Monday, March 15, 2010

Favorite Books of 2009


Here's a list of my ten favorite things I read last year. It took awhile to compile this list and to remember my initial thoughts on some of these books nearly a year after reading them. I'll try to do this more often and split it into two "best of" book lists a year. But, let's see how this one goes. In no particular order...

THE HOT KID
Elmore Leonard

This was my introduction to Elmore Leonard, and I'm glad I started here. It's an awesome story set in the world of 1930s gangsters and gun molls, following a young kid, Carl Webster, who grows up wanting to become a U.S. Marshall and catch bad guys because a gangster stole his ice cream cone. Sounds like kind of a goofy premise, but it totally works. What follows is a cool story filled with twists and turns as Carl's foil, spoiled rich kid Jack Belmont, sets out to become America's roughest, toughest criminal. Naturally, the parallel narratives of the protagonist and antagonist lead to a climax that's as brutal as it is funny. This is a great read.

TISHOMINGO BLUES
Elmore Leonard

My second foray into the realm of Elmore Leonard turned out to be a different, more comedic journey than the first. Tishomingo Blues follows famous high-diver Dennis Lenahan as he holes up in a small Mississippi town and hooks up with a local hotel owner in an effort to establish his high-dive act as a main attraction. Of course, it all looks too perfect until Dennis witnesses a murder that puts him on the run from the Dixie Mafia, a crew of rednecks who get their kicks staging (in great detail) Civil War reenactments. The entire book is solid, but as soon as we discover the main Civil War reenactment is really a scheme to 'off' Dennis once and for all, I couldn't put it down. May favorite Elmore Leonard book so far.

TO THE WHITE SEA
James Dickey

In the early 2000's, the Coen Brothers were supposed to adapt this book into a silent film starring Brad Pitt. I was super excited at the notion of a Coen-directed lyrical drama set during WW2, but then of course the project collapsed and it all went to hell. I finally picked up the book last year and gave it a read. And I'm glad I did - it's a fantastic, harsh story filled with some of the most fluid prose I've ever read. There is maybe three lines of dialogue in the entire book, and the rest of the time you're fused inside the head of the main character, Muldrow, a U.S. bomber pilot whose plane is shot over Tokyo during a raid. That's act one. The rest of the story follows Muldrow's journey as he makes his way across the dangerous, enemy-filled land of Tokyo and into the 'safehavens' of the North. Forced to do anything to survive, Muldrow kills and murders while descending into madness along the way. It's violent as hell, but a beautiful read. I could easily see what drew the Coen Brothers to this material. Imagine a cross between 'Fargo' and 'No Country for Old Men' and you're on the right track.

THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
Steig Larsson

My mom recommended this trilogy to me. I'll admit, I'm one of 'those' readers who'll flip to the last page of a book before starting it to peak at the page count. This bastard's about 700 pages with teeny tiny fine print and features some of the most detailed description I've ever read. All that might sound like a bad thing, except for the fact that the book is easily one of the best whodunit crime mysteries I've ever read. Equal parts engaging character study and suspense thriller, the two main characters' narratives start out like two loose ends of string, until they're wound and wound, eventually intertwining and become one. The fall of Mikael Blomkvist in the first several chapters began to get a bit dull for me, but once he's hired by enigmatic tycoon Henrik Vanger to solve the decades-old mystery of his niece's disappearance, I was instantly hooked. There's something so eerie about the manner in which Harriett Vanger vanished, and once Blomkvist moves to Vanger's town and begins to spend time getting acquainted with each of the disturbed family members, I couldn't put the book down. The story takes some weird and freakish turns, but it never failed to keep my eyes glued to the page. I'm definitely looking forward to checking out the second book, 'The Girl Who Played With Fire,', which is supposed to be just as good as this one. Can't wait.

THE YIDDISH POLICEMEN'S UNION
Michael Chabon

I found this book to be much more accessible than 'The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay.' Chabon telling a noirish detective story set in small-town Alaska is what got my attention, but he really works overtime trying to bathe the reader in countless chapters of Jewish folklore, which I appreciate to an extent. Sometimes it gets a bit tedious, but Meyer Landsman's character is so engaging and self-destructive that I couldn't help but stay tuned for everything that comes next. I didn't ultimately feel that the pay-off of the climax lived up to what the main story was driving toward, but the characters and rich, cultural lore kept my interest. Recommended if you're a fan of Chabon's other work.

THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS
Frank Miller

I can't believe I didn't read this when I was a kid. I probably would've grown up thinking Batman was a hell of a lot cooler that Superman! That said, this is probably the best Batman story I have ever read. They need to hire Frank Miller to adapt this into a screenplay and hire a great director to shoot it as soon as Nolan & co are finished with their Christian Bale trilogy. Not only is the artwork here simple yet bold, Miller can throw at you three full pages of solid illustration without any words and you completely understand what's happening, and to often great effect. But come on...you really want to read this because you get to see a 60-year-old Batman come out of retirement and kick the shit out of criminal punks less than half his age.

CARRIE
Stephen King

A shower of stones indeed. I've never seen the film version of 'Carrie', and I'm glad I hadn't prior to reading Stephen King's novel. The mom in this book gave me nightmares for a week. The shower scene at the beginning might be enough to turn plenty of readers away, but when Carrie is finally pushed over the edge during her prom and goes on a rampage throughout her town setting anything and everything on fire? Holy shit. It's intense. Stephen King is pretty alright. I really dug this one.

BLOOD MERIDIAN
Cormac McCarthy

In terms of intensity, Cormac McCarthy's sweeping Texas/Mexico novel 'Blood Meridian' makes 'Carrie' look like 'Clifford.' Not only does McCarthy not name any of his main characters, there's not a single redemptive quality about any one of them throughout the entire story. They murder. They abuse. They rape. They pillage. They scalp people. They murder some more. It's utterly graphic. And it's hard as hell to read. The prose is written in kind of a biblical, Old Testament-y tongue, and I found myself constantly having to re-read passages just to understand what McCarthy was trying to say - because you know he's not just telling you the story, he's also making a larger commentary on the world and everything in it that's so complex someone had to write a companion book called 'A Reader's Guide to Blood Meridian.' The character of The Judge is possibly one of the scariest, most sadistic characters I've come across. And if you can accurately explain and genuinely understand what happens in the final scene, I'll give you one thousand dollars. What can you expect from a book whose subtitle is "The Evening Redness in the West"?

BATMAN: YEAR ONE
Frank Miller

A solid companion piece to 'The Dark Knight Returns.' Instead of telling the tale of Batman as an old man, Miller here tells the story of Batman as a young man. As a somewhat idealistic youth who sets out to avenge the death of his parents by...oh what the hell, you've all seen 'Batman Begins' so you know the drill by this point. To me, the coolest part about this graphic novel is the parallel story of Jim Gordon's first few weeks in Gotham City working with a precinct of corrupt cops who are out to sabotage him. A really cool yarn.

THE OLD MAN AND THE SEA
Ernest Hemingway

I never read Hemingway in high school or college, and I'm glad for that in a way. Sometimes literature classes can dissect and analyze and over-analyze stories to the point where you no longer get the pure enjoyment of the thing that matters most - story. So I'm glad I didn't read the book and have to constantly think about whether the old man was supposed to symbolize the sea, the fish was supposed to symbolize the old man, or the fish the sea, or whateverthehell. That's all pretty obvious anyway. I am glad that I could finally enjoy the story of how an old, washed up fisherman gets one last shot at redemption by setting out to catch the biggest goddamn Marlin he and the world have ever seen. That's a story I'd want to read. And I'm glad I did.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Top 10 Films of 2009


My top 10 film list - WAY belated. But I hadn't seen a few of them until recently so here goes:

1. INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS:

I love World War 2 movies, and I love Quentin Tarantino. To me, this is his most re-watchable film. I literally never get sick of viewing the carefully crafted scenes he puts together here, especially the 15-minute long scene in the underground German tavern. I'm still not 100% sold on Brad Pitt in the film, but Michael Fassbender, Christoph Waltz and Daniel Bruhl more than make up for it.

2. THE HURT LOCKER

After the first five minutes of this film I thought to myself, "Wait...Guy Pearce isn't the main character??" The intro is so well-executed, written/directed that you're immediately immersed into this world of bomb defusers. I'd read a lot about Jeremy Renner's performance ahead of time, and he doesn't disappoint.

