Why, it just seems like a few weeks ago that X-FACTOR #1 was out. And it just seems like a few months ago that FALLEN ANGEL was consigned to the scrap heap by DC. Yet here are the next issues of both. What were the odds?
Whad'ja think?
PAD
The drive back was a crisp 16 hours including one hour sleep break and an hour for breakfast. The important thing for these types of trips is to stop every two hours or so because you don't want to be seated unmoving for much longer than that. Good way to develop blood clots in your leg that can break loose and, y'know, kill you. Which would be bad.
Been having extended discussions with Axel Alonso over the upcoming events at Marvel, which sound pretty exciting. Also, I'll begin work shortly on the Wonder Man limited series. But first I have to write the rest of the script for "Fallen Angel #4." Meanwhile I'm waiting to see what's going to be happening with "Soulsearchers."
Expect a fairly major announcement soon about something else.
Rough night of bowling last night. How rough? My first game I, with a 182 average, shot a 127. That's not the horrific part. The horrific part is that it wasn't the lowest score of the game. The low score was 125, shot by the opposing team's anchor (i.e., best player) who carries a 197 average. Tough oil pattern. Kicked my next two games to 154 and finally a 188, but still, crappy night.
PAD
So Christmas presents were distributed at Kath's folk's house, and lo, there was much happiness. I received an interesting assortment of stuff, including a little wind-up bowling game, a walking and growling King Kong (it took me a while to figure out how to position his arms so that he didn't fall flat every time he moved) and an assortment of books including--most intriguingly--a book of correspondence between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson's final letter to Adams, likening themselves to the Argonauts, is both amazing and depressing--amazing because of the poetic way in which he frames their participation in the American revolution, and depressing when one considers how far the holders of the highest office in the land have fallen in their ability to express themselves with anything approaching intelligence, much less poetry.
PAD
If so, a marvelous medication has been brought to my attention that could absolutely help you. So check out http://www.panexa.com
You'll thank me later.
PAD
Whenever we're traveling long distances, I always prefer driving at night. Our latest excursion to visit Kath's parents for Christmas is no exception. Our cat-sitter bidding us good-bye, we took off around 10 PM and I drove all the way through to about 6 AM. It's great because there's no traffic except for trucks. At 3 in the morning, you just blow down the highway with your brights on and nothing in your way. No glare from oncoming headlights, and moonlight is a lot easier on the eyes than sunlight. You don't have to worry about cranky kids because they're all asleep.
At 6 AM, though, I felt fatigue finally kicking in. So I pulled into the next rest stop, sat back and closed my eyes. The rest of the family didn't even stir. Police and security patrols were in the area so I didn't have to worry about miscreants. Slept for an hour, woke up refreshed, and hit the road again for a few more hours until we stopped and had breakfast. Afterwards Kath took over driving for a couple of hours while I got some more sleep in the back, then I took back over and got us the rest of the way. Total travel time, not counting breaks, fourteen hours.
PAD
It's been quite some time since a TV villain has had the degree of impact in the real world that Nip/Tuck's "The Carver" has had. When a real-life whack job is endeavoring to model his crimes on the series' vicious mutilator, notice must be taken. To that end, I'll now handicap what I see as the likely candidates to be Nip/Tuck's resident fruitcake. Keep in mind that since I don't exactly have a steel-trap memory, there may be someone on the list who has an iron-clad alibi and I simply don't remember.
Let us also keep in mind that although the Carver raped Christian, well, they're doing amazing things with plastics nowadays, so...
(Some necessary spoilers to recent episodes contained below)
2-1: Liz. If anyone has a reason to have up-close-and-personal hostility toward our Pair 'o Dox, it's their long-suffering anesthesiologist. She's got the anger and she's certainly familiar enough with scalpels. My top pick, with my only hesitation being that--since she's the only lesbian character--are the producers going to want to deal with gays howling over having one of their own being a vicious murderer? Also, we see her in the trailers shouting, "I didn't do it!" so if she's become a suspect, that reduces the likelihood and puts into the front seat...
5-1: Julia McNamara. With Sean and Julia on the verge of reconciliation due to her pregnancy, seems as if it's about time for the rug to be yanked out from under the poor bastard. Certainly she would know her way around a scalpel as well, and she pretty much suffered a complete mental collapse. Deep seated jealousy and possessiveness of Christian would explain why she kidnapped Kimber and short-circuited the wedding. Probably even more ideal a Carver than Liz because the reveal avoids cries of "Foul" from the PC police.
