father.   He couldn’t figure me out.  He thought it was blasphemy that here I was this French Canadian kid and I didn’t care about hockey.

KP: I can’t imagine how you would try and relate to the other kids then.

LAMARCHE: I didn’t.  So hence I went into my own little world of cartoons and sixties television. There was a show on local TV there called Tiny Talent Time, and much like Bobby from King of the Hill, I remember going to my parents and telling them I wanted to go on Tiny Talent Time, and be a comedian.  And all they had was kids from the age of four to eleven doing their talent. It was a really cheesy show.  And I remember my grandmother said, “You wanna be a what?  A comedian? Oh, I can’t imagine anything so frickin’ ridiculous.”

KP: So not only did you lack the hockey gene, but you wanted to be an entertainer.

LAMARCHE: Yes. Now, my family were all natural entertainers.  My grandfather on my mother’s side was a master mimic.  He wasn’t professional, but he was well known in his group of friends for his impressions of Maurice Chevalier and Adolph Hitler.

KP: What a winning combination.

LAMARCHE: Yes.  Of course, you’ve got to realize this was pre-holocaust in the war.  He was just sort of this mean guy in Germany.  After the Nuremburg Trials the true horror of what he had done really began to spread through the world, but before that, he was just looked at as this aggressive SOB over in Europe and it was really none of anybody’s business.  So my grandfather did a great Hitler, a great Maurice Chevalier.  And my mother also could mimic any one of her friends.  She didn’t do famous people, but she would relate stories of conversations she’d had with her friends, and play all the friends in the conversation. You knew exactly who was talking, and four people were talking in this story. She kept it very, very distinct and separate and spoke in their voices, and she was a wonderful storyteller and joke teller.  My father had a very sardonic sort of sense of humor and just ridiculed everything.  So the two of them… my father couldn’t tell a joke to save his life, but my father denied the two main rules of comedy – which is brevity is the soul of wit and… well, this is more of an anti-rule – the joke is always about somebody else. It’s always about two Jews walk into a bar.  You don’t say, “I happened to walk into a tavern with two men of the Judaic faith.” My father would always cast himself as a character in the joke, completely ruining it.  I mean, God rest his soul, but I don’t know…

KP: So he had both timing and structure issues.

LAMARCHE: Absolutely.  But let somebody cut him off on the freeway, and my father could launch into a string of expletives – understated expletives – sarcastic, cutting references to the person that would have you on the floor laughing.  So my father was unintentionally funny whenever he tapped into his anger.  My mother, wonderful raconteur and mimic… and these two things missed me entirely.  No, I guess they sort of came together in me and formed whatever sense of humor and comedy that I have.

mo-02.jpgQS: Did you get a sense at that point that the mimicry ability and humor was not something that everyone had?

LAMARCHE: Yes. I felt like I’d escaped from the bottled city of Kandor.

KP: And making a very nice  Superman reference.

LAMARCHE: Yes indeed.  And coming here, it’s like going back into the bottled city of Kandor because I meet people like Billy West and Jim Cummings and Jess Harnell and Jeff Glen Bennett, and… who else am I leaving off the list that I think is absolutely brilliant?  Rob Paulsen, of course.  A whole passel of people that can do what I do.  So it’s like Brainiac beamed me back in the bottle where I’m with all these other people with super powers.  So I’m just sort of ordinary here.  But yeah, it made me stand out, and I guess people didn’t quite know what to make of me.  I was sent to school psychologists because I wouldn’t stop doing these voices and acting out these cartoons and playing all the characters.

KP: Was it an inclusive thing, where you were the class clown, or did you create your own little world and it was an “everyone else be damned” kinda thing?

LAMARCHE: In earlier life, absolutely it was my own little world. Only in my junior year in high school did I learn to harness my powers for good instead of evil.  In other words, I learned to turn it outwards.  The turning point for me was 10th grade and the high school variety show.  I was schticking around in the cafeteria with a couple of the seniors, and they said, “He’d be great.”  This one guy, Harry Van Bommel turns to Steve Barton – I know you know these guys, so that’s why I’m telling you – and said, “He’d be great in the variety night.”  Steve Barton said, “Yeah.”  I said, “But what would I do?  All I’m doing with you guys is just floating lines from television shows.” And Steve Barton said, “Don’t worry, I’ll write you an act.”  So he wrote a little three minute long standup, “celebrities as waiters.”  And I actually used that bit.  I mean obviously I refined it, tweaked it, but I used that bit up until the very last day I did standup.  It remained a cornerstone of my act.  And lo and behold, I got a standing ovation at the variety night, and everything changed.  The next day I came to school, I was no longer the outcast.  I was a hero, people were treating me special and nice as though somehow or other this thing that I’ve always been able to do, that got me ridiculed, was now something to be admired.  It was a bit heady.  I imagine at an early, early age… it’s like those athletes that peak in high school.  I had, like, this degree of celebrity within the microcosm of my school, and it kind of sent me into a bit of a headspin kinda space.

KP: Were you able to accept and enjoy it, or was it something you were suspicious of?

LAMARCHE: No, I accepted and enjoyed it a little too much and began to think a little too much of myself.  But I quickly snapped out of that when I entered the real world.  I took my little high school act down to New York and open mic night at the Improv when I was… how old was I when I did that?  I was 18.  And when they didn’t ask me immediately to become a regular and move down to New York and – quite the opposite – they just totally ignored me…

KP: That was what – ’75, ’76?

LAMARCHE: That would be the summer of 1977.  So I’m mistaken – I had just turned 19. 

KP: That period was quite a heady time within the comic community.

LAMARCHE: Yes it was.  Maybe the best thing I could have done was to actually move down to New York at that time, but when I walked past Silver Friedman and she… you know, I didn’t make a blip on her radar, and she said, “Well, come back next month I guess.” I went back to Toronto with my tail between my legs.  But I’d gotten my first taste.

KP: Was there a sense, growing up in Canada, that entertainment originated outside the country?  That you had to go elsewhere?

LAMARCHE: Well, we had our own entertainers.  They weren’t very entertaining, but they were there. Actually, there were some very good people.  Second City was getting going then.  And I think because of developing in the bubble, it developed its own kind of humor.  Very self-deprecating, much along the lines of the Canadian national character at the time.  References upon references, somewhat unstructured.  Not Pythonesque, but almost.

KP: Well, the comedy kinda combined the best aspects of both British and American humor, didn’t it?

LAMARCHE: I think so.  But again, I think in both cases, neither of those styles is as culturally referential as, say, some of the stuff Second City did… for instance, that Fantasy Island routine that became a Bob Hope routine.  Just constantly going inside itself.  I think that was uniquely Canadian.  Other than that it’s really hard to nail down what Canadian humor is.

KP: It’s almost comedy in search of an identify, isn’t it?

LAMARCHE: Yeah, but it’s finding itself.  It’s finding itself. The Kids in the Hall, and Second City of course, and now all those guys are becoming the grand old men of comedy.  The new Burroughs.

KP: Was the goal to be a success outside of the country?

LAMARCHE: You were actually shunned if you did that.  I remember… let me think here.  Oh, here it was.  I was watching Jeopardy last night in the restaurant – it was the high school edition of Jeopardy – and I turned to the person I was with and I said, “Look at this.  Alex Trebek has come full circle.”  And the person, being American, had no idea what I was talking about, so I explained that when I first started out, I had a little job at a TV station in Toronto when Alex Trebek was doing Reach for the Top, which was a high school student quiz show.  And I, at the time, had just landed my first job in show business, which was hosting a local variety show. Kind of like Tiny Talent Time except they feature high school students.  And me being just out of high school, they thought I’d be a good host for it.  So when I was negotiating my contract, I was getting a big $175 per episode.  And I remembered saying to my friend last night, at one point Alex Trebek and I were making the same money – because my producer of this show explained to me that that’s what Trebek gets for Reach for the Top: $175.  And when Alex Trebek came down to California to host High Rollers, everybody at that local station turned their noses up at him as though he’d sold out to the great American entertainment Satan.

KP: He should be happy with his $175…

LAMARCHE: It wasn’t about the $175, it was about the fact that he was doing a high level quiz show for high school students, and that that should be his calling in life, and that this should be okay.  You know, that he should be satisfied with that.  I guess there’s the sense of, in Canada, “Who do you think you are to go beyond the ceiling?”  This is actually part of the reason I hate socialism and why I’m not living there today, amongst other factors, the prime of which is that I’d never want to put my back out shoveling another friggin’ driveway.  But the idea that there’s this cap and it’s actually this ceiling that’s actually quite low that you should never try to break out of, otherwise everybody looks at you saying, “Who the hell do you think you are to try to be better than the rest of us?”  It’s dangerous.  And I absolutely heard at least three people talk about Trebek that way.  That he…

KP: So it’s a fervent defense of the middle ground…

LAMARCHE: Absolutely. And why should anybody try to… don’t rock the boat, we’re all getting our health care taken care of, it’s free… Of course it’s not free. It comes from the astronomical taxes that the Canadians pay, but they all think their health care’s free.  Meanwhile, 66% of their money’s going away.  That’s the free health care.

KP: Ironic that the show they shunned him for leaving was called Reach for the Top.

LAMARCHE: Yeah.  It should have been called Reach for the Middle.  No, they wanted him to return to Reach for the Top, and you know what, to Trebek’s credit, he actually came back and did Reach for the Top for the same $175 for another season while they were paying him $10,000 a week down in the states to host the first season of High Rollers.  He still came back. He felt a moral duty and a sense of purpose that he was quizzing high school students and keeping the bar high in terms of educational standards.  Finally though he said it’s just not worth coming back to Toronto to do this.  I assume.

KP: Was the shaming overt? 

LAMARCHE: Not to his face.  Behind his face.

KP: Was it something he could feel?

LAMARCHE: I have no idea.

KP: Was it something that you felt?

LAMARCHE: Oh yes, absolutely.  When I left and made the attempt to better myself, the comedians at the comedy club, two or three of them wished me well, but most of them told me how tough it would be and why are you going there, you’ve got a good thing going here, you’re a big fish in a small pond here, stay in the small pond.  I just didn’t see it that way.  I saw it as my job to make the best of my lot in life.  I’ve got this talent and let’s see what I can do with it.  Let’s take it all the way.  Now a few things… I had a few bumps in the road and I did retire from standup… retire… I left standup after my dad was murdered, but… this isn’t a very linear interview, is it?

KP: No, they never are, and that’s usually for the best.

LAMARCHE: Okay.

KP: I’m not gonna limit the conversation is what I’m saying.

LAMARCHE: Okay.  But as I said, there were a few bumps in the road, and… but my point is I still saw the States as that old cliché, the land of opportunity.  You can become anything you want to be here.  That’s why I still love this country.

KP: When you’re actively making that decision, how difficult… you talk about your first foray down to the Improv.  That didn’t go as you had hoped, and when you returned, does it harden you and make you even more resolved to go back, or is it something that turned you off for the immediate future?

LAMARCHE: No, no. I absolutely wanted to come back and try and do better.  I actually had a little anxiety attack when I got back from Toronto, which manifested in my chest so everybody thought I’d had a heart attack, and I actually went to the hospital.  Of course with the free health care… free health care that my parents’ taxes were paying for, I stayed in the hospital for three weeks for observation.  For having chest pains at 19 years old.  You know, because why not?  We’ve got all this money to spend on health care. 

KP: Are you saying it’s not terribly efficient?

LAMARCHE: Do you get that impression?

KP: It’s kind of subtle.

LAMARCHE: I’m not trying to hit you over the head with it or anything. 

KP: What were you thinking, laying there for three weeks under observation?

LAMARCHE: I was thinking I wish I’d just belched and gotten the damn gas out of my chest or whatever the hell it was.  No, actually, what I was thinking truthfully was, “Oh my god there’s something horribly wrong with me.  Look at all this attention I’m getting!  Hey, maybe I can parlay this into getting laid.”  That’s what I was really thinking.

KP: Well, at least it gave you time to think.

LAMARCHE: Mm-hmm.

KP: If you hadn’t had an anxiety attack, would you have thought about going back into the fold and saying, “I gotta get out of here…”?

mo-03.jpgLAMARCHE: Actually, if I hadn’t had the anxiety attack, I probably would have told my mom and dad “I’m moving down to New York this week.”  And I’ve always regretted not moving to New York.  I came straight to Los Angeles three years later, and I always… afterwards, in retrospect, I thought it was a mistake.  I think that a couple of years in New York would have made me a stronger comedian.  I think nobody… there’s an earthiness to New Yorkers that makes you funnier.  That gives you a bit more of an edge.  And I think by forestalling for three years, I got to L.A., you know, without much refinement.  And I think that would have been a baptism of fire that would have refined my comedy muscles a little more. 

KP: What did your act consist of at the time?

LAMARCHE: My act?  They used to describe me, “He’s like Rich Little on speed.”  I used to do very rapid fire impressions.  My downfall as a comedian, or my shortcoming rather as a comedian, was that I never had great material.  I don’t think I was clever enough to write great material, and I never really… apart from one really great writing session with a guy named Josh Goldstein who went on to create Fresh Prince.  He wrote on Fresh Prince.  He co-created the one that was on Saturday nights about the Kennedy era, American something.

KP: American Dreams?

