FRED Entertainment

September 19, 2007

Quick Stop Thingamabobs: 9/19/2007

Filed under: Columns,Thingamabobs — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:19 am

thingamabobs.jpg

The web. It’s a big place, full of plenty of distractions ““ some funny, some informative, some ludicrous, some disturbing, some inane, some profound. Each and every weekday, we present links to a few of our favorite finds”¦

————————————————

  • Did you get that old thing I sent you?… (Thingamabob)
  • Christopher Walken’s Chicken with Pears… (Thingamabob)
  • Christopher Walken’s Three Little Pigs… (Thingamabob)

Have a THINGAMABOB? Send it in!

##

September 18, 2007

Interview: Frank Conniff

Filed under: Interviews — UncaScroogeMcD @ 6:21 am

frankconniff-01.jpg

-by Ken Plume

Though he’s worked as a writer in Hollywood for the past 12 years, those outside of the business that know the name Frank Conniff probably know him for a gig that lasted five far-too-brief seasons on a cow town puppet show called Mystery Science Theater 3000.

Even though he was one of the show’s exclusive group of core writers, fans of the show know him as the loveable henchkick to Trace Beaulieu’s Dr. Clayton Forrester, TV’s Frank.

Since leaving the show after its 6th season and moving west, Frank has been a writer/producer on shows including Sabrina The Teenage Witch, Invader Zim, and The Drew Carey Show.

He’s recently launched a brand new creation entitled Cartoon Dump – think of it as a sort of dumpster diving heir to Captain Kangaroo – which is presented by hostess Compost Brite (Erica Doering), who’s surrounded by a colorful menagerie of characters… One of those characters being Moodsy the Owl, played by Frank. During the show, an awful animated short from cartoon historian Jerry Beck’s extensive library of the worst cartoons ever made is also presented. Performed live in LA every month, Cartoon Dump is available as a podcast from CartoonBrewFilms.com, and be sure to visit their MySpace page at myspace.com/cartoondump while you’re at it.

Now, however, here’s my in-depth chat with Mr. Frank Conniff…

line.gif

frankconniff-02.jpgKP: You’re a New York City native, right?

CONNIFF: Yes, I was born and raised in Manhattan.

KP: Would you say that, even at that point, there was a creative inclination, or an inclination towards performance?

CONNIFF: Yeah. Absolutely. For performance, it was just to be in show business – probably from as long back as I can remember, from watching the Ed Sullivan Show. I was staying up late and watching Johnny Carson at a very early age and, you know, I just love comedians and I love television, so I was very inclined. And I was, you know, considered funny by certain people…. Certain misguided people. And so the idea that I could be a comedian – or the idea also that I could be a comedy writer… the minute I knew that that was a job description, I think I always thought, “Oh, I really wanna do that.”

KP: What was it like growing up in Manhattan during that period of the 60s?

CONNIFF: Well, it was very interesting, and I think I might have had kind of a troubled childhood, but at least it was a troubled childhood in New York. Being in Manhattan and growing up in New York was, as far as I’m concerned, one of the positives of my childhood.

KP: I’m assuming – even more so than someone who might have grown up in the Midwest or somewhere outside the northeast or the west coast – that showbusiness, as an entity, must have seemed much more attainable since so much of it originated from New York.

CONNIFF: Well yeah, that’s true, and also my father was a newspaper man, and had a newspaper column in the Journal American newspaper in New York, and he wrote mostly about politics. He wrote about sports, also, and moved in show business circles, as well. He was friends with Jackie Gleason and Phil Silvers, and he knew Ed Sullivan very well, ’cause Ed Sullivan was also a newspaper columnist. So I was very privy… I didn’t get to meet those people, but I was very aware of that world from a very early age.

KP: Where there any encounters that you do remember having?

CONNIFF: Um, not a lot. Every now and then my father would take me to Toots Shor’s, which is where a lot of show business people hung out. I was very young, and I don’t remember specifically meeting those people, but I was very aware of who they were and I was very aware that my father knew them.

KP: During that period, growing up, could you name a single person that, to you, represented show business or what you wanted to do?

CONNIFF: Well that’s hard to say. I mean from as long as I can remember, I guess Woody Allen was always my favorite comedian, you know, from when I was a kid, and I also loved Jonathan Winters and Bill Cosby. But I don’t know. I guess, in a way, Johnny Carson was kind of the passageway into that world – just watching him every night. And also what had a huge impact on me was watching the Mike Douglas show every afternoon. That was a very showbusiness oriented show. So I think those two things, and then everything else, had a big impact on me.

KP: Would these sort of creative instincts ever play themselves out at home or at school? You touched on having some troubles in childhood…

CONNIFF: Well, that has more to do with just my family situation that I had. My father got very ill when I was very young, and my mother also had medical problems. And so we ended up not being a very normal household. It ended up being kind of a chaotic, turbulent existence in many ways. So that’s why I say a troubled childhood.

KP: And were you the only child?

CONNIFF: No, I have three brothers and a sister.

KP: And have any of them pursued a creative career?

CONNIFF: Yes, my brother Tony, my oldest brother, he’s a musician in New York. He plays the bass and he writes music and produces records and works with a lot of different musical artists, and he teaches. My other brother Mike works at a newspaper in Aspen now, and he spent a long time involved with computers, but he started in journalism and he’s recently gone back to journalism. And he’s always written and stuff. Our father was a writer, and we grew up very, very much immersed in newspapers and magazines and writers and literature, to an extent. It was just very prevalent in our household growing up.

KP: I mean, if you were to choose what appealed to you more, would it be the creative aspects or the performance aspects?

CONNIFF: I don’t know. I think I always… I think my main ambition was always to write for television, but I also harbored ambitions to be a comedian as well. But I’ve spent most of my career – I mean, I perform a lot, but I’ve made my living as a writer for almost my entire career. I’ve made a living in show business as a writer. I did make a living as a stand-up comedian in Minneapolis in the late 80s up until when I was on Mystery Science Theater, but other than that, my income always came from writing. And I’ve continued to perform all this time – I perform at a lot of coffee houses and book stores and art galleries in Los Angeles, but I really do it out of a love of it. It hasn’t been really a big source of income for me at all. I love doing it, but I also love being a writer, and being a writer has been my livelihood. You know, being a TV comedy writer has been my livelihood for almost 20 years now.

KP: And it seems the bulk of your jobs – and you can tell me if this is mischaracterizing – it seems like you’re often brought in as something of a fix-it man on a lot of projects…

CONNIFF: Oh, I wouldn’t say that. I mean, I’ve had a couple of jobs like that, which are called consulting jobs, but what that means is usually that you’re not there full time. Like, I was a consultant on The Drew Carey Show, and that was just because I only came in two days a week – a lot of the staff is like that. So I don’t know if I’d call myself a fix-it man. I know that I am good at pitching jokes, and punching up scripts I think I’m very good at, but to say that I fix it could be too grandiose.

KP: So would you say you’re a good tweaker?

CONNIFF: I’m a very good tweaker, and I’m good at if a scene needs a funnier line or something, or needs a funnier exit line. I’m good at stuff like that, but I also like to think that I also have skills at storytelling and character development too, you know?

KP: Was there any point that you could have considered a different career path?

CONNIFF: Um, you know what? Absolutely not.

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: For better or worse, this is the only thing I’m good at, you know? So I never really, at any point in my life, ever considered anything else.

KP: Was there ever any pressure to go down a different path?

CONNIFF: I don’t think there was, because I was always just kind of a space case, and not really good at anything. Nobody ever really thought to consider that I’d be capable of anything, you know?

KP: So, you’d say you never really got on people’s radar?

CONNIFF: Yeah, well, that whole fallback position that you mentioned – that it’s a very sensible thing to have – I don’t really have. It’s either show business or work at Arby’s, and I wasn’t even very good at that, so that’s the situation.

KP: (laughs) How would you describe your high school period? Was there any sort of direction then?

CONNIFF: In those years, I really went down a very misguided path. I became, like, a total stoner, and was just kind of a hippie stoner loser kind of a guy, and I didn’t even have the ambition to be a comedian and stuff. That kinda fell by the wayside for awhile. I got involved with drugs and stuff, and I took a really bad detour there for a while. You know that – miraculously, and I’m very grateful that – I came out of that. And once I sobered up and stopped taking drugs and stopped drinking, then I was really able to really pursue my path in life.

KP: Well when you look at that sort of mid-seventies period when you were in high school, where were you culturally at that point? Were you pretty much in synch with where everyone else was in your peer group, or did you see yourself and your influences differently?

CONNIFF: In my peer group. I think I was in synch with my peer group, but that’s like a really pathetic thing to be in synch with my peer group… Those kids, you don’t really want to be in synch with. But, you know, I was very into music and I played in a band. I played drums in a band…

KP: I didn’t know that. How long did you do that?

CONNIFF: When I was in high school I was a drummer. Our band never got any gigs or anything, but it was an excuse to get high…

KP: So was it a garage band or a basement band?

CONNIFF: To call it a garage band is to give it an elegance that it didn’t really have, but it was like your basic garage band…

KP: What type of music was it?

CONNIFF: Oh, you know, we played, like, just bad rock. We did covers of stuff and, um… I mean, it’s so long ago it’s all a blur to me, but the point of it is just that I was playing music and stuff, but I wasn’t really disciplined about it – like the way my older brother was, who really pursued it and was disciplined and actually got a career out of it. Having a career as a musician entails incredible discipline, and I just didn’t have the focus for that, ’cause I was too screwed up back then. So like I said, it was like a big detour.

KP: Have you ever played an instrument since?

CONNIFF: Not really, although I’ve written a lot of songs in my day. At Mystery Science Theater, I wrote a lot of songs, and I’ve written a lot of the lyrics for songs. I’ve written songs that I’ve done in my stand-up act, and I’ve written songs for Cartoon Dump, and I’m writing songs for this other project that I’ve written on. And I actually am in ASCAP as a result of the various things that I’ve written for TV shows through the years. I wrote the words for a couple of songs that were on Sabrina Teenage Witch. I’ve kinda developed, mostly as kind of a dilettante, a songwriting thing, but I haven’t played an instrument.

KP: What kind of inspiration will strike you when it comes to a musical piece? Is it through lyrics or is it through the music – or is it a combination?

frankconniff-03.jpgCONNIFF: No, I’ll come up with lyrical ideas. Like for Cartoon Dump, I wrote a bunch of songs for it and then I hooked up with this guy, Brad Kay, who wrote the music. On Mystery Science Theater, we’d come up with sketch ideas and say, “Hey, this should be a song.” Like the song “If Chauffeurs Ruled the World”, I specifically remember the idea for that song was Joel (Hodgson)’s idea. He actually came up with the title “If Chauffeurs Ruled the World”. and I think he came up with the line, “Everyone would take a back seat to me.” But then I actually wrote the words to the song. And then Mike wrote the music to it, you know? From my memory, Mike (Nelson) would always do the music, and sometimes he’d do the words, sometimes Kevin (Murphy) would do the words. Sometimes Joel would and sometimes I would. So we all kinda contributed in that way.

KP: Were there any other major ones that you remember besides “Chauffeur” that just kinda came?

CONNIFF: I think I wrote the “Pants” song. The tribute to pants. And I wrote a few others, but it’s all a blur to me. I can’t, um… oh, I wrote the janitor song, too. Which I don’t know if you remember…

KP: Oh yeah, definitely…

CONNIFF: I think it’s usually credited in the credits, the person who wrote the lyrics, I think, is usually credited, so if people want to know who wrote which song, I think they can just check the credits on the show.

KP: When you look back at that high school period, did you have any plan whatsoever after exiting high school?

CONNIFF: Um, yeah, as a matter of fact – my plan was so good that I exited it before I graduated.

KP: (laughs) Now that’s a go-get attitude.

CONNIFF: Yeah, exactly.

KP: (laughs) So, was that a difficult decision to make?

CONNIFF: Well, it was a stupid decision to make.

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: You know, there wasn’t any Hamlet like thing involved in it, it was just being an idiot, and not really taking care of myself, you know? So that’s how I describe that.

KP: So when you find yourself having exited high school – and I’m assuming the bulk of your peer group is still in high school…

CONNIFF: Mm-hmm.

KP: What do you do then?

CONNIFF: Well, then I went to a high school in Long Island, and my mother, after my father… my father died when I was 14, right before I went into high school. And my mother moved us out of Manhattan to Southampton, which is where her family was from. So I went to high school there. And after I left I kinda came into the city, into Manhattan, with the idea of writing and becoming a comedian. But it took me a long time to really get my focus and get my shit together to where I finally was able to do that. And I wasn’t even… you know, I did do stand-up comedy in New York and stuff. I did open mic. But I really didn’t pursue it in any consistent kind of way until I was sent to drug rehab treatment in Minneapolis, and then I got out, and then I stayed in Minneapolis and then I started doing comedy in Minneapolis and that’s when my life got a lot better and I was really able to start living the life I always should have been living. You know?

KP: Now was this the late 70s, early 80s, or…

CONNIFF: No, no. Well, the early 80s was in New York, but I didn’t get to Minneapolis ’til, like, ’85… In my late 20s.

KP: What led them to send you to a facility that far away?

CONNIFF: Minneapolis, or Minnesota, is actually very well known for its drug rehab community. And I think it was just recommended that I be sent there, and it turned out it was a good idea.

KP: I’m assuming these were quite serious circumstances to be presented with that option. Or was it not an option? Was it, “Well, you have very few choices…

CONNIFF: Yeah I was presented with just like, “You know, this is what you need to do,” and I had reached a point where I was willing to do it.

KP: And was this an institutional recommendation or…

CONNIFF: My family did an intervention on me. And they had a professional drug rehab person do the intervention with them. And on her recommendation they had this intervention and they sent me to Minnesota.

KP: From a performance and a writing perspective, how would you describe yourself during that New York period in stand-up?

CONNIFF: Well, I mean, I think I did some pretty funny things back then, and the people who saw me always remembered. As a matter of fact, Rich Jeni, god rest his soul, who just tragically died, I knew him in New York in the early 80s, when he was an open mic act, and I met him at this club in Brook, in Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn, called Pip’s, which is like the first ever comedy club. And he was very encouraging to me back then. And then, you know, I drifted into my thing, and in the meantime he became a great comedian and he ended up years later… I didn’t see him for years, he ended up headlining in Minneapolis and I was his opening act. And this was like, you know, seven years or so after I’d last seen him. And he totally remembered everything about my standup act from back then, and he was very complimentary about it. The point is, even though I didn’t really have my shit together back then, I know that I did do some funny things on stage, but I didn’t have the focus then to really develop my act until I’d hit bottom, and then I ended up going to Minneapolis and then just kinda started all over again.

KP: How much of a culture shock was it, making that transition to Minneapolis?

CONNIFF: I don’t think it was a huge culture shock. The Midwest is very different from New York City. It’s not nearly as ethnically diverse and all that, but it wasn’t that much of a culture shock, though, because Minneapolis – and the Twin Cities – is such a great place to be and people there are really smart and, you know, it’s not like I was deprived in any cultural way by being there. On the contrary. Like, I met all these great creative people there, and it was just a wonderful place to be at that time in my life.

KP: And it certainly was a sort of golden age for the comedy scene.

frankconniff-04.jpgCONNIFF: Yeah, it was an incredible scene back then, and that’s where I met Joel and I met Mike and I met Bridget (Nelson) and I met Trace and I met Josh (Weinstein) and we all used to hang out. We all knew each other in the clubs back then, and that whole period in my life, in the late 80s – even before I got on Mystery Science Theater – just that time in Minneapolis doing comedy… and I wasn’t really making any money, I was like practically broke most of the time. But, in my mind, that’s like a golden era to me. That’s one of the great periods in my life.

KP: So were you mainly based in Minneapolis, or did you go on the road as well?

CONNIFF: Well, I was based in Minneapolis, and I did go on the road, but it was all in the Midwest – Iowa and North and South Dakota, and Wisconsin. I would do these one-nighters with other comedians on these little circuits for very little money, but it was a really valuable experience. Although sometimes the shows didn’t go that well…

KP: What would you describe as “not going well”?

CONNIFF: Well, you know, you do these one-nighters and sometimes there’d be really drunk audiences, and not going well is, to put it as simply as possible, bombing…

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: People not laughing would be the description of that.

KP: And how would you handle bombing? What would be your mechanism for dealing with that?

CONNIFF: I don’t know, I just… just walk off the stage in utter shame.

KP: Were you the type to blame yourself or blame the audience?

CONNIFF: Well, I would… you know, I mean, if the audience is really drunk and they’re heckling you and they’re noisy and they can’t hear anything you’re saying, then you can’t really blame yourself. It’s not a question of blaming yourself – it’s a question of, like in any gig you do, “Well, which jokes work and which didn’t work?” And the jokes that don’t work you drop and the jokes that work you keep in the act. So that’s just the constant learning curve of being a comedian.

KP: And how would you describe your type of comedy? Was it character, was it situational, was it largely improv…

CONNIFF: Through the years, I’ve kind of gone through different phases. But I think I’ve always been essentially a very silly, shtick based comedian. Silliness has always been the high priority to me. I think I’m a frustrated Burlesque comic, is what it comes down to. Although I do very modern kinds of things, there’s a part of me that’s just a lowdown Burlesque guy. If I ever considered myself a really good Burlesque comedian, that would be something well worth aspiring to as far as I’m concerned.

KP: So you’re like a postmodern Burlesque comedian.

CONNIFF: Well, I wouldn’t say that. Once you say postmodern, there’s an element of pretentiousness, so I don’t wanna say that. But I would just say I’m just a guy who really likes to be silly and goofy on stage.

KP: And, at your tightest, how long would you say your act would’ve run?

CONNIFF: I didn’t really headline that much at all, ever. I was more a middle act, which in those days was like a 30 minute act. There was the opening act, which is 15 minutes, and the middle act would be 30 minutes, then the headliner would be 45 minutes to an hour. And I never rose above middle act.

KP: And were you comfortable as a middle act, or did you aspire to headline?

CONNIFF: It is a comfortable position, because it’s kinda the best time in the show. You’re getting the audience before they have a chance to get tired or before they’re being asked to pay their bills and stuff. But I did aspire to headline, but I always had in my mind that I was gonna end up making a living as a TV comedy writer, and miraculously that happened in a way that I could never have predicted, when I got hired to be on Mystery Science Theater in Minneapolis in 1990. I was a middle act as a comedian then, but once I got on Mystery Science Theater, any ambition that I might have had to become a headliner and tour and play clubs all over the country kind of fell by the wayside, and I’m like, “Well, now I’m really where I want to be.” Like, I’m on a TV show and I’m writing for it and I’m on the show. I still continued to do stand-up comedy, but I think from then on stand-up comedy was always just a creative outlet for me, as opposed to a lifetime career plan. My career goals were being met beyond my expectations once I got on Mystery Science Theater.

KP: How archetypal now is that job you held at Arby’s?

CONNIFF: (laughs) I don’t know. I used to talk about it in my stand-up act a lot, and then I think we referenced it on Mystery Science Theater. I think my character on the show, if I remember right, we mentioned that he worked at Arby’s. And that, unfortunately, was very autobiographical.

KP: Was it merely just a means to make your bill payments and such?

CONNIFF: Yeah. I think when I started doing stand-up in Minneapolis, I was in a halfway house after I got out of rehab, and part of the thing at the halfway house is you had to get a job while you were there. So I went out and saw what was available, and White Castle turned me down but Arby’s hired me.

KP: Did White Castle give a reason?

CONNIFF: (laughs) They just decided to go in a different direction.

KP: They had hired Tom Arnold they week before.

CONNIFF: Right, right. So I had that job at Arby’s, and then at night I was doing stand-up comedy, so that was like a job I had to take. And like I said, I didn’t have any skill to go and work in an office or to work at a computer. I didn’t even type that fast. As a matter of fact, I didn’t learn to type until I joined Mystery Science Theater and management there very kindly bought me a computer program called Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing

KP: I remember it quite well. (laughs)

CONNIFF: Yeah. So That’s where I learned to type, was on the job at Mystery Science Theater.

KP: So you became good friends with the home row.

CONNIFF: Yeah, exactly!

KP: I’m kinda curious… Coming out of rehab during that period, was there ever any concern, with your counselor saying, “You know, maybe the stand-up scene, and what goes on in that, might not be the best atmosphere to stick around in…”?

CONNIFF: There was a concern on my part about it, because I was really worried about being around alcohol which, of course, all comedy clubs have. Although when I first started in Minneapolis there was a club called the Ha Ha Club that was nonalcoholic, just a theater. I started there, but I knew that the Comedy Gallery was really the place to get work and stuff. So it took me a couple months, but I finally decided it’s just very important to me to pursue this, so I’m going to risk it. And then it turned out once I got into the clubs and stuff, the temptation to drink, very fortunately for me, never became an issue.

KP: And as far as when you would go out on the road, did you do it in groups or did you mostly do it alone?

CONNIFF: Yeah, we would always be, like, three comedians. – the headliner, the middle, and the opening act. And I didn’t drive, either…

KP: A true New Yorker. (laughs)

CONNIFF: Yeah. I didn’t learn to drive ’til I moved out to L.A. So it’d always be the three comedians in the car going out on the road.

KP: So who would be the comedians you’d go out with the most?

CONNIFF: I don’t know. It was different. There were headliners… there was a guy named Bill Bauer who was a really funny comedian, and he’d get gigs as a headliner and he’d take me along as his middle. And that would happen to me with Lizz Winstead a lot, who’s basically my oldest friend in stand-up comedy. And Lizz Winstead actually…

KP: Creator of The Daily Show

CONNIFF: Yes. And she actually, literally, discovered me because she saw me on an open mic in Minneapolis. She was headlining at the club that week and she said, “Oh, how would you like to be in my show this weekend?” And that was the first time I ever did a comedy thing that wasn’t an open mic. That was my first real gig. So she would take me on the road with her sometimes and stuff. And then you’d just work with whoever… you know, these comics from out of town. They’d be on the road and they’d be booked and you’d be booked with them, so you’d just meet them when you hooked up to get in the car to go to the gig. That would be when you’d meet them.

KP: So how accurate are the numerous after-the-fact portraits of the horrible comedy condos and road horrors and so forth… (laughs)

CONNIFF: Well, as far as the comedy condos go, I don’t know that much about them. For me personally, as someone who just lived a very financially marginal existence, for me it was always a treat when I’d be on the road and I’d be in a Super 8 Motel room and they’d have cable. That would be like… I would feel like I was living like a king. That was like my favorite part – besides doing the show, if the show went well – but I just loved being in the hotel room and watching cable. That was like a total… it felt like luxury to me. I don’t have those kind of horror stories… I mean, there were a couple of bad places and they’d put you up at crappy accommodations and stuff. But usually, if you put me in a Motel 6 or a Super 8, I was in heaven.

KP: Anything with a “Free HBO” sign.

CONNIFF: Yeah, absolutely.