3. UP

I didn't love UP when I saw it in theaters in 3-D last summer. At least, not as much as WALL-E and RATATOUILLE. But while watching it again on DVD @ my mom's house over Christmas, a funny thing happened - I choked-up and had to leave the room during the film's opening montage. Whether it conjured memories of my own grandparents or if I was just in a particularly sentimental mood, who knows - but it happened again the second time I watched it on DVD, too! It's so sad but beautiful, and you instantly care for Carl and feel a genuine loss for him and his late wife. The scenes that take place on the Island with all the talking dogs go a little 'left-field', but the film is still fun and filled with a truckload of heart - more than most films any year can claim.

4. DEPARTURES

This won Best Foreign Film of 2008, but it didn't get released in theaters in the U.S. until last summer. I finally caught it on Netflix last month and it really stuck with me. Besides offering a unique window into the world of a 'nakanshi,' or one who prepares the dead for burial, it also serves as a moving film about family, love, and loss. It could easily have been melodramatic, but instead it stays the course. To me this represents the best way to deal with those subjects most of us would rather not think about - with a touch of humor.

5. SUGAR

A really different look at the world of Minor League baseball from an immigrant's perspective. While he's still living in the Dominican Republic, I didn't feel for Miguel "Sugar" Santos' character as much as I did when he relocates to the American Midwest and becomes a fish out of water. Not understanding English, you feel for him when he can't even order off a menu at a diner so is forced to order the same thing every day - eggs; and you feel good when he finally makes a connection with the waitress who teaches him all the different kinds of eggs he can order. While it's affecting when Sugar finally is able to connect to a few people in his new home, the film might have spent a little too much time on Sugar quitting baseball due to his insecurities...but I thought the film offered a really interesting perspective on baseball.

6. BROKEN EMBRACES

I liked BROKEN EMBRACES so much more than Almodovar's last film, VOLVER. I thought it bridged the gap between some of his edgier, more inaccessible films (The Bad Education) and some of his lighter, more commercial fare with Penelope Cruz. This felt a lot more vintage Pedro to me. I like that.

7. CRAZY HEART

Most everyone I've talked to about CRAZY HEART says it's a country music version of THE WRESTLER, with Jeff Bridges essentially playing the Mickey Rourke character. To an extent that's true, they both fit into the same genre, but are way different. Jeff Bridges is always great. It's nice to see The Dude getting some much-deserved recognition. And hey - if he wins this year (which he probably will), it'll sort of make up for Mickey Rourke losing to Sean Penn last year in a weird karmic kind of way.

8. STAR TREK

Fun! Perfectly cast, awesome story...STAR TREK with a budget! Now I kind of wish J.J. Abrams would have been greenlit to reboot Superman in the early 2000's like he was rumored to. And how can you not nod your geeky head in appreciation and silently clap when Leonard Nimoy's Spock walks on screen and saves a young Kirk from a hyper-crazed snow monster? I'm easily excited for a sequel.

9. THE WHITE RIBBON

I think Mike B. said it best in his 'best of' list so I won't expand too much. WHITE RIBBON is one of those films you talk about and debate endlessly with friends after you've seen it, and you're all going to have different theories as to what it meant. I can't believe Michael Haneke wrote this script from scratch as an original story - it feels like it was adapted from a beautiful but violent piece of literature.

10. FANTASTIC MR. FOX

I liked Wes Anderson up until THE LIFE AQUATIC, and then I didn't like him. I REALLY didn't like him when I saw (yeah, I'll admit it) THE DARJEELING LIMITED. I was over Wes Anderson. When I heard he was making a stop-motion version of FANTASTIC MR. FOX, I was curious. The stop-motion was what got me into the theater, but this felt like old-school Wes Anderson. Working from someone else's material forced him to focus on story and not meander on meaningless dialogue and overly-quirky scenes. The outcome - this was a genuinely funny movie with real heart.

Monday, January 4, 2010

Mike B's Top 10 of 2009


Been awhile! I wanted to kick off 2010's first blog post with a top ten list from a friend of mine. His musings are always fun to read and I agree with many of his selections. I'll be posting Mike B's top ten of the decade list this week.

Oh, and if you find any typos or made-up words that's his fault, not mine. Let's see you edit this beast. Without further ado...

Mike B.'s Top 10 Films of 2009:

Overview: The 10 Best Picture nominees thing has people tripping over each other to call this a weak year. They hate the change so much that they’re willing to say there aren’t ten films worth nominating not because it’s true, but because it helps their case. Last year was a weak year. This year was anything but. Not only did I see 10 films worthy of the term “great” (including one everlasting masterpiece), but I have an unusually high 29 honorable mentions. Any year that gives us 39 films worth checking out cannot be called weak. Not to mention films like Drag Me to Hell, Up, Sin Nombre, Adventureland, Bronson, That Evening Sun, Watchmen, and a few others that I enjoyed very much but don’t necessarily think are definitely worth two hours of your time. There were also a few films where the parts were far greater than the sum: the first half of Funny People (the second half is one of the most self-indulgent hours of film you’re likely to ever see), the first third of The Lovely Bones (due mostly to Saoirse Ronan’s exquisite performance), and the humbling final scenes of Gomorrah.

Honorable Mention: Anvil! The Story of Anvil, Big Fan, Broken Embraces, Brothers, An Education, Goodbye Solo, The Hangover, Hunger, The Hurt Locker, I Love You Man, In the Loop, The Informant!, Invictus, Julia, Julie & Julia, The Maid, Me and Orson Welles, The Messenger, Michael Jackson’s This Is It, Moon, Notorious, Paranormal Activity, A Prophet, Revanche, Rudo y Cursi, A Serious Man, A Single Man, Up in the Air, Zombieland

Note: If I had room for an 11th film it would be Me and Orson Welles. I walked into this one solely to kill some free time and I’m obviously glad I did because it’s probably the most unapologetically corny film (in a good way) I saw this year. Some movies I’ll be talking about below are refreshing in the way they avoid formula at all costs, but this one is just as refreshing in the way it perfectly executes its formula. It’s 1937, and a 17-year-old aspiring actor charms his way into a production of Julius Caesar directed by Orson Welles. As the lead, Zac Efron is mediocre at best, but the script is so damn solid that not even his mild acting talents can trip this vehicle up. We meet everyone you’d expect to: the unattainable love interest, the pig-headed womanizer, the veteran producer who’s seen it all before, etc. But everything is so immediately whimsical that it wins you over before you’ve even had a chance to contemplate resisting its appeal. The best thing about the film is Christian McKay’s towering, madcap performance as Welles. He’s brilliant at showing us the layers of the man who was the epitome of confidence and the purveyor of insecurity. His Welles is much more than just a voice (but wow does he have the voice down). It’s an engaging little film about theater and the draw of acting, and you don’t need to know a single thing about Orson Welles to savor every moment. A homerun from Richard Linklater.

10.) CRAZY HEART: If The Wrestler made my list last year, then this one sort of has to make my list this year since they’re the same fucking movie. This thing might as well have been called The Country Singer it’s so similar. From the aging superstar performer battling an addiction to the single mom love interest who will never be his wife to the estranged kid who wants nothing to do with him, the parallels are all too apparent. Randy “The Ram” puts on a show in front of a handful of people in a high school gym; Bad Blake puts on a show in front of a handful of people in a bowling alley. But don’t let my snide tone mistake you. Crazy Heart, like The Wrestler, is a helluva character study. The day Jeff Bridges gives a bad performance is the day I stop caring about movies. There are a few points in the film where the character has to curb his pride and while a weaker actor would let the character’s outrage rule the screen, Bridges allows Bad to also be humored by it all. The character is so defeated he expects nothing less than to be dealt these cards and can only smirk and shake his head. Another small moment of defeat I absolutely love is when he’s being interviewed by Maggie Gyllenhaal’s character. He’s wearing an unbuttoned shirt and when it suddenly dawns on him that this woman is attractive he drapes the sides of his shirt over his exposed gut. He’s so conquered that he can’t even be bothered to button his shirt. The script doesn’t really explore any new terrain, but I did appreciate that Colin Farrell’s former protégé turned megastar character isn’t the cliché it could’ve been. You’re expecting some sort of unappreciative egomaniac, but he’s anything but and it makes way for some really fresh, surprising conversations. It also gives us greater insight into Bad’s own frustrations, both with how he’s perceived by others and with the music business in general. And in a final note, I should say the music in the film is actually good. Really good in fact. I’m not above saying I sat there through the final credits, comforted and just a little but touched by the gift my ears had been given. Crazy Heart won’t change your life, but for two hours it’ll make you forget about it.

