I Agree That Craig’s Bond Has Been a Masterstroke

of nostalgia and ‘older heads’ dealing with modern problems that the modern Establishment doesn’t have the stomach to solve anymore. It’s the triumph of 007’s reinvention. One I was personally dubious about when I first heard Craig was cast to the role. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/james-bond-spectre/daniel-craig-007-casino-royale-skyfall/

And I have to admit these Bond writers are smarter, and slicker than any since the original team with Sean Connery. Not that they’ve been flawless. I thought the ending of Skyfall a bit too contrived. And of course, Quantum of Solace was a placeholder that is almost as forgettable as most of the Brosnan and Moore eras.

There is one thing I disagree with from the article: That is, that Craig’s Bond would’ve voted for Cameron. Cameron is entirely too hipster-friendly for this James Bond. This Bond’s skepticism of Establishment and cynicism toward the government that employs him, would make him an unabashed supporter of UKIP. And that might be one more reason I like him. 😉

Though I Am Not Generally a Fan of Reboots

This one *might* be an exception: http://www.epictimes.com/2015/08/zorro-to-be-rebooted-in-a-post-apocalyptic-setting/

I could even see a way this could function with a nod to the original. Our noble hero remembers his history (or alternate history) and the story of the Californian who fought the oppressive governors in his day and decides to take up the mantle to right wrongs in the present. Now, how rapier and bull-whip would work in a post-apocalyptic setting is another question. But I love me some classic duels–which looked nothing like the watered down sport version people see once every four years in the Olympics. So I’d roll with it, given some decent handwavium.

Simon Pegg befouls his nest

Love his movies and wit. Also amusing what he says here given he has co-writing credits in the next Star Trek movie. http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2015/05/20/nerds-nerd-simon-pegg-renounces-geekdom-rips-on-comic-book-films/

My own thoughts? Weeeeelllll… first of all, whenever someone says, “Movies used to be about (x),” I get amused. Yes, there were “important” movies in the old days. There were also pure camp films (Flash Gordon in all its iterations). And sorry Simon, but parents always took at least guilty pleasure in these. Nor is it correct to say there aren’t ‘important’ movies today. For Hollywood’s given definitions of important. They don’t do as well because the would-be ruling class of the entertainment industry has discovered that forcefeeding its agenda to the ‘masses’ that disagree with them results in dangerously low profits. That’s another reason we get these cycles of reboots and comic properties: They’re among the few things that are *safe* for studios to make.

Given the cost of making major motion pictures, as opposed to say, printing an e-book, it’s safe to assume ‘independent’ films will remain as committed to Hollywood’s ideas of importance as it has. There’s simply no plausible alternative until the cost of putting flicks on screens comes down. But, I think it’s fair to say given the dichotomy between the purveyors of dreck and the audience, you are going to continue to see ‘safe’ choices in movie making for the foreseeable future.

Sorry Simon. Guess I’ll see you and the gang in another spoof. 😉

In Which The Evil League of Evil

Once Again Demonstrates it Knows More About Sci-Fi than The Grauniad. Well-played, Mr. Knighton.


Folks, just because you decided to sit down and read the synopses of a dozen movies, does NOT make you the expert on said movies. I’m not as big a fan of some Dystopian Fiction as our Fisker is. I think Divergent is rather poorly done (with flat-out terrible science in the succeeding installments). And I would say that Mockingjay is a desperate attempt to retrieve a Leftist vision from what was (intentionally or not) an anti-Big Government story. With the result that honestly, the third book falls flat, IMHO. It also doesn’t help that Katniss goes from central player to ‘hardly a participant.’ It may be more realistic, but it’s not interesting reading to have everything go on off-stage.

But I do love Blade Runner and would play Shadowrun in about as much time as it would take to grab my books and dice. So I can’t say I hate it, either. Indeed, a number of my stories are post-apocalyptic. Though one is already in the rebirth of civilization. Another is…well, the Guardian would hate it: It’s Weird Western, so it’s post-nuclear/magical apocalyptic Dystopian AND lone gunslinger. But yeah, it has action. 😉 And my Urban Fantasy isn’t post-apoc yet. But if I ever write it far enough, I’ll get there, Kate Daniels style.

The bottom line as to why Dystopias are fun to write is, as Knighton says, it makes the commonplace interesting to write about. “Just another day in the office” is boring as probing for earwax. “Everyday is a struggle for survival” is inherently more interesting. That’s also why The Walking Dead despite its characters being Too Dumb To Live, is better television than 95% of the dross on the little screen. We’re convinced anything can happen. Anything can go wrong. It’s the NASCAR principle brought to scripted TV “Come for the car-crashes, stay for the concessions.”