I'm Glad I Wore Pants (Running Out of Post Names Here...)

   I went to bed immediately after making yesterday's post. That was around 11 at night. I woke up, I took a shower, I looked at the clock. It was 11 in the morning. For intents and purposes of productivity and being in sleep/wake mode, I slept for twelve hours last night. It is 11:00 pm while I write this. I have been awake for 12 hours now.

   It's just, with photographs, old photographs, like I was saying. What will these eyes see, these eyes that for one brief moment looked in earnestness to the camera? How many tears will they know?

   Stuff like that.

   Plato uses the analogy of a line divided into four sections. Plato loved that kind of stuff. Forms as the highest ideal, illusions as the lowest. You get the drill. I... guess this has something to do with the form versus content theme. As I think about it, less and less so. Meaning I'm stuck for a topic today. Besides bad fanfic. I could tell you stories, man.

   Oh, the stories I could tell...

Old Photographs

   I... cried. There's no other way to describe it.

And That's It

   Alright, sorry for the diversions. I really still couldn't get the scanner to work. Now I've got it, we're ready to continue. Back to the topics I was discussing; hopefully this will tie it all up, pull all these different strands together.

   Scott McCloud, the inventor of 24 hour comics, also authored Understanding Comics, one of if not the most premier guides to understanding the medium. In it he proposed a six-tiered creativity module, from the core idea of a work of art to its surface. I already knew that, but just now realized that fit together with this, so this should make it come full circle, tying the form-vs.-content thing to the 24 hour comic all via Scott over there.

   Between the surface and the structure lies the craft. (Between the ship and the land, the force. Between the thought and the action, the shadow.) He defines structure as "putting it all together... what to include, what to leave out... how to arrange, how to compose the work." Sounds eerily similar to my discussion of substance, so, so far so good. Surface, he defines as "production values, finishing... the aspects most apparent on first superficial exposure to the work." In other words, style. In between them, he has craft: "constructing the work, applying skills, practical knowledge, invention, problem solving, getting the 'job' done." See, this was the brilliant theory that blasts right the heck through mine that I said someone out there had. Had I known that I already knew it...

   And now, in not at all a non sequitur because the surface of my drawing is good but the structure sucks, is another snippet from my 24 hour comic:

   Urrgghh... I seriously need to learn consistency with my character models. They're just zigzagging all over. I mean look at that that is not even funny. Is his head... what? That's why I need more practice. See? I talked about needing practice Sat- Friday, totally not at 1:41 in the morning Saturday but 6:30 Friday afternoon, so, it ties together.

Dollycide

   I'm not sure how many of you are aware of this, but it would seem that Dolly Parton was killed in her apartment last night during a botched home invasion. Witnesses witnessed two adult white male Caucasian men flee from the scene. That's... that's all I've got so far.

Not Redbox, Practice Makes Perfect, Rewrites, and Style and Substance

   I'd post another Redbox pic up here, but I can't access the scanner program while the system is updating or some stuff. I knew I should have clicked on the "remind me later" option. Gahhh well. Since anything from telling you the plot to even revealing what the titular box is would sort of constitute as being spoilers, change of topic.

   Topic, topic...

   I feel I should really get some work behind me. Practice achieved, and all that. As a daily blogger, do I really expect people to go back into all of the archives? It'd be a tall order. I only skim the blogs of some of the people I actually care about as it is, why would anyone want to delve back into this blog? Though to be fair, I mostly only skim those because I'm busy delving into the archives of their web comics, and not every announcement they have to make alongside the comic would be up-to-date.

   Though there are some of those people, the kind where you revel in hanging onto every word they say. I'm not going to be that if no one cares, and no one's going to care if I don't put out professional-quality stuff. That's why I need to practice and get stuff done. Harrumph. That's logic for you, I suppose. (Though there's nothing really logical in that, as logic involves induction and we're not deducing anything new?) That's just good sense, for you, then.

   Rewriting Persistence is kind of harder than it sounds, really. Not that it's a chore or anything. That's the point. It's not a chore, is the thing. Cailin's got a real skill with laying out scenes and breathing life into characters. The dialog really sizzles. It's too entertaining to read than to rewrite. I'm not sure if this is self-congratulatory or not, oh ha ha look guys my book's so awesome, but I'm not talking about my own stuff here, so I guess it's okay? She'd be a really skilled screenwriter or something. Yet rewriting is necessary.

   Yep, it's the other parts I'm having trouble with. The... sentence structures, and everything. But the rest of it is so good, I'm tempted to ignore the style and just copy-paste it word-for-word, as style is just the way to get to substance and her style seems like the most logical way to get across what she's trying to say. But, still, it just reads like bad fanfiction at some points. In a slush pile, it would scream "amateur." So, rewrite those parts, stepping carefully around the good stuff. I have to thus develop my own hybrid style that fits in not only with her style in the good stuff but also my own style in the scenes not directly from her draft, which also fits lake a frame over her substance in the way that her style did.

   It just comes around to the old problem of voice again. You probably remember it; I'm sure I've covered it elsewhere. That the problem of voice isn't a problem; it develops naturally so you just have to trust yourself, and even though that sounds like the moral of a bad direct-to-VHS sequel, it's true in this case. Just... don't worry about voice. It's the natural style to tackle the substance. Though as I think about that that's not really 100% accurate, as there's some kind of intermediary between the style and the substance, the way you tackle how you'll tackle the substance. You have things happening, then you have what to show happening, then you have how to show what to show happening. Things happening: substance; how to show it: style; what to show: ??? Also substance? Though it could be argued as style?