9.) WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE: I would love to live in a room where all four walls are covered with framed images from this film. I think what I appreciate most about Where the Wild Things Are is that it weeds out moviegoers who can’t find beauty in the untamable. It’s a film for people who don’t mind a little paint on their clothes; for people who can cry at the beauty of a lightning storm. It tethers itself to the idea of showing us a fantasy from the mind of a child living on the emotional edge and in doing so forces us to confront the terrifying, yet comforting reality that all children ride on the edge of sanity. And it’s not methodical. There are no obvious tricks up its sleeve. Max doesn’t come in and put a broken family back together like most films would demand. If anything, he leaves them even more broken. It’s a film of staggering beauty and nuance. And I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again: I don’t care if she has 1 line or 100 lines, Catherine Keener can do no wrong.

8.) THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL: The trailer for this one really caught my eye (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHvSkTDWFfk) and it had a good amount of buzz in the horror community, but I still wasn’t prepared for just how good this wound up being. The comparison to Polanski is spot on. Like Rosemary’s Baby, this is a study in tone. A girl answers an ad for a babysitter and most of the film focuses on her lounging around a big house watching TV, listening to music, and doing pretty much nothing. It’s horror at its most bare, and shows how more jolting simple scares are than extravagant ones. Director Ti West really knows his shit when it comes to the genre. Not only does it take place in the 80s, but the film has this beautiful washed out graininess to it that makes it feel like a lost gem from the John Carpenter/Tobe Hooper horror boom. Plus it gives us the fantastically creepy Tom Noonan delivering the second great terrifying performance of his career (his Francis Dollarhyde from Manhunter still gives me nightmares). Not only is this one of the ten best films of the year, but it just might be one of my ten favorite horror movies of all time.

7.) INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS: I’m glad this movie came out in August. Had it come out in the last few weeks it probably wouldn’t have made this list (let alone in 7th place). I hold Tarantino to the highest of standards and expect nothing short of greatness every time I watch one of his films. Anything less than a masterpiece is a disappointment. Though I liked Basterds very much upon my initial viewing, I had quibbles with it and thought that though it was a very good film, it was not a great film. Jesus was I wrong. The first time I walked in ready to love the film I thought it would be, and it hindered my enjoyment to a degree. But I watched it again recently open to the film it is, and I can only judge it for what it is not what I wanted it to be, and it was like watching a completely different movie. All the issues I had seemed insignificant when planted amidst these sardonic five chapters. It’s mistitled for starters. It’s not about the Basterds (years of expecting one thing and getting another certainly delayed my ability to embrace it). It’s an engaging, astonishingly multi-layered 3-way dance between the good (Shosanna), the bad (Hans), and the ugly (the Basterds). It has scenes of such great tension where you feel uneasy with the knowledge that anything can happen in this moment. The opening scene is one of the five greatest scenes in Tarantino’s entire filmography. A later scene between Hans and Shosanna (an interrogation that takes place, once again, over a glass of milk) is just as powerful. The three lead performances from Christoph Waltz, Melanie Laurent, and Brad Pitt are all outstanding: one terrifies us, one garners our pity, and one makes us laugh our fucking ass off (yes, I’m STILL laughing over the face he makes when he realizes their plan is thwarted). I still have some problems with it: Eli Roth and Mike Myers are a waste and I don’t completely buy the Jew Hunter’s final about face. But neither of those things dampens my growing love for this film. It’s so delightfully Peckinpah, so romantically Bertolucci, and so vintage Tarantino. And all due respect to Life on Mars (the BBC version), but there has never been a better use of Bowie in any scene, EVER.

6.) FANTASTIC MR. FOX: Though I see all his movies, I’m not what you’d call a Wes Anderson fan. Aside from The Royal Tenenbaums, I hate all his movies. But I love Tenenbaums so much that I keep going back hoping some day he would once again hit that note I found so sweet some years ago. With Fantastic Mr. Fox, he’s done it, and it may even be his best film. This thing is so charming, so adorable, and so clever (as a fox…get it?), I can’t imagine anyone being able to resist its magical spell. I read in a rave review of this film (by someone who also wasn’t a fan of his) that it made him realize Wes Anderson has always been making cartoons and that he just now got the idea to animate one. Sounds about right to me. I’ve grown tired of looking at the snarky faces of Jason Schwartzman, the Wilson Bros., and the rest of the Anderson gang, but when claymated animals, I think they’re all aces. This film also brought about the added bonus of seeing many children disappointed because they didn’t get any of the jokes.

5.) TYSON: I really, really hate James Toback. It pains me to put one of his films on one of my best of lists, but the power of Tyson is undeniable. Any time you put a microphone in front of Mike Tyson you’re guaranteed gold. But put a microscope on him, and the results are effervescent. Mike Tyson is and always has been, in my opinion, the most compelling figure in modern American history. A battle rages in this man’s head between an eloquent genius and unintelligible child. Sometimes we get one, sometimes we get the other, and sometimes they both find their way into the same sentence. You just want to put on metal armor and give him a hug. Like Me and Orson Welles, you don’t need to be interested in the man to get engrossed by this in-depth tracing of his life. You don’t even need to like boxing. It works as an examination of what happens when we create a monster for a sole purpose and then that purpose no longer needs fulfilling. Toback uses a few too many split screens (we get it, there are many sides to him), but the material is so good you look past it. Tyson is the best documentary of the year.

4.) BAD LIEUTENANT: PORT OF CALL NEW ORLEANS: When I first heard about this project, I groaned. When I saw the trailer, I vomited all over my keyboard. When I saw the actual film, I just threw my arms up and accepted that it was either one of the best or one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. This movie is out of its mind, but its craziness is carefully constructed and it’s one of the year’s most refreshing experiences. The acting is bad. Really bad, all around. But Werner Herzog is no idiot. It’s intentionally bad, and when you give actors the freedom to be awful it sort of breaks down any self-consciousness they have and lets them explore areas they never knew existed. And when you’re in need of someone to give a bad performance, a performance so bad it can carry a cast of awfulness onto the battlefield of preposterousness, there is but one actor you turn to. Nicolas Cage is perfect in this film. And by perfect, I mean he’s absolutely atrocious. His complete lack of talent creates moments so shocking and ridiculous that you find yourself clapping and cheering simply because of the way he laughs or raises an eyebrow. It’s not many films that can make an audience reverberate with chuckles because the main character (as he comes down from a 3-day coke binge) puts a gun to the head of an old woman in a nursing home. BL: POCNO is so bad it’s good, and it’s a risk only a veteran like Herzog would be willing to take. An instant cult classic with an endless number of lines to be quoted by the cinema-savvy for years to come. It must be seen to be believed.

3.) PRECIOUS: This film definitely lays it on (maybe too) thick. Our main character is 16, morbidly obese, illiterate, and pregnant with her second child (both of whom were created from her being raped by her AIDS-ridden father). Add to this the monstrous, venom-spewing mother she lives with and we get the point pretty immediately that life ain’t easy for Precious. The film’s only real overt weakness is a series of intermittent daydreams in which Precious takes her mind to a safer place anytime she encounters one of her many daily horrors. Early on they work on a comedic level, but as we get deeper into the story they serve only to delay us from seeing the end of involving, urgently dramatic scenes. Lee Daniels suffers from that disease which plagues most directors during their first and second films where they feel an urgent need to prove their talent. They overdirect, and it hinders their story rather than serves it. But good acting can make you forgive a lot. And great acting can make you forgive everything. Precious is overdirected alright, but I’m telling you the acting is so fucking good that you just don’t give a shit. Gabourey Sidibe has a blunt stoicism which finds the right mix between a woman who never got to be a kid, and a kid who doesn’t know how to be a woman. And Mo’Nique charges her way into film history, giving us one of the 50 great screen villains of all time in what is certainly the performance of the year. Precious is a saccharine film with simple messages, but sometimes it’s the sweet and the straightforward that makes the hardest grab at your soul.

2.) STAR TREK: If you told me last year that this list would be comprised of a Wes Anderson cartoon, a James Toback film, and the remake of The Bad Lieutenant, I’d have called you a fool. But if you had told me it would also include Star Trek, I’d know for certain you were lying. I had no intention of even seeing this film. I know nothing about Star Trek. I’d never seen any of the movies and had only ever seen one episode of the TV show. But my love for J.J. Abrams, the kick-ass trailer, and the stellar reviews were enough to make me check this out and, well, here it is. It’s the rare big budget action movie that gets everything right (and that’s not even something The Dark Knight can claim). I had the same feeling watching it as I did the first time I saw the Star Wars trilogy as a little kid. It’s the birth of a franchise, creating characters you adore and can’t wait to follow for years to come. I love every moment of this silly space movie.

