Can he Swing from a Thread?

By adding Bad Shakespeare 52 and Bad Shakespeare Takes England as regular features in my blog, it has made my job a little bit easier because I’m not searching around for what to write about which often takes up most of my blogging time. I mean, I do this as a hobby and as a way to stretch my muscles. And, of course, there’s going to be that sad day that I will stop writing regular blog posts and have to start the inevitable “Hey, guys, it’s been a while, hasn’t it? Here’s what I’ve been up to.” That also makes Mondays a little bit harder, because I’m now using that for just about anything I can think of, and that isn’t always readily available, either. I guess what I’m trying to say is…

OH MY GOD THEY’VE FINALLY ADDED SPIDERMAN TO THE MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE!

Ok, to the non-nerds in the audience, I feel kind of bad that you will never know the sheer joy there is in seeing Spider-Man team up with Captain America to punch evil in the face. But, I think this requires some explaining.

So, many of you not born before 2000 (who are now 15. Let that sink in for a little bit, America.) may not realize that there was a very dark time in Comic Book Movie History. There was a time when making a comic book movie was a bit of a gamble… see Roger Corman’s Fantastic Four… Oh, yeah, that’s right, that was never supposed to see the light of day. There was also a dark period where Batman was played by George Clooney, and there was an entire movie spun off from Superman that featured Shaquille O’Neal in one of the worst superhero costumes in the world that never once used the word “Superman” in any point. I remember going to see that one in the Theaters, kids. It was the first time I was the only one in the movie theater, and the first time I went to see a movie that didn’t have a movie poster associated with it. I think I asked what time the next showing was and they asked me “What time can you be here?” 

Oh, and for some reason we thought that it would be a good idea to give Judge Dredd a wacky sidekick.

In any event, you know the big two comic book franchises… DC and Marvel… were looking to branch out in exciting new directions for their superheroes. DC had already had some success in re-inventing superheroes for the big screen with Superman 1 and 2. Those were great, but quickly devolved into evil Superman vs. Richard Pryor (no disrespect to Richard Pyror) and Superman vs. a living ball of Nuclear radiation. Even these weren’t perfect, as it featured the most Gene Hackman version of Lex Luthor you’ll see, and brand new Superman powers like amnesia-kiss and cellophane giant S, which had the power to mildly inconvenience the bad guy for a few minutes. 

DC was ambitious, though, and kept finding some mild successes, like Michael Keaton Batman. So the hope was that one day, we’d get some epic superhero movies from DC Comics, featuring Superman, Batman, and even Wonder Woman.

These were hopeful times, kids.

Marvel, by the way, which owned X-Men, Fantastic Four, Iron Man, the Avengers, Spider-Man… they didn’t have it as good. After a… we’ll just call it a “movie” featuring the punisher, they had to go back to the drawing board. You see, Marvel vs. DC in the movies boiled down to this: DC said: “we have a guy in a Bat costume that fights crime. Find a guy who looks good as Bruce Wayne, then find us seven stuntmen to make him look good while he fights off the bad guys.” Even Superman was done in the 1950’s because they could just show a guy jumping out of a window on a set. Making a DC movie isn’t hard.

But Marvel… Marvel’s big draws feature a kid who climbs walls and a guy in a mostly iron suit, and let’s not get started on the Hulk and the “special effects” used to paint a guy green for a few scenes. They aren’t as easy to make, for some reason. Even Captain America’s costume featured rubber ears on the outside of his mask for some reason and well… I hate to tell you this, kids, but Nick Fury was once played by David Hasselhoff. 

So… Marvel sold the rights to a lot of their characters to different studios to keep themselves afloat and to live the dream of one day putting Tobey MacGuire in a Spider-Man Costume. Sony owned some. Fox owned the X-Men. And it was only recently that Marvel started their own studio and said hey… let’s make a bunch of standalone movies, then have them team up, then build ourselves Scrooge McDuck style money bins for us and our mistresses.

That’s why a big frustration for those of us who really love DC Comics Properties has been how the hell we’ve managed to get an Avengers movie… a movie that had to negotiate the use of one of it’s characters because another movie claimed they owned him and shoehorned him into the plot… before a Justice League Movie, which features the slam dunk team of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and Aquaman.

Hey…. don’t knock the king of the sea. He’s cool again.

This tirade brings us to the roundabout point I’m making about Spider-Man. Spider-Man has been part of a lot of different team-ups over the years. He was an X-Men, briefly. He was a member of the Fantastic Four. And he was an Avenger. So, the large belief was: We managed to get the Hulk on the screen in a halfway decent fashion, why aren’t we getting Spider-Man teamed up with Iron Man?

And it was studio politics. Sony wanted to make it’s Spider-Man movies, and try to team him up with literally anyone before they got him into the Avengers. I’m surprised we didn’t see Spider-Man vs. Taft before we got him on the Avengers. But they relented, and now… now we’re going to see Spider-Man in the comic version of the Civil War, where he famously revealed his identity to the world, thus joining Iron Man against Captain America. These are icons, folks. ICONS. We never thought we’d see together, on the screen, fighting against each other. Or teaming up. It goes both ways with comic books.

So, join me in welcoming Spider-Man home. Join me in the endless possibilities that arise from the fact that Spider-Man can now team up with the Avengers, like he should be doing. Join me, in celebrating this small victory for nerd-dom. 

Now… about Ghost Rider 3….

Book Report 52 Project: Ready Player One

For a while now, I’ve had a dedicated, awesome friend who has taken an interest in what I was reading. I’d tell him, “I really want to finish the Matched Trilogy.” He’d then respond with, “You should probably read Ready Player One.” I’d promptly forget about the book, then tell him about this fabulous new Neil Gaiman book I was reading, and he’d very nicely remind me about Ready Player One. Eventually, as I ignored him and this book, it became less of a friendly reminder about the book and eventually became a threat that if I didn’t read it soon, he was going to strap me into one of those Clockwork Orange Style Machines and shove it under my eyes.

So, Steve... I finally Read Ready Player One.

Ready Player One by Robert Cline is the story of a dystopian future where, as dystopian futures tend to be, everything sucks. That’s putting it mildly. Unemployment is rampant, life is hard, the schools are terrible and everyone pretty much lives to eventually go into a virtual game world called OASIS. It’s a sprawling world that’s less game and more a lifestyle, including schools, sporting events, mini-games, and pretty much anything you might imagine. The creator of the OASIS is a 1980’s obsessed pop culture nerd named James Halliday that dies well before the story starts and leaves, in the game, a series of tasks and Easter Eggs. The person who finds these Easter Eggs will end up inheriting his entire fortune, which is believed to be something like all the money on Earth. I wasn’t 100% clear on it, but it’s a lot.

Our hero, Wade Watts, is a small town poor kid who plays under the name Parzival, but just barely as he can afford to go to school and that’s about it. He longs to join the ranks of the “Gunters”... people who hunt for the Easter Egg.. and studies up on James Halliday, hoping to find that clue. Eventually he finds the first egg, yadda yadda yadda, adventure ensues, with a ton of 1980’s pop culture references. 

Before I continue with this book report, I’d like to point out that at this point, I’ve finished about five books this year. One I read in two sittings, that was Into the Night, the first sitting took me through the slow beginning but once it picked up I couldn’t put it down. That was a quick read, though. Ready Player One isn’t as quick. It’s a pretty big book. I stayed up until 4 a.m. reading it, because I couldn’t put it down. So while I discuss some flaws with it, you have to know that I really enjoyed this book. Like a lot.

Damn it, Steve, when you’re right, you’re right.

While it’s a long book, Ready Player One does move very quickly, managing to pack in a lot of exposition in a short period of time, and without really being that intrusive. It helps that a lot of the references were familiar to this nerd, reading the book. I can understand why it would be a bit daunting to anyone who may not be familiar with them, but they get explained pretty easily and pretty amusingly. While it’s a great strength, a few times it can get bogged down with “hey... the 80’s were pretty awesome, weren’t they?”

I also really enjoyed the “bad guys” of the novel... a faceless corporation named Innovative Online Industries, trying to find the Easter Egg for their own nefarious means. But they added an interesting element to the novel. The OASIS is a large “playground” where pretty much anything can happen. Part of it is pretty monetized, poor Wade Watts can’t go too many places because he doesn’t have much money. But in the long run he still can enjoy parts of the game, either through school or with his friends, Aech (and later) Art3mis. But the idea that these guys want to take something and basically turn it into a cash grab, destroying the spirit of it... it adds a real element of danger to the story itself. 

There’s also a great little piece that in corporates the villains of the novel. Halliday loved the 80’s so he tried to re-create it, adding in little bits of trivia and challenges that force people to be familiar with his favorite things, be it Monty Python, old-school adventure games, John Hughes movies... but in studying these things, people would learn about and celebrate them. They had to love them in order to know about them. Cline obviously cares about them, so he ensures that his off-screen character so to speak, cares about it to. In a way it “forces” Wade and his friends and fellow gunters to love it, but at the same time they learn to enjoy it. It’s about sharing. Innovative Online, specifically Nolan Sorrento a high ranking official looking for the Easter Egg... he doesn’t learn to love it. He has hundreds of people feeing him information, studying just to try to find the egg, not learning to love the culture itself. It presents an interesting contrast. In one way, they all learn about the 80’s for one reason: money. Cold Hard Cash. A lot of it. In some ways, all of it. In another, one group learns to love it, have fun with their friends. It’s just “nice.” There’s no other word for it. Reminds me of when I used to hang out with my friends. More of what Halliday (and by extension, Cline) is trying to each.

The novel, however, is not without it’s flaws. As mentioned, there is a feel in some places that are basically “wow, the 80’s sure are cool!” And, while it happens later in the book, the 80’s gets replaced by “whatever science fiction or nerd culture stuff we can talk about now!” The protagonist gets a Serenity Firefly Class starship which is cool, but seems wildly out of place when we’re talking about Atari. And this is a small one, but has everyone in the 1980’s forgotten about Sierra On-Line and the height of Adventure Gaming like Space Quest, Quest for Glory, Kings Quest... these were great games and a precursor to what we see now, and would have easily fit into the 1980‘s version of the game. Some parts to tend to drag, and the ending is way too abrupt. 

But again, minor quibbles in the long run. The book itself moves at a deft pace, and in the end, is a nice reminder of a life a while ago before things got... complicated. I know that there’s a movie in the works, one I hope never gets made. Billions of dollars in licensing aside, they would never be able to capture what is so great about this novel. It’s set in a future, but manages to transport you into the past. It manages to make you look at the way things were when everything we take for granted now - specifically video games, just hanging out with your friends on a Friday night eating greasy pizza- were a staple of life. Just takes you back. A movie wouldn’t be able to do it the same way, or wouldn’t be able to capture it the same. 

All in all, I would recommend you read this book.

Thanks, Steve. 

Bad Shakespeare Takes England: Shakespeare in Love: The Play.

So, one of the reasons I was in London was for a class in Theatre, taught by the handsome and talented Rick Davis. I should also mention that in addition to be fabulously handsome and so amazingly talented as an inspiration, he hasn’t put final grades in just yet. So... someone let him know about this first paragraph.

Moving on.

Theatre is HUGE in London. There are more theatres for plays than there are movie theatres, and I was fortunate to see 11 plays while I was there. ELEVEN. Nine with my class taught by the fabulously handsome Rick Davis, and two on my own because I’m not made of Pounds, which turns out are worth more than the American Dollar. Fortunately they love students there, and they love their half priced theatre tickets, so you can wander in off the street and get a good deal on just about any play you want to see, so long as it’s not Book of Mormon.

So, obviously, I’d be doing you a disservice if I didn’t pepper in a few stories about the plays I saw there.

I’m going to start with the last play I saw, because I decided to go see it when I saw the first advertisement for it, then I decided I wasn’t going to see it because it was too expensive, then I decided I was in London once and why wouldn’t I take advantage of seeing whatever play I could possibly see.

The last play I saw on my own was the spectacular new production, a Romantic comedy called Shakespeare in Love.

Look, sometimes you want to be inspired by going to the theatre. Sometimes you want to be challenged. Other plays challenged and inspired me. Sometimes you want a good time. For my last night in London, I wanted a good time. Shakespeare in Love was that good time. I had a wonderfully good time, and I’ll tell you all about the challenging (I’m looking at you, Golem) and the inspiring (I’m looking at you, Scottsboro Boys) and even the terrible (How do you make the go-to adventure novel, Treasure Island, boring?) but for today, I’m going to tell you about my good time in the theatre and that was Shakespeare in Love.

Boo-ya.

Now, one of the big things our wonderfully inspiring Professor put into our heads was this: in order to be critical about plays, we should never start with “I Liked it.” It’s a controversial statement, and we need to focus on what he referred to as “Reportage” because we were in Europe and he was going to sneak in as many european words as possible. We needed to tell about the play, talk about it’s elements, and then we get to even think about whether we “liked” it or not. Even then it’s controversial, because in the long run we are there to report and distill our opinions from that.

Therefor, in an effort to be as controversial as possible, I’d like to start off by saying... I really, really, really liked Shakespeare in Love, the play. (The movie was ok, too, but I need to bring in a distinction, because the play was roughly a billion times better than the movie.)

There. I made my controversial statement but it’s not without its purpose.

Shakespeare in Love is a play written by Lee Hall, based on the movie of the same name by Tom Stoppard and Marc Norman, and features the same Academy Award Winning plot: Young Viola knows all of dialogue from the plays of William Shakespeare and wants to be an actress at a time when women even going to the theatre was considered an indecency. We probably shouldn’t go back in and tell them that much of popular culture has been devoted to the female booty this past year. Or maybe we should. Disguised as a man, she meets the Playwright William Shakespeare who is going through a problem of his own with writers block while trying to write his new comedy “Romeo and Ethel, the Pirate’s Daughter.” Eventually he sees through her deception, the two fall in love and of course, hilarity ensues. Well, some tragedy. There’s plenty of tragedy involving a marriage and well, the acknowledgement that William Shakespeare was married to Anne Hathaway at this point, so romancing a young actress is pretty much status quo in today’s times, it’s probably still a little taboo back then. After all, this is something very loosely based on the story of William Shakespeare, a man who once wrote that a man gets randomly attacked by a bear while exiting because there wasn’t enough death; it’s not going to be all happy endings.

The play takes place on a set that is designed to look vaguely like the Globe Theatre might look had England not managed to go through two of them before the third one that stands today (more on that later), which is a nice reminder that this is Shakespeare, and that he wrote very much from his own life, even with this fictionalized story. It’s a bold statement presented right up front: Shakespeare wrote about life itself, this is not to be forgotten, even in a light romantic comedy. Indeed, even the start of the play itself starts with William trying to write, and all of the characters gathered around him, trying to see what the next piece of great literature that may explode from his pen might be, as he grows increasingly more frustrated. One of the greater designs of this set is the ability for it to swing back and forth so the audience is quickly brought backstage as needed. Or a bar. Writers do enjoy writing within bars.

One of the better elements as well was the use of practical elements on the stage. When Will and Viola are rowing across Thames for her to get home, they sit in an arrangement of chairs that vaguely represents a boat, not an actual boat, while characters off to the side actually generate the sounds by dipping their hands in a pool of water. Later, when rose petals drop from the ceiling, they are dropped by several actresses who are standing above the stage. Despite the fact that this is a very 21st century production, every attempt is made to invoke the feeling of being sent back in time to Shakespeare’s day with limited props, minimal set, and practical effects that add to the experience. Really the most 21st century thing about the production is the aforementioned moving set, but even that doesn’t feel out of place... it brings us all in on the experience. We are now co-conspirators, coming backstage with the characters as they bring their new tragedy, “Romeo and Juliet” to the audience.

And that’s the thing about the play. As I’ve mentioned, the opening image, is that of the characters - all of them - gathered around William Shakespeare. The ending image is the same. Rather than an attempt to distance the audience from this genius, the play itself goes out of its way to remind everyone that Shakespeare was a man of his time and place. His writing endures because he is a man who saw the world around him and wrote about it and allows us all to draw our own conclusions from it. He’s a man. And that’s what made him so great. This play gets that. It may be “light.” It may be “funny.” But it reminds us of what this one man was capable of, and why we still read him today.

But ultimately... it was just a good time. 

Macbeth is Dead... Now What do We Do?

So, before I start talking about Dunsinane, the sorta sequel to that Scottish Play written by William Shakespeare all those years ago, I want to take a moment to discuss a rather large moment in Macbeth that is addressed quickly in Dunsinane. Mostly, the large handicap that comes from having one of the main characters in the follow up be someone who was killed rather famously in the first part. Or “seems” to have been killed.

They spend a lot of time on that word “seems.” 

Oh, and spoilers for Macbeth follow. If you haven’t seen it within the 400 years it’s been out, you may want to. It’s a pretty famous play. There’s a version starring Michael Fassbender coming out soon, and another that starred Patrick Stewart that’s already out. So pretty much whichever X-Man you prefer, there’s a pretty good version of it.

So, one of the main characters in Dunsinane, is Lady Macbeth going by the name Gruach in this and somehow all of the characters are shocked and surprised when (spoilers again) she betrays them all. Which is shocking in itself. This power-hungry woman who convinced her husband to kill the king has managed to fool us all! Who could have seen this coming?

Taking it back a step, Lady Macbeth returns for the sequel despite the notable handicap of being killed in the very first play, because William Shakespeare like to kill off characters like a power-mad combination of G.R.R. Martin, Joss Whedon, and Steven Moffat. You can complain about all of those guys you want; Shakespeare once had a guy pursued by a bear off stage because he felt like it. And that was in a comedy. Yeah, Martin, you enjoy your red wedding. Whedon, shoot Tara at the last minute. And Moffat, you kill off River Song as much as you’d like. Shakespeare laughs at you.

But here’s the deal that so many people tend to forget (because hack directors decide they want to show this very important moment on stage) - Lady Macbeth dies off stage. She has a moment where she has a mental breakdown, then goes off and supposedly kills herself. Or “seems” to. And yet here she is, fresh as a daisy and ready to resume her scheming in the sequel. Of course, I never bought it - it was her husband who didn’t have the stomach for killing at the start, despite being a warrior, so she goes in to finish the job. Then, stuff happens, and by the end of it their roles are completely reversed. She seems to be all crazy and Macbeth is the ruler who has a thirst for killing and not worrying about a little rebellion because the witches said - oh my God are those trees moving?

One of the smartest decisions made by David Greig was to bring Lady Macbeth here and gives her the historical name of Gruach, which was more like what her original name would have been back when Shakespeare was reading some old history books deciding which one he was going to turn into his next masterpiece. But they also bring her back, and despite the fact that she doesn’t have as much stage-time, she’s a large presence in the play itself, because, like the historical Lady Macbeth/Gruach, she has a claim to the throne. 

The play is about the aftermath of the death of Macbeth, starting actually around the time that Macduff and his army decide that they’ll just pretend to be trees. In fact, one of the first lines is very comedic - “here, you be a tree” which is a nice comment on the meta-theatricality of what we’re going to be watching. It’s a play, yes, but there are many layers of this play going on.  Siward just wants to bring peace to Scotland initially because it protects the borders with England. Malcolm, originally a symbol of order in the original play here is played almost aloof and unwilling to do what it takes to rule. And Lady Macbeth/Gruach is silently running her own campaign of violence. So there are roles within roles, within roles that everyone is playing. 

And yes, there’s the big honking metaphor that the production is in constant conversation with itself about: you can occupy a foreign nation all you want, but you can’t force everyone to sit down and play nice… even if you force everyone to try and sit down and play nice. 

Most of the play focuses on Siward, the English solider tasked with bringing peace - or at least a new Government - to Scotland. He is a fine character for us to follow, because it’s easy to take part in his descent. The play starts with his son being killed - for the greater good, of course - and he still has to protect his army who is growing increasingly frustrated. He has an affair with Lady Macbeth/Gruach, which makes it that more devastating when she has to marry Malcolm in a scheme to unite the warring Scottish Factions. I found his to be the most interesting section of the play, and I wish they’d spent more time on it. Lady Macbeth/Gruach is the one with the reputation for power and scheming above all else, and for a moment there’s a brief sense of real love between the two characters. But when it comes down to it, it’s not initially Lady Macbeth/Gruach who does the betrayal. Siward is so concerned about his legacy and “getting the job done” that it’s easy to see why she backslides into her old habits. As Siward continues his madness as his obsession with stabilizing Scotland slowly devolves into his obsession with Lady Macbeth/Gruach. Which asks the question: is it guilt? Madness? 

A lot of stories don’t really deserve a sequel. A lot don’t need them. At first glance, Shakespeare’s Scottish play doesn’t really need a sequel - and Shakespeare wasn’t above writing a sequel or two if the moment called for it. And others aren’t above writing sequels for him. I’ve seen sequels (usually in book form) to the Tempest, Hamlet, even Macbeth (focusing on Banquo’s son, who is not mentioned here. The witch part is played up, but the three witches/destiny thing is played down. WAY down.) But by producing a sequel, especially one as compelling as this one, so many years later… it’s a reminder that perhaps we haven’t learned all those lessons we have purported to learn. It’s a reminder that everything old can be new again, not just in the theatre, but in the world in general. 

This play asks a lot of questions, but answers few. Siward, relegated to “background character” and “guy we need to get on stage to get the actor playing Macbeth a break” in Macbeth is one that has divided loyalties, obsessions to duty and honor, and many character traits that make him a compelling character. I’m happy to see him given some of his due here as a take on a character who is initially pretty minor, but with a few tweaks is leading. Which gives me hope for the Bear in a Winter’s Tale, who’s story will be gladly told by the Royal Shakespeare Company one day. Maybe.

Dusinane is playing at the Sidney Harmon Hall in Washington, D.C. I highly recommend you take this opportunity to come watch this show. One of the things I enjoyed in London was the fact that on any given night the theatre was packed… I was disappointed to see that on a Saturday Night, opening weekend for a show the theatre was about half-full. (or half empty) It is a thought-provoking piece that manages to address a centuries old play while keeping in conversation with our current issues, and does so with tragedy, humor, and, well… lots of death.

Book Report 52 Project: A Once Crowded Sky by Tom King

I love comic books and superheroes.

I know. You’re shocked. Shocked. Unless you don’t read this blog regularly, then it may be a bit of a surprise, I guess. But this love of superheroes has given me an odd quest, and that’s to find a great superhero novel, which seems to be increasingly difficult to do. I thought I’d found it last year with Paul Tobin’s Prepare to Die!, but I found it mostly to be a fantasy of an oversexed superhero rather than the compelling portrait of a superhero that has accepted his mortality and just given up. 

So, when I heard about another superhero novel, A Once Crowded Sky by Tom King I was very intrigued. All of the superheroes in the world, giving up their powers to fight a mysterious calamity, except one! A hero, the Ultimate, sacrificing his life with all of those powers to stop this calamity, creatively named “The Blue.” (Not making that up. The big problem is a color, found readily in nature.) One hero refuses to give up his power, and to make the twist even better, it was PenUltimate, the Ultimate’s sidekick! And, despite the fact that he refuses to give up his powers... he’s retired! What could have caused him to retire? And what of all the super villains? Will they take advantage of this superheroless world? 

Here’s where I talk about another issue that plagues me. You see, unlike most people, I can handle something bad. A bad book? I’ll still slog through it, because even in it’s badness there’s something good, even if it’s enjoying how terrible it is. I remember one particularly bad novel called April and Oliver that was terrible, and yet, I managed to make my way through because I could appreciate it. Bad movie? Hey, there’s a certain fun in calling out just how terrible it actually is. I didn’t enjoy Transformers 4: More Explosions and Inappropriate Glances at a 17 Year Old, but hey, I could appreciate that it’s still giant robots wailing on each other. 

No, what I can’t stand is something that wastes it’s potential. Star Trek: Voyager is my least favorite Star Trek series not because it was bad... I still enjoy the characters and the acting is decent... I hate it because of the wasted potential. They could have done so much more with Captain Janeway and her crew.

This brings me back to A Once Crowded Sky. I didn’t hate it because it was a bad book. I hated it because it wastes every potential to shoehorn a superhero story into a fable about the war on terror. And fails. So miserably. 

As mentioned, the book focuses on a world where all heroes are tasked with giving up their powers to a vaguely described energy burst that is destroying the world called “The Blue.” The Ultimate sacrifices himself, and his sidekick doesn’t give up his powers because reasons that are never fully explored, because he retired for reasons that aren’t fully explored, and people hate for all of these reasons. If you’re worried that the novel will spend too much time on it, don’t, because the novel spends almost no time on it. There’s one former superhero (that only shows up at the beginning in a very awesome scene, and then at the end because oh, crap, she’s barely mentioned in the rest of the novel and we have to wrap up her story somehow) that seems vaguely mad Pen (as he’s known) but we find out in her brief scene that she’s his ex, which brings in many other connotations to the scene.

There is also the Soldier, who knows the secret behind the “virus” that caused all the super villains to kill themselves when the Blue (God, I hate typing that as a real problem for people to solve) struck. (Spoiler: He did it. And he’s wracked... WRACKED with guilt about it for a few scenes. Easily two.) Don’t get me started on his supernatural sidekick that may or may not be the actual devil and despite the constant appearances and so much potential for the nature of evil and what’s right in a better novel, makes no sense here. Just... none.

The other problem that this novel has with trying to tell a superhero story in a novel form is the fact that it’s too clever for itself. Chapter titles are given using Comic Book Titles and numbering... and there’s a character who can see the future and writes it all down in comic book form. Not drawn comic book form, mind you, but as a writer writes the comic book form, lest you forget that this is based on a comic book. He’s also the only one who knows what the Blue actually is, and for a while it appears that the threat is comic book itself, but... yeah.

The other thing that needs to be addressed is the very repetitive nature of this novel. Not just in form... no, paragraphs get repeated to the point that you can skip entire sections without missing a beat. But also scenes. Entire. Scenes. Not even in a way that is satisfying or to make a point. But let’s take the main hero, Ultimate, and his creation. Once again... spoilers... but you find out that he brutally murdered Pen’s parents while under the influence of an evil villain, and he also brutally murdered another kid’s parents who becomes the super-future seeing guy. He brutally murders so many people that this book that by the end you have to wonder what a “hero” is.

Ultimately, that’s what makes this novel not so “Bad” but “Frustrating” because it wastes so many good ideas... a world without heroes... what does it mean to be a hero... hard decisions... in such a glossed over manner. If Pen has retired, then why does it matter if he gives up his powers or not? What about the countless other superheroes who have given up their powers... how are they affected? There’s an entire sub-plot where Pen is being monitored that is removed in five seconds after the Ultimate brutally murders the guy who’s watching him... why is this dropped? What about the villains? Or the nature of evil. Last week I talked about a novel that starts off in the modern world but then invites you into it’s strange world. A Once Crowded Sky is content to remind you every few minutes that you’re reading a novel, and hold you away from the world at arm’s length. And that may be the most frustrating thing of all. 

       The Quest for a Good Superhero Novel Continues...

Bad Shakespeare Takes England: Five Guys!

It was my fifth night in London that I broke down and did it. At this point I had explored many of what the country had to offer. I took my time, sat down in tiny cafes and pubs. I was surprised, actually to find that this location had opened up in London of all places. But I had to do it. I just had to.

I went to Five Guys. A Five Guys in London.

So, look, I fully understand that I’m in a new country, and that I should be using that opportunity to explore the local cultural cuisine. I’ve commented repeatedly about how I enjoy cooking. That means that I should be taking a look, seeing what British food is out there, despite the fact that it’s not really known for it’s cuisine, outside of what we like to pretend are British-style pubs in America, but really just offer the one dish that they’re known for: Fish and Chips. And that’s not even REAL fish and Chips, since most of the time it’s just served in a newspaper and it’s literally a hunk of fried fish. That’s it. 

So, walking down Oxford Street, enjoying some of the local places to purchase clothing, I noticed an alley that had a few restaurants down it. Oxford Street is like London’s version of 5th Avenue, where some of the fancier stores tended to hang out. I actually stayed pretty close to this area which wasn’t too bad. This isn’t like a seedy alley like we have here in America, or like the ones featured in spy movies. It was almost like an extension of the well travelled, well decorated Oxford Street. Like these were the places that couldn’t quite make it on the big street. Then I saw it, red and white and all too familiar.

Five Guys.

Now, some of you may not know what Five Guys is, and that’s… somewhat ok. If you don’t know, it’s a Burger joint that started in the Northern Virginia area, and it makes some of the best hamburgers, every, and it has been expanding ever since. I was surprised when I was taking a trip to New Orleans a few years ago and saw they had made it to Georgia. I was really surprised when I’d seen that it had made it ALL THE WAY TO ENGLAND. 

I remember when Five Guys was just a greasy local dive. Finish some of their complimentary peanuts? Just toss those suckers on the floor and go and get some more. You ordered a burger and fries and then you waited for it to come. Grilled cheese? Pffft. Hot dogs? nope. And it was only the rookies that ordered a large fries for themselves, because you’d always get a generous helping lopped right on top. 

But here it was, in all it’s red and white glory, sitting there. A beacon, perhaps false (I’ll get to that in a minute) that stood out in a sea of mediocre food that I’d been ingesting for the past two weeks. 

Now, you see, I say, “mediocre” because I was there to study, and that meant counting my pennies. This meant I would grab a free breakfast from the hotel every morning. It was a buffet that sat out for a while, so even if I got there early I would generally just stick to the cereal because those eggs didn’t retain their egg-like shape very long, and the bacon…. left stuff to be desired. Don’t get me started on the pre-toasted toast that sat under a heat lamp for a while. Who pre-toasts toast? They had bread right there.

Moving on.

I’d also sampled some of the cuisine other than fish and chips, but you have to remember that England had an outbreak of mad cow disease a few years ago. This meant that most of the food was cooked “well done” or “well done” and that tended to remove “flavor” and “taste.” I did have a pretty good leg of lamb, but that was mostly just brown sauce. 

So it was quite the treat that managed to present itself in a real life Five Guys, but I was a little afraid… what if it was overcooked? Would it be the same taste as before? These questions drove me as took the handle and pushed open the door. 

It certainly smelled the same. And except for a heavily accented young lady greeting me at the door asking me if I’d ever ordered at a Five Guys before, everything seemed the same. Yes, she had to ask if I’d ordered at Five Guys, because the tradition was so different. There aren’t a lot of fast food places in England outside of McDonalds, Burger King, KFC… ok, so there were a lot. But the idea of ordering your food then waiting for it at a counter because it wasn’t going to be brought to your table wasn’t a well-known concept. I politely told the young lady that I had, because well.. I had, and I guess she recognized my American Accent and let me through to order. Which I did, my old standby, a burger with mayonnaise and lettuce, and small fries (because I’m not a rookie). 

The fun part was that there was even a sign letting customers know where the potatoes were fresh from. These were fresh from Ireland. 

I got my burger and fries and just… watched. I wanted to see what was going on around me. Apparently it was a new place, because SO any people were surprised, in their accents, and how different these burgers were. I know one lady next to me couldn’t stop talking about it. I had to admit, they were as good as their American counterparts. I did end up seeing one person asking how the ordering worked, because of course I paid attention to the door after I was asked. I had to see what was going to happen. It seemed to be a seamless process, and he got it. I don’t know if he liked his burger or not, because I enjoyed mine and you can only really sit in a Five Guys in London for so long before you feel you should probably go out and view something Englandy. Like the changing of the guard, or maybe some genuine fish and chips. 

I was also surprised to see that this was not the ONLY Five Guys in England. There was one being built in Cardiff, which is bout two and a half hours west of London (and a story for another day.) 

Of course, I did sample some other cuisine. That’s another post. But for one glorious meal, five days after I arrived, I had to just try something at the same time familiar and at the same time not. Even if it was just for the experience. 

Who Ya Gonna Call? (Hint: Not the Internet)

They’re rebooting Ghostbusters. 

I took this news with a certain level of interest, because, as I’ve mentioned before, Ghostbusters was the first movie I remember seeing in the theaters with my father. (Yes… I’m old. We had to ride a dinosaur to get there and then ask a guy swinging his club around to leave.) It introduced me to Bill Murray, which is important - parents, talk to your kids about Bill Murray before they learn about him through Garfield - and it introduced me to the idea that movies don’t have to be serious all the time. Whenever it’s in the theaters because of a special or anniversary, I try to go see it, so, yeah, I love Ghostbusters.

So, I took the news that they were rebooting Ghostbusters with a bit of hesitation. I mean, it’s not only one of my favorites, it’s a classic. I have to admit, they have a pretty good cast, I love Melissa McCarthy (who’s the only one actually signed.. I’ll get to this point in a minute) and I love Kristen Wiig. I have to admit I’m not big on Saturday Night Live so I’m unfamiliar with the other two ladies who have been cast, but as long as they’re funny, I’m willing to give it a shot.

Then I made the biggest mistake in the world. I went online to see what else I could find out about it.

Oops.

Apparently now it’s a hot-button topic. They movie itself is going to ruin childhoods everywhere, it’s stupid, and my personal favorite, if you hate it, then you hate women everywhere because women are starring in it.

So I figured I’d clear a few things up for everyone, because I think I reached my real limit with this particular movie, since I’ve been following the development of Ghostbusters for a while now, way back when it was Ghostbusters 3 and they were going to have to deftly write around Bill Murray being in it or not being in it. 

Let’s start with the “ruining of childhoods”. They’re re-making Ghostbusters, ladies and gentlemen. RE-MAKING. This means that a new set of actors and a new set of writers are going to put on a show, presumably for a certain amount of money. That money is going to cover advertising, the actors salaries, catering…  stuff like that. What it’s not going to cover is buying all the rights to all the Ghostbuster Blu Rays and sending a gestapo-like team to destroy every copy, nor will it fund the conversion of several DeLoreans into Time Machines to go back and replace your precious Dan Akroyd-fueled Ghostbuster memories with that of Melissa McCarthy fueled hijinks. They’ll still exist, but a different version will be out.

It’s really starting to annoy me that the default for these remakes is a “Destroyed childhood” or “destroyed memories.” They’re not taking these memories away, they’re trying to create new ones for new kids… and let’s face it, just because something “new” comes along doesn’t mean what you enjoyed no longer exists. It still does. Bothers you? Don’t go watch it. Stay home. Put in the original Ghostbusters. Or Indiana Jones. Or GI Joe. Or Transformers. Boom. Mind=blown. 

I also want to take a moment to the people out there that were commenting that they already know that this reboot is going to suck. As of right now they have the first draft of a script and really just the one confirmed star: Melissa McCarthy, who quite frankly should be part of any future Ghostbusters. When the announcement broke (those that chose to read the whole thing rather than the headline and burst into a fury of rage, like some nerdy Hulk who’s powers come from no one really knowing who they are.) will know that people are **close** to signing, which means they can change any minute. Hell, even when people are signed up, THAT can change. Colin Firth was the voice of Paddington Bear until six weeks before the movie came out. Things change.

This is another disturbing trend. Before a single frame is shot, people are declaring that once again, something is going to fail despite the fact that time and time again: they’re proven wrong. Right now, not a single piece of footage exists of Ghostbusters: The reboot. Not one special effect is out there. Right now it’s a star, first draft of a script, and a dream. Chill out. To be honest, I was much more worried by the mythical Ghostbusters 3 script that was constantly being changed. Although that one was rumored to have Jack Black attached, and that would have ruled.

Now, the final, more delicate piece of information… the feminist issue. Can we not turn everything into a culture war issue? I wrote all above about how people need to calm down about the upcoming movie that doesn’t exist yet, but people are turning this into a feminist issue and trying to say how everyone who dislikes the idea must somehow hate women. Let’s break it down for a second.

“I don’t want to see the new Ghostbusters because I loved the original and I don’t think this will be as good.” Probably means that they don’t want to see the new Ghostbusters because they loved the original, and they don’t think this one will be as good. Maybe they’re Ernie Hudson fans. Maybe they get confused with the new technology that makes ghosts look real. Who knows? Life is hard. Why read more into things than there needs to be? Don’t get mad at this guy.

“Women Ghostbusters? What if their boobs get in the way when they’re fighting ghosts? How will they hold the trap with them long fingernails” The person saying this probably doesn’t like women very much. Get mad at this person.

But no matter what, everyone needs to chill out about yet another Hollywood remake. I would have liked to have seen the original guys… as many as who were left… put on the packs one more time to bust some ghosts and possibly make up a little for Ghostbusters 2. Everyone remember Ghostbusters 2? Yeah… let’s be grateful we’re not getting that again. That being said, I’m kind of looking forward to what the next one has in store. Could be great. But then, if it’s not, I’m going pop in my copy of the old version, and hum along to the theme song for the 900th time. 

Everyone… just relax.