KP: So who was the first of the sort of MST group that you met? And what were the circumstances?

frankconniff-05.jpgCONNIFF: It was I guess probably… I think I met Bridget. And I may be wrong about this, but I think I met Bridget before I met anyone, and I became friends with her. And I remember – and this was a long time ago so I don’t know if I have all this right – but I met her and then Mike came along. And I think Mike and Bridget met at one of my open mics. I think I might have been there, like, the first time they ever actually met. And so I knew them and I knew Josh. It was all around the same time. I knew Josh. And I knew Joel… I met him a couple times but, you know, I knew him mainly more from reputation, because he was already kind of on another level back then in terms of… he didn’t come down to the open mic because he was writing a TV special with Jerry Seinfeld. He was in our circle, in a way, because he was a great guy and he was very humble and he hung out with everybody, but he wasn’t in our little group at that point. And at one point I was kind of the open mic tsar of Minneapolis. I ran two or three open mics, and so when Mike and Bridget came along, I thought they were really funny, so I always encouraged them and I always gave them really good spots on the open mics. And I did favor them along with the other comedians who I liked. I remember there was resentment from other open mic acts about that.

KP: How would that express itself?

CONNIFF: I don’t know exactly. That’s what happens in comedy – there would be little rivalries and resentments and stuff. And I definitely always gave Mike a good spot in the show. I always gave Bridget a good show. This other guy, Russ Rogers, who was a good friend of Mike’s from college, I always gave him good spots. In my whole career in show business, in a way, that was the most power I ever wielded. When I ran open mics in Minneapolis – and I did have my favorites – we’d do the shows and we’d hang out and stuff. We were like a clique. Like I said, those were really fun times.

KP: Would you associate with anyone outside of the show night?

CONNIFF: Yeah, yeah. We would do a show… you know, we would perform, and we’d always go out afterwards. We’d get something to eat or we’d go and just sit around. And we would have a great time. I think that, partly because of my encouragement of them, and also because of their encouragement of me… like we really encouraged each other – me and Mike and Bridget, at a time when you need all the encouragement you can get. Because you’re not really getting a lot of it from any established authority figures, so we really were very supportive… All of the comedians that we all hung around with back then, we were all very supportive of each other.

KP: There was no group enemy that you fought against? (laughs)

CONNIFF: Well, we had those, but we were on one side and our enemies were on the other side.

KP: So it was very much a mutual support group.

CONNIFF: I think so. I mean, that’s how I remember it. We all were fans of each other. We all thought each other were really funny. And then I know that, when the opportunity came up – when there was an opening at Mystery Science Theater – I know that my name came up right away, and Mike and Joel both knew me and they were the ones… and Trace knew me too. Trace was around back then, too, in the stand-up scene.

KP: What was your initial impression of Trace?

CONNIFF: Oh, I just thought he was hilarious. He was very kind of, like, introspective, not gregarious, but yet very easy to be around – like an easy guy to hang out with and very unpretentious, as he’s always been. And he just really made me laugh, too.

KP: So what was the first inkling you got that they were doing this project called Mystery Science Theater? Were you aware of the KTMA shows?

CONNIFF: Yeah, I’d heard about it. I didn’t really watch it. I don’t remember watching it on KTMA, but I had heard about it. And then Mike went onto the Comedy Channel. Mike got hired for that, for a season on the Comedy Channel, and I remember being really happy about that. In the first season, I remember going over to Mike and Bridget’s apartment and they played me a tape of one of the episodes, and they fast forwarded to the parts that were references to people that we knew. There were just a couple jokes that were in there that only I and maybe two other people would have gotten, and they fast-forwarded and showed me that, and it was, of course, so incredibly delightful to hear that and I just laughed so hard, you know?

KP: So what was your initial impression of the show itself when you finally saw it?

CONNIFF: Yeah, I thought it was really funny. It was totally up my alley, and I liked it a lot.

KP: So when did you first get the call that they wanted to bring you in, and how was it presented to you?

CONNIFF: Well, I actually remember very specifically that I was on the road and I was in, I think… I know I was in North Dakota. I’m not sure which town. Maybe Bismarck, but I’m not sure. And I was in my hotel room, and I got a call from Mike. Maybe he left a message on my machine at my apartment in Minneapolis. And then I remember talking to him in the hotel room and him telling me that the show got picked up for a second season and that they were looking to hire someone and that they had pretty much decided that I was the guy. And I remember that specifically because, I have to say, that that moment was one of the most exciting moments in my whole career. That was a moment of just being on the road doing stand-up comedy and then being told on the phone that I was getting this great opportunity. It was just a really… I’ve had only two or three moments like that since then.

KP: So what was the initial presentation, as to, “This is what we’re bringing you in for…”?

CONNIFF: Well, I was brought in as a writer. That’s what I was officially hired for. I don’t know if those other guys told you this already, but the first month on the job for that second season was just everybody building the set. That was literally the first thing… that was the first job before we could do any writing, was just building the new set for the show.

KP: That’s got to be an odd feeling to come in as a writer, and your first job is to build a set.

CONNIFF: Yeah, I mean, it was… there was nothing… nothing about it seemed weird, because I just knew that this was the kind of way they did things. But the thing, (laughs) about it that was weird is that I… of course, out of everyone, I was the most incompetent at that job. All these other guys that grew up in the Midwest, they grew up with fathers who had garages with tools and stuff, and they all had some kind of natural inclination towards that kind of thing. The only power tool in my father’s house was his martini shaker, so I was just completely out of my element. Although they were really nice about it and they helped me out. But that was probably the only moment on the show that I ever felt like, “God, I’m really not carrying my weight here,” was when we were building the set, because I was pretty bad at it.

KP: Do you remember specific areas you worked on?

CONNIFF: I don’t know. I remember Mike and I had to go get wood one time and we came back with green treated wood and it was the wrong kind of wood. I remember Joel looking at me and going, “We sent a boy to do a man’s job.”

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: So just stuff like that, where I would just try to do what I was told and I would try to hammer things, but I just had no talent for it whatsoever. And that was the only moment that I was ever on the show where I was thinking, “God, maybe they’re just gonna decide that I’m not cut out for this.” Once we finished the set and once we were in the writing room, then everything was fine.

KP: So what was that feeling like, if you recall, being in the writing room for the first time, knowing that this was your job?

CONNIFF: Well, it was just a great feeling, and it just felt very comfortable right from the start. It was just really fun right from the start. It was really a case of, “I can’t believe I’m getting paid to do this.” And back then the pay was incredibly low, but it didn’t matter because it was just really fun. I was just waiting for someone to come along and say, “You can’t make your living doing this. We can’t allow this to happen. Something this great can’t happen to you.” You know, and be taken away.

KP: Yes, they were gonna show up at the door and say, “Mr. Conniff you have to come with us.”

CONNIFF: Yeah, exactly. Exactly.

KP: “Everyone else can play but you, you’re coming with us.”

CONNIFF: Yeah. But I think all of us kinda felt the same way, though, like we felt so blessed to have this job.

KP: Do you recall what your first quip was in the room?

CONNIFF: You know what? I really don’t. I remember my first movie was Rocket Ship XM, but honestly, that I don’t remember.

KP: Do you recall it being easy getting into the groove of doing that?

CONNIFF: Yeah, it was, because everyone was like.. You know, I think Joel created this feeling in the room that it wasn’t a high pressure thing. It was really… I think Joel has this attitude that the more fun you have, the better the end product is gonna be.

KP: Right.

CONNIFF: And so that was how it was. And actually, that first year, the writing room was just Joel, Trace, Mike, and myself. Most of the time. Because Kevin was still spending a lot of time editing. I think the writing staff officially was Joel, Mike, me, Trace, Kevin, and Jim. But Jim and Kevin were always really busy with all the other stuff they had to do, so Kevin wasn’t in the writing room as much as he would have liked. But once the next season came and then we had the budget to hire another editor, then Kevin was in the writing room all the time.

KP: So when was it presented to you that it would not just be a writing job, but also a performing job?

frankconniff-06.jpgCONNIFF: That came up pretty quickly. I knew that I was officially replacing Josh as a writer, and I think the general idea is that I was gonna replace him as a performer as well, but it wasn’t a forgone conclusion when I started. I knew that when I was hired, I was being hired as a writer, and I didn’t just take it for granted that I was gonna be on the show. But pretty quickly, once we got around to that – I don’t remember there being any discussion or anything about it – I think it just kind of happened.

KP: Were there any sense or anything related to you about what had prompted Josh’s departure from the show?

CONNIFF: Not that I can remember. He moved out to LA and I think he… Josh was just in a different place at that point, and had other ambitions. He was 16 or 18 years older, something like that. That was my understanding of it.

KP: But you never got a sense of anything beyond that.

CONNIFF: No. I mean, not really. No.

KP: As far as the atmosphere during that second season, did you get a sense of any of the conflicts that were brewing and would arise in later seasons?

CONNIFF: No, not that first year I was there. It seemed like we were all there just having fun.

KP: When TV’s Frank came to the fore, what was that dynamic like the first time being on camera?

CONNIFF: I think, because it was with Trace, it was just always… it was just a very comfortable thing that felt right, and just working with Trace, being part of that team with Trace, was just so great right from the start. I don’t remember feeling a lot of nervousness about it or anything, because he and I just really, as performers and as those characters, we just really clicked with each other. It was totally, totally on the same page as to the kind of vibe we were trying to go for and what we were trying to achieve in those segments.

KP: When you talked about your stand-up sort of being Burlesque, you two were an incredible double act…

CONNIFF: Yeah, yeah, absolutely, and that was… the great thing about that is we were really… not to compare myself to Abbott & Costello or Laurel & Hardy, not for a moment to say that I’m on that level as Three Stooges, but that was exactly the style of performing that Trace and I were doing. In that tradition.

KP: Well, I think you’re underselling your performance. (laughs)

CONNIFF: Well, thank you.

KP: How quickly into the job did the responsibility of choosing the films come in?

CONNIFF: Oh, I don’t know. I don’t remember if that was the next season or the season after that. I don’t remember exactly when that came about, but that just was another thing, too. I don’t think there was a lot of discussion about it or a lot of thought into it. I think that when the day came, they decided, “Well, we should give someone the specific task of looking at the movies before we look at them.” I think it was just a matter of that, just like it seems like it would be the practical thing to do, and it would streamline the process. And then the job was given to me for whatever reason, but I was very willing to do it.

KP: Who was doing that prior to that?

CONNIFF: I think prior to that we just would all look at the movies. You know, we’d get a bunch, and we’d either during lunch, or we’d take some time out, and we’d just pop the videotapes in while we were eating, or whatever, and we’d watch a few minutes. It was usually pretty apparent pretty early in a movie whether it might be a possibility or whether it was absolutely we weren’t gonna do it. So we would watch a few minutes of each movie, and it was pretty much a group thing from what I remember. And then just one day, I think maybe because, as the show grew, maybe there wasn’t as much time for Joel or for Trace or for Kevin or Mike, who were gaining other responsibilities, for them to have the time to just sit down with everyone and watch. I think it was decided that someone should have that job, and then I think I was just the one that didn’t have a lot else on my plate like those other guys did.

KP: Did you ever regret having to look at all that?

CONNIFF: No, no. I always enjoyed that. On the days when I did that, that was my job – was just to come in and watch TV all day. So how could you not like that?

KP: Is there anything you regret never being able to do, either through rights issues or other problems? I know that’s an odd sort of regret. (laughs)

CONNIFF: Yeah. I do know that sometimes I would recommend things and then the other guys wouldn’t sign off on it. And the one specific movie I remember that I really wanted to do and nobody else wanted to do was Bela Lugosi Meets the Brooklyn Gorilla, which I don’t know if you’re familiar with that movie, but it stars Duke Mitchell and Sammy Petrillo, who were a Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis clone rip-off act. It was, like, Sammy Petrillo, who was a total Jerry Lewis rip-off, and Duke Mitchell’s a total Dean Martin rip-off. And I really wanted to do that one, but I was, (laughs) I was overruled.

KP: Who was the most vehement one overruling it?

CONNIFF: Oh, that I don’t remember. I think, for one thing, because it was a comedy. We didn’t like doing comedies.

KP: The only one you ever wound up doing was Catalina Caper, wasn’t it?

CONNIFF: Yeah. I think there might have been one or two others, but that’s the one that jumps out as being a comedy that we did. So I think that was the main reason. And plus, you know, the other guys on the staff were not as enamored as I was of watching a Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis rip-off act – which for me was something very exciting, but nobody else really shared that excitement.

KP: And I guess there were other films that you later regretted choosing – the largest one being, what, Radar Secret Service?

CONNIFF: Oh, I don’t know. I don’t know if I remember that as a big regret. I think it was just because it ended up being… I remember that when we first screened it, and I think that was from the era before I looked at it first. I think that was one I remember we all looked at once, and we were all riffing like crazy on it and having a great time and thought this would be so great. And then I think what happened was we couldn’t get the rights to it. And then a couple years later we did get the rights to it. And it was like, “All right, we can do Radar Secret Service!” and then it was as tedious as any other movie to do. But I don’t remember that as standing out as being a big regret as compared to other movies.

KP: So at what point did MST become a full time job for you?

CONNIFF: Well, it became a full time job right away, although I didn’t make enough money from it in the first year to really make a living, so I had to continue taking gigs as a stand-up comedian to supplement my income.

KP: But you did quit fast-food, though.

CONNIFF: Yeah. I actually had quit fast food several years before that, because even though I made a very meager living as a stand-up comedian, I did make a living as a stand-up comedian.

KP: That threshold was crossed…

CONNIFF: Yeah, so the minute my stand-up comedy income matched my Arby’s income, then I was a professional stand-up comedian. That is something I was really grateful for when it happened. You know, when I was just making an incredibly meager living as a stand-up comedian, I was just so thrilled that I was making even any kind of living at it, you know?

KP: Did you ever worry, during those early times, that you’d have to go back to it? Or that type of job?

CONNIFF: Um, no. I didn’t worry back then… I worry now, but…

KP: (laughs) I’m sure they’d love to have you. You’re one of their MVPs.

CONNIFF: No, actually, I think I did worry about it. From the moment that I first made a living in stand-up comedy and made a living in show business, I think I’ve always felt so grateful and so lucky to be making a living doing this, that there’s always stuff here in the back of my head that it’ll all be taken away at some point. But luckily I’ve been very blessed for 20 years now, so it hasn’t happened yet.

KP: I’m sure they’d be happy to have you back.

CONNIFF: Right.

KP: (laughs) You’re their most famous alumni.

CONNIFF: Oh, I doubt that, but at least I’d get free horsy sauce.

KP: At least.

CONNIFF: Right.

KP: Mozzarella sticks for at least the first week.

CONNIFF: (laughs) Right, right.

KP: Is there anything performance-wise, on camera, that you ever balked at doing?

CONNIFF: That I ever balked at doing?

KP: Yes. Or were not terribly comfortable doing…

CONNIFF: Um… I really don’t think so. If you look at the stuff I did…

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: … it’s like, what could I possibly have objected to doing? You know, after all the things I did?

KP: Well, the book (the MST Amazing Colossal Episode Guide) mentioned that you were not terribly comfortable in a dress. Or the thought of being in a dress.

CONNIFF: Yeah, that might have been the case, but I don’t think I raised any kind of big stink about it. Personally, I’ve never been afraid to look silly and ridiculous on camera or onstage.

KP: And certainly you had Trace right along there with you.

CONNIFF: Yeah, yeah, absolutely.

KP: How easy or difficult were those filming days for you?

CONNIFF: They weren’t difficult for me. They were fun, really. I can’t remember anything difficult about it.

frankconniff-07.jpg

KP: At what point did the idea of pursuing the MST feature film enter the picture? Because that certainly was during your period there, that the idea of it came about.

CONNIFF: Yeah, that kind of came in, I think, maybe after the second season. I really don’t remember specifically. I know that it went back to when Joel was there. I remember Joel was involved in the talks about it and stuff like that. So I think it was discussed for a few years before they actually pitched it and sold it to Universal, which I guess was probably ’94 or something like that.

KP: And during that early conception, what was your role in the film? I’m assuming that there are drafts, or at least ideas, that had TV’s Frank in it…

CONNIFF: Well, I mean, I was involved in a lot of discussions. The extent of my involvement with the film really boiled down to the fact that I worked on the live version of This Island Earth. We did it as a live show.

KP: That was during the first convention, wasn’t it?

CONNIFF: I think it was the second convention. I think the first convention we did World Without End was the movie.

KP: I think that was just the live show, wasn’t it? It was just the MST Alive

CONNIFF: Yeah, did we just do a live show?

KP: Yeah.

CONNIFF: I think we did a convention where we did This Island Earth.

KP: Yeah, because I think This Island Earth was the one that you did the dance in.

CONNIFF: Right, right. Yeah, that was the convention. So I was involved in the writing of that movie, but by the time it got to the screen, I think it had probably changed from then. I think there were still a few of my jokes in the movie, but those other guys definitely did all the heavy lifting as far as writing the movie and stuff.

KP: How many of the various attempts at pitching and developing outside shows for Best Brains were you involved in?

CONNIFF: Not any, I don’t think, because developing outside shows for Best Brains was not something that really happened that often while I was there. I think if they did go out and pitch other shows. I think that happened after I left. I don’t remember that being something that was any… I think the movie was always the big part of the agenda, and developing other shows did not come to the forefront until my last few months there, I think.

KP: So what was your perspective on the difficulties that led to Joel’s departure?

CONNIFF: I don’t know. It was a long time ago. I do know that there were conflicts between him and Jim Mallon, and I think they were getting to a point where they were having a hard time working together. So I think that came at a time when I think Joel was ready to move on anyway, and he had other things, other projects, he wanted to work on and he was ready to go back to L.A. But I think that Joel, when he did leave the show, I think that that, in a way, saved the show, because if he had just held his ground and if he and Jim had continued their conflict, it might have made the whole company fall apart. But Joel was willing to say, “Okay, I’m gonna just go and move on and do other things.” That resolved the situation.

KP: Well, Joel did mention when I spoke with him about the fact that he did feel that if he had stayed, he knew it would have torn the show apart.

CONNIFF: Yeah, yeah, it was a bad… it was just one of those things that happened where these conflicts between two people who run a company… I remember we were worried at the time when the conflict was going on that is this gonna end the company, you know, but I think Joel’s decision to just go to L.A. and move on really saved the company.

KP: Did any of that conflict affect you in any way, as far as first hand, or was it all just blowback of concern?

CONNIFF: No, I don’t think it affected… it just was… you know, I was sorry to see Joel go. I think we all were. But I think things kinda calmed down, and then Mike took over and that worked really well, too, so then I think we just were kind of able to get back into a groove.

KP: How different was the dynamic after Joel left?

CONNIFF: In what sense?

KP: I’ve heard various stories of Jim interjecting himself in the writing room at various points.

CONNIFF: I think he did that, but he didn’t do that a lot. I don’t think he did it to a point where it really affected the creativity of the show, because obviously the show was still good.

KP: I have heard the concept of the umbilicus cited as a point of contention.

CONNIFF: I remember there was the umbilicus and we did it, and I think the thing about the umbilicus is it just really didn’t catch on. It didn’t become one of the great icons of the show. But, you know, it was an element that we added, for better or worse.

KP: So when did you start to feel an inkling that you wanted to move on, and what prompted that?

frankconniff-08.jpgCONNIFF: I don’t know if anything specifically prompted it, but I had been at the show for five years and I was just restless, as I tend to get sometimes in my life, and I was just kind of wanted to try something different. As great as it was there. So I just kind of knew that I was gonna make that move at some point, so I just chose a moment to make it and I told everybody in advance. So I felt like it was all handled very professionally and I left on very amicable terms. So I feel like I did it at the right time, because it just all kinda happened. There were no bad feelings, at least on my part, about it. And it seemed like it worked out pretty well.

KP: What was the reaction everyone had when you told them?

CONNIFF: You know, I think, on the one hand, they were sorry to see me go, but on the other hand, I think they understood where I was coming from and they were very supportive of it.

KP: Who had the most extreme sort reaction – sort of, “You can’t do that, please don’t do that…” kind of reaction?

CONNIFF: Nobody. (laughs)

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: Nobody really said, “Oh my god, you can’t do this, it’ll ruin the show!”

KP: So no one locked you in a room and just cried in front of you?

CONNIFF: Yeah, and just said, “Please don’t do this.”

KP: If they had, do you think you would have stayed, or do you think your mind was made?

CONNIFF: Oh, I don’t know. That’s such a hypothetical thing.

KP: Of course it is. And if you had super powers at the time, would you… (laughs)

CONNIFF: Right! It’s such an alternate universe kind of concept, but I think that the show… you know, Joel left the show and the show still thrived, and it’s like the show itself was bigger than any one element on the show. And that’s part of the strength of it.

KP: How sentimental were you towards the show and, obviously, the character that you had created?

CONNIFF: Well, I think I was very sentimental then, and I’m still very sentimental about it. That’s never left me.

KP: Was it a decision, at any time in that period after you had made it, that you felt you could have reversed, or that you regretted?

CONNIFF: I don’t know if I could have reversed it. Although, when I came out to LA in my first year, I kind of – as I frequently do in my life – I did it in not the smartest way, in the sense that the amount of money that I had saved up to live on while I was out in L.A. looking for work was, I thought, a substantial amount of money…

KP: So it was substantial if you’d have stayed in the Midwest…

CONNIFF: Yes, exactly. So that my first year in L.A., there was financial stress about, “Oh my god, I had a steady job and now I don’t have a job, and I’m running out of money.” So I did have moments like that. But, as it turned out, I came out to L.A. at a very… it’s like the mid 80s when I started doing comedy in Minneapolis, which was like the boom time for stand-up comedy, and then when I came out to L.A. in the mid 90s that was the boom time for comedy on television.

KP: Sitcoms were all over the place.

CONNIFF: Yeah, and at a certain point, everybody I knew had a writing job. When I got hired to be on Sabrina, everyone else that I knew also had a writing job on a TV show. There was a lot of work, so it was a very fortuitous time for me to come to L.A. – because when I got there, I was very frightened about it, but I didn’t realize at the time that it was actually the best time to go there in terms of there being plenty of opportunities.

KP: So was Sabrina your first job in L.A.?

CONNIFF: No. I had a couple of jobs before. I did this Elvira TV special, this one-time thing, and I wrote an episode of a show on HBO called Perversions of Science. The episode I wrote never was filmed or aired, but I did get paid for writing the script.

KP: Always a good thing. (laughs)

CONNIFF: Yeah, and I wrote a script for Disney TV Animation, a thing that was supposed to be for home video called Twisted Fairy Tales, and I wrote a Three Little Pigs script. The premise was the Three Little Pigs done in the style of the real world, and that was an animated thing that I did. So I did those things before I got the staff job on Sabrina.

KP: How much of a calling card did you find MST to be?

CONNIFF: You know what? It was not a completely effective calling card in Los Angeles. Not as good as say… as far… and I’m just talking, like, from an agent’s point of view…it wasn’t as great a calling card as, say, writing a friend’s spec script. Like, that would be considered a better calling card.

