RECOMMENDATIONS- 3 MOVIES, 2 BOOKS

Since I don't have any new publication info to share, I thought I'd use this space to discuss the quality work of others. I am, after all, an admirer of good writing. I also like to recognize it in various formats, my feelings regarding the inherent superiority of the printed medium notwithstanding, one would have to be a fool to not recognize the brilliance often found on film.

So, I'll start with two movies I absolutely loved and one good one that should have been even better:

• Brightburn- A movie written by filmmaker James Gunn's brothers Brian and Mark, this is the anti-superhero movie I've been waiting for. Basically taking the Superman origin story and turning it on its head, this film reminds us how helpless we would be if a nearly all-powerful alien who looked like us arrived on Earth without heroic impulses. The movie is relatively small, prviding an intimate portrayal of its subject, and the payoff is disturbing and thought-provoking with the promise of more to come.

• Fast Color- Another stripped-down superhero story, this one deals with a lineage of African-American women (although the main protagonist is bi-racial) who have concealed their amazing powers from the world for centuries. Unfortunately, the world is running out of water and desperation had led a team of government-backed scientists to pursue any means necessary to fix what the human race has broken. This includes a woman named Ruth, portrayed by the distractingly beautiful Gugu Mbatha-Raw. A movie that it once a subtle Apocalyptic tale, a rumination of race and family and love, it is a slow-mover but well worth it. 

• Batman: Hush- This is the one I can't fully recommend. I'm not sure if I made the mistake of reading the source material first or if having done so was a good move, because the drop-off in quality is significant. Don't get me wrong. The movie is well-made. Warner Bros.' DC movies still have the best voice acting around and director Sam Liu has become quite good at getting consistent performances and suspense in these newer films. However, the treatment of the vastly superior graphic novel is spotty and the new twist simply does not work. One issue some of these newer animated films has is their tendency to take deeper storylines and given them a superficial makeover. Ultimately a good movie but should have been one of the best.

Books:

• Master and Apprentice- As big a "Star Wars" fan as I am, it's often difficult for me to complete the novels. However, once in a while one comes along I simply cannot put down and this was one of those. Focusing on a pivotal moment between Jedi Master Qui Gon Jinn and Padawan Obi-Wan Kenobi, Claudia Gray spins an interesting tale that is just big enough to warrant not two but three Jedi Knights but small enough to not over-shadow the movies. Definitely worth a read.

• Becoming Superman: My Journey from Poverty to Hollywood- J. Michael Straczynski has long been one of my writing heroes. "Babylon 5" came along just as I was jumping off the Trekkie train and swiftly became my favorite science fiction series of all time. I have also followed his work in the comics medium and movies as well as his stint with one of "Twilight Zone" reboots. But I never knew what a horrible, abusive, traumatic childhood he'd led. I'm not even finished with this one yet and I'm already recommending it! 

The Sequel to Top Gun: Playing Devil's Advocate.

You'd be hard-pressed to find anybody who is more excited about the "Top Gun" sequel than me. I still remember sitting alone in that theater surrounded by an enthusiastic audience, watching what would become one of the defining movies of my generation. Obviously, I loved it. Still do. I even bought the soundtrack, I rented the VHS, and I re-watched it often. In fact, it was probably my most watched non-science fiction film until I saw Oliver Stone's "Platoon," which I consider the defining film of my generation.

But "Platoon" wasn't fun or cool. Okay, it was kind of cool to teenagers because we knew next to nothing about Vietnam, but overall it was tragic and emotionally draining, as were"Hamburger Hill" and, for those who liked it, "Full Metal Jacket." "Top Gun," on the other hand, was fun.

Described by its director as rock 'n roll in the air and by one of its producers as "Star Wars on Earth," the Tom Cruse star vehicle captured the Reagan era zeitgeist better than any other film of the time. And while I recognize that isn't necessarily a good thing in retrospect, it was nearly impossible to not get caught up in some part of it if you were there. Was it a masterpiece? I suppose that depends on how one defines the word in relation to moviemaking but, for what it was and what it was designed to do, I would say yes.

It was.

This may seem like a specious comparison, but in many ways the film reminds me of "Casablanca." Not because of its story or plot but because of its cultural relevance and inherent re-watchability. The two movies couldn't be more different regarding subject matter but they both feature two conflicted male protaganists struggling against external and internal forces and a strong female protagonist whose love both complicates and compliments his struggle.

It's also about a guy who has to make an all-important choice at a critical moment and makes the right one in the end when it counts. Imagine if Rick hadn't decided to help Ilsa escape Casablanca or if Maverick (Cruse) wasn't able to overcome his PTSD during the aerial combat scene at the end and Iceman had been left to fend for himself. They would have been two very different, possibly more realistic movies that probably would only be remembered by cinephiles. However, Rick and Maverick both do what's right when it needs to be done. Despite all my cynicism and desire to write darker-themed stories, I still recognize the need for the occasional crowd-pleasing moment.

Then there's the love story. Normally, I am turned off by love stories in movies because the vast majorty of them feel tacked on, mere audience manipulation based on market research. The love

story in "Top Gun" is integral to the plot. It's part of what helps Maverick grow up and realize there is more to life than just his "need for speed." It also feels like a genuine attraction between two people who were destined to meet but not necessarily destined to stay together. Respectively, the audience never truly knows if Rick and Ilsa ever reunite after the war, nor whether or not Maverick and Charlie (Kelly MCGillis) truly get back together at the end or simply spend a little time together before once more going their separate ways.

In a time when movies were usually designed to tell one story and then end, sometimes ambiguously, this was not a setup for a sequel but rather an ending designed to create speculation and discussion. And that is the magic of a single movie with no follow-ups. When the elements of a film come together beautifully, it's rare that a sequel is able to recapture the magic.

And that's why "Top Gun: Maverick" has a bit of a steep hill to climb. What made the first movie great was its ambiguous ending. Life went on, Maverick was in a better place emotionally, but whether or not he remained a Top Gun instructor or "got the girl" was left up to the viewer to decide. With this sequel coming out next year, we now know he did not do either of those things. We don't know why yet but does it really matter?

The glorious, up-in-the-air, Casablancaesque ending will now be replaced with a new story that may or may not exceed or equal the first one. And since it is a sequel, it will most likely feature a relatively definitive ending, especially considering how many years have passed between films. 

Again, I'm mostly excited to see it. In fact, I can't stop watching the trailer. A part of me always wanted to know what happened to Maverick even though the final minutes of the film appeared to make that pretty clear. Perhaps I'm a little upset because what I inferred from the original film is no longer true. All the decades of assumption and comfort are now gone, maybe even rendered pointless. 

Even writers need to be reminded that that's how art works. I get emotionally invested in things, too.  The idea of a "Casablanca" sequel is loathsome, even when thinking about it happening when the actors were still alive. This is in spite of a damn good novel by Michael Walsh that proved it was indeed possible! So there is a small part of me when it comes to "Top Gun" that says, "You nailed it on your first go-round. Why tempt fate?"

Still, I'll be helping them do exactly that next year when the film is released so it must not bother me that much~

The Best Thing I've Read from an Anthology's Guidelines Possibly Ever.

I don't usually name publications that haven't accepted my work or to whom I have not as of yet submitted my work but these people deserve a mention. I'm not a podcast person so they weren't even on my radar until I saw them in my Horror Tree email along with several other publishers accepting fiction.

Calling themselves "We Will Remember Freedom," they're pretty blunt about what they believe. In short, they're anarchists who oppose oppressive capitalism. Their name comes from an Ursula K Le Guin quote in which she says, "We'll need writers who can remember freedom" when hard times are upon us.

It doesn't matter if you agree with their point of view. Assuming you haven't turned off your brain because the previous paragraph mentions the words capitalism and oppressive in the same thought, you will realize why your hostility is irrelevant if you keep reading, especially if you're a writer. In their guidelines section, We Will Remember Freedom describes their payment structure in ways both wonderful and inspiring:

"We pay $.01USD per word upon acceptance. This is not a professional rate, and we are therefore primarily a reprint market. While we will consider fiction that has not appeared elsewhere, we suggest that if your story is good enough for us, it is probably good enough for someone who will pay you at least 8 cents per word and we encourage you to try submitting to those markets first. Authors should be paid for their labor. Once your work is out of exclusivity, or if you can’t find a better-paying home for it, send it on to us!"

SERIOUSLY???






That paragraph is filled with so much good that it momentarily instilled faith in my fellow human. I mean, it's gone now, but still...

Second Patreon Post for August.

This is starting to feel like work...or it would if I wasn't posting stuff that was already written some time ago.

Anyway, usual crap: Pledge at least one dollar per month and absorb the yummy goodness by clicking here.

How I Made an Ass of Myself and Other Fun Foibles.

Recently I wrote a post about the great science fiction writer Harlan Ellison. In it, I described him in glowing terms as essentially mercurial and a strong advocate for writers as artists and people that deserve to get paid for their work. The thing that prompted this was an ad for Ellison's short story collection "Under Glass," which he wrote in bookstore windows where the public could see him working. The whole idea was to serve as a living example of the fact that writing is work.

I knew about this before the ad came out; Ellison did this many years ago, after all. But the re-release prompted in me a need to point out the obvious: If you call yourself a writer and you don't appreciate the man's vast talent and willingness to defend not just the written word by the originators of those words, you probably aren't much of a writer. In fact, I'll go even further and say you probably just want to sell books to movie production companies.

The original post, which can be read by clicking here, was quite popular and viewed many times, helped in no small part by me sharing the link on a Harlan Ellison fan page via Facebook. And that, unfortunately, is where the title of this post comes in.

If you clicked on the hyperlink above that takes you to the ad for Ellison's short story collection, you also saw an image of the man himself writing in the window of a bookstore. On that image is the name of the photographer. When I first attempted to transfer the image of the ad onto this blog and failed, I decided that, since the photo had a clear copyright credit written across it in huge letters, I could upload the picture by itself and provide a link to the order site. Apparently, I was incorrect in my assessment, as the following message from the group's moderator made painfully clear:

"I've removed your post from the [page] because it has come to my attention that you do not have permission to use that copyrighted photograph of Harlan taken by Rod Searcey, who is also a member... As of this writing, the only other person or entity that has Rod's verified permission to use the photograph is Joe Stefko, specifically for Charnel House's upcoming publication of "Ellison Under Glass". Ironically, while you honor Harlan in your blog and point out his admonition to "pay the writer", you still helped yourself to the work of another artist, in this case a photographer, without paying for or acquiring permission, despite the very obvious copyright Rod marks on his images. Your blog is excellent, and I appreciate your sincere homage to Harlan, but there is any number of public domain photographs of Harlan out there that you could use instead of Rod's. Please change the image as soon as possible, and then you can post the link to your blog again on the... page. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter."

 

Somehow my earnest attempt at honoring one of my writing idols had turned into a misguided copyright infringement situation. I confess my ignorance. I in no way understood that images used in advertising that are reprinted for the sole purpose of creating an extra platform for that advertising were an issue. I know I've done this before but it apparently never caught up to me until the one time it actually had the ability to hurt me professionally and personally.

 

Naturally I removed the image, which is why the current incarnation of the post no longer has one. Lesson learned. It's a lesson one would think I already learned when I was writing articles for different websites that required the use of public domain images only. So there it is, the tale of how I made an ass of myself.

 

But at least the group moderator called me a mensch and said he thought my blog was great. That was pretty cool.

 

Quote of the Week...

...Goes to my Faceboon friend Robin Greene:

"Heard about Moscow Bitch, erm ah Mitch, and his recent fall: Well, at least he finally brought something to the floor..."

Hypocrisy Under the Microscope: Bob Dutko

As I was driving in to work this afternoon, I decided to inflict torture upon myself by letting the radio's scan feature land on 103.5 FM WMUZ, a local Christian station. That time of day during the week is dedicated to the Bob Dutko Show, a politically oriented program designed to give the so-called Christian perspective on the issues of the day. Mostly he just calls anyone he labels as liberals hypocrites and sings Donald Trump's praises no matter what he has done or said or, for that matter, not done or said.

In his own way, Dutko is a bigger mouthpiece than Sean Hannity which is no small feat. And this wasn't my first time hearing or even enduring Dutko's diatribes (that would make a much better name for his show, I think) so I am well-acquainted with his approach. He basically delivers the conservative talking points of the day in a nauseatingly matter-of-fact-we're-just-folks-talkin' tone that appeals to an audience that despises formal speech from so-called elitists.

I have never felt the need to write about him until today.

Dutko was in rare form today. With a sob in his voice that sounded like it belonged to a grieving mother whose child was slain on the fields of battle, he went on and on about three "beloved children's' classics" that were being released in China sans all references to Christianity. That's right. His mighty heart was breaking over a Communist country that has outlawed all religion removing references to religion in foreign literature. And as if this wasn't bone-chillingly idiotic enough, he launched into a rant about the New Testament being (GASP!) rewritten to more readily reflect Chinese culture.

I can certainly understand his outrage; this has never happened before...except when it was translated into Greek...oh, and Latin...and English, French, German...you get the idea. This is a brand new thing!

Dutko's biggest butthurt was the fact that they are including Buddhist teachings in the New Testament. I won't even get into how much of Jesus' teachings sound suspiciously like they were ripped out of Buddha's mouth. What prompted this post was the arrogance from which Dutko operates, where he can actually express outrage over the supposed co-opting of his belief system when things like this exist.

Guess what? If there can be no Bible with Chinese cultural leanings, there can also be no Karate with Christian dogma planted inside it like a weed. You don't get to rip off another culture's identity, re-brand it with the Jesus seal, and then act like somebody else doing the opposite is a monster. That's not how reality works. Then again, if his listeners understand reality, they wouldn't be his listeners.

Well, I'm glad we settled that one!

First Patreon Post of August.

Before I tell you in my next post how I made an ass of myself with the photo I used in my Harlan Ellison post, I'll go ahead and let you know about my first Patreon post for the month of August. It's a quick read, clocking in at an economical 495 words. It's also a direct tie-in to my first novel, "Dreamers at Infinity's Core."

Those who read the novel and enjoyed it might find this considerably smaller-scale story interesting.

Click here, pledge at least a dollar, and start reading all the wonderfulness~