You ever hear a new cd and think: "I like this...I like it a lot, but boy does it ever sound like someone else that I used to listen to..."
I've always enjoyed the music of Ryan Adams...from his debut cd Heartbreaker, or his loving tribute to the Big Apple 'New York New York', but his new release Cardinology has really struck a chord. It hasn't left my CD player since last Tuesday. I'm really digging it.
Listen to him and his band The Cardinals perform new tunes Fix It and Cobwebs on Letterman last week. Sweet and yummy alt-country rock goodness.
But it reminds me, especially his delivery and inflection on certain songs, of some other musical artist buried deep in the recesses of my brain.
Nils Lofgren is a rock singer, songwriter, and multi-instrumentalist (read: wicked pianist and guitarist). He is also a long-time member of Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band.
I first discovered Lofgren in the late 70's after learning he'd played on Neil Young's After The Goldrush lp at just seventeen years old. After that he'd had a stint with the band Grin and then a blossoming solo career, plus the fact he played all kinds of instruments really well, and I wanted to hear this guy play. I wore out his double live album Night After Night on my turntable...yes, those were the days of albums and turntables.
Across The Tracks, Goin Back, Delivery Night, Valentine, Moon Tears, Keith Don't Go, No Mercy, and his classic (with a crappy clip) I Came To Dance...these songs were burned into my brain. And though his guitar work was always stellar, it was his singing style that stuck with me....a soft haunting warble that still managed to pierce...that's the essence of Lofgren. And to circle back around to where this post began, that's what finally connected him to Adams for me.
The both sing in a very similar way.
Sure, Lofgren is more rock and Adams more alt-country, but vocally, cut from the same cloth for sure. Not to diminish Adam's accomplishment with Cardinology, it's one of the best CD's of the year...but Adams arrives to us today via the trail blazed by Lofgren. And though both were cult figures in search of a mass audience, they still made it...while still remaining artists through and true.
Someone else arrived last night, also via trails blazed by others before him...but he did it. Yes, he did.
And for anyone to get there, you must believe a little bit in yourself.
There's horror movies...and then there's THIS + THIS.
I really don't want to see how this film ends...or even watch Dexter (or...gak...Star Wars?) tonight for that matter.
EDIT: Not to sound morbidly obsessive about a morbid story, but read the two articles linked above and tell me....aren't they the most detail-filled pieces you've read about a purported crime in like....ever? I mean, the story is just breaking and they both read like graphically embellished 'true crime' book tales written years after the case has been put to bed.
I think I find that almost as bizarre as the supposed crime that's being 'reported'.
Been reading a lot of horror feature scripts lately...they've been ending up on my desk for development or story editing consideration. And frankly, most have been really disappointing.
First, they all start with a scary action 'teaser'...and fair enough, that's B-movie 101. But the problem with every one of the opening sequences in the scripts I read was that the 'teasers' weren't really connected to the 'story' at all. In fact, most felt tacked on after the fact.
And when I realized later that the opening had been just a bit of a wank, I got pissed. It's like...cheating.
Then we had 'the stories'. Now I don't expect the bar to be set very high, but the in between scenes (or plot) in most of the scripts I read just felt plugged in to get us from one supposedly scary, gross-out sequence to the next supposedly scary gross-out sequence.
Character development? Forget about it. Motivation? Not important. Logic? Hardly. Even suspense and tension seemed a secondary consideration...they were all just about trying to get to little scenario's that could shock or repulse the reader/viewer. Generating some squirm factor is good, but not just all about the squirm please.
And then there were the endings...ALL ultimately unsatisfying, much less surprising or even making any sense. I know endings are tough to make sing when there's generally only two or three ways these kinds of stories can go, but still...try at least. Sigh.
It's paint-by-numbers screenwriting. Imitating, not invigorating. Trying to marry and thus capitalize on two recent horror movie trends - the resurgence of the slasher film (mostly remakes though), and the 'success', I suppose, of goreporn like Hostel I and II, followed by Vacancy and Captivity (but thankfully that trend seems to be behind us).
And while I know you can go back to the original Halloween or Friday the 13th or The Hills Have Eyes or Last House on the Left or Texas Chainsaw Massacre and question whether those flicks had any of those elements in spades, I would argue that they still had more than a lot of these scripts. And those films in their day weren't trying to be 'hits'. Instead, they were designed to be made on the cheap and scare the shit out of teens at the drive-in, NOT be released in 3600 theatres after a month long 20 million dollar marketing campaign.
The greedy system is creating these new types of script 'monsters', whether it knows it or not (or cares or not).
I was discouraged reading most of these submissions. I felt the writers weren't bringing anything original to table. Okay, maybe original is too much to expect from a horror flick...but something 'special' then.
Because it can be done. Like my faves of the past five years...28 Days Later, The Ring, and Saw.
Yes, Saw.
I think Saw was a freakin' great horror movie. Part slasher/gore, part psychological thriller...it worked on a lot of different levels. And had a killer twist/reveal at the end. You can mutter about the quality of the sequels this picture has inspired, but you can't deny the originals masterful horrific simplicity.
28 Days Later was Night of the Living Dead on speed...and managed to not only reinvigorate the tired 'zombie' movie genre, but was an intriguing commentary on human nature.
And even though it's a remake (a better remake) of a Japanese hit, The Ring succeeds with many of the same elements (though with less of the slasher/gore).
All were scary as hell but ultimately 'about' something... morality plays...loaded with complications and dilemmas....characters we could understand and even relate to...created rules and logic that tracked within the context of the story, and all told with loads of tension and suspense.
That's what I'm looking for.
Lately, we've been subjected to constant 'reimaginings' of twenty year old slasher flicks, or remakes of foreign (mostly Japanese) horror hits.