KP: Did you do that at any point? (laughs)

CONNIFF: No, I didn’t, because once again I’m stubborn and I try to do things my own way. But the thing that MST really did open doors for me was in the alternative comedy scene in Los Angeles. When I first moved out here, as far as I was concerned I was retired from stand-up comedy. You know, I was just gonna make my living as a writer. Then I saw there was this great scene out here of great places to do comedy that weren’t comedy clubs, and that were much more fun than comedy clubs. I started performing at these clubs, like Largo and bookstores and stuff – you know, all these alternative comedy rooms. Because of Mystery Science Theater, that door opened wide for me. I got booked in all these rooms. It wasn’t a thing where I made money, but I got to perform and meet all these people. That’s another time that I look at my life – even though I just told you it was kind of stressful financially – but when I first moved out to L.A. and I was going out every night to all these rooms and doing stand-up comedy and meeting all these people, that was another time that I look back on and it’s just a really great period in my life.

KP: Did you get a sense of just how much of a fan base you had and an appreciation for the show?

CONNIFF: It’s just the fact that I had done it. I got booked into rooms that a lot of other comedians – and equally worthy comedians, I might add – were having a hard time getting booked into.

KP: So it gave you a cool cache.

CONNIFF: Yeah, exactly, exactly. I was kind of accepted into that circle very quickly and I made a lot of really great friends with a lot of other L.A. comedians at the time, who are still my friends. So that was a really great thing.

KP: How many people would ask you to push the button?

CONNIFF: (laughs)

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: Not many.

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: They were geeky, but not that geeky.

KP: (laughs) Would it have been an awkward moment if they had?

CONNIFF: Um, no. You know, the thing is, and I actually… I saw Joel last week. We had breakfast and we were talking about that when we’re approached by fans, it’s almost never an awkward moment. People are always really nice and they always seem very respectful… they’re very cognizant that they don’t want to bother you, they just want to tell you how much they like the show. So it’s always really great when someone comes up. And that’s the nature, also, of cult fame as opposed to fame-fame, where cult fame – I can say from experience – is not only the best kind of fame you can have, it’s really the only kind of fame that you should have, because you get approached by people every now and then. It’s never intrusive. It’s not like you can’t go places without getting mobbed. It’s just every now and then someone comes up to you and says something really nice.

KP: So no one’s taking your picture at dinner…

CONNIFF: Not that I know of, but if they do that, it’s no big deal because it’s not like it happens every day. It happens once a month or something.

KP: So it’s not some onerous burden to bear.

CONNIFF: Yeah, it never is. And Mystery Science Theater fans – and I think the other guys would agree with me about this – they’re just always really pleasant and really nice people. It’s always just delightful when they tell you how much they like the show.

KP: When you went into a staff job on a network show like Sabrina, creatively how different was that from MST?

CONNIFF: Well, creatively it was a lot different. A show like Mystery Science Theater, you know, my sensibilities were very similar to everyone else’s sensibility in the room. We were all very much on the same page. And on a sitcom, there’s this other level of agendas going on from the network and all that stuff, and from the studio. So it’s a different vibe. Although I have to say that the Sabrina experience, while different from Mystery Science Theater, was also mostly a very fun, really happy thing to do.

KP: And, in a weird way, reuniting you with Joel…

CONNIFF: Yeah, ’cause Joel… well, Joel helped me get the job in the first place, because he was the writing partner of Nell Scovell, who ran the show. She’s the one who ultimately hired me, so Nell is the one who I really owe a lot to in terms of her hiring me for that show. But yeah, Joel was around too. And Nick Bakay was on the writing staff, who had worked at the Comedy Channel and was friends with Joel. Nick was someone that we, at Mystery Science Theater, would always talk about as someone we thought was really funny, and Joel would talk about things he did that were hilarious. So then for me to be in a writing room with Nick Bakay was just so much fun, and he made me laugh so hard, it was just great.

KP: And I’d say, if there was any breakout star that Sabrina produced, it would have been him.

CONNIFF: Well, as the cat.

KP: Yeah. (laughs)

CONNIFF: But also Paul Feig was on the show that first year too…

KP: As the science teacher.

CONNIFF: I just ran into him at Joel’s party, and he’s like one of the nicest guys ever. And he went on to create Freaks and Geeks and now he directs movies and stuff…

KP: And he’s just a good guy, to boot.

CONNIFF: Yeah, he’s become a star in his own right, and that’s like a really wonderful thing to see.

KP: So what led to your on-camera appearance on Sabrina? Was that sort of a surprise?

frankconniff-09.jpgCONNIFF: It was a surprise to me, but that was just… it was another thing where, just in the writing room, we were developing this idea, and I think Nell just turned to me one day and said, “You know you’re playing the baby, right?”

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: I mean, I think it was literally presented to me that way. And I’m like, “Okay, fine.” And that’s another instance of where there’s nothing too silly or ridiculous for me to do on screen. And actually, when we filmed that episode, some friends of mine came to the set because it was my 40th birthday. So on my 40th birthday I was sitting in a crib on a set wearing a onesy.

KP: You should have felt younger than you’d ever been.

CONNIFF: Yeah, exactly. Exactly. So that’s just the nature of my career.

KP: It could have been worse. You could have been in a onesy at home on your 40th birthday.

CONNIFF: Right. Well, that we won’t go into…

KP: (laughs)

CONNIFF: But yeah, so that was a surprise, but that was another great thing – and I still get checks for that, so that’s another good thing about it.

KP: So what was the reason for your departure from Sabrina?

CONNIFF: Well, Sabrina went through two show runners while I was there. Nell left after the first season, and then I had to get kinda hired all over again for the second season. Then I was there through the fourth season, and then the show went to the WB and they brought in another show runner, and I think that person just hired all new people, or mostly new people. That was a case, too, where I was ready to move on and do other things, but I would have had to have left anyway, I think.

KP: Now, was that around the same time that Joel was developing Statical Planets?

CONNIFF: I think Statical Planets was more like in the first or second year of Sabrina. The first year of Sabrina, I think, is when he was doing Statical Planets. It was around ’95 or ’96, I believe.

KP: Which you would have had quite a pivotal role in.

CONNIFF: Yeah. I barely remember anything about it, ’cause it was so long ago, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen it since then.

KP: I’m sure you must have loved the idea of having an entire army of you.

CONNIFF: I know, how can you not love that?

KP: (laughs) This was also around the same period as Invader ZIM, wasn’t it?

CONNIFF: Right, right. Yeah, right after I left Sabrina, I got hired to work on Invader ZIM.

KP: Now, that was a show that was certainly filled with a bit more conflict, wasn’t it?

CONNIFF: I don’t know. I think there was conflict between Jhonen Vasquez and Nickelodeon, although I wasn’t privy to a lot of that. I was just there for, like, six episodes. I was hired to be the head writer, and I think the thinking on the part of Nickelodeon was, “We’ll bring in an experienced comedy writer guy.” But Jhonen, I think, had just a very singular vision for that show. They didn’t really need me there that much. Although I was there the whole time. I was employed there. But my point is is that, you know, any contribution I made to that show was minimal compared to the contribution of Jhonen, who is brilliant, I think – and the show is really great, but it’s all because of him and because of the artists and the animators and the designers there who, I think, did amazing work on that show, and I can only count my contribution to it as very small compared to all the great stuff that Jhonen and all those other people did.

KP: So when did Drew Carey come into the picture?

CONNIFF: Well, that came after I was done on Invader ZIM. On The Drew Carey Show, the show runner that year was Holly Hester, who had been a show runner on Sabrina and was a really good friend of mine. She brought me in as a consultant, and I was just there the year that she was the show runner there. So that was a really good job, because it was like two days a week, and there was a lot of real talent on that staff, too. A lot of really funny people that were fun to be around.

KP: And then I guess after that was O2Be

CONNIFF: O2Be was a show Lizz Winstead and Brian Unger created on the Oxygen Channel. That was a blast to work on. We did six episodes of that and I have to say it was just… the fact that it didn’t get picked up for more episodes – and it was a very well-received show, it got really good reviews – that was kind of a heartbreaker when that didn’t get picked up, because that was a great experience. That was similar to Mystery Science Theater in the sense that it was a really fun experience with all like-minded people, all my friends. Everyone else who worked on it was already my friend, you know, and I got to be on that show, too.

KP: So what do you think led to its lack of pickup?

CONNIFF: Well, I think if you look at the cable TV landscape – what it was becoming then, and has become since – I think that satirical comedy is just not at the forefront. It’s more reality shows or shows in terms of comedy shows that are much broader, you know?

KP: Right.

CONNIFF: Of course, The Daily Show and The Colbert Report being a huge exception to that… Being like the two beacons of great, intelligent, high level comedy.

KP: Almost the exception that proves the rule.

CONNIFF: Right, right. So that just isn’t the direction that cable – not just the Oxygen network but cable TV in general – has gone. I mean, we premiered on the Oxygen Channel the same night as a show called Girls Behaving Badly premiered, which is just a show of people playing pranks.

KP: Well, that’s a nice one-two…

CONNIFF: I’ve never really seen it, so I’m not saying that it’s bad or anything like that, but I’m just saying that that show went on to have a long run and was very successful for Oxygen. But that’s just a much broader kind of thing, where it’s just hidden camera playing pranks on people, whereas O2Be – which was a very satirical show – the people at Oxygen, for whatever reason, it just wasn’t their cup of tea.

KP: Wrong network, wrong time?

CONNIFF: Yeah, I guess so. But all of us who worked on it look back on it as just something we really treasure a lot.

KP: So how did Tom Green come about then?

CONNIFF: That was just something I got sent out on by my agent. They were looking for people, and the guy who was the head writer, Gabe Abelson, is just a really funny, really nice guy. I had never met him before, but the material that I submitted to him he liked and he hired me. That was a very fun experience. It was very chaotic and we worked under kinda crazy conditions, but I enjoyed it.

KP: Was this also around the same time that you did Dark Star?

frankconniff-111.jpgCONNIFF: I guess so. Dark Star… when you say, “The time I did Dark Star,” you mean the last ten years?

KP: Yeah, (laughs). They just keep bringing you back in for that, don’t they?

CONNIFF: Yeah. Every year or two, I get called in to do a voiceover or something.

KP: So it’s the wine of projects for you.

CONNIFF: Yeah, exactly. (laughs) “We’ll serve no Dark Star before it’s time.” So yeah, that one I’ve just been… that’s been an on and off thing forever.

KP: And literally is probably about as close as people will come to a reunion of MST.

CONNIFF: I guess. You never know, but we’ll see.

KP: How do you view even the thought of… I mean, could you ever perceive of a reunion, creatively?

CONNIFF: I could see it happening in terms of people involved in the show wanting to do it again. I don’t know where it would go on the air now. I don’t know what network would put on a two hour show like that. It’s just a completely basic cable or television world than what it was like 17 or 18 or 19 years ago when the show first went on the air. It’s just completely different now, so I can totally see everyone wanting to do it and everyone being excited about doing a reunion, I just don’t know which network would pick it up in this day and age. I could be completely wrong about that. Maybe there’s people – executives or whatever -who would love to do it. I know that, because of the DVDs, it’s still very popular and stuff.

KP: Well, you would think a network that sort of caters to things like that and has a lot of disposable income, like a G4…

CONNIFF: G4, yeah… although, you know something like G4 is so into what their demographic is, in getting like young males, or whatever, between the ages of 16 and 24. Like, are they really gonna want to put on a show that has a lot of Adlai Stevenson references?

KP: (laughs) You never know until you try.

CONNIFF: Yeah…

KP: Well, Mike, Kevin, and Bill are pursuing the direct-to-video route…

CONNIFF: Yeah, that seems to be working for them…

KP: And Mike obviously has RiffTrax…

CONNIFF: Yeah. So maybe someone at some point would want to do a direct-to-video Mystery Science Theater, but I don’t know if that would work economically. I mean, you’re asking the wrong guy about stuff like that.

KP: Would you still be comfortable on camera, reprising the role?

CONNIFF: Yeah, well, my new show that I’m doing now, Cartoon Dump, I’m on camera on that. I’m still as big a ham as I’ve always been.

frankconniff-10.jpg

KP: (laughs) Could you see working with the guys, in general? Could you see and enjoy doing stuff with Trace again, and Joel, and so on?

CONNIFF: Yeah, well, I actually am kind of in the process of doing something with Joel again right now, because we’re doing Cartoon Dump as a live show on the last Tuesday of every month at the Steve Allen theater. Joel has agreed to build a puppet for the show, so in that sense Joel and I are gonna be working on that together.

KP: So how do you describe Cartoon Dump?

CONNIFF: Cartoon Dump is like a take-off on a low-budget kids’ show from the 60s. But it takes place in a garbage dump, and the cartoons that are shown on it are really awful cartoons. It’s on CartoonBrewFilms.com

KP: It’s also subscribable via iTunes isn’t it?

CONNIFF: I think so, yeah. I think you can pay for it to download it. But it’ll be available to watch for free on that site, and then people can post it wherever they want. So hopefully it’ll be all over the web.

KP: And this is a co-creation of yours and Jerry Beck’s?

CONNIFF: Well, I created it, but it began as Jerry Beck and I having discussions, and he does this show – Worst Cartoons Ever – that he just did at the Comic-Con and that he’s done for years, so we were just trying to figure out a way to turn that into a show, and then I came up with this idea.

KP: Was it always intended to be both a podcast and a live show?

CONNIFF: Yeah, yeah, right from the start. Well, actually we were just gonna do it as a podcast, and then Jerry inquired at the Steve Allen Theater if we could film it there, and the people at the Steve Allen Theater said, “Yeah, you can film it here, but only if you do a live show as well. So that would be our payment, you doing a live show, and our cut of the door.” So we ended up filming six episodes in the daytime and then doing the live show at night, which was an absolutely crazy, insane thing to do. But it ended up working out really well, the live show went really well, and the podcasts are gonna turn out good, too. So far, it’s working out.

KP: How does it feel to be working in the realm of new technology? And new paradigms for distribution?

CONNIFF: Well, I’m, like, so not savvy about that kind of stuff. I’ve always been very incompetent when it comes to technology. I can still barely log on and check my email.

KP: (laughs) Would you rather log on or use power tools?

CONNIFF: You see, now you’re already going over my head. But I do love the internet though, and I’ve actually come to the conclusion that the internet might be the one thing that will save our democracy at this point…

KP: There’s gotta be something.

CONNIFF: Yeah, because the media is just controlled by three companies now, and the only thing that’s really bumping up against that is the internet, where anybody can put anything on. That’s a great thing. That’s the only media going on right now that isn’t controlled by one of just a few corporations. Even though I’m so not technologically savvy, I am very much a big fan of what the internet represents and what it is and what it hopefully will continue to become.

KP: Have you found your mind turning more and more towards creating concepts for that model of distribution?

CONNIFF: Well, the thing about it is, if you want to do a really independent project – which is what Cartoon Dump is – then you kinda have to do it for the internet. It’s an outlet for independent programming and just people using their creativity in the way they want to. But my bread and butter these days is still the stuff that I do for television. I’m currently writing a pilot for Nickelodeon. So stuff like that is still how I make my living, but I’m kind of investing in my own creativity now in doing stuff like Cartoon Dump, and I hope I get the opportunity to continue to do stuff like that while I continue to also work for the man – which, believe me, I’m still doing.

KP: (laughs) Well, anytime that you’re able to get back in front of things is always good.

CONNIFF: Yeah… Thanks. Thanks.

KP: So, at this point, are there any plans to eventually release a Cartoon Dump DVD collection?

CONNIFF: Oh, well that… I think we’ve got to wait until it gets out there and see what the reaction is.

KP: Oh, the internet, if nothing, iss about reckless abandon. Why wait?

CONNIFF: (laughs) Right. Well, as far as Cartoon Dump goes, we’re gonna just see what happens, and then we’re open to anything. I mean, wherever it might lead us.

KP: Could you have perceived, 20 years ago, that you’d be in this position?

CONNIFF: Well, I didn’t even know… I hadn’t even heard of the internet back then, so I doubt it. I didn’t even hear of the internet until a few weeks ago.

KP: Finally, someone told you.

CONNIFF: Yeah, exactly.

KP: So, at this point, would you say that you’re pretty happy with where you are and what you’re doing?

CONNIFF: Yeah, in general. You know, I mean, I feel very blessed. I’ve managed to work steadily for a long time now, and I’m very grateful for that. It’s a real blessing. And I’ve always managed to get work and make a living doing this. I’m very grateful for that, and I’m in a place right now where I’m just very excited about certain projects and what the future holds. I feel like I’m in a very creatively fertile time right now.

KP: So, you’re saying that Arby’s can wait a bit longer for you.

CONNIFF: Um, yeah. (laughs) Although, you know, with all the alternate forms of programming, I might be doing a show that’s broadcast on the Arby’s microwave.

KP: Or they may sponsor Cartoon Dump.

CONNIFF: Right, exactly.

##

Win Fraggle Rock on DVD!

Filed under: Contests — widge @ 3:40 am


In conjunction with HIT entertainment, we’re ringing the bells in celebration of the release of the complete third season of the Jim Henson classic FRAGGLE ROCK by giving away five (5) sets of all 3 seasons currently available.

All you have to do to enter is fill out the entry form below”¦

Contest ends at midnight EST on Tuesday, September 18th.

Enter the contest!
Email:
First name:
Last name:
Street Address:
Address Line 2 (if needed):
City:
State/Province/Whatever:
Zip Code/Postal Code:
Country:
Birth Month:
Birth Day:
Birth Year:

Official Rules

No member of Quick Stop Entertainment or their immediate families may enter.

No Purchase necessary to win.

Must be 18 years of age or older to enter.

All submitted entries must be received by 11:59pm EST on Tuesday, September 18th.

The winner must allow 4-6 weeks after announcement of win to receive the product.

Quick Stop Thingamabobs: 9/18/2007

Filed under: Columns,Thingamabobs — UncaScroogeMcD @ 2:50 am

thingamabobs.jpg

The web. It’s a big place, full of plenty of distractions ““ some funny, some informative, some ludicrous, some disturbing, some inane, some profound. Each and every weekday, we present links to a few of our favorite finds”¦

————————————————

Have a THINGAMABOB? Send it in!

##

September 17, 2007

SModcast 29

Filed under: SModcast — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:48 am

smodwinner.gif

newhead2.jpg

SModcast is the meandering palaver of a pair of dudes whose voices are so dull, they don’t deserve to be on the radio (and, hence, aren’t). Kevin Smith and Scott Mosier are SModcast.

The best thing about SModcast? It don’t cost nothing.

line.gif

SModcast 29: Harry Scotter and the Order of the Penis –

In which our heroes discuss The Boy Who Lived and the wizarding world way, way too much. SPOILER ALERT: “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows” and many others “Potter” books spoiled at great lengths.

[CONTENT WARNING] SModcast features harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Listener discretion is advised.

DOWNLOAD: (right click to save)
SModcast 29 (MP3 format) – 48.84 MB

[display_podcast]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes
Subscribe to this Podcast via FeedBurner

Wanna add your two cents? Spend it here, in the SModcast mailbag.

line.gif

CLICK HERE FOR THE SMODCAST ARCHIVES

line.gif

##

Scrubs Blog: My Boom Cam

Filed under: Production Blogs,Quickcasts,Scrubs Blog,Video — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:04 am

scrubsheader.jpg


VIDEO BLOG #88: “My Boom Cam” ““
We thought we’d be a bit experimental this week, so we’re getting a flashback to the shooting of a scene from episode 6×22, “My Point Of No Return.” So what did we do? We strapped the camera to the boom mic. Enjoy!

line3.gif

scrubs2007-09-17.jpg

Download Scrubs Video Blog #88:

 

Large (560 x 420 – QuickTime – 128.01 MB)
Small (320 x 240 – QuickTime – 55.45 MB)
[display_podcast]

##

 

 

Comics in Context #194: Eternal Verities

Filed under: Columns,Comics in Context — admin @ 12:03 am

comicsincontext4.jpg

cic2007-09-17.jpgHaving spent the last several months covering this summer’s major movie and DVD releases associated with comics, animation, and megaheroes, and reviewing comics exhibits at two museums, I can at last turn to a subject that I’ve wanted to address for a long time: Neil Gaiman’s revival of Jack Kirby’s The Eternals, illustrated by John Romita, Jr., which was collected into a hardcover edition earlier this year. It’s been a long time since I’ve done one of my close readings of a comics series in this column, and Eternals affords me a perfect opportunity.

Last year, to pave the way for the Gaiman revival, Marvel reissued Jack Kirby’s original Eternals series from 1976-1977, collected into a handsome hardcover edition. This was long overdue, and I suspect that it would not have happened when it did if Gaiman had not agreed to write an Eternals series. In the course of critiquing the Gaiman series, I will be referring to and critiquing the Kirby Eternals as well.

One of Kirby’s inspirations for The Eternals was Erich von Daniken’s 1968 book Chariots of the Gods?: Unsolved Mysteries of the Past, which purported that extraterrestrials visited Earth in ancient times, that they became the “gods” of ancient religions, and that they were responsible for amazing achievements such as the construction of the Egyptian pyramids and Stonehenge. One of my friends in my school days was a staunch believer in von Daniken’s book, and I found his efforts to convert me tiresome and irritating. The book is scientific nonsense, but it provided Kirby with a fruitful basis for his fantasy epic.

According to The Eternals, in prehistoric times the First Host of the Celestials, enigmatic aliens of colossal size and tremendous power, came to Earth and experimented on humanity’s apelike ancestors. Although the phrase did not exist in the 1970s, as far as I know, the Celestials were engaging in genetic engineering. As a result, the Celestials created three species of humanity. There were the Eternals, immortal, handsome beings who could not be killed, who lived upon mountaintops, and who developed superhuman abilities, enabling them, among other things, to fly through the air. There were the Deviants, grotesque creatures who lived beneath Earth’s surface, and who were genetically “unstable”: whereas a normal human child may resemble his or her father and mother, a Deviant child was radically different genetically from his parents. Finally, there were the “ordinary” human beings, like you and I, who lived on Earth’s surface, midway between the Eternals of the sky and the subterranean Deviants.

Humans of ancient times thought of the Eternals as gods or superhuman heroes. Hence, the ancient Greeks thought that Zuras, ruler of the Eternals, and his daughter Thena, were Zeus, ruler of the gods, and his daughter Athena. The people of ancient Rome mispronounced the name of the Eternal called Makkari as “Mercury.” Ordinary humans thought of the grotesque Deviants as devils and demons.

In The Eternals Kirby further developed certain concepts he had been developing since the 1960s. He previously demonstrated his interest in genetic engineering by co-creating the High Evolutionary, who debuted in Thor #134 (November, 1966). This master geneticist accelerated the evolution of animals, transforming them into his “New Men,” who had human intelligence, the power of speech, and semi-human physiques. In Thor #146-152 (1967-1968) Kirby and Stan Lee revealed that the Inhumans were the result of genetic experimentation by the extraterrestrial Kree. Later, in stories for DC’s Jimmy Olsen, Kirby created “The Project” (later dubbed Project Cadmus) and its sinister counterpart, the “Evil Factory,” both of which experimented in genetic engineering and cloning.

