Sunday, July 30, 2006
BEYOND THE WALL OF SLEEP
Well, I've always been a snorer, so when we were staying with some friends and I was told I stop breathing for a second or so every now and then when I'm sleeping, I figured it was something worth mentioning to my doctor. He was concerned enough to send me to the "sleep center." I really had no idea what I was in for, but it was an intersting experience, to say the least.
First off, electrodes were attached to my head and body. This took about 45 minutes to an hour. Afterwards, I was told to go to sleep as usual. I got my own private room at least. While I slept, the technicians monitored my sleeping via the electrodes, and there were also cameras in the room. I was told that they'd watch me for a few hours and then I'd be asked to put on some kind of mask contraption to see if that helped. About half an hour after I fell asleep, they woke me up. "Has it been two hours already?" I asked. "No," I was told. "But your apnea is so obvious we don't have to watch anymore."
I then had an oxygen mask-like contraption strapped to my head. It was attached to a machine that appeared to have water in it, with a tube running from the machine to the mask. I then had to breathe into the mask while I tried to get back to sleep. It wasn't easy. And they had to come in and adjust the mask a few times during the night (which meant I got woken up some more). The mask was pretty uncomfortable, but I suppose I slowly got used to it (I did get back to sleep). This lasted until morning, when the electrodes were removed.
I have friends who also suffer from sleep apnea who use this machine at home. It actually seems to be pretty common. I'm not looking forward to having to use this thing to get to sleep every night, but hopefully it won't take too long to get used to it. I did notice that I had very vivid dreams when I slept with the mask on, and my sleep, however interrupted, did seem pretty deep at times. I felt more rested than usual when it was done. So who knows. It would be nice to have better sleep cycles and not feel so tired a lot of the time.
So that was my wonderful sleep center experience. I'll keep everyone updated on what happens next when I actually meet with a doctor about the results in mid-August.
NECON 26
Well, just wanted to write a short bit about Necon 26. It's still my favorite convention of the year (and since money was tight this year, it was my only convention of the year). It was great to see friends I haven't seen all year. I even got to be on my first panel this year! It was a "New Voices In Horror" panel and the topic was "The Novel vs. the Short Story." The only problem was that the panel was at 9am on a Saturday morning. Kind of tough after staying up all night the night before, but somehow I made it. I hope I did okay, considering. The panel was moderated by Nick Kaufmann, and included Lucy Snyder, Bev Vincent, Gary Frank, Mike Myers, Sarah Langan and myself.
One treat this year is we got to see a couple of movie premieres. The first one was a low-budget film adaptation of Ed Lee's classic HEADER. This movie has been in production for awhile, and some people thought it would never get released. So it was especially cool to finally see it (Ed Lee was one of Necon's Guests of Honor this year, along with Gary Braunbeck and Peter Crowther). I won't tell you much about it, especially what a "Header" is, because that would spoil the surprise. Let's just say that HEADER is one of Mr. Lee's extreme horror stories, and that the movie was as unsettling as it was hilarious. The filmmakers were in attendance and even they admitted that it will be tough to get a regular theatrical run, considering the subject matter. The movie's a lot of fun, though, and I hope it gets some kind of release. One scene even features horror writers Ed Lee and Jack Ketchum in cameos as policemen.
The second film we got to see before everyone else was Jack Ketchum's THE LOST, which had a bigger budget and even some recognizable actors. It begins with Ray Pye killing two women in a park in the 1960s and unfolds to show us how the police try to prove he did it, years later. Kind of like the opposite of a mystery, since you know who did it. It's more a question of, will he ever be brought to justice? I thought it was very faithful to the book and the acting was on the whole very good. While not as outrageous as the Ed Lee film, THE LOST was still very dark. I really enjoyed both films a lot and was really happy to finally see them in their entirety after hearing about them for so long. It was especially cool that writers Lee and Ketchum were in attendance to see their work on the big screen.
Otherwise, Necon was just a lot of fun, but it went by way too fast, as it always does. My only regret is that we didn't take any photos this year, and I really wanted to get a picture taken with Edward Lee. Oh well, another time....
Monday, July 24, 2006
CREATURE DOUBLE FEATURE UPDATE
So, in my last post about CREATURE DOUBLE FEATURE, I'd been interviewed for a TV news segment about the show's return. I just thought I'd give you all an update since then.
Channel WLVI-TV 56 in Boston interviewed me for about 20 minutes on Creature Double Feature, a two-horror-movies-and-a-host show I watched religiously as a kid. I also talked to them about being a horror writer, and they even filmed the covers of some books and magazines I've appeared in. Unfortunately, when the news segment finally aired, my 20 minute interview had been cut down to 2 minutes. Little more than a sound bite about CDF. I expected as much, though, and was grateful I didn't end up on the cutting room floor completely. If nothing else it was a fun experience.
As for CREATURE DOUBLE FEATURE, it was a one-time thing. Although I hear it may come back again in the fall. Let's hope so.
TV ROUND-UP - SUMMER 2006 EDITION
It's summer time, which means most shows are on hiatus and we're being overrun with bad reality programming. But there are still some things worth watching. Here are a few shows I've been enjoying lately:
WHAT'S ON HBO
HBO remains the jeweled crown of television programming, and rightly so. They may have built their reputation on The Sopranos (which is still great), but they're more than just a one-trick pony.
DEADWOOD continues to mystify me. I still say it's a stronger show than The Sopranos. And I'm sorry to hear this will be the last season. But I sure am enjoying these final episodes. Gerald McRaney has really impressed me as millionaire rattlesnake George Hearst, come to Deadwood to suck the life out of the place for his own coffers. He's a fitting villain for the denizens of Deadwood, of which Al Swearagan (Ian McShane) and Sherrif Bullock (Timothy Olyphant) are front and center. We even got a very heroic battle between Al's henchman Dan (W. Earl Brown) and Hearst's hired muscle, which made Dan appear to be much more than just a sidekick character, but rather Al's champion (especially after Hearst had chopped off one of Al's fingers). Next week the Earp Brothers come to town to stir things up further, and I can't wait. The main thing that makes Deadwood work, aside from the top-notch scripts, is the terrific acting. Every single person in the cast is amazing. You just don't see shows like this every day.
There's a spate of comedies, old and new, after Deadwood on Sundays, starting with HBO's hit show Entourage, which I never really cared for, and don't watch. To the new Louie CK sitcom, LUCKY LOUIE, to the "stand-up comics on the road" documentary Tourgasm featuring the amazingly popular Dane Cook and three of his friends and fellow comedians, who tour the country in a bus, with the intention of giving us a peek into the real life on the road.
The thing about Dane Cook's show, however, is that it isn't that funny. Either on the bus or on stage, I don't laugh much at Tourgasm, and I am baffled as to why Cook is such a big deal. He's no Bill Hicks or George Carlin. He's just some likable, good looking guy who does observational humor. But he's nothing special. I guess all that promotion on the internet and MySpace and staying in touch with his fans paid off. But I don't see much in the way of clothes on this new emperor. His cohorts aren't much better, although fellow Boston comic Gary Gullman is good for a few laughs. I was actually excited about Tourgasm early on. Cook was getting tons of buzz and I thought the show would be a fun ride. But after three episodes, I stopped watching. It's just not particularly interesting or funny. And my time is precious these days.
On the other side of the coin is LUCKY LOUIE, the sitcom that grows on you. Another Boston comic, Louie CK worked on Chris Rock's HBO show (which was terrific), and the concept is pretty basic. Down on his luck guy lives with his wife and daughter in a crappy apartment, trying to make ends meet. Except in this sitcom, there's no limits on language and adult content, and Louie and the gang take full advantage of it. Welcome to the first "R-rated sitcom." And it works!
The main reason is because the cast is so good. Louie is incredibly likable as a schlub who works part time at a muffler shop and full time as a stay at home dad. Pamela Adlon plays his fiesty wife, Kim, a nurse and the breadwinner of the family Also in the cast are fellow comedians like Jim Norton and Laura Kightlinger, and then there's the black family next door, who Louie tries a little too hard to connect with. Not to mention his apartment, which looks like Ralph Cramden's from The Honeymooners, only not as nice.
The show is low-key and frankly I didn't know what I felt about it after the first episode. But, with each episode since, I've really grown to love this show, and I think it's one of the best things HBO has done. Once again, it's not going to appeal to everyone, but I've become a bonafide fan, and I hope HBO renews it. This show always makes me laugh, and yet I really care about the characters as well. What else can you want from any sitcom? This one delivers, and then some.
ON FX
Other shows I have been digging are RESCUE ME, Denis Leary's fireman drama on FX, now in its third season. Still as uncompromising, and sometimes brilliant, as ever. It's not THE SHIELD, but then again it doesn’t have to be. FX has such a great line-up they almost rival HBO. If it's not THE SHIELD, it's RESCUE ME or NIP/TUCK. Three shows that revolve throughout the year. Any of these three, and I'm happy.
FX has also retooled one of their mediocre sitcoms from last year, IT'S ALWAYS SUNNY IN PHILADELPHIA. Despite the awful title, the show has some good laughs, now with a new cast member - Danny DeVito, who actually adds something to the show. It's basically about three loser friends (and one of their sisters) who own a dive bar and are so shallow they will do anything, just for the hell of it. And I mean anything. From sleeping with each other’s moms to pretending to be crippled to collect disability.
It’s not as envelope-pushing as something like Lucky Louie with language or content (this if FX afterall, and while it pushes the envelope pretty far, it's still basic cable), but it goes as far as it can. And what we're left with is a sitcom about four very despicable characters, who you can't help but root for. They've become very likable despite their bad behavior. The show even seems better than it was last season (and it's not just because of DeVito, who's character can be hit or miss). And Philadelphia has gone from a show I watched once in awhile for a few chuckles to something I actually look forward to.
COMEDY CENTRAL
Comedy Central has been kind of low-key lately, although new episodes of South Park are coming in October. They also have been showing the "Lost Episodes" of THE DAVE CHAPELLE SHOW these past few weeks. Supposedly there are only four episodes. These are the final shows Chapelle did before he quit his job and went off to Africa to regroup. And the last episodes are very telling. Almost every sketch is about Dave's big $50 Million payday from Comedy Central after his show became a hit - and how the fame and money ruined his life. It's almost like watching someone's psychiatry sessions. The show is still funny, but there's a creepy kind of undertone, like peaking in on someone's personal life. While this makes it a lot clearer that Chapelle had to leave. It still doesn't make it any easier to accept. He had a good thing going and it's really too bad he couldn't just keep going, instead of letting all the media hype get to him.
AND, FINALLY, BBC AMERICA
Lastly, I've been hooked on the BBC America show FOOTBALLER'S WIVES. Don't ask me how. It's a British soap opera comparable to America's Desperate Housewives, with just as outrageous plots, except this time it's British Soccer players and their trophy wives. The writing is good, and the characters are very watchable. It's not Masterpiece Theater, but it is fun, and I guess it's become a guilty pleasure in my house.
That's all for the round-up for now. Until next time...
NEW MOVIE REVIEWS: STRANGERS, LEONARD COHEN, CLERKS 2 AND LADY IN THE WATER
I know, it's been a long time. Sometimes I think I'm just tired of the whole blog thing.But I figured what the hell, might as well write some new installments.
Saw a bunch of movies lately. But I've actually avoided Superman Returns (I've just never been much of a Superman fan, and have practically no desire to see this) or Pirates of the Carribean 2 (although I think Johnny Depp is one of the best actors we've got, this is another movie I can wait for cable to get).
What I have seen, as usual, are a lot of indie movies:
STRANGERS WITH CANDY
If you're already a fan of the TV show that ran for three seasons on Comedy Central, then you're going to get a kick out of the movie. If you have no idea what Strangers with Candy is, then there's a 50/50 chance you'll dig it. This was the kind of show that split a lot of people. For those who got it, it's simply hilarious. But it also left a lot of people scratching their heads.
It's basically the story of Jerri Blank (the amazing Amy Sedaris) who just got out of prison on various drug offenses and decides, at age 40, to start fresh and begin her life again from the point where it all went bad. For her - this is high school. So somehow she is able to get Flatpoint High to take her back as a student. Strangely, she kind of fits in. It helps that her teachers are just as weird as she is. Stephen Colbert (now pretty famous from his Colbert Report) plays Chuck Noblet, the science teacher who uses the bible as his textbook (we don't want any evolution in this class!). He is great at playing conservative, authoritative buffoons, and Noblet is a perfect example of this. Paul Dinello (who also directed) plays the free spirit (and dim bulb) art teacher, Mr. Jellyneck. Who is also Noblet's secret lover. There's also Principal Blackman (Greg Hollimon), a corrupt schemer, who is trying to find a way to use his students and an upcoming science fair to pay off his gambling debts. All of these characters are from the television show, as well as the people in Jerri’s home life: her comatose father (played by Dan Hedaya in the movie), bitchy stepmother (Deborah Rush) and annoying jock stepbrother, Derrick. There's also Stew, the meat man, who keeps Mrs. Blank company while her husband sleeps his days away.
Despite the R rating here, the movie seems slightly subdued compared to the television show. Sure there's more freedom in the movie when it comes to language or (very brief) nudity, but the TV show seemed a lot more outrageous, where they were always flirting with the limits and you'd constantly get that "I can't believe they said that" feeling. This is one of the rare times where the increased freedom of the movie version has actually tamed the television show.
All in all, the movie seems like an expanded episode of the show, despite cameos from "famous people" like Sarah Jessica Parker as a self-centered guidance counselor and Matthew Broderick as a science fair guru. The celebrities really aren't necessary and it wouldn't effect the movie in the slightest if they weren't there.
I laughed out loud a lot, which is always a great sign when you go to see a comedy. I really like these characters and since the show was canceled, it was nice to visit them again on the big screen. I still have no idea how this movie got made (well, David letterman has something to do with it) , because it's not exactly mainstream comedy. But I'm glad it got made, because it was a good time.
LEONARD COHEN: I'M YOUR MAN
If you're familiar with Leonard Cohen's music, you'll know right off the bat whether or not I'm Your Man is for you. I really dig his music, and think he has one of the most emotionally powerful growls you'll hear on CD. This movie is supposed to be about him, but really it revolves around a special concert that is being put on in his honor. With such fans of Cohen, who are also successful musicians themselves as Rufus Wainwright and his sister Martha, Nick Cave, Jarvis Cocker (of the band Pulp), Antony (of Antony and the Johnsons), and even U2 backing up Cohen himself on the final song. While some of the performances are stellar (Cave and Cocker come to mind, because their voices are very compatible with Cohen's songs, but Antony has such a distinctively amazing voice that he could make anything sound good), I found myself disappointed sitting through this film, because I didn't really care about the tribute concert. I wanted a documentary that focused on the man himself. From his childhood in Canada, to his catalog of amazing albums, to his time as a Buddhist monk when he needed to get away from it all, Cohen is a fascinating guy. And the film really should have focused on him. And no matter how good some of the performances were, nobody sings his songs as well as the man himself.
I liked the film, but it could have been so much more. And I could have done without Bono's pretentious monologues about how Cohen's music changed his life (even though he's not onscreen as much as the trailer would suggest).
If you dig Cohen's music, wait for it to come to cable or DVD.
CLERKS 2
This movie reminded me a lot of how I felt about the Strangers with Candy film. I am a huge fan of Kevin Smith's original CLERKS, and I think it's one of the funniest movies of all time. I must have seen it easily over 10 times (especially since IFC seems to show it on cable a lot these days). And CLERKS is another movie that splits people - either you think it is insanely funny or you don't care much for it.
Well, I'm a fan. And when I heard CLERKS 2 was coming out, I had a mixed reaction. Kevin Smith's output has been pretty hit or miss lately and there's always the real possibility that a sequel will stink. But at the same time I like these characters so much, I just had to give the movie a chance.
I'm glad I did. While CLERKS 2 is not as outrageous as its predecessor, it tries its hardest to keep up, and has some amazing, funny dialogue (Smiths' strong point). We get to see Dante Hicks (Brian O’Halloran) and Randal Graves (Jeff Anderson) - the protagonists of the first Clerks film - years later, now working in a D-List McDonald's ripoff called Mooby's (after the original Quick Stop burned down). They're still directionless slackers, but now they're in their 30s and it's time for them to get a life. Dante has done just that, getting engaged to rich girl Emma (played by Jennifer Schwalbach, Kevin Smith's real-life wife), with whom he's moving to Florida to run her father’s car wash business. But you can tell the relationship's a little strained. Emma is bossy and needy (she wears a shirt that declares herself "Mrs. Hicks"). But you can't really blame her. Dante is not a decisive guy, and as she says at one point, "Guys like him need decisions made for them." Which means that Emma is not really the villain here. But she is the wrong woman for Dante.
Which brings us to Rosario Dawson as Dante's boss, Becky. There is clearly chemistry between her and Dante, and by the end of the film, situations spring forth that are going to make Dante have to choose between the two women. (Who wouldn't choose Rosario every time??)
And then there's Randal, who's life is 100 times more pointless than Dante's, but who still continues to keep the laughs coming. He only has a job at Mooby's because he's Dante's friend, and you know he'd probably be unemployable otherwise. He's a sarcastic misanthrope who has been hanging onto his buddy's coattails all his life, and now sees his entire life coming to an end when Dante prepares to leave to Florida, seemingly without a second thought for his old buddy. Randal is scared shitless of being on his own, and you can tell that, despite the constant barrage of jokes.
Add to the mix a naïve young employee named Elias (Trevor Fehrman) who believes in trolls and thinks The Lord of the Rings and Transformers are the best things in the world (the argument between Randal and Elias over whether The Lord of the Rings trilogy is better than Star Wars is a laugh-out-loud highlight); the triumphant return of Smith's eternal losers Jay and Silent Bob (who are still funny as hell); cameos from people like Jason Lee and even (ugh) Ben Affleck; and even a "live donkey show," and you've got a fitting sequel to the original film.
I laughed a lot during this movie. And even though it gets a bit too sentimental at the end for my taste as Dante and Randal pretty much declare their love for one another ("in a non-gay way"), the movie as a whole is one of those few sequels that really works. These characters have not lost their ability to make us laugh, and we care about them just as much the second time around.
If you loved Clerks, then do yourself a favor and see Clerks 2. It's as easy as that.
THE LADY IN THE WATER
M. Night Shyamalan is a hit or miss kind of director. The first film to put him on the map, THE SIXTH SENSE was a terrific piece of filmmaking that deserved the praise and box office gold it received. Then came UNBREAKABLE which wasn’t' as popular, but which I really enjoyed and thought was fulfillment of the promise Shamylan showed in the SIXTH SENSE. At this point I was really excited about where Night was going, and what he'd do next.
Who knew it would be all downhill from there?
His next two movies were big disappointments for me. SIGNS could have been a really interesting alien invasion movie, and there are some good scenes, but it's so preachy and manipulative that by the end I pretty much hated it. THE VILLAGE was an interesting ride that turned into a very lame payoff. And suddenly, M. Night Shamaylan wasn't the golden boy everyone thought he was. He was simply human. Capable of making great movies, and just as many lame ones.
Quentin Tarantino has nothing to worry about.
So why did I see LADY IN THE WATER when his last two films were disappointments to me? Well, even when he makes bad movies, Shamalyn knows how to keep your interest and how to draw you in. Maybe this is why some people are so passionately angry at a movie like THE VILLAGE which seemed like a con job. It didn't anger me as much as some people (SIGNS had already done that for me), though.
What got me into the theater this time was the trailer, which seemed interesting, and the casting of Paul Giamatti as the lead. And the knowledge that, even if this was another disappointment, I'd at least enjoy the ride, even if the payoff left me cold.
LADY IN THE WATER, as everyone knows by now, is based on a fairy tale Shamalyan wrote originally to tell his daughters as a bedtime story. It involves a "narf" or sea nymph named Story (the ethereal Bryce Dallas Howard, who is perfect in the role) who lives in the swimming pool in the middle of an apartment complex in Philadelphia. Giamatti is the handyman who knows everyone, and who discovers Story and deciphers her secret.
It seems that she has a mission. If she can come in contact with a writer who will "change the world,” her very presence will be able to break his writer’s block and ignite his abilities. Then she can go back from whence she came (the Blue World) triumphant and inspire her own people. Her going home involves an eagle that will take her away. Of course, there are also forces of evil, in the form of snarks (which appear to be wolves made from shrubbery), who threaten to kill her before she can escape.
One of the main problems a lot of people have with the movie is that the "writer who changes the world" is played by Shamalyan himself, in a role that seems dangerously close to be narcissistic and pretentious as hell. And I find it hard to believe that Shyamalan's dopey fairy tales will change much of anything. A lot of people have attacked Shyamalan in their reviews because of this, and I think it's a justifiable complaint. All he had to do was find another actor for the role, and it wouldn't have seemed so damn blatant.
The rest of the movie involves Giamatti seeking out members of the apartment community who are to play specific roles in the protection of Story and in her ability to go back home. One monkey wrench in the works is a movie critic who is clearly a bitter, opinionated old man, and is clearly supposed to be Shyamalan 's revenge against critics over the years who have maligned him. Instead, the character simply comes off as sour grapes. Maybe there's a reason Shyamalan has had some bad reviews in the past. Instead of learning for past mistakes, he simply blames the messengers.
In the end, the plot is kind of silly. But the acting is good, and Shyamalan is a capable director who pulls you in despite yourself. I didn't hate Lady in the Water and I thought it was an improvement over his last two films. But in no way does it recapture his earlier promise.
The thing is, Shyamalan knows how to draw you in, but he's the lost the ability the give you a payoff that is satisfying. Which makes me think that maybe he should focus on directing - something he's very good at - and leave future scriptwriting duties to someone who can weave stronger plots, and create more fleshed out characters that you can actually care about.
Good acting can only do so much. It's writing that finally makes great characters.
So I guess I liked Lady in the Water, and had a good time watching it. I just didn't leave the theater feeling like I saw anything great.
It makes me wonder if Shyamalan has any more SIXTH SENSE's or UNBREAKABLE's left in him.
Probably not.