LAMARCHE: American Dreams.  He co-created American Dreams.  Anyway, Josh and I paired up for like two days and wrote about 10 strong minutes, but I had 30 minutes, so the 10 strong minutes in my act were from the Josh session, and the rest of it was just me kinda demo-ing my voices.  Sort of the high point of my career was I got to be on the 1985 HBO Young Comedians Special, the 9th Annual Young Comedians Special. And I watched it the other day, and I thought to myself, you know, I was about two years away from becoming really good, and probably about five years away from becoming great, because the problem with impressionists is we don’t say anything from the stage.  We just put on these little skits.  Putting celebrities in wacky jobs and weird situations and implying a homosexual relationship between two well-known characters.  You know, those little devices, but we don’t come from anywhere.

KP: So it’s more about performance.

LAMARCHE: Yeah.  And I think I was about five years away from figuring out that I could be the only impressionist that actually comes from somewhere. That has something to say. But you know, unfortunately in 1987 my dad’s best friend thought it would be a good idea to resolve a little argument they were having by shooting him in the chest, and I went into a tailspin of depression.  I began drinking and that became problematic. 

KP: At that point was there nowhere you could turn?

LAMARCHE: No, I was in therapy, but it’s tough to work through therapy when you come in smashed.  You absolutely must go through therapy sober.  Otherwise it’s not gonna work. It’s like turning on the air conditioning and a space heater in the same room. You’re not gonna get anything.  So I eventually did get sober in 1989.  I stopped drinking on January 20th, 1989, and haven’t had a drink since.  By then I’d lost so much momentum, and I realized there were still Reagan jokes in my act.  It was just tough to get… after falling off the horse and staying off of it for a full two years, I just never quite got back on.

KP: Can you define the spark that disappeared?  Was it your heart wasn’t in it?

LAMARCHE: In 1987 when my dad died, I remember thinking that I… this is the one thing… don’t forget, we got the hockey thing still hanging there.  The idea that my father was ashamed of me. And this was the one thing he was truly proud of me for, that I’d found my niche in life and I was doing this thing and I was doing it quite well.  In spite of my own critique of myself and my material.  I was opening… the outside world was treating me okay for it. I was the opening act for Rodney Dangerfield for a year and a half.  The Temptations and the Four Tops had me on the road with them.  I opened for George Carlin, David Sanborn, Donna Summer.  I was playing Las Vegas, Atlantic City.

KP: So it’s not like you weren’t a working comedian.

LAMARCHE: Oh no. God no.  It was actually tough to split my time between this new career that I’d started, as sort of a part time job in voiceover work, and this full time schedule of traveling around the country opening for famous people, and doing quite well in front of them.  Because I was an extra.  I was just this little extra… you know, the appetizer for them.  But they got this 20 minutes of funny impressions and stuff like that.  But my father used to fly in from wherever he was in the world – and he was quite the world traveler, especially in his later years after he’d made money.  And he would surprise me, come in from Europe just to watch me in Las Vegas… because Las Vegas was sorta his town, you know.  So for him to see his boy’s name on the marquis in big letters at Caesar’s Palace -because Rodney was very generous with billing… He absolutely insisted on giving his opening act 50% billing, which are huge letters when you come right down to it.  That was just such a thrill for him, and it was the one thing I’d done that had made him proud. And when he died, I made a decision that it wasn’t worth making anybody laugh ever again if I wasn’t going to get to make him laugh and make him proud of me.  So I made a conscious decision to abandon this thing, because it would just be too painful to look out at the audience realizing that I’ll never see his Camel nonfilter cigarette burning in his hand in the third row, where I can just barely make out his silhouette.  So there was that. Then there was just the inevitable self-pity that came with being a drunk, and finally after being two years out of the game, just feeling as though I was out of touch with the scene, and that I didn’t know how I would ever be able to get on the bike again…

KP: There’s a quote attributed to you that Sam Kinison said in a Rolling Stone interview…

LAMARCHE: Yeah…

KP: That “You can make them laugh, but you can’t make them happy…”

LAMARCHE: Yeah.

KP: What period did that quote come out of?

LAMARCHE: When we were both doing standup.  We both had gotten quite smashed one night, and Sam was actually very sad.  He was actually in tears.  His girlfriend was consoling him because he was wondering about whether what we did meant anything.  And he said, “Maurice, we help people, don’t we?  We make ’em happy?”  And I said, “No Sam, we make them laugh but we can’t make them happy.”  He went, “Yeah, yeah,” and he kept balling because he really felt like his life was meaningless. (laughing)  Mr. Cheerful helping Sam out!  But it’s the reality.  There’s a huge difference between fun and happiness.  Fun is momentary.  Fun happens in little short spurts and then it’s over. 

KP: When you’d get up on stage as a comedian during that period, who were you getting up on stage for?  Yourself or others?

LAMARCHE: Well, that really became a turning point for me.  I realized I was doing it for myself. And the couple of attempts that I’d made at getting back into it, a good friend of mine, Mike Binder said – I don’t mean to drop names, but here… because Anthony Hopkins told me never to do that – but Mike Binder’s a very funny comedian… He created the series Mind of a Married Man. He said, “Before you go up on stage, Mo, say a prayer to god that you’ll be of service to the audience. That you’ll be able to make the one guy laugh who was there because he’s had a rough day, rough week at the office or he’s got a sick child or something like that, and he really needs to get away from his problems, and you’ll bring a laugh to that guy.”  Because I actually made a very, very short lived attempt to get back into standup in 1990. And tragically enough – and I’m not saying these two things coincide – my little sister was killed in a car accident in September of 1990 at the age of 18 and I just, you know… at that point I just threw up my hands and went, “Oh, that’s it.  I don’t have any funny left in me.  I’m done.”  But in that little period there where I tried to come back to it, that stayed with me, and of course when one recovers from alcoholism one has to live one’s life on a more spiritual basis, so I tried to adapt that, and I did fine. It was a better feeling getting up on stage, praying that prayer, “God, help me bring a laugh to somebody who really needs one today.”  It definitely… there was a turnaround there and it felt better.

KP: But prior to that, would you say you were doing it more along the lines of sort of a lingering feeling of how you felt in high school when you first got that big rush?

LAMARCHE: Yeah, it was absolutely all about me.  Mm-hmm.  No question.

Take Me Home Blog #5 – The Power of Negative Thinking

Filed under: Production Blogs,Take Me Home Blog — UncaScroogeMcD @ 5:41 am

 

takemehomeheader.jpg

Just how long does it take you to say “no”?  

Try it.  Go on, no one’s looking.

There.  Not too hard, was it?  Well, pat yourself on the back, my friend.  For some people, say… our prospective investors, that two-letter word took over TWO MONTHS to say.  Consider yourself blessed.  You have done in one second what took a team of very wealthy men an entire summer!  Remember that next time you’re on the couch, watching reruns of The Simpsons and questioning your self-worth.  Just say, “hey, I can do in one second what took a team of wealthy lawyers an entire summer.”  Then continue eating Cheetos off your chest, knowing you are truly great.

Yes, indeed, our film has been derailed… two months shy of our start date.  On Thursday we found out that our investors, who had seemingly been so enthusiastic about our film, backed out.  This is after several months of positive banter about the project.  Solidifying contracts.  Perusing budgets.  Last minute clarifications.  Appeasement.  All for a big, fat “NO”.

WE SHOULD HAVE SEEN THIS COMING.  No.  We saw this coming, and yet we did nothing.  It was as if we locked our keys in the car and KNEW we were locking our keys in the car AS we shut the door.  Like, “Oh, wow.  I’m locking my keys in the car and AW, DAMMIT!  Why did I DO THAT!!”

Why DID we do that?  Well, we had our options.  We could A). Work very hard to ensure that several pockets of investors are deciding simultaneously on yet another very sound business venture, or B) put all our eggs in one basket.  Needless to say, the choice was obvious.  I mean, who doesn’t like a basket of eggs?!

ON THE PLUS SIDE?
This is not the first film to lose its funding in the final hour, and it won’t be the last.  Hopefully, it’s the last for US, though.  And if there is something positive to come from this (and there isn’t, mind you), it’s that we have our answer.  True, it’s not the one we were hoping for, but it IS an answer.  We know where we stand at last. And now, beginning this very day, we can start rebuilding.  Learning from our egregious mistakes.  Finding yet another avenue for this film. 

I’ve got to be honest, I have not been enjoying this process.  Not lately.  The reason? I put the worth of my film (and ashamedly, a little of my own self-worth) into some businessmens’ hands. Not the most comforting place to be.

I went back to Ohio this weekend for my grandma’s 90th birthday party. I got to see all the people I love most in the world. My brother and sisters. Mom and dad. Cousins, nieces, nephews…. All of them there to celebrate a woman who lived through The Great Depression, World War II, and The Cabbage Patch Doll hysteria of ’83. Not exactly an easy life. But let’s be honest, I think my investor woes stack up pretty good against that Great Depression crap, right? RIGHT?!

If I were in the midst of curing cancer, or AIDS, (heck, even gonorrhea) this might be worth the stress. But what is this?! It’s a movie. Is it going to change the entire world? Not likely (though I’ve got a good feeling about parts of Central Asia).

So why have I let this get to me so much? This tiny little word “no”?!

In the end, if I’m not finding value in making this movie, even in (gulp) the rejections, what’s the point? What if, instead of five more months, it takes five more YEARS to get this film made? Am I going to be miserable all five years? As much as admire that kind of committed depression, I think I’d rather start enjoying myself again.

“Sometimes it is better to travel than to arrive.”
-Robert M. Piesig
“Zen & the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”

 

-Sam Jaeger

jaeger.jpg

Widge Goes Off #8: The Menace From Planet W!

Filed under: Widge Goes Off — widge @ 2:13 am
widgegoesoff.jpg

widgepic.jpgWelcome back. You did bring pizza this time, right? Because I distinctly remember it was your turn to bring the pizza.

[CONTENT WARNING] This podcast contains foul language and high fructose corn syrup.

DOWNLOAD: mp3 Format (24.7 MBs)

The article on the RIAA and lawsuits and everything the layperson needs to know about them is here.

Here’s the Boing Boing listing regarding the blog covering various and sundry Creative Commons gems.

As for your Monday Morning Quarterbacking session, check out the podcast. Follow along here at Box Office Mojo.

Bonus Link: The musician Pink apparently has borrowed quite a great deal from Martin Elmond. Check out the full skinnee here. Thanks to Keith for the headsup.

Special thanks to Exit Mindbomb for letting me use “Godzilla Will Rule You” from their album Happy Accident for my new WGO music. Check them out on MySpace here and I tried to link up as many songs as I could here.

Widgett Walls is the chief cook and bottle washer for Needcoffee.com. He’s also the author of Mystics on the Road to Vanishing Point and Magnificent Desolation. His personal blog is at OneTusk.com, which he updates when he feels like it. He lives and works in Atlanta, Georgia. He hardly ever sleeps.

Spook’d #90: Extreme Lair Makeover – Still Bringing Down the House

Filed under: Spook'd — UncaScroogeMcD @ 2:06 am

by Jeffery Stevenson and Seth Damoose with colors by Anthony Lee

Larger sized comic | ARCHIVES | OLDER ARCHIVES

Spook'd #90: Extreme Lair Makeover - Still Bringing Down the House

To see Spook’d host Alastor’s blogging silliness and more fun Spook’d stuff,visit the Spook’d Web site!

Check out the preview to…

E-MAIL WRITER | ABOUT JEFF | ABOUT SETH | SPOOK’D BLOG | SPOOK’D FORUM | ARCHIVES | OLDER ARCHIVES

Disclaimer: All material in Spook’d is fictitious and intended solely for the purpose of entertainment. Names are fabricated and any similarity to real people or places is purely coincidental except in those cases where public figures are being satirized.

Preachin’ from the Longbox: You’ve Got the Look

Filed under: Preaching from the Longbox — UncaScroogeMcD @ 2:06 am

 

longbox.gif

 

 

This Week’s Sermon – “You’ve Got the Look”

August 14, 2006

A common thread that has been persuasive throughout most of the past PftL columns is the devilish way that I have compared Marvel’s choices of their character-licensed products and the sexual decisions of a drunken Tara Reid on the E! Channel.   Basically, any guy in the bar/club will get a chance with her.   And I’m not exaggerating.  If you don’t believe me, watch an episode of Taradise and try to tell me with a straight face that she’s not looking for a poke-her party with the locals at the very least. 

Marvel HerocutI’m also not kidding about Marvel either.  Some choice Marvel-licensed products include such winners like those Wahl Haircut Kits, the never-imitated, never-duplicated Super Lithos (their website has been off-line for some time due to an unspecified reason ““ hmm, I wonder why?) and those wonderful half-dollar coins (coins + super-heroes = lame).  I won’t begin to mention their highly sketchy relationships with Dynamic Forces (and their huckster HSN showcases) and Wizard Entertainment (who have somehow become Marvel’s exclusive convention provider).  Now, I realize that there are some Zombies living in this world that will buy tons of merch that is Marvel Comics-related.  (Although, I’m not so biased that I wouldn’t miss out on picking up a low-grade Mjolnir on the cheap for $10 at Amazon.com.)  But when you’re dropping some decent paper on a Captain America-endorsed haircut gizmo, you will buy almost anything.  And that you really don’t care about your physical appearance.

(Speaking about buying crap, is it me or have hard times hit both entertainment stalwarts, Huey Lewis and Sally Fields?  Within a span of a day, I saw Mr. “I Need A New Drug” pushing TimeLife’s “Superstars of the 80s” CD compilations while the old Ma Gump was pushing some calcium supplement called Boniva.  Don’t get me wrong; I would take that endorsement money in a heartbeat.  But these two should have enough dough in the bank so they wouldn’t have to resort to hocking crap in informercial-lite commercials.  It’s truly sad.  Alright, back to the column”¦)

And I was content with keeping that opinion.  That was until I saw something that caught my eye that would be a perfect item for me to give it the always-tough PftL product quality test.