1.) THE WHITE RIBBON: The year, is 1913. The place, is a small German Village. The film, is a masterpiece. Four years after the enthralling Cache the great Michael Haneke brings us The White Ribbon, a twisted fable about a series of mysterious, violent crimes that propel us into the black heart of one small, pre-World War I community. A doctor is injured when his horse trips over a wire someone has stretched between two trees. A worker dies after falling through a faulty floor panel. A child is tortured and hung upside down. Everyone is a suspect, but no one dares to vocalize their suspicions. They keep their fear internalized, because acknowledging the existence of such an evil presence walking among them is more hideous than the crimes themselves. The film works as both an Agatha Christie-style whodunit and as a story about what happens to one’s character when there is no longer such a thing as certainty. There are upwards of 40 characters in this epic film and the fact that you never once forget who any of them is speaks to the pure talents of the veteran Haneke. So assured is his direction here that there isn’t a single wasted moment in any of the film’s 144 minutes. At its core, the film beautifully explores the way in which children and adults communicate with each other. Some critics are describing this film as a modern day Lord of the Flies and to an extent that’s true. The children are referred to by their names while the adults are known only by their occupation (and in a story with so many characters it helps that we need only to remember names like The Teacher, The Doctor, The Pastor, The Baron, etc.). This also sets up a running commentary on how we are, at least to our peers, defined more by what we do than we who are. I’ve long resisted the acting of children but I think maybe it’s just the acting of American children which I find subpar. The children in the story match wits with their elders in every way possible. There’s a scene early on between a 4-year-old boy and his older sister about what exactly it means when someone is “dead”, and the emotional balance between the two is revelatory. In a later scene that I just need to highlight, a woman questions her lover as to why he no longer finds her attractive. His answer starts off surprisingly funny, but as his reasons become more hurtful and precise, and as we take note of the lack of any remorse in his stone cold face, our heart breaks. Each time he pauses the woman asks him through her tears to continue and with each request we feel smaller and smaller in our own penetrable shells. So lonely is this woman that she’d rather endure vile criticisms simply because, to her, anguish is a better feeling than no feeling at all. I envy all of you for getting to experience this moment for the first time. Something remarkable happened when the film ended. Instead of shuffling hurriedly out of the theater, people remained in their seats and talked with those around them. The film leaves you with just enough answers so that you think you’ve solved it and just enough mystery so that no matter what you think you will still have some small measure of doubt. I found myself theorizing with a group of strangers because we all needed to compare stories and because none of us, despite the raising of the lights, wanted the experience to end.

Saturday, October 17, 2009

HOLMES Scores! (with UPDATE)

As an aspiring screenwriter, I've submitted my fair share of scripts to countless screenwriting competitions, and have pretty much had no luck. This time was different. My most recent script, HOLMES, has just won 1st Place in the 'Action' Category in the 2009 Creative World Awards feature screenplay competition. I'm pretty stoked. If you want to check out a few links where the results were posted, they're below:

http://www.creativeworldawards.com/awards2010.php

http://www.moviebytes.com/ContestDetail.cfm?StoryID=3683&ContestNumber=2263&NewsTab=TRUE

UPDATE: 'Holmes' also received the following accolades:

Top 10 Finalist in the ScriptShark Insider Competition (http://www.scriptshark.com/script-journal?detail/C18/2009-scriptshark-insider-content-finalists-announced)

and...

Top 20 Finalist in Jim Mercurio’s inaugural Champion Screenwriting Competition (http://championscreenwriting.blogspot.com/2009/11/and-shorts-winners-for-2009-are.html).

Yay!

Friday, April 3, 2009

Superman Rebooted



I'm taking a break from writing about writing today. Instead, I want to draw up my plan for how Warners should fill the roles of the Superman franchise relaunch.

Clark Kent / Superman: JON HAMM



Anyone who watches Mad Men knows he can pull off a more "serious" tone for Clark Kent. He's got the age, the gravitas on his side. And his Funny or Die and SNL skits have shown he can do comedy, if necessary. It would be nice to see SuperMAN rather than Superboy.

Lois Lane: ANNE HATHAWAY



I don't love her in every role, but Anne Hathaway has proven she can play someone who is a mess career-wise - she can be tough, driven, and definitely outspoken. She has my vote.

Jimmy Olson: Michael Angarano



Michael Angarano has proven in films like Sky High and Dear Wendy that he's the geeky, loveable funny guy. That's who Jimmy Olson is. He's not an over-the-top nerd. He's not the cool guy. He's the every-guy. Michael Angarano would serve this character well.

Perry White: Hugh Laurie



Yes, he was originally supposed to play Perry White in Bryan Singer's Superman Returns, but due to scheduling conflicts with House, he had to drop out. Therefore, we got Frank Langella as the grumpy newsroom pitbull.

Lex Luthor: Jackie Earl Haley



Lex Luthor needs to give up his "land" schemes. I don't want to see Lex Luthor the criminal. I want to see Lex Luthor the president of the U.S. A man holding a high, government office who everyone looks up to. He's the hero, adored by the public...until Superman comes along and steals his thunder. He should never be the main villain. Just a man scheming behind the scenes.

Am I close? Do you like these choices? If not, who would you choose to fill the shoes of Metropolis' finest?

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Sell-Out!

Wanna hear a funny story? A horse walks into a bar...no, not that one. An Irishman, Muslim, and architect are stranded at sea...not that one, either. A guy who loves film starts writing design posts for HGTV's 'Design Happens' blog. That one. I actually have no problem writing about design even though I'm probably the last guy you'd ask for design-related advice. The extent of my home makeover experience is tilting my flat-screen television to the right while sitting at the kitchen table eating dinner. So what? It's all relative, right?

I generally contribute between two to four posts per month, so I'll try to plant the links here on this blog (how many blogs are too many?) when they go live.

My first post went up last Saturday: http://blog.hgtv.com/design/2009/03/01/from-screen-to-home/

My second goes lives tomorrow, March 11. You'll be able to find it here: http://blog.hgtv.com/design/

UPDATED: Here's my latest entry: http://blog.hgtv.com/design/2009/03/14/change-of-address/

Let me know what you think!

Shameless Self-Promotion

My awesome sister who works at the Massillon Museum in Ohio always makes me feel like an established writer rather than an aspiring writer. She reads my work, offers me helpful critques and perhaps most importantly, endless amounts of support. One of the many things she's done to help is netting me a nice little mention in the Big Read press release her team put together. Take a look below for the details - and if you happen to be in Massillon, Ohio on March 26th at 7pm, make sure to stop by the night of one-act plays and show your support for a group of talented, hard-working local actors!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

News Release: The Big Read Night of One-Acts to Star Local Thespians

On Thursday, March 26, the Massillon Museum, with the collaboration of the Massillon Public Library, and Washington High School, will present an evening of original one-act plays relating to The Big Read and this year’s book selection, The Age of Innocence. Washington High School dramatics students will perform three plays under the direction of Eric J. Myers.

The evening will begin in the Washington High School auditorium at 7:00 p.m. with period music performed by members of the Canton Symphony Orchestra. The string quartet will perform between each of the plays.

Massillon Public Library Director Camille J. Leslie—a Georgia native fascinated by foreign languages, animals, folk music, and the The New York Times—wrote “A Heavenly View” for The Big Read project. The characters, representing actual people from Massillon’s history, depict a slice of local life during which an itinerant artist/cartographer began work on the 1870 birdseye view of Massillon. Joseph Morales (Nahum Russell), Samantha Smith (Esther Russell), Rebekah Seesan (Flora Russell), Dorroh Smith (Annie Russell), Alexis Jones (cousin Lucia), Kori Baker (Mary), Daniel Murphy (Albert), and Elizabeth Remley (Dorothy) will portray a scene in the Nahum and Esther Russell home on historic Fourth Street—later the home of the McClymonds Public Library, forerunner to Massillon Public Library.

Screenwriter George Nicholis is the full-time Public Relations Coordinator for Home and Garden Television in New York City. His original one-act for the Massillon Museum’s 2008 evening of one-act plays was well-received during the community's first Big Read project. Daniel Condo and Alexandria Burch will perform the two roles in “The Ghost,” Nicholis’s new play for this year.

Brian Centrone wrote “The Gilded Strings.” An accomplished short story writer, Centrone has an MA in Novel Writing from The University of Manchester (UK). He is an Adjunct Professor of English at SUNY/Westchester Community College (New York). Jenna Brinker plays Mrs. Winterguard, Tyler Bennett plays Howard, Elizabeth Remley is Nellie, and Kathryn Leffler is Ms. Shanksman.