   Let's say you were to direct a film version of Rumpelstiltskin. Substance: Rumpelstiltskin. Let's say you use a lot of dutch angles. Clearly, that's a stylistic choice. All well and good (so long as you don't overuse those dutch angles, mister mister! Though it's not like I'm harshing on dutch angles; that could be said of any technique.) All well and good. You decide to tell the story non-linearly, using flashbacks and nested storylines (did I really just have to explain to you what I meant by "non-linearly?") Is this style, or substance? The non-linearity is written into the script. So, substance, right? But it doesn't have to be told non-linearly. Does that make it style?

   There's probably someone out there who offers a brilliant theory on this that blasts right the heck through mine; I'm just kind of going to have to break my cardinal rule of always doing the research because it's too goshdarn late as it is, and I'm already forced to backdate this several hours to make it look like I posted this today, that is, Friday instead of Saturday. It's kind of so late at night, it's early in the morning... But I suppose it really wouldn't hurt it any, since I'm already late as it is. To the researchmobile I go.

... 

   Alright, I'm back. Style vs. substance is also called form against content. Aristotle spoke of lexis and logos; the Romans often wrote of verba and res. I guess that what I'm speaking of would be considered a form of style, but I think this is cutting into it a bit, not splitting hairs but actually carving away until we're left with almost a Platonian cum Levi-Straussian essentially symbolic universe. Hold on, I think that's what I was arguing in the first place...

... 

   Alright, got it. The Greeks and Romans spoke of form and content only as they applied in logical forensic arguments. Rhetoric, in other words. Although the distinction between form and content is inherently artificial, that's not what I'm talking about. Verbal expression and ideas are fundamentally indivisible, yeah, yeah. That's basic Sapir-Whorf stuff. That's with rhetoric. Pure ideas. In fiction, in a narrative, there's a story. There clearly is a difference between the message and the messenger. The messenger is the guy on horseback galloping into the court, the message is the scroll he's got. Metaphorically, of course.

(Thanks Silva Rhetoricae!)

Redbox

   So, I guess I did a 24 hour comic yesterday. Well, not in so many words, but, yes, I suppose in so many words. It has 24 pages, it was conceived and written and drawn within a period of 24 hours. I realized that I could not do the idea I dreamt as a movie or anything else, so, whatever. Comic. 24 hour comic? Why not. 24 pages, plus cover. Since the premise is from a dream, I'm not sure exactly how much time I had to draw, since the rules are that the story and everything has to be come up with within the 24 hours. I was not sure when the dream began and so on, but I had switched beds at around 4:00, in which bed I dreamed the dream. Four, then? I got finished right around 3:00, so. I made a 24 hour comic yesterday (and so early this morning it counts as yesterday.) I also went to the doctor's and to the thrift shop (no comic books there, unfortunately, but some nice albums) and played water badminton. I should have also done an hourly comic. But, no.

The Personal Angle

   I mentioned briefly in my last post that people will only listen to your opinion if you go for the personal angle, give them a reason for why you have your opinion. I said that I've learned from my Batman posts, learning that I was far from the only one to post such things. I've learned that it doesn't matter if you're not the only one to say something. What matters is that you're one of the ones to say it. If you're really lucky, you'll be the one to express that concept the most eloquently. If you're really really lucky, other people will recognize this fact. This is the personal angle I told you about. You have your own experiences to spin it however you want it, in a way that no one else can, so your opinion is worth having and worth being recognized. Individuality. A breath of fresh air.


    Go for the personal angle. You've got to have the personal angle in current events, otherwise anyone could tell the story. You've got to have the personal angle in anything, otherwise what makes you worth listening to over anyone else? Even the experts; after all, what is expertise but this?


   It's taken me a while to know what to say on this when there's so much said already. Hopefully this will do justice to anything at all.


   In times of tragedy, anyone who was there can tell the story, but we don't need that. We don't need people explaining how it's impossible for us to know how we feel. We don't need the story, we need their story. We need to see these people as people to get the sense of loss. Come to praise Caesar, not to kill him and bury him over and over again. Life is not short. Life is long, and this allows us all to be connected more than you could know. Do you want a personal angle? Connections. Potentially it's already there.

   Personal angle. I didn't feel anything at all during the attacks of September 11. Should I have? They took place hundreds of miles away, to people I did not care about. I may or may not have learned empathy since then. I felt something during this, but maybe that's because this was much closer to home, in more ways than one.


   Personal angle. This takes place too quickly on the heels of Adam's death. Or, not that. That Adam's death happened at all, and then this happened. Now that I know bad news. I'm not sure, if 9/11 happened again, if I would still feel nothing. Which is closer to home? Businessmen or moviegoers? Which is closer to home? New York or Colorado?

   Personal angle. The University of Colorado is a nice school; I don't know why he'd want to give that up. I've been there. I've seen things he's seen, maybe met people he's met. I wouldn't doubt it. Did he spend his time in the library or down in the bookstore? Those were some of my favorite haunts while I was there.


   Personal angle. I've always felt the deaths of minor characters in films moreso than I've felt the deaths of the major ones. The minor ones are just civilians, going about their lives till they get disintegrated meaninglessly. Our heroes' deaths, however, are not in vain, even if it's something as simple as advancing the plot. Heroes are orphans, lone wanderers with no attachments. They leave no grieving families in the wake of their deaths.


   Personal angle. We all hold the potential for great evil. It is right there, nearest to all of our cores. In this sense it's the most intimate yet least personal angle of them all. It is dispassionate, ruthless. Why would anyone listen to these? There are a million different reasons why, but only one reason why not. Influences are not actions, though.


   So it only matters if you're one of the ones to say something? Well, no. Even then, you should do your research beforehand, to get a sense of what's in the field, to know which aspects of your own personal angle would seem fresh. If you do your research, odds are someone's expressed it more eloquently than you could have had before, and now you know it. Their words are now part of your shared experience. You are now free to put the personal angle on it, as much as you want, and look like you know what you're talking about.