With the help of moneymaking movies like Superman Returns, the X-Men and Spider-Man franchise, the market for comic book apparel for adults seems to be blowing up.  Okay, that might be an overstatement but it looks that way in my closet.  And nothing feels better in the Metro Washington DC, 110-degree 100% humidity hotter-than-hell summer than flip-flops, cargo shorts and a slick superhero t-shirt.

The Super-LithoBut, in those very same max A/C, fry-an-egg-on-the-sidewalk summers, that T usually turns into a wet and heavy cotton rag.  Aside from the noxious stench that you might be perpetrating with that shirt, sweating that much doesn’t look all that cool unless you’re strugg-a-ling to run on a 10-minute mile on the old treadmill.  And unfortunately, if you’re a single guy and that shirt has a screen print of Superman or Spider-Man, odds are that those muscle-bound heroes in colorful tights is not going to win too many points with the opposite sex; even if you’re married.  Take it from me, folks.

Now, before I go any further, let me be frank with you guys (and gals).  I’ve got way too many t-shirts.  There’s enough of them to make my wife tell me that I’d better start thinning them out myself or she’ll do it for me (with disastrous consequences, at least my imagination leads me to believe).  So, as my piles of finely woven 100% cotton tees slowly dwindle, I needed to find a way to increase my t-shirt collection on the sly.

Then, I found this site called PureHero.com.  If this is the first time that you’re hearing about this site, then an introduction is needed.  Here’s where they’re coming from pulled right off their website:

We, here at PureHero, believe that superhero fans want and deserve more than the same old tee-shirt. We design premium performance apparel that reflects our love for superheroes, using the best sports designs. Whether playing classic or extreme sports, gaming, or just studying physics like Peter Parker, you’ll love our product ““ how it feels, how it works, how it looks.

Now, that’s saying something.  But is there truth in their claim of providing premium performance apparel for the superhero fan?  Or it is just the usual internet hype?  I posed those questions to myself when I decided to put one of their more popular products, the Punisher Performance Technical Crew Top, through the PftL quality apparel and situational test.

Britt Schramm - Test Dummy

So, with pen, paper and clipboard in hand ala Dr. Rudy Wells, I started grading how the t-shirt performed in certain “stressful” functions to see how the shirt’s ability to wick away sweat worked.  But first, here were my initial impressions of the shirt when I received it in the mail.

The Packaging ““ The shirt was polybagged, which give a good understanding that they know their clientele.  Ripping that bag open was somewhat cathartic.  That being said, it wouldn’t surprise me that CBG will decide to start slabbing these shirts in order to drive up the secondary market.

The Look ““ The skull logo looks sharp.  It’s high quality rubberized gray with a silver metallic trim, which does look better on the shirt than a stark white one in person.  No tired, ghetto-style silk-screening process here.  The Punisher script on the back neck is a nice touch.  The shirt’s color is just that ““ a straight up, dark as night black; not a lighter shade or heather.  A red Marvel tag on the right side reminds me of a certain jeans company but more in homage way than anything else.

The Feel ““ The shirt’s weave is buttery soft and feels nice against the skin.  Depending on the size ordered, it can be as tight as those Under Armour Compression shirts or as loose as a regular tee. (In case you were wondering, I’m went with the latter.  I realize that my body may resemble the Comic Book Guy more than I’d care to admit.)

It is Hip to Sell-OutSo, after the shirt passed the initial part of this consumer report testing, it was time for the field work.

Scenario #1 ““ Rather than get right out there and push the limits of the shirt (stop laughing), I decided to go slow and ramp up the testing.  I broke out the shirt for an impromptu evening screening of Clerks 2 in humid Florida.  I thought that it was a good initial foray into a social gathering among some likeminded friends.  I got a couple of favorable comments on the shirt and there was no outright guffawing by the other patrons of the gigaplex.  And while I wasn’t sweating in the nice air-conditioned theater, the shirt didn’t hamper my ability to laugh my ass off.  So, based on those results, the shirt passed the first test.  But there were two more to come.

Scenario #2 ““ The next time I wore the shirt, it was to my mother-in-law’s birthday party.  Now, before you say that this is not a test, let me explain a couple of things to you.  First off, my mother-in-law does not like to hang out inside ““ no matter how hot it is on the outside.  I’ve got nothing against hanging out on the porch but when the temps are almost hitting the century mark, I’m looking for AC, plain and simple.  But at her house, she still likes the inside to be around 80 degrees Fahrenheit.  Let’s just say that I wasn’t drowning in my own sweat while I was there, but the shirt did get some work.  The shirt did get a little damp from sweat but it dried within minutes and I actually survived the party without dying from heatstroke.  I don’t know about you but that would definitely get a pass in my book.  On to the third and last test”¦

Scenario #3 ““ To prevent that image in the mirror to become more and more like that Android’s Dungeon guy, I decided at the beginning of the year to drop a few pounds.  And thus began my love-to-hate exercise affair.  Unfortunately, a new job has prevented me from working out at lunch so I’ve fallen off the exercise wagon for the time being.  However, since I wanted to test the shirt out, I decided to go out and shoot some raindrops at the work hoop.  At noon during the hottest, damn day in the Metro Washington DC area.  Yeah, I’m not the smartest guy around but you should’ve known that by now.  After a few minutes, the shirt was getting a heavy dose of the wet stuff.  And it was working great as the material was in the process of getting drenched; it dried relatively quickly for that kind of output.  The one slight knock on the shirt is not really on the shirt itself but in the style.  It would’ve been great to get a sleeveless shirt for sports the require full range motion of the arms like basketball or those 12-ounce curls in front of the teevee.  Though, after all was said and done on the blacktop, I left the court like I usually did back in the day ““ exhausted and limping.  But unlike most of those other times, my shirt didn’t look like it was partying down in Fort Lauderdale during Spring Break.  Really, no one needs to see that.

Overall ““ This Punisher Performance Technical Crew Top is a great item and is moving into top rotation in my t-shirt wearing schedule.  It has the science behind it for the active lifestyle but has the panache of a slacker counter jockey.    Again, the only knock that I have is that I want a sleeveless version of the crew shirt so I can dominate on the glass while getting a more complete farmer’s tan.  Truthfully, this shirt should be considered a cross-training shirt; you can wear it from couch to court without looking like a schlub.  I can’t recommend it enough.

To that end, the very generous people at PureHero.com have given my peeps (that’s you guys – my loyal readers) a sweet deal just for reading this column.  Check it out below:

PureHero.com Promo Code

Remember, it only lasts until the middle of September so buy it like you stole it, people.

The PftL Inbox

Fellow Big Planet loyalist Adam J writes:

As much as I love Robert DeLeo, I must say, I doubt Army of Anyone will sell many records.  And this is coming from someone who loved the Talk Show record.  Is this “supergroup’s” (and let’s be honest, anything involving David Lee Roth’s backing band can’t be that super) album even out?

PftL:  Adam, it’s great to hear that there’s someone else who really dug that Talk Show CD, a very underrated effort by the three non-smacked out members of STP and some English guy.  And you’re right; the AoA CD is not out yet.  But a guy can hold out some hope for it do actually be good, right?  And yeah, having a former DLR bandmate doesn’t sound all that super.

Deadpool and Plastic man would be bad ass though.  What about a Madrox/Booster Gold team up…?

PftL:  A Madrox/Booster Gold team-up would be a solid book.  I could see someone well-versed in wordplay like Robert Kirkman writing it with some left field artist like Jim Mahfood or Doug Mahnke drawing the one-shot.  And I could see it sell pretty well.  But as well as Army of Anyone?  Ehh, maybe or maybe not.  How do you like that for decisiveness? 

— ### —

Co-chair of the PftL regular emailers’ club, Chet K, chimes in about coming to grips with being an “out” nerd:

Just a note to let you know the harmful effects of this nerd stigma.  I have long wished to attend comic con, but I have so feared the stigma of being labled an uber-nerd that I have never even contemplated actually going.  Now, I am “out” with my close friends and family.  They know about my closet Star Wars trivia addiction as well as my unsightly bouts of utter lunatic excitement that accompanies every new superhero movie and cartoon.  However, as far as my co-workers and other professional contacts might know I could be a die hard Nascar fan, albeit without the requisite mullet. 

PftL:  Hey, Chet, my man, watch the NASCAR fan comments.  I’m a card-carrying member of that club.  And for your information, not all of us have mullets.  (Although I do rock the “all business in the front, nothing but a party in the back” cut, which I cut with my officially licensed Marvel Haircut Clippers by Wahl, and have my old El Camino on blocks in the front yard).  But that’s beside the point.

Now, in my opinion, the biggest roadblock to nerd-dom becoming an accepted social condition is the nerd on nerd hate”¦A house divided cannot stand.  Nerds must unite and accept one another before we can expect anyone, especially journalists (who are barely sentient anyway) to accept us.  Solidarity brothers (and very few sisters)!

PftL:  There’s a ring of truth in that statement.  I can’t stand that other fans of more niche stuff like Trekkies, LARPers or even Civil War Re-enactors try to come off as better when they put down another group of fans by calling them “nerds”.  And yet, there’s nothing better than making fun of my Trekkie boss by saying that “Voyager” was the best Trek series around when it’s clearly should be “Deep Space 9″.  Gets him every time.

— ### —

The wrap-up

First, I’ve changed ISP providers, which means that I have a new mailing address. Just click on my name and you’ll get the new addy. So, make with the clicky-clicky and send some email to yours truly so you can get in this column..

Second, if you’re a new reader and would like to read some of the archived Preachin’ from the Longbox and laugh at my earlier attempts at writing a column or if you just want to relive some good times, just click below and it’ll take you there:

Preachin' from the Longbox Archive

— ### —

I’m off the Longbox this week. Don’t forget to keep your bags and boards together and your continuity straight. Until next time”¦

-britt

 

 

 

 

August 13, 2006

Comics in Context #141: San Diego 2006 – Mr. Robinson’s Neighborhood

Filed under: Comics in Context — admin @ 5:17 am

 

comicsincontext1.jpg

The following events took place on Thursday, July 20 between 11:OO AM and 7:00 PM. 

Discussing fellow columnist Fred Hembeck some months back, Quick Stop editor Ken Plume asked me, “What would it take to get him to go to San Diego?” Well, perhaps if I dazzle Fred sufficiently with my account of the wonders to be found at the San Diego Con, I can persuade him to undertake the pilgrimage that seems mandatory for all American comics enthusiasts.

Another reason that Fred should go is the opportunity to do something neither he nor I have ever done: meet Ken Plume face to face. As far as we know, he is merely a disembodied voice on the telephone. Last year Ken and I managed to miss each other, but surely at this year’s con we could not fail to meet. (Could we?)

THURSDAY 11:00 AM
When I left off my account of this year’s Comic-Con last week, I was attending the U. S. Postal Service’s First Day Issue ceremony for the new set of DC Comics superheroes stamps. I made an early exit in order to take in a panel that was running simultaneously: the opening session of the Comic Arts Conference (CAC), the academic conference on comics that is held every year at the San Diego Con, and, as it did last year, set up residence in Room 7B.

The Conference showcases serious scholarly explorations of the comics artform. But this first panel was only serious inasmuch as the speakers maintained straight faces while keeping their tongues firmly in their cheeks.

This panel was “Myths for the Modern Age,” featuring contributing writers to a recent anthology of essays, Myths for the Modern Age: Philip Jose Farmer’s Wold Newton Universe, published by Monkeybrain Press.

Farmer, a renowned science fiction novelist, wrote two purported biographies, Tarzan Alive and Doc Savage: His Apocalyptic Life, which alleged that these characters are real people, whose lives and exploits were fictionalized by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Lester Dent, and other writers. (Thus, for example, Farmer claimed that pulp novel hero Doc Savage, one of the forebears of the superhero genre, was actually a man named Dr. James Clarke Wildman, Jr.) Moreover, Farmer contended that long ago radioactive meteorites landed at a spot in Britain called Wold Newton, and that various pregnant women passing nearby were exposed to this radiation. As a result, the children of these women and their descendants possessed heightened physical and intellectual abilities. Tarzan and Doc Savage are members of the “Wold Newton” family, as are Sherlock Holmes and numerous other characters from classic adventure fiction of the 19th and 20th centuries.

I recall reading at least part of Tarzan Alive decades ago, but never encountered anyone else who mentioned it. So I was surprised some years ago to discover that, once again, something that I considered a private pleasure in growing up is shared today by many others. The writers of Myths for the Modern Age are carrying on and elaborating upon Farmer’s Wold Newton mythos, and this CAC panel dealt with its applications to comics characters. Hence, one paper presented at the panel hypothesized that Modesty Blaise was Tarzan’s daughter; another argued that Vampirella was the same character as Lady Rawhide from recent Zorro comics.

When I arrived at the panel, writer Win Eckert was presenting his paper, which attempted to reconcile the seemingly contradictory accounts of Doc Savage’s later career from Farmer’s book (in which Savage retired in 1950 and had a daughter) and from DC Comics’ Doc Savage comics of the late 1980s (in which Savage instead married a Mayan princess and fathered a son, though Farmer denied that either event took place).

