PeterDavid.net

Erik, you ignorant slut

I was about to refer you folks to comicbookresources.com where there's a nice article about "Fallen Angel," complete with more artwork from issue #1. And there, on the same page, is a diatribe from Erik Larsen that angrily scolds creators who merely work on company-owned characters rather than on characters they themselves own--which, technically when you get down to it, includes Lee, Kirby, Ditko, Buscema, etc., since everything they created was company owned...just as any characters created for those same titles now are company owned. Yet in the world of Erik Larsen, creators who labor only in the company owned field are "pussies," resting on their "fat asses" and failing to "show (Erik) what (they've) got."

Now I haven't bothered with Larsen's previous columns, despite his swipes at me (and his oh-so-clever use of "But I digress" for transitions.) But the combination of blind irony and blatant hypocrisy on this one, I just have to address...

Over ten years ago, when Image broke away to follow their own muse, their own dream, to no longer "hold back," I wrote a column which had something of the same tone to it. Except my attitude was that I was unimpressed by the notion that--freed of the shackles of the main companies--all Image was going to do was produce more superheroes. Putting aside questions of ownership, I pondered whether the superhero-choked marketplace really needed MORE superheroes. My feeling was that, if I was going to do creator-owned stuff and had the wherewithal to do whatever I wanted, introducing yet more superheroes would be the furthest thing from my mind.

(This is an attitude that I have backed up in my career. "Sachs & Violens," "Soulsearchers and Company," "Fallen Angel," plus my novel creations such as "Sir Apropos of Nothing" are nothing like my other comic book work.)

Well sir! There was much excoriation and bleats from the Image boys, attributing all manner of vicious motivations to my comments. Superheroes were what made them happy. Superheroes were what they wanted to do?

Okay. Fine.

Yet now Erik is expressing disappointment with the allegedly narrow field of achievement of other creators in terms far more nasty, juvenle and insulting than anything I ever said. Except his complaints apparently stem not from the quality of the work so much as who owns it. If someone else owns the material, apparently, then you're just not trying hard enough and you're a wimp and pussy. Which I'm sure will come as a shock to the army of acclaimed Oscar-winning screenwriters who haven't owned any scripts they've written, ever.

What POSSIBLE motivation could Larsen have for excoriating those who toil in the realm of company owned universes? Could it be...jealousy? Well, let's check his recent track record: A widely decried and short-lived run on "Aquaman" that seemed to exist primarily to tear down my work on the book, all of which outsold his...and an attempt to get assigned to the Hulk with a take that Marvel didn't want to touch with a ten meter cattle prod. Maybe he's the fox dismissing those grapes as just too damned sour.

Or maybe he's just shilling for Image, with "Show me what you can do" as a naked attempt to get people to bring their potential new series to Image. That being the case, fine. Nothing wrong with trying to drum up business. But why does it have to be done on the level of a mindless jock? I'd say that being the head of a publishing concern and acting like a jackass isn't the smartest way to elicit support, but certainly the lesson of Bill Jemas has already been learned by everyone. Well...almost everyone.

Know what I think? I think if people are happy writing only Spider-Man or Superman or Batman or whatever...God bless 'em. There are so many people in this country who are laboring at jobs that they despise, where the hell does ANYONE get off bitch-slapping people who are living out their dreams...the dreams of writing the characters they grew up with? And by the way, having the sheer nerve and determination to brave the staggering odds of breaking in to be able to achieve those goals deserves far more than a dismissive "peachy." It deserves a "well done you" and "welcome to the club" and "stick with it." It doesn't deserve snottiness and arrogance and the towel-snapping bullying of the jock mentality Larsen displays with such facility.

And how about the notion that the people who achieved their goal of crafting new directions for the DCU or Marvel Universe achieved their current station in life without stepping over the bodies of friends in order to do so.

Producing creator-owned superhero tales is what makes Erik Larsen happy. Producing company owned superhero tales is what makes other creators happy. One is not intrinsically more cowardly than the other.

Just one fan's opinion.