15-1: Ava Moore. Famke Janssen's loopy transexual has been pretty much MIA this season. Wound tighter than a Swiss watch and with more adult/child issues than any three Greek dramas, the advantage of Ava is that it wouldn't disrupt the core cast to have her revealed as the merry murderer. And yes, transexuals may protest, but there's a lot fewer of them than there are lesbians, so...
17-1: Matt McNamara. Carrying a grudge the size of the Titanic, it could be Sean's son...but I kind of doubt it. He wears his hatred for the world on his sleeve, not repressed in the way that being the Carver would suggest. Besides, he's such a screw-up that the first time he tried to kill someone he'd probably have cut off his own hand.
20-1: Gina Russo. Christian's loopy former lover. Hasn't been seen in a while. Might seem kind of anti-climactic after all this time, though.
25-1: Quentin. "Hi, allow me to introduce myself. I'm Dr. Quentin Costa, and I was brought in to be a prime suspect for the Carver. Look at me! I have sex with anything that's got a pulse, and I lie, and I'm the smarmiest character ever on the series." If this guy's the Carver, then the producers are playing the way-too-obvious card.
30-1: Kit McGraw. Rhona Mitra's detective. Certainly out there enough to be a suspect, but having the Carver be someone who didn't exist prior to last season would be kind of a cheat.
35-1: Dr. Merill Bobolit. And I can see you saying, "Who?!" Merill was the rival plastic surgeon played by Boston Public's Joey Slotnick who had it all, and then lost it all thanks to a botched job on a dog...partly and inadvertently due to Sean and Christian, since they'd refused the job. It makes perfect sense for Bobolit to be the Carver. The downside is the "Who?" factor.
40-1: Christian Troy. Did we see Christian snap and imagine himself as the Carver's victim? Was Roma's character right and he did fake it? Well, if Julian McMahon wanted out of the series so he could concentrate on movies, that would certainly be the way to give him a memorable send-off.
50-1: Sean McNamara. Considering he's been holding himself together with spit and bailing wire, it's not out of the realm of possibility that he's become split personality boy. Thing is, that's pretty much the end of the character. Nip/Tuck's core remains Sean and Christian, and of the two, Sean is the heart and soul of the series. So I kind of doubt it.
100-1: Annie McNamara. Yeah, okay, the Carver looks like an adult. But honestly, it's been so frickin' long since I've seen Sean and Julia's daughter that maybe she shot up and is bored because she's really got nothing else to do.
150-1: Joan Rivers. Hey...why not?
PAD
What a terrific actor has been taken from us, and what a horrific instance of life imitating art. I've been a Spencer fan ever since the double whammy of his brilliant work on "L.A. Law" and his incredibly noirish turn in "Presumed Innocent" that made you wish he'd been around to film black and white gangster films in the 40s and 50s.
When Leo McGarry had a heart attack out of nowhere last season, I was one of the many fans decrying the ER-esque turn of events. Yet now no one can ever watch those episodes in repeats without getting an eerie, chill feeling, watching an actor doing a dramatized version of his own future passing. Sheesh.
Since I don't want to muddle up comments on the passing of a person with the more fannish concerns about the future of his television series, I'm jumping to the extended entry for comments on "West Wing."
Remember a few weeks ago when I talked about "West Wing" being Josh's story. Well, consider: In the midst of a heated presidential campaign, Josh's father didn't live to see the outcome. And now history repeats itself as Josh's father figure dies without living to see the results of Josh's efforts. Certainly the writers will make note of that, and I don't envy Ashley Whitford having to act the scenes. The poor cast members are going to be like walking wounds in dealing with this.
As for the writers, jeez. Whatever they had planned for the election storyline, it couldn't possibly match the emotional drama of what reality has handed them. Bottom line, who becomes the new VP candidate? There's an abundance of already existing Democratic characters to draft into it, or they could come up with someone new. Possibilities off the top of my head for existing characters:
Bob Russell. Yes, Gary Cole is off doing another series, but so is Stockard Channing and she's managed to work in some guest shots. I can see Bartlet sitting down with him and saying that the Democratic party needs him to step up and put his ego aside.
Sam Seaborne. Wouldn't THAT be interesting. Rob Lowe's career hasn't exactly thrived since his departure. Be a hell of a comeback.
Congresswoman Andrea Wyatt. Yes, she had two children out of wedlock with Toby, but on the other hand, she survived the Gaza bombing.
Any other thoughts?
PAD
So Kath and I arranged for child care for Caroline and went to see "King Kong" yesterday, hitting an early morning show when the kids were all in school.
Is it worth seeing? Right, like anything *I* say is going to make a difference to you one way or the other on that score. Bottom line: If you intend to see it, absolutely don't wait for it to show up on DVD. You should see it on a big screen. Spoilers follow:
Things I liked: All the tips of the hat to the original, which is fresh in my mind because we just watched it last week. Some wonderfully snarky in-gags, such as Carl Denham grousing over Fay Wray's unavailability to star in his picture (and the hilarious reasons why), or snatches of dialogue from the original (including a shipboard conversation from the original film being restaged as a segment from Denham's film). Or the stage show accompanying Kong's presentation in New York, including music from the original and native costumes lifted from the 1933 version.
The relationship between Ann and Kong. Yes, I said relationship. The original Kong's interest was strictly one way. In this go around, made in an era more sensitive to the sensibilities of animals, Naomi Watts' Ann Darrow--rather than doing nothing but screaming in Kong's presence--actually bonds with the big galoot. You can chalk a chunk of this up to the brilliant CGI, modeled on Andy Serkis' performance (Serkis does double duty as the ship's cook, uttering a memorable Robert Shaw-esque tale of a previous survivor of Skull Island). But the bottom line is that when human actors interact with huge green screens, if the human doesn't sell it, the audience won't buy it. And Watts does it brilliantly, so much so that this "King Kong," as opposed to the original which was mostly a horror movie, is truly to all intents and purposes a romance.
The rest of the cast. There's not a misstep in the bunch. I, along with many others, was dubious about Jack Black as Denham. But the new take on the character absolutely works. The original Denham was an aggressive adventurer, largely modeled on Marion Cooper, the original director. Black's Denham is one third adventurer, one third con man, one third crazed movie maker. He's Orson Welles with a map. With the most expressive eyebrows since Nathan Lane, Black always reins himself in just when you think he's about to go over the top.
And if he's the storm, he's well matched with the steady eye of the storm with Adrian Brody as Driscoll, transformed from ship's first officer to thoughtful playwright turned screenwriter. Although I have to say, the one thing that bugs me about Brody is that I kept waiting for him to change into a slouch hat, large black flapping coat, whip out a pair of guns and recede into the shadows while laughing dementedly. I'm sorry, I can't help it: Adrian Brody looks more like Lamont Cranston than any actor in the English speaking world. Peter Jackson's next project should be to produce a "Shadow" film for Brody to star in. Hell, bring Naomi Watts along for Margo.
The pacing. People don't understand how important pacing is: A three hour film such as this can fly by in the right hands, while I've been to films that were 95 minutes and I checked my watch five times in the course of it.
Kong and Ann go ice skating. Screw the dino stampedes. For my money, Kong and Ann cavorting on a frozen Central Park lake was the single best sequence in the entire film, even though by rights both of them should have had breath misting out of their mouths in the cold New York air.
Things I didn't like: The special effects. Okay, bear with me on this--yes, they're brilliant. Yes, they brought Kong to life in a way that was previously impossible. Yes, there were tons of edge-of-your-seat moments, most particularly the battle between Kong and the three T-Rexs over Ann. (Although I have to say, watching three T-Rexs all fighting over who gets to eat Ann Darrow is like watching three sumo wrestlers slugging it out over a single Ruffles. You appreciate their artistry and enthusiasm, but my God, that's a lot of work for one little chippy).
Anyway, here's the thing--In the old days, the very limitations of special effects forced the movie makers to be more clever. The plot drove the FX. Now the plot has become interchangeable with the FX, except FX and plot AREN'T interchangeable. Ten minutes of our heroes running from a herd of dinosaurs, no matter how incredibly rendered, isn't plot. Ten minutes of bugs attacking them isn't plot. It's twenty minutes of filler, none of which was needed, and the reason we know it wasn't needed is because the first film clocked in at 94 minutes and did just fine without them. Don't get me wrong: It wasn't boring. My attention was fully engaged. But no matter how wonderful FX are, "less is more" is as true now as it was then. Furthermore, Ray Harryhausen was right. One of the main accomplishments of CGI is to take the nightmarish and render it mundane. The herky-jerky surreal movements of the original Kong--the imitation of reality--made him a creature out of your deepest bad dreams. The new Kong, whatever else he may be, isn't a monster. He's a really really big silverback gorilla. So the masterful CGI both elevates him and diminishes him.