Eckert alleged that earlier in 2006 an anonymous party had sent him news reports by one Adelaide Johnston Lupin, who is the daughter of the gentleman thief Arsene Lupin and the aunt of anime adventurer Lupin III. Based on this purported evidence, Eckert concocted an incredible theory that he nonetheless contended was the only way to reconcile these two contradictory histories. According to Eckert, at one point Doc Savage had traveled back in time. Therefore, for forty years Doc Savage (who ages at a different rate than normal humans) was leading two parallel but different lives on Earth, and thus both Farmer and DC were right.

Now, obviously, Farmer and DC were each devising a different version of Doc Savage’s career following the classic pulp novels of the 1930s and 1940s. The reader should regard each version as an alternate possibility. If the reader insists that one version should be canonical, than he should judge each on its literary merits and on its fidelity to the work of Doc Savage’s creator Lester Dent. It is easy to regard Eckert’s convoluted effort to reconcile such disparate accounts of a fictional character’s life as merely silly.

But I nonetheless sympathize with what Eckert was doing, even if he took it to an extreme. The Wold Newtonian scholars know full well that Doc Savage and the rest are fictional characters, but they are engaging in an entertaining intellectual exercise. They pretend that the characters are real, and try to demonstrate that, beneath a fictionalized facade, the stories about them are true. Thus it becomes an intellectual challenge to reconcile seeming contradictions, and even to find links among various celebrated fictional characters created by different authors.

The impulse behind the Wold Newton scholars seems much like that behind Alan Moore’s League of Extraordinary Gentleman: to chronicle an alternative history in which all these classic characters of popular literature co-exist and interrelate (see “Comics in Context” #22-23).

Eckert was followed at the podium by Peter Coogan, one of CAC’s chairmen, who dropped the pose of utter seriousness in presenting “Principles of Wold Newtonry,” an explication of Wold Newtonian methodology. Coogan pointed out that Wold Newtonry is based on what Sherlock Holmes aficionados call “the Game”: their pretense that Holmes was a real person and their efforts to explain away contradictions within Arthur Conan Doyle’s stories about him,

Among the guiding principles of Wold Newtonry that Coogan identified was the Principle of Physical Resemblance, which underlay a previous speaker’s theory that Modesty Blaise was Tarzan’s daughter. Another was the Principle of Unverifiable Evidence, as exemplified by Ms. Lupin’s newspaper stories. Eckert claims to have clippings of these stories, but, as Coogan observed, “you can’t find them.”

My affinity for Wold Newtonry should not surprise anyone since I was engaged in a similar endeavor. In working on the original versions of The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe in the 1980s, its creator and editor, Mark Gruenwald and I operated from a similar assumption: writing as if the Marvel Universe were real. We too found ourselves resolving apparent contradictions in Marvel stories and filling gaps in past Marvel history. And much of the appeal of the Marvel Universe lies in the concept of an entire alternate cosmos in which so many favorite characters coexist and interact.

THURSDAY 11:30 AM
Once Wold Newtonry was out of the way, the Comic Arts Conference moved on to more serious matters with Session #2: “The Great Leap: Adapting Comics into Film.” I stayed to hear the initial two presentations.

The first was by Kate McClancy of Duke University, who this year joined Peter Coogan and Randy Duncan in co-chairing CAC. As I did in my lengthy review of the comics and film versions of Alan Moore’s V for Vendetta earlier this year (see “Comics in Context” #126-131), McClancy disputed the conventional critical opinion that the movie is a faithful adaptation of the comics. In her presentation, “Should Governments Be Afraid of Their People?: Fascism in V for Vendetta,” she argued that whereas in the comics, Moore contended that each of us must make his or her own decisions, “the film tells us we must rely on a superhero to save us.” Hence, McClancy asserted, the film “actually enforces fascist implications” in the story. That explains the radical change that the Wachowskis made in the film’s ending, wherein the people of London all don “V” masks and costumes: they are idealizing a strong, iconic leader figure, as fascists do, rather than “take responsibility themselves.”

Agreeing with Moore’s contention that the film reflects an “American liberal fantasy,” McClancy pointed out that Moore’s V not only destroys the entire fascist government, but goes after the church and the media as well, whereas the movie V is content merely to bring about “peaceful regime change.”

McClancy also criticized the movie for overly humanizing V, through such means including displaying his burn scars and having him fall in love with Evey, whereas Moore’s V claims to be “an idea,” rather than “a man of flesh and blood,” and his emotional calm reinforces that impression.

(McClancy also asserted that there is no proof of the original V’s gender, and noted that it has been speculated that V is actually Valerie, the woman he claims inspired “him.” Well, the Larkhill sequences certainly indicate that V is male, but then again, can we be certain that the male escapee was V? Hmm.)

McClancy was followed by Richard A. Becker of CSU Northridge, who contended that the makers of movie and television adaptations of superhero series suffer from “a lack of conviction” in the genre. Hence, for example, there were never any supervillains in the live action Hulk TV show, and the X-Men movies refuse to put the characters into colorful costumes. Becker asserted that film makers were afraid that audiences would not suspend their disbelief enough to accept the many fantasy elements of the superhero genre, and yet he pointed out that audiences are willing to accept “Oz, Middle-Earth, and the Star Wars universe.” Becker summed up his presentation by stating that “all fiction” involves a “threshold of disbelief,” but that what is most important is that the audience “must accept” a story “on an emotional level, in their gut.” In comparison to this emotional reality, he said, “it doesn’t matter how many rivets are on Iron Man’s armor.”

THURSDAY 12:00 PM
Once again I left a panel early, this time to get some lunch, or, more precisely brunch, at one of the Convention Center’s fast food counters (not as bad or as overpriced as some claim) and to do some exploring of the main floor of the convention before I appeared on the DK panel at 2 PM.

The convention already appeared crowded, yet it was only Thursday, a day when most adults could not attend unless they took a day off from work. (Do I need to explain that the vast majority of Comic Con attendees are adults, and not school-age kids?) Comic-Con sage Mark Evanier, who has attended each San Diego Con from its very beginnings in 1970 (presumably when the nearby Gaslamp Quarter really was lit by gaslamps), observed on his blog (www.newsfromme.com) that “Thursday afternoon could have passed for Friday.” If Thursday at Comic-Con is the new Friday, and Friday is the new Saturday, then could anyone imagine the horrors of congestion that awaited us on the real Saturday?

I managed to covere a great deal of the convention main floor on Thursday, and explored much of the rest (with difficulty) on Sunday. The immense DC Comics booth area and the somewhat smaller Dark Horse section were easy to locate. As for the question that those of you who have read my past Comic-Con reports are about to ask, yes, I was informed that there was a Marvel booth at the Con, or, rather, a Marvel/Activision booth, but I never found it, and I was searching for it!

One Comic-Con landmark that was hard to miss was the unearthly, unspeakable menace of H. P. Lovecraft’s elder god Cthulhu, which hovered above the heads of unsuspecting convention attendees, and was once again disguised as a giant version of Pikachu from Pokemon. Don’t these fans realize that the reason that Cthulhu/Pikachu wears that blissed-out smile is that he is just about to suck out their brains? Can anyone stop his march to world domination?

Consider Pikachu’s latest triumph. Perusing the current schedule for Boomerang, Cartoon Network’s sister cable network, to which it has banished 20th century animation, I cannot find classic Looney Tunes except for most episodes of the revived anthology series Toon Heads. But Boomerang is now doing hour-long blocks of Pokemon. Could any of us have imagined a day would come when there was no Bugs Bunny show on daily television? Does it even make sense that Warners would drop such a valuable property from its TV networks, especially from a channel that doesn’t have commercials and hence presumably need not cater to current fads? Grateful as I am for the 1990s Batman episodes on Boomerang, will the network eventually become so crammed with retired series from Kids WB and Cartoon Network that Warner/Turner will have to found yet another new network for classic theatrical cartoons? Or should TCM just expand its Cartoon Alley schedule? Or is Warners’ current attitude, “Let “˜em eat DVDs”? (And will a new generation buy Looney Tunes DVDs if they haven’t seen samples of the cartoons on television?)

Damn! If only Pikachu/Cthulhu could meet the fate he so richly deserves! Little did I know on Thursday that before Comic-Con ended, I would see justice served.

By sheer chance I encountered my longtime friend (and former comics pro) Meloney Crawford Chadwick as I made my way through the crowded aisles. We talked animatedly, and discussed getting together on Sunday afternoon, as we had the last two times I attended Comic-Con. We didn’t set a specific time or place to meet ln Sunday, but she told me how to get in touch with her.

And this was a mistake that I make every year at Comic-Con since the new century began. It was merely by luck that I met Meloney on Thursday, and it would be a matter of luck if I saw her again at this Con. Always set a specific time and place to meet. I again quite the wisdom of Mark Evanier, who rhetorically asked on his blog, “Why is it I couldn’t locate the ten or twelve people with whom I had to talk business but I couldn’t take twelve steps without running into Len Wein?” In my case, it was Danny Fingeroth.

I also found the DK booth, where I had the pleasure of meeting two people from DK Publishing’s London office, who would be sharing the panel with me: senior designer Robert Perry and DK Licensing publisher Alex Allan, who, despite the misleading name (or, rather, I was just too unimaginative to recognize an alternate possibility), proved to be a blonde woman.

THURSDAY 2:00 PM
It was also a pleasure to see former Marvel editor in chief Tom De Falco again. We are two of the many writers of DK’s forthcoming Marvel Encyclopedia, which goes on sale in October. I don’t think either of us had any idea what we would say on the DK panel in Room 1B, but thanks to our improvisatory skills it went quite well. We even discovered that we had different stories about the origin of The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe: I think it came from former editor on chief Jim Shooter’s notion of doing a book of “specifications” of Marvel superheroes’ powers, and Tom thinks it came from Shooter’s suggestion that Mark Gruenwald turn his style guide sheets on Marvel characters into a book. But as I pointed out, both stories could be true. Alex Allan said that the Handbook was indeed a partial inspiration for the DK Marvel Encyclopedia, so I’m still working on the Gruenwald legacy. During the panel I also surprised Alex by praising DK’s art and travel books, which I had been buying long before I did any work for them.

The panel had a good audience, some of whom came up to speak to me afterwards. This was how I got to meet Stuart Vandal, one of the writers of Marvel’s current Handbooks, who had journeyed to Comic-Con all the way from the United Kingdom (thereby putting the reclusive Mr. Hembeck to shame!). As we left, Tom and I got to talk to an old friend, comics writer Marv Wolfman, who was arriving to sit on the next panel. And once I was outside the panel room, I encountered Ben Jackendorf, the cameraman for Constantine Valhouli’s Sex, Lies and Superheroes, the documentary I worked on several years ago, who had since moved to Los Angeles. There may have been over a hundred thousand people at this convention, but sometimes the gods of Comic-Con arrange welcome surprises.

THURSDAY 3:30 PM
Gina Misiroglu, the co-editor of The Supervillain Book, and I had set a time and place to meet (in front of Pro Registration) before we left for Comic-Con, so we had no trouble finding each other. Since we a relatively quiet spot to talk, I escorted her to a quiet restaurant with a picturesque view that Meloney has shown me which is only a short walk from the Convention Center, and yet it appears to remain a secret to over ninety-nine percent of Con attendees. (No, I’m not going to tell you where it is.) There we discussed Gina’s idea for her next book, which I would help write if we find a publisher for it. (No, I’m not going to tell you what it is.) And I finally told Gina my idea for yet another book that she and I could co-edit and co-write, which she loved. (And I’m certainly not going to tell you what this is!) (Gina was also excited about my airborne encounter with Annette: “Did you ask her out?”)

This meeting with Gina worked out fine, but I missed the big Publishers Weekly meeting that was also held that afternoon. I knew there was going to be one, but as of the time I left my apartment on Wednesday I still hadn’t been e-mailed the time or place; the e-mail wasn’t sent out until Thursday, when it was too late for me to see it. The meeting was at 5 PM, which, according to the Beat’s e-mail, was “after the Grant Morrison/[Deepak] Chopra thing that everyone seems to be going to.” (Well, not “everyone”: I am not a particular fan of Morrison’s work or New Age blather.)

Too bad, since the e-mail continued, “We’ll be going over assignments, party invites, and other stuff.” Hey, you mean PW could have gotten me into some of these exclusive parties? Not only that, but I could have gotten my press badge, which PW editor Calvin Reid had picked up. (Couldn’t he have left it at Registration for me?) But Calvin and Heidi had already been swallowed up by the Comic-Con crowd, and I would not see either of them for quite some time to come. Sometimes the gods of Comic-Con are determined to keep people apart.

THURSDAY 5:30 PM
For me Comic-Con would not be complete without dropping in, at least once, on the con-within-a-con hosted by Mark Evanier, who moderates panels, primarily about animation and the Golden and Silver Ages of Comics, throughout the convention. For any comics fan with a sense of history (say, like Fred Hembeck), simply following Mark from panel to panel –twelve in four days this year–and staying clear of the crushing masses on the main convention floor, would make for a perfectly satisfying Comic-Con experience.

If you follow Mark’s blog, you know that he recently underwent surgery for weight reduction, which has had astonishing results. On July 30 he posted on his blog, “I’ve lost 65 pounds in 65 days. I used to eat steaks that weighed that much.” At this rate, I expect that at next year’s Comic-Con we will see the Incredible Shrinking Mark wielding a sharp needle to fend off a predatory housecat. If DC’s new Atom series doesn’t work out, I know where they can find a new contender for the role.

The next panel in EvanierFest was “Spotlight on Jerry Robinson,” the Golden Age Batman artist, editorial cartoonist, and comics historian, held in Room 8.

