Michael Offutt's Blog, page 55

Deception is a remarkable thing.

I know several deceivers, and they are small time creatures who weave webs of lies to cocoon themselves within their own realities. What strikes me as remarkable about this is that it seems so apparently obvious to me, yet it isn't obvious to their families and even one fiancée in particular (you'd think that a fiancée would know, but they don't). Though I don't care all that much, I wonder why I'm able to see things that they are not. And I think it all boils down to one thing: the family and the fiancée want very much for life to appear a certain way. The fiancée does not want to be single, and I think she believes she is running out of time with one failed marriage already under her belt. I believe she's put a lot of time into this relationship, and that she just doesn't want to see anything wrong with it. It's like a cost vs. benefits thing. "There's no effing way that I've spent this kind of time investing in this thing and I'm not gonna get a reward for it!" It's like a cognitive dissonance or something similar....

What the family wants is a bit different. They want things to be defined a certain way. To them, bad people look like non-whites who are flashy in the way they dress (or sexual). Bad people are the ones with the tattoos, the ones with the piercings, and the ones who are blatantly honest with their sexuality. A person who is very open and has no problem saying, "I'm gay and I like dick," is a bad person not to be trusted with underage boys because (obviously) they are just waiting to molest. But a person who is closeted, who outwardly says all of the right things...the deceiver if you will...is the person they invest with all of the trust. It's truly baffling, and all of the signs that they are "in the closet" are right there (and perhaps up to nefarious things). But it's not worth digging any deeper to them because it might spoil what they really want (a Norman Rockwell life?), which in my opinion doesn't exist.

I've come to observe that a willingness to take lies as truth comes from fear, and I wasn't expecting this. I have a very healthy and honest relationship with fear. If I'm afraid of something I say it. I also embrace fear in many ways, realizing that (as an emotion) it's purpose is to keep me safe. But I've never been struck by a fear of truth (I guess) because I've always embraced truth and didn't care what other people thought of me. I'm gay, I'm fat, I'm two years from my fiftieth birthday...all of these things are true and I don't care. I say blunt things because this is how I think and I feel bluntness is good and solid communication that has no risk of being misunderstood. When people I've barely met ask to use my computer, they act stunned when I say. "Yes. But I should warn you that there's naked pictures of guys on there so don't open certain folders if you are offended by that kind of thing." I just don't care, but I'm also comfortable living a life alone. I've had people say to me over the years, "You are so courageous for living alone like this." I usually look puzzled and say, "Um...I like living alone. This isn't torture you know?"

One of my friends even said, "Living like you would make me want to commit suicide." I think I was eating ice cream and watching t.v.  I was like, "What?" And they clarified, "I just don't know how you do it?" And I was like..."Do what? Eat ice cream?" And then they started saying how it must be miserable to be single, and I quickly said, "Look, I only suffer from loneliness or depression honestly about once a month or once every two months. I actually love all the space I have and I love being single. It's great. I go to movies all the time, and I only have to buy one ticket. I never have to arrange myself around anyone else's schedule. I eat what I want every night. I watch what I want. It's actually pretty great." But they would have none of it. They thought I was miserable.

There's a weird kind of shaming that happens with our society around folks who are single. We must all be the biggest losers that humanity has ever pooped onto the Earth, and we must all be suffering and one inch away from suiciding out. But that is not the case at all, I assure you. But it's this "idea" and "fear of being single" and "going your own way" that opens people up to deception. It's the idea that there is only one formula for happiness, and that if you stray from that formula, well you're basically f*cked so you should accept anything that happens to you (or that is told to you) as long as it preserves the formula for happiness. It's complete and utter bullshit. And it makes me think ultimately, that a lot of people are not equipped to detect deception, because ultimately they don't want to do just that. Essentially, people find comfort in being lied to as long as it fits the formula for happiness. What they don't like are the things that threaten to derail the formula for happiness. Even if these uncomfortable things are facts and are completely true, they will be labeled as lies by people in order to preserve what they know.

That is so messed up. So yeah...deception is a remarkable thing. And it's just another layer of what it's like to live in this messed up world. Do I have any advice to people out there who want to be able to spot deception and to be free of it? Yes, and it's actually pretty easy. Embrace the fear of being alone. Embrace the fear of walking a path alone through life. Be your authentic self. Get to a point where you don't care what people say about you. Get to a point where you are not dependent on anyone else, and you can truly say "No" to opportunities (because if you wanted to you could just do them yourself). Once you've arrived at that point, you will spot people who are lying to you. You will unmask the deceivers and the manipulators.  And you will probably learn something about yourself along the way.