Think about it, and naming only a few...'Halloween'...'Texas Chainsaw Massacre'... 'Amityville Horror'....'Black Christmas'...'The Fog'...'Prom Night'...'The Hills Have Eyes'...even 'Psycho' for crying out loud?!
And then there's all the foreign remakes...'Dark Water'...'The Eye'...'The Grudge'... 'Mirrors'...'Shutter'....'The Invisible'...'Quarantine'...
So many do-overs. So few originals. No wonder new writers don't feel like they have to work too hard.
Yesterday was a brief overview of scary movies....today, some soundtracks that helped make those movies even scarier. And not surprisingly, a lot of the most haunting or unforgettable scores are from a lot of the same films.
First rule seems to be LOTS of minor keys...major notes or chords, not so much.
Next, refrain from resonance...add plenty of dissonance.
Then bring on the cacophony...leave the harmony on the shelf.
And finally, a LOT of repetition...drilling it into your head over and over...this is scary...this is scary...this is scary...
As for classic horror movie soundtracks, there's the obvious ones..John William's Jaws... the theme from The Shining... Bernard Herrmann's score from Psycho...Mike Oldfield's theme from The Exorcist... Krzysztof Komeda's score from Rosemary's Baby ...Jerry Goldsmith's The Omen ...
But even though clearly influenced by Oldfield (in the case of Halloween) and Berrmann (in the case of Friday the 13th), for me the two most memorable have to be from the 'original' modern slasher films...
John Carpenter's theme for 'Halloween':
...and Harry Manfredini's theme for 'Friday the 13th':
Saw V did over 30 million at the box office this weekend, proving once again that public appetite for such 'horrific' fare still reigns supreme, especially when All Hallows Eve approaches. Also in the spirit of Halloween, my tweenage son and I watched Will Smith's I Am Legend on Friday night.
Bad idea.
Now I am old and jaded, so it didn't do much for me (not to mention an abundance of CGI which, however well it's done, always tends to push me out of a movie as opposed to draw me in), but it freaked my son out. A lot. He's since woken up from nightmares, and when awake hasn't stopped talking about it - ("...what if world got wiped out by virus?" "...what if a virus turned us into flesh-hungry zombie-like creatures?"). What if. What if. Gak.
I will admit I'm feeling a little guilty for subjecting him to it (even though he was the one who said: "Let's watch something scary!")
"I Am Legend", like most contemporary horror films, isn't 'original'. The story is adapted from a 1954 sci-fi novel by Richard Matheson, which has been filmed twice before, as "The Last Man on Earth" (1964), and "The Omega Man" (1971) starring Charlton Heston.
And I do remember "The Omega Man". Oh yes. It freaked me out when I first saw it...probably around the same age as my son is now. And like him, I didn't even see it in a theatre but on late-night television, and it still freaked. Of course, checking it out now, it seems pretty cheesy...but way back when...Omega Man...."shiver".
Sticking with when I was younger, the two movies constantly referenced as well-made pictures that also managed to scare the crap out of the audience were "The Exorcist" and "Psycho".
No argument here...but when I eventually saw them, I'd either heard too much already or my expectations were too high, and I felt let down. I wasn't 'fugged up'.
"Jaws", on the other hand, freaked me out quite a bit, but most wouldn't really categorize it as a horror movie. The first "Halloween" and "Friday the 13th" and "A Nightmare on Elm Street" all had their moments, but they were just good candy-coated popcorn...tasty in the moment, but generating very little of the residual 'wake up screaming covered in sweat later that night' factor.
No, the two that really did it for me it were John Carpenter's "The Thing" (1982)...
...and "Alien" (1979).
I suppose one could debate whether they are 'horror movies' in the classic sense as well, but I would say so. At their core they're 'trapped in the house with a monster' movies...relentlessly suspensful and tension-filled...and they accomplished horror's highest grade - they scared the bejesus out of me.
More on contemporary horror later this week, but now that you've read this far --- scariest horror films ever?
During my channel flipping and subsequent rediscovery of Amadeus, I witnessed something I found rather fascinating in regards to youth/kids and their media viewing habits per say.
My youngest tweenage daughter and I were chatting as I scrolled through the tee-vee channels...she was telling me about how impressed she was by another student's drumming talent....she wanted to know how someone got to be so good at such a young age. I said that some of it could be natural ability, but most of it was because of practice. Anyway, the word prodigy came up...she asked what that was...and I explained...and then she went on YouTube and looked up 'child musical prodigies' or something. And she found a clip of an amazing pianist who was like, 6...and a wicked guitarist who was 8 or something. Then she asked if Beethoven was a prodigy. And I said I believed so, and then mentioned Chopin or especially Mozart. So she 'youtubes' Mozart...which led us to a list of clips from the Amadeus movie.
And here's where it got interesting.
If I'd said: "Let's go down to the big TV and put on the Amadeus DVD," she'd have laughed and said no way. But instead, she clicked on Amadeus movie Part 1, and we watched the first nine minutes of the film. "Cool," she said, "And look, there's more." And she clicked Part 2...the next nine minutes of the movie.
She was totally engrossed...asking some questions, but still enjoying the story.
The clip ended. I held my breath. She said: "Onto Part 3..." and was about to click it when she remembered she had some homework to finish. And off she went to do her math, but her parting words were: "That was pretty good...I'll watch some more 'parts' tomorrow."
That's how the kids take in so much of their media and movies and music and TV today...in 'clips' and 'parts'. And I know that's no big revelation, but it was kinda cool to see the process unfold in front of me.
And my takeway was realizing that the big challenge ahead for us creatives is to figure out how to create stories best told in that manner, make them (that's the hard part...financing the 'making' part), and then somehow attract the kids to our story (on the computer/internet) that's presumably told in 'parts', thus tapping into and hopefully capitalizing on their new-found viewing habits.
