E.R. Torre's Blog, page 77
May 16, 2018
Corrosive Knights, a 5/16/18 update
It’s been nearly a month since my last update (4/18/18… you can read it here) on progress for Book #7 of the Corrosive Knights series.
[image error]Today, I’m pleased to announce I’ve finished the read-through/written revisions of Draft #6 of the book and will be soon putting those revisions on the computer. Once done, It’s off to Draft #7.
It’s taken me a little longer than I hoped to get through the read-through, though this was something that was also anticipated. We had some traveling done (a graduation) and I’ve been left in almost sole charge of a family business so time to focus on the novel has been a little tighter (and might be a little tighter for the next few weeks) than before.
Regardless, I feel I have a very good grasp -much better than I did after finishing Draft #5- of the book than before.
Basically, the first half or so of the book is great. It requires minimal fixing, mostly grammatical/spelling type stuff.
However, there is still work to be done in the second half of the book, some of which may require a little more writing (I suppose this is similar to when it is reported a film calls back the actors to do “reshoots”).
To be clear: The book is well on its way to being finished but there are elements in that second half that will require more work.
On the great side, I feel that after I finish up the revisions for the 1st half of the book, I can set that aside and don’t have to do full novel revisions from now on.
This will save time as I’ll be focused on shaping/revising the second half of the book exclusively and reading/revising a full novel versus one half a novel will cut down on the time required to finish up.
Before I release the book and when I’m happy with the second half of it, I’ll give it one more full read-through and see how the book feels as a whole.
As impatient as I am to get it all done, these things do take their time, but it IS moving ahead and we will get there.
Soon!
May 15, 2018
Now this is truly strange… Christopher Nolan and the “unrestored” 2001: A Space Odyssey
I think its fair to say director Christopher Nolan is up there in the very high echelon of “great current directors.”
His first full film, Following, presented a story which was told in reverse order, something he would subsequently use for his breakthrough follow up, Memento.
Mr. Nolan would release several incredibly well reviewed films, including his Batman trilogy (though, to be fair, the final movie in the trilogy did have its detractors), The Prestige, and Inception.
I’ve read interviews with Mr. Nolan and clearly he’s a BIG movie lover. He loves celluloid and, interestingly, seems to have similar tastes to mine with regard to films he admires.
One of them is Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, which happens to be one of my top three all time great films (for the record, my other two all time favorites are Metropolis and Orpheus, though there are many, many films that fall just outside this category… and in time may supplant a film or two there!).
Anyway, Mr. Nolan, while in Cannes, showed a unrestored (yes, you read that right) copy of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and… I’m left scratching my head. So too was Stephen Garrett over at Slate.com, who wrote about it here:
Does Christopher Nolan’s “Unrestored” 2001 do right by Kubrick?
Understand: As a film lover, I very much want to see films look as good as they can. I know that film stock can degrade over time, some dangerously so. Colors tend to fade and this is why restorations, IMHO, are vitally important.
Yes, restorations of films often involves turning them from film stock into digital media and I understand that, as mentioned in the article, digital media wasn’t always the greatest way to show all the sparkling colors film stock manages.
But…
Digital technology is always improving and, as the author of the article mentions, what digital media produced 20 or even 10 years ago is at a lower level than what can be produced today. I suspect it won’t be long before digital images will capture anything/everything film stock can.
However, here’s the thing: UNrestored print?!?
Again and according to the article, the image was generally good but the author noted scratches in the print, wobbling sound here and there, and the cigarette burn looking edges of the print which, in the old days, indicated a reel change.
Look, I’m all in favor of seeing things as they were, but given the film’s age, the “unrestored” copy that Mr. Nolan is showing has to display such age related wear and tear. And seeing these little glitches… does it really enhance one’s appreciation for the film?
I would think not.
But that’s just my opinion. Who know, maybe there is something to replicating the original theater experience, warts and all.
May 14, 2018
Sketchin’ 68
Charles McGraw (1914-1980) was a fascinating actor who appeared in many roles, none as good (IMHO, of course!) as that of Detective Brown in The Narrow Margin (1952), a great noir thriller involving protecting a mob informant. Sadly, Mr. McGraw died when he slipped and fell through a glass shower door.
May 11, 2018
Gut punches… TV cancellations!
Yesterday news broke on several TV show cancellations… and one case of a network not airing any more episodes of a show.
First up, Fox announced the demise/cancellation of three very good comedies. From CNN.com and written by Sandra Gonzalez, this article which notes…
Brooklyn Nine-Nine cancelled (also The Mick and The Last Man on Earth)
The article hews toward the (bad news, IMHO!) of Brooklyn Nine-Nine’s demise after five seasons and, I must say, I’ll miss the show. It’s been a fun run and I suppose one should be happy with five seasons -which, let’s be clear, is quite good- but the show wasn’t slowing down. It was still a very fun, at times outright hilarious comedy with a quirky, interesting cast and well written episodes.
Sadly, the show simply didn’t have terribly good ratings so away it went.
The good news?
Looks like the show may have a chance to be picked up by a service like Hulu or Netflix. I’m skeptical (I’ve heard that before with shows that were never seen again) but hope, as they say, springs eternal.
The two shows the article doesn’t focus on as much is The Mick (2 seasons) and The Last Man on Earth (4 seasons), both of which were also, IMHO, incredibly funny shows, though the later does require a bit more patience from viewers.
I felt The Mick was an enjoyable show that featured potentially nasty yet lovable characters. Yeah, they were slobs, snobs, and losers, but they were presented as less than the caricatures they could have been.
For me, The Last Man on Earth was really tough to get into, at least during that first season. The main character was such an asshole that it was difficult to want to follow his “adventures” in the post-apocalypse. My wife, to her credit, stuck with it and I gave the show a second chance and… it clicked.
The appearance of the main character’s brother -and his eventual sad fate- humanized him. Yeah, he remained for the most part a clueless asshole but his heart was clearly in the right place.
I’ll miss all three shows.
Finally, from i09.com, Evan Narcisse writes…
Syfy says this season of The Expanse will be the last one on the Network
Unlike the shows I mentioned above, I gave up on The Expanse after its first season, which I thought was decent enough but didn’t “grab me” like it did other shows.
And, to be very clear, The Expanse certainly grabbed many other viewers!
In fact, many consider this one of the best sci-fi shows airing on TV currently. Critically acclaimed or not, the Syfy Network won’t be airing it anymore because it costs them too much to do so and they only have the rights to air the episodes on a first run basis. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Syfy Network does not have any rights to digital or streaming of the show, which obviously cuts down on the returns (ie money) the network could have made on what is a very expensive show to produce.
It’s a cruel thing to lose shows one likes, and this year so far (lest we forget, Ash vs. Evil Dead is another goner), seems crueler than others.
May 10, 2018
In these dark days…
…its always fun to find articles like this one, presented on etonline.com and written by Brian Haas:
Mike Myers wants to do an Austin Powers movie from the perspective of Dr. Evil
I point this article out not only for the fact that it sounds (at least to me!) like a fun idea for a continuation of the Austin Powers film “universe”, but because of the comments he makes regarding Margot Robbie, who produced and stars in the heist thriller Terminal, in which Mr. Myers also plays a role (his first in a while!).
A fun little article and I’m not going to spoil it by giving away anything. Check it out!
May 8, 2018
One-album wonder
Sorry for the dearth of posts of late… been busy with plenty of different things, including the lovely graduation of my eldest daughter (sniff).
Getting back to business (at least ’round these parts), found this intriguing article by Priscilla Frank and found on HuffingtonPost.com:
One-Album wonder Margo Guryan didn’t fade away. She escaped.
The article’s title is pretty self-explanatory and involves musician Margo Guryan who, in 1968, released her one and only album, Take a Picture and then dropped off the proverbial face of the Earth, at least with regards to continuing any sort of musical career.
I highly recommend you read the article as Ms. Frank details how she stumbled upon Ms. Guryan, who also released a politically twinged song titled 16 Words in 2007 but only has these two musical works out there to be listened to.
Ms. Frank would eventually get in touch with Ms. Guryan, who is now 80 years old, and find out why she dropped out of the music scene.
Her lone full album is considered by many to be among the best “one-album wonders” ever released and several critics have noted the album sounds like the Beach Boys’ music of that same era. Mighty high praise indeed!
So check the article out, its quite fascinating!
May 3, 2018
Sketchin’ 67
Humphrey Bogart and Gloria Grahame are… In A Lonely Place (1950). Superb noir-ish romance/suspenser with some stunning imagery.
Ric Ocasek and Paulina Porizkova break up…
Yeah, I know, this is stuff that unless you’re at all familiar with the two individuals I’ve noted above, you probably don’t care.
But if you’re an old fart like me, you know Ric Ocasek was a member of the very popular (and, while they were around, fantastic) band The Cars and he and the then very successful supermodel Ms. Porizkova first met when they made the video to the 1984 song Drive, one of The Cars’ most popular releases:
Sung by Benjamin Orr (while Ric Ocasek is often presented as the “face” of The Cars, it was Mr. Orr who sang most -but certainly not all!- the best of their songs. He passed away in the year 2000 at the age of 52 of pancreatic cancer), Drive was a big hit and Mr. Ocasek and Ms. Porizkova married a few years later and have been together for 29 years.
However, this article by Ron Dicker and presented on HuffingtonPost.com notes…
Paulina Porizkova and Ric Ocasek are “Peacefully separated”
The reason I point out this article is not to titillate or spread gossip or wallow in nostalgia.
The reason I point out the article is because of this line from it, a bit that blew me away (and which is presented in bold):
Porizkova, 53, and Ocasek, 74, met during a music-video shoot for The Cars’ song “Drive” in 1984 and wed in 1989, according to People.
I’m just… speechless.
Rick Ocasek is 74 years old?!?!
He’s a grand total of 5 years younger than my… father?!?!
He’s three years older than David Bowie?!
I was so flabbergasted I had to investigate this a little further. How old was Mr. Ocasek when the self-titled first (and, IMHO, best) Cars album was released in 1978?
The answer? He was 34 years old at that time. He was 40 years old when he met Ms. Porizkova in 1984.
Incredible!
The point I’m making is this: Mr. Ocasek -and The Cars- bloomed rather late considering the business they were so successful at -the music business- that tends to cater to two audiences: The young and the very young.
Good on ya, Mr. Ocasek!
May 1, 2018
Apple troubles…?
Interesting article by Seth Fiegerman and presented on CNN.com:
Apple faces Wall Street ‘panic’ over iPhone
The key line from the article is this one:
Apple stock fell this month after one of its key chip suppliers warned of “continued weak demand” (for the iPhone).
Which, of course, brings me back to something I’ve talked about several times: The silly need for tech companies to look successful by selling “new” versions of their products when they get to the point that their current product is so good that people no longer need to make that upgrade.
Once again: I lived through the rise of the desktop/personal computer golden age. We went from the 8086 processors to the 286 processors to the 386 to the 486 to the Pentiums and, for the most part, each new iteration was much, MUCH better than the previous one, and if you were into using your desktop computer, it made plenty of sense to toss the old version away and buy the newer one.
It was that good.
A very similar thing, IMHO, happened with the iPhone. Each new version was a hell of a lot better in ways both large and small to the previous version.
But…
There came a point, perhaps with the 6th version or so, that the iPhone seemed to hit the same wall the desktop/personal computer folks did: The phone had reached something of a peak, and subsequent versions merely tweaked things here and there and the changed were nowhere near as “exciting” as previous changes.
Thus, people were suddenly not quite as eager to line up around the block (remember when that happened?) to get the latest version of the iPhone.
So when with much fanfare Apple releases their iPhone X, and its priced extremely high and its features are a little better than the previous phone yet people don’t feel this difference is worth pursuing, especially for $999, it shouldn’t be too big a surprise.
Yet that’s the stuff that makes people in the business community suddenly think a company is in “trouble”.
No, people probably still love their Apple iPhones. The problem lies in the fact that the company has refined the product to the point where people don’t need to toss their last version to get a new one.
A little more on Avengers: Infinity War
$258.1 million dollars.
That’s what the film made in its opening “week” (though its really a weekend), which means that the movie has had the strongest opening ever.
I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat it here: I’m certain the film is quite good, exciting, fun, etc. etc.
And I’ll repeat what I said before: I don’t care to see the film.
Every week new films/TV shows/books, etc. etc. are released and the fact of the matter is that one can’t see/read/hear ’em all. Further, those you do spend some time on may wind up thrilling you while others might wind up seriously disappointing you.
It’s the nature of the beast.
With regard to Avengers: Infinity War, I feel like I’ve had my fill of Avengers films. With the current film’s release, we’ve had four so far: Avengers, Avengers: Age of Ultron, Captain America: Civil War (though a “Captain America” film, it was essentially an Avengers film), and now Avengers: Infinity War.
I’ve seen the first three and I know I’m in the minority here (at least with two of them), but I didn’t think all that much of the three.
I felt the original Avengers film was “ok”. Didn’t hate it, but didn’t understand the fangasms. Avengers: Age of Ultron is the film that may get the least amount of love from the fans and I won’t dispute the fact. The film did feel more than a little confusing (the whole Thor going away -even with the extra/cut scenes- made little sense). Captain America: Civil War had a well realized fight scene at an airport and involving almost all the characters in the Marvel Universe… but the rest of the film was something of confusing mess as well, to me anyway.
So here’s the thing: If I didn’t really like the previous three Avengers movies all that much, what incentive do I have to see the latest one, especially given all the many, many spoilers which make me feel like the film is trying to create excitement/suspense/sadness out of something that is temporary at best?
I’ll repeat for the thousandth time: I know I’m in the very small minority here.
But it is what it is.
I’m glad people -and most critics!- seem to like the film and I’m glad you feel, at the very least, you’ve gotten your money’s worth seeing the film.
For me, its a pass, alas.