Admission is free and open to all. No reservations are required. Washington High School is located at One Paul Brown Drive Southeast in Massillon.

The Big Read is an initiative of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) designed to restore reading to the center of American culture. The NEA presents the Big Read in partnership with the Institute of Museum and Library Services and in cooperation with Arts Midwest. The Big Read brings together partners across the country to encourage reading for pleasure and enlightenment.

For more information about western Stark County’s Big Read project, call the Massillon Museum at 330-833-4061 or visit www.massillonmuseum.org or www.NEABigRead.org.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Omitted


I need to mention that I saw The Visitor last night, and, if it didn't mess with the flow of my Top 8 of '08 list, I would've added it. But 'Top 9 of '08' doesn't carry the same tune, does it?

I'd heard good things about The Visitor, but it fell off my radar until recently, and Richard Jenkins being nominated for a Best Actor Oscar a week ago rekindled my interest. Jenkins really pulls your strings in this coming-of-age film. His character is sort of in deep-hybernation throughout most of the running time, and it's only upon contact with a foreign couple squatting in his Manhattan apartment that he slowly starts to thaw. You really don't appreciate how good he is here until you've seen his comedic turn in Step Brothers (also released last year). In The Visitor , his character is the 'straight man' in every way. It's interesting to see how far this character-actor's range can stretch between two very different films. If you pick up the film, which I highly recommend you do, pay attention. Thomas McCarthy directed it and he also directed The Station Agent - another coming-of-age story about unlikely friendships and bonds.

While my "Top 8" list might have been somewhat preemptive, I'll notch this one under Runner Up for the time being. We'll see how it ages.

Friday, January 23, 2009

My Turn


The Academy Award nominations are in, and the only surprise is that they were actually able to scrounge together five films worthy of the Best Picture title. I don't agree with their selections. But who ever does? 2008 was the poor man's film year. It was the Diet Coke to 2007's Coke Classic. You can call it the same thing and say it's better for you, but in exchange for your hard earned cash and a little slice of your soul you know all you're really going to get is a watered down beverage that'll give you bad gas and unpleasant memories. 2008 never really had a chance. Following a year populated by the likes of There Will Be Blood, No Country for Old Men, Zodiac and Ratatouille, I suppose we were lucky to even find a few bright spots in the night sky. And few there were. So few that writing a Top Ten List is difficult. I've had to think about it a lot. I won't cheat by placing unworthy titles into this list just to hit 10. But I promise to stick to even numbers. I don't get paid to think, but if I did this list would have made me rich. Here's where the cards would fall were I writing the dialogue:

8 BEST OF '08

1. The Wrestler
Mickey Rourke's performance is reason enough, but the ringside brutality and tracking shots where we follow Rourke's hulking, sloped shoulders into meat markets and strip clubs notch this baby at numero uno.

2. The Dark Knight
A perfect follow-up to Batman Begins, Chris Nolan was able to take every storyline that's ever worked in a Batman comic and gangster flick and blend them into a chocolate milkshake from hell. Oh, and I guess Heath Ledger's Joker was OK, too.

3. Let the Right One In
Twilight sucks this movie's...blood. Sure, kid vampires are kinda scary, but when they rip the heads off of adolescent bullies and toss them into swimming pools? Bliss.

4. Wall-E
I was choked up throughout this beautiful, touching film. The whole time filled with fuzzy warmth and the urge to hug the person sitting next to me in the theater. I did not know this person. I did not hug him.

5. Synecdoche, New York
Didn't love it when I first saw it, but the damn thing grew on me like an unexpected nose hair. Andy Kaufman being handed the keys to unleash the insanity of his mind upon the film world is like getting a call on a Sunday and finding out you never have to go to work again.

6. Transsiberian
A movie that takes place on a train running from China to Moscow, but not without a few murders and cover-ups along the way was such a cool concept. No fancy bells and whistles, just a good, edge-of-your seat thriller.

7. Milk
I was kind of annoyed by Sean Penn's performance at first, but by the end of the film he breaks your heart. Everything about the filmmaking hit me the right way. The supporting cast, especially Josh Brolin and James Franco, were top notch. I love Gus Van Sant and he didn't disappoint here.

8. Gran Torino
Say what you will about the choppy acting from the non-pro actors. I'm not an Eastwood hater, and I'm not an Eastwood apologist. I love his Man With No Name Spaghetti Western trilogy and Dirty Harry, and Eastwood in this film is Eastwood from those films. A grizzly old bad-ass who wants to sit on his front porch with a shotgun and a bottle of Jack and pick-off anyone who dares ring his doorbell. I like this film.

Sue me. I may be the only person on the planet who didn't love Slumdog Millionaire and who liked Gran Torino. I make no apologies. And for the record, I would have included Revolutionary Road in the above category because of Thomas Newman's score...but I'm not that cheap.

Monday, January 5, 2009

2008 Reading List


Butterfly in the sk...I wouldn't do that to you!

I'll always remember 2008 as the year I gave my eyes a different kind of work-out. No longer were they molested and battered by endless frames of film on a silver and plasma screen. No, 2008 brought upon the heavy reading my eyes so loathed at first. Like the morning sun spearing the eye of a sleeping vampire. And there's one man to blame. Stephen King.

When I first started this blog thing (not a diary, damnit!), I wrote about how Mr. King's part biography / part instruction manual really gave me the jump start I needed to plow into some heavy reading I'd been putting off. Because of him, this year has brought on some pretty great adventures. I'll list all the ones I read, in the order I read them, along with some ratings should anyone get curious:

STEPHEN KING: ON WRITING by Stephen King (Excellent)
RED HARVEST by Dashiell Hammett (Excellent)
THE DAIN CURSE by Dashiell Hammett (Good)
THE ROAD by Cormac McCarthy (Excellent)
THE MALTESE FALCON by Dashiell Hammett (Very Good)
THE AMAZING ADVENTURES OF CAVALIER & CLAY by Michael Chabon (Excellent)
THE BODY by Stephen King (Very Good)
WISE BLOOD by Flannery O'Connor (Good)
DEVIL IN A BLUE DRESS by Walter Mosley (Excellent)
A RED DEATH by Walter Mosley (Very Good)
R.L.'S DREAM by Walter Mosley (Good)
WATCHMEN by Alan Moore (Excellent)
WHITE BUTTERLY by Walter Mosley (Very Good)

These were the books that occupied my time, my thoughts, and informed my writing this year. I read a lot of Walter Mosley to get into the mood of the script I just finished. Somewhere in the process I got hooked. The ink in his pen bleeds noir. I read a lot of Hammett for his use of crime and noir conventions. This year I'd like to add a little more Stephen King and Arthur C. Clarke to the pile. To some the above list might look slight. To me, it's a tower. Admittedly I'm a slow reader. Baby steps, people! I'll post my "2009 To Read" list soon. But in the meantime...Happy New Year!

Tuesday, December 2, 2008

The Coming Age of Story

Just read this really interesting article on "story", and how Hollywood still struggles with that very concept as it applies to film. Enjoy!

http://www.writersstore.com/article.php?articles_id=1004&discount=ezine&source=ezine
-----------------------------------------

The Coming Age of Story
by James Bonnet

The interest in story is greater now than it has ever been, and – putting aside for a moment the movie business, television, book publishing, other major producers of story and their consumers – that interest now extends to every facet of our society.

Heavily funded, major research projects now exist throughout government, the sciences, and the corporate world. And everywhere that interest is growing. Everyone – from stock brokers selling derivatives, lawyers trying to convince a jury, preachers trying to save our souls, and neophytes looking for employment – wants to be able to effectively tell their story – who they are, what they do, how they (or their products) fit into the scheme, and why they (or their products) are destined for great things.

In short, people everywhere have begun to realize just how important story is
and the key role it was meant to play in our lives. We are, in fact, entering the age of story and the time is not far off when knowing what stories actually are and how to create them may well be the most valuable knowledge a person can possess. In such a world, unbounded opportunities will exist for skilled storymakers and others with a profound knowledge of the art.

There is, however, a fly in the ointment. Along with this new interest, and considerable research, has come the realization that the inner workings of a great story are more elusive and profound than previously assumed – and what great stories actually are, the real purpose they serve, and the mechanics of their creation remains, for the most part, an intriguing mystery.