More importantly, through the 1960s and 1970s, Kirby returned time and again to the concept of two warring races of “gods” or “superhumans,” with ordinary humanity caught in the middle. There were Thor and his Asgardian allies against Loki and the forces of evil. There was Professor Charles Xavier and his team of X-Men pitted against Magneto and his Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. There were the “good” Inhumans such as Black Bolt arrayed against Maximus the Mad and his Inhuman allies. There were the HIgh Evolutionary’s noble New Men, called the Knights of Wundagore, and his archfoe, the Man-Beast, an wolf that evolved superhuman powers, who would lead other renegade New Men. Most prominently, in his “Fourth World” comics, Kirby depicted the benign New Gods of New Genesis in conflict with the satanic Darkseid and his fellow gods of the planet Apokolips.

In various respects the Eternals and Deviants are similar to the New Gods of New Genesis and Apokolips. Darkseid and his minions seek the Anti-Life Formula and conquest of the universe. In Kirby’s Eternals series the Eternals go to war with the Deviants to prevent them from conquering the Earth and attacking the Celestials.

But if the focus of the Fourth World books was on thwarting Darkseid’s quest for ultimate domination, in The Eternals Kirby appeared less interested in the battles between the Eternals and Deviants than in a more challenging subject: the nature of God. In my columns about the second Fantastic Four movie (see “Comics in Context” #184185), I have investigated how in Lee and Kirby’s “Galactus trilogy,” the Watcher and Galactus represent different visions of God: a benevolent God who is unwilling to interfere directly in human affairs, and a God of wrath who has sentenced all of humanity to death. In the Fourth World books God is represented by “the Source,” who is unseen and mysterious. The gods of New Genesis consider the Source to be benevolent, and their leader, Highfather, who significantly resembles an Old Testament patriarch, can communicate with him. But those who attempt to breach the Wall in outer space which separates us from the realm of the Source are punished by being transformed into “Promethean giants,” imprisoned, immobile, on the wall.

The Eternals represent the gods with a small “g” of ancient mythologies, who possessed human-like personalities and emotions, whose powers, though vast, were nonetheless limited. The Celestials represent God with a capital “G”: all-powerful and beyond human comprehension. The Source was mysterious, but was nevertheless clearly benevolent towards the New Gods of Apokolips. In contrast, the motivations and goals of the Celestials are almost wholly enigmatic. In the present day of Kirby’s Eternals series, the Fourth Host of the Celestials arrive on Earth, apparently to spend fifty years studying human civilization. At the end of that time, the leader of the Fourth Host, Arishem the Judge, is to deliver his verdict. If it is negative, humanity and the Earth will be destroyed. The odds do not look good: the series’ omniscient narrator tells us that over the ages the Celestials have performed genetic experiments on numerous worlds, and that not one world so far has received a favorable judgment.

But what is the basis for Arishem’s judgment? What do the Celestials expect of us? In Kirby’s vision the Celestials created humanity for reasons that remain unknown and expect us to fulfill some purpose that likewise remains unknown. This is the human dilemma in real life. Why are we here? If God exists, what does He expect from us?

Like the Galactus trilogy, Kirby’s Eternals is a tale about the possible end of the world. According to Christianity, the end of the world is the time of the Last Judgment; “Arishem’s” name looks as if it were a Hebrew word, but he too is to deliver a Last Judgment. Moreover, as I’ve suggested in the past, the end of the world can serve as a metaphor for one’s own mortality. Arishem’s “fifty-year judgment” fits the metaphor. One’s own death may seem a long way off–perhaps fifty years–but within a period of time that nonetheless seems uncomfortably short.

Although Kirby is considered an icon today, and his Eternals remains a remarkable achievement, back in the mid-1970s it was a commercial flop.
But why?

One reason might be that, when it is read one issue at a time, the series seems to meander. As with the Fourth World, Kirby had created a vast tapestry, and would move from one set of characters in one issue to another set in the next issue. So, for example, the efforts of Ikaris, Thena, Sersi and Makkari of the Eternals to thwart Deviant Warlord Kro’s attack on Manhattan in issues 3-5 are followed by Ajak’s confrontation with three SHIELD agents in issues 6-7, and then Kro and Thena’s journey to undersea Lemuria in issues 8-10, which introduce two new significant characters, Karkas and the Reject. This series isn’t like, say, Spider-Man, which keeps its star, Spider-Man, in the spotlight in every issue.

Nor do Kirby’s Eternals storylines always receive conventionally satisfactory conclusions. Kro’s invasion of Manhattan halts not because he was defeated, but because he meets his former lover Thena and, his feelings for her aroused, he agrees to a truce. In Kirby’s Eternals Annual #1 a super-strong being named Tutinax is transported through time to the present, where he begins a titanic battle with the Reject. But the fight abruptly ends when Tutinax simply fades back to the past, and possibly because the story had run out of pages. Though Kirby’s dynamic battle scenes in Eternals make fight scenes in contemporary superhero comics look tame, he understandably seems less interested in standard superhero combat than in unveiling the next set of wonders he has devised for the audience.

It should be no surprise that the Kirby Eternals reads better collected into a single volume than it did as separate issues. I wouldn’t be surprised if Kirby thought of it as a serialized version of what we would now call a graphic novel, in the days before that format existed.

There’s also the problem that Kirby was less adept at dialogue than Stan Lee, or Roy Thomas, or various other writers who were working at Marvel and DC in the 1970s. At times Kirby definitely shows a tin ear for dialogue: “That’s funky corn,” Makkari tells Sersi (Kirby Eternals collection, p. 73), as the rest of us go “Say what?” However, rereading the Kirby Eternals, I find the dialogue to be much better than I remember, sometimes producing truly well-turned phrases, as you shall see. It’s true that the dialogue may seem dated by today’s standards, but Kirby was working in the melodramatic style that was standard in superhero books at Marvel and DC at that time. (I recall one editor instructing me in the 1980s, “Write more purple.”)

A particular problem with the Kirby Eternals may be that its heroes really did not conform to the Marvel mode. One thinks of a Marvel superhero as a seemingly ordinary human who lives a realistic daily life, but who assumes a costumed identity to go on fantastic adventures. Even Lee and Kirby’s Thor, a Norse god, transformed into the human surgeon Don Blake. The Marvel heroes’ everyday identities make it easier for the readers to identify with them. Kirby’s lead character in Eternals, Ikaris , may initially pose as a human called “Ike Harris,” but he drops this “secret identity” almost immediately. Kirby’s Eternals lack “normal” human identities and lives: they are full time “gods,” if you will. Normal humans, such as Margo Damian and Dr. Samuel Holden, may hang out with the Eternals, but very much remain subsidiary characters. Moreover, in classic Marvel series of the 1960s, the heroes had ongoing personal problems, which many have condescendingly referred to as “soap opera,” but that allowed for still further reader identification. Again to cite Thor, there was the thunder god’s doomed love for the mortal Jane Foster, forbidden by his father Odin. Kirby’s Eternals has no such subplots. Marvel introduced three-dimensional personalities to the superhero genre in the 1960s, but Kirby’s Ikaris, Makkari, Ajak, and Zuras, seem flat in comparison. This isn’t true of the entire Eternals cast: Thena, Sersi, Kro, the Reject, Karkas, and Sprite all develop multidimensional personae as the series goes along. But none of them is the central figure of the series. Indeed, Kirby’s Eternals really has no central figure, since not even Ikaris appears in each issue.

Recently in his blog Mark Evanier pointed out that Steve Ditko, co-creator of Spider-Man and Doctor Strange, disagreed with what became the classic Marvel approach to portraying its superheroes: “The company dynamic had evolved into offering a diet of “˜heroes’ who were either flawed or uncertain of their own heroism and values. That’s not the way Ditko saw the world.” (http://www.newsfromme.com/archives/2007_09_11.html#014000). And indeed, Ditko characters like the Question definitely don’t go in for self-questioning.

All of this suggests to me that it really was Stan Lee who was primarily responsible for something that is considered a quintessential Marvel concept–the flawed, self-doubting hero–since his principal collaborators in the 1960s, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko, pursued a different direction when they subsequently wrote their own superhero comics.

So The Eternals was canceled in 1977, apparently so fast that Kirby did not have the time to devise a satisfactory conclusion to the series, or perhaps he simply did not want to; the final issue, 19, simply wraps up the concluding three-parter about Ikaris’s attempt to stop his evil cousin Druig from finding and using a Celestial weapon. As far as loyal readers were concerned, Arishem was still standing in the Andes, contemplating the forthcoming fifty-year judgment.

Marvel writer/editor Roy Thomas reintroduced the Eternals in Thor in the 1980s. In Thor #300 (for which I was a consultant on the plot) the gods of Earth’s pantheons, such as the Asgardians and Olympians, attempted in vain to defeat the Celestials, but Arishem delivered an early judgment in Earth’s favor, and the Fourth Host departed the planet. There was a twelve-issue Eternals series in 1985 and 1986, illustrated by Sal Buscema and initially written by Peter B. Gillis; editor in chief Jim Shooter disliked Gillis’s scripts, so Walter Simonson wrote the final four issues. Of all the attempts to portray the Eternals before the Gaiman revival, the Gillis-Simonson series was by far the most interesting and creative, but it has been grossly underrated and did not lead to an ongoing series. Subsequently Marvel demonstrated no interest in using the Eternals outside of one-shots and guest appearances, and certainly none in reprinting the original Kirby series. In 2003 Marvel even produced a ghastly mini-series called The Eternal, which utilized the names like “Eternal” and “Celestial” from Kirby’s series but otherwise had nothing to do with it. I expect that if Neil Gaiman had not accepted the offer to write a new Eternals series, the recent flurry of interest in the characters would not have occurred.

Gaiman’s first issue opens with a medical student named Mark Curry, and perceptive readers who already know the Eternals will realize that if you pronounce that name fast, you will get “Makkari.”

In interviews Gaiman has expressed amusement over the fact that in the Kirby Eternals series Ikaris used the transparent alias of “Ike Harris.” But “Ike” only uses that alias in the first issue, before he begins operating openly in the modern world as Ikaris. People are not about to suspect that “Ike Harris” is Ikaris, because at that time they don’t know that Ikaris exists.

Gaiman’s alias for Makkari, “Mark Curry,” is in the tradition of Kirby’s “Ike Harris.” When Makkari appeared in Marvel’s Quasar series, the late Mark Gruenwald gave him the alias “Mike Kahry.” Gaiman’s alias is an improvement.

And here’s an interesting coincidence–or is it? A while back I was watching a rerun of The Sopranos on A & E–the first episode of Season 3, “Mr. Ruggiero’s Neighborhood,” I think–and discovered that the nickname of a recurring character, FBI Agent Dwight Harris, is “Ike.” Well, that’s probably because President Dwight Eisenhower was nicknamed “Ike.” Then again, one of The Sopranos‘ writer/producers, Robin Green, used to work at Marvel and wrote the celebrated 1971 Rolling Stone cover story about the company (http://www.geocities.com/jonhulkholt/rs91.facefront.1.html). The first explanation is probably the correct one, but the second is certainly tempting.

Back on page 1 of issue 1, Mark Curry is “trying to remember why I want to be a doctor.” This may be because the Roman god Mercury, known to the ancient Greeks as Hermes, carried the caduceus, a wand that had wings at the top and that was encircled by two serpents. The caduceus has been adopted as a symbol of medicine by various organizations. However, these groups have confused Hermes’ caduceus with the staff of Asclepius, the Greek god of medicine, which has only one serpent and no wings (http://drblayney.com/Asclepius.html). Most medical associations, it seems, use Asclepius’s staff as their symbol, not the caduceus.

If Gaiman is aware of the difference between the caduceus and the staff of Asclepius, then perhaps that further explains why Mark Curry is questioning his decision to become a doctor. As we shall learn later in the series, another Eternal, Sprite, has removed Makkari’s memories and given him this new identity and role in life. But just as the caduceus is not supposed to be a symbol of medicine, Mark Curry/Makkari/Mercury is not meant to be a physician.

Curry states that “I’d hoped that I’d dream of racing a Ferrari down an open track forever.” Hermes/Mercury was the swiftest of the Olympian gods, and Kirby gave Makkari a “mania for fast vehicles” (Kirby p. 74). That’s reminiscent of Johnny Storm’s fascination with hot rods, come to think of it. It’s a bit strange that Makkari is so interested in “fast vehicles” since he can move at superhuman speed, but perhaps it’s because at times he needs to transport others at superhuman speed (as in Kirby’s Eternals #5).

Of course, Sandman readers should pay attention to Gaiman’s references to dreams, whether it is Curry’s dream or the Dreaming Celestial.

Mercury/Hermes is also the messenger of the Olympian gods, and this fact may explain why later in the series Gaiman turns Makkari into the “messenger” of the Dreaming Celestial.

The reader who realizes that Mark Curry is Kirby’s Makkari then faces an unexpected question. Why does Mark Curry have dark skin? Kirby made Makkari look Caucasian, which would be appropriate for someone who was mistaken for a Greco-Roman god, and all other artists who have portrayed Makkari have done the same, until now.

The likely answer is that Gaiman wanted his Eternals to have a multiracial cast.

In the interview in the back of the hardcover edition of this Eternals series, Gaiman states that he red the Kirby Eternals but acknowledges that he has not read all of the subsequent stories featuring the characters. It is possible then, that Gaiman is unaware that in the second series, Peter Gillis already supplied the Eternals with racial diversity.

In a brief sequence set in the Eternals’ city of Olympia (Kirby pgs. 184-185), Kirby introduced Kingo Sunen, an Eternal who dresses in samurai armor, and who associated with actual Japanese samurai in centuries past. Ikaris’s companion Margo Damian recognizes him as “a famous Japanese movie star,” and we are informed that he stars in samurai movies. In other words, what if Toshiro Mifune were one of the Eternals? Gillis gave Kingo Sunen a much larger role in the second Eternals series, which made clear he had Asian features.

Moreover, in the second series Gillis and artist Sal Buscema created a black Eternal, Phastos, who was based on Hephaestus, the blacksmith (get it?) of the Olympian gods.

However, in this same interview Gaiman explains that he did not want his Eternals to have as large a cast as his previous Marvel series, 1602. So perhaps he knew about Phastos and Kingo Sunen but felt he did not have room for them. So he turned Makkari non-Caucasian instead.

I would have preferred sticking with Kirby’s visual depiction of the character, but this change doesn’t bother me much, since I can explain it away.

Sprite altered reality, transforming his fellow Eternals into seemingly ordinary humans, unaware of their true natures, by creating a “Uni-Mind” (a group mind) that drew power from the Dreaming Celestial. It’s possible that Sprite could thus have altered Makkari’s physical appearance, although then one must ask why he didn’t bother doing that to the other Eternals.

Another possibility is that since Eternals have “absolute mental control” over their bodies (as established in The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe), then each can alter his or her own physical appearance at will, at least within limits. So Makkari may have altered his own appearance at some point in the past. Later, Gaiman and Romita present a flashback showing Makkari in ancient Egypt, where he was believed to be the god Thoth (Gaiman issue 3 page 2, see also issue 4 page 8). Makkari has dark skin in this flashback, which would be appropriate for looklng Egyptian. So possibly Makkari has altered his physical appearance at various times in the past in order to match those of the people of the countries to which he travels.

Instead of dreaming about a Ferrari, Curry instead has on of his “weird dreams,” in which he is wearing his Makkari costume, is rescued by Ikaris from captivity by Deviants, and finally sees three immense Celestials (including Arishem on the left) in an extraordinary double-page spread drawn by John Romita, Jr (Gaiman issue 1, pages 2-3).

Far more successfully than any other visual sequence in the new series, this double-page spread captures the feeling of awe that the Kirby Eternals induces issue after issue. Perhaps the greatest difference between the two series is that the Gaiman-Romita Eternals tends to keep to a (comparatively) more human scale, since so many of the Eternals in Gaiman’s story have been reduced to living “ordinary” human lives. The epic grandeur of Kirby’s art and visual concepts for The Eternals is an essential part of that series. Perhaps Gaiman and Romita did not believe they could match Kirby in this regard for more than an occasional sequence like that double-page spread. But Gaiman takes a more psychological approach to his Eternals cast, making the relatively more human scale of his series more appropriate.

By the double-page spread even readers who have no previous experience of the Eternals may recognize that Gaiman is working a variation on a familiar trope of fantastic storytelling. This is what may be the archetypal story of the person who is seemingly ordinary and who leads a normal life, but who discovers that he has another, truer identity with extraordinary potential.

Gaiman’s novel Anansi Boys follows this pattern: the protagonist Charlie discovers that he is the son of the trickster spider god, and that he is the brother of another trickster deity, known as Spider, and Charlie ultimately wields the abilities of the spider god himself (see “Comics in Context” #105, 106, 107 and 108).

This is a variation on the traditional story device of the protagonist who is unaware of his true parentage and hence of his true station on life. Similarly, in Gaiman’s Stardust, the young hero Tristran does not learn until the story’s end that he is not a simple villager but the heir to the throne of Stormhold in the realm of Faerie (see “Comics in Context” #191 and 192).

According to Joseph Campbell’s monomyth of the hero’s journey, the protagonist starts out in a lowly position, perhaps having fallen from a higher one. So the protagonist may even be unaware of his rightful status. In the Star Wars films Luke Skywalker first appears as a farmboy, who does not know that his father was a Jedi Knight until Obi-Wan Kenobi tells him and, as herald in the monomyth, issues what Campbell terms the “call to adventure” for Luke to become a Jedi himself.

In Anansi Boys Charlie learns about his true identity from other characters, including Spider, just as Ikaris will inform Mark Curry that he is actually Makkari. But in other variations of this story pattern, the protagonist senses or glimpses his true identity through dreams or visions, or through having thoughts or exhibiting abilities that surprise even himself. His normal, everyday life is therefore a lie, preventing him from achieving his real, greater destiny. Hence Curry dreams about himself as Makkari, about Ikaris, the Deviants, and the Celestials.

It did not take me long to come up with an extensive list of other stories that follow this pattern. There’s Alan Moore’s Marvelman a. k. a. Miracleman, as well as Paul Jenkins’ The Sentry for Marvel: in both, middle-aged men have forgotten their past careers as superheroes, but reclaim their memories, powers, and heroic identities. There’s Moore and Dave Gibbons’ story “For the Man Who Has Everything” in Superman Annual #11 (1985), which was later adapted into an episode of the television series Justice League Unlimited: in the story, Superman is trapped in a fantasy of leading a “normal” life as a husband and father on Krypton that never exploded, from which he must wake to his real life as a superhero. Similarly, in the episode of Batman: The Animated Series titled “Perchance to Dream” (1992), in which the Mad Hatter captures Batman and gives him a dream in which his parents never died and Bruce Wayne never became a costumed avenger, and yet the dreaming Wayne comes to realize that this “life” isn’t real.

In live action television there was the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode “Far beyond the Stars” (1998), in which Benjamin Sisko finds himself as a science fiction writer in the 1950s who may only be imagining his life as a starship captain, and the Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode significantly titled “Normal Again” (2002), in which Buffy is temporarily persuaded that she is an inmate in a mental institution who has only fantasized being a super-powered Slayer of vampires. This year there was the two-part Doctor Who story, “Human Nature” and “The Family of Blood,” in which the alien Doctor has transformed into a human being, and is living as a teacher in 1913 England, unaware of his true identity, but experiencing memories of his past through dreams. The Doctor’s companion Martha and ewven his enemies, the Family of Blood, attempt to convince him of his true identity, but he initially refuses to believe them and to give up his “normal” life.

Then there’s Philip K. Dick’s 1966 science fiction novelette, “We Can Get It for You Wholesale,” and the 1990 film adaptation Total Recall.

There’s even Nikos Kazantzakis’s novel The Last Temptation of Christ, adapted onto film by Martin Scorsese in 1988: these not only deal with a Christ who regards himself as human but struggles with the realization that he also has a divine nature, but also climax with the “last temptation”: a vision of a happy life as an ordinary human being, which proves to be merely a fantasy and a diversion from Christ’s true mission as Messiah.

So Mark Curry finds himself dissatisfied with his “normal” life, wondering why he is trying to become a doctor, while being puzzled by his “weird dreams” of being a superhuman in a world of superhuman beings and gods. On page 4 Curry seems in a lowly position in life, all right: he is exhausted, his girlfriend has left him, and he just got a phone call from a student loan company that “wasn’t good news.”

And then, the Campbellian herald arrives with the call to adventure: Ikaris, who tells Curry, “I’ve got some good news for you.” Curry replies, “Great. I need good news.” The word “gospel” means “good news,” and this religious allusion may be no accident.

Ikaris has come to tell Curry his true identity: “that you were an immortal, indestructible being” who has “power you’ve never dreamed of.” But Curry refuses to believe Ikaris and rejects the call. Those who know Campbell’s work know that rejecting the call to adventure is never a good thing.

Moreover, Curry tells Ikaris, “I’d say I don’t need a religion” (issue 1, page 5). Here Gaiman’s Eternals begins one of its major themes: the role of religion in a contemporary, rationalist world, as we will examine further next week.

Copyright 2007 Peter Sanderson

Shades of Ray: An Interview with Writer/Director Jaffar Mahmood

Filed under: Interviews — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:02 am

-by David J. Lieto (The Squeeg)

ray-01.jpgNormally, I cover the goings-on of a little town called Las Vegas. Every so often, however, I come across a subject that deserves special attention.

Shades of Ray is a new comedy by director/writer Jaffar Mahmood that is set to hit the festivals this season. Jaffar, a graduate of the Peter Stark Producing Program at USC, has been a friend for some time now, and when I was presented with the opportunity to read his screenplay, I jumped at it.

The story revolves around Ray Rehman, the son of a Pakistani Father and Caucasian Mother. His father, played by Brian George, wants his son to marry a Pakistani woman, but Ray has already asked for the hand of his Caucasian girlfriend. Although she hasn’t given him an answer yet, Ray is fairly certain his Father’s wishes are not going to be met. That is, until his Father and Mother separate and the former shows up on his doorstep.

In order to cheer up his father, Ray agrees to meet with the Pakistani woman his Father has spoken of, Sana. Because she is of mixed decent, like Ray, they hit it off immediately. According to Jaffar, “although he [Ray] didn’t want to have feelings for her [Sana], he can’t deny having a connection with her.” The only problem is that his girlfriend/fiancé, Noel, still wants him. So now Ray is not only trying to reunite his parents, but he’s also contending with the two women in his life.

ray-02.jpg

The film stars some of this year’s new television talent. Zachary Levi, who plays Ray, is the star of the new NBC series Chuck (Premiering Monday, 9/24, at 8pm on NBC). He is joined by Bonnie Somerville, of ABC’s Cashmere Mafia, and Sarah Shahi, from NBC’s Life. Also, as mentioned above, Brian George – remembered for playing Babu Bhatt on Seinfeld – co-Stars along with the Emmy Award-winning Kathy Baker from Picket Fences.

Shades Of Ray is far from being a typical romantic comedy. It’s loosely based on events in Jaffar’s life. Jaffar and the Ray character share the same heritage. Jaffar’s father, a doctor in New Jersey, hails from Pakistan and, like Ray, his Mother is Caucasian. The experience of such a background was the motivating factor behind writing the script.

ray-03.jpg

“There’s been several films that analyze the relationship between two people of different ethnicities – Jungle Fever, for one,” says Jaffar, “But there’s so few American movies, if any… [that examine] what’s it’s like for the product or offspring of two ethnicities coming together – the kid – and how that effects him and the way he sees himself. Shades of Ray is my way of exploring that issue.”

