Author Archives: Bob Evans

Quickie Movie Review: The Big Combo

My current novel in progress is a science-fiction noir and to put myself in the right mental head-space for plotting it out I am watching a lot of noir films. This week I discovered one that is apparently a favorite of Joss Whedon, The Big Combo. Whedon nods to this movie in his feature film Serenity by naming  twins character duo after a two-man button team from this film, Fanty and Mingo.

Big ComboThis film follows a straight-laced police detective, Leonard Diamond as he tries to bring down an underworld Boss, Mr. Brown. Brown is played with oily smoothness by Richard Conte who played another slick underworld boss in the classic film The Godfather.

For most of this film, I was engaged, but not enthralled. The characters were likable enough and the writing and the production competent enough to make for a watchable experience before bed. (I like to watch 20-30 minutes of stuff to unwind after writing and editing and then go to sleep.)

I didn’t understand why someone of Joss’ talents might have a special place for this film until about an hour in and then the plot twisted into a new and novel shape. Most movies I can see their ‘surprises’ long before the actual reveal. It goes with plotting your own, but not this time. This one, and clearly I am not going to tell you what it comes out of the blue and yet was not forced or gimmicky.

The film has fallen into the public domain so you can likely find it in all sorts of places. I streamed it from Hulu. It’s less than 90 minutes and worth at least one viewing if this genre interests you.

 

Share

Movie Review: Jurassic World

Friday Night my plans for the night fell through and after a pleasant evening spent with my jurassic worldsweetie-wife I went to the theater and watched the newest installment in the ‘Jurassic‘ franchise. Of the previous three films I have seen two of them in the theater and Jurassic Park III I watched on blu-ray when I picked up the boxed set at a decent price. So I am a fan but not a particularly hard core one. I was not determined the watch this installment on the big screen, but the chance arose and I do believe that a film is best viewed in a proper theater.

Short review: I enjoyed it but I did not love it.

The film is set twenty years after the original Jurassic Park. Jurassic World is a going concern having made real Hammond’s vision of a zoo/theme park with living biological attractions. The story borrows and lifts from previous franchise themes and characters, but in a simplified manner reducing all the people to stock characters with little to inject life into them. Protagonists Corporate characters are cold business people who have a change of heart learning what is really important in life. Child characters are siblings living under the threat of a family dissolution. Scientist characters are haughty in their arrogance in the face of nature and disrespectful of their creations. (There’s an argument to be made that the I-Rex is really a new version of the Frankenstein tale.) Villainous military characters see only the potential for war and death, though the concept of V. Raptors replacing soldiers or drones ranks for stupidity right up their with the company’s weapons division obsession w the Zeta Reticulian parasite in Alien. Chris Pratt’s character is the wise uber-competent hero who is rarely wrong and needs no life lessons to learn.

All that said, and these are real flaws, the films was fun in a theme park kind of way. (I was also amused just how much the set of Jurassic World looked like the theme park Universal Studios.) the film pretty much jumps to action with just minimal set-up and once the action starts, it runs at full speed, pausing occasionally for nods and camera-winks to the original film, and then right back to the scientifically implausible I-Rex and her need for violence.

If you like films with lots of action, and you can tune down your disbelief enough this film is enjoyable, but not one worthy of repeated viewings.

Share

Not a movie post

I had planned to post and talk about the classic 1973 film The Wicker Man. (Yes, I have post before on that movie but it is one of my favorite and I watched it last night in tribute to Sir Christopher Lee’s passing.)

However events today have changed my plans.

As of today I can announce that I am now represented by the Virginia Kidd Agency. They have accepted my novel and I look forward to a long and productive partnership with this prestigious agency.

 

Share

Getting a tad despondent over my D&D Game

So for a number of years I have been running a 3.5 D&D campaign setting. For the last four years it has been a particular campaign. Sadly of late I feel like the game is getting out of control and beyond my ability of manage. That has brought several issue to the fore concerning 3.5 and how much I have come to loath certain aspects of the system.

1) Wizard’s Wal-mart

The variation of D&D that i learned, knew best, and enjoyed the most, A D&D had now rules for the buying or selling of magical items or spells. You found them as loot. 3.5 introduced crafting rules, selling rules, and buying rules. In my opinion that has horribly damaged the tone of the game. Where once magical items were things of power, rare and unusual, now they are consumer goods. When players obtain treasure the motivation is to sell it so they can go shopping and buy the magical items that they really want. The whole concept of item being tied to story is trashed. In addition to devaluing the emotional impact of magical items, this has the larger effect of transforming settings from quasi-medieval to sort of a pre-industrial consumerist culture. Magic isn’t rare and strange power, it’s just a skill set like programming or drafting.

2) Mundane Magic

I can recall clearly looking around at my players and noticing that everybody save one cast spells. The proliferation of new and unusual classes and prestige classes has so greatly inflated the number of potential spell casters that being a spell caster is nothing of note. The use of magic in such a situation quickly becomes no more interesting than the use of any tool. Magic has been demystified from arcane and unknown lore to a set of Ikea instructions.

3) There’s a rule and an exception for everything

Once upon a time I ran long running campaigns with only three books. The DMs guide, the Players Handbook, and the Monster Manual. That was it. The entire library needed to play my campaign. Currently on my shelf there are 31 rule books. Every single one introduces new character classes, new spells, new feats, new items and new ways of doing things that have to be integrated into the existing system. It makes StarFleet Battles look positively straight-forward. Of all the players in my game both active and those on a temporary hiatus, very few come from just the core books. Running a game is often derailed into not only looking up a rule, but trying to find which cursed tome holds the information.

4) Complexity Curses Spontaneity

Back in my days of running an A D&D games I often rans for hours with very few notes, flying by the seat of pants through the encounters and storyline of the game. 3.5, just the core books, introduces a level of complexity that make spontaneous encounters quite difficult. Once the ‘splat’ books are added it becomes an impossibility. (At least for me.) Every encounter must be pre-generated, the numerous statistics documented, and the paperwork prepared. All this is doubly true if your players are of the sort who challenge rulings causing the game to stop so the 31 rulebooks can be consulted, If the player group diverges significantly from the expected play line the games usually has to stop because the system impedes ‘winging it.’

5) Behold the Mighty Munchkin

Start with a system that from its complexity rewards detailed attention, add in 31 books of exceptions to rules and interesting abilities, mix on top of that the ability to pick and choose your magic items at Wizard’s Wal-mart and you have the ideal recipe for Munchkin Mayhem. A player with even a modicum on intelligence and the will to do the research can craft characters that engines of efficiency, molded from the right classes, the right feats, the right spells, the right items to be far more powerful than a ‘standard’ character of that level. Worse yet such players tend to drag the entire campaign down the rabbit hole of combat calculations.  No one wants a weak link in the team and the advice on builds end up guiding everyone down the ideological paths.

 

That’s my rant, my course of action?

I don’t know.

Share

Classic Universal Horror Movie Mini-Marathon

So last weekend I had a couple of friends over and we had a mini-marathon of a few select films from Universal Classic Horror movies. There were three of us and we each selected one film from my new 8 movie Blu-ray boxed set.

Watching in release order we started with Frankenstein (1931).

The second classic horror film produced by Universal Frankenstein followed the boffo box office hit Dracula. Boris Karloff, a working actor at Universal found his star making role in his mime performance as the monster. Possibly more than any other production this film set the image in people mind’s of the sympathetic monster. Tormented by the lab assistant Fritz (Not Igor, Ygor was not to appear for another two films.) the monster is presented as being placed in a incomprehensible world of cruelty and persecution. One elements I do wish other filmmakers take away from this production is how quickly it gets into the meat of the story. When we meet Henry Frankenstein at the films start he is already in the grips of his obsession. We do not waste a quarter or more of the screen time explaining why he has the obsession, exposition that only drags back the force of modern production.

The next film up was The Mummy (1933)

Another franchise launching film again staring Karloff, now billed as Karloff the Uncanny, The Mummy stands apart as a movie monster that is not in someway based upon old European myths. The nation, nay the world, had been gripped by Egyptian fever in the 1920s and this fascination had yet to die  away at the start of the sound era. In 1999 Universal re-launched this franchise with a remake which relied heavily on elements from this film and to a lesser degree from the original sequel The Mummy’s Hand. While the 1999 film presented things with a large dose of camp and world threatening danger, the 1933 film is more tightly focused dealing with danger to just one person and an atmosphere of danger and horror rather than action and effects.

We finished with Creature From the Black Lagoon (1954)

My favorite of the classic Universal Horror movies, Creature is the most recognizable as a modern monster/horror film. Presented without the gothic overtones found in the other movies, this is a tale of scientific exploration and evolution’s dead-end branches. Chasing an amazing fossil find a small team of scientists quickly finds themselves trapped in the South American Jungle, somehow with an always heard and never seen kookaburra that must have gotten lost from Australia, fighting for their lives against a amphibious humanoid with deviant tastes.

Share

The Delicate Deception of Word Choice

There has been a lot of stories in the media lately concerning marriage equality and businesses that assert the right to withholding services to participants of same-sex weddings. In almost every case a very sly bit of slight-of-hand is used in these stories that subtly bias the piece.

Word choice is paramount in writing, Mark Twain advised aspiring writers to always use the precise word, noting that there is a world of difference between ‘lightning and lightning bug.’ A similar but I suspect quite deliberate word substitution going on in many of these pieces. Consider the following sentence:

The baker has strong religious convictions.

That’s a clear, declarative statement that is perfectly logical. Now let’s change one word:

The bakery has strong religious convictions.

Huh? How does a bakery have religious convictions, strongly held or otherwise. A bakery is a business, a company, a baker is a person and the two are not the same.

What is going on is that the person who owns the bakery is asserting that his business has the same religious beliefs as a person does and the owner is doing it to retain the option of    discriminating who is served and under what conditions.

I assure that this concept that the baker and the bakery are one and the same is purely a marriage of convenience. Let that bakery produce a product that poisons a wedding party and you will swiftly find that the baker’s assets are separate and protected from the bakery’s assets.

 

Share

Movie Marathon

So for my birthday I got the Universal Classic Horror Collection on Blu-Ray. This Sunday I am going to have a mini marathon of three films. The question is which three?

Here is what is in the collection:

Dracula

Frankenstein

The Invisible Man

Bride of Frankenstein

The Mummy

Creature from the Black Lagoon

Phantom of the Opera (1942)

The Wolf-Man

 

Suggestions as to which three should be selected?

Share

A bit of music

And answering a very minor debate from last weekend….

youtube placeholder image

Share

The P’s of Politics

There is a famous saying that ‘politics is the art of the possible.’ As far as it goes that is true, but there are additional P’s to couple with politics, Principle and Priorities and it is these secondary P’s that are often in conflict and often denied for their importance.

Principle is not dogma. Dogma is inflexible. Dogma does not admit the half-loaf and demand only total victory. Dogma demands total fealty. Principle is a guidepost, a map, not a straight jacket.

Priority is about what matters more. If we are being mature about our politics and realistic about our expectations, then priority becomes important and presents us with the most difficult decisions.

For example I support gun rights and I support marriage equality, it is quite rare to find an acceptable candidate that holds both of those positions. Therefore when looking at candidates I end up, via my vote, prioritizing one over the other. In practice it tends to be marriage equality, while I support gun rights I must be honest that it is a secondary cause and that the fight there has to wait while a more important battle is waged.

In my experience most people have the conflicting priorities, but they rarely are honest with themselves in their hierarchy. In my positions they would proclaim themselves both for gun right and marriage equality, claiming the honorable mantle of both camps while ignoring the ground facts of their actual support.

 

Share