Before it began, I asked Mark if he had seen our mutual friend Ken Plume. Mark looked at me somewhat severely and said no, but advised me to seek out Ken’s friend, voice actor Billy West. I would not realize the full import of this counsel until later, as you shall see in ensuing installments.

Because I was on the DK Publishing panel, I wasn’t able to attend the Evanier panel that was held simultaneously, “Batman: The Golden/Silver Age,” on which Robinson had appeared. Perhaps that is one reason why Evanier did not ask Robinson much about Batman on his “Spotlight” panel. Another, even better reason, is that there has been considerably more to Robinson’s lengthy career.

Evanier began by observing to Robinson that Batman comprised perhaps “five percent of your career” but that’s “probably what you’re asked most about at cons.” Robinson agreed, “That’s true,” but he added that “It doesn’t bother me.” He added that “I wish maybe they asked more about” his career as an editorial cartoonist, which lasted for thirty-two years. But, Robinson said, reminiscing about Batman “lets me relive my youth.”

Evanier said that “I didn’t realize for a long time that the Jerry Robinson of Batman is the same [person] as Jerry Robinson the editorial cartoonist” because their “styles are so different.” To illustrate Robinson’s versatility, Evanier projected a retrospective of selections of Robinson’s work on a screen: I know that the presentation was done via computer, but the end result was effectively a slide show.

Early on were some classic Batman covers from the 1940s, including one from Detective Comics #70, showing Batman underwater, attempting to rescue Robin, who was trapped inside a bathysphere and, from his expression, clearly running out of air. Robinson explained that this “never happened in a story,” but that he “liked the shape” of the bathysphere. He came up with the visual idea, and “just did it” and showed it to DC editor/art director Whitney Ellsworth, who bought it.

Later there was Flubs and Fluffs, a Sunday comic strip that Robinson did for “seventeen, eighteen years,” in which he drew cartoons based on funny things that children had actually said in classrooms, such as “An autobiography is the life of an automobile.” We were shown a cartoon illustrating the line “In the Civil War, the Southern States receded from the Union”: Robinson’s illustration showed Confederate soldiers at sea, with one dryly observing, “I think we receded too far.”

Robinson said that Flubs and Fluffs received “up to 1500 letters per week,” and he was “told it got more mail than the President of the United States.”

Robinson also said that some lines were submitted to the strip that were too “off color” for them to use, giving as an example, “Magellan circumcised the world three times.”

Beginning in 1961 Robinson did a daily series of editorial cartoons called Still Life, in which inanimate objects commented on current events. In one that we were shown, the Presidential seal states that “The President [Richard Nixon] is in conference with his most trusted advisor. He’s alone.” Still Life was succeeded by a more conventional editorial cartoon series, Life with Robinson, in which people appeared.

Robinson told the audience that as a result of his cartoons he was invited by President Lyndon Johnson down to his ranch, and to the White house by Presidents Johnson and Carter. Robinson said that Richard Nixon “once asked for an original,” but this was “early on,” before Robinson “started criticizing him heavily.”

Since these editorial cartoons were syndicated to numerous papers, Robinson said this gave him “freedom.” He said he “was as harsh as I needed to be” in his commentary. “At times” he “lost papers” due to what he said in the cartoons, but thanks to syndication he could “lose a paper” but “not lose your job.”

How cutting were his cartoons? Here’s an exchange from a Still Life, presumably from the Vietnam era, that we were shown that seems relevant today: a cannon asks, “What’s a limited war?” and is told, “That’s one where the casualties don’t exceed the birth rate.”

Robinson also spent years doing “Theatre Life with Robinson” for Playbill, the program given out at Broadway shows. As something of a counterpart to the late Al Hirschfeld, Robinson would draw illustrations of performers on Broadway shows. (Evanier mentioned that he had once sat for Hirschfeld, and was surprised that he “drew me without looking at the page” once!) Robinson would sit in the audience during a show to do sketches, but he would also go backstage. Evanier showed various examples of “Theatre Life,” such as a striking portrait of Duke Ellington amidst a montage of performers from the Ellington revue Sophisticated Ladies and the original cast of the musical Nine. Commenting on portraits of MGM musical stars Ann Miller and Mickey Rooney from their Broadway show Sugar Babies, Robinson had interesting insights into performers’ public and private selves.

Miller, Robinson said, “posed for me in her dressing room,” which was full of “big stuffed lions.” This affectation, it turned out, was not a reference to the MGM lion; Miller was a believer in reincarnation, and claimed she lived in Egypt circa 300 B. C.. She “told me about some of her funnier lives” in what he termed “a high. sweet voice” until she was interrupted by a phone call to her agent, whereupon Robinson imitated Miller shifting into a loud, angry voice. Then, when the call was over, he told us, Miller shifted “back to the sweet voice” as if nothing had happened.

Rooney, he said, was “frenetic, couldn’t sit still” until Robinson offered him the Napoleon-style hat he wears in the picture. He “held [his] grin for almost a minute once he put the hat on,” Robinson said, long enough for him to make the sketch.

And there were many more examples from Robinson’s wide ranging career in cartooning, which makes most contemporary comics artists’ careers look rather narrow. From a book about the Civil War (America’s, not Marvel’s), there was Robinson’s fine portrait of Abraham Lincoln, which he said he “tried to do in the engraved style of the 1860s.” There was art from children’s books, and a cover that Robinson did for a book called Moon Trip. (Here Evanier interjected that he once asked Jack Kirby about the moon landing, and Kirby told him, “I’ve been there already.”) There were pages from comic book stories he had drawn in the Western and crime genres. There were sketches he had done on his travels to such places as Florence and Prague. We were shown pictures of a caricatured eagle and bear, representing the United States and the Soviet Union, that Robinson had done as co-art director for an animated film called Stereotypes. We were also shown the cover for Robinson’s early 1970s book, Comics: An Illustrated History of Comic Strip Art, which Dark Horse will be republishing, probably next year.

The subject of the recent protests against the cartoons of Mohammed drawn by Danish artists came up. Robinson said that the Cartoonists and Artists Syndicate, which he had founded to represent foreign cartoonists in the United States, represented two of those Danish cartoonists.

This led to Robinson’s recounting of how in the 1970s Jules Feiffer called him to tell him about “a cartoonist imprisoned and tortured in Uruguay,” which then had “one of the worst fascist regimes.” Robinson said this cartoonist was a “prisoner of conscience” who “only opposed the government in his art.” Robinson set about publicizing this man’s case. “It took three years,” Robinson told us, but finally, through the help of Senator Paul Tsongas and other U. S. senators, the cartoonist “was released six months before his term was up.”

“Most such prisoners,” Robinson continued, have “no one outside to help, so they lose hope” and “commit suicide” or die by other means. Robinson stated that this cartoonist’s wife told him that “Knowing that American artists were working to get him out kept him alive.”

Perhaps inevitably, the panel ultimately returned to Robinson’s reminiscences about his early days in comic books. Mark Evanier asked Robinson to retell the celebrated story of how he, the late George Roussos, and several other artists turned out a whole sixty-four page comic book over a long weekend, starting on a Thursday night in 1941. If they didn’t have the comic done by Monday morning, publisher Charles Biro would have lost the allotment of paper he needed to print it. The artists rented a vacant apartment to work in, but on that Saturday night the city was hit by “one of the biggest blizzards in New York history.” Robinson told us they “had to dig our way out of the doorway.” One of the artists, Bernie Klein, “went out to forage for food,” and returned with a dozen eggs and a can of beans. But they had “no way to cook them,” Robinson recalled, until they started to “break off tiles out of the bathroom” to construct an improvised hot plate.

The artists all created new characters for this book, and Robinson’s contribution was a superhero named London, It was “just before we got into the war,” Robinson told us, the city of London was being “bombed by the Nazis” and “the fate of Western civilization” was at stake. Robinson’s new superhero embodied the British resistance to tyranny. A caption in Robinson’s London story read, “As he is London, the living, breathing reality to prove London can take it!”

Also perhaps inevitably, a questioner from the audience asked Robinson how he came up with his most famous creation, the Joker. Robinson was a student at Columbia University (like myself!) when he was first working on Batman. “I was studying literature,” he told us, and “I knew every great hero has an antagonist,” like “David and Goliath” or “Sherlock Holmes and Professor Moriarty.” Hence, Robinson said, he wanted to come up with a villain “with some dimension.”

Robinson was specifically influenced by the fact that, he said, his brother and mother “were champion bridge players. I played too, but not as well.” So he “searched a deck of cards” and found the “classic image” of the Joker.

Robinson pointed out that in the first Joker stories they “didn’t explain his white face.” (Or, for that matter, the Joker’s green hair and blood-red lips.) He “felt it was more intriguing not to explain it.” Robinson is aware that later it was established that the Joker’s hair and skin were permanently dyed by chemical wastes, but he contends that “once you know he fell in a vat, it’s not bizarre.” In a period when comics fans demand explanations for everything, Jerry Robinson thus advocates the appealing intrigue of unsolved mysteries.

A dweller of the Northeast like Mr. Hembeck or myself can see Jerry Robinson speak at New York City conventions, but it took a trip to California to hear him drawn out on these many other interesting facets of his career.

Is this enough to persuade Fred to go to San Diego? Or does he need more? If you and he come back next week, you’ll learn still more about Comic-Con ’06.

ADVERTISEMENTS FOR MYSELF
I’ve written yet another review column for Publishers Weekly‘s online newsletter Comics Week, and you can find the article here.

Copyright 2006 Peter Sanderson

 

 

August 11, 2006

Film Flam Flummox – August 11, 2006

Filed under: Film Flam Flummox — UncaScroogeMcD @ 4:00 pm

filmflamflummoxbanner.jpg

August 11, 2006

WTC = M8 4 TV

World Trade CenterTo pan a work as sincere and well-intentioned as WORLD TRADE CENTER would seem a bit of a bullying move, but for all its noble intent Oliver Stone’s film brings to celluloid life makes just about every fear anyone had about a Hollywood treatment of the 9/11 tragedy. The specific real-life story Stone tells is indeed one worth telling: the rescue of Port Authority policemen John McLoughlin (Nicolas Cage) and Will Jimeno (Michael Peña) from underneath the rubble of the twin towers. For about twenty or so minutes, Stone finds a fresh angle to what the audience has become all too familiar with, staying with McLoughlin, Jimeno, and their ill-fated colleagues as they are among the first inside the building after the planes hit the World Trade Center–and the buildings collapse right on them. The catastrophe and the immediate aftermath are gripping; Stone gives the collapse a chilling you-are-there immediacy.

But the genuine terror makes for manufactured mush once the action shifts from outside the rubble and McLoughlin and Jimeno’s families as they wait for news on their loved ones. As hard as Maria Bello (as McLoughlin’s wife) and Maggie Gyllenhaal (as Jimeno’s very pregnant spouse) work to make the suffering real, they are at the mercy of first-time screenwriter Andrea Borloff’s Hollywood hackneyed script, which have the two spouting unconvincing dialogue (such as Bello’s “He gave the best years of his life to you” rant to the police department) and doing only-in-the-movies actions to amp up the “drama” (Gyllenhaal storms out of a car in a huff because a stop light was taking too long). Reportedly a great deal of research went into the script, and the words spoken and the actions taken may have very well taken place, but as committed to film they come off as artificial–and Stone, never one known for subtlety, hammers everything home with a heavy hand, confirming that straight-laced sincerity is not organic to this natural born filmmaker’s repertoire. I’m not one who thinks that a 9/11 movie needs to be dark and depressing or have a distinct political point of view; I’m certain a truly inspirational film celebrating the courage and resilience that came to the fore on 9/11 can be made and is perhaps even needed. World Trade Center isn’t that film, though; for all the A-level big screen talent involved, its mawkish manipulation is no different than any typically trite TV-movie based on a real-life tragedy.

Missing a Step

Step UpThe TV spots for STEP UP claim that it “captures the voice of a generation,” and if that’s the case, then the voice of the youth hasn’t changed at all in the five years since Save the Last Dance hit theatres. Once again classical dancer (Jenna Dewan) meets street dancer (Channing Tatum), and through some plot contrivance they become unlikely rehearsal partners for her big school showcase. Along the way his keep-it-real hip-hop style loosens up her traditional one; his aimless existence gains some order and purpose; and they, of course, fall in love. Dewan and Tatum are capable dancers and likable presences, as are Drew Sidora and Damaine Radcliff as their respective best friends, but director Anne Fletcher doesn’t dress up the old blueprint with enough energetic dancing to distract from the gnashing gears of a mechanical plot.

