The Last Drive-in Rides Again

If you’re a horror fan and watched late-night TV in the 1990s, then you know who Joe Bob Briggs is. (And if you’re horror fan and you don’t know, you’re missing out.) Recently, Shudder resurrected “The Last Drive-In” following a couple of successful holiday marathons, and the streaming world is a better place for it.

So why does a double dose of dorky horror movies matter? Community.

The world has grown smaller with the advent of social media. If you love something, you can certainly find others who do as well. However, the likelihood of sharing that passion in a tangible way is unlikely unless you live near them.

Enter the resurrected “The Last Drive-In.”

Once a week (Fridays at 9EST/6PST), you can join Joe Bob Briggs and Darcy the Mail Girl on Shudder and enjoy a double feature of horror movies. If you are active on Twitter, then the hashtag #TheLastDriveIn connects you with fellow mutants (horror fans who love the drive-in) and is moderated by Darcy (@kinkyhorror).

So who cares?

Horror fans across the country who can’t sit down with one another and enjoy a classic they’ve never seen before or re-watch a favorite for the hundredth time are treated to an online community of similarly interested horror fans. And in a digital world where social interaction is a metric, the horror community that tunes in each Friday and commiserates via the #TheLastDriveIn hashtag (or tweets to Darcy) feels like a group of friends enjoying the movie together even though they aren’t located in the same physical space.

Through the first four weeks, we’ve been treated to behind-the-scenes commentary from Joe Bob and classics like The Changeling and C.H.U.D, relatively unknown films like Wolf Guy and Q: The Winged Serpent, cringe-worthy films like Society and Castle Freak, classic slashers like Madman, and incredible New Zealand horror like Deathgasm.

Who knows he’ll screen next?

But if you’re not doing anything next Friday and you love horror movies, then join the rest of us mutants at “The Last Drive-In.”

 

DC Should Tackle Batman Beyond Next And Cast Donald Glover

Nerds of the world will recall Batman Beyond as a refreshing animated take on the Batman mythology. We were gifted with an incredible Batman animated series in the 90s that stands the test of time. (Don’t believe me? Go back and check it out.)

Here are some reasons why DC should tackle a Batman Beyond movie next:

 

They can stop rehashing the same story. Even Nolan’s trilogy was beholden to the rogue’s gallery of villains and characters that had previously existed in the Batman movie universe. Whether it is the Joker or Catwoman, they have to be reinvented in a new decade, but much of the story remains the same. In setting a movie in the future, you can create a new set of villains and characters in this  version of Gotham. For too long has the detective aspect of the character been absent on the big screen, but a reboot in the future could allow for new methodology. An aging Bruce Wayne would be playing mentor and watch tower for a younger Batman: this means new challenges and methods for overcoming problems.

 

 

Recast Bruce Wayne. Since this version of Bruce Wayne would be an older man, you have an entirely different set of actors from which to choose. There would be no need to hire the en vogue  actor who is going to provide an appeal to key demographics. You could cast based on the needs of the character, which would no longer be purely (or predominantly) physical; the detective aspect of the character would be more important, as well as being a mentor. I think it would be interesting to bring back Michael Keaton as an older, grumpy version of Wayne.

 

Add diversity to the story. Not to be a prisoner of the moment, but Donald Glover is fantastic. I’m one of the many fans who would have loved to see him play Spider-Man on the big screen. Sure, he got a cameo, but that’s not the same thing. Can you imagine a movie where Michael Keaton plays mentor to a snarky Donald Glover in the ultra-tech version of the bat suit? If you don’t want to go with Donald Glover (or perhaps he wouldn’t be interested in it), then utilize some diversity by casting a person of color.

 

 

The Marketing Blues

Writing a book is difficult; revising and editing is an odyssey.

However, marketing looms large, hanging around your neck like an anchor. Indie authors face an uphill battle. There are hundreds of thousands of new books created each year across a myriad of genres. Depending on the pool you dive into, you may (or may not) have a bastion of potential supportive fans.

Unfortunately, the grind is indeed a millstone.

You must learn to embrace the suck.

I love a rousing speech, but marketing is about discipline and a real desire to share what you have made with the world. Often, in the throes of sending out review emails or contacting media outlets, you are struck by a desperation to simply give up. You might consider just being content with having completed a book.

And truthfully, finishing a book is a real accomplishment. Very real.

Some things that help me get through the grind (and also result in some progress):

  1. Advertising.  Not everyone has the budget to run a full-page ad in The New York Times (I certainly don’t). However, you can chip away with a smaller budget using Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon. If you ran an ad 2-3 times a week, you might be able to run an ad that reaches 10,000 new potential readers for as little as $50.
  2. Starting a conversation. You’re probably on social media; you probably even retweet some truly interesting people. But you likely aren’t having a conversation. The importance of this is in building relationships, showing potential readers that you don’t just want to sell them something: you want to make them a lifelong reader.
  3. Talking to someone new. Every so often I like to shoot for the stars and reach out to someone on social media who’ll probably never respond. You don’t need to tweet Chris Pratt in order to talk to someone new. You could reach out to a columnist you admire (Lauren Duca) or just someone who covers your genre to say you enjoyed what they wrote. Writers are always excited to hear from people who enjoyed their work.
  4. Making a plan. Wondering what to do next? Decide what you want to do. Sell 10 books today? Sell 10,000 books by the end of the year? Get a thousand new followers on Twitter by the end of the year? Figure out what you are aiming for and then build a step-by-step plan to reach it. That’s what I do anyways.
  5. Throwing out the plan. Then sometimes plans change…goals change. You need to adapt with them. Throw out what wasn’t working and plan for something new. The world is constantly changing; you need to be changing with it.

All I know is that if you are unwilling to share your book, then potential readers will likely not be interested in reading it.

 

Purchase Sixth Prime before Fifth Prime arrives!

Sign up for my newsletter to get free ebooks and to be entered into contests for cool gifts!

 

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Thor Ragnarok

Copyright: Daily Express

I have decided to start a new approach to reviewing movies, TV shows, and books on the site. Enter “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly” segment. First up is the latest in what has become the exhausting MCU.

Simply put: I loved this movie.

The previous two entries in the Thro franchise set up an interesting relationship between Thor and Loki, but never seemed to produce a movie that was worth the price of admission. With that it mind, let’s get to it.

The Good: Loki (in my opinion) has been one of the few bright spots in terms of a largely underwhelming stable of villains the MCU has marched out for the shiny Marvel movies. Here, Taiki Watiti treats the god of mischief as he should be: chaotic neutral. Loki, traditionally, is less a black hat and more a “let’s watch them dance” kind of antagonist. This is revived here with requisite humor. Thor Ragnarok was, quite simply, fun, which has been sorely missing from the MCU. Hela was a great villainess and the supporting cast, especially Korg, proved to be wonderful. Jeff Goldblum delights as well, though I would have expected nothing less. The Good: characters, dialgoue, music, and overall story.

The Bad: There was not a lot to complain about in this movie. One criticism I have seen levelled at it is the lack of seriousness. While the plot is peppered with humor and misadventures, I never felt as if it needed more seriousness. The Bad: very little at stake in the larger MCU picture (not really a bad thing).

The Ugly: Valkyrie was one of my favorite characters in the film. However, there was a point at which the movie veered toward her as a potential love interest for Thor. She deserves to be an autonomous character, not beholden to a potential amorous companion for Thor. The Ugly: hinting that Valkyrie might tumble into love-interest territory.

Overall Score: 

out of 5

Haiku Review: iZombie (S3E5)

Credit: iZombie Wiki

Dominance guides them

As memories fade to black

In a world on edge

iZombie continues to be one of my favorite, if not my favorite, show on TV. The acting is top notch as always. Rose McIver is wonderful again, taking on yet another personality with ease. Robert Buckley is sadness personified. Malcolm Goodwin remains powerfully stoic and humorous and somber as he deals with how much his life has changed and been affected by Team Z. (Also, I loved yet another GoT reference.) A great episode that portends even greater things in the future. 

Perd Hapley is a Dimension-Traveling Alien

will-the-real-perd-hapley-please-stand-up-2-26474-1428472335-14_dblbigIf you’re like me, then you have a strong and abiding love for Parks & Recreation. I can admit that it is one of my favorite comedies in recent memory, due in large part to the brilliant casting and writing. And Ron Swanson, always Ron Swanson.

post-29590-ron-swanson-meme-i-like-ron-du-pf0k

However, I came to an interesting realization the other day: Perd Hapley is a dimension-travelling alien observer who is clearly the most powerful being in the shared TV universe. For eagle-eyed fans, you will notice that Jay Jackson, the actor who plays Perd, has a penchant for reading the news on your favorite TV show.

m8d5ovn

What you never noticed though, his how closely he likes to stay to danger and intrigue. Much like the Observers from Fringe, I think that Jay Jackson has created a kind of shape-shifting constant character that is not unlike Stan Lee in every MCU movie.

Starting in 2007, Jackson has played a report or news anchor no less than 14 times, including:

Bones (TV Series)
Scandal (TV Series)
The Catch (TV Series)
Supergirl (TV Series)
Pretty Little Liars (TV Series)
Parks and Recreation (TV Series)
Revenge (TV Series)
Battleship (Movie)
Fred: The Show (TV Series)
Body of Proof (TV Series)
The Mentalist (TV Series)
Fast Five (Movie)
The Closer (TV Series)
Dexter (TV Series)

Now, perhaps you can say that he has been typecast as a reporter/news anchor or even that Jay Jackson likes playing these parts. However, I like to think that a casting agent, writer, producer, director, or even Jackson himself is purposely creating one of the greatest easter eggs in all of TV history.

So, the next time you are watching a TV show and they cut to a reporter in the field or an anchor delivering the news, don’t be surprised if it is Perd Hapley looking back at you.

A New Condition

The world is in crisis.

We have been lied to.

Each of us deceived by those who we thought would protect us. Conditioning has placed us where we are. Conditioning is what will free us once more. There is much about the world around us that we cannot understand for what it is; interconnected parts working for each other against the best interests of humanity. Like lambs to the slaughter, we were shown our roles. We did not fight for what we believed, nor did we conform to what they wished.

We succumbed to the will of perceived inevitability.

I think that we are avoiding the most obvious point of it all. It is not whether it is happening because we started it. The thing that we must remember is that we can do something about it. What we know and believe is little more than what we were told to believe; the wealth of our knowledge is little more than what has been told to us. The nations of this world are divided by walls and barriers that are not physical, but instead ideological and financial. We are not creatures of evil or apathy, but instead we are taught and engrained throughout our lives to behave this way, adhering and following the antediluvian archetypes of centuries and empires past.

What can be offered is not a panacea.

What can be offered is to help find the value in living and the love in what is all around you. These times that face us are powerful and sorrowful, for each day defines the next. A change does not appear before our eyes, but is instead the earnest incremental struggle of ideals and beliefs that will change the world.

It has been said that one human being cannot change the world. This creates a false dichotomy insofar that we have been made to believe that either our actions can change the world, or they cannot. This is not the way of things. We may change, for good or bad, when we lift up (and are lifted up by) our brothers and sisters.

The world is sick.

Humanity is ailing.

We have hunger, famine, disease, and widespread violence the world over. Consuming the resources of this one planet, we do so at such a rate that we will collapse beneath the weight of our own refuse before our time. If we are to survive, then we must fight to stay. We must believe that this world is worth having, and prove that we deserve to occupy this planet.

Some have deferred responsibility, saying that the world will do what it must and technology will catch up. But how can technology match our consumption and destruction pace for pace, if all of our monetary resources are being funneled into that consumption and destruction? All of us are responsible for what we do, how we behave, and the lives we live.

We as a species face such a need for survival. No longer can we look at the plights of the world through rose-colored glasses, or from atop our distant steeples. We must accept responsibility for the actions of the nations in which we live. Though we did not deprive a village of their resources, our constant demand for new things has driven industry to knock on the doors of nations the world over for resources.

It is time to stand up and say no more.

Caring about other people needs to be trendy.

Not because being eco-friendly and caring about your fello human is popular amongst the rich and the famous, but because it can and will save the world. None of us are perfect. Nothing is expected of us in this life except what we are willing to give. But, we must not be afraid to give.

We are a community whether we wish to believe it or otherwise. Even if you strand yourself in the farthest reaches of the world, your existence is dependent upon the creation and distribution of consumer goods that you will need in order to survive. We are an interconnected world. We have this one world and we have to prove that we belong here. I have heard (from loved ones and mentors alike) that we cannot be responsible for what is happening to his world; that we are too insignificant to make an impact.

But this feels like an excuse.

As is such with much of life, we want to be responsible when it is in our best interest. When what we have done appears as a black mark upon who we are, then we decide we can  no longer influence events. People wish to judge others actions, but not be judged on what they do. They wish to say whatever comes to their minds, critiquing and attacking others, but not to be held responsible for the insufferable, illogical discourse that marks their opinions and doubts.

It would appear that empathy is a forgotten emotion.

Creating a system in which the blame falls on the individual despite the nature of the system has become the standard. We think that every person is capable of overcoming circumstances; that advantages are not awarded by birth and affluence. Pop culture has ingrained in us that if we think positively about something, if we dare to dream, then we can influence our future.

But this strikes me as logically incongruent.

And it should sound problematic to the world.

This type of belief blames those who do not rise above their circumstances. There is a passive nature to this time of admonition, hidden behind a beautiful possibility. I ask: is this truly the nature of the world? If you believe something, then doors will open for you? I think the outliers and exceptions have become the norm. We expect that if we try hard, then we will be rewarded.

What of those afflicted with famine and victims of genocide forced into refugee camps the world over? What of rape victims? What of children abused? What of people killed because of the color of their skin? Did these people not wish hard enough? Did they not direct their thoughts in the proper direction to find hope? Certainly I have outlined only the horrors of the world, but we cannot turn a blind eye upon these sores on the back of humanity.

We have to stand up for those who have no voice.

Have we become a nation that hears, but does not listen? Have we become a nation that speaks, but says nothing? Some of my peers, as well as those a generation older, fear assisting those less fortunate; that by giving to them, the will to achieve will be broken. That somehow helping those that cannot help themselves will erode the fabric of who we are.

Is this true?

I am not suggesting that we bankrupt ourselves to help others, but as Peter Singer has suggested, we should give enough so that the least well-off can rise to a level that could be considered basic. When there are children starving in countries where what we pay for a gallon of gas could feed them for a day, I have to question whether sacrificing some of the comfort and affluence so others may simply live should not be mandatory.

We have been tricked into believing something that is not true.

They told us that there is a right way and a wrong way. They said there are Republicans and Democrats, Conservatives and Liberals, pro-war or against war. All around us the constructs of our society dictate endless false dichotomies that force us to choose one over the other without examining the rationality, or possibility, of something that we cannot perceive.

I sometimes try to think of a world that is so unlike this one. The mantra that there is no better place to live, or that we are number one, simply makes me sad. Who wants to be number one in a world where there is so much suffering and sadness? In America, there is immunity to the horrors and travesties of the world. We are insulated from the world that surrounds us.

We rally behind demagogues, partisan rhetoricians who care more about the game of being elected than demanding excellence and change of policy. They have become so assimilated into the culture of domination and conditioning that their campaigning rhetoric is little more than a clever game of chess with words. They dance and shuffle with issues that should matter, but know that the hot button issues (the ones we have been conditioned to care about) should have well-articulated and formulated opinions.

The world does not change because power is assumed. One person can direct the world in a positive direction, but the capacity for change is within each of us. The ability to radically alter our circumstances is in the belief that we are equal, that we can help each other. Leaving those deemed as unworthy to fend in a world that rewards selfishness and shuns those less fortunate prepares us for failure.

I fear that when the times do not regulate themselves quickly enough, that change does not happen with the turn of a phrase or the passing of a single day, that some will be quick to demonize. One person can lead. One person can inspire. But it takes a nation to change. It takes a world to see.

There are times in history we look back upon when reading, or taught in a classroom, that we shudder at the humanitarian violations of a government and the apathy of the people at its base. We wonder to ourselves how a nation loses its moral compass.

Apathy.

Compliance.

Comfort and Conformity.

Ponder the world as it is. Take it in and really think about it. Talk about it amongst your friends and family and encourage intellectual discourse. Find your own answers. Seek out information. Do not be satisfied with the status quo or the regurgitated material that you see on every news channel. Fight against the propaganda and lip service of news that is created for you. Remember that you have the power to change your mind.

People may tell you what to think, but you decide whether or not you will believe what is being feed to you is truth, or if you will search for something that might be difficult. Some may try to convince you that questioning the good life is wrong, or that what you have read is wrong.

There is nothing wrong with disbelief, it encourages discovery.

Do not be afraid to be proven wrong, or to prove something wrong. These are the issues I grapple with every day. These are issues that I think autonomous beings of the free world must talk about. It would be intellectually dishonest of us as thinking beings to not analyze the impact of who we are on the world. We need to demand change, to stand with others instead of standing apart.

A new condition must prevail.