While trying to raise money for the film, Jaffar had been informed by a handful of executives at production companies in Los Angeles that he’d have a much easier time getting his family comedy made if he changed the ethnicity of the main character to being half latino or black. “Those are proven minority markets” is what he was told. In response, Jaffar says, “Maybe we can add South Asian to that mix if Pakistanis and Muslims weren’t only portrayed as three things in American film: the terrorist, the cab driver, or the convenience store owner. Ray is a kid from New Jersey who has conflicting pressure from his parents on who he should marry. He’s struggling to find success at work, struggling to make his parents proud, struggling to make himself happy. These are problems that anyone from any background with any religion can relate to.” Only time will tell if Jaffar is right.

ray-04.jpg

Quick Stop Thingamabobs: 9/17/2007

Filed under: Columns,Thingamabobs — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:01 am

thingamabobs.jpg

The web. It’s a big place, full of plenty of distractions ““ some funny, some informative, some ludicrous, some disturbing, some inane, some profound. Each and every weekday, we present links to a few of our favorite finds”¦

————————————————

  • Have you created your own Slanguage?… (Thingamabob)
  • So much better than the Spider-Man flick… (Thingamabob)

Have a THINGAMABOB? Send it in!

##

September 16, 2007

Cabin Fever #02: Hetero Man Crush

Filed under: Cabin Fever — UncaScroogeMcD @ 1:29 pm

cabinfeverheader.png

Oh no! Just when you thought it was safe to hang out at the Quick Stop…

cabin.jpgCabin Fever (hosted by the twisted souls Brian Fitzpatrick and Aaron Poole) is the result of having too much time on your hands and access to your local community radio station.

Over the course of an hour, they manage to trawl the depths of good taste, plus throw some music in. How much more could you want from a podcast?… Quality? Oh… we didn’t think of that.

Enjoy! And we hope our cross Atlantic friends can understand the Irish accent 😉

Hugs and Kisses,
Aaron P. + Rev. Fitzy

linesm.gif

CABIN FEVER #02: Hetero Man Crush – Who knew they’d let us near a mic again? I celebrate every one of these we get to make. As mentioned previously this week’s show is a little more somber due to outside influences but we’re still finding our “voice”, if you will, so hopefully you can allow us these teething problems. So here it is. Drugged up Grandmothers, flaming Russians and an admission of our (totally) hetero-love for Patrick Warburton.

[CONTENT WARNING]: Explicit contents! We say every naughty word you can think of. You have been warned!

DOWNLOAD: (right click to save)
Episode #02 (MP3 format)

[audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/cabinfever/cabin_fever_02.mp3]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes

Got something to say? E-mail Aaron & Brian at the Cabin Fever mailbag.

line.gif

CLICK HERE FOR THE CABIN FEVER ARCHIVES

line.gif

##

September 14, 2007

Weekend Shopping Guide 9/14/07: The Rock Goes On

Filed under: Shopping Guides — UncaScroogeMcD @ 2:10 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 Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers once so aptly put it, the waiting is the hardest part – particularly when it comes to the now yearly release of another full season set of Jim Henson’s classic Fraggle Rock (HIT, Not Rated, DVD-$49.98 SRP). We’re now up to season 3 which – depending on how they handle the release of the short 4th and 5th season – may be the penultimate Fraggle set. The denizens of the Rock are firing on all cylinders this season, with a well-defined world, great songs, and quite a bit of character development. And, most importantly of all, it’s a FUN show. Bonus features include many behind-the-scenes interviews, plus a packet of designer Michael Frith’s original conceptual drawings.

blankguide.gif

If you’re a child of Jim Henson and the Muppets like I am, then you’ll probably love the documentary Stories of the American Puppet (Mazzarella Media, Not Rated, DVD-$19.98 SRP), which chronicles the history of puppeteering in America, including the creations of Bill Baird, Shari Lewis, Buffalo Bob Smith, and many more luminaries who brought an ancient craft into American’s homes.

blankguide.gif

Those still jonesing for more Mystery Science Theater can get another fix courtesy of the newest addition to the Film Crew library – Wild Women of Wongo (Shout! Factory, Not Rated, DVD-$19.99 SRP) – featuring the riffing of MST3K alums Mike Nelson, Kevin Murphy, and Bill Corbett. Bonus features include the ability to make the Crew dance, and a “Wongo-style” goodbye from the guys.

blankguide.gif

It’s taken years of a criminally bare-bones edition before we finally get the long-awaited special edition of The Graduate (MGM/UA, Rated PG, DVD-$24.98 SRP). The 2-disc 40th anniversary edition features an audio commentary with Dustin Hoffman and Katharine Ross, second audio commentary with Mike Nichols and Steven Soderbergh, 4 featurettes, the original theatrical trailer, and a CD contains a selection of Simon & Garfunkel’s songs from the film.

blankguide.gif

Fans who have been holding off buying the individual releases can now unload their accumulated cash on Avatar: The Complete Book 2 Collection (Paramount, Not Rated, DVD-$64.99 SRP). The 5-disc set features all 20 episodes, plus an exclusive bonus disc with interviews, featurettes, shorts, and more.

blankguide.gif

Congrats to David Boreanaz for scoring a post-Angel hit with Bones (Fox, Not Rated, DVD-$59.98 SRP), whose second season is hitting DVD with a feature-laden bang. If you’re not familiar, Boreanaz stars as FBI agent Seely Booth alongside Emily Deschanel’s Dr. Temperence “Bones” Brennan in a cross between CSI and The X-Files. The 6-disc second season set features all 21 episodes, audio commentaries, deleted scenes, featurettes, and a gag reel.

blankguide.gif

It’s goofy high-octane action schlock, but there’s still charm to be found in John Woo’s Face/Off (Paramount, Rated R, DVD-$19.99 SRP). I don’t know exactly if it warrants a new 2-disc special edition, but now there is one, replete with audio commentaries, deleted scenes (including an alternate ending), a making-of featurette, a spotlight on Woo, and the original theatrical trailer.

blankguide.gif

The witchy Halliwell trio bow out in the eighth and final season of Charmed (Paramount, Not Rated, DVD-$49.99 SRP), with 22 episodes of the same basic formula that made the show a cut-rate Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The 6-disc set features a 2-part documentary, behind-the-scenes featurettes, commentaries, and a look at the show’s fanbase.

blankguide.gif

To me, evolution is fact, and the statements of those whose belief lies in “intelligent design” that are interviewed in scientist/filmmaker Dr. Randy Olson’s Flock of Dodos (Docurama, Rated PG, DVD-$26.95 SRP) are equal parts delusional and funny. Olson, however, does allow them to present their case – and also explores the frequent difficulty for scientists unskilled in public speaking to present the scientific reality of evolution when faced with a coordinated effort of theological spin. Olson presents the scientific principles with east to understand animation that should be a required viewing in high school science classes nationwide. Bonus features include deleted scenes, interviews, additional animation, and more.

blankguide.gif

I’ll be honest with you – I’ve never watched an episode of Two And A Half Men (Warner Bros., Not Rated, DVD-$44.98 SRP)… That is, until I caught a few in the complete first season set. It may not be my kind of sitcom, but I can see how its amiable, classic sitcom quality – like the similar stealth powerhouse, According To Jim – would be appealing to middle-of-the-road viewers turned off by fare like The Office or 30 Rock. The 4-disc set features all 24 episodes, plus behind-the-scenes featurettes and a gag reel.

blankguide.gif

Try as I might (and admittedly, I haven’t been trying *that* hard), I can’t bring myself to like Grey’s Anatomy (Buena Vista, Not Rated, DVD-$59.99 SRP). Well… I can’t even like it. Frankly, I can’t even tolerate it. But I now its soapy, predictable, ogling storylines about McDempsey and crew have their fans, and more power to them. I’m sure they will devour the extended dreaminess found in 7-disc 3rd season set, featuring expanded cuts of the episodes, plus audio commentaries, behind-the-scenes featurettes, and more. Paging Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard.

blankguide.gif

Of the two adaptations of Nora Roberts novels hitting DVD – Carolina Moon & Blue Smoke (Sony, Not Rated, DVD-$24.96 SRP each) – I’ll have to say the enjoyment factor of Blue Smoke was made entirely by the presence of both Alicia Witt and Scott Bakula (who I still haven’t fully forgiven for Enterprise. Still… Alicia Witt…

blankguide.gif

The fourth season of Las Vegas (Universal, Not Rated, DVD-$59.98 SRP) marked the end of James Caan’s run on the show, but what a memorable season it was, even featuring a crossover with Crossing Jordan. The 4-disc set features all 16 episodes, plus a pair of behind-the-scenes featurettes and a season 3 recap.

blankguide.gif

The princess of power returns in the second and final season of She-Ra (BCI, Not Rated, DVD-$39.98 SRP). The 6-disc set features all 2 episodes, plus a pair of audio commentaries, interviews, galleries, trivia, and more.

blankguide.gif

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…

-Ken Plume

##

QSE News: Week In Review – 9/14/2007

Filed under: Columns,News — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:47 am

quickstopnews.jpg

line1.gif

Here are today’s top entertainment headlines:

  • qsnews.jpg
  • As reported here last week, Britney Spears made her, albeit futile, comeback attempt at this year’s MTV Video Music Awards. The response to Spears’s performance was overwhelmingly negative as she lip-synched and danced her way through her new single “Gimmie More.” Music executives were quick to point out that Spears’s, bloated, half-hearted, over-hyped train wreck of a performance was in no way a reflection of American Pop Music.
  • Catholics are all pissed off at comedian Kathy Griffin. After winning an Emmy this past weekend for her reality TV show My Life on the D-List, Griffin said “a lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus.” Jesus responded by saying, “You know, she’s right. Like I don’t have better things to do than sit around and make sure so and so wins some bullshit award or some team wins a football game.”
  • Rock star and renowned dirt bag Kid Rock was cited over the weekend after an apparent fight with fellow musician Tommy Lee in the crowd of MTV’s Video Music Awards.  Reports stated that the altercation began when Lee became upset that rock was ignoring him, and ended with Rock punching Lee in the face.  Authorities are contemplating bringing charges against the pair’s ex-girlfriend, Pamela Anderson, for “willfully staging a public cock fight.”
  • In continued Tommy Lee news, it appears that Lee is quitting Motley Crue. The rest of Motley Crue is upset with Lee and his manager after Lee chose to star in a reality TV show rather than tour with the band. Lee’s only comment regarding the split was “[EXPLETIVE DELETED] those guys. I’m not going to let those guys stand in the way of my efforts to completely destroy any credibility I have left. Besides, I’ve got to prepare for my new reality TV show called My D*ck is Longer Than My Career.”
  • According to a note posted on the band’s website, Coldplay is finishing up work on a new album. The album, produced by Brian Eno, may include the songs “Lost!,” “leftrightleftrightleft,” and “42” among others. Coldplay front man Chris Martin said this new album should complete the band’s mission of boring every single human being on the planet.
  • The White Stripes have canceled a planned UK tour due to drummer Meg White’s “acute anxiety.” The group apologized to disappointed fans “We hate to let people down and are very sorry.” Front man Jack White reportedly turned down the option of replacing Meg with a monkey saying “I don’t want Meg to feel like she’s being replaced by a better drummer.”
  • And finally this week, Daily Show host Jon Stewart will be hosting the 80th Annual Academy Awards. This will mark the second appearance hosting the awards show. Fathers across the country are already complaining about the announcement saying unanimously “I just don’t think he’s that funny.”

line1.gif

That’s all for today’s news, stay tuned to this channel for all the news that matters least but you still care about.

(Compiled by J. Allen)

##

Trailer Park: Ted Rall

Filed under: Columns,Interviews,Quickcasts,Trailer Park,Video — admin @ 12:28 am

By Christopher Stipp

Archives? Right Here”¦

Instead of manning-up and actually going the emotionally hard route of being outrightly rejected by publishers, I’m rejecting them first and allowing you to give my entire book a preview, let you read the whole thing or, if you like, download the whole damn thing at no cost. Download and read my first book “Thank You, Goodnight” for FREE.

It feels good to be in the presence of someone who makes you want to be a smarter person.

All through college I appreciated the chance to learn and appreciate what the collegiate system, I thought, was supposed to be about: to sit amidst the free flowing of ideas from various peer groups, the chance to gain wisdom from those who were hardwired to espouse thoughts related to lectures or, ultimately and hopefully, have the possibility to have your knowledge base raised a notch or two after the sixteen weeks was over.

For me, it was exactly like this. I learned and gleaned just as fast as I could. Unfortunately, I paid the social cost of turning my weekends into extended learning time but there’s something I was frustrated I couldn’t do after I was given my bachelor’s in English: tell you why the world has turned out the way it had. I don’t know why this was such a sticking point with me but, through divine intervention, as I crammed in 12 credit hours in one summer I had to take a sociology class entitled Social Problems. It was taught by Professor Pete Padilla at Arizona State University and it pushed my understanding of the underhanded things or government is capable of to its veritable limit. To understanding what Sea Lines of Communication means to our overall military strategy and how it will impact whether we’ll defend Taiwan in the case of a Chinese assault on that island to the blatant and glaring reality that as long as you have the control you can spin any story you want, even if it’s how the ATF and FBI had a hand with what ultimately happened in Waco, Texas some decade ago.

The thing is, though, I had my eyes opened to a whole new world and when the class was finished I felt there wasn’t a way for me to keep the intravenous information flowing into me. I was tossed into the Working World and lost my sense of sifting through the messages I was spoon-fed on a daily basis through all forms of media.

It was about 4 years later when I found Ted Rall.

Ted was an instant touchstone for me from the standpoint that his cartoons, which somehow sounds awfully minute and insulting when I say it aloud as you compare his work to the other funnies out there for your base amusement, represented something more than just jokes. They were actionable in that they reached out and made you agree with what he was saying or it made you want to scribble down a death threat or two as evidenced by his “Terror Widows” comic which ran five months after September 11th:

His thoughts almost always have a heft to them when he has something to say. His book, America Gone Wild, showcases some of his own hits and misses with commentary to tell why he’s more than happy to say when he thinks his point wasn’t a very clear one or when something was written too hastily. Ted’s writing some of the most profound commentary on our modern society, with a voice that is unequaled in its ability to attract thunderous protestations from those on both sides of the political arena but, and here’s the most important part, he’s been an active voice against a presidency, the Bush presidency, that knows no limits with how far it will go to lie, cheat or steal its way into your hearts.

Rall’s disdain for the current administration is certainly out there for all to see in its Generalissimo El Busho glory but it’s also his essays that cut straight to the quick about what’s on his mind with the world or his books on what’s happening in the Mideast or Central Asia. And it’s the latter, entitled Silk Road to Ruin, that I read after picking up at the 2006 San Diego Comic-Con which not only kicked open my closed sensibilities with regard to caring for countries I couldn’t pronounce but it made me acutely and severely aware of what is coming on our political, military and, possibly, environmental horizon with things like Lake Sarez being poised to be our next great world disaster waiting to happen.

I had the privilege to talk to Ted for a few minutes regarding Lake Sarez, politics, whether Bush is, indeed, the worst president ever, airport security and what it takes to develop an acute sense of reading between the lines we’re fed by an anxious media.

line3.gif

trailerpark2007-09-14.jpg

Download SDCC Ted Rall Interview:

Large (560 x 420 – QuickTime – 187.88 MB)
Small (320 x 240 – QuickTime – 83.19 MB)

[display_podcast]

Quick Stop Thingamabobs: 9/14/2007

Filed under: Columns,Thingamabobs — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:01 am

thingamabobs.jpg

The web. It’s a big place, full of plenty of distractions ““ some funny, some informative, some ludicrous, some disturbing, some inane, some profound. Each and every weekday, we present links to a few of our favorite finds”¦

————————————————

  • A minimalist version of the Super Mario Bros. theme… (Thingamabob)

Have a THINGAMABOB? Send it in!

##

September 13, 2007

Quick Stop Thingamabobs: 9/13/2007

Filed under: Columns,Thingamabobs — UncaScroogeMcD @ 4:36 am

thingamabobs.jpg

The web. It’s a big place, full of plenty of distractions ““ some funny, some informative, some ludicrous, some disturbing, some inane, some profound. Each and every weekday, we present links to a few of our favorite finds”¦

————————————————

  • Mark Evanier on the translation of Amos & Andy from radio to TV… (Thingamabob)

Have a THINGAMABOB? Send it in!

##

September 12, 2007

Quick Stop Thingamabobs: 9/12/2007

Filed under: Columns,Thingamabobs — UncaScroogeMcD @ 3:20 am

thingamabobs.jpg

The web. It’s a big place, full of plenty of distractions ““ some funny, some informative, some ludicrous, some disturbing, some inane, some profound. Each and every weekday, we present links to a few of our favorite finds”¦

————————————————

  • A great live set from a fellow Jacksonvillian, Ryan Adams… (Thingamabob)
  • A reminder why I still miss The Drew Carey Show(Thingamabob)
  • Ah, to be young and foolish again… maybe not this foolish, mind you… (Thingamabob)

Have a THINGAMABOB? Send it in!

##

September 11, 2007

DVD Late Show: Guns, Guts & Glory

Filed under: DVD Late Show — UncaScroogeMcD @ 4:36 am

dvdlateshow.jpg

9/11/07

Welcome back to the Late Show, kids! This time, we’ve got Spaghetti westerns, space westerns, giant monsters and a variety of horror and action flicks ““ along with another six-pack of capsule reviews. Can’t say we don’t cover all the bases here at the Show!

leoneanthology.jpg

Let’s start off with probably the most famous and influential Euro-Westerns ever made, the “Dollars Trilogy,” starring Clint Eastwood and directed by Sergio Leone. All three of these classic films, as well as the James Coburn-starrer, DUCK YOU SUCKER!, are now available in brand-new editions as part of MGM’s recent box set, THE SERGIO LEONE ANTHOLOGY.

Previously released a few years ago in England and Europe, but delayed here, in part, by the various changes in management and distribution suffered by MGM Home Video over the last few years, these newly-restored and remastered editions are a film buff’s dream come true.

A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS (PER UN PUGNO DI DOLLARI, 1964) introduced Clint Eastwood and Sergio Leone to filmgoers with a gritty, dark remake of the Akira Kurosawa samurai epic YOJIMBO. It also kicked off the Spaghetti Western genre in high style, with its stylish direction and amoral protagonist.

FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE (PER QUALCHE DOLLARO IN PIÙ, 1965) added American character actor Lee Van Cleef to the recipe, along with a bigger budget and a more character-driven story.

Then came THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY (IL BUONO, IL BRUTTO, IL CATTIVO, 1966), a sprawling, utterly involving tale of greed and betrayal set against the backdrop of the American Civil War. This allowed Leone to add some epic battle scenes to the formula, and he pulls them off magnificently.

For this DVD release, the TGTB&TU has had several scenes restored that were included in the International versions but never shown in the U.S., and thus, never dubbed into English. For these scenes, Clint Eastwood and Eli Wallach returned to the recording studio and dubbed their new lines (another actor filled in for Lee Van Cleef). The audio was also fully redone in 5.1 Surround, with some sound effects added and some sweetened or completely changed.

DUCK, YOU SUCKER! (GIÙ LA TESTA a/k/a A FISTFUL OF DYNAMITE, 1971) stars James Coburn and Rod Stieger in an overtly political story set in Revolutionary Mexico. MGM has restored the film with around 20 minutes of footage never seen in the U.S.

Each film is presented in newly restored, damn-near pristine anamorphic 2.40:1 widescreen transfers, with cleaned up, juiced up sound, and commentaries by film historian and Leone authority, Christopher Frayling. Each film is also given a second disc containing various bonus features, including trailers, outtakes, interviews with Eastwood, and rarities, like the only-seen-once network TV prologue to FISTFUL, featuring Harry Dean Stanton.

No self-respecting film fan can afford to pass this box set up. Highly recommended.

clinticoncollection.jpg

Upon his return to the New World, Eastwood continued to tread the prairies and deserts of the cinematic West for various studios. Universal has collected the three that he did for them and packaged the films into another of their low-cost “Franchise Collection” sets. In this case, it’s the CLINT EASTWOOD WESTERN ICON COLLECTION, which includes HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER (1973), JOE KIDD (1972) and TWO MULES FOR SISTER SARA (1970).

HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER, directed by Eastwood himself, is the best of the three, a macabre, downbeat Western nightmare, with Clint as a nameless stranger bent on avenging the death of a lawman by ruthless gunmen ““ and punishing the townspeople who made no effort to stop it. Spooky, possibly supernatural (or possibly not) DRIFTER is pretty harsh stuff, even today. A minor classic.

JOE KIDD is a routine, somewhat uninvolving oater, despite being directed by THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN’s John Sturges and being based on a solid Elmore Leonard novel. Eastwood is good as usual, and Robert Duvall and John Saxon both turn in decent performances, but somehow it never quite comes together.

TWO MULES FOR SISTER SARA teams Clint with Shirley Maclaine as an unusual nun in a decent little Western adventure directed by Don Siegel (DIRTY HARRY). I had avoided this one for years, “˜cause I’m not a fan of MacLaine, but it’s not bad. The leads have some decent chemistry, the plot is solid, and the climax is appropriately explosive. Not Clint’s best, but a decent time-killer.

Universal’s “Franchise Collection” 2-disc package has DRIFTER and KIDD on disc 1, and SARA on the second disc. Each film is given a decent 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer and Dolby Mono sound. The only extras are the original theatrical trailers.

Once again, a bare-bones, budget release from Universal, who clearly don’t give a damn about their older library titles beyond just getting them out there with the least possible effort. DRIFTER, in particular, is really deserving of a Special Edition treatment ““ I’d love to get a definitive answer to Eastwood’s intentions re: the possible supernatural elements of the flick. But that’s not likely at this point, unless there’s a major shake-up over at Universal Home Video before the aging Eastwood passes away”¦.

Worth getting, but only because this is the only way to (legally) get these particular Eastwood films on DVD in quality widescreen versions.

planetfall.jpg

Westerns aren’t always historical, though. There’s nothing new about fusing horse opera and space opera, for instance, and Heretic’s PLANETFALL (2005) is one of the more recent examples of that particular genre fusion.

Shot on hi-def on a very small budget, this sci-fi homage to Spaghetti Westerns sends a couple of competing female bounty hunters into a hostile section of the psi-war-torn planet Zita, in search of a mysterious crate called “Planetfall.”

While certainly ambitious, with its copious CGI effects and virtual backgrounds, PLANETFALL is, unfortunately, too slow-paced and chatty to really work. The pace is draggy, and the too-wordy script overwhelms the cast, most of who appear to be amateurs. Considering the limitations of its cast, the film would have benefited from a simpler, more action-driven plot and a lot less expositional backstory. The computer effects are fairly decent, considering the budget, but the extensive use of green screen also has the unfortunate side effect of making the film feel like a video game.

While inexpensive CGI has opened doors for independent filmmakers in allowing them to attempt types of stories that previously would have been prohibitive, it doesn’t make up for weak scripts or performances.