I'm not excited to see Joaquin Phoenix play The Joker.

The Joker is probably the Batman's most iconic villain. Growing up and collecting Batman comics, Detective Comics, and reading the stories written by Frank Miller, Sam Hamm, and others...probing the subject matter of Death in the Family (in which Jason Todd dies) seeing the appearance of Tim Drake in Batman Year Three and on and on and on. I collected, consumed, and loved these stories. I understand that comic books are an industry, and that all of those stories were just money grabs. Comics kind of lost their way when they started making panels so huge that only one or two of them could be featured to a page, and some were being released with alternative covers so you had to collect all five. Do you have the special "black bag" edition when Superman dies? Why yes I did. I fell for that. However, I had fun at the time, and as a kid an an immature nerdy adult, I guess that's all that matters.

I have spent many nerd years thinking about the Joker, and I honestly don't think he's anything more than a psychopath that dresses like a clown if he is shown in a story without the presence of the Batman. I've heard that Joaquin Phoenix has turned in a stellar performance as The Joker, which (to be honest) doesn't surprise me. Joaquin Phoenix strikes me as one of those people that probably couldn't do any other job than the one that he has because he's probably got mental illnesses and demons of his own to wrestle with. Being in a field where he can channel all of that into a character for an audience just suits him well. It'd be like having a super beautiful young woman who likes to be naked a lot in front of other people and have exhibitionists sex seeking out the career of a porn star. People might say, "You are so great at your job! We've never seen anyone perform like you!" Well...duh...it's what they like to do, and it comes naturally to them. Do we praise mountain goats for climbing mountains and cliffs really well? It's what they do. For what it's worth...I've heard that sharks are excellent swimmers. Go figure, right?

The thing that makes me annoyed about the Joker probably stems from my like of the character. I think the Joker is an excellent villain. However, the character (because of its mental illnesses and demons) has become an "award grab" rather than a "money grab." Every actor out there who wants to prove their acting chops slavers at the idea of turning in a "Meatloaf worthy" performance as The Joker, because the character's range is built to handle that. As a caveat, I know that may not have been Heath Ledger's intention, however, his performance as the character pretty much defined it for a whole generation of people. But so did Nicholson's.

I'm old enough to remember people who talked about how great of an actor Nicholson was after walking out of Tim Burton's Batman, and how Nicholson's turn at the Joker cost some $50 million (which was an unheard of sum back in the eighties when it was released). Nicholson (at the time) was already an Academy Award winning actor, so he had nothing to prove other than to turn in heavy and drippy art worthy of his reputation. It's the same thing that countless other artists do: anyone remember Francis Ford Coppola mailing in the visual feast that is Dracula? I call this kind of spectacle the "Meatloaf" phase of art, because it all strikes me as incredibly overwrought, kind of like a lot of Meatloaf's songs. Celine Dion after finally making it, turned to singing ballads worthy of Meatloaf just because she could (think of it's all coming back to me now). Michael Jackson went from just doing music videos to making mini movies filled with crazy special effects. So did Madonna...I remember the video for "Express Yourself" was just over-the-top.

Anyway, I think that is what "The Joker" as a character has come to represent. It's something that artists who are intent on proving themselves to the world seem to want to portray (as the icing on the cake), and that disappoints me. For one, there should be more crazy roles out there for people who truly want to stretch their acting chops (like Brad Pitt's go at Twelve Monkeys). The Joker being cast and recast and done and redone is removing anything that was special about that particular character. And I'm not sure I'm interested in watching yet another talented actor pour their heart and soul into a role that has been done before, and by people who took it just as seriously. 

Why am I the only one who takes to heart the phrase "If it seems too good to be true it probably is?"

I know a young woman (18) that may be getting targeted by a female human trafficker (of about the same age if not the same generation) looking for sex slaves to sell in eastern Europe or the Middle East (take your pick). I know that sentence is not what you expected to read when you came to my blog, but I have no other way to say it. I've thought about why I think this, and also, please know that I have not been vague at all in expressing my concerns to the mother of this girl and to the girl directly and as bluntly as possible. Thus far, I've been dismissed, in the similar way that a crackpot or the boy who cried "Wolf!" might also be dismissed. That doesn't bother me. However, what does bother me is that I'm the only adult in a group of older women who are observing the behavior with any red flags going up. Here's the situation:

This young woman (I shall call her Bee for purposes of this blog post) is attending the University of Utah as a freshman for the first time. Bee's classes (as of this writing) started approximately two weeks ago. Anyway, Bee met another young woman who sat next to her in a Biology class. They started talking, Bee followed the other woman on Instagram, and they've hung out some. Within the first week of knowing each other, Bee's new "friend" told her that her father was super rich, the owner of a Marriott hotel that overlooks the water in Athens, Greece, and that he has a private yacht. She's invited Bee to go to an all-expense paid vacation to Greece for spring break. This offer has since been sweetened to a tour of Greece, Italy, and Jordan (where the woman's mother lives). I was flabbergasted while Bee and other adults were overjoyed at Bee's "good fortune." I was the only one that said, "Who is this woman? Is she a human trafficker?" And then I expressed that this sounds way too good to be true and probably is.

I said, "You will be in a foreign country and can't speak the language," directly to Bee who was horrified that I was being so serious about this. Her response, "Well I would be with this woman." And my response was, "She IS the kidnapper. She could discuss your sale price, which could be $10,000 to some Arab that she plans to pass you off to right in front of you and you'd never know. One man could overpower you, grab your passport, then push you into a van and off you go to Eastern Europe to be gang raped by ten guys a day and then they get you drugged up and addicted to heroin (in your off time) while you are chained to a bed. As for your mom, she'll never see you again."

I should point out that Bee is quite a lovely girl. I think all of you would find her attractive. She is tall, slim, very fit, blond, and with blue eyes, and I don't think she has had sex yet, though that is none of my business. However, I'm just throwing that all out there so you can at least see where I'm coming from and what my concerns are. In the least, she is a bright-eyed girl who dreams of going to medical school and becoming a doctor and doing humanitarian work. However, she's got this desire inside her that wants to derail all that because what she REALLY wants is to be a woman like Kylie Jenner. She wants to be famous without really having any kind of talent that justifies the fame...and I think ultimately she wants to be famous because it would mean super acceptance among the most beautiful people that walk the earth. It seems like a really shallow goal...to want to be able to date the most handome bachelors like Tom Holland or Shawn Mendes and to pick and choose and have young, handsome, rich men fight over her. Bee's favorite show is called "The Bachelorette," which should tell you something about this girl. Her mother, by contrast, lives a poverty-stricken life mostly because she doesn't work. Most of her waking hours are spent pursuing a polyamorous lifestyle and social connections and then having situational anxiety over money flow and facing the fact that age is happening. I'm not sure where her daughter picked up the desire to be "like a Kardashian," but she sure did.

And here's the thing: Bee is not the only one I know who shares her similar desires. Bee (and other girls) want only the cream of the crop of the youngest most handsome men the world has to offer. They actually did very little dating in high school because none of those boys that asked them out were good enough. Seriously, I heard their conversations (gay men are privy to all kinds of things that get said in front of them). Get this...I will even dare to say that every young woman I know in the State of Utah has the same desire. They all watch "The Bachelorette," they all have no skills whatsoever unless "fashion" and "makeup" counts as a skill, and they all just want rich, good-looking, young men to fight over them. These women are too proud to take the bus. I know one that absolutely complains that she has to take the bus anywhere, trying to blackmail her mother into driving her places when she's perfectly able to take the bus to any destination (Salt Lake City has excellent public transportation), and they complain that they have to get up in the morning (I've gotten up at 6:50 a.m. five days a week for as long as I can remember). They want to be able to snap pictures of themselves and post them on Instagram and make tons of money so that they can be invited to the Oscars and wear the latest fashions. What the actual f*ck is going on?

And you know what? All of that "desire" to be famous for just being you and not even stretching yourself beyond that is resulting in some disastrous behavior. For one, these girls all think that getting invited to stay on a yacht for Spring Break that is all expenses paid (off the coast of Greece) is perfectly normal. It happens to Kylie Jenner, right? So why not me? Well for one... you are not Kylie Jenner! Without the ability to recognize when you are being lied to by someone, there is a strong chance that you will be taken advantage of in a serious way (human trafficking being the ultimate bad scenario here). Second, a lot of these girls will never ever be famous. A huge percentage of them will fail. If they hold onto this desire to be famous through their adult life, they will never commit to perfectly fine average partners with mediocre jobs (which will result in them probably realizing they've gotten old someday and don't have anyone) and they will experience profound dissatisfaction with life and end up depressed with anxiety and on meds to manage it all while they draw social security because they don't want to face the shame of working for a low wage (because that's all they're qualified to do). So instead of being in the middle class, they actually land in the lower class or even homelessness. Instead of having a home of their own...they don't even have a trailer park at the age of fifty to call home. I've seen this scenario happen over and over, so I'm not making it up. The party only lasts so long folks, and you've got to commit to something or you miss being the last one there.

Bee is in a hurry to have it all (incredible house, nice clothes, yacht, fans, invites to exclusive parties, sex with the handsomest men on the planet, and glamour), and it's very frustrating. She has no idea how much any of that costs at all. Whatever happened to her wanting to be a doctor? Like...literally...it feels very much that the career of "doctor" was merely a catch phrase because she couldn't envision a path to this "other career" that she wants very much. I've known a few doctors and 1) they got lucky to even get to medical school and 2) it required extreme focus at the expense of everything else. And I would point out that there's a reason why "becoming the next Kardashian" is not taught in school. It's not a path that most people are able to follow. It's like trying to get winning lottery numbers ahead of the lottery. Not a whole lot of people are able to do that.

I should note that my concerns have found some ground with the mother, so we'll see if it actually goes anywhere. But in the aftermath of me almost pointing a finger at Bee's newly found "Jordanian" friend and shouting "human trafficker" (I suppose I stopped just shy of this), I can tell that my comments ruffled some feathers (I honestly don't really care because I like to call things out as I see them). I did stalk the new "friend" on Bee's Instagram follow list. It was the most peculiar Instagram I have ever seen. There were exactly 60 photos all going back to 2016 where they just stop. Each picture is staged, and there are no other people. No pics with friends or family. Just one person...this girl...and someone behind the camera (who is taking these pictures?). They are not selfies. Each picture has between 50 and 100 comments, but no words. Every picture is just filled with users who are posting emojis. Multiple lips or hearts or kissy faces. Every...single...picture. Like...that isn't a red flag for anyone but me? Every instagram I follow has people posing with friends. Even the Kardashians do that. Bee says, "I think this girl is lonely, and I'm just lucky to become her friend." Yeah...lucky...or you've got a huge bullseye on your back and can't see it.

This "friend" also doesn't live on the University of Utah campus. Bee lives in the dorms, this woman lives by herself in a two-bedroom apartment that is close by, and she lives by herself. The rent on this thing has got to be $1600.00 a month. I also checked with the University of Utah, and although they have an international campus for countries like South Korea, they do not have one for Greece. Which makes me wonder...why the hell is a woman who has the resources to go to school anywhere find herself in Utah of all places?

Anyway...I may never get answers to all the questions that circle in my head. Bee certainly doesn't ask any questions of her new friend. She's afraid to, as it may chase her away and cost Bee these beautiful opportunities that she is eager to pluck with greedy fingers. I can see Bee's mind churning at the thought of posting Instagram pics of herself in exotic locations looking good and making her friends from Utah jealous. I can see herself thinking, "I'm going to be a rich social media influencer and everyone will see how ignoring me was a bad thing to do! I can't wait to meet Taylor Swift so we can be besties!"

Nowhere in Bee's mind does she picture herself being knocked out and raped in some dungeon in Jordan and then sold to ISIS soldiers in Syria looking for a bride. The thing is, there's a word for this: desperate. So I ask you, what are parents doing these days that are raising girls to be so desperate for fame? Why do girls even want fame? Is there anyone left that just wants to be a refrigerator repair person? That's a respectable profession? I thought about learning to repair HVAC systems before I got hired in Assistive Technology. Whatever happened to just grinding away at something and finding success over many years? That's what I did. Was the path that I walked so bad? It makes me feel like no one wants to put in the time anymore because there's something shameful about that. But walking the slow path is also a much safer path, especially given that today's world is so filled with everyday dangers.

My home is honestly the best place for me to write anything.

Today is the first Wednesday of September, and I'm hearing the lyrics to Green Day's "Wake Me Up When September Ends." That being said, it's also time to post for the Insecure Writer's Support Group.

The IWSG is a monthly blogfest originally created by Alex Cavanaugh. Since that time, it has become a writing force in the online world. I participate in it every month and you should too. To sign up, go HERE.

Each month you get a choice to blog about something related to writing, or to answer the monthly question. I'm doing the latter this month, so without further ado, the September question is:

If you could pick one place in the world to sit and write your next story, where would it be and why?

I think I would still write my story in my home. Honestly, I've created a nice space for my writing, and I think it is the best place I could find inspiration were I truly to seek it out. Right now I'm prioritizing some personal projects ahead of any fiction writing, and it might remain that way for some time. But I recently published a friend's book on KDP print and kindle, and I've got to say that I rather enjoyed working on it. It's made me think that I should publish something of my own, but then I get distracted by the afore-mentioned projects (if you must know I'm drawing a map of my Dungeons & Dragons world using an old edition of Photoshop while watching Netflix or Amazon Prime). Anyway, I find the space I've carved out for myself in my home to be the perfect place to relax and pursue art projects--whether those projects are writing or drawing. And there's close proximity to homemade cookies and refreshments, which I think are a plus when burning mental calories.

So there you have it folks. I'm off to read other's answers to the above question, and I wonder just how outlandish these answers might get. Thanks for the read.

There are a ton of projects that are better built as a limited series than as a continuous multi-season show.

I have a few thoughts about television series.

Steven Spielberg famously once said that he wasn't sure if people knew how to tell stories anymore. What he was referring to was the conclusion, the finale, and there being no sequel. No one wants things to end anymore. They just keep on wanting the story to go on and on and on, for whatever reason. Maybe it's kind of like another hit of Ecstasy (a well-known club drug). The audience just wants that dopamine release one more time, and so they ask for it from the creators of a story that brought them pleasure, and the creators end up spinning some filler (or stretching a plotline way out) because it means more money in their pocket. Only this made up stuff is sub-par because it was never going to be part of the original story in the first place. Sounds familiar, right?

My mom was always on guard for house guests that "Overstayed their welcome." Well there are stories that do this too.

Good Omens is a great example of a show that does not overstay its welcome. Short and concise, and taking few liberties with its story from the novel version allows it to play out in the brains of its audience and finish with a bang. On the flip-side of this, stories like The Man in the High Castle (Amazon), The Handmaid's Tale (Hulu), The Walking Dead (AMC), and American Gods (Starz), are turning in lackluster seasons because each of these was meant to explore a single interesting idea (and now its all about grabbing some money). This works great in a single book or in a limited series, but it starts to break down when it is extended into an exploration of the world around it.

I would even argue that Star Wars is another great example of a show that has overstayed its welcome. It had a singular idea, which was the arc (and the story) of Darth Vader. But the love for all of the extras from Jedi vs. Sith to bounty hunters to the world at large has fueled a never-ending amount of stories that can be told in the universe. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm one of those junkies that has insisted on more Star Wars stories. However, time may well prove (along with Lord of the Rings--I guess we will see) that it is (in fact) one interesting idea that has been stretched in innumerable ways and none of it is as good as the core story.

I would also argue that dystopian fiction is better as a limited series than as a continuous multi-season show. Here's why: dystopian fiction is kind of prophetic--it tries to speak to a particular tension in the present moment that readers can relate to and are bothered by. This tension becomes the backbone of a world, but it is ultimately not sustainable for long because tension needs to have some kind of resolution. The Man in the High Castle, The Handmaid's Tale, and The Walking Dead in particular fall victim to this trap. Season after season of the dystopia (just throw a rock and pick one) never resolving is not a way to continue to woo an audience. Who wants to just immerse themselves in a frustrating anxiety-inducing thing with no end in sight?

This is where (I think) good science fiction is better built for multi-season (or extended) storytelling. Science Fiction in particular is "speculative." It tries to imagine a working future in believable detail, based on existing trends, technology, and scientific theory. In dystopian fiction, if there is a "speculative" element, it is usually just a vehicle to get us to the prophetic element, to show us a nightmare scenario if you will. The latter mode doesn't play well with world-building, which is the core of multi-season storytelling. The former, however, is made for it.

Anyway, these are some thoughts, and now I'm interested to hear yours. Other than that, have a fine weekend.

The Infernal War Machine from Wizkids is available today and I'm super excited to get mine.

Look, I play Dungeons & Dragons. Y'all probably already knew that. But along with the hobby is a bunch of nerd gear that goes beyond dice and rule books. I also collect miniatures, and the maker of the officially licensed minis for Dungeons & Dragons is a company called Wizkids. Today, August 28th, is the day that their latest set, called Icons of the Realms Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus, goes on sale.

In the D&D universe, there is not just one Hell, but nine of them and they are arranged like poker chip piled one on top of another on a table. The top most layer of Hell is called Avernus. In the past, it was ruled by a five-headed dragon. I've no idea who rules it now, because I haven't bothered to keep up. But the minis that are coming from this set are ones that I've wanted for a while now, because most of them are various kinds of devils (which I don't have very many of). And then there's this: the Infernal War Machine (look at the pics below).
This thing is 12-inches long (most character minis are only an inch high). According to the Wizkids website, these magitech tanks breathe noxious gas and ride roughshod over anything that gets in their way (and where devils are concerned it is probably their hated enemy, demons).
And it opens up. The vehicle "hood" is removable and you can place one regular sized character mini in the driver's seat.
It also comes completely apart so you can stick an army in the back (cargo) area.

I got the call last night that the Infernal War Machine was on the shelf. I asked them if I could come and pick it up tonight, but they refused saying that they can't sell before the August 28th sell date. So I guess I need to be patient until this evening when I get off work. Good thing my local game store doesn't close until 10 p.m. :)

The trailer for The Mandalorian makes me think that Disney spent all the monies on this to ensure that its excellent.

The Mandalorian trailer dropped on the internet last week, and my first thoughts were around how good it looked, how identifiably Star Wars it actually was, and how it seemed steps away from expected tropes. All of these things got me excited to subscribe to Disney +. In fact, I wish it was out already so that I could hurl money at Disney faster, and start watching it. I wonder if the assassin droid in the trailer is IG-88? When I used to run the Star Wars RPG from West End Games in my college days, I sometimes talked about what a badass I thought IG-88 might be. For the record, I also posed that a live-action Star Wars series told from the perspective of a bounty hunter in the galaxy might be fun to watch. That was thirty years ago. Glad to see that someone else thought the same thing and made it happen and with a reported $100 million budget for ten episodes (source The New York Times).

So yeah...if you haven't seen the trailer yet, click on it below and let me know what you think in the comments.

The Netflix series Altered Carbon brings up many questions regarding the subject of immortality.

For various reasons, I put off watching Altered Carbon on Netflix until the last week or so. If you haven't seen it, I think it's worth watching. The author of the series is Richard K. Morgan, and I'm familiar with this author through his dark fantasy series called, A Land Fit for Heroes.

The Altered Carbon film adaptation on Netflix follows a main character named Takeshi who is hundreds of years old because the human civilization has discovered alien technology to allow them to transfer their souls (called consciousness) into human bodies (referred to as sleeves). You come to find out that this technology was originally invented by a woman who simply had too much she wanted to do to fit into one lifetime. That seems like an admirable thing, right?

But when the technology was released unto the world, it allowed those with financial means to become immortal. Without death to keep people in check, a dystopian world emerged. The people who always had the power stayed in power, the people who always had the money just generated more money, and the evil that was always there was now allowed to survive in perpetuity. Basically, there is no upward mobility anymore, and there's no getting rid of bad ideas and tyrants, because the tyrants never die and never suffer the debilitating effects of old age.

This idea of immortality and how it is truly monstrous is something that I've thought about a great deal, and I think it hits really close to the mark of how it honestly might be if the likes of Peter Thiel (a very conservative billionaire) get their way.

The subject of immortality (as well) goes beyond just fictional study for me, as I live in the state of Utah (which is a kind of "special" place all to its own). As you may well know, Utah is heavily populated by religious people belonging to the Latter Day Saints. Many of them believe in an interesting afterlife, wherein family and friends are sealed together for all eternity and can enjoy each other's company for that same amount of time. This explanation is very simplified, and you just need to assume that it will be mostly if not all the way a blissful and happy existence. But thinking of immortality the way that Altered Carbon presents it seems to me to be the more realistic of how something like this could play out (if it is indeed a real thing). Unless personalities are altered--which (to be honest) would not make that person who they were on Earth--then humans are fundamentally flawed and awful creatures. They are judgmental, narcissistic, self-absorbed, prone to megalomania, prone to envy and greed, etc. So in my book, spending an eternity with any family member sounds like pure Hell, even if I were to believe in that kind of thing. And if people in the afterlife didn't possess those qualities because all needs were met, then I think it would be a very boring place, not to mention that I wouldn't recognize any people I knew to begin with because all the people I know have these qualities .

But I digress as I was talking about Altered Carbon and the particular view of immortality in which Richard K. Morgan paints, albeit with a "bloody" brush. In Altered Carbon, the eternal soul just jumping into bodies so that it can interact with the real world is horrifying. People treat their "sleeves" as disposable, and having an immortal life has caused many to become psychopaths...losing all connection they ever had to empathy. Immortals (for the most part) have become monsters. After having watched Altered Carbon, I think the show presents the idea that things coming to an end is actually a good thing for life, because the finality of an ending provides its own satisfaction that living an eternal life could never give. If this is true, I wonder then why so many people struggle with their age? Why is it so difficult for many of us to let go and to realize that death is just a part of life? Why have humans always been obsessed with immortality?

My own brother would be eternally young and immortal (I think) if he could be. So would many people. I don't think I would ever choose something like this for myself. Maybe it's because my own life's experience hasn't been all that great, or that there have been particular pains that I have endured that I really wouldn't want to relive over and over again. Rather than immortality, I think I'd choose maybe one more lifetime than the one I'm currently living. And maybe I'm saying that because I don't have the perspective such a long life would provide. I just hope that humanity never discovers a way through science to realize the ideas of Richard K. Morgan. If that happens, humanity may well enter an epoch of suffering unrealized by the crimes that history has thus far presented to us. Just imagine a world in which souls like Hitler and Stalin and Pol Pot were allowed to continue forever. It gives me nightmares just thinking about it.

Spider-Man will no longer appear in MCU films and I think this decision won't really matter all that much.

So, news dropped yesterday that Sony will no longer be sharing Spider-Man with Marvel. I wasn't expecting this news, but it makes sense given that Far From Home grossed over a billion dollars and is due to take down Captain Marvel on its re-release (to show four minutes of extra footage) this weekend. I guess they didn't even consider Marvel's offer, which was to pay for 50% of everything going forward, and Sony pretty much just told Disney to stick it where the sun don't shine (maybe a little more polite than that). I think Kevin Feige and others at Marvel made some really great decisions in casting Tom Holland and in crafting the last two Spider-Man films (I feel like the character is on track better than he ever was before), and Sony definitely now has a good blueprint to create a successful Spider-Man film.

I remember the buzz of having Spider-Man join the MCU before Captain America: Civil War. I hadn't read that particular comic book, but a lot of the nerds I talk to and respect told me that Spider-Man was pretty crucial to the storyline. Please note that these are the same nerds who also stood up for Adam Warlock being crucial to the Infinity War storyline (which I had read and was familiar with), yet that character was completely written out of Infinity War and Endgame and no one noticed because the storyline didn't follow the books, yet was still quite good.

So knowing all of this...and then having watched Captain America: Civil War...I'm still not certain that Spider-Man was necessary at all. I don't think he was necessary for Infinity War or Endgame either. Don't get me wrong...I like that character and I think that he was a great inclusion and lightened the mood in several spots, but Spider-Man was never essential to Captain America: Civil War or any of the others he was in. I mean...what did Spider-Man even do? Take away Captain America's shield? Give Iron-Man someone to mentor and miss after the snapture? Help fight Thanos on Titan (which they ended up losing anyway)? All of those things could have happened through another character, easy. The only thing he was really good for was having a teenager to rope other teenagers into wanting to see the film (because they had a character that represented them).

Anyway, I guess my point to all of this is that Spider-Man going back to Sony seems like a good move at this point. It means Tom Holland will probably appear in the next Venom movie and that his appearances in future Avengers films will depend on Disney showing up with a truck load of cash, which they probably won't do because...why? I think I prefer the smaller plotlines anyway...where Spider-Man faces off against one of his rogues' gallery villains and they expand the world just a wee bit by exploring various characters Peter Parker interacts with. I will miss Happy Hogan, but I'm sure they'll have fun with the Aunt May character.

The great Stan Lee understood that the troublesome issues of the day belonged in Marvel comic books.

I hear all the time from white religious people in Utah about how they wish television, movies, comic books, and other forms of entertainment (they enjoy) didn't include things like feminism and other social justice warrior issues. I look to none other than the late Stan Lee for an explanation of why entertainers should never completely cater to the escapism crowd who (in their hearts) just wants to ignore the fact that our government is putting brown people in camps. This was such a refreshing find to stumble across on the internet:
For any of his faults, Stan got it. I just wish other people did.