THIS MODERN NIGHTMARE

THE MIST AND TV ROUND-UP

First off this week, I just finished reading Stephen King's novella, "The Mist" from his collection SKELETON CREW. I read it because there's a movie coming out in October based on the story, directed by Frank Darabont, who gave us such cool King adaptations as THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION and THE GREEN MILE, two really good flicks, and I have to admit, I'm pretty excited about THE MIST as well. The story was actually pretty damn good and could make for an excellent film. And Darabont is just the guy to make it happen.

This might be old news to some of you folks. But you see, I'm coming to the table a little late. I'm something of an anomaly in the horror fiction world - I didn't start writing horror fiction because of Stephen King. Back when I was a kid and first got addicted to horror, the fiction that drew me the most was H.P. Lovecraft. Then, as I got older, my interests switched to science-fiction, especially writers like Harlan Ellison, Theodore Sturgeon and Fritz Leiber. Leiber is especially interesting because he straddled both worlds, not only did he write some horror classics as CONJURE WIFE and OUR LADY OF DARKNESS, but he was also a major science-fiction giant who won more Hugos than just about anyone (except, maybe Harlan Ellison, but I've lost count over the years).

What got me to leave sci-fi and come back to horror began with Clive Barker's BOOKS OF BLOOD in the '80s, which pretty much got me addicted to the genre again, and it culiminated in Paul Sammon's SPLATTERPUNKS anthologies. I know, "splatterpunk" has become a dirty word in the years since, but back then, those collections introduced me to a lot of people who grabbed my imagination - Joe R. Lansdale, John Skipp and Craig Spector, David Schow, Poppy Z. Brite, Kathe Koja, Rex Miller, and the recommended reading section led me to seek out novelists like Richard Laymon, Jack Ketchum and Edward Lee. These are the people who made me want to be a horror writer again.

Stephen King wasn't part of the equation then. He was a big, bestselling writer, and in college I'd discovered the underground and people like Henry Miller, Charles Bukowksi, Hunter Thompson, J.G. Ballard, and William S. Burroughs. Being a hip, underground kind of guy, bestselling writers weren't at the top of my "to read" list.

Which doesn't mean I didn't see a lot of the movies based on King's work. And I'm pretty sure I've seen every single one of the ABC miniseries.

But it was my loss - because unlike a lot of bestselling writers who are as generic as possible to appeal to the widest possible audience - Stephen King actually has the goods. He's great at characterization and knows how to tell a story. And now I'm playing catch-up. Every once in awhile I'll pick up a King book, and so far, it's been a pleasant adventure. I began, of course, with CARRIE (I'd dug DePalma's movie, but the book was pretty good, too). Then it was THE STAND and one of the Bachman books, RAGE (which is hard to find these days because of the similarities to the whole Columbine thing). I'll no doubt read more. THE SHINING is on my bookshelf waiting to be read. But I figured I'd check out THE MIST since the movie was coming soon.

I absolutely loved "The Mist," by the way. A lot of people seem to be very fond of this story, and I can see why. And I hope Darabont does it justice.

And I'll keep checking out King books every now and then. So far, it's been a fun ride. And for those who grew up reading him, and have already read every book, this probably sounds like old hat. But for me, it's something new.

I'm sure I won't like everything he's written (if DESPERATION is anything like the two-part miniseries that aired a year or so, it's way too heavy-handed with the sermonizing for my tastes), but it will be fun to catch up on this stuff.

***

And now, on to the TV ROUND-UP.

First off, JOHN FROM CINCINATTI has been canceled. I'm actually glad, because I feel like I was taken for a ride by David Milch. I stuck with the show, because, as regular readers here already know, Milch previously created one of my all-time favorite shows, DEADWOOD, and I wanted to give him a chance. JOHN was meandering, cryptic and often downright annoying, but I figured it was all building up to some mind-blowing finale. But I was wrong. The show ended exactly how I thought it would after seeing episode one. John was some kind of mystical Christ figure come to save the Yost family. He wasn't an alien. He wasn't a parrot trapped in a man's body (even though he repeated everything everyone said) and he wasn't a robot, even though he sure acted like one.

I was dreading the show turning into a sermon, and that's exactly what it did. This could have been interesting if done in a new way, but the last episode was as cryptic and annoying as the rest of the series, and I got to wondering why I'd hung on for so long. I guess it was because I actually liked some of the characters, especially Butchie and Freddy. Hell, even Ed O'Neill's bird brained ex-cop was starting to grow on me. But it was all for nothing. And I'm glad it was canceled so I can finally stop being suckered into watching it.

It just goes to show you, even someone as brilliant as David Milch is going to stumble once in awhile.

But I think DEADWOOD being revived for a couple of HBO movies to tie up loose ends is still a long shot. The cast members have all moved on to other things. So people thinking the end of JOHN FROM CINCINNATI might increase the chances of DEADWOOD coming back are probably going to be disappointed.

In the meantime, HBO has a minor hit with the show FLIGHT OF THE CONCHORDS. A quirky little comedy with music about a two-man New Zealand band (called, what else, The Flight of the Conchords), two guys named Brett and Jermain, who have come to the big city of New York looking for fame and fortune. Instead they find obscurity. It's kind of like a deadpan riff on TENACIOUS D (an older and much wilder HBO show that has since turned into a phenomenon). CONCHORDS even features a small recurring role for the former-Boston comic Eugene Mirman (in a real stretch, he plays "Eugene the Landlord"). It's kind of cool to be able to say I shared a stage with him once when I was doing stand-up. But chances are he wouldn't remember me (haha).

Who knew JOHN would fail and the CONCHORDS would take off? Then again, for once, it all makes sense. Because CONCHORDS is the better show.

Showtime has some new stuff on this month as well. They've brought back WEEDS for a second season (Monday nights at 10pm) with the very hot Mary- Louise Parker as a suburban mom who pays the bills by selling pot. The show features her two bratty kids, her layabout brother-in-law who's come to stay, and the other pot dealers she's friends with, and the ones who wanna kill her and take her business. The first season of the show was pretty good and I'm looking forward to new episodes. This is also the first show I've ever seen that has made Kevin Nealon seem funny (I never got why he was on Saturday Night Live or why he even had a career, but on WEEDS he's actually good). But Elizabeth Perkins as the shrew-on-wheels (and now council-woman) Celia Hodes, just gets on my fuckin nerves.

After WEEDS at 10:30 on Mondays, Showtime now has a new series called CALIFORNICATION, which features a comeback of sorts for David Duchovny. Yep, Mulder finally has a new gig. It's too early to tell if a show is good from just one episode, but this one has a lot of potential. Duchovny plays Hank Moody, a writer who wrote one bestselling book, called "God Hates Us All," (which was turned into an awful, sappy movie called "Crazy Little Thing Called Love"), but then finds he doesn't have another book in him. He's got writer's block. His wife (well, I guess they were never actually married) leaves him. His 12-year old daughter looks like Wednesday Addams. And to relieve the frustration of his life, Hank drinks and screws anything that moves. What this means is we get to see a lot of naked chicks - always a nice thing (the show, in this way, reminds me of the old HBO show DREAM ON, where Brian Benben also had lots of women in his bed every episode).

Duchovny is extrememly likable, even when he's behaving in an unlikable way. And it's nice to finally see him stretch the comedy muscles that he always had on X-FILES, but never had the chance to truly indulge. It's a dark comedy, with touches of drama, but it works so far. So I'll be watching.

And IFC has brought back THE MINOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF JACKIE WOODMAN for another season (Sunday nights at 11:30). The show features one of my favorite women stand-ups, Laura Kightlinger (and no, her claim to fame is not that she was once Jack Black's girlfriend, but rather that she's a pretty damn funny comedian in her own right). I've been a fan of hers for years now, and it's good to see her helming her own show. And staying true to her comedic persona, Jackie Woodman is a sarcastic wiseass who is doomed to failure every week, no matter how often it seems like her luck is going to change. She lives in Hollywood and dreams of becoming a big screenwriter, but even when things seem to finally go right - they always end up in the toilet.

And, on a final television note, they aired another episode of MASTERS OF SCIENCE FICTION this weekend, and the show is getting better and better. This time around, it was actually based on a story by a writer I'd consider a real MASTER, Robert A. Heinlein, called "Jerry Was a Man." It takes place in future where geneticially-engineered slaves called Joes are mass-produced to do all the jobs we don't want to. They're made from a mix of human DNA and synethic materials and once they've outlived their usefulness, they're turned into dogfood. Thus is the cycle of life as dreamed up by their creator, played by the always terrific Malcolm McDowell. Anne Heche plays a rich woman who "buys" one of the Joes - named Jerry - who was "grown" to be a mine-sweeper for the army, and now works as a janitor at McDowells institute. When his time is up, Heche saves Jerry by taking him into her home, like a pet. And Joes become her personal cause - even inspiring her to take McDowell's character to court and to have Joe's declared human beings.

The story, the acting, and the direction all meshed this time around. Where the show started out so-so, it has finally hit its stride, and it promises to be even better next week when they adapt Harlan Ellison's story "The Discarded."

But this is also very sad, because the show, like Jerry the Joe, was made to become obsolete. Airing on at Saturdays at 10pm for just four weeks, there is no way a show like MASTERS OF SCIENCE FICTION is going to be picked up as a regular series, no matter how good it gets.

I think I might just write a letter to ABC about this. If you're a fan of the show, I suggest you do, too. It probably won't do any good, but man, is it annoying when a show with this much potential gets the shaft before it has a chance to bloom.

That's all for now. Until next time,

Infernally Yours,

~LLS

SO LONG, LEE HAZLEWOOD

Singer/songwriter Lee Hazelwood died yesterday. A lot of you will have no idea who he was, but he was this guy with a deep voice who sang some famous duets with Nancy Sinatra in the '60s, like "Summer Wine," "Jackson" and "Some Velvet Morning." He also wrote Nancy's biggest hit, "These Boots Are Made for Walking."

He was also a famous producer and churned out a bunch of cool solo albums. Of course, it took awhile for the rest of the world to catch up with him, and he became something of a cult figure later in life, even influencing some alternative musicians like Nick Cave.

I remember when I was a kid, going through my parents' old vinyl albums, there wasn't a lot of stuff I liked. But I really dug Lee's voice. I even have a few of his duets with Nancy Sinatra on my Ipod.

Lee Hazlewood was 78 and died of kidney cancer. Toward the end, he gave away his gold and platinum records and was working on a final album, Cake Or Death. I wonder if he finished it.

***

On a lighter note, there are bands who agonize over their names, and other bands who just don't give a fuck. I was curious where one of my favorite bands, Queens of the Stone Age, got their weird name. So I went on Wikipedia. I also checked out Kyuss (the band Josh Homme and Nick Oliveri were in before Queens of the Stone Age) and Josh Homme's side project Eagles of Death Metal. Here's how those names came about:

1) Kyuss - Kyuss was named after a creature from "Dungeons and Dragons." The band was originally named "Sons of Kyuss" but changed their name once they started recording.

2) Queens of the Stone Age - started out being called Gamma Ray, but there was a German metal band with that name and they threatened to sue. So they changed their name. Where did it come from? Well, here's the story from Wikipedia:

"When we were making a record in 1992, under the band Kyuss, our producer Chris Goss, he would joke and say "You guys are like the Queens of the Stone Age." The band was originally called Gamma Ray, but we got threatened with a lawsuit because someone else had it. So we were Queens of the Stone Age."
-- Nick Oliveri (2000)

On why the band chose the name 'Queens of the Stone Age' rather than 'Kings of the Stone Age:

"Kings would be too macho. The Kings of the Stone Age wear armor and have axes and wrestle. The Queens of the Stone Age hang out with the Kings of the Stone Age's girlfriends when they wrestle, and also it was a name given to us by Chris Goss. He gave us the name Queens of the Stone Age. Rock should be heavy enough for the boys and sweet enough for the girls. That way everyone's happy and it's more of a party. Kings of the Stone Age is too lopsided."
-- Josh Homme (2000)

The name's still fucked up.

3) Eagles of Death Metal was formed by Jesse Hughes and Josh Homme. Despite the name, Eagles of Death Metal is not a death metal band. Hughes, in an interview with a Polish rock magazine Teraz Rock told the story of the band's name. He said that his friend, Lou, was trying to make Josh Homme like death metal. When he played Vader, Homme called it "Eagles of death metal." (actually, the name comes from a discussion with a drunken man who claimed the band Poison were death metal to which Jesse said they were the "Eagles of death metal") Later, Josh Homme inspired him to write music that he thought would be the Eagles crossed with death metal, and their debut album was the result.

Take that, Don Henley!

MASTERS OF SCIENCE FICTION & JEKYLL

Saw two new shows this weekend. Both had real potential, but both had flaws as well.

First off, there's JEKYLL on BBC America. It's normal time slot is going to be Saturday nights at 9pm, but the first episode was a two-hour premeire. The show stars James Nesbitt as Dr. Tony Jackman, a modern-day descendent of Dr. Henry Jekyll. Even though he is middle-aged, he suddenly starts to undergo a weird transformation. At first he thinks it's a split personality, but then realizes that it's not. That it's a completely different person who inhabits his skin. So Jackman/Jekyll goes to great lengths to stay abreast of his new self's activities. He uses a dictaphone, a tracking device, and cameras throughout his home to keep tabs on his other self, who at first does not have a name, but who eventually takes on the name Billy Hyde (Billy, from one of his victims - a mugger who deserved it, by the way - and Hyde for obvious reasons).

Jackman has a pact with his Hyde. He won't look for a cure to his condition, if Hyde doesn't kill anyone. But they're both lying. We see Hyde kill a few people (but only where Jackman's cameras won't catch him in the act), and Jackman is obviously searching for a cure (and he has the tons of library books to prove it). Jackman even hires a psychiatric nurse, Katherine Reimer (Michelle Ryan), to keep tabs on them both.

When Hyde goes to visit Jackman's wife and kids - a definite no-no as far as Jackman is concerned - things suddenly heat up, and Jackman starts to question why he continues to allow Hyde to live.

This Jekyll doesn't take a serum to become Hyde, by the way. He simply inherited the "affliction" of having two selves from his ancestor. Why this process did not start happening earlier in life (like, let's say, puberty) is never explained. And even though Jackman tells us this is a recent development, how can he or we know that for sure?

And Jackman is not alone in keeping tabs on Hyde. There's also a private detective hired by his wife to tail him (because he's never home, she obviously thinks it might be another woman), and strange black vans which belong to some government agency that want to use Hyde for their own ends.

As is always with these stories, Hyde is by far much more interesting. Jekyll is kind of a drip. Nesbitt plays both characters well, but there are some serious flaws. First off, the two don't look very different. In fact, I hardly noticed any differences in their appearance at all. Characters go on and on about how they have different hairlines (not by much) and darker hair and eyes (so subtle I didn't even notice), and Hyde must have some kind of animal magnetism that Jekyll lacks because people can automatically tell the difference - even his own wife and sons. But for a viewer, they are practically identical. Since everyone reacts as if they are two different people, why not make them look a little bit different? A more bestial Hyde, perhaps? Nesbitt's okay, but not enough to make the transformation convincing. And it's easy to forget who he's supposed to be at a given moment.

And Hyde, while clearly the wilder side here, isn't wild enough. A bit more bloodthirsty behavior (and a lot less rhyming chatter) would go a long way.

As a big Jekyll/Hyde fan, I was really looking forward to this show, but I had a mixed reaction to it. There are some good things here (a scene where Hyde kills a lion with his bare hands is good) but in the end, I don't give a fuck about Jekyll, and the government agent subplot smacks way too much of X-Files. I would rather if they'd jettisoned the government stuff and focused more on Jekyll and his dilemma at dealing with his dual nature.

At least Mr. Hyde reacts to everyting with the sheer joy he's supposed to. But more Hyde, and a much more vicious Hyde (and one who certainly wouldn't agree to not kill anyone), would have been a lot more satisfying.

I'll keep watching JEKYLL, but so far the show seems mediocre, which is too bad, because the Jekyll/Hyde theme still has so much potential to it.

The other new show on Saturday nights is on a network, strangely enough. Most interesting television has been appearing on cable - especially in the summer - but don't worry. ABC is doing its best to keep anything good from lasting.

By burying MASTERS OF SCIENCE FICTION at 10pm on Saturdays, ABC is pretty much guaranteeing the show will fail and will soon be forgotten. Which is too bad, because it is produced by the same people who gave us Showtime's MASTERS OF HORROR, and the idea of stories by great science fiction writers being adapted for the screen by A-list directors is long overdue.

The show is narrated by Stephen Hawking, of all people, and his computerized voice seems to suit a show devoted to "Masters." But the masters themselves are nowhere to be seen in this first episode. It was based on the short story, "A Clean Escape" by John Kessell. I admit, I am not as knowledgeable about science fiction as I used to be, but my first reaction is John Who? Not to insult Kessell (who is a prolific short story writer, and a Nebula award-winner), but the name of this series of MASTERS of Science Fiction. The names that come to mind include Asimov, Heinlein, Ellison, Leiber and Sturgeon. And one of them should have at least been the first episode's "master."

It's also directed by Michael Rydell, who previously directed such movies as ON GOLDEN POND and THE ROSE. And what is the criteria for being considered a Master of Science Fiction again??

As it is, "A Clean Escape" was a very talky, annoying episode about two characters in a post-apocalyptic future: a psychiatrist (Judy Davis) and her patient: a man (Sam Waterston) who can't remember what's happened to the world around them. They spend the entire episode verbally sparring, as the reality of their situation slowly (yes, slowly) unfolds before us. Davis's character learns she has terminal cancer at the beginning of the episode, so she has nothing to lose. Waterston's stubborn amnesia bit is just grating on the nerves. And the denouement just isn't worth it.

Which isn't a complete condemnation of the show, actually. Because it is superbly acted by A-list performers who give it there all. My problem is with the story itself. Who chooses these things? And, with the entire history of science fiction at one's fingers, why choose this one?

Like I said, this show was pretty much set up to fail, but it's not just the time slot. If you want to build an audience, wouldn't you start out with an episode that really grabs viewers? That makes them want to see more? Then why start out with a stagey episode that just features two characters talking for an hour - leading to a climax that is downright anti-climatic?!

Why not start with a bang? The universe did, after all.

Future episodes will feature stories by people who are rightly called Masters: Robert Heinlein's "Jerry Was a Man" is the third episode, and the terrific tale "The Discarded" by Harlan Ellison is the fourth. But why not start with those two? And will anyone still be watching by the time they air?

I often wonder why certain stories are chosen for MASTERS OF HORROR as well, so this is not the first time the production team involved has made odd choices. With so much great horror and science fiction literature out there, there's no reason for stumbles like this, especially when only a handful of episodes of MASTERS OF SCIENCE FICTION have been filmed. Why not go with five powerhouses?

Unless you really don't want the show to find an audience.

So MASTERS OF SCIENCE FICTION has a lot of potential. They've already proven they can get solid actors. Now if they can get directors who have proven themselves in genre filmmaking, and writers/stories that truly deserve to be adapted (and don't bore the hell out of us), this series might just prove itself a hidden gem. A diamond buried in a bad time slot.

But my fear is that, by the time the show finally proves itself, it will be gone.

AND ANTONIONI MAKES THREE (7/31/07)

Woke up this morning and saw that Michaelangelo Antonioni died. He was 95. This after Ingmar Bergman died yesterday at age 89. That's two major foreign directors in two days (and since celebrity deaths always come in threes, talk show host Tom Snyder died yesterday as well).

This is sad news for the film world. Bergman and Antonioni were giants.

Michaelangelo Antonioni was probably most famous for his surreal film about a photographer in London in 1966's BLOW UP. But he made lots other great films like L'AVVENTURA and RED DESERT. He had a great sense of style, and, like Bergman, he'll be sorely missed.

If Federico Fellini wasn't already dead, I'd be worried about him at this point.

***

ODDS AND ENDS (7/30/07)

First off, for those who didn't get enough of Greg Lamberson after the 3-part interview here a couple of weeks ago, I now have a review of all things Gruesome (as in JOHNNY GRUESOME) on the movie website DVD RESURRECTIONS. If you'd like to check it out, go here.

Today was a weird day. The director Ingmar Bergman died today, and so did the talk show host Tom Snyder. Bergman was known for arthouse classics like THE SEVENTH SEAL (with the famous scene where a knight plays chess with Death), WILD STRAWBERRIES, and FANNY AND ALEXANDER.

Snyder used to host THE TOMORROW SHOW in the 1970s. He was a talk show host with odd mannerisms (Dan Akryoyd parodied him several times on the classic early episodes of Saturday Night Live). Snyder was an interesting guy, though, and was one of the first talk show hosts to have punk and new-wave musicians on his show. They even released a DVD of some of the best moments, featuring interviews he did with John Lydon (Sex Pistols/PIL), Wendy O'Williams (the Plasmatics) and Elvis Costello, early in their careers.

That's all for now. Until next time.

Infernally Yours,
~LLS