Not the Movies You Remember.

With the constant barrage of blockbuster films assaulting our senses these days, I have been thinking back to another blockbuster-filled decade and wondering how many of these current films will stand the test of time as poorly as so many of those. Will people still use words such as “awesome” to describe “Iron Man” or the “Lord of the Rings” films in ten or fifteen years? Here are ten films people considered to be pretty damn incredible at the time that have not aged well at all:

 

The Fugitive- When news of this Harrison Ford starring remake of the classic TV series dropped, I’ll admit to reacting bitterly. After all, I’d already started work on a script with Dennis Quaid in mind (A Harrison Ford type to my way of thinking) and it was a far more grounded treatment than what we got. At the time, the film seemed exciting and riveting, but age has revealed it to be overblown and suffering from a ludicrous third act reveal.

Speed- Okay, I hated this one from the outset, but even I thought it had some production level merits. Not anymore. It was yet another overwrought descent into laughable mediocrity, featuring Dennis Hopper is an embarrassingly awful scenery chewing performance and more clichéd dialogue on that stupid bus than one would find in a screenwriting class.

Demolition Man- What once seemed like a refreshingly humorous take on a tired genre now feels forced, loud and severely compromised. Stallone’s fish out of water is fine but Snipes’ overacting is painful to watch.

Forrest Gump- I’m pretty sure this movie makes everybody’s list of overrated schlock. What a cloying piece of sentimental rubbish. Hanks has never been worse and neither has Zemeckis.

Titanic- Bill Paxton once referred to this movie as a 3-hour “romance novel crap-a-thon” in an SNL skit. Whether he meant it or not, he was right. Frankly, at the risk of offending idiots, they’re the only ones who could possibly still think this historical bastardization that was obviously filmed on a soundstage was anything other than James Cameron’s massive ego run amok.

The Matrix- Oh, look. It’s Keanu Reeves again. Never mind the fact that he seems to have just recently learned to act. Nobody could have changed my opinion of this pretentious, over-the-top pile of drek.

Jurassic Park- I never understand what thrilled people about this lackluster, phoned-in excuse to introduce people to the next generation of CGI. The story was dull, the action was stagey, the acting was better than the material and the dinosaurs failed to impress. Looking at it now, the skeletal plot and dull resolution remind us that it really was an excuse to practice using new technology. Boys and their toys…

The Silence of the Lambs- If ever one needs an example of bad melodramatic Nineties acting and “Face/Off” isn’t available, look no further than this overrated glorification of serial killers. Anthony Hopkins, an actor I’ve always found rather iffy, chews scenery so hard I’m surprised he still has his teeth. Taking a character another actor infused with a quiet, subtle dread and turning it into a farcical mockery must be a talent. The less said about an apparently half-asleep Jodie Foster the better.

Braveheart- Mel Gibson is a very good director, despite his personal problems, but this is not the movie to showcase his talent. While his acting in the film is quite good (everyone’s is) the visuals are so textbook symbolic and silly the movie suffers from an overabundance of self-indulgence. If not for the admittedly kick-ass battle sequences, this woefully inaccurate portrayal with its cartoonishly evil English and virtuous Scots would be a complete waste.

Men in Black- Here’s an idea: Let’s take something people have been reporting seeing for decades in the most negative manner possible, and turn them into a pale reflection of the Ghostbusters.  Let’s make the aliens wacky and almost harmless and throw a bunch of one-liners at everybody. Oh, and let’s make sure the movie is plotless. The only saving grace for this movie is that by the third installment, all involved had apparently learned how to make an actual movie with a plot.

 

 

 

They Get Me in the UK, Man.

This hefty anthology, originally published in 2013, features one of my most intensely personal short stories called "In Green, Remembered." I usually pay an inordinate amount of attention to the American Amazon site when I apparently should be paying more attention to the UK version! British readers tend to have a firmer grasp on what I'm doing, as the below pull quote should indicate:

 "In Green Remembered", by Christopher Nadeau, is an unusual tale, evocative of memory and loss.

An Open Letter to Marvel That They Will Never Read

Dear Marvel,

 

This letter is more specifically aimed at your aptly named “Cinematic Universe” but it’s also to the overall Marvel Comics Corporation. And while I’m sure you couldn’t give a possum’s furry ass what I think of you, especially considering the enormous success you’ve achieved over the past eight years, I’m gonna share it with you anyway.

As a young boy, I read your comics all the time. I read DC, too, but yours contained an immediacy and a relatability I was drawn to on several levels. Spiderman’s youthful vulnerability, the Hulk’s doomed nobility, and of course Captain America’s struggle with never quite fitting in. Then there was the original X-Men team I was fortunate to read in reprinted form, a true metaphor for being born different and singled out because of it. Discriminated against mutants was a perfect source of relatability for this biracial young’n. The stories in these books were almost as compelling as the artwork.

As I entered my teen years, however, something changed my perspective.  A chance encounter at a comic convention, to be precise.  Conventions were different back then.  Smaller, more intimate, filled with genuine fans.  Not the pop culture ludicrousness that exists now. 

At the time, the biggest thing going in comics was your original “Secret Wars” mini-series, the epic clash between all of Marvel’s heroes and villains for the amusement of an omnipotent being known as the Beyonder. As I picked up a copy from a dealer’s table, he asked me if I liked the series. I shrugged and told him I did and he nodded. He then asked me the question I’d never asked myself: “Have you noticed how everything they claim is going to change is changed back one or two issues later?”

I stood there, mouth agape, book forgotten, staring at this seemingly wise comic sage.  What did he mean? Wasn’t that how comic book storytelling worked? Why was he making me think that was a bad thing?

Then he dropped the bomb: “Have you heard what DC’s doing?”

DC? I read their stuff, too. I loved the Justice League of America and Teen Titans. But Marvel was the king, right? That’s where all the cool stuff happened, like “Secret Wars.” Who was this guy?

Then he told me about DC’s plans to completely revamp its stagnating universe with a mini-series called “Crisis on Infinite Earths.” We didn’t have the term “Spoilers” back then but he dropped some on me anyway, including the fact that Supergirl was going to die.

“Die?” I said.

“And stay dead,” he said.

Whoa! As far as I knew, only one superhero had stayed dead and that was your Captain Marvel, who’d died of cancer a few years prior in a highly regarded graphic novel. But Mar-vell was never an A-List character like Supergirl or the next person he told me was going to die.

“The Flash???”

My head spun with the possibilities of a comic book universe where heroes could die for good and multiple Earths could be permanently wiped out of existence. I had to see this! It wasn’t that I wasn’t going to still “Make Mine Marvel” but this sounded incredible.

The next few years saw a radical change in my tastes. “Crisis” was everything that convention guy said it would be and, sadly, so was “Secret Wars.” One felt like a revolution while the other felt like a total waste of time, money and talent.

Not much has changed since then. Your books slowly became unreadable until, by the late Nineties, I wasn’t reading any of them anymore. Until I stopped buying comics altogether, DC and a handful of Image titles got my money. You see, I fell out of love with you because you no longer felt genuine. Different names assumed different mantles but you always churned out that same regrettable paint-by-numbers pointlessness that caused me to stop reading back then.

Fast forward a few years and suddenly there are Marvel movies coming out which, until recently, reminded me of the comics I obsessed over when I was a kid. But now they’re starting to look more like the comics I stopped reading and that’s a hard thing to admit. Lately, as a friend remarked, my Marvel apathy is well-documented. I just can’t seem to work up the same excitement for your films and I think it’s because the convention guy’s comments have once again run true. As much as you try and convince us that big changes are in the wind, it looks like the same old bait and switch to me.

So, Marvel. Although I want to fall in love with you all over again, and while I certainly don’t blame you for doing what millions of others love, I don’t know that I can ever feel that way a third time.

Readers who like me can't be wrong.

While Googling myself (it sounds much dirtier than it is, senior citizens) I came across this website that I'd never heard of before selling my novel, "Kaiju." And while that in itself wasn't a surprise, the fact that the book has an average of a 5-star rating certainly was a pleasant one!

Some of the English on this site indicates it's foreign, so I'm wondering if some of the readers are, too. I would love that.

 

Plot:

Walter Henderson didn't think things could get much worse He has a job he hates, a marriage that seems to be going nowhere except toward parenthood and a military past that haunts him to this day Not to mention an inappropriate workplace attraction Then someone nukes the city of Tokyo and the world is thrown into chaos For on the other side of the world, a man named Walter Henderson didn't think things could get much worse He has a job he hates, a marriage that seems to be going nowhere except toward parenthood and a military past that haunts him to this day Not to mention an inappropriate workplace attraction Then someone nukes the city of Tokyo and the world is thrown into chaos For on the other side of the world, a man named Tanaka single handedly fights a battle against an overwhelming, ancient force capable of harnessing humanity into a source of power that can literally rip open the Veil between worlds But Tanaka has grown old and cannot do it alone This follows a powerful man s quest for the next great ally in his cause, a quest that takes Tanaka from Japan to the Middle East to France and, finally, to a troubled man named Walter Henderson whose newly emerging powers just might engulf him before he can be of use

From the "Crap You Just Can't Make Up" Files.

Children of the 1970's and 80s should remember Hanna-Barbera's "The Wacky Races" featuring Mutley and a host of other bizarre characters from that company's second-tier. I never though this obscure gem would be the thing that signaled how far into absolute ridiculousness pop culture had descended. But it is! Behold below DC Comics' Mad-Max-style reimagining of "The Wacky Races!"

If you lean toward the screen, you can actually hear the end of civilization approaching~

"The Good Fight" Available on Kindle for Only $2.99!

The Embry Press anthology featuring my short story "The Hero Disease" and other quality stories is only $2.99 through Kindle. One reader referred to my story as, " An insightful look at the superhero in all of us."

Dark Little Dreams Released

This anthology featuring a short story by me was released to a rather positive review in Publishers Weekly. And while the review doesn't mention me, it's an honor to be included in such a high quality collection.

10 REASONS WHY I MAKE A LOUSY FANBOY

1.     I seem to dislike what most of you like. For instance, I despise “Game of Thrones” and barely tolerate the abject stupidity of “The Walking Dead.” I also view “The Big Bang Theory” as a fanboy minstrel show with no redeeming value.

2.     Fan theories are useless, annoying dead air that adds nothing to fandom except a format for human annoyances with far too much free time and a disturbingly over-developed love of retconning.

3.     Genre often bores me to the point where I spend long stretches wanting nothing to do with it.

4.     I regard fan fiction as an abomination. Either create your own stuff or step aside.

5.     The reasons fanboys tend to give for liking something (i.e. “Deadpool” was high-larious!) fall upon deaf ears when it comes to me. Well, maybe not deaf. I hear them. I just wish I didn’t.

6.     Taking sides in some arbitrary “war” between franchises is akin to plantation-era slavery except fanboys should know better.

7.     Cosplay is one of the primary factors in my decision to no longer attend conventions as a consumer; this is not based on a hatred of costuming in general, but a reaction to the pervasive elitist attitudes the increase in its presence has caused.

8.     I don’t believe in brand loyalty in any way shape or form. I have my preferences and my favorites, but I would never choose one or two things to the exclusion of all others. For example, while I prefer “Star Wars,” I can still enjoy “Star Trek.”

9.     I refuse to see sequels to genre films I hated just because fanboy “wisdom” thinks the first film is often a setup for a good movie yet to be made. That’s a level of compromise that relates directly to number 8.

10.  I’m not a close-minded purist. I don’t adhere to a certain version of a character or concept that’s been around for decades and then bitch when someone develops a new interpretation. I like it when my comfort zone is disturbed, which is why I had no problem with the “Star Trek” reboot or “Man of Steel” and its sequel.

 

 

The Year of the Reprint?

I'm starting to think 2016 will indeed be the Year of the Reprint for me. I've already received two copies of "Dark Little Dreams" in the mail featuring my short story, "The Love of a Good Entity" and recently received word that The Horror Zine will be publishing a best of anthology featuring the seemingly undying "Always Say Treat."

The latter collection is still in its infancy so I'll update as details become available. Meanwhile, I cannot endorse the former enough. It is an impressive collection of dark fiction!

Upcoming Anthology Release Cover!

The anthology I wrote about back in September has a cover:

From the website:
"Compiled by Bad Dream Entertainment founder and editor Brett Reistroffer, readers will explore fifteen stories of dark contemporary fiction from the likes of Bram Stoker Award winner Eric J. Guignard, Spanish author Santiago Eximeno, Christopher Nadeau, MP Johnson, Brian Culp, Mark Patrick Lynch, Louis Rakovich, Travis Burnham, Tim Jeffreys, Robert G. Ferrell, Anna Yeatts, Gerri Leen, Jay Seate, and Birney Reed."

My Thoughts on the "Exposure as Payment" Non-troversey.

Basically, people are waking up to the notion that publishers who only offer "exposure" are offering an intangible they can neither guarantee nor quantify. And since there have been no studies I know of detailing the supposed benefits of such an arrangement, it's safe to say at this point exposure remains unmeasured and, sadly, most likely not worth a helluva lot in the long run. This is especially true for writers who actually need money in their bank accounts.

That's not to say I haven't submitted work to publishers who promised exposure. I not only have, but I've also been published by some of them. I've even developed pretty good working relationships with some of them and have sent them stories from time to time when they were short of filling an anthology.  But would I recommend doing it as an ongoing practice in the hopes that there will be some sort of positive outcome beyond seeing one's name on in the table of content? Hell no.

I have known many writers in my time and, while personalities vary sometimes wildly, we all have one thing in common when it comes to our writing: We work our asses off to get it as good as we can. The operative word in that sentence is, of course, work. Imagine interviewing for a job with some company or municipality and being told by the hiring manager how much they look forward to hiring you but just so you know, this is a "for the love" position so it only "pays" in networking opportunities. Would you take it?  Maybe if you were just starting out and needed to get some work experience for your resume. Flash forward a few years or even a decade later: Would you still be willing to accept employment on that basis?

That is, ultimately, the crux of the negativity towards exposure-only markets. Many feel they take advantage of new writers who are so desperate for publication they will gladly give away the result of their sweat and tears. That's probably not an entirely wrong point of view, but a lot of people who get into small publishing do it because of a love for the field and a genuine desire to help writers find outlets for their work. As with most issues, there are not clear cut villains an victims. 

The rise of online publishing has given rise to a glut of publishers trying to maintain their concerns with as little in the way of expenditures as possible.  Not having to pay writers can mean the difference between their websites remaining operational and not.  But as with any piece of decent journalism, what happens when we follow the money? Who exactly is making money off these ventures? It's a sure bet the web designer got paid. If not directly, then through some other back-end means. The same goes for the owner, who surely gets ad revenue and makes money from the hits the site receives.  In some cases, the artists get paid because their work is what often draws readers to the site, despite the fact that the writing keeps them there.

I've worked for people who thought I should have been so giddy over the fact that they were publishing me that I didn't deserve much of anything. I've written for a place that did pay me but then decided it couldn't anymore while still offering to allow me to publish my work for free if I so chose because, apparently, being published is the same as getting paid as far as they're concerned. I know all about the disrespect writers receive, especially in the United States.

So, is exposure a worthy form of "payment?" In the beginning, when I was building a list of published credits, I guess. Now? After having published dozens of short stories and two novels? Again, hell no.

However, to quote the great Obi-Wan Kenobi, "You must do what you feel is right, of course."


*Meanwhile, check out this cartoon.