Hold on to the Nights

Talladega NightsWith Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy and now TALLADEGA NIGHTS: THE BALLAD OF RICKY BOBBY, Will Ferrell and director/writing collaborator Adam McKay have carved out a comfortable comic niche in taking confidently clueless oafs and pulling the rug out from under the core of resolutely prototypical alpha male existence. This time, it’s Deep South Americana and NASCAR hyper-machismo rather than ’70s TV news, and the results are sharper, smarter, and funnier as Ferrell and McKay are able to hone their episodic, personality-driven approach into a more cohesive overall story. Not that personality isn’t the engine that drives this wild, fast ride; Ferrell’s champion race car driver Ricky Bobby is no doubt an exaggerated paragon of male and American arrogance and chauvinism, but he’s innocently, not mean-spiritedly, so, and Ferrell’s innate sincerity paired with his go-for-broke commitment to the part make it easy for the audience to root for Ricky as he attempts to make it back to the race track after a traumatizing crash. The arc of Ricky’s story also allows Ferrell and McKay to savvily spin on sports biographies, cheerfully making beelines toward every corny cliché only to subvert any sap (and never ultimately surrender to it, unlike the oeuvre of fellow Saturday Night Live alum Adam Sandler) with a perfectly deployed zinger. While undoubtedly a showcase vehicle for Ferrell’s talent, even more so than in Anchorman he and McKay are unusually generous to his impressive supporting cast, who, regardless of the size of the part, are given a moment to call his or her own: John C. Reilly (as Ricky’s race partner/best friend); Gary Cole (as Ricky’s deadbeat dad); Jane Lynch (as Ricky’s tough mom); Sacha Baron Cohen (as Ricky’s very French, very gay rival racer); Amy Adams (as Ricky’s loyal assistant); Michael Clarke Duncan (as the head of Ricky’s pit crew)–the list literally does go on. So, too, does the list of potential targets Ferrell and McKay would have a comic field day skewering; I eagerly anticipate whatever’s next.

The Cave Done Right

The DescentThe headline sounds like damning with faint praise, but a comparison between THE DESCENT and last summer’s largely forgotten late-season turkey are inevitable, as they are both thrillers in which people venture into a cavern only to find some nasty creatures awaiting them inside. But that’s where the similarities begin and end, as Neil Marshall’s UK import, while delivering the anticipated blood ‘n guts, is genuinely suspenseful and unsettling. In fact, it’s almost a disappointment when the creatures first show up, as Marshall already builds enough palpable tension as an all-female group of thrill seekers find their spelunking adventure gradually go awry. While this includes some conventional calamities as cave-ins and less-than-navigable passageways, the drama is enhanced by the increasing friction between the group members, particularly the fearless, feisty de facto leader Juno (Natalie Mendoza) and the tormented Sarah (Shauna Macdonald), still recovering from the tragic loss of her husband and child. Thankfully the drama doesn’t deflate but rather intensifies once the bloodthirsty creatures show up, and while Marshall does pile on the blood and body parts, the gore is not the be-all end-all unlike some recent “thrillers” but mere tools to go along with staging, editing, and pacing to create an intense, horrifying atmosphere. After all the carefully-wrought mayhem, the conclusion in this U.S. cut (as usual, someone saw the need to alter a foreign piece to tailor it to domestic tastes) is a bit of a cheap jolt, but it doesn’t dilute the disturbing effect of what comes before.

Fly the Coop Already

BarnyardTogether, John A. Davis and Steve Oedekerk made the refreshingly witty Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius. Apart, they have exemplified why studios need to slow down the CG/3-D animation output, first with Davis’s The Ant Bully and now Oedekerk’s BARNYARD. That the lead character is a “male cow” complete with udders shows how confused the picture is; it wants to be a Lion King-like story about a carefree son (voiced by Kevin James) taking responsibility and assuming the mantle of his dad (Sam Elliott) as leader and protector of his barnyard’s family of animals, but also wants to revel in the shallow joys and excesses of hakuna matata obnoxiousness. The result is neither moving nor charming–not to mention particularly funny to viewers over the age of ten–and the lackluster work of the B-level star cast (which also includes Arquette-less Courteney Cox and Andie MacDowell) makes one further yearn for the days of animated features starring bonafide voice actors.

No One Is Listening

The Night ListenerDespite his claim to fame as a manic cut-up, these days for me Robin Williams more interesting to watch in dramatic roles, from the summer 2002 one-two punch of Insomnia and One Hour Photo, and even in lesser projects such as 2004’s little-seen The Final Cut and now THE NIGHT LISTENER. Williams has a captivating, anguished stillness as Gabriel Noone, a writer and radio personality who strikes up a phone mail friendship with Pete, a dying teenage fan who may or may not actually exist. As he showed in The Business of Strangers, director Patrick Stettner knows how to keep the pace tight, the atmosphere unsettling, and the run time lean. But even at 82 minutes, this film of Armistead Maupin’s (who also had a hand in the script) novel seems padded out, spinning its wheels and generating no suspense once the central, easily answered question is introduced. Toni Collette delivers another solid turn as a woman who holds the key to the mystery, but the work by her, Williams, and Sandra Oh (largely wasted as Gabriel’s sassy housekeeper and confidant) cannot disguise what is plainly, quickly obvious to the viewer–though not the characters themselves.

The Sundance Afterschool Special

QuinceaneraAway from the high altitudes and freezing temperatures of Utah in January, the celebrated Sundance prizewinner QUINCEAÑERA doesn’t look quite so special. Although it boasts appealing work by two promising newcomers–Emily Rios as Magdalena, who discovers she is mysteriously pregnant in the weeks before her traditional Mexican fifteenth birthday celebration; Jesse Garcia as her cousin Carlos, a gang member coming to terms with his homosexuality–Richard Glatzer and Wash Westmoreland’s drama is as slavishly routine as it is warm and crowd-pleasing; there’s even an aging great-grand-uncle (a winning Chalo González) whose fate is telegraphed even without me adding “saintly” to his character description. The themes of teen pregnancy, young homosexuality, and radical changes in an old neighborhood are handled in a simple, tidy fashion that feels as calculated and programmatic as a Very Special Episode of a series or an afterschool special; the cursory ethnic angle particularly gives the film the latter feel, and Carlos’s scandalous affair with one half of the gay landlord couple gives the film instant Sundance-anointed R-rated indie arthouse chic. The beguiling genuineness of Rios, Garcia, González, and most of the cast ultimately cannot combat the carefully orchestrated paint-by-numbers formula.

Not So Spectacular

The L.A. Riot SpectacularWith a title like THE L.A. RIOT SPECTACULAR, writer-director Marc Klasfeld’s aim is obvious: to shock and, better yet, offend with this outrageous satire of the 1992 civil unrest that erupted in Los Angeles after the Rodney King police beating and trial verdict. But not unlike the recent crop of gore-filled horror movies that spend too much energy trying the gross out the audience instead of scaring it, this is one of those comedies that exhausts itself trying to be outrageous and crass but often forgetting to actually be funny. A number of familiar names–Emilio Estevez, Charles S. Dutton, George Hamilton, Charles Durning, Ronny Cox, William Forsythe, Ted Levine, Christopher McDonald, even Jonathan Lipnicki–pop up as Snoop Dogg narrates the wacky, irreverent chain of events that follow the beating of King (T.K. Carter), but the parade of random recognizable faces underscores how thrown together and scattershot the film is. Very occasionally something hits and incites a chuckle, but much like the overall broad approach, whatever targets are hit are from the most obvious angle (e.g. some faintly amusing bits about how the media are–shocker–heartlessly exploitative vultures), and even at only 80 minutes the forcibly over-the-top, in-your-face lowbrow shock tactics become exhausting well before the halfway mark.

Sights Unseen

Dimension Films and the Weinsteins may now be free of the Disney reins, but the hot-potato game of release dates for genre films continue as the remake of Kiyoshi Kurosawa’s PULSE finally hits theatres after getting tossed around the schedule for the last year. Kristen Bell, Christina Milian, and Rick Gonzalez are among the teens terrorized by a deadly force unleashed on the Internet.

Tim Allen’s latest family film ZOOM casts him as a retired superhero bringing together a group of superpowered youths to battle a supervillain (Rip Torn). Courteney Cox also stars.

At the Video Store

The screen adaptation of Alan Moore and David Lloyd’s celebrated graphic novel V FOR VENDETTA (Warner Home Video) wasn’t quite the huge blockbuster that a lot of recent comic-to-screen projects have been, but director James McTeigue and screenwriters Larry and Andy Wachowski have fashioned a masked (anti)hero yarn mixing the requisite action with unusually provocative, thought-provoking ideas–brains to go with the bangs, booms, and blood. Central to the story is not so much the titular Guy Fawkes-masked terrorist/freedom fighter V (Hugo Weaving) combating the fascist government of Great Britain than the political and intellectual awakening he inspires in a young woman (Natalie Portman) who becomes his unlikely ally. Warner Home Video has issued both a standard edition (available in either widescreen or full-frame) and two-disc special edition (widescreen only). The latter includes extensive documentaries on the making of the film, the original comic, and the real-life Guy Fawkes; as well as, as an Easter egg, Portman’s infamous Saturday Night Live music video.

Walt Disney Home Entertainment’s DVD of their Tim Allen-starring remake of THE SHAGGY DOG has to go down in some sort of history book for offering a “bone-us” feature strictly for the dogs (literally): a “bark-along” Sing-Along Songs-style clip for the song (yes) “Woof! There It Is.” The usual deleted scenes and commentary by director Brian Robbins are also included.

Next Time…

…more reviews, including Accepted. As always, for additional reviews from past and present and and more, check out my home site, TheMovieReport.com.

 

 

Addicted to Bad: Curse Words

Filed under: Addicted to Bad — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:43 am
addictedtobad.jpg

Statistics is the science of proving that everyone you meet is a either a pervert, a criminal, or has a rare, communicable disease. Usually this is done at the behest of a local news program, who uses the numbers to scare old people. Which in turn causes more old people to die, thus providing statisticians with more data. And that, my friends, is the circle of life.

Regardless, statistics tell us that, out of any group of 100 people, 99 of them will suffer some horrible misfortune during their life, and the 100th still won’t win the lottery. Which is why it’s so hard to believe in the so-called “Superman Curse.” Sure, Supermancurse creators Jerry “Joe” Shuster and Jerry “Joe” Siegel died penniless, begging on the streets and selling their bodies to Japanese businessmen in exchange for a warm place to sleep and a half-empty Snapple, but that’s more an indication of the predatory business practices of the 1930s comic book industry than it is some sort of supernatural curse against people connected to the character. Name me a legendary comic creator who didn’t wind up broke, disillusioned, and trading his body to perverse Asian millionaires for cash and/or soft drinks. Apart from George Papp (who had a taste for Austrians and Mr. Pibb), it can’t be done.

Which isn’t to say that there aren’t some comic book movies that are, indeed, stricken by widespread afflictions that some say border on the paranormal. For instance:

BATMAN: Actors playing this character have all later been diagnosed with “tennis elbow.” (See photo.) Also, actresses appearing as love interests for Bruce Wayne have all been revealed to be completely and utterly insane.

SPIDER-MAN: At least three actors associated with the character are chronically unable to match their socks. In addition, many of the silver screen’s Spider-Men look really stoned, even when they’re not.Fatman

THOR: Two of the men who have portrayed this character on screen have later gone on to be Cardinals in the Catholic Church, but have always been passed over for Pope.

TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES: Every single performer in these films has had a sex change operation.

SWAMP THING: My friend tells me that he knew this guy who worked on SWAMP THING 2: EVEN SWAMPIER who swears that there’s one shot in the movie where you can totally see Dick Durock’s taint. More a curse for the viewers than the cast, if you ask me.

THE FANTASTIC FOUR: Gerald Mohr, who originated the part of Reed “Mr. Fantastic” Richards on the 1967 cartoon, suffered from crippling bacharachornithophobia, or a fear of birds owned by singer-songwriters. In the 1990s, Cam Clarke, who portrayed the same character, had the exact opposite condition, bacharachornithophilia, or an unusual sexual attraction to birds owned by singer-songwriters.

THE CROW: Nothing bad has ever happened to anyone from these movies, ever.
GhostRider
GHOST RIDER: Actors associated with this role have a history of appearing in awful movies about motorcyclists with flaming heads.

BLADE: Spooky but true: 37 crew members became ill on the set, first getting a high fever and then nausea, followed by their internal organs turning into a fine paste. However, this was later discovered not to be a curse, but botulism poisoning.

SPAWN: Everyone associated with this film has at one time or another been described as “a total dink.”

CONSTANTINE: Strange things were constantly being reported around this film’s set. Trained performers, called “actors,” would show up each day, having learned pre-rehearsed sections of written conversations, or “dialogue,” which they would enact in front of “cameras” loaded with “film” that would record the entire thing. Later, these “scenes” were taken to a lab, processed, and then carefully thrown away, replaced by total, unfiltered crap.

Weekend Shopping Guide 8/11/06: Elk’s Run

Filed under: Shopping Guides — UncaScroogeMcD @ 1:37 am

weekendshopping.jpg

The weekend’s here. You’ve just been paid, and it’s burning a hole in your pocket. What’s a pop culture geek to do? In hopes of steering you in the right direction to blow some of that hard-earned cash, it’s time for the Quick Stop Weekend Shopping Guide – your spotlight on the things you didn’t even know you wanted…

I don’t often feature something that actually hasn’t hit shelves yet, but I want to make sure everyone heads over to their favorite online book emporium and pre-orders the trade collection of Josh Fialkov’s amazing comic series Elk’s Run (Random House, $19.95 SRP). Just do it… Then head back here and we’ll get on with this week’s shopping guide.

What I love so much about The Wire is that you never get the same show when you come back in for another season. The focus shifts and suddenly you’re dropped into a different arena. The third season (HBO, Not Rated, DVD-$99.98 SRP) focuses on the city’s faltering drug war, with a desperate mayor eager to claim some sort of victory before the upcoming election in the face of a police department running on empty. The 5-disc set features the full 12-episode run, plus a Museum of television & Radio Q&A, a conversation with creator David Simon, and five audio commentaries.