The three act structure, which is the most popular storymaking tool being used in Hollywood these days, it turns out, isn’t really a story structure at all. It’s a holdover from the theatre and the arbitrary division of an action into three parts, and you can’t find it in the great stories and literary masterpieces of the past. Other popular structures like those that hinge on conflict and turning points are derived from Aristotle’s classical story structure – which is important because it’s a structure of action and will appear naturally in any problem solving action that encounters resistance. But there’s much more to a story than the action. Then there’s Joseph Campbell’s The Hero’s Journey which is also important and even more sophisticated because it is grounded in the initiation rites of primitive societies and has a lot to say about our psychological development. But taken together, the Classical Structure and The Hero’s Journey still add up to just a small part of what writers and filmmakers will need to know to actually master the art form. There are huge missing pieces to the puzzle.

This, of course, is not hard to prove – when you consider that out of the hundreds of feature films that are produced each year in Hollywood, fewer than ten or fifteen are worth seeing. That’s a pretty sorry statistic. And in television it’s even worse. Mozart, Beethoven and Van Gogh (artists who understood their art forms) could do what they did every time. That’s not happening in Hollywood. If you study the credits of our top writers and directors, you’ll discover a few outstanding hits and a long list of things you never heard of. Why? Because the principles of the art form have not really been established so it’s still a hit and miss process. Which leaves us, in effect, with an entire industry manufacturing something which it doesn’t understand. Story. That leaves about six and a half billion people in this world with a desperate need for real stories which isn’t being met. So despite the nine billion dollar yearly grosses, there is a vast, untapped potential market out there – and if we can actually crack the story code, there will be, to paraphrase a line from Shakespeare in Love, “rubies in our saddlebags.”

Be that as it may, there’s a new, higher level of understanding emerging in the world of story concerning deep, hidden story structures which all great stories have in common. These hidden structures are intimately linked to our evolutionary journey and are extremely powerful. They are the reason some of these great stories defy time and remain active and relevant for thousands of years and why others became so charismatic that religions were formed around them – religions that attract millions of followers who have worshipped the revealed truths in these stories for an equally long time. These new deeper structures make clear where these extraordinary stories got their enormous power and why these hidden structures are the missing pieces of the puzzle.

In this new series of articles, I will attempt to reveal the significance of these
new deep structures and why it is critical for every writer and storymaker to know. This is what’s coming in the age of story, and this is what we will need to know, if we are going to become masters of the craft.

By far the most important revelation contained in these new deeper structures has to do with the source of our creativity. And this is absolutely where the search for the truth about story must begin.

When we work with the creative process, the creative decisions we make are governed by positive and negative intuitive feelings. That’s how we know what works - by how we feel about our ideas.

Well, what’s behind those feelings? Where do those feelings come from? Carl Jung called the source of those feelings the collective unconscious. Others call it the muse, the psyche, the holy spirit, or the God within. George Lucas called the positive aspect The Force and the negative aspect The Dark Side. I call it the creative unconscious, the hidden truth or the self. You can call it anything you like.

My own take on it is this. We traveled an evolutionary path. A record of this path has been kept and is buried deep in the unconscious like a treasure. This treasure is probably stored in the DNA. It may be a manifestation of the DNA itself. Whatever it is, or whatever you call it doesn’t matter, it is the source of all of the higher intelligence and hidden wisdom we possess. It plays a major role in our lives and it plays a major role in storymaking. And when we’re creating stories, it helps to be aware of it.

Great stories, especially those created in oral traditions, bring this creative unconscious wisdom to consciousness. The information contained in great stories
is all about this hidden wisdom and how we can use it to achieve higher states of being and awareness.

And how do great stories do this? With the use of metaphors.

Metaphors are the symbolic language of great stories. This hidden, creative unconscious energy is translated into the visual images and intricate structures of story. These metaphors are made of real things that have been taken apart and artistically rearranged to represent these hidden truths. The unique combination of these real things when brought together creates the characters, gods, Shangri-las, haunted houses, and real people, etc. which expresses different attributes and dimensions of the hidden energies. The natural world is taken apart and rearranged to reveal the supernatural, unconscious, hidden world. And this is what makes a psychological connection. When these visual images correspond to this hidden energy, you get a story of extraordinary power.

In any event, if you analyze hundreds of great stories, the patterns hidden in these deeper structures begin to emerge. These patterns are called archetypes, and you can use these archetypal patterns to create models of this hidden truth. These models reveal some amazing secrets, not the least of which is a dynamic model of the human psyche, all of the life cycles we experience from birth to death, and all of the archetypes and passages that can lead us to higher states of being and success. You can use these models not only to analyze and create great stories, you can use them to fathom your own psychology and analyze important events in the real world. In fact, you can use them in every aspect of your life.

And why is all of this important to writers and filmmakers? Because the patterns hidden in the deep structures of these great stories have enormous power, and if you utilize these patterns in your stories, you can create super powerful stories that have a significant impact on the world. And, if that isn’t enough, there are enormous psychological benefits to be gained from a creative storymaking process that engages and collaborates with the creative unconscious self (the source of our creativity) using our intuitive feelings.

Friday, November 28, 2008

Who Watches the Watchmen?


I love it when the theme of a movie or book is posed in the form of a question. Aside from its brilliance, it's a great alternative to pitching a concept as "Star Wars meets Showgirls", or "a cross between Sisterhood of the Travelling Panties and Godzilla, with a dash of Daddy Day Camp thrown in for good measure." That's no good. 'Who Watches the Watchmen?' MUCH better!

I've gotten into the habit lately of reading certain books before their film adaptations are released. I've done it with No Country for Old Men, The Road and now Watchmen. Sure, it can ruin the element of surprise (depending on the faithfulness of the adaptation), but it can also save the story in case the movie is dreck. Who would want to read a great novel right after a shitty movie adaptation has plagued theatres? I'd much rather read the book first and THEN sit in a theatre, knuckles cracking in anticipation. Another upside is having a cast already assigned to their roles, so while reading I could easily tack Jackie Earl Haley's gravelly, Marlboro-fucked voice onto Rorschach, Jeffrey Dean Morgan's onto The Comedian, etc.

The comic itself is excellent. Filled to the brim with noirish twists, turns and clues. Jam-packed with exposition. Everything you'd want from a proper whodunit. I'll spare the details so as not to spoil the fun. And yes, I'm probably the last geek on the surface of the planet to have read it. But I'm glad I have. I can now say, I'm VERY eager to see what Zach Snyder does with Watchmen. The look of the film in the trailers thus far is arresting, painterly. It looks like he's captured the essense and tone of the comic book, and cooked up a visual feast that will teleport the characters from paper panels to silver screen. As long as they include the flashback scene where a young Rorschach chews the face off of a pesky bully, I'll be happy.

Friday, November 21, 2008

Wrestle This!



The Wrestler is a reminder that there are still great actors in our midst that have gone forgotten for too long. Fallen heroes of our youth who slipped between the cracks of time only to resurface at the most unexpected of moments. When we truly need them. And are richer for having bared witness to their gifts. Mickey Rourke's turn in this film easily rivals John Travolta's comeback in Pulp Fiction. What he's done to himself physically in life...his face...now a mask...is somehow very appropriate for this role. I was lucky enough to catch a screening at the New York Film Festival last month, and although I was saddled with arguably the worst seat in the house, even that couldn't damper my enjoyment of the film. Mickey Rourke's bravura performance is one for the books - he was born to play this role. It's sad. Iconic. Real. Awesome. A simple story told simply. But with a cast that breaks your heart. I'm so thankful that Nicolas Cage, once up for the title role, was ceremonially dumped. Darren Aronofsky has scored another classic. Feast your eyes on the trailer goodness above.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Sometimes Nothin' Can Be A Real Cool Hand

What's a hero?

To some it's a stranger who dives selflessly in front of a speeding Ford and cradles a newborn baby to safety. To others it's a guy who puts out fires. To me, it was a guy who could swallow fifty hardboiled eggs in one sitting and still walk away with his gut in tact. It wasn't the ocean blue eyes or dashing good looks. It was the everyman. The quiet rebellion. The absense of fear in nonconformity. That guy was Paul Newman.

It's funny how you can feel genuine loss for someone you've never met. How you can feel like you've lost a good friend. A loyal friend who's always there, ready and waiting to talk or listen whenever you pop in a DVD to dillute the day's frustrations. A friend who always says the right things. Always says the same things. The things that comfort you. The things that make you smile. The things that make you cry. The things that shape you. The things that can even make you a better person. Paul Newman was many things to many people. I'm sure he was a caring father to his children. A loving husband to his wife. A real friend away from the silver screen. But I'll never know that Paul Newman. I'll only know the guy who never took no for an answer on my T.V. screen. The guy who wasn't afraid to hustle. And I'm cool with that. Because to me, Paul Newman will never be gone. He'll always be tucked away in several spots throughout my movie collection.