   No, I'm not saying it's okay to speak your mind. You keep your mouth shut. It's precisely that kind of entitled attitude that leads to stuff like this in the first place.

The Moon Will Wax

   Remember when we eagerly awaited for this film to come out? Less than a week ago, if you can believe it. It all just seems like a horrible nightmare now. There's a scar there, one that's never going to fully heal. The moon continues waxing, away from the tragedy. New moons are supposed to be new beginnings, but this new moon is only the beginning of... of a fire rising. Huh.

   I did my research this time, to see other's reactions. I've learned to do my research ever since the answer to Am I the Only One Who Noticed This? turned out to be a "no." I've learned that anyone can still have their opinions, but people will only listen to yours if you go for the personal angle. I guess it's come full circle since then.

   Searching for images of badgers again. "Badgers! Oh, there's an animal I haven't got any-- no wait." Is this going to become a running thing with me? Google's got this algorithm to give you mostly fresh stuff though, so that's good. That is, it scans your history to see your preferences. It's not an invasion of privacy if you ask for it. Who would be interested in you personally anyway? There's a lot of people out there on the internet. A lot of stuff. In this instance, badger pics. Not all of it is of very high quality. There's a line there. 90% of everything. Why share the crap at all, why put it up?


   I don't know.


   I mean, a lot of my own stuff isn't all that good, but I still share it. It's better than a lot of other people's stuff, at least, but... mmm? Well, at least I feel I'm still improving. That's more than can be said for a lot of people. But then, a lot of people don't even try. Still, like I said, what with the movie, I feel confident on my career path, secure on my voyage from fledgling amateurism up to worthwhile prodom.


   The sun sets quickly in the high mountains, leaving it twilight for hours. This was another sunset shoot, just like the others, including the scene they apparently did partially reshoot yesterday. It makes sense; after all, it did not rain all that much, just enough to settle the dust. The new footage is supposed to be even more powerful than the superemotional first take I told you about. Which, for those of you who are not aware when something is said, is saying something. We discussed briefly maybe adding a single violin or something, for the music there, but the emotions stand fine on their own, so maybe all of the music will be pulled out for that scene. Whichever. So far all we've got is the acting there. If there's a commentary track on the DVD, you're going to hear the amusing anecdote of what makes that so effective.


   It involves bugs.


   That's all I'm going to say. You'd just better hope for that commentary track.

And Yet

   It's, just, hard to be lighthearted when the world is never going to look at Batman the same way again. When going to the cinema will never be the same again. When I can't in good conscience even tell you what I'll be unable to do, since it'd seem like a distasteful joke.

   No filming today. Maybe I just wasn't invited, but I was invited for shooting tomorrow, so I think it was just decided that it would be kind of bad to do a collapse-from-dehydration scene on a rainy day. Smart move. This scene coming up's going to be awesome. Look for a familiar face in it. That's all I'm going to say.

Nothing I Couldn't Have Told You Yesterday

   Nothing seems appropriate.

   Then again, when is anything appropriate? I'm still stalling. Still working out what to say. I'm almost ready to tackle this thing head-on. But as for now...

   As for now, I'll continue to stall.

   Yesterday's film shoot involved some live firing there at the end. If I had not have been plugging my ears, one of the flying shells would have clocked me right in the side of the head. Instead, it bounced harmlessly off of my fingernail.

   I said that there's a short reshoot tomorrow of a little bit of the collapsing scene. I'm not sure if I can make that. It shouldn't take too long to do, but, it depends on a lot of things. There's more filming the day after that, and that seems more certain.

   Delaying discussion on this for right now. It hasn't been two days. Not enough time. Not nearly enough time. It's clear nothing's going to be the same again, but other than that, there's nothing really we can say yet. Something else, then.

   More shooting for the On Our Own remake. More dusk scenes. Racing against the sun can be challenging under ideal circumstances, filmed with multiple cameras in real time with all of the actors having their lines down pat. With only one camera not filming in real time, working with amateur child actors, especially when "amateur" here is not in the in it for the love of the art sense but in the other sense, and are just kind of coerced into it by their father, it's... well, I guess it speaks for his talent as a director that the scenes even work at all?

   Turns out we'll have to do a partial reshoot Monday of the dusk scene where Luke collapses, because part of it was too dark. I don't know exactly what needs to be reshot, so I'm not sure if this means that the fudge container on the ground with the ants will still be in the background like it was. We'll, uh... We'll see, I guess.

   ...

...

   W... Well, frig.

Obligatory Batman Post

   I suppose I should follow this up based on the fact the DKR is coming out midnight Friday, and... I should get this done before tomorrow. Last day for new theories. You've got twelve hours, everyone! (Not you, critics. You've already seen it; you guys don't count.)

   New Batman movie coming out? So, apparently, everyone knows that. Like, everyone. Well, not everyone, but, pretty much everyone. I had been thinking this whole time that this was some kind of indie film nobody's heard about, but it turns out that it's not, and the majority of the population's going to see it. They'd better. This is DC's only major live action film this year, and the first one since the disastrous Green Lantern last year. Marvel's already put out Avengers, Amazing Spider-Man, and Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance this year alone, with Thor, First Class and First Avenger last year. That's a 3:1 ratio of Marvel to DC (animated direct-to-DVDs don't count, eh?) Not that there's anything wrong with Marvel. DC had just better step up its game is all. All they've got this year is this. (Dredd also does not count; I don't even know how you could think that.)

   This is a big movie, and everyone's going to see it. Which explains why I'm not the only one to have caught the Superman insignia on the poster thing. Man I thought it was a niche thing. Well, okay then. Significantly fewer people caught the batmask on the other side. The third poster, the "flaming" one...