Heretic’s DVD of PLANETFALL presents the feature in 1.78:1 anamorphic widescreen and Dolby 5.1/Dolby 2.0 Stereo. There are 3 commentary tracks, a 60 minute behind-the-scenes documentary, a production design featurette, deleted scenes, a documentary about some of the locations where the film was shot, and an interview with B-movie director Ted V. Mikels (ASTRO-ZOMBIES).

As an example of ambitious ultra-low budget fantasy filmmaking, PLANETFALL is worth a viewing. There’s a certain amount of talent and potential evident, but it’s really not a particularly good movie.

serenityce.jpg

Of course, if you’re into space westerns, you can’t ignore Joss Whedon’s cult television favorite FIREFLY, and its theatrical sequel SERENITY (2006), which has just been double-dipped by Universal in the shape of a new collector’s edition.

In this feature film follow-up to the short-lived series, the rag-tag crew of the tramp spaceship Serenity find themselves the target of a deadly government operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor, CHILDREN OF MEN) who’s after their slightly-daffy and decidedly dangerous passenger, River Tam (Summer Glau). In order to save his crew, Captain Mal Reynolds (Nathan Fillion, SLITHER) goes on the offensive, determined to expose a conspiracy that could potentially tear down the galactic government.

A smart, action-packed space adventure that may be just a bit inaccessible to anyone who isn’t already familiar with the TV series (although my in-laws had no trouble following it when we saw it at the theater), SERENITY is a lot of fun.

Previously released by Universal in a more-than-satisfactory single-disc edition, this new 2-disc “Collector’s” set includes a gorgeous 2:35.1 anamorphic widescreen transfer, and Dolby 5.1 Surround sound.

But while the previous DVD release was fine, true fans (or “Browncoats”) will want to upgrade to this new version for the added extra features, which include extended Scenes, a feature commentary with Whedon and several cast members, four featurettes, and “Session 416,” a series of internet webisodes that expand upon the River character’s backstory. The two discs are packed into an attractive box that’s as big as the one containing the entire TV series.

Like I said, fans will want to trade up to this new edition, and while I’m still annoyed at the studio’s crass exploitation of fans with these double-dips, I know they’re not going to stop. In any case, it’s a good movie and a fine package. Recommended.

giantbehemoth.jpg

Poor Eugene Lourie. A talented Art Director, he finally got his chance to helm his own motion picture with 1953″˜s THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS, a rousing B-movie creature feature that benefited heavily from Ray Harryhausen’s innovative stop-motion effects. Unfortunately for the neophyte director, the film was so successful that Lourie was about as typecast as it is possible to get: he only directed two more features and both were virtual remakes of BEAST.

The first of these was THE GIANT BEHEMOTH (1958), which takes the basic plot of BEAST ““ a prehistoric monster rising from the sea and rampaging through a modern metropolis ““ and transplants it from New York to London. In this case, it’s a radioactive bronto with a bad attitude that trashes Londontown before being taken out by a mini-sub in the Thames. Gene Evans (DONOVAN’S BRAIN) is the American scientist who leads the British into battle against the behemoth, which is brought to life on screen by pioneering stop-motion animator Willis O’Brien (KING KONG). Unfortunately, O’Brien was getting pretty old, and the budget was small, so the effects are occasionally shoddy, but the creature is still pretty impressive; nicely designed and scary.

(Lourie followed THE GIANT BEHEMOTH with 1961″˜s GORGO ““ which is available on DVD from VCI ““ which had an almost identical plot.)

Recently released by Warner Brothers as part of their recent “Cult Camp Classics” line, THE GIANT BEHEMOTH has been given a solid 1.66:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer culled from a decent print. There’s a little damage and speckling, and some effects shots are grainy ““ but they always were. The disc includes the original theatrical trailer and a commentary track by modern day FX artists Dennis Muren and Phil Tippett. I found the commentary to be pretty awful, myself. Muren and Tippett didn’t sound like they prepared for it at all. They had virtually nothing to reveal about the making of the film or the people who made it, and I found many of their more snarky comments to be disrespectful and even insulting to O’Brien, who, after all, was one of the true pioneers of the field in which they earn their livings.

For fans of 50’s creature features, it’s worth picking up. I’d skip the commentary, though.

pathfinderur.jpg

I’d been looking forward to seeing the Indians Vs. Vikings epic, PATHFINDER UNRATED (2007) for some time, but after reading the almost universally negative reviews online and at the IMDB after it was released, my expectations were considerably diminished. Nonetheless, my collection includes hundreds of films that everybody else says suck, and I can usually find something to like in even the most abysmal drek, so I decided to give the film a chance anyway.

The plot is pretty straight-forward: after a raid by Vikings on an Indian tribe, a young Viking boy is left behind and is raised by native villagers. Fifteen years later, the Vikings return and kill his adoptive family and burn their village to the ground. The young man (Karl Urban, LORD OF THE RINGS, XENA) is now set on a Rambo-like spree of guerrilla warfare against his own kind.

Well, once again, I’m going to buck the tide. I liked it. Anyone who calls this the “worst movie ever” just hasn’t seen enough movies.

First off, the look of the film is exceptional. The production design and photography are amazing and nicely stylized; the film looks as if every frame was painted by Frank Frazetta. There is very little dialogue, and what there is is of the “There are two wolves in every man’s heart: love and hate,” variety, but what do you expect from a sword & moccasin saga? Criticizing it on a historical basis is kinda pointless, too ““ the filmmakers have made no claims as to it being a history; in fact, they clearly label it a legend in the opening titles. And those who think the movie unfairly portrays Scandinavian explorers”¦. Cripes.

Is it a great movie? I wouldn’t go that far, but it sure doesn’t suck. The pace is good, the action sequences are well staged, the violence is appropriately graphic (no bloodless sword wounds here), and the cast ““ which includes Clancy Brown (HIGHLANDER) and Rolf Mueller (TV’s CONAN, unrecognizable under the make-up and Viking beard) is perfectly adequate for this type of action-driven flick.

This Fox DVD presents the unrated version of the film in a crystal 2.40:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer. The clanging steel, rolling thunder and rousing score are nicely served by a robust Dolby 5.1 Surround Sound audio mix. Bonus features are plentiful: there is a commentary track by director Marcus Nispel, deleted scenes, a half-dozen production featurettes, a “Clancy Brown: Cult Hero” featurette, the theatrical trailer, and an atmospheric “concept trailer” shot by Nispel to sell the project to studio suits.

For the visuals alone, it’s worth checking out, but if you’re one of those who go into films looking for reasons to dislike them, this isn’t for you. On the other hand, you’re up for 107 minutes of bloody escapism, you might want to give PATHFINDER UNRATED a shot.

reddawnce.jpg

At first, I thought that John Milius’ (CONAN THE BARBARIAN) Reagan-era exercise in Cold War paranoia was an odd choice for a “Special Edition” treatment, but then I remembered how much impact the movie had on my generation and how fondly I recalled it. Apparently someone at MGM also recognizes just how much of a generational touchstone it was, because the 2-disc RED DAWN ““ COLLECTOR’S EDITION (1984) is a great DVD set.

I’m not saying the movie is great, necessarily, but MGM Home Entertainment has done a hell of a job on this DVD.

The plot is simplicity itself: when the American Midwest is invaded and occupied by the combined forces of the Soviet Union and Cuba, a group of Colorado teenagers flee to the mountain wilderness, eventually becoming partisans who fight a guerilla war against the foreign invaders.

Starring a bunch of young actors who soon went on to major Hollywood stardom ““ Patrick Swayze, C. Thomas Howell, Charlie Sheen, Lea Thompson, Jennifer Grey ““ as well as some veteran character actors like Harry Dean Stanton, Ben Johnson, Ron O’Neal, Powers Boothe and William Smith, RED DAWN is packed with solid performances. The script is ludicrous (much of the dialogue is corny) but the film is executed with a certain amount of conviction by the eccentric Milius, and his cast, and the audience is soon caught up in the story. The gorgeous location photography doesn’t hurt, either.

This new Collector’s Edition features, on the first disc, a new 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer and Dolby Stereo sound mix. This disc also includes a somewhat tasteless ““ but undeniably fun ““ extra feature in the form of a “carnage counter,” which, if you choose to activate it, keeps a running tab of every death, explosion, and act of violence in the film.

The second disc includes a great retrospective documentary which includes candid interviews with most of the primary cast ““ including Swayze, Sheen, Thompson and Howell ““ all of whom seem pretty proud of their association with the film. Director Milius is also interviewed. This doc is one of the best I’ve seen in a while, and is really worth watching. The disc also includes three other featurettes ““ one on building the “Russian” tanks and vehicles for the film, one on the military training the cast was given prior to filming, and, finally, a return to the town that was used as the primary location for filming. This includes on-screen interviews with a number of residents, who seem extremely pleased with their association with RED DAWN.

If you grew up in the Eighties, chances are that RED DAWN left an impression on you, positive or negative. If your memories are good ones, I highly recommend this new edition. The film looks great, the documentary is exceptional, and the price is reasonable.

I wish more “Special Editions” were this good.

heroess1.jpg

I missed this on television, but I’ve just watched HEROES ““ THE COMPLETE FIRST SEASON (2006/07) on DVD, and I have to admit that I’m impressed and pleasantly surprised.

Essentially, the debut season of HEROES chronicles the interconnected lives of a group of people with extraordinary powers ““ invulnerability, flight, precognition, invisibility, etc. ““ as they attempt to prevent (or cause) a nuclear catastrophe in the heart of New York City.

Smartly-written scripts that give viewers credit for some intelligence, extremely good acting, and solid Hollywood production values combine in what may be the most challenging network television series since the first season of LOST ““ and unlike that show, HEROES actually makes a point of rewarding it’s audience with occasional answers to its many questions. Not everything is neatly resolved, however, and there are plenty of surprises and twists in the show, which gleefully bounces around within its own timeline, keeping viewers on their metaphorical toes.

The cast, which includes Ali Larter (JAY & SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK), Adrian Pasdar (NEAR DARK), Hayden Panettiere, Milo Ventimiglia (STAY ALIVE), Zachary Quinto (the new Spock) and Jack Coleman, is uniformly exceptional, and the genre-friendly guest stars include George Takei (STAR TREK), Richard Roundtree (SHAFT), Christopher Eccelston (DR. WHO), Eric Roberts (BEST OF THE BEST), and Malcolm McDowell (TIME AFTER TIME), adding considerably to the show’s geek factor. My personal favorite character is the time-bending teleporter Hiro (Masi Oka), who not only lives up to his name, but brings considerable charm and humanity to the show.

Universal’s standard DVD set presents all 23 episodes of the premiere season in razor sharp 1.78:1 anamorphic widescreen transfers and Dolby Digital 5.1 sound. Each episode features deleted scenes, and many have commentary tracks by creator Tim Kring and various cast and crew members. The set also includes several behind-the-scenes featurettes, a profile of comic book artist Tim Sale (whose art is featured prominently in the show) and an extended, 73-minute “director’s cut” of the pilot episode.

HEROES manages to take the Marvel Comics-styled super-hero soap opera and bring it to television in a modern, stylish manner. While the fanboy in me wishes that at least one of them would put on some spandex (preferably Larter), I have to admit that Kring and his crew have really made the super-hero genre work for 21st Century television, and I can’t recommend this set highly enough. If you’re already a fan, you’ll want this set for the bountiful extras, and if you missed this on TV, like I did, you really need to check it out. It’s great fantasy television.

DVD LATE SHOW CAPSULE REVIEWS!

halloweenrestored.jpg

HALLOWEEN (1978). I guess with Rob Zombie’s new remake hitting theaters, they had to do something to tie-in”¦. By my count, this is the seventh or eighth version of John Carpenter’s HALLOWEEN to be released by Anchor Bay/Starz Home Entertainment. This one features a newly “restored” THX video transfer from a new interpositive culled from the original negative, supervised by cinematographer Dean Cundey. The disc also has an all-new Dolby 5.1 Surround audio mix. And yes, it looks and sounds terrific. But with the same DVD player, sound system and TV I’ve got, it’s not really a notably different viewing experience than the 25th Anniversary Divamax version I already had. Extras are a bit lean, too: there’s a compromised full-frame version of the film (which kinda undercuts all the new tech improvements, if you ask me), a 7-year-old documentary, trailers, TV and radio spots and a couple of still galleries. If you don’t already have it, this is a fine DVD, but I’m not sure it’s really worth upgrading. Your mileage may vary.

bubbahotepse.jpg

BUBBA HO-TEP ““ HAIL TO THE KING EDITION (2003). Identical to the previous DVD release except for the new gimmicky packaging, this Bruce Campbell (EVIL DEAD) vehicle, directed by Don Coscarelli (PHANTASM) is still one of the best “cult” films of the decade. An aged Elvis Presley battles a soul-sucking mummy in a Texas rest home with the aid of a black JFK”¦. what else do you expect from the mind of Joe Lansdale? MGM’s “Hail To The King Edition” has the same 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer, same extras (including “Elvis'” commentary track)”¦ hell, it’s apparently the same damned disc. But now you get a stylin’ Vegas jumpsuit to put it in.

uglybettys1.jpg

UGLY BETTY ““ THE COMPLETE FIRST SEASON (2006-07). An odd choice for this column, perhaps, but this comedic soap opera (based on a South American “telenovella”) was one of the most addictive shows of the past TV season, with its campy cliff-hangers, outrageous plot twists and the heaving bosoms of some of the most gorgeous women on the tube ““ including Vanessa Williams, Rebecca Romijn, and Salma Hayek. But it’s also a surprisingly smart and occasionally touching series, with the admirable and heroic America Ferrera’s “Betty Suarez” overcoming adversity and never succumbing to fear or embarrassment. Disney’s DVD set presents the first 23 episodes in sparkling, anamorphic 1.78:1 widescreen transfers, and Dolby 5.1 Surround sound. Extras include several behind-the-scenes featurettes, audio commentaries, a slew of deleted scenes and a blooper reel. Sure it’s a “chick show,” but if you check it out, who’s gonna know?

voyagers.jpg

VOYAGERS! ““ THE COMPLETE SERIES (1982). An ex-pirate (Jon-Erik Hexum) and an 80’s kid (Meeno Peluce) travel through time attempting to keep the timeline straight and teach kids history. It’s pure kid’s stuff, but fairly-well produced for the early 80’s. This series is fondly remembered by those who watched it as children, and it’s not hard to see why. The leads are appealing, the scripts are fun, and it’s wholesome family fare with imagination. Universal’s new box set includes all 20 episodes of the short-lived series in their original 1.33:1 full-frame aspect ratio and 2.0 Dolby Stereo. Image quality is decent, sowing only a bit of age-related wear and some excess grain. Recommended for nostalgic adults and their kids.

bournefiles.jpg

THE BOURNE FILES (2002/2004). The first two cinematic adventures of Robert Ludlum’s Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) ““ THE BOURNE IDENTITY and THE BOURNE SUPREMACY ““ are double-dipped by Universal, and bound together in a cute “File Folder” package. It won’t fit on your shelf with your other DVDs, but it does contain the earlier “Special Edition” versions of the Bourne discs, with an additional bonus disc that includes a preview of the current third entry in the Trilogy, THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM. If you don’t already have them, this is an inexpensive way to catch up with this superior action/spy franchise. Both films have sterling 2.35:1 anamorphic transfers, 5.1 Dolby Surround Sound, and a bunch of extra features.

Thanks for spending some time with me today. Look for my next column soon, with reviews of SPLATTER BEACH, FRANKENSTEIN CONQUERS THE WORLD, SPACE AMOEBA, THE COMPLETE UNDERDOG COLLECTION, UNHOLY, VANESSA, WELCOME TO GRINDHOUSE DOUBLE FEATURE; DRAGON PRINCESS/KARATE WARRIORS, and more!

For older Late Show columns (adding up to well over 200 reviews!), visit the recently revamped DVD Late Show website and archive. For additional pop culture musings, occasional DVD previews and lots of shameless self-promotion, you might try checking out my blog.

Comments, DVD questions, review requests and offers of money can be sent to: dvdlateshow@atomicpulp.com

 

Toy Box: Star Trek The Original Series Mini-Mates

Filed under: Columns,Toy Box — admin @ 4:32 am

toybox.jpg

I’m a bit TOS fan. Oh, TNG is fine, and Enterprise, DSN and Voyager have all certainly had their moments. But for me, TOS will always be the one true Trek.

I’m also a big minimates fan. Yes, I do like Mez-itz better in the land of mini figures, but that’s not to say I don’t like the uber-cute nature of these little blocky figures.

So it was a no brainer that I’d be picking up the new Star Trek TOS minimates from Diamond Select. There are three regular two packs – Kirk and Vina, McCoy and Scotty, and Pike and Spock. There’s a fourth variant set that includes Scotty again, but a ‘dress uniform’ version of McCoy. These have hit online retailers over the last couple weeks.

“Star Trek TOS mini-mates: Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Pike and Vina”

These guys might look familiar to you. That’s because Art Asylum did do a set of TOS figures back in the very early days of minimates, but they were in the 3″ scale, not this new 2″ scale. So yes, you have to buy them all over again, and these don’t fit in with the old versions size-wise.

toybox_091107_1.jpg

Packaging – **1/2
The packaging is the new basic card bubble stuff you’ve seen with the DC minimates line. I like it because it’s nice and small, but on the downside, it’s not particularly attractive. Still, it does job 1 (keeping the figures safe) relatively well.

toybox_091107_2.jpg

Sculpting – ***
Sculpting is not exactly the strong suit of minimates. The style is supposed to be fairly basic and consistent, with only minor sculpt additions and changes (like the hair), and unique paint work.

toybox_091107_3.jpg

The Spock is perhaps the most distinctive and easily recognizable, although they did a better than expected job with Pike. I don’t know that Kirk looks all that much like Kirk, and Vina is fairly generic, but Scotty and McCoy benefit from fairly distinctive hair styles.

toybox_091107_4.jpg

My only complaint with the sculpt is the goofy added flairs on the bottom of the pants. Yes, they had bells on those pants back then, but these are too over done and look odd. I pulled them off Kirk in some of the photos, and I think he looks far better without them.

Paint – ***1/2
The key to good minimates is great paint. The tampo style paint work on the eyes, lips, and various ‘wrinkles’ in the clothing make all the difference in recognizing and distinguishing the characters.

toybox_091107_5.jpg

Vina’s paint job doesn’t make her all that less generic, although the green skin is pretty much the giveaway. Most of the characters have fairly distinct expressions, and Scotty is downright depressed. Again, Spock seems to do the best in this department, but overall the paint work is extremely clean and well done. That’s critical for the success of the design.

toybox_091107_6.jpg

Articulation – ***
Minimates have a ball jointed neck, shoulders and hips, along with pin elbows and knees, and cut wrists, waist and ankles. It’s pretty decent articulation in this scale and style.

One of the cool features is that the body parts all come apart, allowing you to mix and match if you feel the desire. This usually includes hair pieces, so even Shatner can try on new looks…just like in real life.

toybox_091107_7.jpg

Accessories – ***
All the two packs come with three or four accessories, depending on the set.

Spock and Pike come with four accessories – the tricorder and regular phaser, which come with a number of the other figures, along with the very specific old style phaser for Pike, and the very unique extra hand for Spock, posed in his well known greeting.

toybox_091107_9.jpg

Kirk and Vina only have three accessories, all for Kirk. Again, there’s the commonly used phaser, and the communicator, but Kirk also has the very specific phaser rifle. It fits well in his hand (as do all the accessories), and looks great. Too bad Vina doesn’t have anything, but that would have been pretty tough.

McCoy and Scotty have two of the common phasers, and the common tricorder and common communicator. Even with the reuse, these are pretty handy.

toybox_091107_8.jpg

Fun Factor – ***1/2
If there was a kid that had any idea who these characters were, they could actually have a great time with these guys. These are really toys first and foremost, which is what makes it tough to sell them to the adult collector market. Still, there’s enough big kids out there who like actual toys that the minimates market has been able to survive, particularly with the Marvel and DC lines. Whether they can pull that off with the many other licenses they have – like 24, Back to the Future, and these – remains to be seen.

toybox_091107_10.jpg

Value – ***1/2
You can get these basic six characters for around $18 at a lot of retailers. At just $3 each, that’s a great value. Most of the Marvel and DC stuff is running slightly higher, closer to $4 each even when you buy them in sets.

Things to Watch Out For –
Not much. Take some care with the tricorders, as they pop off the shoulder straps a tad easily, and once they do, they come off way, way too easy.

toybox_091107_11.jpg

Overall – ***
I’m a fan of TOS, and I’m a fan of minimates, so it’s no surprise I like these. Oh, they aren’t for everyone, especially of sculpt and accuracy is your game. If you like toys though – especially toys like Lego or Playmobil – then you’ll really enjoy these. It also helps that there is such a wide variety now of 2″ minimates, allowing you to put your TOS figures with Jack Bauer, Marty McFly, or Buffy Summers.

toybox_091107_12.jpg

Where to Buy –
There’s plenty of online options:

Alter Ego has the set of 6 for $17.82, and they are in stock.

CornerStoreComics has the two packs for $6 each, or the set of three two packs for just $16. They also have the full set of eight figures, including the ‘chase’ variant, for $30.

Amazing Toyz has the same excellent prices, and they are also in stock.

Related Links:
You can check out a guest review of teh 3″ versions from a few years ago right here.

Quick Stop Thingamabobs: 9/11/2007

Filed under: Columns,Thingamabobs — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:01 am

thingamabobs.jpg

The web. It’s a big place, full of plenty of distractions ““ some funny, some informative, some ludicrous, some disturbing, some inane, some profound. Each and every weekday, we present links to a few of our favorite finds”¦

————————————————

  • The man behind Mario, Charles Martinet… (Thingamabob)
  • The case for war against the ultimate enemy… (Thingamabob)

Have a THINGAMABOB? Send it in!

##

September 10, 2007

Party Favors: Blockbusted

Filed under: Columns,Joe Corey's Party Favors — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:06 am

partyfavors1.jpg

DALLAS – My affair with Blockbuster is over. I was cheating on Netflix with Blockbuster Online Total Access. And thanks to Newsweek online, it’s out in the public. You want to call me a cad now or wait till our drinks arrive so you can be extra dramatic? Remember to remove the umbrella from the glass – that hurts.

Why did I do it? And why should you believe it’s over?

It started last November when Blockbuster put up their offer of Total Access. It was pure temptation to a film fiend like myself. I used every bit of energy to build up resistance. But how can you top paying $17.99 each month for a three out plan that also allowed me to return my mailers to the nearby Blockbuster store to exchange for titles on the shelf. This guaranteed me the chance to rent the hot new titles on the Tuesdays that came out. If Netflix has one major drawback, it’s the fact that if you don’t get picked for a new title on the Tuesday release, you’ll be stuck on “Very Long Wait” for nearly 2 months. I wanted new so I grabbed the deal.

Can you blame me?

