Congratulations, Eris!

You really were invited, it's just that your invitation was several millenia late:

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2006/09/14/eris-dwarf-planet.html

Hail Eris!

Cinema on the Web Part One

I was a terrible film student.

No, I should rephrase that. I was a terrible student film maker. I am an excellent student of film when it comes to writing, studying and thinking about film. If I could, I would go to the movies every night of the week (and I used to when I was in school). I love analyzing film and I love looking for the little details, the symbolism, use of color, the framing of scenes. But mostly, I just enjoy being told a story, which is probably why I did better as a screenwriter than as a cinematographer or director.

One of the millions of reasons I love the Internet so much now is the ability for indie and hobby film makers to find an audience for their films. I'm not talking about the boobs on YouTube lipsyncing to disco songs, but film makers crafting short films and animations. But I'm also not talking about Art here necessarily either, though I have found some very beautiful and thoughtful films, but something in between Amateur Crap and High Art Pretentiousness.

Whenever I find a great movie site on the Web, I bookmark it for future viewings. Sometimes I email it to friends but usually the URL just gets tucked away into a folder and forgotten. And that's a real shame, because these sites really deserve some attention.

First, let's look at one of my new favorites, Elevator Moods:

http://www.elevatormoods.com/

The site itself is clever, designed to look like an elevator control panel. It uses just enough Flash to make it interesting and interactive, but not so much to make it annoyingly slow. Each of the movies are very short, only about the average length of an elevator ride, and use either an actual surveillance camera or an inexpensive camera rigged in the same manner, an ingenious way to get around the limitations of cheap equipment and poor video quality. The stories aren't necessarily unique or particularly well-written, but have an endearing roughness.

Next, a very impressive animation:

http://blissful.leftchannel.com/

This very short, abstract movie is difficult to describe. Done in entirely in black and white, often in what appears as ink blots, cilia and/or silhouettes, it has a disturbing beauty. The animation technique by itself is amazing and smooth.

A Very Enlightening Web Site

Like so many other great sites, I found this one by accident, while searching for something completely different. It is a site for a company called FluidEffect, which specializes in photographic retouching, site design, etc.:

http://www.fluideffect.com/

Go to this URL. Click on the Portfolio link. Agree to their site terms and choose "Before and After." Choose any of the thumbnails, which will show the "after" part. If you want to see the "before" image, click and hold the "before" link (it's in tiny type above the thumbnails).

The results are startling. I always knew that magazine photos, especially those of celebrities, were touched up, but until I saw the before and after, I really didn't know just how much.

Fall TV Time - 2006

Yes, once again it is Fall TV Preview time, one of my favorite times of the year. Here is a list of TV programs I am looking forward to:

Heroes (premiers 25 September): Take one part Lost, one part The 4400 and one part X-Men. Add in a lot of hype, some very intriguing teasers and high quality special effects. I'm a little bit worried about the writing, as it is written and produced by the same team that creates Crossing Jordan, a rather light-weight and improbable crime drama (with some hokey plots and not-so-good acting), and it is rather obviously trying to capture the Lost fans. The characters listed on the show's site are not as interesting as I would like: a painter with an addiction; a cop who hears voices; a girl who is indestructible, yet wants to be normal; a son following his murdered father's crazy research, looking for answers. Yet, I am a sucker for any SciFi/Fantasy/Horror I can get, so I will definitely watch at least the first few episodes.

Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip (premiers 25 September) and 30 Rock: NBC is getting weird and a little bit senile in its old age - this fall, it has two completely different shows based on the same thing, namely the back-stage politics of producing a comedy show, a thinly veiled Saturday Night Live. Both are written by some of the best television writers around - Aaron Sorkin, the genius behind West Wing and Tina Fey, my personal hero and the genius who may have single-handedly saved Saturday Night Live (that is probably an exaggeration, but honestly, the only thing I really love to watch is the Weekend Update). I suppose if there is room for three Law and Order programs, then two SNL spin-offs doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

Smith (premiers 26 September): I am probably one of 10 people who actually liked the remake of Ocean's Eleven, so hearing about a TV show that is the adventures of high-level thieves got my attention. Fan reviews have been high, but rumors of bad reviews are everywhere. I really want to have Ray Liotta on my TV every week, however, so I'll be tuning in.

Veronica Mars (premiers 3 October): The first season's date rape plot and the murder of Lily (Veronica's best friend, for the uninitiated) storyline had me riveted. The second season somehow managed to keep the murder storyline afloat without making it boring AND gave us the startling bus crash plot (it's not as hokey as I make it sound, trust me). I can't wait to see what season three has in store.

House (5 September): I was not a faithful watcher of Dr. House and I actually only just started watching the show in reruns. I have no idea what's going on with his cane and the apparent "cure" of his painkiller addiction. Frankly, I don't give a rat's ass, as long as Dr. House is still cranky.

Lost (3 October): The sudden emergence, at the end of the season no less, of Desmond not only as an important character, but also as a good, compassionate, heroic and interesting one, left me in a state. The show introduced as many intriguing puzzles as it answered, which left many fans (on the message boards at least) feeling unfulfilled and restless. My hope is, no matter how much I love the show, that this is last season. It is skillfully written, but four+ seasons of no answers will eventually get old, even if I am still rabid for more.

Supernatural (28 September): Last season ended on a cliffhanger, with the boys and their father badly hurt from a car accident. It seems unlikely that show's writers would off either of the brothers, but the father has been a marked man from the start. It's possible that someone might be in a coma for most of the season (making him a target for the various monsters and cultists that populate the show) or that all of them will simply wake up in the first episode. I'm curious to see what cliche the writers decide on. Even for all its cliches, plot holes and predictible plots, I still think the show has potential. The chemistry between the actors is good, the soundtrack is fun and man, do I love monsters.

Dexter: Showtime is the new HBO. Who cares about Entourage (the only reason to watch it is for Jeremy Piven anyway) when you have Weeds? Plus, there is Dexter, a new series featuring Michael C. Hall (once a star on HBO's Six Feet Under) that appeals to my inner goth. Based on the book Darkly Dreaming Dexter by Jeff Lindsay, it follows the adventures of Dexter, a CSI by day and a serial killer by night. Subject matter aside, did I mention it has Michael C. Hall?

Pop Culture Hits Chicago

Holy cow, there is so much going on both in the City in general and the world of pop culture.

For one, Lollapalooza is this weekend in Grant Park and I really wish I could go. It's a great place to have it, although downtown can get congested under the best of circumstances. But being outside in a really beautiful park, surrounded by magnificent buildings on one side and the Sea of Michigan on the other - what could be better? The lineup this year is really good, too, which makes me even more bitter about missing it. I was surprised to see Smoking Popes on the roster (they're still around?!?) and seeing Wolfmother listed just made me smile. It's nice to see old faves like the Reverend Horton Heat and Violent Femmes along with some of my new faves, Dresden Dolls, Gnarls Barkley and She Wants Revenge. If you're going, you're a lucky bastard.

I will, however, be going to the geek festival know as Wizard World. Make fun of me all you want, but Wizard is far cheaper for me ($25 versus $65 for one day) and takes far less time, which means I can squeeze it into my already packed weekend schedule. I have a short list of comics I'm looking for such as the last half of the Ocean mini series that I missed, for example, and all of the issues of 52, since I've managed to miss those as well. I hope I find some deals!

Scary Monsters

Halloween is probably my favorite time of year. I love costumes, I love candy, I love monsters, but most of all, I love scary movies.

Or at least I used to. The current crop of horror flicks from Hollywood are pretty damn banal. Either they are remakes of classic horror films or bland American remakes of new and interesting films from Japan, China and Korea. I'll admit that Hollywood is an easy target, but these movies are being made for a reason: people will go to see them. This is sort of a chicken and the egg situation, though. Is Hollywood making bad movies because that's what the audience wants to see, or is the audience going to see bad movies because that's all Hollywood makes? My gut tells me that with the success of smart, interesting and fresh films (especially indie films) that it's simply the later. People want to be entertained so they'll pretty much go see any movie that looks remotely interesting, then bitch about it afterwards.

But, I digress. What I really wanted to talk about was good scary movies, the ones that scared me as a kid and still scare me now. In honor of Halloween, here's a list of some of my favorites and why you should watch them. These are sorted by category.

Now I'm feeling Zombified

Night of the Living Dead: the original film seemed all the scarier to me because it was shot in black-and-white. I think it must be the way shadows are rendered (see anything made by the Germans in the 20s if you don't believe me). This film plays on a primal fear of death and the dead (not to mention cannibalism!) and the tone and acting was quite serious; Romero never talked down to his audience nor did anything at their expense.

Shaun of the Dead: not a horror film in the traditional sense, this comedy starts dark and gets darker. It plays upon the zombie genre as a metaphor for growing up and can be funny, scary and heart-breaking all at the same time.

Dead Alive: This was the first movie I saw from Peter Jackson and much later, when I heard he was making The Lord of the Rings movies, I had a difficult time reconciling the two. Sure, he had also directed Heavenly Creatures, but then again, he had directed Meet the Feebles. Anyway, this is another zombie horror comedy with plenty of over-the-top gross-out effects, great action and quotable lines ("I kick ass for the Lord!" still makes me laugh my ass off).

28 Days Later: This was surprisingly effective movie that plays upon fears of contagion and fears about our fellow humans, imagining what would happen if we were compelled to act upon our basest impulses.

Evil Dead 2: worth it just to hear Bruce Campbell say "Groovy."

Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me

Seven: The sheer ugliness of the movie makes it both fascinating and repulsive. Every scene is filled with darkness and dread and when the horrible truth comes to light, the filmmakers do not cop out or allow you to look away. Probably one of the best films I have ever seen.

The Sixth Sense: Speaking of dread, it is nearly overwhelming in this film. This is a perfectly made story and although much is made about the surprise ending, there is enough detail, metaphor and lovely moments to make repeat viewings a treat.

Jacob's Ladder: What scared me about this film was its panicky freakiness; even at the end you were never quite sure what just happened and what was really going on. Like most good horror films the main character's fear, confusion and pain is palpable.

The Shining: This is, of course, Jack Nicholson's movie and it's a great deal of fun to watch him come unhinged. The weird touches, like the twin girls and the strange figures in costume make this a very creepy and unnerving film.

The Exorcist: Linda Blair is the Exorcist what Jack Nicholson is to The Shining - it's a perfect peformance.

Monsters!

Halloween: I watched this movie recently and was surprised at both how well it held up and how slow it builds - even though you may know what happens, the tension is still there. I still can't watch this alone and in the dark. Bonus points for an extra creepy soundtrack.

Alien: This movie at times has an almost dreamlike quality to it. It's beautifully shot as well as horrifying (the alien coming out of John Hurt's stomach is still one of the best moments in horror film history). And the alien is beautiful and disturbing.

Nosferatu: This film is still a beautiful example of German Expressionism, the movement that probably did the more for cinematography than any other school, director or technology. The vampire is ugly and creepy, much different from the charismatic vampires that would follow in movies and TV.

Ginger Snaps: This wicked little gem uses lycanthropy as a metaphor for growing up or more specifically, for puberty. Like I Was a Teenaged Werewolf before it, it puts teens in the roles of werewolves, but this time with a smart, witty and scary script.

In time for Halloween: TV Thrillers

What a great season to be a Sci Fi/Fantasy fan! Not since The X-Files and Buffy the Vampire Slayer were on prime time have there been so many science fiction and fantasy-based shows on network television. Hoping to catch the same audience that made Lost a such hit, the networks have given us two new creepy shows: Supernatural and Night Stalker. How do they compare?

Premise
Supernatural: Two brothers search for their missing dad, who became obsessed with occult-based crimes after their mother's death. By investigating mysteries that he would have been drawn to, they hope to find clues to his whereabouts.
Night Stalker: Carl Kolchak, a reporter, is drawn to mysterious and occult crimes similar to the death of his wife.
Winner: Tie - the premises are very similar. And yes, before you get all pop culture on me, read the next one.

Pedigree
Supernatural: Many of the episodes are directed by Kim Manners and written by John Shiban, both of whom worked on The X-Files.
Night Stalker: Based on the cult made-for-TV movie and television series staring Darren McGavin in the early 70s.
Winner: Night Stalker; the original is considered to be some of the best sci-fi/fantasy produced for television and definitely inspired The X-Files.

Sample Storyline
Supernatural: The brothers invesitgate a wendigo, a person now transformed into an evil spirit through cannibalism. The wendigo stalks hikers with uncanny swiftness and stores them in an underground larder.
Night Stalker: Kolchak investigates mysterious killings in a secret college society. The victims were literally scared to death. The killings were caused by the lingering fear of a little boy who was murdered by his father in the house where the rituals of the society take place.
Winner: Supernatural - Although neither plot sounds like much, it's all in the execution. Night Stalker's plot had holes and the resolution (including Kolchak burning down the house!) seemed silly. Supernatural, on the other hand, was actually scary and gross.

Production Values
Supernatural: A recent episode featured a shapeshifting creature that actually shedded its old appearance, including skin and teeth, into a gross puddle of goo.
Night Stalker: Generally, the show avoids monsters and even then shows them only as shadowy shapes.
Winner: Supernatural - No, the show isn't as glossy as a big budget Hollywood movie, but they do really well with what they've got.

Stars
Supernatural: Jensen Ackles and Jared Padalecki - though not big stars as yet, they are nice-looking boys and have done quite a bit of work.
Night Stalker: Stuart Townsend - an Irish actor who has been in such movies as Queen of the Damned and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Winner: Draw - I like all three. Townsend's film work might leave something to be desired, but somehow I still like him. Ackles and Padalecki have a good rapport and actually seem like brothers.

Winner: Supernatural edges out Night Stalker. Though I really want to like Night Stalker, I also really want it to be more: more scary, more interesting, more, ironically enough, like The X-Files; fans of the original series will be disappointed. On the other hand, Supernatural, unsurprisingly, feels like The X-Files and has intriguing, scary stories. However, both series lack a strong "mythology" plot, which has come to be expected from these sorts of shows. I hope they last long enough to get a chance to develop that story element.

Supernatural is on WB on Tuesday nights.
Night Stalker is on ABC on Thursday nights.