The big plot hole. Three hours long. Over seventy years to come up with an explanation. And STILL they take a big sidestep around how the hell they managed to get Kong TO New York. How did they lift him? How'd they get him to the boat? How'd they restrain him ON the boat? How'd they manage to navigate past the treacherous rocks and shoals? How'd they manage to keep him unconscious for the entire trip? Chloroform? The WHOLE TIME? What did they feed him? Any of that answered? Nope. Denham shouts, "Kong, the eighth wonder of the world!" and boom, we're in New York.
The end. He falls off the Empire State Building and dies. How depressing is THAT? That's the most depressing ending since that movie where the boat sinks. They should have fixed that part.
PAD
Although some folks have been commenting on the previous update thread, this will be the official commentary thread for the new issue.
Whad'ja think?
PAD
FALL OF KNIGHT: Copy-edited manuscript proofread and shipped off to publisher. Next up to be proofread: The galleys for "Writing Comics With Peter David," due out beginning of summer 2006.
FALLEN ANGEL #1: Advance copies received from IDW. Looks fantastic. Considering everything we had to go through to make this happen, I feel like I'm holding a small miracle in my hands when I flip through it. I'm told the on-sale date is December 28.
X-FACTOR #1: Out this week. Advance copies were made available in Marvel's advance look package, and Silver Bullet Comic Books has already posted something like half a dozen reviews of it as part of their Sunday Slugfest. We're told that the aggregate score is among the highest ever received from the SS. So that bodes well.
Next up: Working on the Battlestar Galactica novel for Tor. A tight deadline, but I should be able to make it.
PAD
So the Bush White House endeavors to send out a nice, simple, inclusive holiday card. No different than millions of Americans of all religions send out.
And what happens? The extreme religious right is offended. Hell, let's not even call them the extreme religious right, because that makes it sound like extremist Jews, Muslims, Shintoists, etc., are all on the same page. Let's call it what it is: Extremist Christians.
Here's the fascinating thing about Extremists: They're all the same. The philosophy of Extremist Christians is fundamentally no different than, say, that of Extremist Muslims. They believe in the same things: Exclusionary thinking. Intolerance. Ignoring fundamental lessons of their own faith when it runs afoul of extremist thinking. Where is the philosophy of Christian charity and understanding? Where is the writings in the Koran specifically forbidding the killing of innocents? They don't serve the Extremist viewpoint of exclusion and intolerance and thus are cast aside.
They only differ in degrees of their actions. Some chop off the heads of helpless victims. Others blow up abortion clinics.
And the most consistent link is that trying to accommodate them never, ever works. That's what Bush is discovering now, having staked his political star to the whims of the Extremists. It's insufficient for Extremists that eighty percent of this country celebrates Christmas. Instead the ONLY acceptable greeting at this time of year is "Merry Christmas" rather than something inclusive such as "Happy holidays." It's insufficient for Extremists that there is already an implicit lack of separation of church and state around the holidays (the government shuts down for Christmas. You see the government shutting down for Yom Kippur? For Ramadan?) They want an EXplicit lack of separation by having the official greeting card from the White House be in celebration of Christmas only.
It's never enough for Extremists. Never enough. Because the only thing that will really satisfy them--whether they're walking bombs or just bombasts--is if everyone thinks just like them, believes just like them, and wants the same things as them. Which is never, ever going to happen, which is why they will never, ever be satisfied. Bush has been trying to appease them and hopefully even he is now realizing that it's hopeless.
One is left shaking one's head at a people who are claiming their holiday, their very beliefs, are being threatened. No. When Romans were throwing them to the lions, THEN their beliefs were being threatened. Here, in this country, their core philosophies have complete dominance over just about every aspect of life in this country.
And it's not enough.
When dealing with Extremists and terrorists...it never is.
PAD
Twenty five years ago, I was at home in my apartment in Queens with then-wife Myra. We were watching the TV news and were stunned when they announced that John Lennon had been shot. At the time, that was all we knew: He'd been shot. That was appalling enough. The notion that the gunshot was fatal was almost too much to contemplate. Then, almost immediately thereafter, they gave an update stating that Lennon had passed away.
It's just one of those moments in life--like when JFK was shot or when the Challenger blew up--where you remember exactly where you were when you heard the news.