A friend of mine once had an encounter with Paul Newman during a Nascar event in Ohio. He scrambled awkwardly up to the cigar-chomping icon and asked in a squeaky voice if he could steal an autograph. Paul looked down at the kid, his mashed cigar temporarily held to the corner of his mouth, and said, "no." My friend and I spoke about why Paul refused to grant his request, even after he'd poured a bleeding heart's worth of praise upon him. He either said, "no" because he didn't buy into his own celebrity. Or he said it because he was being a dick. Whatever he really meant, it probably meant nothing. Some people pull teeth for a living and some people pull favors. Paul Newman pulled the heart strings of millions of moviegoers around the world. Sometimes nothing can be a real cool hand.

Thursday, September 18, 2008

L.A. by Way of Mosley


Walter Mosley is a cool cat, ya know? My favorite genre is crime/detective fiction. I've read a lot of Chandler and Hammet, who are no doubt masters in their own right, but Mosley just makes it all so cool. So real. So surreal. When I picture a Walter Mosley story, I immediately think of Los Angeles at night. I think of palm trees and Tim Burton-sculpted pine trees backlit by pale track lights. I think of large billboards with the devil's red, thin, mustached face carved into them. I think of Smokey the Bear. I think of Los Feliz. Griffith Park. The Greek Theatre. Glendale. Silverlake. Big Foot Lodge. Red Lion. I think of old Disney Cartoons with rich, moody technicolors and characters with exaggerated proportions. I think of vampiric suburbs where day-sleeping evil awakens to Tom Waits-narrated nights.

I'd read DEVIL IN A BLUE DRESS (our first introduction to Easy Rawlins) for a class in college called "Kiss Me Deadly", and was really taken by the moody, bluesy atmosphere Mosley created in his depiction of 1950's Los Angeles. I decided to re-read the book again earlier this summer, as I wanted to use Mosley's unique atmospheric style as an influence in a new crime script I'm writing.

I'd forgotten how great and how fresh a character Easy Rawlins is. He is flawed. He is human. He's relatable. He's an African American man trying to solve crimes for wealthy, seedy white men in an era where African Americans weren't considered equal. He's a guy like us who needed some fast money to pay his mortgage after being fired from a job. We can relate to him. Hammet's Continental Op or Chandler's Philip Marlowe are both hard-nosed, no-nonsense detectives, never refusing to crack wise or dish out a witty retort. They're larger than life. They don't always feel like they exist in our world. They don't encounter problems like we encounter. Easy Rawlins does. He's one of us. He represents the working class. He's a guy you'd easily find in your local neighborhood bar. He has a real reason to take make a bargain with the devil. He either makes it, or he loses his house: the one constant in his life and his mark of stability. He exists in a real world with real problems. It may seem like a slightly heightened world. But that's L.A. at night.

What I like about Easy is that he uses his common sense and street smarts to solve crimes. He wasn't trained to track down criminals or find clues. He just does it. He uses his inside knowledge of his community and its inhabitants to get the job done.
More to come...

Thursday, August 21, 2008

This Must Be The Place


It's almost September again - and you know what that means: time for the fall film festival (c'mon - a little alliteration never hurt anyone) season to commence! Most people know it's fall when the leaves begin to change, the thermo drops a few degrees, and the smell of burning fills the thinning evening air. Others know it's fall when they lay their eyes on the warmer dreads littering their local fashion hole. I know it's fall when the serious, gritty, award-worthy films begin to roll out and the talk of the town consists of cries, not whispers, of "Toronto" and "NYFF"! To me, fall in NY is spending the majority of my evenings and weekends in front of the silver screen.

I recently became a member of the Film Society of Lincoln Center, which means getting advance tickets to New York Film Festival screenings. For seventy-five bucks, it ain't a bad deal. Order forms are mailed out tomorrow, so hopefully I'll get to snag tickets for the films I'm burning to see. Sure, there are dozens of brooding domestic and international releases on the newly-revealed line-up. But I'm most looking forward to Darren Aronofsky's THE WRESTLER and Clint Eastwood's CHANGELING. First of all - it's Darren Aronofky directing Mickey Rourke. I personally think Mr. Rourke does not hail from planet Earth and these days he looks something like a mix between Michael Bolton and Joan Rivers, but that's half his charm. He doesn't get enough work, and Aronofsky's never made a bad film. Shame on you if you didn't like THE FOUNTAIN.

Clint...Clint...Clint...I'm so relieved he got his WW2 rocks off and returned those overdue books to the library. Where Clint reigns king is in the slow-boiled social crime and semi-melodramatic realms. He hit it with MYSTIC RIVER and MILLION DOLLAR BABY, and, well into his seventies, he shows no signs of tire. Angelina Jolie is hit or miss with me - but hopefully The Man with No Name will make better use of her acting chops in a period drama than Deniro did in THE GOOD SHEPHERD.

That's it for now - I need to bulldoze my way through a recent bout of writer's lag - I won't call it block because it's not that - I'm halfway through a new script, but getting used to a new professional job and the adjustments that come with it, I need to refine my writing schedule. I'd vote for continuing to write in the evenings - but I think I may have to start waking up with the rooster.




"Why So Serious?" The Dark Knight Reviewed!


I think this is a really cool review of THE DARK KNIGHT from a screenwriter's perspective, rather than from a traditional film critic's. It's one of those films that casts a pretty big shadow over the world of Hollywood genre screenwriters and doesn't just raise the bar - it breaks it. I've seen the film twice, and both times I just sat there in awe and thought, "I wish I wrote that!" Anyway - enjoy!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Truby reviews The Dark Knight
John Truby's profile
By John Truby

August 12, 2008

Spoiler alert: this breakdown divulges information about the plot of the film.

For anyone who wants to look beneath its action surface, The Dark Knight proves that a movie can be a huge hit because of theme, not in spite of it. The Dark Knight is the closest thing to a fictional exploration of moral philosophy to come out of Hollywood in a long time, and that includes No Country for Old Men. Amazingly, writers Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan, and David Goyer create this complex moral expression on the foundation of superhero action crime genre.

The writers begin their elegant construction with the depiction of the main character, Batman, and here they had a tremendous advantage going in. Of all superhero characters, Batman highlights and consistently questions the very concept of the hero and the savior. He is truly a dark knight, concerned with justice but also willing to use illegal and immoral means to achieve it.
He is also deeply aware of the negative effects a savior can have on the general populace. He knows, and probably believes in, the great moral principle of “If you see the Buddha, kill the Buddha.” But he is unable to live the principle when faced with so much injustice. And when, in The Dark Knight, the bad guys escalate their evil acts, Batman is dragged into a war of tit for tat that soils everyone. Interestingly, Batman’s garbled voice has a strange resemblance to Clint Eastwood’s, especially in his Dirty Harry films.

In the Blockbuster story development software, we place a lot of emphasis on the “character web,” and The Dark Knight uses this crucial technique to perfection. The first character to be compared to Batman is the main opponent, The Joker. A lot has been written about Heath Ledger’s terrific performance. But we need to look at what he built his performance on, and that is found in the script. Non-writers might think I’m referring to the dialogue, but I’m not. The writers constructed this character to drive two major story elements, the moral argument (theme) and the plot.

The classic crime story is based on a master criminal who believes he is above the law and society itself. The Joker is just such a character, a genius psychopath whose massive intellect is shown not so much in dialogue as in his ability to plot. He accuses Dent and Batman of being schemers. But in fact he is the master schemer, a modern Moriarty, who acts not out of greed or revenge, but for the game. And he is better at the game than anyone else, so much so that we have the rare example of a story with too much plot.

The Joker is literally the author of Gotham City, constructing criminal plots that will remake the city to express his moral vision. Many have called The Joker a nihilist, a man in love with chaos. But this is a serious misreading. If Batman is The Dark Knight, The Joker is the Dark Philosopher. The entire plot of The Dark Knight is a series of moral conundrums The Joker creates to expose what he believes is the true animal nature of mankind. Tracking the beats of the crime story that goes all the way back to its originator, Crime and Punishment, The Joker creates ever more difficult versions of the genre’s central question: What would you do if you had to choose between two bad options?

First, does Batman expose his true identity or let the Joker kill someone every day? Then does he let Dent take the risk of getting killed to pull The Joker out of hiding? Does he save Rachel, his true love, or Dent, the righteous hope of the city? Does he listen in on the entire city in order to save a few?

