Author Archives: Bob Evans

Thoughts on 2001: A Space Odyssey

Last night I attended a 70mm screening of the classic science-fiction film 2001: A Space Odyssey. Released in 1968 2001 represents what might be considered the pinnacle of cinematic SF before the K/T event eight years later, Star Wars. While there continued to be released a number of low brow monster and invasion films throughout the 1950s and 1960’s, cinematic SF was, until Star Wars, moving towards a more idea centered adult focused set of stories.

Directed by Stanley Kubrick and written by Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke, 2001 deals with the gigantic themes of the origin of humanity and our possible fate. In other essays I have discussed the difference between story and plot with 2001 I want to introduce another approach, the Idea Centered Narrative.

Where story is chiefly concerned with the evolution of a character and that character’s eventual change, and plot is focuses on objectives and the barriers impeding the achievement of those goals, idea driven narratives are concerned with big thoughts and exploring theoretical landscapes. With less focus on individual characteristics idea centered narrative are often more symbolic, impressionistic, and, particularly with film, strikingly visual. This definition fits 2001perfectly.

2001 can be broken down in five acts; 1-The Dawn of Man, 2-Clavius, 3-The Discovery, 4-The Horror of Hal, and 5-Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite. Others has noticed that each act makes a reference to birthdays and births a central and recurring motif throughout the film as it deals with the up-lift of humanity, symbolically shown by way of Bowman’s transformation, into a post-singularity species. Across the five acts there is no single character to follow, Bowman is in three but only in two acts does he service as an audience Point of View. Instead of a singular character, 2001, presents humanity as a whole as its character and the vehicle for its ideas. Humanity transforms, first from a pre-intelligent hominid into a thinking and reasoning animal, then into a complex but divisive species cooperating and competing as individuals and nations, and finally into the cosmic, alien, and unknowable ‘star child.’ This is a movie that is not concerned with any individual’s problems or challenges, not Moonwatcher the hominid, not Hayward the administrator, and not the doomed astronaut Bowman. Rather the central ‘character’, much like how a landscape or a city can be a ‘character’ in a film, is humanity itself and these various individuals stand in for humanity at key moments in its evolution, an evolution that is directed by unseen, unimaginably power, alien intelligences. I find it fascinating that of the five acts it is act that where Kubrick swore off the Hollywood mainstay, the close-up. Bring the camera right into the subject’s face has been thoroughly accepted mechanism for creating intimacy and empathy between the subject and the audience. Across the entire film we have close-up of our heroic astronauts, Bowman and Poole, of non-human characters such as Hal and Moonwatcher, but not when we are with the most human centered aspect of the movie, the discovery of the lunar monolith and the elaborated conspiracy keeping it secret. Instead keeps us at arms length, emotionally distant from all of these characters. I am not sure what I think about this choice; it’s one that I shall ponder for quite awhile.

There’s no doubt that 2001: A Space Odyssey deserves if venation as a cinematic masterpiece. One of the most thoughtful and though-provoking films of any era 2001 stands as giant and seeing it in 70mm was a real treat.

Share

Truly A Terrible President

To me it is an inescapable observation that Trump is a terrible president. Hot-headed, shallow in thought and knowledge, indulgent, petty, mean, vindictive and with a fragile ego he possessed no quality that qualifies him for the responsibilities of his office. I say this as someone who has voted for more Republican presidential candidates than Democratic ones.

This week we learned that from a leaked letter that Trump and his people have argued that it is impossible for the President, because he is, by virtue of his position as the head of the executive branch, the vehicle of justice in this nation, to obstruct justice. He cannot be subpoenaed, indicted, and possesses the power to pardon fully himself. Utilizing laws passed to ensure that the nation’s military can command critical resources during an emergency, he has taken personal power with the potential of greatly impact the national and world economy. He has abandoned the norms of American political power, dismissing many who refuse to be cowed yes-men, going so far as to suggest, albeit in his own sense of jest, that perhaps he should stay on past the constitutionally limited two terms. He has suggested at Article 5 of NATO isn’t important. He keeps his finances opaque while foreign nation pour money into projects in which has he has a financial interest. He distances us from our Allies has be gets friendly with dictators and tyrants.
And yet it would seem that there are vast number of people who do not seem to see the same defects in Trump as I do. It is always possible that I see through a bias and they do not, the first element of wisdom is humility in certitude and recognizing the possibility of error. However facts are stubborn things and I can see no reasonable narrative constructed from the known facts and observations that lead to any other conclusion. Many of the same people who now find Trump an adequate president found spurious fault easily seen in the previous president, seriously undercutting their observations of Trump as an acceptable president.

This is poisonous partisanship. This is the end result of my team is always right. This is the threat to self-governance that we must face. Yes, this tribalism exists on both sides, I have seen numerous distortions and false stories spread by those who see only evil in the conservative parties, but truly their transgression are far less than those defending this presidency, this graft, and threat to our way of life. These times will not only try our souls it will try out nation’s.

Share

Navigating Beta Reads

Getting feedback on a narrative piece is always tricky. It starts with the fact that all art is opinion and all feedback on art is opinion, none of this is quantifiable or subject to objective measurement such as say the Speed of Light or the rate of radioactive decay. A piece of art, no matter how terrible or great you may value it has those who love and those who hate it. Given that starting point what I look for in feedback is consensus. If several people tell me ‘X’ then ‘X’ is more likely something that will resonated across more readers than if one person holds that opinion. This is why having a diverse group of readers is so very helpful and why every person’s opinion is valuable.

Honestly that part is the easy part, what is more difficult is maintaining a distance between yourself and the actual feedback. It is easy to become dejected at a harsh critique, one where the feedback found very little to praise or recommend, and the natural inclination to avoid that dejection is a total rejection of that feedback, but this serves no one well. Even if that critique is an outlier among the rest it represents a point of view that others in a wider readership are likely to hold and should be considered and not dismissed out of hand.

Equally dangerous is the critique that praises. These can induce joy and elation and present the danger that they are valued over other feedback. Just as with the harsh criticism it is important to maintain some level of objectivity and see what elements you may or may not agree with in the feedback.

There are no right answers, there are no wrong answers, this is all personal taste and the waters of beta reads are filled with treacherous shoals ready to wreck to unwary.

Share

Movie Review: Solo: A Star Wars Story

There are really two ways the deal with this sort of prequel movie, explore untold aspects of the backstory to deepen our understanding of a character or perform ‘fan service’ giving answers to some of the character’s known aspects. Taking the first route runs the danger of running your narrative aground in a manner that is inconsistent with what has already been established as well as telling a story that no one wanted while the latter runs the risk has being all sizzle and no steak, an exercise in call-backs and in-joke references that have little appeal beyond a core fan-base.

So which route did Solo: A Star Wars Storytake? Both. And achieved middling success on both fronts leaving us with a film that is competently crafted but largely empty of any real theme, story, or substance.

Solotells the back-story of Han Solo, rogue, smuggler, and surprising hero of the Battle of Yavin. It does not seek to subvert the know aspects of Han’s character, as the surprising good Pink Fivedoes when it tackles the Battle of Yavin, nor does it reveal anything that we did not already understand about Han. Solotakes time to show us key moments we already knew about from Han’s history, getting the Falcon, meeting Chewie, and the film also shows us things we hadn’t know about his early life and early loves, but it doesn’t do this in a manner that tells a compelling character arc but rather attempts to dazzle the audience with thrilling action and daring exploits. The action is well staged, the heists and capers interesting and fit well into the Star Wars universe delivering a film that modestly fun, watchable, but falls short of having a real story.

As I have said in another post I draw a distinction between plot and story. Plot is the physical task and objectives for a character, can Bond stop Drax from nerve gassing the entire world is a plot. Story is the change in the character, Bond learning to love and giving up the service is a story that ends up being tied to a plot.

Solois nearly all plot and what story there is is underserviced. I think the producers and LucasFilm were caught in a bind and lacked the courage to tell what I think would have been the essential story that could have formed to core of the film. When we meet Han Solo in Star Warshe is a self-centered cynic, a man who breaks the law for his own enrichment, and who sticks his neck out for no one. He undergoes a transformation by the Battle of Yavin when he returns, adding just enough to flip the battle and save the day, putting himself on the path that leads to heroism. Han can’t end Soloas that heroic figure and enter Star Warsas that cynic. To me the story should be one where he starts as an idealist, gets that beaten out of him and ends as a cynic leaving him set up for redemption in Star Wars. Soloattempts to split that difference and as such ends up with empty action that is fun to watch but lacking in meaning and emotional punch.

The cast is uniformly with stand-put performances from Donald Glover as Lando Calrissian and a scene stealing turn by Pheobe Waller-Bridge as Lando’s droid L3.  My final judgment is that Solo: A Star Wars Story is a middle grade movie, not a bad one but not a really good one either. Given the large-scale action it is fun to watch in a theater but it will in all likelihood not join my growing physical media collection.

Share

Movie Review: Deadpool 2

If I have to tell you who or what a Deadpool is then this movie is not for you. Following on the heals of the surprise box office success of the first Deadpool20th Century Fox green-lit a serious R-rated superhero film Logan, and the audience rewarded with another resounding financial success. Given those two data points it is hardly surprising that the sequel toDeadpoolwould not only be green-lit but a substantial budget increase, allowing for more special effects, a larger cast, and an expanded scope. The question is can Deadpooljustify a larger cast, more special effects, and an expanded scope?

The answer is yes.

Where Deadpool fulfilled the customary checkboxes for a superhero origin story, Deadpool 2delves deeper into the character and he tortured transition into a semblance of a hero. Playing a familiar theme, an invincible time-traveling cyborg with a murderous mission, Deadpool find himself bereft of his usual emotional support and grappling with the meaning of family.  In this respect, defining family and what it means, Deadpool2shares significant genetic material with the aforementioned Logan. Where Loganapproached the material as a western tragedy Deadpool 2utilizes the sharp incisive tool of parody and satire to dissect their themes and characters.

As with the first film this sequel revels in set piece action sequences, graphic bloody violence, and fourth wall shattering commentary. The comedy comes as quickly as the bullet hits and broken bones, from the first sequence to the parody of Marvel’s post-credit buttons, Deadpool 2never forgets the funny, while weaving also a story about something, about the things that give life meaning. The movies never dragged and never felt long, sprinting from the start to the finish.
If you enjoyed the first Deadpoolthen you need to see this one in the theater.

Share

Memorial Day

Well, the long weekend has passed and we have now returned from our beaches, our grills, and our games to perform our daily services but as this holiday recedes let us not forget the people it was intended to honor; our fallen service men and women.

Fallen does not have to mean combat. Though we have been in active operational combat continuously since later 2001 I think it is a factor often overlooked just how dangerous military service is even when you are not participating in combat operations.

The men and women of our armed services practice, operate, and maintain complex and dangerous system, devices, both weapon system and support system, that very easily present a danger to life and limb.

In my brief service as a member of the United States Navy, a life that I was ill suited for; such tragedies stuck my own ship. I took part in a single deployment to the Western Pacific in 1981and on that cruise two men lost their lives. One was a marine who fell from a helicopter during operations, and from a great height the sea is no more forgiving to a falling body that the cold hard ground. The second death was a navy Chief who testing repairs on a helicopter when a bad roll of the ship caused the aircraft to strike the deck as a sharp angle, shattering the rotors, sending their shards as shrapnel across the deck, and tumbling the helicopter over the side. Men were maimed but the accident and we never recovered the chief.

Remember and think upon all the dangers our men and women face everyday in their service to our nation, our ideals, and our safety.

Share

But the Underdog is Supposed to Win

Narrative fiction, at least in the western tradition, pretty much bakes into the cake the idea that the underdog is supposed to win. There is little dramatic tension is the protagonist gas significant material advantage in their quest that assist them in overcoming the hurdles between them and their goal. The more overmatched the protagonist is the more we thrill to their eventual victory. (Excepting, of course, tragedies and the literature that descends from that tradition.)

This expectation that the underdog emerges victorious is even more pronounced in American fiction. American mythology’s foundation of rugged colonialists making a new nation against the backdrop of hostile natives, starvation, and overcoming the most powerful empire on the planet to win their freedom, all conspire to make us the most rebel loving people in the world.

This cultural background is the reason I suspect that 1998’s romantic comedy You’ve Got Mailis one of the least loved films staring Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks. There are spoilers in the essay.

Based on a play that was later made into an earlier film The Shop Around the Corner, Mail, is about two business rivals locked in a fierce and unequal contest that unwittingly have been falling for each other by way of anonymous chats and emails. Ryan, playing Kathleen, is the owner of a beloved local bookstore and Hanks, as Joe, runs a massive bookstore chain very much like a fictionalized Barnes & Noble. Hanks and Ryan have a tremendous on-screen chemistry and the pairing off of these two actors has yielded a number of beloved films including Joe versus the Volcanoand Sleepless in Seattle, but ask people about this movie and you’ll often get a fairly negative response. As in most romantic comedies by the end of You’ve Got Mail the destined pair are a couple, having overcome all the obstacles that attempted to bar their love, one of which was the capitalist competition between their businesses. That ended with the bankruptcy of the beloved little bookstore. The underdog lost. Pluck, heart, and fierceness did not carry the day, no amount of spirit could overcome the massive economies of scale that advantaged Jo’s chain over Kathleen’s store, It wasn’t personal, it was business and he crushed her, a plot turn that I think very few could forgive and certainly never forget. (Though of course if you extend the story forward Joe’s business, Fox Books, eventually gets crushed by the on-line retailer Amazon.com because the wheel always turns.)

You’ve Got Mailis one of my favorite romantic-comedies and one I often re-watch, but I can understand why so many people have a visceral unease about the movie, it violates in a non-tragedy plot, what we have always come to believe is the only just outcome, the Underdog wins.

Share

Honest Loyalty Cannot be Forced

“Say you love me or you’re going to get it.”

That invented quote is of course absurd, any utterance of affection under such a threat steals away the possibility of meaning and sincerity from what is spoken. One aspect and definition of patriotism is love for one’s country, and just as with personal love that cannot be forced. Dictatorships around the globe force people to stand, sing, and praise and it fools no one. It results in the ultimate expression of symbolism over substance and that is the same outcome for the NFL’s anti-protesting rule.

For a sport already facing a growing backlash over its treatment of its players and apparent lack of concern over their health I think this latest move is of questionable strategic value. There have already been a number of people uneasy about their enjoyment of the sport’s spectacle and giving even more ammunition and reason for people to boycott the games and the telecasts if less than wise.

The owners changed the rule without consulting with the players’ union and frankly if I were the players I would start building support for a strike. This heavy-handed shut up and do what I say approach is not one that will smooth the rough waters.

There are those who bemoan that politics has invaded every aspect of life, but I have found very few of those are willing to throw out the playing of the anthem as a solution, even though it’s performance is a recent addition to the show. In general people only gripe about a ‘political invasion’ into sports or the arts when it is a branch of politics with which that they do not agree. Given the apparent lack of concern about assaults, domestic abuse, animal abuse, and all manner of unsavory behavior NFL players have displayed over the years it’s unconvincing that the Owners are taking any sort of moral high road with this action but rather the poor beleaguered billionaires are acting as toadies to the President. The owners are not billionaires because they own football teams they own football teams because they are billionaires. They have vast economic interests, interests that the federal government influences and this move is yet another example of Trump’s corrupting influence on our nation.

Share

The Between Projects Break

Sunday I sent out the first of five acts from my latest Work in Progress to my Beta readers. This leaves me, at the moment, without an active writing project on my desktop. Oh, there’s a secret project that I work on intermittently as practice and an experiment into adaptation, though steering clear of anything that’s still under copyright, but for original material that I’d be sending straight to a market, nothing is currently in progress.

I don’t know if it is a good sign or a bad sign but for the novel that has just started its beta read process I have really good feeling about it. I am quite happy with how it turned out and it’s overall tone and effect seemed on target. That said I have had a few projects die at the beta read step. It’s hard when you’ve worked on a novel, banged out 80-90 thousand words and the result is a flawed piece that needs to be rewritten from the ground up. Though it is hard to hear that news it is also important to accept it, to look upon the wart and faults with honest eyes and learn from the failure. Failure teaches far more than success provided you listen to its lessons.

So with no active projects that means I have more time for relaxation and recharging the creative juices. Luckily I recently obtained a number of cool Blu-rays with tons of bonus material and the 15-episode documentary The Story of Film. This is perfect for soaking in knowledge and growing as an artist while I lazily sit on the loveseat not writing.

One of the movies I picked up was the most recent Blu-ray edition of The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the Eight Dimension.The documentary is longer than the film it documents and has been wonderful to watch. Its interesting to speculate on what sort of film it would have been had Tom Hanks been the lead, as apparently nearly happened, or if Jordan Cronenweth, the cinematographer who shot Blade Runner, had remained as the Director of Photography.

This pause in creative output will not last very long. My mind is already banging out the rough structure of my first horror novel and I can feel the anticipation and drive building, soon the muse will once again be in command.

Share

Who Knew that Kim Jong-Un Read Peanuts?

A few months ago, though really I think it has been a matter of weeks, things looked strangely good for Trump as a diplomat. He brought the North Koreans to the table apparently willing to talk about giving up their nuclear weapons and his followers chanted ‘Nobel’ like it was a sports championship.

But now it seems that thing are falling apart and it seems the North Koreans are unwilling to surrender their prized and expensive nuclear weapons.

Some have blamed this on Bolton, Trump’s senior National Security Adviser and a man who still thinks that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a good idea. Bolton has compared the North Korean talk tot he deal made with Libya, you know that place where the citizens revolted, overthrew their dictator, and killed in cowering in the street, Granted that image I am certain does not prompt good feelings and pleasant dreams in the mind of Kim Jong-um, a man, despite his resemblance to the Pillsbury Dough Boy, brutally slaughters his own family members. I do not think it was merely Bolton’s mouthing-off that has now derailed the summit.

Trump has announced a date and place for the summit and after he did that Kim comes out and yanks the prize away. This leaves Trump with two options, go to the summit with the one things the rest of the world really really wanted, North Korea nukes off the table, making the summit a prominent propaganda coup for Kim, and make no mistake sitting at the table as an equal with the President of the United States, even this one, without having to even discuss surrounding his bombs is a huge win for Kim, or Trump cancels and is humiliated on the world stage by ‘little rocket man.’ Kim will gain a win no matter what Trump does and we will be left with a bunch of commemorative coins proclaimed Kim as ‘Supreme Leader.’ (Just imagine Fox news if Obama or any Democrat had called Kim by that status.)

My bet is that Trump will go, rather than face public humiliation but I would place money on that.

Share