PAD

MOST HAPPY Endeavor

As those of you who read my wife's web log know, she is currently stage-managing a new play called "Most Happy." The play is a showcase in New York City and the first show for the new Unofficial New York Yale Cabaret. Kathleen explained to me that the Yale Cabaret is the graduate student run theater at the Yale School of Drama and this theater company was formed by a number of alumni of the school. Compared to ticket prices for other shows in New York, this is very reasonable.

For more information on the show and ticket prices
Most Happy Information

You can also see her millinery skills since she is making tudor-style hats for the show.

Road Trip to and from Necronomicon

The following is an excerpt from the website for Necronomicon http://stonehill.org/necro.htm, a convention in Tampa, FL that I'll be attending October 28-30:

Calling all fans of Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Peter David or (best of all) both. Want to go on a little adventure to kick off Necronomicon. Check this action: The beautiful San Marco Theater in Jacksonville is going to be screening two of the most acclaimed "Buffy" episodes ever at 11 PM Friday, October 28: "Hush," followed by the karaoke version of "Once More With Feeling." Organized by none other than Peter's daughter, Shana, the showing will not only feature Rocky Horror-esque audience participation, but extras including a trivia competition with nifty prizes courtesy of IDW, the publishers of the "Angel" and "Spike" comics.

Now Peter's going either way, but we've come up with a plan if enough hardy souls are interested in going along..."

If you're going to be attending Necro, and are interested in participating in a small adventure, check out the website and read up on it. And if you're a Buffy fan, be sure to relay this information to other fans as well.

Hope to see you there.

PAD

KNEEL! KNEEL BEFORE COWBOY PETE AND HIS COMMENTS ON LOST, CHARMED AND WEST WING!

Sorry. That's just where my head's at after having read the following:

http://www.zod2008.com/

Anyway, below we begin the 2005-2006 round-up. Rather than gathering them all, I'll just do them as I go along (since I've been out of town, I'm just now catching up with stuff.)

Spoilers below:

LOST: Understand, I'm not one of those who's been screaming for everything in "Lost" to be explained. (Personally, I doubt the numbers will EVER be explained in any sort of satisfactory manner.) I'm just enjoying the ride.

That said, I thought the season debut was twenty minutes of program crammed into an hour of time. When it takes an episode damned near forty minutes to get your hero back to where he was in the teaser, that's a problem. And whereas most of the backstories have had at least some direct connection to the island--some sense of why this person was "picked" to be there--Jack's this go-around did nothing for me. Connecting the notion that Jack used to be uncaring with his patients to a passing comment made to Hurley that "they're just numbers" is pretty weak. It wasn't as if Hurley was lying there hemorrhaging and Jack said, "It's just blood."

Frankly, it's as if they had a great way to end the episode, and had to stall for time until they got to it. Still, it's not as if I'm going to stop watching at this point. But not the strongest outing by a longshot.

CHARMED: Going into its eighth season with sure-handed assurance, "Charmed" follows up on the girl's predicament (the world thinks they're dead thanks to the producers thinking they were going to get canceled last year)with a compelling episode featuring new set-ups, a Quantum Leap-ish solution to their dilemma (the world sees them in their new identities; we see them as the actresses) and the continued question of why the hell they don't have some sort of mystical wards around their house so that demons can't just pop in at will and try to kill them.

High points of the episode were Phoebe's ill-advised trip to her former office where she finds a shrine to her and everyone sobbing their guts out, and also a psychic flash of an interesting potential future for her. That, and the great close-up shot they had of Wyatt toward the end when he had apparently dispatched a passel of demons without breaking sweat.

The demons we've seen thus far are standard issue; we haven't had a really good villain on this series since Cole. So as the sisters take in hand a novice witch who's apparently seen "Elektra" too many times (like, say, once) which promises to be an interesting storyline, here's hoping the producers can come up with a serious quality nasty for the witches.

WEST WING: I'm not familiar with the writer of last night's debut episode, but she's certainly managed to come closer to nailing Sorkin's style than anyone else. The flashforward to the establishing of the Bartlet library was a brilliant touch, showing us the future of several key characters and providing some tantalizing clues as to things that are going on now.

Note, for instance, Leo's absence. Since I think we can safely assume Leo wouldn't miss such an event, and dismissing the notion that Leo and Bartlet had some sort of major falling out, that leaves us with three options: 1) Leo's dead; 2) Leo's the VP and therefore can't be with the president, Santos; 3) Leo IS the president (wouldn't that be a scenario? Santos wins and, the day he's sworn in, is assassinated?)

And CJ's there. CJ, the prime suspect for leaking classified information. Married and with a child, which would indicate she didn't get to jail. Which means either she cut some sort of deal (which would take some doing), or else she wasn't the one who leaked the information in order to save the astronauts. If not her, then who? My money's on Margaret. With razor sharp hearing, an established tendency to listen at the door, and a key enough position to be considered in the know, the loss of Margaret to the series--while it would suck for the actress--wouldn't be the crippler that losing CJ would be.

As for the remainder of the episode, lots of really good stuff, including the interesting notion that their "polling" regarding Santos matches up with my own perception: A nice enough guy to go and knock a few beers back with, but you're not sure you'd want to vote for him. Then again, it was enough to get Bush elected--I'm sorry, inserted into office--in the real world, so maybe that'll be enough. And the line that Bartlet "took an oath of office, not an oath of party" was great.

Hey...going back to that earlier notion: Santos is assassinated (I mean, it's not like Smits tends to hang around for more than a few seasons anyway); Leo is made President, and then Leo selects as his own VP...Vinick. Not that it would ever happen, but that'd be intriguing.

PAD

Happy Birthday Peter!

Today is Peter's Birthday.
It is 3 weeks after Ariel's and 2 weeks after mine. So if Ariel's birthday is on a Friday we know Peter's and mine are too.
Kath

Yippee Ki Yea

I'm heading out to a book fair in--of all places--Deadwood, South Dakota (now I wish I watched the program). I'll be out there with editor Andy Schmidt, pushing the notion of comic books as being something other than the province of children and forty-year-old virgins, although we will be doing a panel on comic books aimed at kids. .

I'll be back Sunday afternoon.

PAD

Checking in with projects...

Pilot episode to a proposed animated series: Turned in. Producers working on making it happen. Will keep everyone informed.

Manuscript for "Fall of Knight": Done. Some line-editing needed, but hopefully minor. WIll be turned in Monday morning. On schedule to be published in summer of 2006.

Script for X-Factor #4: Turned in.

Script for Soulsearchers #74: Turned in.

Fourth "Apropos" book: Here's the thing, guys. Pocket Books is no longer acquiring original fantasy novels. And it's difficult to move a series to another publisher since they can't have the first three books. So I'm basically stuck at Pocket until I can get the rights reverted...which won't be happening anytime soon since they keep going back to press with the first book, and are just coming out with the paperback of the third one. I'll probably be working on doing short stories of the character in my copious spare time.

Sleep: BWAAAHAHAHA

PAD

An illegitimate presidency

I'm sorry, but I simply cannot accept the idea of Geena Davis as president.

I think it is grossly unfair that she is able to become President of the United States without having been properly vetted through the rigorous campaign process of the "West Wing." The fact that she has not had to slug it out with Alan Alda or Jimmy Smits for the candidacy, and that she has not had her campaign managed by anyone who worked for Martin Sheen, casts--in my opinion--a pall of illegitimacy upon her entire presidency that cannot be ignored, even if a decision comes down from a full majority Supreme Court featuring Glenn Close, Edward James Olmos and Sally Field.

PAD

One of you will doubtless know this

If someone is standing in a shallow pool, and the leads of a taser are fired into the water, will it discharge electricity through the water that will stun the person standing in the pool even though the leads never touched the person himself?