Smart and savvy, Brendon Frye (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) has chosen to remain an outsider – but soon finds himself up to his neck in a high school crime ring when he tries to solve the murder of the girl he loved. Brick (Universal, Rated R, DVD-$29.98 SRP) is a sharp, brilliantly executed old school detective story, I can’t compliment Gordon-Levitt enough on a riveting performance that kept my eyes glued for the duration (which is no small task for a multitasker like me). Bonus features include an audio commentary, deleted scenes, and a featurette on the casting process.

Just when I begin to sink into a full-on depression about the state of comics today, the latest parcel from Twomorrows always brightens my spirits, bringing me back to far happier times and spotlighting amazing work worthy of the attention. Three releases worth snagging are the first volume collecting Roy Thomas’s Alter Ego (Twomorrows, $21.95 SRP), Danny Fingeroth and Mike Manley’s How To Create Comics: From Script To Print ($13.95 SRP), and my personal fave, Modern Masters: Walter Simonson ($14.95 SRP).

As a fan of Chappelle’s Show right from its premiere, I was incredibly leery of the trio of episodes cobbled together from the footage shot for the show’s third season prior to Dave’s abrupt departure. Based on just how much material was cut from the first two seasons because it didn’t quite make the bar, I can only imagine that a fair share of the sketches shot would have been cut long before a real third season would have aired, just in the natural vetting process. After viewing the Frankenstein-episodes featured on Chappelle’s Show: The Lost Episodes (Paramount, Not Rated, DVD-$24.99 SRP), my fears were entirely justified and, sadly, borne out by the material on display. Of the dozen or so pieces, only about 3 were truly worthy of the show’s legacy (and the bulk of that strong material is in the first episode presented here, most of which is a rather unsubtle look at exactly where Dave’s head was at and why his flight to Africa should have come as no surprise to anyone paying attention), while the rest range from average to abysmal. It really is a sad way for such an incredible show to go out, but I guess that’s business. Bonus materials include additional unaired sketches, deleted scenes, bloopers, a making-of, and audio commentary.

In one of those cases of “What do you mean a book like this hasn’t come out before?”, I wholeheartedly recommend, suggest, prod, and poke you into getting a copy of Steve Allen and the Original Tonight Show (Prometheus Books, $26.00 SRP), which details the formative era of late night television and one of its main pioneers, whose long shadow still looms large over his heirs.

As soon as I watched the pilot, I feared that Prison Break (Fox, Not Rated, DVD-$55.98 SRP) was going to be one of those shows that had a high concept that would eventually run out of steam and collapse in a pathetic, clichéd mess (see Twin Peaks and X-Files). At least for the first season, the steam is still there, and I’m eager to see exactly how the brothers Scofield will make their break, what the big conspiracy is, and whether Michael can ever get that tattoo removed. The 6-disc set features all 22 episodes, plus select episode audio commentaries, a trio of behind-the-scenes featurettes, Fox Movie Channel’s Making the Scene, and alternate/deleted scenes.

When it first premiered, I absolutely adored Adult Swim’s Sealab 2021. It was odd, it was surreal, but it was also funny as hell in a decidedly bent fashion. However, the show hit a significant hurdle when the actor who played the loony Captain Murphy – Harry Goz – passed away. Unfortunately, the show lost a lynchpin, and never was able to recover the same level of, well, funny that they’d lost. By the time the final episodes of the series – contained in the new 4th season set (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$24.98 SRP) rolled around, the writing was clearly on the wall and they very appropriately decided to close up shop. The episodes are certainly not their best, but I thank them for giving me Captain Murphy and a nice footnote to the long career of Harry Goz. The 2-disc set features the last 13 episodes, plus deleted scenes, featurettes, and an alternate ending to “Legacy of Laughter.”

Another Adult Swim original marking it’s final DVD release is The Brak Show (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$24.98 SRP), which – although it ended on a much higher note – definitely stepped away as the well was beginning to run dry on the twisted suburban adventures of Brak, Zorak, Mom, and Dad. There are no bonus features on the 2-disc Volume 2 set – it’s just the last 14 episodes.

At first, I honestly wasn’t sure if the new Ween album, Shinola: Vol. 1 (Chocodog Records, $14.98 SRP) was complete genius or complete crap. Over its 12-track run, I vacillated between the two until I heard the last track, “Someday,” and it clicked – and I’m happy to say, it’s the positive rather than the negative.

When I saw the original theatrical cut of Ridley Scott’s Kingdom of Heaven, I was less-than-impressed by the cluttered, somewhat incomprehensible morass of it all. I’m happy to say that his revised and expanded director’s cut (Fox, Not Rated, DVD-$34.98 SRP) is a vast improvement, taking what was a disappointing entry in his career and making film that – while not great – is certainly the mess it was. The 4-disc set features an introduction from Scott, audio commentaries, a 6-part feature-length documentary on the making of the film an its eventual director’s cut, deleted scenes, behind-the-scenes featurettes on various aspects of the production, cast rehearsal footage, visual effects breakdowns, storyboard and conceptual art galleries, footage from the premieres, trailers, TV spots, and more.

It’s not your average Spike Lee flick, and maybe it was the surprise of something different that made me get a real kick out of Inside Man (Universal, Rated R, DVD-$29.98 SRP), an action set piece about a high stakes bank robbery gone pear-shaped, leaving a detective (Denzel Washington) to deal with both the robber (Clive Owen) and a power broker (Jodie Foster) with an agenda of her own. Bonus features include a conversation between Lee and Washington, an audio commentary from Lee, deleted scenes, and a making-of featurette.

Following the same release pattern of its companion show, He-Man, we get The Best of She-Ra: Princess of Power (BCI, Not Rated, DVD-$24.98 SRP). The 2-disc set features the original pilot film The Secret of the Sword, plus the top 5 episodes as voted by fans. The set is also packed with bonus materials, including a brand new behind-the-scenes documentary, an audio commentary on Secret of the Sword, a music video featurette, and more of the collectible postcards that have been featured in the He-Man sets, this time by Brandon Peterson and Joe Chiodo. Keep an eye out for the first seasonal volume in the near future.

Proving once again that they’re the only company out there who should be doing releases of cartoon shows, BCI has managed to make a special edition worth owning of the largely mediocre animated Flash Gordon series (BCI, Not Rated, DVD-$39.98 SRP). Running just 24 episodes, they’re all featured in this 4-disc set, which also contains a newly produced retrospective documentary, a trio of episode commentaries, storyboard-to-clip comparisons, a gallery, and more (plus another pair of collectible postcards). Why couldn’t BCI have been the ones to put out the Disney catalogue, such as DuckTales and Darkwing Duck?

Finally giving it the definitive edition it deserves, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (Fox, Rated PG, DVD-$26.98 SRP) adds to the bonus features already found on the original DVD release, winding up with 2 audio commentaries, a making-of featurettes, a featurette on the real Butch & Sundance, an extended making-of documentary, a History Through the Lens documentary, interviews with the cast and crew, deleted scenes, trailers, and more.

The fourth season of The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$29.98 SRP)shook up the status quo by sending Will and Carlton off to college, and increasing the comedy with Uncle Phil (the always wonderful James Avery). The 4-disc set is, sadly, completely featureless… Come on, you couldn’t even get Alfonso Ribeiro?

With the release of second volume of season 4, the deluxe Starburst Editions of Farscape (ADV, Not Rated, DVD-$24.98 SRP) is drawing to a close, with only a single release remaining to finish off the series. So far, the Starburst sets have been worthy reissues, packed with new bonus materials that should satisfy the most diehard of fans (short of having Ben Browder and Claudia Black packed in every case).

Examining their formative years, Rolling Stones: Under Review 1962-1966 (Sexy Intellectual, Not Rated, DVD-$19.95 SRP) is a nicely presented analysis of the rock royalty as they exploded from a bar band to a worldwide phenomena.

Craig Armstrong’s music for Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center (Sony Classical, $18.98 SRP) is just as understated and subtle as you’d hope would accompany so touchy a subject matter, never devolving into unnecessary (and unwelcome) bombast that would turn the flick into a Hollywood cliché. Give it a spin.

Of the three films featured in the new Jayne Mansfield Collection (Fox, Not Rated, DVD-$49.98 SRP) – which include The Girl Can’t Help It and The Sheriff of Fractured Jaw – my favorite has to be the Madison Avenue satire Will Success Spoil Rock Hunter?, starring a young Tony Randall at his comic best as the titular adman desperately trying to climb the corporate ladder. Fox has taken a page from Warner’s beautiful catalogue releases by getting commentaries and classic Fox Movietone featurettes for each of the discs.

You know, the first season really didn’t phase me too much, as it was so much brainless eye candy, but the second season of MTV’s Laguna Beach (Paramount, Not Rated, DVD-$38.99 SRP) is when the contrived crap of it all really started to drive nails into my cranium. I truly, honestly, would not care if the sea along the beach they so adored just swallowed up each and every one of them. The 3-disc set features deleted scenes, cast interviews, home videos, behind-the-scenes featurettes, and more.

Regardless of the content, I love the designs of Xiaolin Showdown (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$19.98 SRP), the first season of which is now hitting you local DVD emporium. It’s like a cross between Powerpuff Girls and Teen Titans, and it’s a dynamic I really dig.

Far from inheriting an exhausted license, McFarlane Toys has found new and quite fun permutations in their take on the Simpsons action figure line, with the latest release being the Couch Gag Playset (McFarlane Toys, $20.00 SRP), where you can mix-and-match the family’s positions via magnets located throughout the figures. Stack ’em wackily, and join me in hoping for a really nice Power Plant playset in the near future.

weekendpicks20060811-23.jpg

weekendpicks20060811-24.jpg

So there you have it… my humble suggestions for what to watch, listen to, play with, or waste money on this coming weekend. See ya next week…

Trailer Park: Frankly, I’m Partial To Kill Bill’s Snakework.

Filed under: Trailer Park — admin @ 12:09 am

By Christopher Stipp

Archives? Right Here…

It’s been a long road from HOMEWARD BOUND II: LOST IN SAN FRANCISO (Did anyone bother to check the chop suey?) David Ellis has cultivated a career out of stunting before he turned his attention to directing films.

While much has been written, and written, and written about SNAKES ON A PLANE I thought to add a novel, or lo-fi, approach to disseminating what was said at the press roundtable I sat at for S.O.A.P’s promotional campaign during the San Diego Comic-Con a few weeks ago.

Sure, you could read all about the process of what this absurd flick has done to the viral marketing community but that would take a lot of work on my part. In fact, it would take more time for me to transcribe this audio than it would for you to sit down, watch the movie, and then deal with the shame for having seen it. I didn’t feel like doing that but not for the sheer laziness that you might think. Yes, a little laziness, as you’re going to get Sam Jackson’s audio next week and I don’t even want to transcribe that but I think a movie like S.O.A.P exists solely for the fleeting moment that it’s going to have at the box office. It will go just as fast as it came and the audio here just snaps right through the energy involved in making this film. It’s all about the fun and no one understands this better than Sam, David and everyone else who made the film. Kenan Thompson, on the other hand, had a different kind of energy altogether, probably fueled by herbal supplementation, and you can listen to that next week.

It’s all about the cheap thrill, the flimsy and filthy excuse to have nudity and full-on profanity, and why try to gussy that up with exacting penmanship and accurate reporting? This isn’t the New York Times, this isn’t something that lends itself to careful introspection. This is SNAKES ON A PLANE and why mess with something that is going to make you feel dirty for having seen it? That’s why I’m not going to mess with it and offer something that no one else has offered (Finally! A not-so-exclusive but kinda is because I was so smart to do this and think of a good way of selling it to you and no one else was bright enough to do it and how sad is it that I need to end this sentence with an exclamation mark to make sure I accentuate my greatness!): the actual interview.

Now, I would disclaim the audio quality but, eff it, I could understand David and snake wrangler Jules Sylvester just fine so if you can’t understand the questions the answers sure as hell come in loud and clear for your listening enjoyment. And while David is a pretty impassioned fellow it’s really Jules who was just a treat to listen to. The guy is a reptile fan and he’s just as happy about his profession as much as I was dreading of having to sit through 20 minutes with him. He made a fan out of me and I hope the audio gives you a glimmer about why that’s the case. Both of these guys made for some good audio and I hope you all remember who’s the lazy asshole who wanted to write a real column this week and not get hate mail for supplanting it with some transcriptions that you all would just peruse anyway.

You’re welcome.

Roundtable interview with David Ellis (MP3 Format)

Roundtable interview with Jules Sylvester (MP3 Format)

CRANK (2006)

Director: Mark Neveldine, Brian Taylor
Cast:
Jason Statham, Amy Smart, Efren Ramirez, Dwight Yoakam
Release: September 1, 2006
Synopsis: A hit man (Statham) learns that a poison injected into his body will kill him if his heart rate drops slows a certain point. Now he must exact his revenge on the people who injected him before he takes his last breath.

View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)

Prognosis: Can’t Wait Until It Comes To Netflix. This movie looks absurd, bestial, groan-worthy and worth my money when it comes out on DVD.

After I churned through this trailer I honestly thought this could be mistaken for TRANSPORTER 3. It’s got Statham click-clacking around in his romper stompers, just looking to skull anyone who bothers to enter his walking path, you’ve got guns sliding around and shots going off in every which direction and, what every testosterone-fueled young man wants to see: hot ladies accompanying Jason as he ass-kicks.

This really should be a negative review for a movie that will disappear from people’s collective consciousness but I just can’t deny that I love the way this trailer understands its audience, first of all, and is honest with itself in knowing that it’s better to just go whole hog than it is to try and put a dress on the pig and call it something else.