Easy peasy...like composing a symphony. Hmmm. Sigh.
Was flipping this evening and came across something called 'BloodMonkey' on one of the movie channels - kind of an Anaconda meets Blood Diamond but with killer apes instead of snakes - and was about to keep flipping when I recognized the crazed leader of the rain forest expedition...it was F. Murray friggin' Abraham!!
You know, F. Murray Abraham. Best Actor Oscar winner for his portrayal of Salieri in Peter Shaffer and Milos Foreman's Amadeus. Amadeus! Oh sweet Jesus, Amadeus...how you rocked my world way back when...
Perfect storytelling. Perfect casting. Perfect direction. Perfect performances. Pitch perfect score. In relating the tale of a lessor artists agonizing and ultimately futile quest for notoriety and creative excellence while the 'genius' of another eats away at his very soul (we've all been there), the film works on so many levels.
I needed more...
But YouTube clips couldn't quench the thirst, I had to have it all on the big (TV) screen.
"On the page it looked nothing. The beginning simple, almost comic. Just a pulse - bassoons and basset horns - like a rusty squeezebox. Then suddenly - high above it - an oboe, a single note, hanging there unwavering, till a clarinet took over and sweetened it into a phrase of such delight! This was no composition by a performing monkey! This was a music I'd never heard. Filled with such longing, such unfulfillable longing, it had me trembling. It seemed to me that I was hearing the very voice of God."
Sort of like how the words on a page of a screenplay, in the right directors hands and right performers mouths, can result in an amazing film...but it still all begins with the words.
And after I watched Amadeus through and been moved to tears yet again by this wonderful film and F. Murray's brilliant performance, I didn't begrudge Abraham and his 'BloodMonkey' money. He's a great actor, but there's just not that many Amadeus's floating around...and a man's gotta eat.
Still, it seems a little sad that compositions by performing monkeys, like the script for BloodMonkey, are more the norm and not the exception. Or perhaps it's that our business is primarily made up of "Salieri's", while the "Mozart's" are few and far between.
And as a bonus, go HERE to find all six parts of a marvelous behind the scenes making of Amadeus...sweet filmmaking goodness.
Sort of a work-related plug, but also kind of a cool tip for Canadian television viewers...
Like Burn Notice, The Closer, Skins, and Sons of Anarchy before this, Super Channel continues to add provocative and entertaining TV to its broadcast roster - next week its Crash, a new series, in fact the first original dramatic series, from the Starz network in the States.
Inspired by the Academy Award®-winning Best Motion Picture of 2006 of the same name, Crash explores the complexities of social and racial tolerance and the meaning of the American dream through characters whose lives intersect and collide as they strive to achieve that dream in Los Angeles California.
The production team headed by writer/executive producer Glen Mazzara (The Shield) includes executive producers Bob Yari, Bobby Moresco and Paul Haggis and co-executive producers Don Cheadle, Tom Nunan and Mark R. Harris – part of the group behind the Oscar-winning movie.
Add to the mix a large ensemble cast, including Dennis Hopper doing his best variation on 'Frank' in years, and you got Crash: the series.
And in a nice bit of cross promotion, you can find the entire first episode of Crash posted HERE on the short film sharing Super Uwebsite.
Check it out...it looks good (Alan Sepinwall reviews pilot here), but know this online exclusive will be available in Canada only until November 30, 2008.
Super Channel will premiere the Crash series on its premium pay television network with a double episode Oct. 20 at 10 p.m. ET.
So, one national election down (a disappointment but not a shock - we are so spread out as a country with so many parties to choose from, I predict minority governments will continue to be the norm...and I don't know if that's necessarily a good thing. It feels kinda...half-assed, if you know what I mean, though that may be what we deserve after the lowest voter turn-out in our nation's history), one more national election to go...
And as I watched CNN speculate over the weekend and today with story after story wondering whether color or 'race' will be a factor in the US presidential election (more like 'how much of a factor it's going to be', I'm sad to say)...I couldn't help but remember this classic Eddie Murphy bit:
I'd like to think that we've all come a lot further in terms of acceptance and tolerance and 'color-blindness' since 1982 (yes...1982...when Murphy was only like 20 and funny as hell), but when it comes to the USofA, I'm reallyreally doubtful.
Although here in Canada, the majority/minority? seemed colour-blind to Harper's sweaters, so perhaps there's still hope.
So, not only did the Leafs get stomped 6-1 by Montreal last night, the new Hockey Night In Canada Theme song winner was announced:
Um...yeah. (Bagpipes...seriously? Since when did our national sport become synonymous with the River Dance?)
Oh well, at least it doesn't suuuuuccck. When Monday Night Football changed its theme song there was lots of grumbling and gnashing of teeth, and now we can't imagine it any other way. Eventually, this HNIC anthem will be the norm.
So for old times sake, HERE is the old HNIC theme song...but also found this entry that didn't make the finalists but absolutely positively should have been on the short list:
I laughed till I peed. Then I ate more pumpkin pie.
This might be like so ten years ago, but I just found it. For fun, create your own South Park character HERE...
Should I call mine Wilbur, or Willard? Either way, I'd probably want him to tell Cartman and co. that last night's Season 12 Part II premiere kinda suuuuuucccckkkked... (though I'll never be able to look at Steven Spielberg or George Lucas the same way again - OMG!!!)
Thanks to Jaime Weinman for reminding me that South Park returns tonight to Comedy Central for the second half of its 12th season with the episode 'The China Probrem'. I can't remember when this ep will air up here in Canada, whether it's this Friday night or next Friday night. But no matter, I'll catch it online later this evening (which makes me wonder...since most US TV series are simulcast up here at the same time, including 'premium' shows from HBO and Showtime, why do we always have to wait a few days or a week to catch South Park on Canada's Comedy Network?).
Anyway, Weinman was somewhat underwhelmed by the first half of Season 12 which aired back in the spring...and upon reflection I suppose I have to agree. I feel kind of fortunate to have only discovered South Park and all of its yummy goodness in the past couple years, when the show has really been on a roll. But the whacked-out funny goodness of 'Super Fun Time' and 'Major Boobage' didn't make up for several one-note one joke episodes like 'Over Logging', 'Britney's New Look', and 'Canada On Strike'. And the show has set the bar pretty high with a lot of consistently brilliant episodes (not to mention lotsa relevant political, social, and cultural commentary) in Seasons 9-11....which Mr. Weinman also points out in this great article he wrote earlier this year.
Come to think it...who cares what I think. Go read Weinman, and find somewhere to watch 'The China Probrem' tonight. Even if it isn't an 'instant classic' ('Make Love Not Warcraft' or 'Le Petite Tourette' anyone?), South Park's less than stellar episodes are still better than most comedy series on air right now.
Sorry about being all linky and slutty, but that's how some days go.
Today Bill 'the Mad Pulp Bastard' Cunningham comes out swinging, then pulls off the gloves and tears apart some B-movie maker's lame poster and marketing campaign. Witness the carnage HERE...
Part of me has been sometimes tempted to post a really badly executed (read: shitty) synopsis or outline or screenplay I've been sent, just to point out what's not working (read: rip it a new asshole) in an effort to educate and inform...but I always jam out. Maybe it's because I'm just a nice guy. More like I'm just a pussy.
Not Bill.
But as tough as he is on these poor people's work (or peoples' poor work), there's a lot to be learned from their mistakes and his analysis.
Students...school is in session at Pulp 2.0. Go. Now.
Remember when I chatted up old pal Damian Kindler about his new web-only supernatural series 'Sanctuary'? Well after a relatively successful run on the internets, the show was picked up by Sci Fi Channel in the U.S. and then eventually Movie Network/Movie Central here in Canada (funny how so many of our Canadian nets only come in after our neighbours to the south get on board...hmmm) for a 13 episode television season.
The rejigged and rewritten reboot of the pilot premieres tonight, and although some reviews or other reviews or even other reviews haven't been glowing, with old colleagues like Damian and Sam Egan (Outer Limits) and Martin Wood (Earth: Final Conflict) at the helm, I'm still looking forward to it. I'm sure it was difficult to re-introduce the series again after you've already done it, but now with a whole new layer of input and expectations. And the news hasn't been all negative, especially with the Canadian Press. And here's a nice article where Wood discusses the in's and out's of directing a show set primarily against green screen.
Check out Sanctuary this evening....let's see where they take us.
Film and television acting is more of a science than an art, in my opinion.
Not to belittle the brilliance of the many talented performers who grace our movie screens and TV sets every year, but acting for 'the lens' requires lots of other very specific abilities. Of course it's about creating a voice and becoming the part to make the viewer believe you 'are' the character being portrayed, but it's also about finding your light and hitting marks and maintaining eye lines and understanding lenses and knowing edge of frame...I could so go on and on. Not to mention NOTHING is performed continuously top to bottom, but rather in little bits and pieces all filmed out of order.
Generating a performance is very important. Conveying that performance effectively to the audience within the parameters and constraints of the filmed medium...as if not more important. More math than method...again, in my opinion.
That's why the 'Acting In Film' series with Michael Caine is so money, and should be required viewing for every aspiring (and even established) thespian. Caine's all about less is more, craft not art, and in a straightforward and understandable way drops dozens of helpful hints to make the camera love you.
Here's a taste:
Michael Caine On Acting In Film...I own the book and DVD and recommend them to anybody, but you find find some of the best video bits HERE (parts 1-6)
LIFE is HOUSE but set on the streets instead of a hospital...unusual Bones-like crimes instead of obscure medical mysteries...both a form of procedural with a quirky British actor playing the American lead. I mean, Damian Lewis (Detective Crews) could be Hugh Laurie's brother for crying out loud...
C'mon!
But I still like Life...a lot.
Last night was the season two premiere, and although it wasn't a standout episode (so many new and returning shows this fall seem hung up on revisiting all the 'setup elements' of the series as if viewers have been away for years!) it was still a solid effort that effectively drew me back in. Life continued its two parallel storylines: solving new crimes in the present while zen-spouting Crews tries to find out why he was framed back in 1995. A nifty spin on the cop detective genre, Life feels oh so 'been there done that', and yet...somethingsdifferent.
And that's all a TV show really needs to do to fit in yet stand out in today's crowded television major network landscape. So what's different?
The characters mostly...smartly drawn and armed with clever dialogue, especially the seemingly mismatched partners Crews (Damian Lewis) and Reese (Sarah Shahi).
Good cop.
Bad cop.
Okay she's not that bad, but still, mmmmmm....bad cop.
"They say I'm crazy but I have a good time I'm just looking for clues at the scene of the crime Life's been good to me so far."
Check this show out. Like the Joe Walsh song, once it gets in your head you'll be humming it all day. If you like 'familiar TV' which is also smart, funny, and original in its own unique way, that's Life.
One other thing to know about the series is it's wonky schedule over the next couple weeks. To try to capitalize on Heroes as a lead in it'll air a new episode on Mondays and another new episode on Fridays before settling into its regular Friday evening slot on NBC.
Far Away Scriptwriter thinks I have great musical taste (sometimes), and so tagged me with the following meme:
Find a song that sums up what you think it means to be a writer and post the lyrics on your blog and why you've chosen it. NB: It doesn't have to be your favourite song, it just has to express how you feel about writing and/or being a writer. It can be literal, metaphorical, about a particular form or aspect of writing - whatever you want. Then tag 5 others to do the same.
Well this will be NSFW, but I have to go there. NIN. Trent Reznor. The dark auteur of industrial excellence. A song not surprisingly from his The Downward Spiral release, 'Closer'.
Closer
you let me violate you you let me desecrate you you let me penetrate you you let me complicate you
help me i broke apart my insides help me i've got no soul to sell help me the only thing that works for me help me get away from myself i want to fuck you like an animal i want to feel you from the inside i want to fuck you like an animal my whole existence is flawed you get me closer to god
you can have my isolation you can have the hate that it brings you can have my absence of faith you can have my everything
help me you tear down my reason help me it's your sex i can smell help me you make me perfect help me become somebody else i want to fuck you like an animal i want to feel you from the inside i want to fuck you like an animal my whole existence is flawed you get me closer to god
all through every forest above the trees within my stomach scraped off my knees i drink the honey inside your hive you are the reason i stay alive
Reznor’s 1994 album The Downward Spiral told the story of one man’s descent to near self-destruction. He describes this album as having “a brutality and an iciness that is a way to prevent you from getting inside. It’s an armor.” This reflection on the artist and the album from BlogCritics Jaime Nichols is well worth reading, and I liked this bit:
By the end of the last song, on The Downward Spiral, one had the unmistakable sense of teetering on the brink of the nihilist void with Reznor's narrative "i", now reduced to a stripped down, elemental consciousness that had eviscerated itself of moral and emotional certainty, but whose mind was still terrifyingly and unflinchingly engaged. It was a dreadful prospect, but one which felt like a kind of extreme, if uneasy, virtue.
'Closer', with all its ferocious intensity, was the highpoint of The Downward Spiral. And for me it's less a song about raw uninhibited sex, and more about achieving purity through sin, freedom through expression, unbridled passion through purging. Letting it all out and holding nothing back, as painful and soul-baring as it will be, can allow for 'pure' creativity. Giving yourself wholly and completely will make it an experience unlike any other...usually resulting in what we call 'writing in the zone'.
You are the reason I stay alive....that more or less says to me all there is to say about writing or being a writer.
Most people hate getting tagged, but I'll tap the shoulders of fellow Canucks Henshaw, McGrath, Epstein, Trevor, and Brandon and see if they respond.
Friday Fun! Jon Stewart smacks a line drive home run with this faux bank loan interview last night, enhanced by props...big glasses! Watch and enjoy HERE. Colbert Report and The Daily Show...best TV all week.
Please consider this letter my small token of appreciation for your new cdDear Science. Your original blend of funk, soul, jazz, and new wave/punk rock is a juxtaposition worth listening to, not to mention it makes me wanna dance.
I heard some of the new release HERE, and more of it OVER HERE...and then I purchased the cd when it hit the stores yesterday. Plus you put out trippyWebisodes like THIS, and a new video for 'Golden Age' on the Youtubes.
Mmmm. Cool musical goodness.
We have some history together. You got my attention with 'Wolf Like Me' from Return To Cookie Mountain. You sunk your hooks deeper into me with 'Staring At The Sun' off Desperate Youth, Blood Thirsty Babes. And you hail from Brooklyn...my brother lives in Brooklyn.
Your bizarre sonic stylings inspired by diverse musical influences seems like it shouldn't work, but it does. I am, once again, impressed and entranced.
Some day I'm going to start to act my age...put away the music that my eldest daughter listens to and wants to tell me about but then is almost disappointed when she learns I'm already all over it --- and start being all about the classical and opera.
But until that day comes, I still want my TV on the Radio.
"What made you want to be a TV writer? Was there a defining moment? Was it an awakening? Did you always know?"
And not wanting to be a poop, here's what I can say...
I enjoy writing, but since I'm not much of a journalist, a really lousy novelist, a mediocre blogger, a bad playwright, an 'only occasionally' feature film writer, and a lame poet (not to mention a rather slow 'plinkplink' typist), where does that leave me?
I still like to tell stories, even seem to have a bit of a knack for it...so why TV? Well, in the immortal words of Zack Mayo (Richard Gere) in An Officer And A Gentlemen...
So much is being made of how the pilot for the new Fox series Fringe wasn't very original. Or that it didn't blow the competition out of the water ratings-wise. Or that it isn't Lost. Or that it ripped off Lost because the teaser was set on a airliner. Or that the two leads (Anna Torv and Joshua Jackson) seemed a little wooden.
Get over it, people...it's the friggin pilot for crying out loud! Go back and watch the pilots of Buffy or The X Files or Alias even if you want to witness some less than stellar plotlines or actors still finding the comfort zone of their characters.
In fact, I did just that.
Little green men, alien abductions, and government conspiracy proliferated the beginning of The X Files TV series...in fact, it almost became a little repetitive. And David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson weren't embarrassing but definitely struggled to find the voices of Mulder and Scully. And then 'Squeeze' aired...a dark unnerving story about a hibernating man-boy creature who awoke every 30 years to extract and eat livers from five random targets. And the kicker was this...he could squuuuueeeeze through any small opening to get at his victims.
Cool. And creepy. I was hooked.
But my point is this...the first X Files I watched was entitled 'Fire', episode 11 of Season One. I just happened upon it...didn't love it, but enjoyed it enough to continue watching. Then Fox reran the pilot and the first couple of eps that I'd missed, and it was then that I saw 'Squeeze' (ep 3). So this was like halfway through Season One, and nobody else I knew was watching.
But that's because 'The X Files' didn't really hit its stride and start to approach what might be considered a hit until the end of the second season. Think about that...40+ shows to get your formula working and stories cooking and your actors and crew firing on all cylinders? Seems unthinkable now.
I feel sorry for TV producers and showrunners today (even if they are JJ Abrams). Though the networks so desperately want another X Files or Buffy or Alias, they won't allow audiences the time to find or discover them for themselves as it were. There is such relenting pressure to deliver 'a hit' right out of the gate...but as we've recently seen with Back To You or Bionic Woman or even already with 90210, expecting hit ot touting something a hit before it airs is usually a surefire way to strip it of all its potential 'hitness'.
House was solid out of the gate, but grew into a hit. Same can be said for Criminal Minds. In genre turf similar to Fringe, both Supernatural and Smallville were allowed to play in the sand for a bit before settling into their groove. And people still found them. And stuck with them.
Don't get me wrong, I had some complaints about Fringe...I didn't quite buy Joshua Jackson's 'sweetheart' take on the character of Peter - he's no Mulder/Duchovny. And the 3D titles establishing location were a cool at first, but they quickly became a tiresome and intrusive gimmick, taking me out of the story and reminding me I was only watching a TV show (with a big budget).
Another common complaint was that the pace of the pilot was sluggish, but I'd actually prefer if it all slows down even more. Because that creates tension. Tension and suspense is good. Ick factor is also good. We could use a show on air now that makes us wanna look away from the screen and go "ewwwww"...and in a scripted show, as opposed to a Wipeout or being part of a Survivor challenge. Not mention it's really hard (and expensive) to make an bang up action 'rock video-like' TV series every week. When are networks going to get this through their heads...? fasta pace lotsa action all-the-time does not keep people (much less 'the kids') watching the tee-vee. Good drama and intriguing engaging characters combined with suspense, tension, and some cool twists, punctuated with some running and jumping....that's what keeps 'em coming back for more.
But overall, I liked the Fringe pilot a lot. It unfolded well, had some good twists, and most importantly, effectively set up the characters and the world of the show. From that, I really like the arena and the potential for stories in the series. I'm looking forward to episode 3.
Here's hoping the networks' 'out of the gate' expectations for the series weren't too high, so they, and we, can eventually reap the benefits of Fringe.
Fringe airs Tuesdays (tonight) after House on Fox.
(and unlike other 'fancy' blogs...Fox didn't send me any Fringe screeners to convince me to bat for their team)
I'll wrap up 'plug week' with a shout-out for a post...a MONSTER post over at Henshaw's house. The Big Jim doesn't exactly support the Harper governments' recent cuts to Canadian arts and culture programs, but he doesn't exactly knock the notion of cuts either. Instead, he uses them as a springboard to do what we ALL need to start doing...seriously question whether our over-subsidized, under-nourished entertainment industry is really working.
Just a taste:
Folks, our subsidy system is broken because it serves neither the artists of the country nor the audience while allowing and encouraging the money to be siphoned off by those who are mostly hanging around for the wine and cheese party.
We need to start considering a system that works for the rest of us. Because if we don't, things are only going to get worse.
In the 1990's, I had the opportunity of shooting a couple of films in Hungary, shortly after the fall of the Communist system. There had been a strong, state-funded Arts system there and we had a number of very talented local artists working on the films. But working with them wasn't that easy. A system that had looked after all their needs had also robbed them of all initiative and accountability. Many sleep-walked through their tasks, their artistic flame smothered by living too long in a welfare state.
And you can see the same thing happening in this country. The more Government has subsidized (and thereby controlled) our ventures, the less we produce in terms of both final production numbers and work that inspires our audience. Our television drama is a shadow of what it was 20 years ago and our feature film industry has gone from one of the busiest in the world to one of the least productive.
Telefilm spends hundreds of thousands of dollars developing scripts no local production company even deigns to read. Writers, directors and actors stick with series none of them would be caught dead watching because it pays the rent. And the phrases you most hear at industry soirees are "what're you gonna do" and "it's what they're making".
It makes you wonder if what we've got is really worth preserving. Surely there must be some way to kick-start a new financing formula that would attract venture capital or reward private contribution instead of hanging on to one that isn't creating anything we're really proud of.
Read all of it HERE. And I mean read it...with attention. And then think about it. And then start talking about it and discussing it with your colleagues.
I wish we could all have a town hall meeting afterwards...
This is turning into 'plug week' for some of my old friends and colleagues.
I've known filmmaker Brian Stockton for about 25 years. We met in film school at UofR, and while there scratched each others back several times, so to speak...him acting in my graduating project "Heartline", and me acting in at least one of his videos ("9 1/2 Minutes" I think). Then we went in different directions...me choosing to pursue the more commercial and mainstream world of television, whereas Brian wanted to keep it personal yet go bigger...you know, make feature films.
His collaboration with Gerald Saul resulted in the darkly amusing post-apocalypse road movie "Wheat Soup", critically acclaimed and regarded by many as Saskatchewan's first indigenous independent feature. Brian followed up that effort with "The 24 Store" (I think I had a role in it...it all kinda blurs together after a while), a precursor of sorts to Kevin Smith's "Clerks" about the proprietors of an old convenience store coping with a new 7/11 setting up shop across the street.
And then...?
Well, as we all know, it's a bitch to finance and produce theatrical features in this country. And so while Brian toiled to try to get his next longform movie off the ground, he ended up making a bit of a name for himself with several successful short films...most notably "The Blob Thing" and "The Weight of the World" (the latter produced during his stint at the CFC).
That led to The Saskatchewan Trilogy... three short 35mm films tracking his childhood growing up on the prairies and in Regina... all very personal and done with a unique blend of documentary, drama, and animation (think the opening scenes of Annie Hall and Alfie remembering his youth).