PAD

Emmy Time

After a slightly shakey start, I thought Ellen did a very nice job hosting the Emmys this year. Glad that "Daily Show" did as well as it did (although comparing what Hugh Jackman did in one show to what John Stewart does night after night seems ridiculous to me.) I'm glad that Felicity Huffman won for DH, and pleased/stunned that Shatner won for Boston Legal.

And speaking of Shatner, his expression mirrored mine for the winner of the surprisingly entertaining Emmy Idol competition. TRUMP? For his off-key rendition of the theme of "Green Acres?" No f'ing way. Shatner was my sentimental favorite for the theme to "Trek," although Kristen Bell's rendition of "Fame" showed anyone who missed "Reefer Madness" that she has singing and dancing chops (although...what? Neither Irene Cara nor Erica Gimpel were available? I mean, c'mon.) But DONALD TRUMP? Sheesh.

They're missing a bet. They could make a whole prime time special out of the theme song thing. I once did that at an August Party convention years ago: Organized an entire afternoon entertainment that was like "Side by Side by Sondheim" except we sang TV theme songs. People were so dubious at first, and by the time we finished our program, we had volunteers lining up wanting to do more songs.

PAD

The Remarkable Prescience of West Wing

Back in the "West Wing" episode "A Proportional Response," Leo and Bartlet have a blistering confrontation over the proper use of armed military might by the lone remaining superpower trying to maintain a degree of conscience. It's a fascinating sequence, especially in light of Bush's actions several years later. When Leo presents certain actions as essentially the worst thing someone in power can do, and then you realize Bush did it, it's sobering to say the least.

In the second season, "In the Shadow of Two Gunmen," the director of the NSA states--after a shooting incident involving the President--that they do not know the whereabouts of several key terrorist leaders, "including bin Laden." This was a reference that meant nothing to most viewers (including me) because it was pre-9/11.

And now, in the current ramrodding down the nation's throat of John Roberts, I am moved to remember the first season episode "The Short List" wherein Bartlet is looking to fill a slot on the Supreme Court. The initial prospect, played by Ken Howard, seems good to go...until it's discovered that he does not believe that the right to privacy is a fundamental right of American society. The INSTANT that they determine that, Bartlet and his people show him the door because, to them, the right to privacy is such a given, such a necessity, such an obvious and basic right for any number of reasons--not just abortion, but mandatory drug testing, illegal search and seizure, internet activity--that putting Howard's character on the bench is simply unthinkable.

Funny how the real life administration is 180 degrees from that, embracing a candidate who does NOT believe in the constitutional right to privacy...a belief that would nicely erode everything that bothers the Bushies, ranging from legal abortion to protections from the intrusiveness of the Patriot act.

Every single place where, on the "West Wing," the Bartlet administration--an administration of conscience--zigs, Bush's administration zags. I just find that interesting.

I wonder if the next real-life election will involve a youthful Hispanic lawyer/cop going head to head with a likable former surgeon from a MASH unit.

PAD

Going crazy

I have three deadlines crashing up against each other. I'm working on finishing "Fall of Knight," the third Arthur book; a rewrite on my "How to Write Comics" book; and a teleplay for an animated pilot which I won't go into.

So I'm jumping from one project to the next to the next. Every time I slow down with one, I put it on hold and move on to the next one. Going to be a pretty exciting two weeks.

PAD

OUT THIS WEEK: HULK #86

Conclusion to the "House of M" tie-in. Whad'ja think?

PAD

Oi! See "Green Street Hooligans" and annoy studio executives!

Studio executives have been sitting around scratching their heads or their backsides and wondering why in the world movie going is dropping off. They're blaming DVDs, they're blaming cable, they're blaming all kinds of things.

Well, we just came back from the premiere of "Green Street Hooligans," a film that every single major studio passed on distributing, and I can tell you with full confidence that at least one factor in audience erosion is that studios can't discern quality when it's right in front of them.

And quality is what "Green Street Hooligans" most certainly is. It's easily the most riveting two hours I've spent at a movie this year. Elijah Wood plays a disconnected, frustrated college dropout who sojourns to England and becomes involved in a "firm"--a gang, if you will, of cocky, proud, hard-drinking, fight-seeking football (not "soccer," please) hooligans. When Wood's character tries to compare the rivalry between certain rival firms as "Yankees and Red Sox," he's corrected with "More like Israelis and Palestinians."

What unfolds is a fascinating tale of brotherhood on numerous levels, and the ultimate futility of lives lived in violence and vengeance. It is, quite simply, a brilliant piece of movie making.

Yet every major studio passed. Insanely, they claimed that it glorified violence, making it seem like a positive means of solving problems. Any person with an IQ above that of a kumquat who sees this film will realize that the studios completely and totally botched it. It takes some serious stupid to think this movie is a celebration of violence.

You absolutely must see this film. You must get all your friends to see it. And as soon as you do, you must go and plug it long and loud on your own blogs and get the word out. Not just because it's a fantastic movie. You must see it to send a message to movie executives, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent. They have to be told that they are insane to pass up high quality films such as this one. They have to be told that audiences are not getting it up for the movies because they want to see something other than the latest paint-by-numbers action flick or play-it-safe romantic date movie. That movies such as "Green Street Hooligans" deserve studio support and audience attention.

Also, on Kathleen's blog, she'll be writing about the film as well (and since she used to hang with football hooligans in London, she knows about this stuff personally) and also posting a photo of Ariel with Elijah Wood.

PAD

"Fallen Angel" preview on Newsarama

Over on Newsarama, the first seven pages of "Fallen Angel #1" are up. You might want to check 'em out.

PAD

The "Blame Game"

The Bush administration has embraced a term that truly sets my teeth on edge: The Blame Game.

Yet again, the administration trivializes that which it wants to draw attention from or diminish, finding new and innovative ways to dodge questions and avoid responsibility.

I have no clear idea yet, for certain, if lapses in administrative judgment can be blamed for everything from siphoning money away from shoring up the levies in order to support the war and Bush's tax cuts, to slow response to the emergency. But these are questions that must be asked. Clearly, the Bush administration embraces this notion with the same enthusiasm and thirst for truth that it did the 9/11 panel. Instead it endeavors to sprint along the obvious "high road": The Bush administration will not play "the blame game" when people need to be helped.

You know what? The government is large enough to multitask. There's no reason it can't help people AND investigate. Not play "the blame game." It's not a game, Mr. Bush. Perhaps much of your life has been thus far. Play with toys such as corporations, governments and armies, run them into the ground, and then wait for others to clean up your mess. But it's not. A game. It never has been, and that's something that this administration has yet to comprehend.

One thing guaranteed, though: They'll try to find a way to blame it on Clinton. But Clinton shouldn't take it personally. It's all part of the game.

UPDATED 10:45 AM. Maggie Thompson sent me the following link: http://www.thisisnotover.com/archives/2005/09/heres_what_gets.html This is one of those "I wish I'd said that" entries.

PAD

Fallen Angel #1 alternate cover

In addition to the awesome art of J.K. Woodward, the first issue of "Fallen Angel" from IDW will feature an alternate cover from original series artist David Lopez. Check it out.

Spider-Man: The Other press conference

Over in her on-line blog at Comicon.com, in an entry entitled "Quality or Ramifications"...since apparently the two are mutually exclusive...Heidi MacDonald cited a question asked by a retailer during the Spidey press conference on September 1. The retailer said his readers were concerned that they would read eleven issues of Spider-Man having "spider-cancer" and at the end of the storyline, he'd be cured, and there'd be no ramifications. He asked if if there would be any lasting impact as a consequence of the storyline. I said, "Yes." Heidi then wrote:

"The Pulse's transcript doesn't make it clear, but David's yes meant tat (sic) there would, indeed be ramifications.

"Which made us wonder...what “ramifications” did WATCHMEN have? or DARK KNIGHT? Or SANDMAN?

We have no idea of THE OTHER will be any good, but we would have thought that a good, solid story would sell more in the long run than mere ramifications."

An interesting question. Would that Heidi had actually asked it during the press conference. Instead, with over a dozen retailers and on-line reporters there, as I recall she was the only one who took a pass on asking any questions whatsoever. Of course, maybe she hadn't thought of it at the time. She could have e-mailed me later. Or gotten my phone number at the Dragon*Con hotel from Marvel and called me. Didn't do either. Oookay.

In answer to the question directed to me that she never actually asked, I submit the following scenario:

"Peter, will there be ramifications?"

"Well, you know, why can't we just tell a good story and let that be enough?"

"So you're saying there will be no long term impact after fans have invested in twelve issues of this storyline."

"I didn't say that. But I can guarantee you it'll be a really good story."

That loud thud you would then hear would be orders dropping like a rock. So I'll go with my answer rather than Heidi's, thanks.

And as for her other question, the obvious answer is that it shows a shocking lapse of understanding of the nature and requirements of on-going serialized stories as compared to series with a beginning, middle and end. In picking up limited series in particular, all readers are looking for is a good story. When they're being asked to embark on reading a mega-crossover and investing the time and money into reading books they ordinarily aren't reading, a good story simply isn't enough. Perhaps it should be...but it's not. As the retailer's question makes clear, they want to know they're going to be present at a major turning point in the protagonist's fictional life. That's part of what MAKES it a good story. As a matter of fact--and this is purely speculation on my part--it may well be that one of the reasons various limited or spin-off series nowadays have such a rough slog in terms of sales is specifically because they're seen as NOT having any sort of impact on the "main" storylines presented in the ongoing titles.

And the less obvious answer is, Yes, you bet your ass the series in question had ramifications. "Watchmen" and "Dark Knight" were responsible for launching a grim-and-gritty mentality into comics that continues to this day ("Identity Crisis" owes far more to Moore and Miller than it does to Marv Wolfman). And the ramification of "Sandman" was that it was responsible for launching the entire "Vertigo" line. The ramifications of "Sandman" are "Fables" and "Y."

It's just that no one knew that at the time.

So that's the answer to Heidi's question.

Which she never asked me.

PAD

Dragon Con, Day 3

Thus far I've seen virtually nothing of Dragon*Con. I've either been doing panels or been at my table, autographing stuff and meeting fans. But that's okay. That's pretty much what I'm here for, and certainly the fact that it's been busy for me is far bettr than just sitting there with nothing to do.

Aside from the initial panel I had Friday which was a solo reading, everything else I've been doing has been well attended. The major misfire was during my spotlight panel on Friday when I was doing a dramatic reading of an upcoming FNSM story...and discovered to my horror that the last several pages of the script were missing. Apparently my computer never printed them out for some reason. So that kinda sucked. I did my best to summarize the remaining pages, but it certainly wasn't anywhere near as effective.

The CBLDF raffle for breakfast with myself and Jewel Staite raised around $500 and the winner was, thank God, a nice normal guy. Understand, I love fans, but there are some folks that, y'know, can kind of creep you out a little. But that wasn't remotely this fellow, so there was serious relief there.

Kath and Ariel are out at the moment, Kath to the con suite and Ariel to go hear the Boogie Knights sing. Caroline needs something. Gotta go.

PAD

Dragon Con, Day 1

Did a phone interview for Marvel yesterday for Spider-Man: The Other. I thought it was going to be Joe, Reggie and I, and it turned out to my shock to be me, some Marvel editors, and a battery of fan reporters and retailers. So that was kind of surprising. I hope I didn't sound like an idiot.

Stayed in the room last night while Kath, a former Atlanta resident, renewed old friendships and acquaintances on the party circuit. Woke up this morning, showered and am ready for the day. Should be interesting. I have a 3 PM reading in the Williams room that appears nowhere on any schedule, and a 7 PM focus-on-me panel (God help me.) Kath has stuff in the artshow, including a muppet of Scorpius.

Also, the CBLDF is having a raffle to win breakfast with Jewel Staite and myself Sunday morning. So if you're interested, be sure to check that out.

PAD