Put a Stake In It, PLEASE

It’s over! It’s finally over! It’s over for good!
Wait, maybe not? Oh, Renfield save me…

Previously, I talked a bit about what prevented me from doing weekly recaps of Dracula, and it basically came down to how appalling the series became, and so quickly, both in terms of predictable tropes and character assassination.
Here’s the thing, though. I can move past the predictability and utter nonsense that was the plot of this series -- and only because I’ve become so jaded and cynical in my belief that no one cares about even trying to be original anymore; it’s all a facade, this trend of doing a ‘new twist’ on classics in an attempt to make something seem more 'original' than 'adaptation.' Except it’s not original when you simply borrow from other sources and mash things together. It’s like trying to fit puzzle pieces of different puzzles together and expecting a full picture. But I digress. I’ve become accustomed to this approach, so that part I can get over...ish.
What really astounds me (and confuses me on the part of people who actually seem to like the show) is how the creators of the show gave the audience a swath of characters who are all narcissistic, immature, bitchfacey douchewads with no ability to act like mature, responsible, compassionate adults for more than an episode. By the end of the series every single main character, with the possible exception of Renfield, is deplorable. There’s no one to root for, unless you enjoy rooting for self-involved sycophants and whiner babies.
(Granted, Dracula isn’t the only show with characters like this, but it is the most heavily populated…)

It's difficult to find vampires more narcissistic than The Originals family, but Dracula made ALL its characters as bad as they are...

These characters are taken from a novel wherein there is one wretched, narcissistic jerkface. Just one. And despite the fact that said novel is named for him, he’s not actually in the book a whole lot. This is where my righteous indignation over character assassination shades into outright fury. Not only did you do a mash-up of other stories to craft your plot for the season, rather than maintain any semblance of paying homage to the source material, you also managed to completely mangle every single main character. Not just mangle by giving them attributes and/or flaws and/or character arcs that have nothing to do with how they’re actually written, but turn them into genuinely dislikable people. All of them.
I’m just glad Qunicey was nowhere to be found in this show.
If the series does get renewed, it’ll be interesting to see how they move forward with these characters. And by ‘interesting’ I mean ‘good luck getting any of your audience to give a crap about anyone,’ because there’s a difference between having characters that are flawed and make bad choices, and just having a group of blundering assholes.

Dracu-zzzz

So back in October, I intended to chronicle my MST3K-esque journey watching Dracula.
Unfortunately life (and NaNoWriMo) intervened for a little while, and while I do have recaps of episodes 2 and 3, by the time I got to episode 4, a disturbing trend emerged (and no, I'm not talking about the continued character assassination of every canonical individual, which is still happening). The trend became this:
Character A does something to or for Character B.
Character B turns into a whiny bitch about it.
Character A apologizes, makes amends, or turns into a whiny little bitch, too.
Lather, rinse, repeat.

Just sit and mope with me, Renfield. I'm too emo to do anything productive.

We're now just past episode 8, and this is still happening. More than global energy subplots involving mysterious sociopolitical/religious orders and tragic pasts, more than the hunt for Dracula (Vlad Tepes, Vlad the Impaler, who we have to repeat all three titles every time we mention his name in case someone didn't know who he was) by a clandestine society of rich white guys who get a woman to do all their heavy duty fighting, more than the potentially emotionally engrossing story of young people exploring their feelings, desires, and sexuality in a healthy, honest way, the show has pretty much turned into a (really bad) soap opera with a vampire. And Dracula is pretty much the king of whiny, bitchy, tantrum-throwing moments.
It's really difficult to even feign interest in a series when every character is horrendously unlikable -- and not because they're wicked or evil or devious, but because they're selfish, whiny, assholes incapable of behaving like rational adults for more than a single episode arc. If I wanted to watch crappy daytime TV I'd watch crappy daytime TV. Don't try and feed me that swill on primetime network television and act like I'm supposed to think it's engaging.

Once you have sex with Mina, will you get rid of the ascot and ridiculous facial hair?

Aaaaaand that is why my next post is going to be dedicated to the complete opposite of Dracula: the utter magnificence that is Sherlock (whose main character is frequently a selfish, whiny, asshole... and yet you love him).

Dracula Bingo!

Or: Why I’m going to need gallons of alcohol in order to make it through this show. 

 (And yes, I've read the book. Repeatedly. So several gripes will be of a strictly canonical nature.)

 

Unchecked dramatic pauses such as: “Ladies and gentlemen, I give to you tonight… POWER!”

Dramatic pauses of such nature are only allowed from one person.
 

Dracula as sexy-romantic (anti)hero.
"Sometimes, the people we are meant for take us by surprise."
 

Lengthy tracking and/or close up shots of Dracula watching people
 

Overt attempts at inserting modern feminism ideals into female characters (who will still probably fall in love with the mass murderer known as Sexy-Drac)
 

Dracula licking/wiping his lips

Non-canonical romances

Dracula as over-protective stalker douche (but I’m sexy and ily so it’s OK, right bby?
 

References to immortal love of any kind (including the ‘immortality is a curse I would never bestow upon you’ spiel -- usually followed by making said beloved immortal)
 

References to Dracula not eating or drinking

Bosoms heaving for no other reason than boobs look awesome when stuffed inside corsets

Anytime a character comments on a new invention of the ‘modern age’

Dracula is talked about/portrayed as the ‘mysterious American’ (and if they don’t keep that facade for long, then being the ‘mysterious foreigner’)

Random shots of predatory/ominous animals (yes, including bats and wolves -- if they don’t actually interact with people ever and serve a real purpose but are just there for ‘mood’)
 

Dracula described as ‘unlike anyone I’ve ever met’ or any variation thereupon

Heavy fog orgy

Van Helsing being crazier/more manic than Renfield
 

Complete annihilation of canonical character traits (Lucy as a sex pot)

Insertion of contemporary music (this includes original score that features synthesizers and/or electric guitar)
 

Anyone seductively consumes food or drink

FLASHBACK

Bad vampire makeup

Recreational drug use

Use of creative ‘swearing’ or ‘cursing’

Ridiculous rationalizations/explanations for people dying

So, in order to cope with this insanity, I did what any rational modern viewer would do: I made a BINGO game! Copy it. Print it. Share and drink to it with friends

I'm am returning...

I know... it's been a long time. I wish I could say many important, cool, exciting, and/or life-altering things have occurred in my absence, but that would be an utter lie.
However, in the next few weeks I plan to resurrect this blog as a place to air some creative/life grievances and offer some opinions and silliness and fangirling and ranting over the upcoming fall season of new (and returning shows.

First up: Dracula Bingo! (Or, Why I'm Going to Need Gallons of Alcohol to Survive This Show)
Coming really, really soon...

If It's Been Done Well, Leave It Alone

*deep breaths before diving into a hot button issue with me*

Articles and speculation about adapting classic literature (and literature in general) always draw my attention and, sometimes, my ire. I am not one of those Every Book Is A Holy Canon Which Should Not Be Altered For Screen people. I'm a writer, and I have flaws. I've written for the screen, and have flaws. No writer is perfect and no medium of expression is perfect in conveying what one medium already covered. My issues with adaptations are not rooted in that base problem, they are rooted in this: when one creator crafts a story and characters, it is the responsibility of someone later coming along to adapt that work to at least stay true to the overall tone and message of the source, as well as its characterization -- or change the g-d name! You change plot points? As long as we get to the same eventual conclusion, fine. You combine or omit characters? As long as it makes a stronger narrative and doesn't mess up essential moments in the story, fine. You alter a major character motivation, changing who they are on a fundamental level? NOW I have an issue, and my outrage will be rantalicious unless you give damn good support for your change or, you know, CHANGE THE G-D NAME. (Noticing a trend?)

My only other gripe with adaptation (and why I pretty much never take issue with Shakespeare films because he's the one writer out there whose work we never quite get right), is that once a well done, faithful adaptation is accomplished it's time to close the book, so to speak, and remove it from the realm of stories up for grabs. In my hasty youth, I didn't even extend this to previous film works. I thought, hey, if you can update a classic film well, then go for it! I've wizened and grown curmudgeonly in recent yeas, however, and now see the error of my ways. And if ever I need a reminder, I think of High Society (yeah, Hollywood was pulling that even during its Golden Age, so we can't heap all the blame on ourselves for the current state of stagnant original ideas). It's fine to have a vision of someone else's story in your head. If you're lucky enough to be allowed the chance to craft that story in another medium, then kudos to you -- you're already achieving one of my biggest dreams. Just... don't eff it up. And if you do and then someone else comes along later and hits the marks where you missed them, then at least you had that chance. However, if someone beats you to your dream (and I swear I will probably resort to every known tactic of undermining human success if this happens to me -- yeah, I can get competitive when I need to be), accept their success and find a new dream for yourself. The idea that once a good, faithful adaptation has been crafted someone else can come along with a new interpretation that will make the successful one shudder in shame is ridiculous. Improving a work from one medium to another is one huge accomplishment. Don't tempt fate by trying to improve the adaptation -- find something different or original to make, or CHANGE.THE.G-D.NAME.

What spurred my current eruption of emotion about adaptations? Well, it's been sort of a slow burn recently between varying reports of remaking IT, a clustermess of issues in season two of Game of Thrones (many of which end up as just sloppy storytelling -- and making strong characters into idiots), and culminating in the top news of this article about directors who were born for certain adaptations. The article itself is intriguing and has some interesting (and some, really, very safe) choices in the roster. What made my head do a Linda Blair was the news which sparked this article: that Guy Ritchie is doing an adaptation of Treasure Island.
Now, I don't necessarily doubt that the movie will be a fun romp with cool action sequences, quippy dialogue, and a sassy Long John Silver. There's just two issues with this equation. First, that concept is not going to end up being Treasure Island. Second, there already exists a near perfect adaptation of the book -- we don't need another.
Addressing issue the first: Guy Ritchie's already proven this is his MO with the Sherlock Holmes movies. Those guys bashing around the world solving mysteries are not Holmes and Watson. What Ritchie crafted is a set of cool Victorian buddy movies, with two men who happen to share names with and few characteristics of two of the most compelling characters in literature. You want to really see Holmes and Watson on screen? Watch the BBC series Sherlock. It's a modern setting, yes, but it IS Sherlock Holmes. I enjoy the movies, but I told myself about fifteen minutes into the first one that this was a Victorian buddy movie, not a Sherlock Holmes movie. In my head, I CHANGED THE G-D NAME, and then it was fine.
Now on to issue the second: already a near perfect adaptation of Treasure Island? Yep. I've never seen that... you think. No, you probably haven't. Yet it exists. It's a very good film, and it is one of the best examples in existence of how to adapt literature for screen. It's faithful to the tone, style, feel and majority of the plot. The characterization is spot on with a stellar cast. It's not a perfect movie, but Treasure Island is not a perfect book. It is however proof that when you maintain the core of a novel as your guiding star you can make not only a good film but a truly faithful adaptation of a work which deserves that treatment. Yet, people are still making Treasure Island... except no other adaptation I've seen really is remotely close to actually being Treasure Island, thus the crux of this whole entry: if you're going to keep remaking something and yet deviate drastically from the source -- CHANGE.THE.G-D.NAME.

Stay Tuned!

New, interesting, thought-provoking, occasionally ranting, sometimes fangirling posts coming REALLY soon. 

Just as soon as I find my brain.

Which will be very soon.

I hope.

I mean, it was here recently. I have a dim recollection of having amazing ideas for posts, and articles, and the drive to complete them.

Enter debilitating invisible illnesses rearing themselves for a week and POOF! my brain went into hiding. I now have the attention span of a four year old on pixie stix. I can barely finish a coherent thought let alone...

Have you noticed how incredibly hot and talented and all-around-geeky Tom Hiddleston is? Classically trained Super Actor who refers to Loki as 'cray cray,' gets himself memed all over the interwebs (Loki'd!), and will either rap Will Smith's "Miami" or recite monologues from Henry V on command.

Oh, and then there's this:

What was I talking about?
Ummm...
Oh yeah, I'm going to see APOCALYPTOUR in less than a week. Which might help get songs from Holy Musical, B@man out of my head... or just embed them deeper. *shrugs* Still doesn't make me regret having Supersnoop saying "You got a phone call, motherfucker," as my ringtone.

Wait... that wasn't what I was talking about...

Oh. Yeah.

Brain missing.

Hopefully not for much longer...

Winter is Mine

Game of Thrones: Series 1 Bluray Review

First off, I want to praise the shipping processes of release date guarantee sites. My blurays got here in record time. Record. High praise indeed.

I was so excited when these got here, I may have scared my co-workers...

If you want links to in-depth analysis of the discs and their features, I recommend Tower of the Hand or Winter Is Coming. Generally, I recommend those sites for any and all wishing to gain further knowledge of the ASoIaF universe.
If you want a fangirlish assessment by someone currently head-over-heels for the series who is chomping at the bit for series two to arrive on screens, I'm here for you.

For ease of following my general squeals of delight, Imma break this down into sections:
1. Episodes
I don't have swanky HDTV. Yet even in standard definition the blurays look gorgeous. From Bran's freckles to swirling snowstorms at the Wall, to gruesome blood-spatters, it's all there in detailed glory.
1.1 Commentaries
I haven't made it through all the commentaries yet (I know, I suck for not being able to devote every waking hour to watching these, but sadly my life and soul-sucking day job do not allow me freedom to watch my favorite shows for money, twenty-fours hours a day). However, I did watch episodes three (Lord Snow) and four (Cripples, Bastards, and Broken Things).

Episode three starts with the actors who play Bran, Arya and Sansa doing their own version of the opening titles (including the HBO logo), which is just damned adorable. Especially Isaac (Bran), who just won't let it go. The kids are sharp (especially Maisie / Arya), but still silly and obviously learning -- and in genuine awe of how good their adult castmates are. They definitely play up a bit trying to make sure they all get their comments in on everything, even if it's just one of them adding, "yeah, I know."

Episode four delves in with the writer for that episode (who started off as the showrunners' assistant) as well as swoon-worthy Kit Harington AKA Jon "You Know Nothing... Except How to do the Lord's Kiss" Snow. Huge points for both lauding the Sharpe series during one of Sean Bean's scenes. There's a remark made about Sean being the anchor for series one, which he absolutely is. Makes me wonder, though, who will anchor the series this season. Also, random factoid: Kit Harington has a phobia of things touching his neck which we learn from the extremely unpretty death of Sir Hugh of the Vale.

2. Character Profiles
These little snippets were, I believe, shown on HBO(.com) leading up to and during season one. It's nice to have a little examination of each major character from the perspective of the actors playing them. I would have liked a bit from either of the Mormonts and/or Maesters Luwin, Pycelle and Aemon, but none of them play significant roles in the first two episodes so I sort of get it. For anyone who's read the books, Richard Madden speaking of Robb's relationship with Jon Snow is quite powerful. Hopefully, there will be more of these as the seasons go on and we get introduced to yet more major characters.

3. Guide to Westeros
NERD ALERT! These little featurettes done in motion comic style provide the uninitiated with some of the very detailed history of GRRM's world. From the long ago to the events that start episode one, from history to religions to the great houses and beyond. As one delves further into these snippets, many are narrated by characters from some of the major houses, relating the perspective of that house on the events of the past. Particularly interesting to note are the POVs regarding Robert's Rebellion, and Tywin Lannister's less than favourable opinion of the Wall and the men of the Night's Watch. For those who have read the books, it's a convenient review of events and information disseminated throughout the books in piecemeal bits.

The only piece which lacks are the sections on the houses and their members / lieges / households / etc. These are just paragraphs of description where I feel like they could have devoted short 1-2 minute segments to each character either with video or a combo of that and the motion comics.

4. In-Episode Guides
The only feature so far I'm not a fan of... had it been illustrated or video cutaways or inserts during the episodes, I might have enjoyed it. As is, the couple sentences of exposition given on any selection isn't of much note, and I think only folks with a 55+ inch HD telly would be able to easily decipher the tiny writing.

5. Anatomy of an Episode: A Golden Crown

It's like in-vision commentary on crack. A toned-down version of this is what the in-episode guides needed. There are occasional full-stops in the episode to talk about the location or the set which seem a bit odd but are understandable as they don't have to do with the action at hand. Still, the concept of a making-of special / episode commentary within the episode itself is really cool. I hope they do more of these as the seasons continue.

6. Making of Game of Thrones

Fun little making of special overview. Nothing astonishing in terms of knowledge, though the interviews with GRRM are cool. Hearing the cast reactions to the sets, locations, costumes, and overall depth of the production makes my fangirl heart soar knowing they're as awed by it all as us uberfans are.

7. Creating the Dothraki Language

A neat little bit on the creation of the language. Jason Momoa, imho, should only speak Dothraki. Also, Iain Glen somehow slips into sounding like a chav when he says 'really crap.'

8. Creating the Show Open

A cool piece on the ideas behind crafting the amazing title sequence.

9. From Book to Screen

Basically a shorter edition of the Making Of special, but with more GRRM.

10. The Night's Watch

I love me some black brothers action. This is a nice acknowledgment of the one place in the seven kingdoms where EVERYTHING is different in terms of weather, adversaries, class standing, fighting, friendship, and loyalty.

Minuses:

The title menus for each disc are exactly the same, and other than the starting episode there's no indication on the disc menu of how many episodes are on a particular disc. This makes navigating the special features pretty aggravating. This would be a lot more tolerable except there's no guide in the enclosed booklet either. The only indication of what episodes are on each disc is printed on the discs themselves, which doesn't help much when you're over excited to see all the special features and have a two second memory for anything not related to them (or if you toss all the discs in a multi-disc player). At least with similar collections (I'm gonna just use the extended LotR DVDs as an example), even if navigating the features with the disc menus is a bit difficult, there's a guide map in the booklet to show you what features each disc contains and where to access it.
As stated before, the guide to Westeros section is amazing, except where it decides to just be written paragraphs. If you're going to go for it on these bits, then go for it like you did with the other sections.
While the making of specials are cool overall, it would be nice for a little more behind the scenes action in them. There's a lot of talking head bits, but not much of the off-screen interactions between actors, crew, directors, designers, etc. which, to me, is always more fun than just everyone talking about how they crafted this cool thing, and how grand it is to be working on the series. This would be a point where the crafters of special materials for the DVDs could take note of behind the scenes stuff from LotR and a myriad of British series (see Merlin and Doctor Who for two good current examples).
The only other minus, and I get that while filming these there was probably a gag order on everyone not to reveal major plot points, is that it would be nice to hear more from the cast and creators about their thoughts on some of those events. No book spoilers needed (and I actually love the decorum both Sophie (Sansa) and Kit (Jon Snow) show when talking about certain scenes during the commentary and speaking of events in the book without really giving anything away. I just happen to be one of those wacky people who assumes if you buy a movie or show on DVD that you've seen it before you start delving into the special bits, so a bit of a nod to those of us who know what's going on would be appreciated.

Dragon Eggs:

They're here... somewhere. I'm too lazy to sift through arrow buttons to find them (I tried a bit on a couple discs, to no avail), but when someone wants to point me to them I will happily seek them out.


All in all, it's a really good set and I encourage anyone who watched the series or hasn't seen it yet to get it. The show itself is so well crafted and the entire collective of people working on it show genuine love for the material and the work they do.

MoffTissIan

I'm proclaiming it, right now. (Links will contain major spoilers...)

The only thing which currently gets my brain a-buzzing, my pulse a-racing, my geek heart a-pitter-pattering as much as the ASoIaF series, is Sherlock.
While I understand that for the quality of the series to remain so spectacularly high they can only produce three per season, IT'S NOT ENOUGH. Just like waiting for The Winds of Winter (or, T-Wow, as my geek friends and I like to call it), waiting for whatever will follow "The Reichenbach Fall" is equal parts excruciating and exciting, both mentally and emotionally.
Thankfully, the interwebs indulge my addiction, while constantly proving to me that there are other fans out there just as invested. Even more so.

While following up on every theory and explosion of fandom awesome regarding these series may not equate to the best use of time which could be spent being 'productive,' it does get those synapses firing in a way nothing else does.

It's certainly better than spending my days following celeb news on TMZ and Perez Hilton...




#believeinsherlock

Meanwhile, in the Depths of Editing...

As previously mentioned, I (perhaps foolishly, perhaps brilliantly) agreed to have a readable first draft of Novel the First completed in a couple weeks. After the initial shock of it all, I planned out a rough timeline of how to accomplish said goal.

Week one (now): Scan through binary (i.e. computer-stored) draft, seeking out obvious spelling and grammar issues, major plots holes, items that still need explaining, and logistical problems. If a solution cannot be found to one of the non spelling/grammar issues, mark it, describe the issue, and move on for now.

Week two (next week): Compare edits made on printed draft to those done above. Correct further grammar issues. Hopefully find solution to a few of the other problems.

Week three (oh, lord...): Fix all the things. All the things? Yes. Fix all the things like a mother-effing adult! All the things... or at least as many as I can.



Week four (I predict): Send this wicked child out to be viewed by other eyes. Panic. Begin work on query letters. Panic more. Drink. A lot.

Progress is... progressing. Not at the present moment, obviously. This is in part due to the fact that I have entered the repeated 'shit hitting the fan' section of the book (i.e. the last third) and even in Editor Mode there's a lot of emotional turmoil happening to the characters and it's difficult to look at that with a completely disconnected eye. It's the first time I've really done that to characters I created, so I'm quite new to this feeling.
Still, I continue to press on... or did until I decided to pick up A Feast for Crows and finally finish it. Getting my head out of Westeros is proving difficult. But hey, if I want throngs of readers to one day have themselves sucked into worlds I create because I nurtured those worlds, and my writing, then by the seven I shall find a way to exist in both realms.

After all, when your mind races with thoughts of your own writings along with thoughts of a master's, sleep is irrelevant, right?

Edit all the things!
Fix all the things!
Defend the Wall... erm, all the things!

Trust Your King, Baby

Two very geektastic things have occurred thus far today. It’s Ash Wednesday (no meat so far for me, but that’s not the Ash I’m talking about) aaaaaaannnnnnd the airdate for the start of the new Doctor Who season was announced. I may have actually jumped up and down like a five-year-old about that for a few seconds. Mostly because it seems that the BBC and its American subsidiary have finally come to realize that making us Yanks wait weeks, and even days, for new episodes of Doctor Who in this ever-increasingly connected world that we live in is actually a form of extreme mental and emotional torture. We can avoid the interwebs for a few hours while the time zones align properly, but keeping ourselves from (even accidentally) spoilers after just twenty four hours have passed is nearly impossible. So thank you, Gods of the BBC, for your benevolent understanding and for succumbing to the will of the people.
Also, the new tagline: Trust Your Doctor = love.

While I feel like a horrible Campbell-ite for forgetting the importance (and if I’m honest, the existence) of Ash Wednesday, my office has been chatting about it enough to make up a little ground. I find myself pondering why there are no pubs/bars/etc that celebrate this day. It would certainly be a hit among horror geeks and filmmaking hipsters in Michigan (especially in Grand Rapids and around The D), and there are plenty of LA people who I’m sure would love any excuse to drink and watch cheesy horror movies… come to think of it, I think all decent-sized cities have enough horror-loving lushes to warrant at least one bar holding an event that screens at least one Evil Dead movie while offering Ash-inspired cocktails.
When I open the comfort food pub (plus food truck) with my friends, we are so doing this every year.

Hail to the King, baby!

I promised you an eternity of misery, so I'm just keeping my word.

Since I apparently still possess the obsessive power of a twelve-year-old (at least emotionally, if not fiscally or with as much devoted time and energy), I decided that I could no longer wait the span of mere days in order to indulge my love of The Vampire Diaries. Thus, I caved and used some hoarded gift cards to purchase series one on DVD.
Surprisingly, my memory for this show only lasts about half a season as many things I noticed in watching just the first few episodes I completely forgot about. This either means I’m getting old, or I really did dismiss the show utterly in the early days and only focused on scenes Damon was in… or both (scary thought).
So here’s a few items I jotted down last night in my pre-NyQuil haze that struck me as Things Maybe I Should Have Noted and Retained From the Beginning:

Naïve Bonnie is Naïve – who’s the first person to notice Stefan? Soon to be anti-vamp-everything Bonnie. Her spew of how good he looks from behind is even more laughable when you know how much she grows to despise him (and it doesn’t take that long)

Emo Jeremy is kill this stupid child now – Elena has a line early on about how she knows who Jeremy really is and it’s not this guy. She’s right. Real Jeremy is the HotJailbaitMan we have now. Whiny, lovesick, druggie, emo Jeremy is just an annoying dick… almost as annoying as Tyler.

WTF fog? Damon! Really? Why doesn't he use this more. It's pretty freaking cool. – No, really, why did we get rid of vampires having the ability to control fog (and animals)? It’s a traditional and pretty awesome power. Plus, it’s like Damon’s slinking around Elena before Stefan even knows he’s in town, which is pretty brill.

Weeping angel statues For the Terror! – Forgot about those early cemetery scenes with G-D angel statues that are going to burst through the television and displace me in time or snap my neck as soon as I stop looking at them. Damn you, Steven Moffat.

Seriously... the Vicki/Tyler/Jeremy triangle makes me want to hurl – ‘nuff said.

Caroline doesn't change much and I kinda love her for this. Other characters I can't wait until they evolve, or die, but Caroline's basically a sweet but shallow, tactless twat from the get-go and I pretty much adore her.

I epically forgot about Logan... probably because I have infinitely more love for Alaric.

The pilot has Kevin Williamson all over it: teen delinquency, quippy one-liners, mystic symbolism... and that whole 'no teens actually talk this way' dialogue.

The diary device worked well in the early episodes, but I'm glad they did away with it. – Even by episode three I was tiring of it. It’s good establishing technique to see what Elena and Stefan are coping with internally, but as the writing and acting improve, it becomes rather ridiculous.

Wuthering Heights? NOOOOOOOO! Too cliché! – I mean, of course Damon knocks Twilight and Edward, but then why must Stefan give Elena a copy of this book? Not only is it a vampire cliché now, it’s a PIECE OF SHIT NOVEL.
Yes, the queen of anti-snobbery has a big vendetta against this book, but that’s a rant for another day.

New World, yes... but better?

With the broadcast announcement of Torchwood: The New World today, it occurs to me I've never really shared thoughts on post-Children-of-Earth Torchwood.

Do I want more Torchwood? Yes.
Am I excited for new Torchwood? Yes.
Am I glad that Russell is head of production and Barrowman and Eve are still in it? Absolutely.
Am I psyched for new, 'hip,' Americanizing of the show? Ehhhh...

See, the problem with American shows is, well, they're American. The fact that the show is a co-production between the BBC and Starz gives me hope to be sure, seeing as how you cannot put a show like Torchwood on NBC and expect it to have the kind of life it had on BBC. Never going to happen because our major networks, and even regular cable networks, are far too conservative. Also, major networks have a completely different set of standards than the BBC because we're still puritanical infants who are only allowed certain flashes of life in our TV viewing lest we all become degraded, sexual beasts... and yet we have shows like The Real Housewives of Shut Your Whining Gobs You Spoiled Bitches and I'm a Meth Addict, Get Me Out of This Hoarders' Intervention.
So that's my rant on American TV, and why I fear shifting Torchwood to our shores.

Am I excited for new cast members? Ehhhh....

One of the greatest strengths and greatest flaws of the Torchwood world is that in its brutality, hardly anyone lives very long. We have the benefit of one character who will not completely die (not on this show anyway... unless we go all wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey to the extreme, we already know what happens to the dear Captain in the end), and the likelihood of Gwen being offed anytime soon is highly unlikely, but otherwise every major character on the show has been axed already. Do I really want to start over with new, primarily American, characters and either grow to love them only to see them killed, or hate them from the beginning and count the days until they get blown up or shot? I don't know. Again, not to rag on yank actors, but having 'replacement' Tosh, Owen and Ianto does not sit well with me, especially when they're not Brits.
I guess it comes down to liking my British TV to stay British... which is probably why I'm less than enthused about Shameless.

And really... I'm just not over Ianto yet. At. All.

The Dark Tower 'Fairy Tale' Casting

Trolling around the 'new' IMDB (but not being a troll), I decided to see what message board activity existed for the Dark Tower Multimedia Project of Epicness. After stumbling on a casting choice for Eddie I hadn't thought of -- that almost caused me to wet myself and scream with glee, and then curl into a fetal position because it's likely they'll pick, say, Ryan Reynolds *gag* -- I decided I should put some thought into my ideal casting. Just because, you know, I like having my hopes dashed by Hollywood politics. This post will be expanded upon as I think of other ideal (for me) candidates.

Roland (Contemporary) - Viggo Mortensen
Hugh Jackman LOOKS the part, and lord knows plenty of people don't mind looking at that man for hours and hours on end, but the ability to carry the entire series on his shoulders with the grizzled depth required... I don't think he can pull that off. Viggo's a no-brainer -- he's got the look, the talent, the depth, the proven ability to carry an epic undertaking like this. Hell, I think the question isn't whether they'd want him to do it, but whether HE'D want to do it.
Otherwise they should just wait another 5-10 years and have Karl Urban and Christian Bale duke it out.

Eddie - Ben Foster
Thank you IMDB board for that one. Now all I will ever want is him in that role and there's a snowball's chance it will happen. (Of course now someone's also said Joseph Gordon-Levitt... oh, wait...)

Roland (Young) - Joseph Gordon-Levitt
He may be pushing the age, but he still looks like such a baby it would work. Plus he's got the intensity and depth necessary for making that section of the story powerful and believable -- something I'm not certain an actual 18 year-old could pull off. And if they could throw in a zero-gravity, balletic fight scene in old-west-style clothes, so much the better.

Susan Delgado - Karen Gillan*
*Not 100% sold
She'd have to be blondied-up, but given the choice between her and any number of blonde (or pretend-blonde) Hollywood tartlets... yeah, Karen's got it. Hands down. Not that I want to see Amy Pond put through that kind of hell, but Karen's gorgeous, spunky, smart, and has the 'it' factor of making you want to watch her.
If only one could reverse time and steal Rosamund Pike when she was 16-18, that would be perfect. Or Jewel Staite.

Cort - Mickey Rourke
I've seen some ideas floating that he should be Randall Flagg, but that makes Flagg too creepy without any appeal. There has to be something about Flagg that draws you in, even though you know nothing about him is good. Cort on the other hand is just a grizzled, old bad-ass, which Rourke could do in his sleep.

Walter/Flagg - Colm Feore
Again, thank you IMDB board. Not only has he god the unsettling-yet-appealing freaktastic thing down to a science, crossover be damned he KNOWS how to do this brand of King evil. Ever see Storm of the Century? Scarred for life, in the best way.
"I'm a little teapot, short and stout..."

Susannah - ???
Of all characters, this one gets the 'fucked if I know' award. The complexity involved in being an African-American schizophrenic, wheelchair-bound heroine with deathly accurate aim and a soft spot for redeemed screw-ups... to put any established actress in this will lose some pivotal aspect of her due to pre-existing habits and ticks. Whoever plays Susannah needs to disappear into her entirely, and that's going to take a face we haven't seen much/any of before.

Stephen King - DUH
Incidentally, his appearance on Sons of Anarchy is probably his best acting work to date.
And if he's not Rick Baker-ed to the extreme for the young appearance, use Joe. He looks plenty like his poppa.

In other random movie news, apparently Cameron wants to prove he can single-handedly destroy own the movie industry by making a Cleopatra movie with Angelina Jolie.
Quick, let's get Brad in on this. It did such wonders for Liz and Dick...

Dollop-headed clotpole

“Come on, dollop head. I need you to recover. Listen to me, clotpole. I don’t care if you die. There are plenty of other princes. You’re not the only pompous, supercilious, condescending, royal… imbecile I could work for; the world is full of them. But I am going to give you one more chance.”

Me? Obsessed with a BBC show starring a lanky, pale Irish boy with sculpted facial features and piercing blue eyes? A show that takes all Arthurian legends and says, "to hell with them, we're going to have fun... occasionally homo-erotic fun, but in a family-friendly way..." and doesn't care what die-hard Arthurian critics say? A show that was designed for the non-snobs? Ha! How could I ever love such a show?
Yeah. I do. Oh-so-ever-loving much. What makes Merlin work for me is the dynamic between the characters. I don't care what color anyone's skin is, or what varying accent they carry, or that there's more sexual tension between Merlin and Arthur than any other characters -- I care that those dynamics work. As the show progresses, the cast and crew continue to work harder and harder at developing these characters even while dealing with ridiculous scenarios and written-into-a-corner plot devices.
What sells the show more than anything is Colin Morgan as Merlin. When he's silly it's adorable. When he's getting abused it's entertaining. When emotions get real, he brings the level of the entire show up with just a flicker of his eyes. He's got magic inside him to be sure -- the magic of performance. I hope someday there's a film or series written for two Irish brothers with Colin Morgan and Jonathan Rhys Meyers... of course then I'd have to watch every episode at least three times. Once for Colin, once for JRM and once for both of them... and maybe once more for actual plot.
Point is, as cheesy as a show like Merlin can be, it's also proof that solid acting and passionate creativity aren't limited to art-house pictures or series on AMC. Not every series needs to be a hard-hitting drama or high-concept comedy or time-jumping, fast-edited action-adventure.
Plus, there's the occasional very fun word thrown into dialogue. Like clotpole. Or dollop head. Or besotted. Or idiomatic...

Based on the books on your bookshelf, what conclusions would people draw about you?

Well, I'm not in the habit of pretending to be other people... or at least not assuming what their thoughts might... OK, even I couldn't make it through that sentence. I'm very much in the habit of imagining what other people think, it's just a matter of whether or not I care.

In the case of my bookshelves and their contents, it depends on the bookcase. Our downstairs by-the-telly case contains my small non-fiction collection and a smattering of general fiction & mysteries. One book in particular garners a lot of attention, and I will admit that's why I put it there. I haven't read it yet, but considering there are about 100 books on my shelves at any given time which haven't been given even a perusal yet, this means little in the grand scope of my reading habits.
One shelving unit upstairs, which acts as an additional headboard/room divider, contains more non-fiction (most of these related to 'the biz,' writing and how to keep hold of money), all my sheet music and instructional piano materials, a gothic-horror section, an historical fiction section, and my American Lit section... with a topper of myths, fairytales and huge anthologies.
The final bookshelf, my favorite shelf in terms of placement and scope, contains many, many books divided by subject per shelf. Top shelf is theatre, poetry, journals and spill from the shelf below which is... British Literature. Below that, at eye-level-for-my-midget-self, sit every copy of Dracula I own plus research books, related vampire novels, etc. Next is the King family shelf: Uncle Stevie, Tabby, Joe and Owen. Down one more, at rugrat level, are my youth novels (the entire Harry Potter & Lemony Snicket series, plus half a dozen Roald Dahl books and the Inkheart trilogy included). Bottoming out in the best way, the last shelf holds my Tolkien & Jasper Fforde collections, along with gothic mysteries/adventures by Louis Bayard, Matthew Pearl, Ellis Peters and Arturo Perez-Reverte.

I think 'eclectic' and 'voracious' are choice terms for my shelves on first glance. Anyone who pays particular attention will notice a trend towards darker, gothic, macabre fiction (hello Dracula and King family shelves), but not slasher-fic. It's also a collection of books for book lovers with a slant towards historical and fantasy fiction -- but not high-fantasy. There's a lot of epic/series collections included as well.
So what would other people think? Generally?
This bitch has a shit ton of books.

And they'd be right.

A Beautiful Dark Mind Tower?

They're really doing it. They're really making a film/tv adaptation of The Dark Tower series.



I'm not even sure I can form coherent thoughts regarding this development, but I shall try.
I want to jump for joy and flail about in fangirlish glee over the fact that after years of quasi-development someone finally got their mitts on the rights to the Dark Tower series and is tackling it in a logical way: films AND television.
My opinion has always been that the series would be an awesome spectacle on the big screen, but would have to be a larger undertaking than even The Lord of the Rings... which might be impossible. I've since held that the way to 'do it right' would be to divide the series into a few short-run series 'seasons' on HBO, Showtime, Starz... one of the pay cable channels where they can be as violent and sexy and profane as King wrote and also have the budget to pull off all the fantastic elements. It looks like we're trying to strike a balance between the two, and I wish Universal success and hope it does not bankrupt them.

Here's what I AM excited about:
Including Roland's backstory via what's touched on in The Wizard and The Glass and expanded on in the comic series.
Covering, hopefully, the entirety of the series in a format that allows the inclusion of all the good stuff (of which there is much).
Something on such an epic scale that provides me with years of something to obsess over an geek out about (much like The Lord of the Rings trilogy).
Roland Deschain 'in person' as an actual physical being. 'Nuff said.

Here's what's potentially terrifying:
Poor casting choices. Howard's very hit and miss with this. Something it's great, sometimes there's someone awesome on tap and they get turned down in favor of someone not nearly as right for the role. In this situation, for this series, I will go all kinds of fangirl apeshit if the right people are not found for Roland (young and old), Eddie, Susannah, Jake, Flagg, or Callahan. And Uncle Stevie better be Uncle Stevie.
Forcing CGI where other alternatives would be better placed. This is a general fear I have of late, but especially when it comes to epic fantasy/horror/adventure... of which this is all three.
Ron Howard. I'm sorry, but the man is an emotional dead weight when it comes to filmmaking. He's got good ideas and executes technically cool films... sometimes... but they can be be the dullest, most unemotional movies ever. If that happens to this series, there are going to be a ton of pissed off King fans gunning for him and Universal. I mean, we're not talking about The Dark Half or Desperation here... or even 'Salem's Lot. This is the magnum-frigging-opus of King's career -- his LotR, his Narnia, his Golden Compass series as only King could envision.

I truly am excited at the prospect of this project; I'm just worried about the execution. So if anyone out there has the power and needs any kind of consultant on how to make this series emotionally engaging, well cast, and not made of suck, I'm here.

(Sidenote: I saw the trailer for Priest -- comments to come -- can we please work Paul Bettany and Karl Urban into this Dark Tower mix?)

AdaptRANTation

How do you feel when an adapted film's story deviates from the original material?

Awww... lookie here. I make a comment on my other blog about how the daily prompts aren't inspiring and the very next day we decide to question one of my favorite topics of ranting discussion.
Let's get something straight for this and all future records: I am not a purist. Not in the sense that I believe a film has to be exactly like the source material or it fails. This is virtually impossible and anyone who doesn't realize that is delusional. I understand there cannot be literal translation of book to film for more than just the obvious reasons. I also understand that one person's interpretation of a story differs from someone else's.
However, I do believe all source material adapted for film has an inherent tone and certain themes and characters that should be honored as close as they can be when a filmmaker undertakes the project (I'm looking at you, Francis Ford Coppola). I accept that not every detail of the source will be included -- some aspects may be condensed or done differently or omitted altogether. When it comes to adaptations of fairy tales and myths my flexibility in interpretation widens. Even the combining or omission of some characters can be warranted. And by all means, please feel free to shorten a work that needed an editor in the first place *cough*OrderOfThePhoenix*cough*
Where I get picky and ranty and annoyed at filmmakers comes in the unneeded and unwarranted changing of tone, characters, motivations, themes, etc. The major aspects that hold a story together and keep it compelling on the page. This is why I am all right with the idea of combining some of the Lord of the Rings appendices material into the trilogy but not at all OK with changing the entire ending of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (including the part where by Dumbledore's not petrifying Harry we turn him from hero to giant pussy in less than a minute). Conversely, it's also why I'm aghast at placing Elrond at Isildur's side in Mount Doom (throw the bastard into the river of fire or don't spend the next 3,000 years bitching about the weakness of humans because you were too much of a coward to act when you had the chance), and why I don't mind that Peeves is entirely absent from Hogwarts (annoying, obnoxious, and sure a nice way to break up the tension sometimes, but overall completely unnecessary).
All that being said, I'm in no way against interpretation of other media for film.
It's one of my favorite aspects of filmmaking, really. However because of this I have my own set of standards to which I cling, somewhat obsessively, always hoping someone will create something that lives up to those expectations. I also know that my idea of a great interpretation is not the same as someone else's... and this is why I'm a movie and book lover and not a snob.

Thank. You. Heavens.

http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/110/1104063p1.html

According to IGN, which I respect as a source for information, especially on Sci-Fi related film/tv news, the whole Johnny Depp as the Doctor rumour is made of false.
The heavens have no idea how elated this makes me. I love Johnny, and I love the Doctor (duh), but Johnny as the Doctor is much bad. Do not want. Ever.
For one, the Doctor and the entire Whoniverse is so completely British that to have someone not from the UK play the Doctor would be a juvenile, ridiculous mistake. On top of that, much as I love Johnny and talented as he is, there's a quality beyond Britishness he doesn't possess which renders him incapable of portraying the Doctor. There's a combination of emotions and layers that Johnny does very well individually but as a composite I don't think he can pull off.
Oh yeah, and the most obvious point: WE ALREADY HAVE A DOCTOR. If you're going to make a film of Doctor Who, pick one of the most recent Doctors, each of whom is different and remarkable in his own way. Honestly, I think Tennant is the most 'bankable,' but Smith's quirkiness would surpass even what Depp could do with the role. I think that's my biggest issue with the idea -- a Depp Doctor would be a very quirky Doctor and the current Doctor excels at it and needs no replacing.
Plus, how do you account for Depp's Doctor in the line of regeneration? I don't want to lose the 12th Doctor to movies because some Hollywood yahoos think there's money to be made.
Doctor Who is a fairy tale and fairy tales have a lot to say about acting solely for the purpose of making money -- there's no reason to make a movie at all right now, much less one with Depp, other than to try and capitalize on a show that needs nothing to add to it beyond what already exists (which is my sly way of saying I love the audiobooks).