“My name is Chev Chelios and today’s the day that I die”¦”

When we all meet up with Statham we’re immediately thrust into how this movie is going to end. Pure and simple, this is great. Most storytellers would frown on such a reveal but now we as an audience can feel we have something invested in this guy knowing that he’s going to flat line by the end. Oh, and the gorilla/alpha male look he’s giving the camera, looking all surly, is a machismo move that will no doubt get the ladies from who appreciate this kind of Neanderthal behavior all tingly and bothered.

“I’ve been poisoned with some kind of Chinese synthetic”¦”

Um, so, we next get Jason telling his “doctor” that he’s been drugged with some kind of voodoo medicine and, without explaining what in the hell is going on, or what the context is of the situation, we are rushed into a pack of quick cuts of Jason screaming and pounding as herr doctor let’s us all know that his adrenaline levels are crapping out and that he’s, “gonna die!”

Cue the Euro trash techno, hurry in the requisite action helicopter that means nothing to any of us, have him repeat the macho walk thing again, reveal some hotness with Amy Smart looking all beleaguered and then have Jason reappear in a dressing gown inside a hospital. Huh? Why is he in the hospital if he’s got one hour to live, as we’re told? Don’t know, couldn’t tell you, but I can say that this gives the filmmakers a great reason to have Jason get defibrillated while brandishing a nine millimeter on the resulting shockwave that sends him backward. Cute.

There’s a whole lot more ass kicking with Jason kicking down doors, him getting angry a whole lot, pausing ever so briefly to have a tender moment with his lady, breaking shit up with his car in a BLUES BROTHERS inside the mall kind of moment while adding in just one more moment of Jason walking with that swagger that only he could pull off.

The trailer ends rather abruptly but, really, who cares? I don’t. This is a trailer for a movie that has an endless supply of one liners and such a worldwide marketability quotient that I almost can’t wait to be able and see it when it comes to my video store.

THE GREAT NEW WONDERFUL (2006)

Director: Danny Leiner
Cast: Olympia Dukakis, Jim Gaffigan, Judy Greer, Maggie Gyllenhaal
Tom McCarthy
Release: June 23, 2006 (New York)
Synopsis: “The Great New Wonderful” is populated by people you know: New Yorkers you see on the elevator, in the supermarket, at the gym. Without a trace of sentimentality, director Danny Leiner, a Brooklynnative, and his extraordinary cast paints five portraits of life in this city a year after the attacks of 9/11.

View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)

Prognosis: Positive. Get off your self-important ass and rent JUDY BERLIN.

This was a movie I actually caught in the theater and couldn’t have been more taken at how well this movie, quiet as it was, spoke its artistic message. I’m a fan of Edie Falco and, not just because of her, but the movie was good because it showed how a solid ensemble can work together to all fit equally in a filmic puzzle.

That’s why I am really hopeful for a movie like this. You don’t see a lot of these kinds of films where, instead of an Altman kind of narrative, you have people slowly unraveling, as it would be in your everyday life; multiple people with layers of issues. This is the kind of film that can either be boosted by those involved or dragged down, as was the case with Madonna’s performance in FOUR ROOMS, by a singular, soft effort.

The trailer opens intriguingly enough.

It’s stated that it is September 11″¦2002. I’m feeling the city used for this movie’s backdrop is New York and it’s a curious selection; not so much for the location but why one year, exactly, after the terrorist attacks? Hmm, I’ve got nothin’.

You’ve got Jim Gaffigan and Tony Shalob (Really, one funny guy and the other, an enigma in the search for why this guy keeps winning awards for his show Monk) sharing a moment in a corporate break room. It’s an odd exchange but the two of them are well enough equipped that the resulting conversation, one that we really aren’t privy to, definitely produces a smile. It’s weirdly amusing.

Next scene, some woman in a hot pink panties (Really, is there any other kind? I think not.) tells her beau that it’s been twenty-two days since the two have done it. I know the hot wife/distant husband trope is about as fresh as a bucket of egg yolks that have been allowed to ferment in a pile of old tires behind an abandoned gas shack in Winslow, Arizona on a delightful 113 degree August morning but she’s still a hot lady in a pair of pink panties so consider me interested in this story, sight unseen.

Olympia Dukakis is some old coot who is trapped in a loveless marriage as she, no doubt, finds herself with nearly both feet in the grave. I’m sure it’s good but I’m not really engaged with the story for all the reasons above, minus the pink panties.

Maggie Gyllenhaal’s despondency is not just pleasurable but it’s appropriate when she mentions that it all stems from her needing an undefined job. We don’t know what this job is but seeing her vacant expressions is enough to establish her position in this movie.

Steven Colbert, an odd duck if ever there was one, pops up in an authoritative capacity trying to dole out a little school justice as it pertains to a troubled little dude. What’s really at stake here? Ah, that’s right, we’re not privy to any defining information.

Olympia starts to get her swerve on with a guy who no doubt has a wrinkly sack so I am very appreciative of the trailer makers who quickly set the tension in motion and get the hell out of there.

Interestingly, these stories start to congeal like a rather spirited Paint n Swirl project. The lines aren’t really clearly defined with how these people relate with one another but the extended moment when a lot of these people are caught on an elevator that loses its lights and then stops briefly gives me pause. I don’t quite understand what this elevator moment is supposed to mean but I do know that I am unable to look away from what happens next.

“Rebuilding is a process”

This trailer gets a positive if for no other reason than I have nothing firm to go off of with regard to the aims of this story but I am absolutely taken with how well the tease functions here. It looks like a solidly interesting premise but, like I said, it all comes down to whether each story can be as good as the others. Even if one fails it, unfairly, I know, taints the rest of the experience.

RUNNING WITH SCISSORS (2006)

Director: Ryan Murphy
Cast: Annette Bening, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jill Clayburgh, Brian Cox, Joseph Fiennes, Evan Rachel Wood, Alec Baldwin, Vanessa Redgrave
Release: October 20, 2006
Synopsis: An adult man looks back on his childhood with his bipolar and self-centered mother.

View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)

Prognosis: Next. Can’t there be any good non-fiction literature made today that doesn’t have an exquisitely twisted family at the center of it all?

I mean, I know it’s cool to just come from a completely fucked up family where the father has a predilection for rubbing Crisco on his nether regions right before going out for a nightly streaking or a mother that might as well be a walking Rush Limbaugh pharmacy with the amount of uppers and downers she’s been able to extort from hapless medical professionals? No, if you want to be taken seriously as a writer. When in doubt, mine your personal pain for profit.

Burroughs has. And, you know what? Good for him because if the opening scenes really happened in his life I am guessing we’re in store for a rather uppity exploration of middle-class twits who have a better handle on their own inner pain than they are with dealing with their family, interacting normally with their children and with really trying hard to decimate any semblance of what average humans do.

We’re introduced to Burroughs as a very young child as he polishes his coins in front of his father, played here by Alec Baldwin. The moment, to be sure, is trying to capture both the child’s odd behavior and Alec’s aloofness as someone who questions his own contribution to a kid that really doesn’t act like one. It’s an odd way to start a trailer, though, and I am not sure of what I really think: is it artifice dressed up in pretentious clothing or is there something else afoot? I’m unable to answer that question as the freak show goes on tour and lands in the head of Annette Bening, a fruity artiste who has grand designs of superstardom that clashes with Alec’s more grounded thoughts about having to put in an honest days work every day.

These values clash in a therapy session where our screen doctor suggests daily therapy for five hours at a time. It’s nuty, to be sure, but Annette is all over it with Alec chiming in with the reality of the situation. This part was amusing to me.

This is, unfortunately, the last time where amusing will be used in this article as the next moment for this film has Alec walking out on Annette, a woman who seems on the verge of a complete mental breakdown. Therapy only solidifies the family as ground zero notion but where the movie should have been about the mother doing what she can to take care of her child she decides to pawn him off to the therapist in an adoptive kind of situation.

Now, I guess since the movie actually happened this way in real life everyone deserves to do whatever they want in explaining Burrough’s own Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride but it just feels false as a story. I don’t have a lot invested in what we’re being whisked away from and to through this trailer but where some people might be shocked at this development, having to shack up with an eccentric (of course! All writers encounter eccentric characters never nut jobs who needed to have the NYPD break out some plunger justice on this cat.)

The home is a relatively safe one, where weirdoes also live with him, where drugs are as available as mama’s Skittle dish, The addition of Paltrow and Wood as the sexy young wards of the crazy old coot is a hapless attempt to try and infuse some pop and sizzle into this thing but I can’t see what this movie’s trajectory actually is.

Are we to believe that Burroughs had wonderful moments here or that he found love here or that he relishes in the oddity that is this family knowing that he’s going to be able and go on tour some day after he’s older and better able to handle a pen and pencil?

I don’t know what to think but there is the feeling of pretension that coats the whole trailer in a sappy gunk that I could not wait to scrub off with a viewing of the trailer for Frank Miller’s 300.

THE PRESTIGE (2006)

Director: Christopher Nolan
Cast:
Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, David Bowie, Scarlett Johansson, Michael Caine, Piper Perabo
Release: October 20, 2006
Synopsis: From the time that they first met as young magicians on the rise, Robert Angier (Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Bale) were competitors. However, their friendly competition evolves into a bitter rivalry making them fierce enemies-for-life and consequently jeopardizing the lives of everyone around them. Full of twists and turns, THE PRESTIGE is set against the backdrop of turn-of-the-century London, the exceptional cast includes two-time Oscar® winner Michael Caine, Scarlett Johansson and David Bowie.

View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)

Prognosis: Sorta Positive. It’s ARMAGEDDON versus DEEP IMPACT all over again, I speak here of the Ed Norton/Paul Giamatti vehicle THE ILLUSIONIST that’s competing for the affections of movie going magis, but it really isn’t a battle between wits, it’s twits. I mean it’s not like this is a mano a mano between Doug Henning and Blackstone but this is something more than just a Deluxe 24 Pack of Tricks to Amaze Friends and Quadriplegics.

This is something more than dueling movies; Christopher Nolan has given us BATMAN RETURNS part 2 without using the masks.

As soon as you look at the opening sequence, Bale asking his proper and pale looking female companion to shoot him with a pistol, you don’t know whether Batman is trying out a new Gregorian vest for late Victorian nights on the town or if this something else entirely. I obviously know it’s the latter but there’s a BATMAN carryover here and it’s unmistakable.

It’s odd that the next scene is Hugh Jackman’s voiceover as a woman gets lowered down into a tank of water, him saying something about showing a trick that no one has ever seen before, but when we see his face, and he’s talking, he’s holding a disappearing birdcage. I guess this audience hasn’t yet been exposed to Tweety and Sylvester; that cat can make that bird disappear into his maw more times than even I can fathom. The moment is choppy.

And then we get Scarlett Johansson, doing her best English accent as she comforts Hugh’s magically delicious ego.

Bale and Jackman, we take it, are pals. They’re the kind of pals, even, that can share each other’s indentured help that, here, takes the form of Michael Caine. To someone who has seen BATMAN and then this it is hard not to see the same kind of cinematography represented. It’s not a bad thing, good thing, or otherwise but it’s curiously satisfying as I can think of a few Joel Schumacher flicks that do the same thing, aesthetically speaking, but to a much worse degree. It’s just an odd sensation to look at something that feels like an extension of another.

Things kick up to eleven when, in a rather confusing muddle of cockney and visual quick cuts, Bale performs a trick that seems to utilize the same kind of special effect-ness that TANGO AND CASH did when they had Robert Z’Dar fall in that unfortunate way into the electric cabling, thus allowing Sylvester Stallone to make a clean getaway. That’s pretty much what happens here.

Jackman seems genuinely blown away by the illusion.

The awe turns, obviously, into obsession and we’re all treated to the triad of a magician’s act. It’s a cheeky way to give us a basic understanding of what makes a good magic trick but there seems to be a lot more brewing beneath the surfaces of Bale and Jackman but the trailer just wants to feel like a glossy ad. I understand the need to have these two main characters trade furtive glances with one another but we’re not treated to something genuine about these men.

No, instead we get Caine voicing over a series of unrelated scenes that realty need to do more than just be an assortment of chocolates in a heart-shaped box. Yes, it’s great to taste these things but, seriously, the last third of this trailer is just a spooge of nonsense. I’m excited to see this movie only because I know what it was about before but the trailer needs to be more focused lest Doug Henning gets the upper hand on this one.

 

Melonpool Quickcast #8: A Tale of Three Cartoonists

Filed under: Melonpool Quickcast — admin @ 12:07 am
melonpool1.gif

-By Steve Troop

Based on Steve Troop’s classic webcomic of the same name, the Melonpool Quickcast features puppet versions of Troop’s alien cast, who are desperately trying to make heads or tails out of Earth culture.

Mayberry and Scott

Mayberry chats with Eisner Award winners Scott Kurtz (“PVP“, “Truth, Justin, and the American Way“) and Doug TenNapel (“Iron West“, “Earthworm Jim“), as well as Internet staple Stephen Notley (“Bob the Angry Flower“) in another round of interviews at the San Diego Comic-Con. Now, aren’t you sorry that you weren’t there?

Check out the Nightgig Gigcast featuring behind-the-scenes info as well as about the future of these Quickcasts!

Don’t forget to comment on this and other Melonpool Quickcasts over at the official Melonpool Quickcast Forum!

Melonpool Quickcast #8: A Tale of Three Cartoonists:

  • Large (560 x 420 – QuickTime – 20 MB)
  • Small (320 x 240 – QuickTime – 10 MB)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress