Archive for May, 2009
28 items.
I realize that Jared says “googles” instead of “goggles” in the punchline of today’s comic and I am sorry.
This is what happens when I finish my comics at 1:30 in the morning. I will fix later.
Until then, let’s all pretend like I’m a professional that proof reads his own work. There. Y’see. You opinion of me is increasing already!
[ 3 Comments ]
Pretty much all weekend long I’ve been talking about Star Trek. So much so, that Cami feels she’s missing out a little bit.
Over dinner I expressed that it was too bad that she never got into Star Trek: The Next Generation because it was a really good show.
Much to my surprise, she said, “I’d be open to watching some of those shows if we can rent them using Netflix.”
I just about fell out of my chair.
So now I’m thinking that I have an incredible opportunity to expose my wife to a cultural touchstone, but I’m not sure where to start.
Logically, you would think “Start at the beginning.” But here’s the thing… as much as I love The Next Generation, I don’t think the first three seasons are very good. My rule of thumb is, if Ryker doesn’t have a beard, it’s a bad episode. If Tasha Yar is in it, it’s a bad episode. If Worf doesn’t have his ponytail, bad episode. If Wesley Crusher is in it… Well, you get the idea.
I have it in my head to start Cami out on Season 4, but I’m worried she might miss out on some important character development. Admittedly, it’s been years since I’ve sat down to watch a complete episode. I would catch them from time to time on Spike or G4, but I was never patient enough to sit through the whole thing. Renting the past seasons on DVD would be a way for me to get caught up as well.
So I guess the question is this: For someone who has never watched Star Trek before – let alone The Next Generation – where is a good place to start? Would you suggest starting from the beginning, or do you think there are better episodes to be found in later seasons?
Leave your comments below!
[ 17 Comments ]
Apologies for the cut and paste job on today’s comic. But to be completely truthful, I spent most of the day in front of my computer writing my final paper for my Master’s research class. In fact, I took the day off from work to do it. By the time I was supposed to start working on the comic, I had a little trouble with the thought of sitting there for too much longer.
I don’t know how that’s any different than me sitting in front of a computer monitor at work for 8 hours and then coming home to do a comic. But maybe it has something to do with the location. Too much time in a tiny room ends up with you approaching Jack Torrence levels of crazy.
To make it up to you, I drew a pretty picture of Tom firing a phaser from Star Trek. To see it, vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics. And in case you’re not catching the reference Tom is making to the slinky dress and the green body paint, that was a sexual escapade introduced in last Friday’s comic.
Incidentally, regarding my research project, you guys knocked it out of the park when you came to bat for me by filling out those surveys. When all was said and done, almost 700 of you completed the survey! To keep that in perspective, during a round table discussion our class had about our research projects, many people were coming back with about 10 to 20 respondents for their surveys. You guys blew them out of the water. Even my professor was impressed!
So, at this point, I have to wait and see if she finds the paper that explains the research compelling. I felt like I wrote a pretty good paper. 9 pages, 3,000 words… respectable. Cami read it and she thought it made sense. Of course, by that point, it was due in an hour. I wasn’t going to be making any changes then!
I think what I found most interesting in the results is that the overwhelming majority of you – 82% – did not believe a background in film or journalism was a requirement to be a “legitimate” film critic. 81% of you felt that online reviews were no more or less credible than their print counter parts. In fact, nearly 8% of you felt that online reviews were MORE credible than print reviews.
That’s good news for me, but it makes me think about the traditional film critics who complain that online film criticism has devalued the art form. Turns out, education or background isn’t something the audience cares about.
The battle between traditional and online critics, to me, is very similar to the battle between syndicated cartoonists and web cartoonists. There’s all this finger pointing going on. One side says the other is devaluing the art form and if they had and “real” talent, they would have been able to make a name for themselves through traditional, “legitimate” print media. The other side points fingers back saying those in traditional media are behind the times and are clutching too tightly to their meal ticket instead of figuring out a way to monetize their talents in new media.
Less face it: Print is on it’s last legs right now. But of all the people losing their jobs, I would think film critics would have the easiest time cultivating an audience online. They’re afraid of starting over. That’s justifiable. But if their position is that only “legitimate” critics are good enough to make it in the world of print, let’s throw them into the global melting pot that is the internet and see the cream rise to the top.
Either you’re very talented and can attract your own audience or you’re a big fish in a little pond screaming bloody murder when the pond starts drying up. Better swim downstream into bigger waters before you get caught at the bottom of a dried up pond. That’s my advice.
Is there any interest from you guys in reading “The Value of Film Criticism Compared to the Decline of Print and the Rise of Online Publishing?” If so, let me know in the comments. Maybe I can upload it to the server later tonight and you guys can look it over for fun. That is, if your idea of reading a research paper is “fun.”
Not much else for discussion today. I pretty much exhausted all there was to say about Star Trek on Monday’s The Triple Feature.
In case you didn’t have a chance to listen to the show, I strongly encourage you to download it. We had a really good conversation about Star Trek as well as the teaser trailer for District 9 that was floating around last week. We didn’t completely see eye-to-eye on Star Trek, but I thought we got some interesting discussion out of it.
Just as a reminder, you can subscribe to The Triple Feature through iTunes. You can either search for us by name on through the iTunes store, or you can use this link. You can also subscribe to The Triple Feature’s RSS feed.
Just making things easier for you!
That’s all for now. Thanks for stopping by and I’ll see you here again on Friday!
[ 20 Comments ]
May15
I had a hard time with today’s comic basically because it relies so heavily on the caricatures of Ron Howard and Tom Hanks to help sell the joke. I’ve convinced myself that caricature is not my strong suit. All you need to do is look through my archives to see how long it took me to get comfortable drawing my own characters, let alone internationally recognizable celebrities.
I’ve bought a few books about caricature and it has helped me to understand some of the fundamentals. Basically, you take the most obvious feature on someone’s face and exaggerate it while minimizing their less noticeable features. Ultimately, what I end up doing is looking at what OTHER caricature artists have done and use that for a source image.
I don’t think I’m beyond help when it comes to learning how to caricature, but I do think some people have an innate talent for it. Thursday’s strip parodying Lost over at PvP was excellent. It not only clearly communicates which characters are being parodied, but Scott retains his signature style throughout. I’d be lying if I said it didn’t inspire me a little bit to try my hand at caricature again for today’s strip.
Joe over at Joe Loves Crappy Movies does a great job with caricature as well. Check out his Jason Statham or his comic for Slumdog Millionaire. Joe makes it look so easy.
I tried to stretch a little further by doing another caricature of Tom Hanks for today’s incentive sketch. I think it turned out pretty well. To see it, vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics. I would be curious to know what you think!
Turning the Lens of Introspection away from myself for a minute, let’s talk about Angels & Demons coming out today. Considering how big The DaVinci Code was when that came out, it’s weird that no one I know is talking about this movie.
Do you remember the sequel to The Silence of The Lambs? Hannibal? I think we’ve got another one of those on our hands here. Angels & Demons looks like the kind of movie that was green-lit based on the financial success of the first movie without anyone stopping to consider if it was a product anyone wanted to see.
The comic addresses the controversy surrounding The DaVinci Code which, at the time, was palpable. But very few are even raising an eyebrow over Angels & Demons. In fact, the Vatican’s official position on the film seems to be “So?”
Director Ron Howard insists that there is still a controversy and believes the Vatican is holding a grudge. That very well might be true, but it seems they learned their lesson from the first time around and aren’t lending the new film any credibility by addressing it directly.
I’m not a church-goer, nor am I a fan of the Catholic church and their policies. But, in this case, I say “Good for them.” Frankly, the Catholic church shouldn’t be commenting on works of fiction. (I could make a real easy joke about The Bible right here, but won’t)
My point is that the Catholic church is a global organization with incredible influence whose leaders support the faith and give comfort to millions of people around the globe. If you can find me one person who read The DaVinci Code or saw the movie adaptation and said, “You know what? Catholicism? Not for me. I’m out,” then maybe you’d have an argument.
But as it is, there is enough REAL LIFE problems in the Catholic church that is causing followers to question their faith that I think the institution should be addressing if they want to continue tending to their flock. Addressing Ron Howard or the novel’s author Dan Brown doesn’t help anything at all.
Henry is staying with his grandparents tonight, so Cami and I are going to see Angels & Demons. I’m practicing a little bit of willful ignorance and ignoring some of the negative review headlines I’ve been scoping out in my travels around the web. I’m not worried about it. If it’s dumb, it’s dumb. Between Howard, Hanks and Ewan McGreggor, there’s enough talent in the pool to hold my interest. And besides, it’ll be nice to go to a movie with Cami for once. I see a lot of crap movies she doesn’t have an interest in seeing anyway, so it’s a treat the two of us can go out together. I’m really looking forward to it.
What about you? What do you think? Not about my date night with Cami, but about Angels & Demons? Are you planning on seeing it this weekend? Do you think it looks good? Do you think there is any controversy or is it all part of the film’s marketing plan? Can movies about religion avoid controversy, or is it built in? Leave your comments below and let’s get a discussion started!
[ 12 Comments ]
On Wednesday I blogged about the survey I asked you guys to take to help me finish my research paper, titled The Value of Film Criticism in Comparison to the Decline of Print and the Rise of Online Publishing. I mentioned sharing the research if it was of interest to anyone in the comments section. I was surprised by how many of you said you’d like to read it! It sounds like we have a lot of part-time research analysts in the house!
If you’d like to read my paper, right click on this link to save it to your desktop.
The research data is somewhat skewed because it cultivates the opinions of online respondents only. I acknowledge that in the paper and cite the need to speak with people who are more fond of traditional media to get a true cross-section of opinion.
The paper itself is a brief outline of the problem facing print critics, followed by some research examples gathered from previous paper and concluded with an examination of chunks of data gathered from the survey. Only the more interesting or surprising tidbits. The full survey results have been tacked on to the end of the paper.
I chose the subject as a means to identify the value opinion leaders placed on film criticism with the hope that I could somehow leverage the information to benefit Theater Hopper. In the end, I think I ended up giving comfort to the enemy by identifying the ease with which print critics could bring their talents to an online environment.
I guess if I was going to take away a positive for myself, I appear to be doing things right or at least servicing a need for film fans online. So I’ve got that going for me. Which is nice.
I took the day off from work Tuesday to write this paper. 9 pages and 3,000+ words. I’m surprised I was able to put something like that together on such short notice, but kind of ashamed that I waited until the last minute to do it. Just the same, I’m proud of the paper and I’m happy that there are those of you who are interested in reading it.
Enjoy!
[ 3 Comments ]
For those of you not familiar with the reference Tom makes in the second panel and the menacing, destructive figure in the third and fourth panels, that’s a Benbot – a cybernetic duplicate of actor and hair gel host Ben Affleck.
The Benbots were introduced in this arc from 2006. A second, brief encountered was established about five months later. Since then? Not a peep.
I guess the timing felt right to bring them out of storage to explore Terminator Salvation coming out this weekend.
So, yeah. Despite there not being much of a punchline for today’s comic, you can expect a continuation of the story line this week. More Benbot action in your browser. LOOK OUT!
Speaking of Terminator Salvation, if your a fan of the franchise, you’re going to want to check out the drawing I did for today’s incentive image over at Top Web Comics. It’s a T-800 and I’m really proud of the way it turned out.
I have ambitions to sell these sketches at some point. I don’t know if it will be through the site or at conventions. Regardless, if and when I make these drawings available, I’m pretty my version of the T-800 will be one of the first to be sold. To see it, vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics.
As for Jared’s assertion about the Terminator franchise, I’m sure there are those who will disagree with him. Personally, I love the Terminator films – even the jokey third movie. But you can’t help but overlook the fact that a lot of painstaking effort went into sending the increasingly complicated machines back in time to kill John Conner.
Obviously it wouldn’t make a very interesting film if the T-800 had been sent back in time with sniper skills. No conflict. But if your contention that Skynet is a ruthlessly organized computer system that prides itself on brutal efficiency… well, having Arnold leave a trail of destruction around Los Angeles is kind of makes it look like Skynet doesn’t have it’s ducks in a row. When you consider how advanced the T-1000 and the T-X are in the sequels, they should have had even LESS difficulty doing the job.
I’m just sayin…
I have more to say about Terminator Salvation, but I want to save those thoughts for later in the week.
In the meantime, I wanted to talk to you about Angels & Demons, which Cami and I were able to see together this weekend.
I can’t tell you the last time we went to the movies together. I go by myself from time to time, seeing stuff she has no interest in seeing at late hours – usually so I have something to talk about for the site or The Triple Feature. So it’s nice when we can go to a movie together and it’s something she wants to see.
Both Cami and I liked the movie insomuch as we were still thinking about it and talking about it the next day. It’s a little bit more straight forward than The DaVinci Code. It doesn’t emphasize history as much and I think the plot is bolstered by the fact that the bulk of the story is told within a four hour time span. Also, Tom Hanks’s hairstyle is CONSIDERABLY less distracting.
But despite the fact that the movie has urgency, I felt it dragged out a little long. The idea is that there is a bomb planted somewhere in The Vatican, threatening to kill thousands in St. Peter’s Square as they await the confirmation of a new Pope. Watching the movie, I kind of wanted them to hurry it up and get to the inevitable scene where they uncover the bomb (with 5 minutes left to spare!) and try to dispose of it. The stuff leading up to it was… interesting. But excessive.
To put this in perspective, there are a few scenes shot inside the Vatican archives. After the movie was over, Cami confided, “I wish they would have spent more time in there! I would have loved to have seen more of their old documents!”
The film also has an annoying habit of over-explaining itself. As Vatican security are being shown a live feed of the bomb from a wireless camera (tech savvy, no?), they realize that it is being illuminated by an independent light source. In an effort to uncover it’s location, they cut power to individual grids all over Vatican City.
Every time the power goes out – usually just as something important or tension-filled is about to happen – one of the characters has to remind us that individual power grids are being shut down to find the bomb. It happens at least three times in the movie and by the third time you’re sitting there thinking “Yeah! We get it!”
I won’t talk too much more about the film because I think, despite its flaws, it’s entertaining and worth your time. Although Hanks sometimes appears to be an incidental contributor to his own movie, the performances in the film are very good. Particularly Ewan McGreggor who plays a priest of passionate faith, but who is also keenly aware of religion’s competition for influence in the modern world.
Ultimately, I think what I took from the film was more personal. Having been to Rome and visited the Pantheon and Vatican City, it was interesting to me to look at the locations and say “I’ve been there!” I experienced a bit of cognitive dissonance, however, because I had a hard time believing that the Vatican would give that level of access to the filmmakers in some locations.
I mean, the catacombs in St. Peter’s Tomb and the Vatican Archives are obviously sets. But I couldn’t reconcile if they were able to shoot interiors in The Basilica of Saint Peter or how they were able to recreate it if they weren’t. My eye told me one thing, but my mind told me another. It’s a good illusion, but one I never fully accepted.
That’s all I have on Angels & Demons. I was a little surprised that it came in first this weekend at the box office. I was expecting Star Trek to edge them out. I began to revise my thinking when I noticed packed the theater was at our showing. Did you see the movie this weekend? What did you think? What about Terminator Salvation? Are you getting excited for it? Leave your comments below!
[ 8 Comments ]
I just wanted to let everyone know that there will NOT be a live recording of The Triple Feature tonight at 9:00 PM. We have canceled the show.
Sorry I didn’t mention it earlier, but I’m seeing the Toadies in concert and really the only new movie to talk about was Angels & Demons. Joe saw it, but it wasn’t on Gordon’s radar.
We will talk about the film next week along with Terminator Salvation after it comes back on Friday. That’s a flick that’s on EVERYONE’S radar.
See you then!
[ No Comments ]
Since there wasn’t a new episode of The Triple Feature last night due to the fact that I was seeing The Toadies in concert, I thought I would make it up to you by blogging about my experience at the show. Yeah, I know it’s not movie-related. But it’s my site, so I can bend the rules!
I had a great time last night. Easily one of the top shows of my life. I’ve been on a roll lately seeing concerts. Last Thursday I went to see Clutch. Bands like the Toadies and Clutch don’t come to Iowa very often – if ever. So if they’re making a stop and you want to see them, you have to seize the opportunity.
Whereas I was anxious about seeing Clutch because I felt like I was going to be the old guy in the corner bobbing my head along wit the music, I found my confidence and mixed it up at the Toadies. I was front and center as Todd Lewis and the group bellowed out songs at breakneck speed.
In case you’re not familiar with the Toadies, they were part of the second wave of grunge – the post-Seattle “alternative” sound labels started snatching up once they figured out crunching riffs and dark subject matter could be profitable. You might remember their song “Possum Kingdom” and it’s memorable coda “Do you wanna die?!” from their album Rubberneck from 1994. The Toadies were never really grunge, but the dark subject matter of their lyrics lead most people to believe they were. They have more of a hard rock/bluegrass feel. They’re basically what Alice in Chains would sound like if Layne Staley’s influences were John Lee Hooker and ZZ Top.
Their label rejected the Toadies second album, Feeler and it took the group 7 years before they produced their follow up, Hell Below, Stars Above in 2001. Of course, by then, musical tastes had moved on. Although I personally find Hell Below, Stars Above the better album, it didn’t receive the same reception Rubberneck did. The Toadies broke up not long after that, but are recently reformed and touring behind last year’s No Deliverance.
That’s quite the history lesson.
Anyway, the show was great and I had a ton of fun. I think we caught the band by surprise as well. “You weren’t the crowd I was expecting on a Monday night,” Lewis said between songs.
The only down point came during the crescendo of their song “Tyler,” a really great song I encourage all of you to download, and the crowd was really hopping. Right before it reached the breaking point, some moron starts throwing water all over the crowd and stage. Bouncers came flying out from the wings yelling at the guy to stop it. The band stopped playing and disappointed groans followed.
“Whoever is throwing water, that’s not cool, man,” said Lewis. “We’re up here with, like, a million wires and thousands of volts of electricity. Electricity and water don’t mix, moron!” People were pissed. If the crowd had figured out who it was throwing water, they would have torn him apart. It was pointless for the band to pick up where the left off because they right at the end of the song. People had been calling for that song all night and some tool went and ruined it for everyone. The band pressed on and got things rolling again, but I hope that guy thinks twice before he decides to give everyone an involuntary shower again.
Like any show, there were other interesting characters. Here are somethings I’ve noticed about the concert experience, not entirely specific to seeing the Toadies last night. Let me share them and then tell me what you think:
- Why is it that the tallest guy in the room always somehow manages to get in the front row and why am I always stuck standing behind him? I’m 5’10”, so it’s not like I’m some runt who can’t see over most people’s shoulders. But when you have 6’5″ Gigantor lumbering around in front of you, it’s a little annoying.
- Additionally, why does the tallest guy in the room have to obscure the view of people behind him further by constantly extending his arms over his head and trying to reach the singer with his banana hands? Is it because you have the reach you decide “It would be a waste not to?”
- On the opposite end of the spectrum, can someone explain to me why the tiniest of tiny girls will make their way to the front and then get pissed off when the mosh pit riles up. I had a girl who couldn’t have been more than 5’3″ pushing back on me most of the night. I’m sorry, darling, but I have 200 people at my back pushing forward. I’m not taking a knee to the kidney for your sake. The phenomenon of people in the very front annoyed there is this kind of activity going on behind them befuddles me.
- If you are near the front recording the show with your Flip camera or taking pictures with your cellphone, I will do everything in my power to stay away from you. I came to watch the band on the stage. Not have my line-of-sight corrupted by what’s on your tiny 2″ screen.
- Why is it that the white guy with dreadlocks either always wants to throw their arm around your shoulder or use your back as a springboard for jumping up and down?
Anyway, just a couple of observations. What are your thoughts?
I had a great time at the show. If you have a chance to see the Toadies in concert, I strongly suggest you do so!
[ 4 Comments ]
Wait. This Benbot came from the future? What do you suppose his warning was all about? I guess we’ll never know… Or will we? Come back Friday to find out!
In the meantime, you only have this incentive sketch of another T-800 skull to tide you over. To see it, vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics.
For those of you who find it out of character for Tom to point a shotgun point-blank to the face of a Benbot when it’s usually Jared who does the dismantling, remember that Tom’s paranoia against and hair-trigger for robotic interlopers was established long ago. I also think it’s funny that Tom has defenses established for the zombie apocalypse and felt forced to improvise with a cyborg in his home.
When did this comic become so weird?
I tried something different with the coloring in the second panel. I guess I was a little worried about the violence being too graphic, so I tried to stylize it a little bit. I think it turned out okay.
I guess I don’t have very much left to say for today, so I’ll point you to this article about Terminator Salvation from Entertainment Weekly. I was particularly taken by this part about Christian Bale receiving the pitch for the movie from the much-loathed director, McG:
Bale recalls, ”I had this guy sitting there saying, ‘Christian, didn’t somebody ever take a leap of faith on you to do something radically different than you’ve ever done before? Give me that opportunity.’ So I’m thinking, ‘Oh, f—!”’ Bale’s advisers were against it too. Not just because Terminator Salvation was a sequel to a sequel to a sequel, but also because of McG himself, a man with little more to his credit than The O.C., a couple of Charlie’s Angels movies, and a ridiculous name. ”I had people telling me, ‘Don’t do it, Christian. Don’t go with that guy.’ In a strange way, I like the fact that he keeps that name because it does him no friggin’ favors,” says Bale. ”But people hear it and they go, ‘F— him!’ People were telling me, ‘Christian, you’re too good for Terminator.’ And I’m thinking, I’m too good? I’m not a snob. I really f—ing enjoy watching a good action movie. Who do you think I am?!”
I think Bale is a pretty smart guy who knows that he has to mix it up a little bit and take a paycheck role like John Conner so he can attract the attention of more out-there material like The Machinist or The Prestige. But I think between the Batman and Terminator franchises, he’s getting dangerously close to painting himself into a corner.
I also found it interesting that he has this rebelliousness in him that tells him to work with a ridiculous director because everyone else thinks the guy is a joke. Just like there is some truth in stereotypes, there is plenty of evidence to support the idea that McG doesn’t have the emotional maturity to direct more than music videos.
Later in the article, McG talks about his credibility problem and how others perceive him…
The artist formerly, and formally, known as Joseph McGinty Nichol knows what you think of him. He’s spent the past decade battling the perception that just because of his name, he’s some shallow jackass. Or, as he puts it, ”a lightweight with some hip-hop nickname and a gold chain around my neck, who drives a Lamborghini.” It drives McG nuts that with nearly $570 million under his belt at the global box office, he still has to explain himself. ”If you can’t get past my name after 12 years in this industry, you’re not invited,” he says in his L.A. production office two weeks before the film’s release. ”If you don’t have the hustle to figure out that McG’s short for ‘McGinty,’ which is my mother’s maiden name, and that she’s the least funky person ever, I’m kind of done. My name won’t define my movies. My movies will define my name.” He pauses to let this sink in. ”Look, I know I have a body of work that would not suggest that I am a credible storyteller. I need to prove myself on this film. Before you can be Johnny Depp, you have to do your time on 21 Jump Street.”
First of all, anyone who uses the word “hustle” in that context, I can’t take seriously.
Secondly, “$570 million under his belt at the global box office” and “12 years in the industry” don’t make you legitimate. Box office is rarely an indicator of quality. It is an indication of effective marketing and some gullibility on behalf of the movie-going audience. So don’t point to a stack of money and say “See! I’m talented!” If you want to talk talent, look at James Cameron who brought the concept of The Terminator to life, created something original and groundbreaking. McG is only playing with someone else’s toys.
I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because I’m a fan of the franchise. But if the movie turns out to be good, it’s not because McG is at the helm. The Terminator concept is too strong, too powerful in our collective imagination. It sustains itself. The only way for McG to go is down and he’ll do that if he screws with the formula too much and audiences don’t accept it.
There looks to be some interesting tweaks to the Terminator mythology in this film. If people really end up liking the motorcycle Terminators, then I guess I’ll have to eat crow. But until McG comes up with a concept as strong as the Terminator on his own, he’s still a scrub.
What are your thoughts about Bale, and McG? Do you think Bale is taking a risk with this film. What about Bale’s on-set explicative-filled rant from earlier in the year? Do you think it will affect Terminator Salvation’s box office take or has it been long enough that people have forgotten? Does McG deserve respect? Do you think he should take the credit if Terminator Salvation’s is a hit? Leave your comments below!
[ 20 Comments ]
In my haste to post this morning’s blog, I forgot to include an explanation of the rather… unique sound effect in the second panel.
It’s actually a very specific reference to my good friend Mitch Clem’s old journal comic San Antonio Rock City. Specifically, the comic where he shoots me in the face.
I was always a little disappointed that “cha-bert” never caught on as a sound effect…
[ 2 Comments ]