PAD
Check this out. It explains so much.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/43189&rss=1
PAD
Three years ago yesterday, I drove an in-labor Kathleen to the hospital. We arrived just before midnight and I parked right nearby the hospital itself since almost no one was there. When I left late the next day--today, December 5th--my car was buried under a foot of snow, and blizzard conditions were such that I skidded three times on the dangerous drive back home.
Somewhere between all that, Caroline Helen David was born. One of the first remarks by a nurse: "Oh my God, look at those FEET!" Great gunboats they were, indicating this was going to be one tall kid (now more than halfway to six feet in height).
We had her "official" party on Saturday since that was when all her little friends, cousins, aunt and grandparents could attend. Today's her actual birthday, so we're having the remains of her birthday cake and trying to work out a time to take her to see "Chicken Little."
PAD
Last night on "West Wing," Toby Ziegler, in a spirited confrontation with Josh, explained precisely why he wasn't wild about Santos and didn't see him as presidential material. He said that what makes someone presidential material is that--rather than being dragged into the fray, as Josh did with Santos--a true president believes that destiny and the gods have brought him to this time and this place so that he can grab the presidency with both hands, and so that he can come up with the tough answers that stump everyone else in the country.
Not only did he neatly summarize everything I find lacking in Santos, he also described what I find so annoying about Bush. Because I have the sense that Bush was steered into the presidency in the same way that Santos was. He didn't grab the presidency with both hands; it was handed to him on a platter. That's what I think he was doing back on 9/11 when he was informed that the towers had collapsed and he sat there immobile for six minutes: Staring at his hands and thinking, "Who handed me THIS?"
PAD
Thus far we're seeing solid progress in the Gordon Lee case down in Georgia, where several of the counts have already been thrown out in pretrial motions. See here for more information, and also check out the various auctions that the CBLDF is running to help raise money for this costly case:
http://www.cbldf.org/pr/archives/000282.shtml
PAD
Season 5 of "West Wing" is out on DVD, and it's the first season that I'm not bothering to buy. But the current one is certainly shaping up as something different. Spoilers below...
While we hang in hiatus, apparently, waiting to see the fallout of the live debate, whether one likes "West Wing" these days pretty much depends upon what you think the series is.
If one believes that it's the story of the Bartlet administration, then current directions more or less suck rocks. The only major storyline involving Bartlet was the one about the leak, the outcome of which seems so appallingly out of character for Tobey that I'm forced to one of two conclusions: Either the writers have no idea how to write the character, or Richard Schiff wanted off the series and the writers did a fast veer-off from having C.J. be the leak.
Tobey as the leak makes no sense. Remember, one of the tip-offs that it didn't come from within NASA was that it was rife with inaccuracies. Tobey got details WRONG? I don't think so. Tobey remains silent for weeks at a time while C.J. is the target of the investigation? I don't think so. I think if Tobey truly believed that the information had to get out there in order to save lives, he writes out his resignation, leaves it on his desk, marches into the press room and makes the information public. Done deal.
C.J., on the other hand, has a track record of leaking stories or even trying to leak stories to reporters if she feels a strong moral compulsion to do so. From her, it's believable. From Tobey, you have to rationalize it up one side and down the other and it still stinks of bad writing.
Anyway, as I said, those who believe "West Wing" is all about Bartlet can't be thrilled. I, on the other hand, have always believed the series to be about the character journey of Josh Lyman. From the very first episode where he was on the verge of losing his job, to his being shot, to his departure from the administration setting up the campaign story, Josh has been at the center of EVERY major direction that the series has gone. So on that basis, I've no problem continuing with the show and watching with fascination as new life is breathed into the series.
Even the most unlikely development of the campaign story--last year's dubbing Leo as the VP candidate--is easily defended when you realize that he's basically Dick Cheney except not, y'know, evil. Plus since Leo was Josh's boss, it's a turn that keeps to the Josh-centric direction of the series.
The only problem is that I'm still more impressed with Arnold Vinick as a presidential candidate then Matt Santos. Here's the weird thing: In terms of what we've watched behind the scenes, I like Vinick better. But purely in terms of the debate, I thought Santos came off far better. So if I were a voter in the "West Wing" universe, I'd be leaning toward Santos. But Vinick simpy seems to have more gravitas, more character, and more on the ball than Santos, all of which I wouldn't have gleaned without watching all the behind-the-scenes stuff.
So if the series is going to remain true to the story of Josh, Santos really has to win. If Vinick wins, then the series really, truly does become about something else. I'll probably keep with it because I really like the Alda character...but I'll still be mourning the loss of a series that will finally have shifted irrevocably away from its focus.
PAD