...lacks the face one the upper corner, with that cropped out, so we really can't tell anything there. The old "Superman" thing is now on fire and looks like, I don't know, the Blade logo? It... It kind of looks like the Blade logo. Makes sense, what with the David S. Goyer. Actually, I like that a lot. New theory: not a crossover with Man of Steel, another DC property, but with Blade. Instead of a DC/DC crossover, it's a DC/Marvel crossover. Batman has bats, Blade has vampires. It's a perfect fit. Batman's head is neatly matched against the flaming building batsignia's bathead, emphasizing the battiness of it all. Battiness=vampirism. Plus everything's on fire, just like in Blade. This... this could work, you guys.

There! It's right there!

B-B-Bowser!

   I woke up this morning to find this staring at me:

Aah! It's Bowser's giant head!

Really, the resemblance is uncanny.

   I then went back to sleep a little, as I had stayed all the way till 11 at night trying to get the downed internet back up, which did not succeed (see previous post.) I know, way late, right?

   My bed right now is an unmade mosh pit of blankets, sheets, and plushies, which allows me to sleep in almost any position. Really it's quite comfortable. What you're seeing there is a teddy bear and a quilt crammed against the wall in a way that happens to look like the great King Koopa.

   Awesome.

I am Posting This from the Future

   Sorry about not having a post... today? Today's post was actually written tomorrow. That is, I'm writing this Wednesday and backdating it to Tuesday. Originally I was just going to go with it, since I posted two things the day Adam died, which knocks the daily schedule all silly, but I think I'll leave the skipping-a-day thing to a date that makes more sense, like the one year anniversary or his birthday this year.

   Alright?

Makes More Sense Than You Know

   Right when I was literally suspecting Dr. Stephen R. Covey of being immortal, he dies on us. Sads. More than one sad, that is. Not Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (a real thing,) but a bike accident and the ensuing complications. Apparently.


   They say to be the change you want to see in the world. Well, Gandhi said that. Someone so influential certainly was and did so. Challenging others to do the same. Inspiring greatness in others. Helping others rise up. Living--- wait... Am I talking about Gandhi or Covey?


   Yes.

   From now on, Covey was Gandhi, got it?

   The same person.

Film Review: The Amazing Spider-Man

   Genetic engineering is the new nuke. There is a fine line between heroism and vigilantism. Reboots rock. Pretty much everything except the end of the world. Yesiree, Amazing Spider-Man could only have been made in 2012. Sony, under contractual obligation to make another Spidey flick, made the most topical one possible. I noticed this, but I don't think I'm in a qualified position to elaborate on that, so I'll stop now.

...

   Even though as I search it, it looks like not very many people did notice it, so maybe I shall elaborate on this? I suppose I shall.

   Genetic engineering as the new nuclear power: In the original comic books, Peter Parker was bitten by a spider that was radioactive. In this film as with Raimi's, the spiders are genetically engineered. Curt Conners studies transgenesis with lizards in hopes of regaining his stump. This doesn't turn out well. While this faithfully sticks to the Lizard's origins in the comic books, not changing it from radiation or anything, we must remember that the Lizard was specifically chosen as a villain for this movie. It is not nuclear power we are afraid of, not any more. It is this strange new world of genetics.

   Heroism versus vigilantism: Spider-man is hounded by the police for his actions, and is seen as a vigilante. Of course he is. This is a common trope lately, one which is explored much more in depth in the recent Batman films. Spider-man was always this to some extent, so, see next point. I don't even need to talk about it here.

   Reboots: This is another origin story of Spider-Man. We recognize some of the tropes from the previous incarnation, so, thankfully that origin-y-ness gets over quick enough. Still, another film series reboot. Many have said that this reboot is even one of the dark and gritty variety, but, I don't think so. Though my sense of what's "dark" or not is kind of broken. But this one has spider-quips, for crying out loud, so maybe it's not as dark as the brooding Tobey Maguire version. ("Mopey Maguire?" No? That's a- I am pretty sure that's a thing.) Though the suit is this time. Darker, I mean.

   The end of the world: Just, seems to be a common theme lately, within the past few years. I mean, very common. I don't even want to get into it. Mostly in smaller films, focusing on the intimate personal reactions when you know the world's going to end. Perfect Sense, Seeking a Friend for the End of the World, Melancholia, the upcoming The End of the World, which features James Franco as James Franco so Spider-Man points for that, 4:44 Last Day on Earth, um, I guess Children of Men would count, though that one was in 2006 and was merely apocalyptic instead of the-end-of-the-world, but it's still a good example. I suppose in this, there's Dr. Conners wanting to transform the world into superior lizard people, which kind of echoes the enemy who assimilates us, like in zombie apocalypse scenarios, so there's that. I guess.

Thon (This One, as I'm Sort of Out of any Other Good Name for This Post)

   More work on the On Our Own remake thing. Just motorcycle unit stuff; I was in charge of capturing some sound stuff on a recorder since obviously we couldn't use the boom mike going 50 mph on the open road. But it was awesome. Not only the recorder, but the motorcycles, of course. If you find the ending of Mission Impossible 2 too cool for school to abandon your suspension of disbelief, well, for one, you've probably got a point, but for two it actually does look as cool as Tom Cruise does in that movie, even without any fancy wheelie-spinning while shooting dudes. It's only the sunglasses and '90s hair combined with the slo-mo and the nonsensical explosions and the chorus singing in Latin and just the general John Woo-ness that distract you from the drama. But, as I've seen firsthand today, it apparently is possible to have Tom Cruise hair and sunglasses while being on a motorcycle. The rest is just John Woo being John Woo. Although come to think of it he doesn't have to be so over-the-top all the time. Paycheck had what, only one dove? But I digress.

   There's only about four days of shooting left. Still haven't asked about scoring the film or anything. Dave says that the score's probably going to come from anyone who's interested, meaning, many people contributing individual compositions. I can work with that.

   The John Woo thing reminds me of something I wanted to say tangentially yesterday in my Ice Age 4 review, but, maybe I'll get to it next time, as it would be severely misplaced here (but since when has that ever stopped me before? Do-ho-ho-ho-hoh.) Tomorrow: More film reviews! Why Amazing Spider-Man is a product of its (our) time, though not necessarily in a bad way.

Film Review Colon Ice Age Colon Continental Drift

   So, it's Friday, apparently the thirteenth, which, as everybody on the internet seems intent to remind me, is Friday the Thirteenth. Huh. I didn't really think of today that way till it was pointed out to me. Nope, what I thought of today being as, "the day when they come out with yet another one of those Ice Age movies." Alright!

   This time, it's about pirates. In a series about the ice age (and dinosaurs and melting ice,) the continents start drifting, which leads to sea travel, which leads to pirates. The entire thing could be summed up as going Pirates of the Caribbean by way of Rango, as a sequel to Ice Age. As a sequel to Ice Age. One gets the feeling that it wasn't originally intended to be. Still, if the film is based off of a completely different script adapted into the series, they did it very well. I still don't know where they got the idea of pirates, but, it's actually pretty cool.

   Anyway.

   In an apparently canonical and not-at-all hallucinatory sequence, Scrat's pursuit of finding an acorn burial place actually causes him to drop to the center of the earth and rotate its core around all crazy-like, causing Pangaea to break up (1. Didn't the first film have humans in it? What's Pangaea doing here anyway? By the time the films take place, the continents should look very much like they are now. 2. The entire thing with the rotation of the core is kind of like that one movie, only the opposite. You know, the one with the earth's core? The... core movie. Oh, if only I could remember its name...)

   Make no bones about it. This film is a cartoon. In 3D, and featuring state-of-the-art particle physics effects, but a cartoon nonetheless: the liberal use of the "stretch and squash" feature leads to some of the film's funniest moments. Here, it's used as Scrat does some physically impossible things that need to be seen to be believed, and, well, all you need to know now is that it leads to the titular continental drift, with the landmasses breaking apart rapidly.

   Enter into this cracking world our heroes, a motley assortment of prehistoric mammals assembled over the three previous films, along with some new faces, most notably Granny, Sid's granny whose name is also apparently literally Granny, dropped off and abandoned by Sid's fond-of-dropping-off-and-abandoning-family-members family. Manny and Ellie, meanwhile, having a bit of a hassle controlling their daughter Peaches, who has a crush on another mammoth, Ethan, oblivious to the fact that her best friend Louis the molehog is crushing on her (interspecies romance cool? Peaches herself may or may not be half opossum (which doesn't really make sense considering how certain possum, um, anatomy makes interspeciated breeding almost impossible which is what leads to their being such a longstanding species in the first place (I mean, look at them, they've hardly evolved from then to now, unlike the practically unrecognizable hey-I'm-an-alien-from Pitch Black sloths.))) (Diego's own problems are coming up later.) All of this is fairly expected, standard, straightforward character stuff.

   Cracks appear in the ground, the entire ice shelf breaks off, and Manny is separated from his family, with a promise to meet at the land bridge. Alright. So our valiant main three heroes set out adrift on an ice floe raft with no steering or anything, a big storm approaching, the whole nine yards, while back on land the extended cast and the rest of the animals set out trekking toward the land bridge in order to escape the continental drift (both voyages recalling early theories as to how fossils of the same species were found so widely around the world before they came out with the tectonic plates theory. The writers clearly put a lot of thought into this and did their research. Oh, goody.)

   It is here, out on the open sea (where else?) where Manny, Sid (and Granny) and Diego come across  the pirates, led by the infamous Cap'n Gutt, an orangutan who'll, you know, gut you if given a second chance; and his first mate Shira, a saber-tooth tiger enemy mine love interest for Diego, who is given unexpectedly deep characterization, which makes sense come to think of it with potential sequels in mind. The film juggles all of these characters and their respective arcs quite admirably while still having time for all that zaniness the series is known for, so, why would adding a few more characters to the series suddenly snap the camel's back?

   (Still, what would the next one be about? We've already used up cavemen and Stonehenge and "Send Me on My Way," global warming and a talking animal Noah's Ark, insane weasels and dinosaurs and Scratté, and now plate tectonics and prehistoric piracy and Ewoks doing an homage to Braveheart, so what's next? The Garden of Eden? It certainly can't be Atlantis, now, unfortunately, seeing as how Scrat manages to sink "Scratlantis," (which I think is the first time that the nomenclature of the squirrel-rat is actually namedropped within any of the films (and yet everyone knows his name- speaking of Ewoks...)) Though it could have been a fake Atlantis? But, with all its classical architecture and cool blues, we are led to believe that this is the real Atlantis. (So maybe humans are still around? Someone would have to preserve that legend...) Still, the color scheme kind of bothers me, as the real Atlantis should have had a lot more copper reds. I'm a bit of a wonk, you see. The secret of Atlantis was orichalcum, after all. Or a secret of Atlantis, at least. So, with the real Atlantis, maybe that's still open? I mean, Scrat causing the continents to drift was first used in the short "Gone Nutty" (told you I was a wonk), so hopefully that's still open.)

   Anyway, all in all, a much better film than it needs to be.  Ships made entirely out of ice beg the invention of a new punk subgenre (freezepunk?), and although it doesn't look like humans are still around in this world, orangutans prove that primates still are. We have no choice but to postulate that somewhere along the line, the timelines split up, and the Ice Age series takes place in an alternate history where cartoon physics causes sentient animals to be the dominant lifeform on Earth instead of humans, what with Mount Scratmore, Screaster Island and the Scrinx. That is literally the only explanation that makes sense.

   The fact that Lamarckian evolution (at least with giraffes) also seems to exist in this universe may either negate or prove this theory, but, we'll see.

No, I Knew What You Meant...

   Wikipedia's disambiguation pages are pretty cool, especially for words with a lot of meanings, like bridge or jack. Sometimes you learn new things, new words, sometimes it inspires awesome ideas. For example:

   Haha, see that? Anthropomorphic webcomic! It's a webcomic shaped like a man. The very webcomic itself, in the form of a human being shape. Possible, maybe, through the form of a human statue made out of LEDs, projecting juxtaposed sequential art via the internet-- as a modern art project, perhaps. Call him Jack. That's what I think of.

   (Actually, that's an insanely good idea. I know what I'm doing later...)

   Right? So it would seem to someone who does not know exactly what is implied by the term "anthropomorphic" in this context. Which would be, anthropomorphized. Given human characteristics. Generally to animals. Sometimes, to other things. But, usually, furry. Given that, the rest of the definition falls into place.

   Anthropomorphic webcomic. Far from a cool idea for modern art, (unfortunately?); it means Sequential Art ("comic"), Online ("webcomic"), with Anthropomorphized Characters ("anthropomorphic.") Which is pretty much most to all of the webcomics. (Including Sequential Art, come to think of it... No word yet on whether Online or Anthropomorphized Characters are the names of webcomics. I could do a websearch, but those terms would be impossible to Google. "Online Webcomic?" Come on. Ca me branche. It out-Herods Herod. Still, I wouldn't put it above the internet.) Makes you wonder why they'd even have that term, if not to inspire wicked MoMA-level ideas.

   Which it did. Oh, lands, it did...

   Alternatively, the phrase could be seen as a reference to Spider Man, when he's in a particularly quippy mood.

From the Set

   Today's shoot didn't start off so well, as I thought it started at 6:30 when apparently it actually started at 5:45, causing me to be somewhat late. Which is just as well, because when we got to the location okay, we got to, not the location where we were going to shoot, but a location that the director just saw on the side of the road and thought that the lighting looked kind of neat with the sun's angles so why not do some trekking-through-the-desert shots in front of that, which we ultimately didn't do, because then we discovered we had forgotten some stuff. By the time it would take to go back and get the stuff then go to the location again there wouldn't be enough light in the sky to do the scene we had planned on filming, so we just scrapped that idea and did a different, more sunsetty scene. I've always liked scenes that take place at dawn or dusk, as, well, you don't see them very often. Not even in 24, which is precisely where you'd expect that kind of thing. I guess there's the whole "continuity" thing to worry about, but what about continuity with real life? So, I guess this scene takes place at sunset. It doesn't really specify when it takes place in the script, but the next scene takes place at night, so...

   Scott and Lucas are walking through the desert, almost at the end of their journey, when Luke collapses from dehydration. Neither of them has any water left. That night, Luke tells Scott to go on without him, that' he'll be okay. It's a pretty powerful scene, at least on page, and, since it was downright painful to watch the actors even act it out in real life, that's probably going to hold up well. Since the shadows are really long during the first part of the sunset, I kept east of the action during the first shots of the scene, which are dialogless and thus did not require my assistance.


   There, I found a piece of litter: one of those plastic boxes that would contain cake or some other pastry (in this case it was a fudge container) there at the store. A couple of ants had managed to make it into the box and found some dried up crust of chocolate frosting, and were trying to get them out of the box even though the lid was on. They just kept crashing into it. I mused that such is somehow a microcosm of the entire universe. I lifted the lid, and, with the wind blowing, they almost got swept away. The first ant made it out with its bit of frosting, but the other had clearly bit off more than it could chew (so to speak) and struggled even lifting its frosting crust, much less maneuvering it up and out over a smooth curved plastic surface. Breaking the piece down didn't even occur to it. Was this still somehow a microcosm for the entire universe? I'm still not quite sure.

The Fermi Paradox

   If the universe is teeming with lifeforms, then why haven't we discovered any yet?

   According to the Drake Equation, which is a mathematical formula that determines the probability of extrasolar life, though you probably already knew that, we should not be alone in the universe. Francis Drake himself estimated there are around 10 advanced alien civilizations in our galaxy.

   But we haven't found any.

   There's loads of theories about why this is. Intergalactic zoo is a good one. Or Dysons spheres. Those are always neat. I'm just going to share some of my favorites here, as there's really no way I could get into an exhaustive list in one post.

   In her TED speech, meme-ologist (apparently a real thing) Susan Blackmore suggested that the formula should be adapted to include the concept that a sufficiently advanced society might not survive its robot uprising before they perfected interplanetary space travel (well, she didn't say robot uprising- she actually used the term "teme", or technological meme, which is equivalent but she seems to be in the camp that memes actually act like genes in and of themselves, going so far as to exist and mutate independently of human civilization. Maybe when robots become self-aware, that might happen, but it's utter pseudoscience outside of that- memes are propagated and mutated by us (humans) (and whales, what with their songs being remixed and passed along (so maybe it's not that far-fetched (except as presented here)))).

   Astronomer Dimitar Sasselov just thinks that the universe is still very young, and we're just among the first lifeforms to form an advanced civilization. That's a thought.

   And then there's the Terry Bisson approach, of course. Kind of like the interplanetary zoo theory, but with the aliens deliberately avoiding us. (It is a little creepy how we're made entirely of meat.)

The Gameshow Talkshow Show

   It's like a trivia game quiz show, but all of the questions are soft-ball opinion questions. Which was better: Iron Man 2 or Sherlock Holmes 2? I see. Who, then, in your opinion, plays a better Sherlock Holmes: Robert Downey Jr or Benedict Cumberbatch? Yeah, he's great, isn't he? And now, for $100,000... 

   Gee, I don't know. Something else vaguely related to that? It would depend on the answer to the previous question, wouldn't it.

   But really, that's not an idea that's too serious. If I had my own game show, it'd be a trivia show based entirely around film ratings. There's a lot of crazy film rating descriptors out there. This film received an R rating from the MPAA for "crash scenes too intense for unaccompanied children."  (It's "Alive," by the way, thank you very much.) This 1993 film received a PG-13 for "a murder and other action sequences in an adventure setting." Give up? It's The Fugitive!


   Those guys over at the MPAA sure've got some wacky content descriptors, is my point. I'm betting you can probably think of a few examples. Now, as a TV quiz show. Awesome.


   I would totally watch that show.

Greek Fire

   Wasn't the secret to making this stuff lost to the Ancients? I guess no one told that to Leonardo da Vinci, since he conveniently provided a recipe for us contained within a bundle of notes currently located at Trivulzi Palace in Milan. I'm not sure how reliable this recipe is, since I'd be insane to actually try it out, but having it here in a convenient place is just kind of good to know, I guess.

Boil together:

• the charcoal of willow wood
• saltpeter
• sulfuric acid
• sulfur
• pitch
• frankincense
• camphor
• Ethiopian wool

Then, if you want to have your Greek Fire in bomb form, add:

• liquid varnish
• bituminous oil
• turpentine
• strong vinegar

Mix together and bake or let dry. Mold into bomb shape, preferably studded with sharp nails. Don't forget a hole to have as a fusee, and to cover it with rosin and sulfur.

The Monastery: Notes and Sketches, Part IV

   There's a monastery in the book that's a pretty important location. It's very well explored in the narrative, so nailing down exactly how it works is important. What the monastery exactly is was pretty vaguely defined, so I was given more or less free rein over it. Its history as a fortress was inspired a lot by the history of the Notre Dame de Paris cathedral and the Abbey of Kells, and I looked into the Monastery of St. Gall for a view on Benedictine monastic life. The main cathedral, Gothic and Renaissance-inspired design, a lot of Da Vinci's sketches of hypothetical architecture.

   We're dealing with an entirely fictional location here, so we can't get too attached to any one source of inspiration. The place needs to feel real, though. A lot of this stuff won't even show up in the story, especially all the history, but we need to get the feeling of it, the hundreds of years' worth of collapse and renovation, the countless generations passing through.

   This is just concept art, and the actual thing is going to get much better-defined in the future, but it's still a pretty good direction to start heading:

Click to make it huge.

Notes and Sketches: Notes and Sketches, Part III

   This right here is a pretty good example of why I keep notes in the first place. As you can see, it's a whole bunch of reminders on writing tips, objects symbolic to specific characters, reminders to look things up, sketches of locations. In the upper right hand corner, I remind myself to have scenes accomplish specific objectives in the story, as the opening scenes in the old draft don't seem to do much. In the center at the top, an idea on how to imply how our hero is left handed, by having him push his pen across the paper rather than pull it. In the bottom left of the center (more like the top right of the bottom left), an idea to callback in a scene to an incident earlier in the story. There are also plenty of notes of detail to add to establish tone.

Lethean Units: Notes and Sketches, Part II

   Lethean units are corpses reanimated using technology and used to track people down, as they have the ability to see memories bonded to places and objects. You know that's not frightening enough, so how's this? Their bodies' life support systems keep oxygen pumping mechanically, through what equates to be artificial lungs attached to their backs, giving them a hunched appearance. To maintain balance, a cable runs from a crest from an implant embedded in their skull. Like this basically:

Probably the only not terrifying Lethean drawing in existence. Maybe that's because it looks like ZIM on one side fused with a chibi Zuko on the other.

   The exhalations produced from being filtered through their bodies result in a psychotropic pathogen that induces fear in anyone who inhales it. Yeah, they breathe fear gas. I know that seems like overkill, but it makes physiological sense. Oh, and did I mention that their breathing sounds like gentle sobbing?

   And that they travel in swarms?

This drawing is my experiment with pencils and charcoals of different hardness. Turned out well, did it not?

   You can see the full size of that one if you scroll down this page. Good luck with the whole "sleeping" thing tonight.

Writing Process: Notes and Sketches, Part I

   I'm just doing more PoM, or at least focusing more on it. Or trying to. Better now, as I'm no longer so afraid of being forgotten. Getting things actually done helps. Delving into the rewrite, getting past the opening scene for the first time in a while. The part after the opening scenes is much better constructed. I've got a lot of ideas and events to flesh out some stuff that's hard to explain without giving too much away. Let's call it character stuff. Rem looks into his past and finds nothing that he doesn't already remember, and it impacts him a lot. Basically. Not much else to tell you, as the plot points from here on in get more spoiler-y.

   With a complex preplotted story like this, a major part of the writing process is keeping everything organized. This requires extensive... notetaking. I've taken a lot of notes to organize my thoughts. Notes and sketches on events I want to add, details in settings, symbolism, characterization. Et cetera. Since that's what I'm doing mostly these days, I think that's what I'll show you today. Some of my notes.

Some of my notes.

   Since they're notes, they're basically made of spoilers, all the written stuff, so I'll only closeup on the sketches, especially the ones I'm actually kind of proud of doing. This one is a closeup to avoid places where plot points are written, just a particularly blank spot of notes with not much writing but with some particularly nice sketching on it. It's stuff on how death works in this universe, not really the science of it but capturing how I'm trying to make it feel.

   I'll post up some more note sketches tomorrow. If I feel like it.

And If Not

   Still on the points I brought up yesterday. The idea that I'll never break in, since I don't know anyone like how Nancy Fulda is Howard Tayler's sister-in-law, and both of these people are awesome, so awesomeness might be some kind of exclusive club. I realize that might be a fallacy, but still, that very idea is a... bummer? Sure, that's a word.

   Alright, I'm willing to chalk that one up really to the (fact?) that writers who attend workshops and have communities write more successfully. My fandom of Howard Tayler and my fandom of Nancy Fulda were quite independent of one another, though, and to discover how closely related they are is a little discouraging. I'm still not really in the mood to do things, with the soul crushing idea that odds of becoming successful are stacked against me. Incentive to work harder? Perhaps. I'm already more successful than most people could ever be, in a lot of aspects. I continue to do what I do. If no one cares, it won't matter anyway, so I might as well, so why not? 

   But I don't feel like I could do the things the great ones in the field can do. Inexperience. Yes, could be. I'm still just so young. I've got loads of time. I guess that's a good thing. But the future remains a mystery. It might not come to me at all.

   Would I find worth living still, if it doesn't? I survive on the hope that one day I might be able to share stories with the world (I can still do that, and I am doing that, but, I'm not finished with the sentence yet.) ...and the world would care. See, that's the thing. My entire worldview of leading a worthy life is based around being important. I hinted at that in the first point on my hundredth post. There's a lot behind that, but really, it's just so little. Such a small core.

   So that's why this idea hits me so closely, I suppose. If I could never get in or get a big break. Though with On Our Own that might have already happened, if it turns out successfully. My goodness, that's awesome. I am a part of that. Here's praying that goes places. Worst case scenario, that'd make a good point on my resume. My filmography? Okay, so I break into motion pictures and/or television. From there, with enough success in that, people would care what I have to say, and... Mm. Yeah, that'd still... But, still.

   Alright. Better.

Mehhh...

   It's weird. I really don't...

   I don't feel like doing that much of a post today. I, just, realized this. The day after I put up the links to the episodes of Writing Excuses. Nancy Fulda is Howard Tayler's sister-in-law? See, it occured to me that maybe that's not good news. Do you have to have connections already to get into the SF field?

   Crrrruuuud. I'm never going to break in.

   Adam's death was a month ago now, BronyCon happened to happen,which is the exact same thing my blog post was about yesterday, and now the world's actively trying to eat us with the fact that outsiders can't get in to the field of speculative fiction. If the universe's going to get any more surreal, I hope the thing that happens next is that the Marvel comics universe turns out to be true. I'd try to ignore some of the more existentially terrifying ones like Deadpool, but I don't think I'd quite be able to ignore the existence of Squirrel Girl who is just as, if not moreso. Aside from the fourth-wall breaking (is there a forth wall in real life?) that's some pretty good stuff right there.

   (By the way, if any of you actually click on my links, I'm pretty sure the fish-in-the-barrel thing John de Lancie is referring to there at the end of the first one has to do with the semi-satirical late-night current events program Red Eye's take on January BronyCon, which I personally found to be fairly even-handed (and hilarious.) I'm sure he's got to be referring to something else, though (or maybe didn't know it was supposed to be funny? Though you'd think Bill Schultz's off-key rendition of the "My Little Pony" theme there at the end would have tipped him off. So, it's got to be something else. Right?) I mean, I can see it a little bit, but nothing to anger him quite that much. Or maybe the bizarre David E. Kelley-style ranting from nowhere is just another part of the surrealism.)

   There was a little girl with a My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic coloring book in the pew across from us at church today. A few things:

1. Princess Celestia is like really super pretty.
2. Do the coloring book illustrators even watch the show?
3. If any of the characters gets so much as a broken leg, they'd have to get taken out and shot, and that is sad.
4. Coloring books are for little girls.
5. So is My Little Pony.

   That's their primary target. Little girls. For those of you not keeping up, lately the show's started pandering to the "brony" periphary demographic (and, you know, the pegasisters, but that's a much more forseeable fanbase. Aside from the ones who consider themselves "bro"nies nonetheless, which is kind of weird? Anyway.) I'm not going to complain or anything; there's plenty of that elsewhere, with much more pursuasive arguments one way or another than I could certainly muster, suffice to say that I think that we must trust the showrunners to do the right thing, so everything that has happened so far has been what's best for the show. Still, it's an interesting phenomenon. No show before has had quite such an interesting relationship between being a children's show to begin with but having an unexpected yet endearing popularity amongst adults.

   There have, after all, been other children's shows popular among adults, and not even just for drinking games. Yo Gabba Gabba, for instance, was (and still is/might be?) quite popular due to its fresh funky beats and trippy visuals, but it didn't feel the need to curry favor with older fans of the show. (Unless it was from the very beginning, and the entire thing was for adults the whole time. Which admittably does explain the presence of some of the show's more eyebrow-raising musical guests, such as of Montreal or Shiny Toy Guns the Shinys. Actually, what was up with having guests at all? Are DJ Lance Rock and Biz Markie not good enough or something?) Loads of shows contain some, ahem, parental bonuses. So there is precedent for appealing to an older audience. Friendship is Magic takes this to mindblowingly insane new levels. If the current trajectory continues, the show's bound to create some kind of bizarre eloi/morlock dichotomy between a show for little girls and a show for college-age men.

   I guess they're just reveling in their popularity. It's certainly what I would do. Lots of kids' shows are popular, but not quite like this. I mean, at least it's not Barney. Barney, right? It remains popular, and not even the show's intended audience likes that show. At least not very much. They continue to watch because they are culture-starved children who are starved for culture. I speak from experience.