I've always enjoyed Brian's sensibility and unique take on things...sort of a Woody Allen meets Guy Madden, if that's even possible. And so I am pleased to direct you to screenings of his latest effort, "Whitmore Park".
It's playing this week at TIFF (that's the Toronto International Film Festival y'all) as part of the Short Cuts Canada Program, and is the fourth and latest installment in what he ultimately hopes to be a 8 part series of short films entitled The Epic Story Of My Life.
Here's the where and when (in Toronto of course):
September 10, 7PM - Jackman Hall - AGO September 11, 5PM - AMC 3
And if you are at the fest and finding it difficult to get into one of the 'gala screenings', go check out "Whitmore Park"...I know it'll be short, but sweet.
I know McGrath posted about this the other day, but felt it was worth another mention.
Producer/director/writer Larry Raskin is an old pal....from swinging clubs in the old old days in the Atlantis golf tourney at the Banff TV Festival, to the not so old days, burning the late night oil churning out final season Psi Factor's on next to zero budget and six day shooting schedules...and his latest effort is Make Or Break TV. He gave me a screener episode a couple months ago which went behind the scenes of the short-lived series Blade, and it was pretty swell.
There was some confusion about when exactly Make Or Break TV airs...the following release should clear things up.
The premiere episode of this insightful, encyclopedic look at the process of television production, will air on Monday, September 8th at 9:00 pm ET/PT on TVtropolis.
Hear the back-story of various television series as told by the writers, actors, directors and studio executives that were involved in their development, trajectory and demise.
Each television series featured in MAKE OR BREAK TV has had an impact on the pop culture landscape - Max Headroom, EZ Streets, Blade: The Series, Quark, Lonesome Dove: The Outlaw Years and Grosse Pointe. MAKE OR BREAK TV features interviews with such award-winning actors as Eric McCormack, Kurtwood Smith and Joe Pantoliano, as well as candid commentary from some of television’s greatest players including Paul Haggis, Chris Carter, Darren Star and David Frankel.
MAKE OR BREAK TV will premiere Mondays at 9:00 pm with encore presentations on Thursdays at 6:00 pm and 8:00 pm and Sundays at 7:30 pm. (NOTE: ALL TIMES ET/PT)
So tonight at 9pm (ET) here in Canada...check it out.
The American fall TV season kicks into gear this week, and Bones begins Season 4 on Wednesday night with a 'very special' two hour episode set over in the UK. The following is just a cut and paste of an email exchange me and old pal/Bones showrunner Hart Hanson had over the weekend, so don't take it all too seriously.
WD: So big Brit two part season opener this week, how did it turn out?
HH: It turned out very well. It was a bear to shoot, lots of budget considerations to take into account, not to mention cultural differences with crews, etc., but I think it might have been the most fun I’ve had on a shoot. It didn’t hurt that the hotel was great.
WD: Did you write a story that ended up being a two-parter, or did it have to be at least two eps to make it worthwhile to even go over there?
HH: It’s a seamless two hour extravaganza with a gigantic seam in the middle that should be invisible. HAHAHAHA! We were given an impossible task. The network wanted a seamless two hour movie version that could nonetheless be split into two separate episodes. Insane! We did a pretty good job, I think. You’ll tell me after you see it. Tonight it’s showing at the IMAX. I may slip down and see how a crowd in a theatre likes what we did.
WD: How did you get Bones gang over there, story-wise. Does it track or at end of the day, was it just a stunt move? (man, what a dickish question!)
HH: Nah, that’s not a dickish question. That’s a question involving reality. The whole gang didn’t go over, just Booth and Brennan. The squints stayed home and worked on the lab stuff – we gave up trying to adjust to the time change REAL fast. Also, there’s a huge story for the squints, biggest we’ve ever had. I expect to hear hollering on the level of when Zack turned out to be the Gormogon’s apprentice.
WD: Are the cast all behaving after the 'demise'(sort of) of Zack last season? Or have they gotten paranoid and bothersome? Or all wanting to direct now?
HH: The cast is mostly behaving. I would prefer that they simply blindly do what I ask them to do but if they did that then they wouldn’t be actors. Though David Boreanaz will be directing this season – most likely episode 11.
WD: And what are the message boards saying...are you still on probation?
HH: On the Zack thing? The fans have not calmed down. I think I’m definitely on probation. We just finished shooting an episode in which Zack is featured again. Here's a pic from a scene where Zack and Hodgins confab at the loony bin. It's from the third episode of the new season called "Pieces in the Purple Pond" or something.
It was lovely to see him for the actors and for the crew. Millegan is a sweetie-pie. It’s possible that some of the fans may rethink their ire as Zack’s story unfolds but the fact is he’s not a regular on the show any more. Zack was some peoples’ favourite character and they will never forgive me.
WD: Do you still like writing for the cast, or is the 'thrill gone'? And is the network happy with how the stories and relationships are playing out, or are they constantly asking you to spice it up?
HH: I like writing for them still, a lot. And for the rest of the ensemble. And John Francis Daley is new to the cast and we have these new interns to write for and they've been a blast. The tricky thing is not to move too fast on Booth and Brennan's relationship but not to let it grow stale. The network tends to want to rush things too much. ADD as a corporation. But it's actually a good dynamic: they push for stuff, I resist, and we find equilibrium.
I think.
We should be getting reviews on the season opener any minute and then we'll know whether Bones still has it or not.
WD: Fourth seasons always seem to be a bitch and can be the beginning of the end for a lot of shows. You know, coming up with new stories...remaining familiar but not predictable --- any plans for how Bones will combat the 4th season curse?
HH: I’ve already had one tantrum in the writer’s room. I was waving two scripts in my hands. Both were good. Unfortunately, both were stories that were far too familiar. I actually hollered. Since then, the room has been more careful about generating stories that I might find too similar to earlier stories. Alas for everyone (especially me) it means that I have to be involved in story generation earlier in the process than I’d like.
We face all the typical problems of Season IV, which I, in my simplistic way, always think of as the "Desire to Be Sympathetic". I don’t know what it is exactly, but on every series I’ve ever worked on around Seasons III or IV everybody wants the audience to love them even more so they resist everything that might make them less sympathetic.
WD: Any spoiler scoops for the upcoming season? Or is all the good stuff already out there on the internets...
HH: Booth and Brennan will be in bed together naked. One of Angela’s ex-lovers, a woman, returns to complicate her love life with Hodgins. How’s that? Not exactly scoops because I said these things at Comic-Con. Lemme think of something no one else knows...how about we are currently working on a story revisiting “The Gravedigger” serial-kidnapper. He comes after one of our own. Also, we are looking for someone to play Booth’s brother.
WD: Any more behind the scenes pics you can share?
Here's David, me, and Emily in front of the monitors. We are at Greenwich England, pretending to be at the side of Buckingham Palace, a scene where Booth and Brennan confront one of the Queen's Guard.
WD: Are you really listening to Emily, or just wondering what's for lunch? And is Boreanaz texting??
HH: Hmmm, good question. I know that later in the day I got ice-cream for the crew and it cost a fortune. This was a fairly simple scene so I very much doubt there was any meaningful discussion. The dark haired woman next to Emily is Indira Varma, who played "Inspector Cate Pritchard" ... she was INCREDIBLE. Very beautiful and talented woman.
Lunch was something called a "Banksey Chop" -- that's phonetic. And I'm sure my bladder is full of tea. Oh, and David and Emily are both WILD texters between scenes.
WD: You're starting to look old. I recently touched on the issue of ageism in the TV/move biz... what's your take?
HH: I think it’s massively complicated. Yes, ageism exists. But then so do entitled writers who need an excuse to explain a career dip. As someone who thinks real writers peak in their fifties, I think TV is all too anxious to turn to writers in their twenties. Also, in the last couple years I’ve been privy to young writers being asked to run shows and being BROKEN by the experience. Also, again in my opinion only, there is this seething need by the networks to appeal to younger audiences and it ain’t happening. Perhaps TV isn’t a young person’s medium? Who knows? I certainly don’t. If I did, I’d offer to run a network. My own network seems fixated on bringing “film like” premises to TV when I personally think that TV should be as far from films as possible in conception. “Lost” would never be a film, for example, and it’s a lovely, lovely TV show. But what do I know? I’m old.
WD: You and me both. Speaking of old, will there be a Led Zeppelin reunion album?
HH: Jimmy Page played at the Olympics. He wore a ponytail. A PONYTAIL. Now, no offense Will, I remember when you had your wacky samurai type haircut, but I think that pretty much suggests that a Led Zeppelin reunion is only weeks away, if you follow my reasoning.
WD: I do...sort of (what was wrong with my tail??). So what new music is 'must listen' on your cd player/ipod(?) these days?
HH: I’m not sure what counts as “new” these days. I’m listening to Madrugada, Jim White, Pedestrian, Bonnie Prince Charlie, Phutureprimitive, Alejandro Escovedo, Patrick Wolf, Antony and the Johnsons, Bardo Pond, VAST, Tomasz Stanko, Smog, Skalpel, Pedestrian, the New Mastersounds, Jazzhole...is that enough?
WD: Man, I feel so mainstream and uncool now. Okay, what new TV series do you hear good things/bad things? about for this fall? Are you looking forward to anything in particular?
HH: I’m woefully out of touch. One of my writers, Noah Hawley, got a series pickup off his pilot “The Unusuals” so I’m pulling hard for that one and it has good buzz. Another bud, Dave Hemmingson, has an hourlong in limbo, untitled. “Fringe” looks massive. I’m a Joss Whedon fan so “Dollhouse” looks good in the winter though I’ve seen and heard nothing. But let’s face it, the guy’s a genius. But I’m really not paying attention so your guess is better than mine.
WD: Okay, and most importantly...when's the House/Bones crossover?
HH: David Shore and I talk about this once a week. So far, it’s much more to "Bones" advantage than it is to “House’s” -- although we are now beating “House” in reruns. Like anyone cares. Aside from us.
Ugh...what a bunch of lame questions, but thanks to Hart for playing.
Bones Season 4 premieres Wednesday September 3 on Fox.
Ok, I'm being lazy and stealing from my last post. Tiger Woods has a new golf game on the shelves, and this Advertising Age article talks about one viral-marketing video that was created to promote it. It's an okay spot, but I like the second one they did better...
Kids heading back to school today, and I'm always amazed at how frazzled they get. You know, running around making sure their hair is washed and 'just right'...that their new clothes look 'just right'...that they have all their 'supplies', and definitely absolutely want to get to class early.
Because maybe this time it will be different.
I suppose it's not unlike starting a new gig on a TV series. There's a nervous excitement...you'll try to look more presentable, perhaps brush the teeth and comb the hair after donning a new shirt. And you pack the computer bag with new notebooks and a package of your favourite pens. And you definitely absolutely try to get in early.
But before long you're dragging your sorry tired ass in as late as possible, maybe even wearing the same top you wore the night before. You know, after you realize its just another 8 month gig (like another school year), and you make a few friends but the jerks are still jerks, and it's really just about grinding out the scripts (homework)...getting there early and all the 'appearances' stuff seems kinda irrelevant.
I guess you could say going to school prepares you for working in TV.