There are people who hate Blockbuster because of an outrageous late fee in their past. This has never been my reason to hate on them. I didn’t rent at Blockbuster because they were expensive. Back in the video days, my rental love was spread at a Phar-Mor. They rented titles for about a half of Blockbuster. How could they charge less? A major hint can be found in the fact that their Founder and CFO were sent to prison on fraud charges. Should I feel criminal for taking advantage of their extra low prices? I didn’t like Blockbuster because it stopped stocking straight to video masterpieces featuring William Katt and Andrew Stevens.

When I went inside a Blockbuster, it was to hunt through the used VHS tables. They’d have two dollar sales at least every other month. It used to be cheaper to buy a used tape than rent the copy on the shelf. But now I was renting titles.

Actually I wasn’t renting since there was no charge for me to swap out that DVDs. That’s when I knew Total Access wasn’t going to go on forever at $17.99 a month. My nearby Blockbuster charged $4.25 per 2 day rental for new titles Plus it had the “No Late Fees” policy. This means I had an extra week grace period before the store would slap a $1.50 restocking fee on my credit card. On Tuesday morning, I’d show up with three envelopes and walk out with three hot new titles. I was never tempted to grab a 4th DVD. I was denying the cash register $13.75. Plus I wouldn’t bring those hot titles back for at least a week. They could have rented my copy of 300 three times instead of having it sit on my coffeetable.

I averaged six swap outs a week. I walked out the store with $100 plus of free rentals per month. Blockbuster online also mailed me 6 DVDs each week. They paid for the postage to me and the return to their distribution center. If this was just an online rental service like Netflix, I paid about 70 cents an online rental. Is that even coming close to covering their stamp cost? If I had shown up at the store with a “this is a stick up” note, they would have lost less money than my nine month reign of terror.

You want to know why Blockbuster is bleeding red ink? Me. They ought to have my picture on the cover of the quarterly report.

It wasn’t a complete shock when last month Blockbuster decided to retool their online rental program. I just figured they’d let it last until 2008. The new deal for $17.99 lets me rent 3 DVDs at a time. But they’d only allow me to swap 5 titles at the store for free. If I wanted to keep the Total Access (now called “Premium”), it was going to cost $24.99 a month. What’s $7 bucks especially after all the damage I do per month? Why quit?

This is a protest. If Blockbuster is going to yank me this time; they’ll yank again to calm down investors when the quarterly numbers bleed. While it’s fun to get the new titles with the swap out, the pickings get slim fast. Lately I’ve found myself grabbing crap off the shelves in order to make the trade. Would I have spent $4.25 to rent Astronaut Farmer, Pathfinder or Ghost Rider? Or would I have waited a few more months for them to appear on HBO? Instead of renting titles because I’m curious about them, I checked them out because they were there. The pile of DVDs seemed more of a endurance test than an entertaining evening. The only good part was that if a film stunk, I didn’t feel too bad stopping it after 20 minutes and tossing it back in the box. This was done to The Breed, Black Christmas and pretty much anything that was a Blockbuster exclusive. I didn’t really waste $4.25 on a clunker. It’s not like I could have rented porn at Blockbuster.

The online version of Blockbuster did offer quite a few titles that Netflix refused to stop. The biggest thing BBO offered was Disney’s True Life Adventures series. Why couldn’t the lemmings arrive in the red envelope? Contrary to what Netflix wants you to think, they don’t buy every new title to put in circulation. And they are quick to pull titles that have gone out of print. Or is it a case that Netflix users have “lost” them in the mail? It was nice to be able to use both resources while working my way through the Psychotronic Encyclopedia of Film.

There are also a couple minor yet annoying reasons to quit. My nearby Blockbuster store shut down a few months back. It’s twice the drive to get to the new store. I’m trying to save gas so this war can end. Plus Blockbuster will only ship DVDs that are within 2 or 3 mailing days. This means that even though the website tells you a title is available, it might not be available to you. It got annoying waiting for rare titles to snail their way cross country through the distribution centers. Netflix ships me a title from Hawaii if its in their system. Plus every other week, a Blockbuster title would get lost in the mail. I’ve yet to have a Netflix title go MIA – not even Missing In Action with Chuck Norris. Rarely would a Blockbuster title arrive in the mail the day after shipping. This wasn’t bothersome when I had DVDs checked out of the store unless those DVDs were lame fare like Prey.

Now I’m just a Netflix customer. I won’t be getting all the new DVDs on Tuesday. The mailman will only have half the load to shove in my box each week. I should feel dirty for having made a deal with Blockbuster, but after they do the math, I’m the best worst customer they’ll ever have. As I told Newsweek‘s Brian Braiker, “when word gets out that I’m no longer with Blockbuster, their stock will soar $4 a share.”

BLOCKBASTARDS

After I decided not to do anything about reupping and just let my deal with Blockbuster lapse, those weasels decided to not wait until Sept 4 to end my account. When they didn’t ship me anything the other day, I wrote them asking if they were going to send me my next titles. This was the response:

Hello Joseph,

Thank you for contacting Blockbuster Online Customer Care.

I’m sorry to hear we haven’t shipped the DVDs you’ve requested. In looking at your account, it has automatically been cancelled as of 08/25/2007. Please reactivate your account by choosing new plans. You can find the details of other plans that are available via “My Account” in the “Subscription Plan” area.

Joseph, I hope this information has been helpful. Have a nice day.

Always here to help,

Ryan
Customer Care Associate
BLOCKBUSTER Online

They bill me for 30 days of rental action and are denying me 10 days of service. Sounds like it’s time to sue their asses. Anyone else get ripped off for a month? I have a really great class action lawyer. You think I’m joking, Blockbuster? Google “Joseph Corey” + “Class Action.”

CRYING AT COMEDY

Using one of my freebie swaps, I picked up The Ex since it’s a Blockbuster exclusive. This should have been funny. You have the three leads from excellent sitcoms teaming up on the silver screen. How can you go wrong with Zach Braff (Scrubs), Jason Bateman (Arrested Development and Donal Logue (Grounded For Life)? Guess it starts at the script and it’s downhill from there. This is a script that wouldn’t have escaped the writer’s room at any of these shows. It might have stood a chance at Charles in Charge. What was the point of casting Mia Farrow for a job that could have filled by a bottle of Mrs. Butterworth?

When Superbad came out, the hype kept saying it was the best comedy since Borat. Has there been any other funny comedies since Borat? Sure there was Idiocracy, but for a majority of Americans, they discovered it on DVD. What is wrong with cinematic comedies? There seem to be plenty of decent sitcoms in the past 10 years. But comedies? Is there a problem that after 25 pages, a comedy becomes a painful exercise that devolves into painful Kate Hudson vehicles? Or they just become Dipshit Comedies starring Will Ferrell. Way too many movies are prolonged Saturday Night Live sketches that are only funny in the sense of discovering your anal warts are actually parasite infections.

THE MAGIC IS BACK

How does one full appreciate R Kelly’s Trapped in the Closet: Chapters 13 – 22 with the knowledge that the auteur is still awaiting trial for peeing on underaged girls? The answer for me is Jack on the rocks. The new 10 chapters of this epic do not disappoint. I still haven’t a clue what R. Kelly is doing. But damned if it’s seriously messed up. His hot new character is a pimp at a church service. Plus we’re given a mobster shoot out that blasts away the finale of The Sopranos.

The shame is the lack of action for Michael K. Williams’ cop character. Give him screen time, R Kelly. The bad part of this new DVD is that we don’t get R. Kelly’s commentary track. I want to hear his genius at work. Watching R. Kelly watch and “explain” Chapters 1 – 12 took this project to the next level.

A REAL COMMENTARY TRACK

The Film Crew DVDs have been a fun way of keeping the joy of Mystery Science Theater 3000 alive. The deal of this show is that Mike Nelson, Kevin Murphy and Bill Corbett are hired to create commentary tracks for films that don’t have them. Their movie jokes are done only on the audio track. I miss their shadows on the screen. I do wish they’d retool the show so that at least one of the guy fakes being connected to the film. They could impersonate an actor who claims they were in the part of the screen eliminated by the pan and scan. Or they can play the Production Assistant who has worked 50 years in the industry. This way they can tell horrible stories of being on location. Give us fake insider tales of Hollywood, Mike Nelson!

Or they can bring in Rock and Roll legend Patti Smith. Her work on Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film For Theater For DVD deserves an award. She’s an amazing conversationalist with the various folks in the recording booth. And a fan of the show. Since R. Kelly didn’t create a commentary for Trapped in the Closet 13 – 22), Patti Smith can put on her resume “Best DVD Commentary Personality of 2007” under the honors section.

SCARY SEPTEMBER

The Midnite Movies Double Features return on Sept. 11! After a few years off, we’ll be treated to Return of Dracula/The Vampire, Phantom from 10,000 Leagues/The Beast with a Million Eyes, & Konga/Yongary, Monster from the Deep. Also Best Buy will be featuring Vol. 2 of Universal’s The Classic Sci-Fi Ultimate Collection. The five black and white features are Dr. Cyclops, Cult of the Cobra, The Land of Unknown, The Deadly Mantis & The Leech Woman. Now I await news to the day BJs stocks the Monsters Cereal multibox. Then it’s truly my favorite time of the year. Spooky time!

TVLAND HATES VINTAGE TV

An email showed up from TVLand looking for reality show contestants. Unlike their recent reality shows that featured acting icons from their older programs, TVLand’s new slate of shows have zero to do with classic television. They want women over 35 ready to be models. They want people who crave their outrageous 40th birthday parties broadcasted. They want couple between 45-55 that are dumping their old jobs to pursue a life long dream. What the hell does this do with me wanting to watch I Love Lucy? The dorks at TVLand want to turn the channel into MTV for Middle aged people.

The channel is now showing Extreme Makeover: Home Edition. While I enjoy the show and have worked on it in the past, it’s not a Classic TV show. It’s still on ABC primetime. And the same goes to them running movies that have nothing to do with TV like The Negotiator.

Do I have to sue your asses, TVLand? Your channel promises me a nice mix of vintage TV shows. Can you not do your job? I don’t pay for your channel in order to watch new shows. Stop trying to bait and switch. You are a niche channel and you need to remain true to your promise to me.

You want to do original programming that ties into your mission? How about a show that interviews the character actors that popped up in dozens of great shows. How about a little tribute to James Wong? Do we really need a show about a middle aged couple opening up a Bed and Breakfast in the wine country? Would that be Dean and Tori Get Old?

Thank goodness Paramount Home Video is putting out the first batch of Love, American Style episodes on DVD this November. They also have more Perry Mason, Happy Days, Laverne and Shirley, Mork and Mindy and Mission: Impossible. There’s going to be plenty of TV goodness on the shelf for the Christmas shopping season.

DIRTY POLITICS

Why do high profile Republicans have no sense of hygiene?

First off there’s that video footage of Mitt Romney at a pork cookout in Iowa. When he lifted the hunks of pork from the grill into a bag, one of the pieces fell off his spatula and onto the ground. Mitt picked the pork off the ground and put it back on the grill. “Five second rule!” he exclaimed. Is he psychotic? Will someone explain to Mitt the “five second rule” when it comes to large hunks of meat doesn’t mean you can just pick it off the ground and toss it back on the grill. You have pick the meat off the ground and wash the dirt away. You can’t serve people dirty meat. I bet if Mitt discovered his personal chef was serving him “five second rule” prime ribs, he’d be pissed off. But a voter in Iowa should be satisfied with his dirty slice of pork?

Should I really expect more from Mitt? Not really. This is a man who had a dog with the shits strapped to the family station wagon so that feces could drip off the back window and splatter onto motorcyclists. The Center for Disease Control needs to swab down Typhoid Mitt’s private plane to make sure he isn’t the reason the bees are disappearing.

The second big GOP Germy is Sen. Larry Craig. There’s no need to debate if he was really looking for a blow job in the Minneapolis airport bathroom. But there’s one thing that can’t be denied is his alibi that he reached into the adjoining stall to pick a piece of toilet paper off the tile. What? Who the hell picks anything off a men’s room floor? Do you know what is in that toilet paper? There is no five second rule when it comes to Public men’s restrooms. And there’s one major rule in the world of men’s restrooms, you never put your hand in another man’s stall. If your wedding ring falls off and rolls into another stall, you buy another one. He might as well have claimed he was tonguing the toilet seat to sanitize it for his ass.

At the next GOP convention, instead of having another “how great we are” speech, they must hire a nurse to explain proper hygiene techniques. Don’t let Mitt Romney kiss your baby. Who knows what he’ll allow his unwashed lips to touch for five seconds.

SUMMER’S GONE

What’s irritating about the year round school craze overtaking America is that right after a store removes the 4th of July fireworks display, they’re already slapping up the Back to School sales crap. We don’t get to enjoy summer since we have to worry about passing stopped yellow buses. Remember when summer lasted until Jerry Lewis sang, “You’ll Never Walk Alone?”

KILLING US SOFT SHOELY

After Mark Cuban goes off about how the internet is dead and boring, he signs up for Dancing with the Stars. Way to save civilization, Cuban. Guess he’s too much of sissy to be on my new show So You Think You Can Drink Nitro Glycerin and Do The Twist. It’s a tribute to Big Jim and Billy Sol on SCTV. Here’s a warning to Mark Cuban. According to my Magic 8 Ball, Marie Osmond will lead to the end of Cuban’s marriage!

THE DEATH OF COCK ROCK

Normally this would be the space to grouse about the music industry. But I’m feeling generous thanks to the latest albums by Amy Winehouse, Lily Allen and Feist. I’m not coming up with a fancy name to lump this trio into a genre. But it is quite obvious what’s lacking these days – bands with dicks. What happened to the cock rock? Why haven’t I heard a song and said, “Damn it! Those guys know what they’re doing!” Why does my lighter remain in my pocket instead of being waved over my head?

What happened to cock rock? I don’t want to think I’m turning into a pussy, but there’s very little alternative. Here we are in the midst of six years of war and the best we’re fed is Fall Out Boy and Nickleback. Why isn’t there a band filled with bile, blood dripping down their chin and with a riff that can’t be denied?

Where’s the next Black Sabbath with Paranoid 2? I’d settle for the second coming of Styx (or is already here as Maroon 5 and The Killers?). Is there any reason for Velvet Revolver to be considered a super group with their mediocre tunes? Velveeta Revolver is more like it.

Maybe the Hives will put balls back on the radio. But do they really have a new record or just pimpin’ Nike-iPod sneakers?

HAPPY TWENTY?

This is not a blog. It’s a column! This column has been around longer than the word blog has been in existence. This is the 20th anniversary of The Party Favors. At least we think it is. We were drunk in the mid-80s so that whole period of time is a blur. We were all doing lines of coke off Drew Barrymore’s ass between cameos on Miami Vice. Elvis the alligator was a mean drunk, but a lovable lush. Five a.m. would arrive when Epi would slide a live Nina Simone album onto the turntable. “Either get busy or fall asleep,” she’d insist. “The sun doesn’t take prisoners or excuses.” I miss Epi. I’d miss her more if I could only remember her last name. Or if Epi was her name or nickname. But since I stole her Nina Simone album, she’s always close to my heart and ears.

BACK TO SCHOOL

Did you know that Party Favors is taught in several leading universities? This column is used as a final exam in copyediting classes. And congratulations to Hank Ashbaum for winning last month’s “Spot the Typos” contest.

The nice thing about going to school in the 21st century is that you no longer have to worry about stashing your porn collection in the cramped dorm room. Or being soiled by your roommate. It’s all on the computer. That would have freed up at least five cubic feet in my old Turlington dorm room. Once a college official sent me a nasty letter pointing out that dorms should only be called residence halls. Dorms are what they call them in prisons, I was told. Oddly enough, a prison guard told me they don’t call them dorms, but residence halls. Nobody wins.

Comics in Context #193: Mystery In Montclair

Filed under: Columns,Comics in Context — admin @ 12:03 am

comicsincontext4.jpg

comicsincontext2007-09-10-03.jpgBack in February at the New York Comic Con, during the panel about the forthcoming movie Will Eisner’s The Spirit, executive producer Michael Uslan recommended that we all go see the exhibit “Reflecting Culture: The Evolution of American Comic Book Superheroes,” that was opening at the Montclair Art Museum this summer (see “Comics in Context” #170). it turned out that Uslan lent a good number of comics and original comics artwork from his own extensive collection to the show. At the convention Uslan assured us that the museum, in Montclair, New Jersey, was merely “a half hour train ride” from Manhattan. Regular readers may recall that, as a result of my expedition to the Newark Museum to see the first section of “Masters of American Comics,” I was suspicious even then of Mr. Uslan’s assurance.

And I was justified. I decided to head out to the Montclair Art Museum on the show’s bright, sunny and delightful opening day, Saturday, July 14, and discovered from website research that on weekends there is apparently no direct route via public transportation from Manhattan to the museum. Moreover, I ended up not arranging to stay overnight with a friend who lived in a nearby New Jersey town, so my journey to Montclair was going to be a day trip. Getting out to Newark, New Jersey by train was simple enough. Waiting a long time in a grungy area of Newark as the summer sun beat down for the bus heading to Montclair was less appealing. But I was pleased to discover that Montclair itself is a rather pretty, upscale town, and that the bus stopped directly across from the museum. I disembarked, notebook in hand, ready to gather information for my column.

An introductory wall text, on “Definitions and Origins,” began promisingly by quoting a definition of the term “superhero” from Dr. Peter Coogan’s remarkable book Superhero: The Secret Origin of a Genre (see “Comics in Context” #162). The wall text goes on to state one of the themes of the exhibition: that superheroes are modern successors of the title hero of the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, of the heroes of ancient Greek mythology, and of legendary figures like Robin Hood. Moreover, “comic book superheroes became manifestations of American history, culture, and folklore.” And so, the exhibition shows visitors, during World War II superheroes battled the Axis powers. Wonder Woman became a feminist icon. In the 1960s Stan Lee and his collaborators created superheroes with more complex personalities, who felt alienated from the rest of society. In the 1970s superhero comics tackled social issues like drug addiction. The 1960s and 1970s saw the rise of non-Caucasian superheroes like the Black Panther and the John Stewart version of Green Lantern. The “deconstruction” of superheroes got under way in the 1980s, and numerous superhero comics stories were done about the 9/11 attacks. And I suspect that most of my readers are surprised by none of this.

Unfortunately, the Montclair show doesn’t move much beyond what one might term Superhero Comics 101, the most basic kind of course in the genre. Certainly there must be many visitors to the show who know little about the history of the superhero genre, to whom much of this information will be new. But walking around the exhibition, I was reminded of mainstream media articles about superhero comics circa 1970, marveling that they were dealing with social and political issues: comic books had suddenly become “relevant.” Over thirty-five years have passed, but the Montclair show delves little more deeply into the genre. “Masters of American Comics” raised the bar for museum shows about comics considerably. In co-curating a show dealing with Stan Lee’s superhero comics for MoCCA, the Museum of Comic and Cartoon Art (www.moccany.org), I was careful in writing the wall texts both to provide the basic information for people who knew little about the Marvel series of the 1960s, but also to provide insights that I hoped that even longtime Marvel aficionados would find illuminating and different.

What was most rewarding about “Reflecting Culture” was looking at the original artwork and vintage comic books on display. I continue to be amazed that actual comic books that I bought as far back as the 1960s–and even some comics from the early 21st century–are now displayed as museum pieces. But I was pleased with the selection of vintage comic books on display here, ranging as far back as the Golden Age of the 1940s, and, unlike in Geppi’s Entertainment Museum (see “Comics in Context” #176), the accompanying texts provided satisfying explanations of each book’s significance. There was original comics artwork on display by Neal Adams (from a Batman story and Green Lantern), Dave Cockrum (from Uncanny X-Men), Gene Colan, Amanda Conner, Steve Ditko (from The Amazing Spider-Man), Will Eisner (from The Spirit), Carmine Infantino (from The Flash), Gil Kane, Jack Kirby (from Captain America’s Bicentennial Battles), Joe Kubert, Frank Miller (from Batman: The Dark Knight Returns), Jim Lee, H. G. Peter (an unpublished Wonder Woman splash page), and John Romita Sr. (from The Amazing Spider-Man). Certainly there were many major superhero artists whose work was not represented, but the examples of art by the artists I’ve just named was all worthy of close inspection. There was even Superman co-creator Joe Shuster’s own 1971 recreation of the cover of Action Comics #1, Superman’s first appearance.

I was particularly delighted with Joe Kubert’s cover art for Batman #310 (1979), showing Batman battling the Gentleman Ghost atop a runaway horse-drawn carriage. Daringly, Kubert put the hero and villain in the background, while the horses powerfully hurtle into the foreground, as if to burst from the printed cover and trample the reader. The dynamic power of the galloping horses reinforces the sense of action conveyed by Batman’s fight with the Ghost. The accompanying label commends Kubert’s “powerful, naturalistic style” and “his masterful eye for realistic detail.” But the secret of Kubert’s artwork in “Reflecting Culture” is his ability to make his heroic figures, whether it is Batman, Hawkman, or Sgt. Rock, appear larger-than-life and iconic and simultaneously seem realistic and credible. In his own way, Alex Ross also achieves this same amazing alchemy. (During the run of “Reflecting Culture,” the Montclair Art Museum is also featuring a commendable exhibit, “Comic Book Legends: Joe, Adam, and Andy Kubert,” honoring these three New Jersey residents, just off the entrance lobby.)

comicsincontext2007-09-10-02.jpgAnother of my favorites was the original artwork for Gil Kane and Murphy Anderson’s cover for Green Lantern #26 (1964), in which Star Sapphire, shooting an energy beam into Green Lantern’s power battery, triggers another beam which unmasks the superhero as Hal Jordan. (It is reproduced on the cover of the recent Showcase Presents Green Lantern Vol. 2 paperback. It was a pleasure to be able to study Kane’s elegant linework, as inked by Anderson, up close. This also gave me the opportunity to consider the composition of the cover drawing. Star Sapphire’s downward descent, at a slight angle, is roughly echoed by her power beam. Green Lantern’s stance exactly parallels the other power beam which snatches off his mask. While Star Sapphire’s figure is nearly vertical and exudes confidence, Green Lantern/Hal stands at a decided slant, as if he is literally taken aback by his sudden unmasking. She is triumphant; unmasked, he is vulnerable and seems defeated. The two figures form a classical triangular composition, mirrored by their respective power beams.

The argument has been made that hanging pages of original comic book art on the wall of a museum distorts the experience of reading comics because each individual page is only a segment of a longer work. The “Masters of American Comics” exhibition displayed some entire Spirit stories by Will Eisner and an entire EC war story by Harvey Kurtzman, but only excerpts of one or a few pages from Marvel and DC stories drawn by Jack Kirby.

On the other hand, by displaying a single page, or a two-page sequence, a museum focuses the viewer’s attention on that specific segment of the overall story. Whereas in reading the comics story, the reader will probably get caught up in the narrative, if he sees one or two individual pages on a museum wall, he may notice details and nuances that might otherwise have slipped his conscious notice.

The pages in Montclair that most impressed me were pages 15 and 16 from issue 12 of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons’ masterpiece Watchmen. In the Watchmen trade paperback, page 16 is the reverse side of page 15. Arguably, these two pages work better as a unit within the issue when they are seen side by side. This is how the Montclair Art Museum presents the original art for these pages.