For the film’s final choice, the writers use the classic Prisoner’s Dilemma, central to game theory and moral philosophy. In Prisoner’s Dilemma, two prisoners suspected of a crime are placed in separate cells. Each is given the following choice: If you both remain silent, you both get only six months in jail. If you both confess, you both get 5 years. If you remain silent but your partner confesses, he goes free and you get 10 years in jail. As you can see, the only real choice each person can make is to confess, since neither can risk the harsh 10-year sentence trusting that his partner will remain silent.

In The Dark Knight, two ships filled with passengers are given the choice of pushing a button to blow up the other ship before a time deadline, at which point both ships will be destroyed. This sets up a unique battle in which not only two forces but also two entire moral systems are brought into opposition. The battle is marred only by the fact that the writers don’t play true to the reality about human beings they have carefully crafted throughout the film. In other words, the people on the boats don’t make the believable choice.

Though The Dark Knight has too much plot, resulting in a movie that is at least 20 minutes too long, its plot is worth studying to see masters at work. These writers use a vast array of plot techniques, and a lot of professional writers I know, while bemoaning so many false endings, have said the plotting is what they studied the most. Ironically, one of the main techniques these writers use is character web, proving again that at the deepest level of good storytelling, plot and character are the same. I’ve already mentioned the plotting power the main opponent brings to the story. But plot also comes from the second lead, Harvey Dent, as well as a number of other characters who appear to be friends but are really enemies, or appear to be enemies but are really friends.

Screenwriters and storytellers can learn all kinds of lessons from The Dark Knight. Perhaps the most important is placing all story elements at the service of the larger moral argument, and expressing that argument primarily through the story structure. Using the crime genre as its foundation, The Dark Knight focuses on whether someone can remain a hero when the opposition becomes increasingly ruthless, a question that is central to our world. But as the cop in Orson Welles’s Touch of Evil says about how hard it is being a cop, “It's supposed to be (tough)... A policeman's job is only easy in a police state.”

Interestingly, the writers go all the way back to the classic Western, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, for their ending. When it turns out the hero of a gunfight didn’t actually kill the bad guy, the newspaperman refuses to print the truth. “When the legend becomes fact,” he says, “print the legend.” Batman decides to let Harvey Dent die a hero, so the people will have hope in justice, while he accepts his role as the scapegoat. With a subtle flip on the ending of Shane, Lieutenant Gordon’s little boy doesn’t say, “Batman, come back.”

The Dark Knight is a writer’s genre movie, even a transcendent one, and screenwriters would do well to study it closely.

Thursday, July 17, 2008

How will my great idea stay great? (I hope.)


I read this article today, written by Gordy Hoffman who runs the Bluecat Screenplay Competition. What he says echoes several of my own thoughts about writing - wanted to share!
Without further ado:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

How will my great idea stay great? (I hope.)
by Gordy Hoffman

It’s always the same. The feeling I get when I think of something and see a movie idea. It’s a wonderful warm pull inside that probably is very similar to prospectors spotting gold in a stream. Sometimes, in an instant, upon momentary review, it collapses, measured against my own quick sense of whether I’m willing to live with it for the lifespan of a feature length screenplay. If I pass that filter, then I grab something and write it down, later transferring the new gem to my running list of jackpot movie ideas.

What stays with me from that list? Why are there ideas I save for years, never to be started? Usually I maintain a belief in their value, their promise, and more than likely they will stay on that list when I die. I have so many ideas now as it is. But I don’t run them off simply because I’m not compelled to start. I have no idea what leads to another, and now that I’ve written for almost two decades, I see old ideas finally coming to life in a beautiful new light in another idea altogether. Keep your ideas, the ones you have a fight for, and you’ll see why.

But what makes for the great idea that will light the way through all the drafts, production, editing and release to audience? For me, film ideas can never be only solid to my practical eye or rational brain. I see this in writers all the time, writing scripts over and over like term papers or Sudoku puzzles. They follow patterns, refine habits and crank many a page, deriving their satisfaction from completing drafts and successfully executing their outlines, beat sheets or treatments.

But is the heart involved? This is the difference between a great idea and a great idea that turns into a motion picture: falling in love. On more than one occasion, I have started off on something with great excitement, knowing I have a very commercial and/or original idea in my hands, and I get going. But there are questions, and the initial pieces of the writing might be boring or borrowed. I have started the marathon and I’m on mile seven.

What has to happen? For me, I have to find myself in the writing. I have to fall in love with my story. I have to share a common emotion with my characters. I become intimate with what I’m trying to say, and my story becomes honest.

My idea has become truly great. I have taken a personal ownership of my story, as it now has started to become a reflection of me.

Now this might sound very arty or independent, but this happens when I’m writing commercial specs of high concept. Why? Because it has to.

It has been said before that we are in the feelings business. So when I invest my own generously, I support and sustain an idea to fruition in a produced movie. Until this emotional ownership of a concept takes place, it might as well stay in a file on my hard drive, as a very interesting list.


***************************
http://robinkellyuk.blogspot.com/2008/07/guest-post-gordy-hoffman-on-ideas.html

Wednesday, July 2, 2008

I AM Clean!


Here we are: Another month, another book review. I can't believe it's already July!! I was just getting used to June before July had to rear its ugly head and wring all of June's pleasantries from the summer wash cloth. I'm going to pretend that it's still June 15th, and that I'll have a job for the next two months. Much better!
I just flew back to Ohio for the 4th of July weekend (so much for pretending it's still June...), and of course its raining! Still, I'm very much looking forward to relaxing, spending time with the fam, and continuing work on my new script. A little note that pertains to the previous post: My next project isn't going to be the sci-fi story I'd written about. I've put that one on the back burner to officially begin work on a project that's been baking in the womb of my mind for nearly a year like a fetus ready to claw its way to the light. These things just happen. I got side-tracked. While I was putting the finishing touches on WARLAND, I desperately needed to start on something new because I was about to go blood simple and jam the whole thing into a paper shredder. While thankfully that feeling has subsided, the sci-fi project has shifted to numero dos in my script queue. It's on deck. Still alive and baking in the womb.
So, while I'm here at home in the motherland, I also have a bit more time to reflect on some of the books I've read since my last review. I know you've missed it dearly, so I won't keep you waiting any longer. You've been patient. The least I can do is reward you with a heaping helping of Flannery O'Connor.
Flannery O'Connor's WISE BLOOD is a fantastical examination of religion, nearly separating its characters into two categories: Those who need a god and those who claim they don't. Lines are blurred, people not who they seem - everything is askew in O'Connor's universe - but isn't this what you'd want from a summer jaunt through the gothic south? This is the first piece of O'Connor's work I've been lucky enough to sample. While I hear her novels don't hold a candle to her short stories (most notably A GOOD MAN IS HARD TO FIND), WISE BLOOD still manages to make one think about his/her own beliefs.
Hazel Motes, the title character, is a boy en route to a small Southern town following a recent tour of duty for the army. He is determined to prove to everyone that god does not exist. Little does he know, he'll happen upon a blind preacher and his degenerate daughter, who will both mold Haze's destiny. Haze also meets Enoch Emery, a boy a few years his junior, and who in many ways is Hazel's complete religious opposite. I'll keep it brief and won't etch out a super-detailed synopsis, but suffice to say - Flannery is one sneaky writer. The first 150 pages of the book are always interesting, albeit slow-moving, deliberately paced - but what keeps it fresh is her composition - her description is raw and cuts right to the bone. Then, just when you think the story isn't going to really take off or go anywhere, everything gets fucked up. Characters begin to show their true colors, do heinous, morbid things all in the name of religion. Enoch is a very reactive character. While he is driven by an unseen, internal force that wills him to commit crimes, Hazel is more proactive, and believes that he guides his own destiny.
WISE BLOOD is a really intriguing book, and I highly recommend it to anyone who values character studies and seeks novels that inspire thought. You may not LOVE it, but you'll walk away with a full head ready for digestion.
Until next time...

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

We Come In Peace


Sadly, it's not the title of a new script (I should use it though, huh?). But I did just start work on my first science-fiction project. It's a blast so far. My last two scripts were heavy character studies, and with this new story, I'm taking a character-driven approach to the classic sci-fi thriller mold. It's been fun spending some time in (hopefully) the same sandbox as Clark, Lovecraft, King...I'm really digging it. Oh - and take my word: There definately, absolutely, positively are NOT any aliens. Seriously. I mean it. This isn't me saying there aren't aliens and meaning there really are. There aren't. It's not that I don't like aliens. I do. It's just that there aren't any. In this story. Now that we've settled that...