These two pages make up a short scene within a larger story sequence in the twelfth issue. Since Alan Moore notoriously writes extraordinarily lengthy and detailed scene descriptions in his plots, I do not know which visual aspects of this scene should be attributed to writer Moore and which to artist Gibbons. Together, however, they created a two-page sequence that is a masterpiece of comics storytelling, and which whets my interest in someday embarking on a panel-by-panel analysis of the entire Watchmen series.

(And if you have not read Watchmen, I am about to give away one of the secrets of its plot, so you may wish to skip ahead twenty-seven paragraphs.)

In the first panel Adrian Veidt, alias Ozymandias, stands inside his Antarctic headquarters, gazing into a doorway. Veidt has modeled himself after Alexander the Great, his costume evokes the garb of classical civilization, and he looks rather like an ancient Greek statue as he stands in profile. He wears a placid expression, looking perhaps as if he is lost in thought. If you have the book, then you know the context: he is looking into his “intrinsic field subtractor” chamber, which he just employed to (apparently) disintegrate the godlike Doctor Manhattan, and in the last panel on the previous page he was mulling over the scientific aspects of destroying the Doctor, apparently oblivious to the moral cost of murder.

In the background of this first panel the alert reader will see the silhouetted figures of the superheroes Nite Owl and Rorschach, as if they embody Nemesis, out to avenge the murder of their colleague. They stand in another doorway, and perhaps are merely watching at this point, and not coming forward,

But revenge will come sooner than they could reach him. A balloon, containing the word “Veidt,” hovers to the right of his head, its tail leading offpanel, towards the second panel in the page’s top tier.

This second panel shows another of Watchmen‘s superheroes, Laurie, the Silk Spectre, who was once Doctor Manhattan’s lover, who has surely just witnessed Veidt’s seemingly successful attempt to murder him, and who knows (as do Nite Owl and Rorschach) that Veidt is the mastermind behind the massacre of half the population of New York City. (As I have pointed out in my “1986: The Year That Changed Comics” lectures at MoCCA, in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, issue 12 of Watchmen takes on new resonance.) Whereas Veidt was shown turned in profile, Laurie faces the reader, angrily aiming a gun and telling Veidt, “You’re an asshole” (a line which should confirm to the museumgoer who hasn’t read Watchmen that this isn’t a book for small children).

Circular lines curve around Laurie: these are the walls of a circular tunnel (as shown two pages earlier), leading in from the Antarctic snows (accounting for the puddles marking Laurie’s footsteps). The circular lines also serve to emphasize Laurie visually, perhaps harkening back to the occasional circular panels used in comics of the 1930s and 1940s. (Look at an early Batman story, for example.) If Laurie is enacting the role of avenging angel here, the circular lines might even suggest a halo.

Laurie is aiming her gun right at the reader. What this actually signifies is that in this one panel the reader has been given Veidt’s point of view as he, off-panel, turns his head and sees Laurie pointing the gun at him. Moore and Gibbons hardly encourage the reader to identify with Veidt in Watchmen, but by giving the reader Veidt’s literal viewpoint for this one panel, they encourage the reader to consider what it would feel like to see someone about to kill him or her.

Subtly the top tier heightens the intensity of the drama by bringing the reader closer to these two characters, panel by panel. The initial panel on the top tier shows Veidt from his head down to his knees. The second panel gives a closer view of Laurie, from her head to the top of her thighs. The third panel brings us even closer to Veidt, starting from the middle of his forehead, as he raises his left leg, as if that is the only way it could be seen in this close-up.

With the third panel the point of view shifts to Laurie’s. (The first panel was from an “objective” point of view, not that of any of the characters.) Veidt is in the process of turning from his profile position in the first panel to a position facing her. What is most notable about this panel, though, are the multiple images of his hand, held as if to administer a karate chop, and of his left leg, moving up as he is about to launch himself into the air. In contrast with the characters’ static poses in the first two panels, the third panel suggests that Veidt is moving to the attack so quickly that it his movement cannot be “caught” by the artist: it is the equivalent of a blurred movement in a photograph. It’s the kind of multiple image effect one might expect to see in The Flash, and presumably Moore and Gibbons are suggesting that Veidt, though he lacks super-powers, is somehow moving almost too quickly for the human eye to register fully. Even the transcription of Veidt’s battle cry (“Hhhhiiiiiii. . . .”) suggests movement.

The second tier consists of a single, long panel. It unites all four characters in the same visual space and serves as an establishing shot, marking the location of each within this chamber. The characters are divided into groups of two. In the background Nite Owl and Rorschach have moved forward, enough so that Nite Owl’s figure is now partly in the light, whereas Rorschach remains mostly in silhouette. The positions of their legs shows that they are now walking. In the foreground Veidt and Laurie are united by the bright blast of her gun, which not only connects the two figures visually but illuminates them both amid the shadows that have swallowed up much of the chamber (as well as Nite Owl and Rorschach).

The figures of Veidt and Laurie are sharply contrasted, and not simply because they are of different sexes. (This panel provides a clear view of Laurie’s microminiskirted legs, for example. Laurie becomes an archetypal female resisting Veidt’s personification of male aggression.) Veidt has no leapt into the air towards Laurie to attack her, thrusting forward his left leg (which he was raising in the previous panel), which looks as if it would have hit her in the lower abdomen (raising some nasty sexual implications). Veidt’s cape flows outward behind him. Hence Veidt is a basically horizontal figure here, whereas Laurie, firing her horizontal gunshot, stands vertically, in opposition to him.

Yet though Veidt and Laurie are in opposition to each other, their figures also echo each other. Veidt continues to utter his battle cry from panel three as Laurie fires her shot, whereupon it continues in the second tier as a cry of pain (“Yaaa. . .”). Whereas in panel three Veidt was extending his left arm to deliver a karate-style blow, in the second tier he holds his arms closer to his body, bringing his hands together, seemingly to clasp them over a gunshot wound. This pose echoes Laurie’s as she holds her arms together, as her hands hold her gun. As Veidt’s left leg extends forward in attack position, his right leg bends, perhaps in reaction to the pain he feels. Laurie extends her right leg forward, anchoring herself to the floor as she fires the shot, but her left leg bends back, perhaps in response to the recoil effect of the gunshot.

Moreover, whereas in the top tier Laurie and Veidt both wore facial expressions of anger, now their reactions are quite different. Veidt looks somber, as if reacting to the pain, while Laurie looks somewhat anguished, perhaps feeling some fear as she saw Veidt hurtling towards her, or perhaps distressed by the act of shooting at him, however much he deserves it.

The bottom tier continues the visual opposition of Laurie (vertical) and Veidt (horizontal): Veidt lies on the floor, seemingly dead, with his left hand over his heart, with blood staining his costume over his heart, and with his right hand, partly clenched, resting in a small puddle of blood on the floor. Laurie stands upright, although not entirely confidently: her head looks down towards Veidt’s body, and her left knee is bent. The bright light from the gun has been supplanted by smoke which curls eerily upward from the barrel.

In the background, Nite Owl and Rorschach continue their advance forward, both now mostly in the light. Shadow covers Nite Owl’s face, though, masking his reaction to what he’s seen; Rorschach, of course, wears a mask which conceals his facial expressions.

The first panel of the bottom tier hides the facial expressions of Veidt and Laurie as well. The seemingly dead Veidt’s face is turned away from us. Laurie has moved, standing beside Veidt’s head, with her back to the reader. We cannot see her face, but her body language–her stance, the position of her head–suggests her uncertainty as she carefully studies the seeming corpse.

Again, the “camera” is being moved subtly closer to the figures. Whereas the middle tier gave us a full figure shot of Laurie, in the third tier’s first panel we see her from the lower third of her head to just above her ankles. We still see the full length of Veidt’s body. In the second panel of the bottom tier, we draw still closer, seeing both Veidt and Laurie from the waist up. Now we can see Veidt’s face, which is once again in profile, but still not Laurie’s. This has the effect of focusing our attention more on Veidt. From the position of her head, Laurie is clearly looking at Veidt’s bloodied clenched hand, and we are being directed to do the same. The starlike points of the puddle of blood further emphasize Veidt’s hand, and oddly contrast with the rounder contours of the puddle of water marking Laurie’s path.

In the Watchmen paperback, one must turn the page to see what comes next, creating more of a feeling of suspense. But in the museum, pages 15 and 16 hang side by side, so the movement of the “camera,” coming increasingly closer to Veidt’s hand, is unbroken (save for having to shift one’s eyes to the top of page 16).

This pattern of slowly zooming in on something, or slowly pulling the “camera” back from it, is a characteristic Watchmen technique. Issue one begins, on the cover, with an extreme close-up of the Comedian’s trademark happy face button, with blood on it, as if from a head wound, and surrounded by a rivulet of blood, from the Comedian’s body. In each succeeding panel on page one the “camera” pulls further up and back, until it reaches the level of the window from which the Comedian fell to his death. Similarly, issue one closes with the “camera” pulling up and back from Laurie and Dan (Nite Owl) standing on a balcony.

The sequence with Veidt’s hand here in issue 12 creates a reverse effect from the opening page of issue 1. In the first issue the “camera” pulled up and back from a small object, amid blood, that was the symbol of the killing of one superhero (the Comedian) by another (Ozymandias). In issue 12, the “camera” step by step moves closer to Veidt’s clenched hand, lying amid blood, giving us a close-up of the hand in the first panel of the top tier of page 16. In the next panel the “camera” moves in still further, as Veidt opens his hand and reveals the bullet, covered with blood, that Laurie shot at him. Earlier, on page 9, Veidt had implied in conversation with a disbelieving Nite Owl that he was capable of catching a bullet that had been fired at him; now we see the proof. The blood-covered bullet becomes not the symbol of death but the symbol of one superhero’s (Veidt’s) ability to survive a murder attempt by another superhero (Laurie).

The third panel cuts to a closeup of Laurie, aghast at realizing what Veidt has done. Then the rhythm of three panels per tier is abruptly interrupted by the second tier, which consists of a single long panel, in which Veidt just as suddenly comes fully to life, raising himself on one hand and kicking Laurie in the abdomen with his left leg. Notice that this parallels the structure of the previous page, in which the top tier of three panels was followed by a second tier consisting of one panel, in which the figures of Veidt and Laurie were joined by the gunshot with which she attacked him. In the second tier of page 16 the figures of Laurie and Veidt are again joined, this time by Veidt’s leg connecting with her stomach. Thus Veidt succeeds in the kicking attack that Laurie thwarted on the previous page. Veidt still occupies a horizontal position and Laurie is in a vertical one, but Veidt is in the process of raising himself to a standing (vertical) position, and Laurie is toppling to a horizontal position, lying on the floor.

Thus Veidt and Laurie exchange positions, both literally and figuratively: he stands up, triumphant, while she lies down, in pain and defeat. This sequence is also a sinister variation on the archetypal pattern of symbolic death and resurrection, as Veidt, who sees himself as a hero but actually fills the role of Watchmen‘s primary villain, rises from apparent death.

In this second tier we see Veidt and Laurie from the same direction as Nite Owl and Rorschach do. This subliminally prepares us for the third tier of panels, in which Nite Owl confronts Veidt. With the violent assault over, the third tier returns to the steady three panel per tier pacing thatWatchmen usually employs.

Veidt’s first line in this tier is “There. Something else I wasn’t sure would work,” presumably about his success in catching the bullet, and echoing his comment about his seeming murder of Doctor Manhattan on page 14. This suggests that Veidt cares as little about Laurie’s pain as he did about the moral horror of murdering his former teammate Doctor Manhattan. Veidt’s figure is cropped in this panel so that we do not see his head, but we can imagine his indifferent expression from his dialogue. Instead the “camera” turns our attention to Laurie’s facial expression, reflecting her intense pain, as she lies on the floor, her arms positioned so that her unseen hands clasp her abdomen, just as Veidt’s seemed to cover his seeming wound on the previous page.

On rereading Watchmen the reader may observe that, despite Veidt’s confidence, he is as wrong in believing that he succeeded in killing Doctor Manhattan as Laurie was wrong in thinking she had shot Veidt.

Nite Owl and Rorschach have come much further into the chamber, while the “camera” looked elsewhere in the previous five panels, and they now stand fully in the light. As Laurie did in the first panel of the previous page, Nite Owl demands Ozymandias’s attention by calling his name: “Veidt!” But Veidt will defeat Nite Owl’s attempt at confronting him much more easily than he survived Laurie’s.

In the final tier’s second panel the “camera” radically changes position, so that we now seem to be standing behind Nite Owl and directly behind and to the immediate right of Rorschach. Whereas the previous page showed Nite Owl and Rorschach slowly advancing from the background, now we see Ozymandias advancing towards the foreground. This time the figure in the far background is Laurie, who begins to rise to her feet.

Nite Owl insults Veidt (“Veidt, you bastard. . . .”) and begins to threaten him, but his insult and threat seem standard melodramatic clichés, and his voice trails off (“I’ll. . .”). As if wearily scolding a child, Veidt calls him by his first name over and over (“Oh, Daniel, Daniel, Daniel, Daniel. . . .”), thereby failing to acknowledge his costumed persona. Then, in the page’s final panel, Veidt walks right past Nite Owl and Rorschach and out of the panel: the panel crops most of Veidt’s figure, as if he has already mostly passed out of the scene. “Do grow up. . . .” Veidt tells Nite Owl, who turns, looking bewildered at him. Not only has Nite Owl utterly failed to stop him, but Ozymandias has verbally reduced his would-be opponent to the level of a small child. Rorschach’s cropped figure has slightly turned to watch Ozymandias as he passes, showing us part of his mask: Rorschach’s thoughts on the scene he has witnessed these last two pages remain characteristically enigmatic. In the background Laurie stands upright, but her head is bowed, presumably in pain and defeat.

Nearby hung the original art for a page from another classic Alan Moore story, Batman: The Killing Joke (1988), illustrated by Brian Bolland. This page was from the sequence in which the Joker recounts his (possible) origin, based on the 1951 story “The Mystery of the Red Hood” from Detective Comics #168. In Moore’s version an unnamed comedian is forced by criminals to pose as their supposed masked leader, the Red Hood, but while they are robbing a chemical plant, they are confronted by the Batman. This page has numerous superb visual effects. In one panel we see double images of the Batman in the Red Hood’s goggles, magnifying the threat perceived by the frightened comedian. Bolland takes a surprising but effective minimal approach to the key moment when the Red Hood, desperate to escape Batman, falls into a vat of chemical wastes: the artist represents the two antagonists by only a glove and part of a cape. Best of all is the large panel in which the Red Hood, still masked, climbs out of the chemical wastes outside the factory. Bolland depicts the barbed wire and vegetation in highly detailed, naturalistic fashion, but what is most impressive are the concentric circles in the tainted water, marking when raindrops fall: the patterns are at once beautiful and eerie, thus setting the stage for what will happen on the next page, when the Red Hood unmasks to discover the wastes have given him the garishly colored hair and face of the Joker.

My final favorite artwork in the show was Alex Ross’s gorgeous painted cover for a reprint edition of The History of the DC Universe. Strangely, the accompanying label at the museum claimed that the painting exemplified the influence of Surrealism on Ross’s work, offering Salvador Dali’s work as an example. No, no, no, Ross does not deal in distortions of reality but in endowing the fantastic figures and places of comic book universes with a persuasive semblance of reality. His History of the DC Universe cover really demonstrates the influence on Ross of both the great artists of the Golden Age of Illustration, such as his hero Norman Rockwell, and of cinematic montage.

comicsincontext2007-09-10-01.jpg

There is so much in this painting to admire. My favorite section shows the head of the Batman; as usual, Ross makes him look like a real man, wearing a mask made of real fabric, his eyes visible through slits, and simultaneously like a formidable, iconic figure who is larger than life, rather than, say, a guy going to a costume party. Ross makes the bat “ears” on Batman’s cowl so long that they conjure the image of devil’s horns, for the Batman is a man who takes on the image of a fearsome bat–or a devil–to defend us from truly devilish menaces. Look how the tall, thin “horns” of Batman’s cowl are echoed by the tall, thin spires of Gotham City’s skyscrapers to the left of his head. Bats, his symbol, fly amid the skyscrapers, and simultaneously over a scene of the boy Bruce Wayne sitting in darkness behind the slain bodies of his parents. The bats hover over the scene, like omens of the boy’s eventual transformation into Batman. Ross’s positioning of this scene near the head of Batman may suggest that this is something that the adult Batman is constantly thinking about: it is his motivation for his endless war on crime. I am also struck by the pose of the kneeling young Bruce. His body language doesn’t suggest the initial shock and horror of witnessing the murders of his parents. Rather, this scene seems to be set moments later, when that initial shock has passed, and young Bruce has relaxed into a state of quiet mourning, and perhaps contemplation, which will eventually lead to the decision that will shape the rest of his life. The blue colors of the Batman section of the painting suggest both night, which is Batman’s realm, and the “blues”–his endless sorrow.

Ross places Wonder Woman’s head against a background of classical architecture, suggesting both her home among the Amazons on Paradise Island and her series’ background in Greek and Roman mythology. Ross pursues the mythological theme with the section of the painting devoted to Captain Marvel. I like his depiction of the Captain shouting as lightning dances over his body. It is as if moments before, young Billy Batson shouted the magic word “Shazam,” and the enchanted lightning transformed him into his superhuman counterpart. Even better is the background: pyramids amidst the desert, reminding us that the Captain derives his powers from the wizard Shazam, who came from ancient Egypt. The orange palette of this area of the painting suggests the desert sands.

For the section of the painting devoted to DC’s World War Ii heroes, including Sgt. Rock, the Haunted Tank (complete with the specter of the Civil War’s General Jeb Stuart), and the Blackhawks in their planes, Ross chooses the color red, perhaps as a reminder that war involved death and blood

I love the visual parallels and echoes in this painting, such as the way that the large foreheads of the Guardians of the Universe, who protect the cosmos from injustice and danger, parallel the enormous brow of Darkseid, the DC’s Universe’s foremost embodiment of all that the Guardians oppose.

I also greatly admire the way that Ross unifies the entire composition with circles: the twin planets New Genesis and Apokolips from Jack Kirby’s The New Gods, the time bubble holding three members of the Legion of Super-Heroes, the encircled swastika representing the foes of the World War II heroes, the circular body of the Guardians’ giant power battery, reflecting the images of their Green Lantern Corps. The right of the painting, which would have appeared on the front of this wraparound cover, is dominated by the face of Superman against what is really an exploding circle: the destruction of the planet Krypton. But shooting above the cataclysm is a small, nearly circular object: the tiny spacecraft bringing the future Superman to Earth.

There was more than just comics art to see at the Montclair Art Museum, and I also explored its galleries of 19th and 20th century American art, its gallery devoted to the Hudson River School painter George Inness, and its collection of Native American artwork. Pleased with my visit, I exited the museum, had only a short wait at the bus stop just outside, and embarked on my expedition back home.

But I got off the bus only about five minutes after I got on. Where was my notebook? It was not in my pockets or my bag or on the floor in front of me. I asked to get off the bus and trudged uphill back to the Museum (How did that bus cover so much ground in such a short time?). The notebook wasn’t at the bus stop, or along the path to the Museum, and although the Museum staff was very helpful, we couldn’t find it anywhere on the floors of the Museum either. So I ended up going back through the exhibit, reconstructing my notes on the pages of a magazine I’d brought. I left my phone number at the Museum, in case the notebook turned up, and checked with New Jersey Transit the next day, but the notebook had seemingly dematerialized.

Could it be that some museumgoer spotted it and gratuitously decided to steal it? But why? One of the guards suggested, “Maybe you take good notes.” Hmm.

To cheer myself up upon returning to Manhattan from Montclair, I went to see the movie Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. In it Luna Lovegood tells Harry about nargles, creatures that she claims have stolen many of her belongings. Harry doesn’t believe in them, but he may be mistaken.

I say that Montclair suffers from an infestation of nargles, who are even now attempting to use my notes to become celebrated Internet columnists on comics! Readers, feel free to visit “Reflecting Culture,” which remains at the Montclair Art Museum through January 13, 2008 but beware: the nargles of Montclair may exact a heavy price.

Copyright 2007 Peter Sanderson

Quick Stop Thingamabobs: 9/10/2007

Filed under: Columns,Thingamabobs — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:01 am

thingamabobs.jpg

The web. It’s a big place, full of plenty of distractions ““ some funny, some informative, some ludicrous, some disturbing, some inane, some profound. Each and every weekday, we present links to a few of our favorite finds”¦

————————————————

  • Who’s who in the classic Donald Duck short The Autograph Hound(Thingamabob)

Have a THINGAMABOB? Send it in!

##

SModcast 28

Filed under: SModcast — UncaScroogeMcD @ 12:01 am

smodtest.gif

newhead2.jpg

SModcast is the meandering palaver of a pair of dudes whose voices are so dull, they don’t deserve to be on the radio (and, hence, aren’t). Kevin Smith and Scott Mosier are SModcast.

The best thing about SModcast? It don’t cost nothing.

line.gif

SModcast 28: Scottacita Wants a Carnita! –

In which our heroes marvel at a canine onanist and other dog oddities, dissect barf-jobs, dream of seeing how Cheerios are made, expose the dirty secrets behind the Twinkie and the McDonald’s shake, and spend a long time discussing the Twenty Most Bizarre Experiments ever conducted.

[CONTENT WARNING] SModcast features harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Listener discretion is advised.

DOWNLOAD: (right click to save)
SModcast 28 (MP3 format) – 48.31 MB

[display_podcast]

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to this Podcast via iTunes
Subscribe to this Podcast via FeedBurner

Wanna add your two cents? Spend it here, in the SModcast mailbag.

line.gif

CLICK HERE FOR THE SMODCAST ARCHIVES

line.gif

##

September 7, 2007

Contest: Win 30 Rock!

Filed under: Contests — widge @ 3:12 pm


In conjunction with Universal Home Video, we’re celebrating the DVD release of the complete first season of Tina Fey’s 30 ROCK by giving away 2 copies to a pair of lucky winners.

All you have to do to enter is fill out the entry form below”¦

Contest ends at midnight EST on Monday, September 10th.

Contest closed. Thanks for playing.

Scrubs Blog: My Broadway Auction

Filed under: Production Blogs,Quickcasts,Scrubs Blog,Video — UncaScroogeMcD @ 5:03 am

scrubsheader.jpg


VIDEO BLOG #87: “My Broadway Auction” ““
The “Stephanie & Deb Show” returns for a third outing, this time with a special announcement about a special charity auction where fans can support Broadway Cares while picking up some cool swag from Season 6’s musical episode. Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS (BC/EFA) is the nation’s leading industry-based, not-for-profit AIDS fundraising and grant making organization. Since its founding in 1988, BC/EFA has raised over $130 million for critically needed services for people with AIDS, HIV or HIV-related illnesses. Please join us in supporting this wonderful organization. Simply log on to www.bcefa.org and follow the links to the “online auctions” page. Thank you!

line3.gif

scrubs2007-09-07.jpg

Download Scrubs Video Blog #87:

 

Large (560 x 420 – QuickTime – 157.60 MB)
Small (320 x 240 – QuickTime – 68.27 MB)
[display_podcast]

##

 

 

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress