Thank you to several friends of the blog Part II

I think it's weird when someone says "friend of the blog" until I realize that I used that term myself in a post about a year ago where I thanked several people who have been influences, inspirations, and help to me:

I'd like to update that list a little with a few more names:
I recently wrote about many twitter friends I've made including my favorite grammar nazi Christine  Becker, eternal Community fanboy Noel Kirkpatrick, rapping bookworm Ellen Wernecke, and the AV Club's budding star Rowan Kaiser. All of these guys continue to provide support and ideas to bounce off.

I'd like to also give thanks to some other friends I've made through twitter that I missed last time:
Kenny Herzog is a guy who's given me advice and is kind enough to talk to me despite being wayyy more successful at what he does than I am. He said to me once, "Hey man, us freelance plebes all gotta stick together." Great words to live by.
Kenny Herzog is currently published nearly everywhere in the Western Hemisphere (he is currently looking to get in the door at the Trinidad Press for the trifecta). Rolling Stone, Spin, Time Out, MSN, New York Daily News all bear his name. Rumor has it that he freelance wrote some chapters of the King James Bible as well.

Kenny Herzog's work can be found at www.KennyHerzog.com

Cory Barker is a guy who in my early days of twitter (remember kids, these were different times. Think back to November 2010)  when no one was following me, I emailed this guy in a huffy-puffy snit over why he wasn't following me. Since then, he's been a guy who's done an admirable job of tolerating me in our storybook twitter friendship (Disney hasn't yet bought the rights to our story, but we're holding out). Cory's love of TV criticism borders on masochism. He insists on watching pretty much every show on TV and reviewing it all. Look at his end-of-the-year list and you'll see he's watched some 20 million shows in 2010 and apologized for the 4 he didn't have the time to watch. www.tvsurveillance.com

Les Chapell is a person I met when LA Times Critic and AV Club chief TV writer Todd van der Weff was compiling a crowd-sourced sitcom and Les and I agreed to share a $10 prize to type up a transcript.. Since then, Les and me have fed each other publishing tips and shared advice on how to improve each other's pieces. This is the perfect relationship a freelance writer needs and I highly recommend you all go out and find your own Les (not my Les, though, I've snatched him up). Les's work can be found at ahelplesscompiler.wordpress.com


Speaking of Todd van der Werff, who once deemed himself the 17th most prominent TV critic in the nation (how cool is it, mom, that I have the 17th most prominent TV critic in the country on my email queue?!) also played a major role at the beginning of my writing career: Namely, rejecting me as a writer for the AV Club when I was unemployed in directionless in the Fall of 2010. More specifically, Todd's biggest contribution to my writing career was taking two weeks to reject me after looking at my work, rather than just flat-out looking at my work and rejecting me outright. .

The mere mention that I applied to the AV Club and was under consideration had a few facebook friends to get real excited for me. In an effort to keep my doors open and clean up my work for when Todd would eventually take a look at it, I applied to more things in that two-week period that either accepted me or, at the very least, gave me hope to keep writing.


More than that, Todd's contributions to my career haven't been accidental. In addition to hopefully paying the $5 he owes me (and $5 to Les if he wants it), he was encouraging and kind upon rejecting me, and he regularly is kind enough to respond to me on twitter. I know that's not much, but Todd is patient enough to respond to some of the dumbest things I say on twitter (I'm not sure why he doesn't respond to smarter tweets), such as getting the number of seasons of a particular TV show wrong or assuming Davy Jones of the Monkees was dead when Todd, in fact, was standing in a room with him. Todd's writing (or the writing of the writers he hires) can be found at avclub.com/tvclub

I also have to thank Eddie Rodriguez for assisting me in being published on cracked and offering to include me on other pitches. Neither me nor Eddie had been published on cracked before when Eddie volunteered to jump on board the idea of an unpublished writer like me and bring it to fruition. Since then, Eddie's had phenomenal success on cracked with 6 or 7 pieces to his name last I checked. Thanks also E. Reid Ross over at cracked for helping to work with me on pitches as well and volunteering to troop on through my examiner recommendation..

In the world of print, I have been lucky enough to be published in 4 different print publications over the last 12 months*-Sun Gazzette, Connection Newspapers,  Falls Church News Press, and Washington City Paper, in addition to toptenz.com, gunaxin, patch.com,  and Arlingtoncounty.com and thanks to all the editors at those places and anyone on staff who helped me. I wouldn't want to mention any of them by name because that would make it look like I'm sucking up to them for more articles but I would like to thank one of them, Philip van der Vossen, for his transparency and his interest in hearing writers' opinions and suggest to freelance writers that Gunaxin.com, while not necessarily the most profitable place on the web, is not a bad place to consider because its editor-in-chief is a trustworthy and fair guy.

At Connection, I had the opportunity to work in an office setting with a number of interns and other freelancers who were great company and inspiration. Maya Horowitz, an intern-turned-freelancer, worked side by side with me for quite a while and has been a source of support even after my leaving the Connection. To see Maya's exploits at the Connection and to learn what it's like chasing local leads for a community newspaper, she can be found at mayahorowitz.wordpress.com.


A special thanks also to aspiring editor and Connection intern Edison Russ for helping me tremendously in terms of teaching me how to write better and self-editor (this blog entry was live for half a day before I recognized that mistake. That's how badly I need Edison) . He stayed behind on the last day of his internship just to help me with my grammar. He also looked at my blog recently and tried to compliment me on my ironic misspellings of certain words, unaware that I didn't misspell those words on purpose. I would highly recommend Edison to anyone interested in hiring him as a rearranger of words in (that mistake took an extra two run throughs for me to spot. Read every other entry of this blog to see how much I suck at grammar and self-editing) and inserter of punctuation marks (I guess that's what they call a copy editor?). I almost had an opening for Edison at Arlingtoncounty.com and he was a good sport when it fell through.
Edison's collegiate portfolio can be found at edisonruss.webly.com.


Thanks to all the interns I worked with at the Connection who made last summer more exciting for me and for making me feel important because I wasn't the lowest person in the office. Thanks to Isabelle for keeping me in the loop about the high school running scene, Adam for being the rounder-up of lunch-going and thanks to budding journalist Abigail for completing her fine article for me at ArlingtonCounty.com which allowed me the opportunity to say I successfully hired and supervised another journalist.

Predicting the Oscars 26 minutes before they're announced

While waiting for the Oscars to be announced in 25 minutes (and counting), I'm going to post my predictions as I did at goldderby.com via invitation of the LAMB. This is solely so in the case that I'm correct, there's some evidence out there that I was either very right or very wrong.
Eight Questions to Ask Before the Oscar Nominations Are Announced

Picture: War Horse, Moneyball, Tree of Life, Midnight in Paris, Hugo, Artist, Descendants, Help

Director: Bennett Miller, the director of The Artist, Terrence Malick, Marty Scorsese, Alexander Payne

Notes: Can't spell the director of The Artist, and won't even try. Wasn't a big fan of Bennett Miller's work in Capote but Moneyball is all about the director. If Malick doesn't get nominated, that would be tragic.

Actor: DiCaprio, J Edgar, Michael Fassbender, Shame, George Clooney, The Descendants, Brad Pitt, Moneyball, Jean Dujardin, The Artist

Notes: Ewan MaGregor of Beginners is also highly deserving


Actress: Michelle Williams, My Week with Marilyn, Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs, Meryl Streep, Viola Davis, The Help, Tilda Swinton, We Need to Talk About Kevin

Note: I would be thrilled if Charlize Theron for Young Adult or Rooney Mara for Girl with Dragon Tattoo got nominated. In the case of the latter, I have no rooting interest for the film, but I'd want to see Mara because heroes and heroines from big blockbuster tent pole films rarely get mentioned

Supporting Actor: Max von Sydow, Extremely Personal and Up Close, Brad Pitt, Tree of Life, Jonah Hill, Moneyball, Albert Brooks, Drive, Christopher Plummer, Beginners

Notes: I'm really holding out hope for Ben Kingsley, but I thought I'd mix it up anyways.

Supporting Actress: Shalene Woodley, Descendants, Carey Mulligan, Shame, Octavia Spencer, Help, Jessica Chastian, Help, Vanessa Redgrave, Corlianis

Notes: Vanessa Redgrave is the actress I have rooting interest for. She's a living legend and it's a field almost entirely composed of newbies

Adapted Screenplay: Moneyball, Help, Descendants, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Notes: Best pictures shouldn't automatically be placed in the screenplay categories (Goodbye Hugo and War Horse). Girl with the Dragon Tattoo had as much pressure as The Da Vinci Code to not disappoint fans of the book. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy was also adapted from a well-known source and succeeded despite comparisons to recent movies. A film like Hugo doesn't really stand out for stylized dialogue.

Original Screenplay: Young Adult, Artist, Margin Call, Bridesmaids, Midnight in Paris

Notes: Artist is a silent film, but that can be just as hard to write. Margin Call is wishful thinking, but it's that good. Beginners and Win Win would also be wishful thinking. Bridesmaids would definitely be a unique contender and, what's more, it's pretty probably it will make the cut. I have my personal qualms with Midnight in Paris

Score: Super 8, Artist, Hugo, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Harry Potter VIII

Notes: I listened to about twenty different scores thanks to youtube so I had a lot of samples to draw from.  Artist and Hugo both sound very much alike. Plagarism?






Editing: Girl with Dragon Tattoo, Moneyball, War Horse, Tree of Life, Hugo

Notes: Tinker Tenor Doctor Spy or Drive could easily also fit into here. Moneyball should win this. Tree of Life is an interesting conundrum: It's way too long but you have the feeling that without the editor reigning in Malick's vision, it would have been a much longer film


Cinematography: Super 8, War Horse, Artist, Tinker Tenor Doctor Spy, Tree of Life

Notes: Super 8 has amazing cinematography even if it's not a good film.. I'm not sure why it would be ignored in that category.


Art Direction: Anonymous, J. Edgar, Tinker Tenor Doctor Spy, Hugo, Harry Potter VIII

Note: Anonymous was shot using Roland "I like to blow up the world" Emmerich using mostly green screens. A very interesting and novel way to do a period piece. Harry Potter VIII, I'd put in art direction, because Lord of the Rings won in that category, and the two seem very similar in production values.

Reviews of Moneyball, The Help, and Margin Call

Just went on a back-to-back-to-back DVD watching binge over the last three nights as I figured out how to reopen my redbox account. All three films were excellent but clearly I had the foresight of all those year-end reviews to steer me in the right direction.

Moneyball:

Moneyball is all about Brad Pitt. Because the film ties Billy Beane’s journey of self-discovery to that of his sport, and because there’s a surprising amount of psychological depth to Beane himself, this film transcends the typical sports film. At the same time, it’s a very exciting sports film in and of itself.

The sad thing about professional sports today is that to spectators and players alike are excited by the whole phenomenon up until the point where they lose. This is a film that deals almost exclusively with how to deal with defeat and how victory itself is tenable. That says more about life than much of sports does today.

This is Aaron Sorkin’s third movie (Charlie Wilson’s War and The Social Network) since making the abysmal television show “Studio 60” and committed every sin imaginable in the TV writer’s bible (don’t have all the characters sound alike, don’t use the show to air out your dirty laundry, try to at least pretend to care about where your story is set, etc.) and he’s been using more and more restraint on those Sorkinisms. Occasionally, Sorkin still gets cringe-worthy as in the conversation between scouts about how they shouldn’t put in a pitcher with an ugly girlfriend.

Another weakness of Aaron Sorkin seems pretty subverted in Jonah Hill’s shy and introverted character of Peter Brand. Unfortunately he drifts a little towards Sorkinish territory towards the end.

On my top ten list (which I’m working to rapidly construct a couple weeks later than everyone else), this lands at #2. Not as profound as ambitious as “The Tree of Life” but it’s more intense and kinetic than anything else I’ve seen this year and it marries that intensity to a stronger story than a typical action or sports film

Margin Call:

The film takes place over a condensed 28-hour period as a bright employee (Zach Quinto) a couple levels below management at a multi-billion dollar investment company discovers some kink in the system. It’s 10 pm on the night when the staff is out celebrating because they’ve survived the night of recent layoffs, but gradually everyone up the chain of commands right up to the CEO, stops everything their doing and shows up back to the office, because they come to the realization that they’re company is going to be screwed very soon.

For me, it’s an especially interesting experience to watch because I’ve long relegated economics and finance to the grey areas of my knowledge that I’m too far behind on to have a chance of understanding. I could embarrass myself very quickly with a list of current news events from recent times (Fanny and Freddy, the subprime mortgage crisis) that I didn't understand whatsoever.

So as someone who had no understand of this world these characters inhabited, I can truly say the film did a very good job of not making it exclusively about numbers and graphs. Rather, it was the emotions and consequences behind those numbers  It also helped that (whether it was making some thematic point), some of the higher ups in the company had no idea what those numbers meant either.

The film’s biggest strength is how the ensemble is all on the same page. Zach Quinto, Paul Bettany, Kevin Spacey (hamming it up as the most conflicted character), Simon Baker, Demi Moore, and Jeremy Irons all seem to bring a surprising intensity to a movie that’s basically set in the same two or three rooms and features a fair amount of quasi-technobabble.

This film is definitely a keeper for my top ten as well, somewhere in the middle. It’s certainly about more than a film like “Bridesmaids” and I’m not sure where I compare it to “Win Win” which has a little more heart but has a little less solid of a cast.

The Help:

It’s probably safe to assume that the genteel life of bridge games and debutante balls in 1960’s Mississippi with those colored women lurking the background of family photos was probably a morally grayer zone than depicted in “The Help.” In this film, you have heroes and villains with Bryce Dallas Howard playing Cruella de Vil donned in the makings of a society gal. Words that I would associate with Bryce Dallas Howard (someone who I’ve been eagerly following since my older sister randomly became friends with her at summer camp 15 years ago) are enigmatic, quiet, and reserved. This is a major change of pace for her.

The hero is independent gal Eugena “Skeeter” (what a name!) Phalem, who bucks the trend by going to University of Mississippi and majoring in something other than husband-hunting. For a film that would eventually make the short-list for Oscar if all goes according to plan this Tuesday, Emma Stone was a risky choice for the lead. She looks like Lindsay Lohan and her career trajectory up to this point (minus the drugs) has mirrored hers. Stone pulls the leading role off admirably.

Aside from Stone and Bryce Dallas Howard, this film boasts a very strong cast and one of the few films that’s loaded with great female talent without looking like it’s simply an excuse to win someone an Oscar in the ordinarily thin “Best Actress” category. Mary Steenburgen, Sissy Spacek, Allison Janey, and Jessica Chastain (who holds the distinction of being in literally half the films to come out in 2011) have great parts while Octavia Spencer and Viola Davis provide the heart of the film as the two African-American maids who Emma Stone is interviewing to get the maids’ side of the story.

The film still does an excellent job at capturing a place and time, although I do wonder if it’s the most interesting place and time  

This is definitely not a film that reaches for the tragic depths of The Color Purple or Mississippi Burning. The abuse that the maids suffer is relatively mild that maids suffer in comparison to other points or subsets of in the Civil Rights era. Without having a firm working knowledge on 1960’s Mississippi, it’s a little hard for the viewer to decide how badly to feel for the protagonists. They are, after all, getting paid to do a job, and on occasion, they seem to have friendly employers.

It’s through the framing device of Emma’s story and a New York publisher’s (Mary Steenburgen’s) reaction that we learn that race divisions were tense enough that no one would willingly trash their employer. Of course, no one looks good trashing their employer today, but you get the sense that the repercussions might be more dangerous.

If there’s one other slight weakness, I’m not sure if I’m conditioned to expect dramatic films to be devoid of comedy, but some moments in the second half of the film felt more screwball comedy than cathartic. The major plot point revolving around a (without spoiling too much) rather unique slice of pie, seems a little more like a scene from some zany children's flick than a film with the kind of aim this film goes for.

The Help is still a film that swings for the fences.

Oscar buzz: Is the tail wagging the dog at this point?

I just bought an issue of Entertainment Weekly when I was was on a trip and stressed out and needed to get my mind off things, and it was comfort food to read it.

When I skipped straight to the prediction section, I started to realize a problem.
What I was reading was information I already knew with just minor alterations (i.e. now Steven Spielberg is in the best director category instead of Terrence Malick and Money isn't one of the BP frontrunners).

And then it struck me as ridiculous. I was eagerly wanting to consume information telling me most of what I already know. Then I'll eagerly watch the Oscar ceremony where 70% of the content is what I've already seen before.

The Oscar speeches will be mostly identical to the Golden Globe and SAG speeches and the results will almost be pre-ordained.

Oscar buzz likely started out as a few people wanting to be the guy in their office who says "I know who will win the Oscars," but 80% of the time, we all know who will win the Oscars and 80% of the time, the participants know who will win. How awful is it to invite Jacki Weaver (nominated last year for "Animal Kingdom") or Mark Ruffalo (nominated for "The Kids Are All Right) to the Oscars when they both know it's a practical certainty that they're going to lose. For all, we know the precursor gluttony decides the voting. Someone might have asked themselves in the 2010/2011 race: "Why should I vote for Jacki Weaver when all of the precursor awards show that it's either gonna be Hailee, Amy Adams or Melissa Leo?"

More disturbing is that when we discuss Oscar buzz, we're not actually talking about movies anymore for the most part. We're simply trying to use statistics and such to predict human behavior. Some of the most prominent people in the film criticism community are nothing more than glorified statisticians. Go to Awards Daily and you'll see that most of their articles consist of announcing press releases by various groups giving their awards of the films of the year. Commentary by the webmasters of the commenters will use this information to slightly recalibrate their attitudes about who will be selected as Oscar winners.

Just the other day, we had the Central Ohio Film Critics Awards announcing their picks. Are we now dividing states into latitudinal thirds for the sole purpose of disseminating a list of best films of the year that closely mirrors 200 other such lists?

I've previously written that the winners of the Oscars were originally publicized before the big night. Now, the stated goal of the Academy is to keep the results sealed. Technically, those awards are still sealed but when we have 8 million awards precursors; when they allow directors, actors, writers and producers of the academy to vote in other awards ceremonies; when sites on the internet are dedicated to using every algorithm they have to predict the results, what's the difference?

FAQs about blogging

How do I know whether I should start a blog?
I would recommend a blog if you have things to say and you take pride in expressing it.

Do you find yourself occasionally having thoughts about stuff and wanting to express them in a fuller extent? Do you take pride in what you write on message boards or even your facebook notes, facebook status messages, tweets, or correspondence to other people in e-mails? That’s material you can put on a blog.


Do I have to like writing?
You might or might not like the process of writing. Sometimes, I might not like the actual writing, but I do like the feeling I get of looking at something I’ve written and knowing that it was written by me. In other words, I write for love of the finished product.

In another scenario, writing might also be cathartic or therapeutic for you. It might not be the thing you enjoy most in the world, but like eating vegetables, it could be a healthy component of your daily activity.

Lastly, you might see it as an ideal vehicle for advancing your point of view or opinion.

What are the benefits of blogging as opposed to just writing on a blank word document?
Blogging is partially about creating a body of work. You can use it as a reference for yourself for things you’ve written. I’ve had two occasions where someone wanted me to write about the film “From Here to Eternity” and fortunately, I’ve already written about it multiple times on my blog. That’s fairly easy material to rework for someone else’s needs without having to rewrite the piece. More importantly, it’s a way to display to someone else what you can do which is what you often need to get ahead as a writer.

Blogging will also keep you productive. If you see that the current month has only one blog post, you think it looks kind of lonely sitting by itself and are tempted to add another one to it. It’s a fairly easy way to ensure that you’re consistently writing each month.

Does blogging make you money?

Blogging on wordpress or blogspot will likely not make you much money at all. Even if I do have ad sense, people have to click on those ads and google ad sense doesn’t yield much profit as opposed to other sites. It depends on growing your readership to 5 or 6 figures which is easier said than done.

That’s not to say that blogging shouldn’t make me money. I do firmly believe that the world is a better place if people pay for art they consume in the appropriate amount. If you enjoyed reading my piece on Capitol Critters, for example, you should pay whatever you think that experience was worth (donation jar on the top right, tis the season for generosity folks), even if it was worth 19 cents. That said, believing that people SHOULD pay and convincing people to ACTUALLY PAY are two entirely different things.

So you don’t care about the money? Why are you doing this?
For the money, of course. I originally graduated college as a naïve idealist who didn’t think money was important, but I've come to understand that everything I do is underlined by capitalistic motives. My goals are to grow readership and to direct you (through links) to sites where I do get paid based on traffic. That's not to say that that strategy is working particularly well.

So everything on this blog is your third-rate throwaway work?
Exactly! So if you like these measly article scraps, you should check out my better stuff. In all seriousness, though, I do strive to maintain a minimum level of quality for this blog. Putting my best efforts on this blog while trying to maintain a presence on my new home at Gunaxin and Examiner (my home of two and a half years) and give both of those outlets my best stuff can be somewhat of a challenge.

The consequences of trying to maintain a minimum standard in quality. so that anyone seeing this blog would be impressed translates to a loss in quantity. I have a lot of things I could write easily, but to write them and not have them come off as sloppy, takes twice as long.

But you’re writing is still sloppy

I’m not writing the most perfect piece with a blog entry. I’m writing the best I can in the time I’ve allotted myself to write that entry. Every fact check and spell check I do is time and it adds up. There are bloggers who argue to the contrary: Poor spelling and grammar is unacceptable. I’m not ideologically opposed to those people and would get everything right if I could. It’s just a matter of time constraints.

What are the benefits of blogging as opposed to writing for a site that pays you money?
Three main reasons:
1. Sometimes, blogging fires up your creative juices or gets the wheels turning in your brain en route to producing that thing you would get paid to write.
2. I have free reign to write whatever I like with my blog. In order to write for examiner.com, I have to go through the trouble of using their more complex interface system and I have to stick to the topic on the film industry in Washington D.C. In order to write for Gunaxin, I have to make something that’s conducive to heavy visuals. In order to write for toptenz.com, it needs to be a list. In order to write for cracked, it has to be meticulously researched and pass through an editorial team
3. Sometimes a blog entry is a first draft of a better piece and it’s good to get that first draft out.


PART II:
WHAT ABOUT ME, What should I write about?
It generally helps to write about one thing, but you don’t have to stick to any rules. If you look at my early posts, I was pretty free-flowing. In order to develop a readership (i.e. one of your main goals), you should try to stick to the same general area of interest, the same style, and/or consistent features. That’s what they call branding.

If a reader stumbles upon your blog because of one good post you wrote, they’ll appreciate that, but they might not stick around. If, on the other hand, they come across more of what bought them there in the first place, they might have cause to stick around.

What if I can’t contain myself to just one interest?
If you have multiple interests and don’t want to constrain yourself to one topic, I recommend that you rely on an efficient tagging system. For instance, if you’re equally passionate about insects, skiing, and Cambodian politics, I would just tag all three posts and clearly divide it on your blog. That way if a reader stumbles upon an excellent article on the Cambodian elections, he can easily sort his way through other articles on Cambodia.

You should also diversify how you write on a topic. I do standard film reviews, but I also have a feature on guest star rosters, a directorial list progress report, and an ongoing list of songs that I like based on lyrics, for example.

But that’s not branding!
Yes, it is. I’m actually building a new brand with each new feature I do. You might stumble upon a guest star list and want to see more of them. I know this because this happens a lot to me as a reader.

I’ll give an example: A blog I have on my google reader is Zulkey.com. The reason I follow this blog is because Claire Zulkey (a published author) interviews writers (who otherwise don’t get press coverage) and I find it interesting and informative for someone in that field.

Looking at her feed, she has two interviews from her last 12 posts. In between, she has a variety of other stuff. She has a wide variety of topics, mostly resembling the kind of oddball humor bits you’d find at McSweeney’s. She writes about boring presidential scandals. If I stumbled upon her blog article about boring presidential scandals, I might enjoy it, but I also might be more inclined next time to go to a site like snopes.com (dealing in urban legends) or oddee.com (dealing in oddball munitiae of that sort). However, because I already was at her blog (because I like her interview pieces) to check out her latest interview, I was able to jump to that piece fairly easily and enjoy it too.



Also of note, Zulkey uses the blog to promote larger projects of hers. In this case, it is an event she's speaking at.

So that's how web traffic works?
No, that's how I work. Most people are worrisomely overreliant on web searches for everything, so in response, a lot of bloggers try to make their writing match google searches by using a technique called Search Engine Optimization. People still remember branding and blog names, however.

Is that how people find their way to my blog?
Yes and no. People find their way to your material through a variety of ways, but not as many ways as you think. If you do absolutely nothing to promote your blog and if you write on a standard wordpress or blogspot account, then people will find you through searching. You can, however, network and ask to be listed or linked to by other blogs. You can also keep a twitter account and mention your blog on facebook. I personally find message boards to be an effective place.

What if no one reads my blog?
First of all, join the club. If no one is reading your blog, go get some more readers.

OK, what if I do that and fail?

That’s part of what blogging is about. Whether you succeed or not, going through the struggle of getting more readers and trying different methods to accomplish that goal will likely have taught you a lot about how networking, promotion and media work. There are people who have been interested in hiring me in the field of PR because I've been through the trenches in trying to promote a blog that no one reads

Any other questions? Post in the comment section or email me at mrpelican56@yahoo.com

Some Capsule Reviews of 2011

This holiday season, consider making a $1 donation to this blog.

Some links: What if the SAG Awards Didn't Exist?
An Open Letter to Dwight Howard and Chris Paul on Gunaxin

Some movie reviews of 2011 Films (rapid fire edition)
Cedar Rapids-Ed Helms plays a small town insurance salesman who goes on his first plane trip to the big city to attend a convention. This movie is an excellent example of "Funny cause it's true" comedy. Trade and professional conventions are treated by the people who put them on and many of the attendees as highly exciting. From an outsider's perspective, it's a bunch of people overly excited to be spending a weekend at a hotel listening to lectures. Thus, you have a perfect premise for a movie and with the point of view being told from the perspective of the greenest convention goer ever to exist, there's not a mean bone in the film's body. John C. Reilly does his best to channel Jack Black. If I have one complaint about the film, is it ends on too much of a high. Even the best convention experiences aren't THAT life-changing.

We Built a Zoo-Covered here in my retrospective of Cameron Crowe. A must read if there ever was one.

Horrible Bosses-That was one enticing trailer that "Horrible Bosses" offered. Unfortunately, many of the best jokes were in the trailer. Oh yeah, and the trailer was misleading. It's not a film about three people trying to murder their bosses. That's really just the first act of the story. Maybe it's because the film switches directions in so many spots, that the film feels kind of rushed.

Overall, the film is still pretty decent. Jason Sudeikis, Charlie Day, and Jason Bateman have some pretty good chemistry and Kevin Spacey and Colin Farrell have a lot of fun hamming it up as villains. Also, Julie Bowen of "Modern Family" pops up into the mix and gets kind of naughty.


Hangover II-Probably THE most shameless sequel to come along as of lately. It was enjoyable only on account of the fact that I was already in the theater (on account of other people) and did my darndest to forget I ever saw the first film. So if you try really hard, you can enjoy this film, but I do strongly believe that if a film has nothing original to say, then there's no reason for it to be made.

Cowboys and Aliens-This wasn't meant to have a shelf life beyond the two hours you spent watching it last summer, but this movie has proven surprisingly memorable for me. Several elements in the plot (i.e. why aliens would want gold, why Olivia Wilde's character wouldn't reveal her form, etc.) didn't make too much sense but it wasn't a movie that took itself seriously and I really appreciated it on the level of genre filmmaking (or more specifically, double genre filmmaking). The visuals, special effects and certain members of the cast (Adam Beach and Sam Rockwell made great supporting players) worked well. There was a sort of clash between Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford (One reviewer called the pairing a "peanut butter and peanut butter sandwich" and I ) both being the grumpiest guys you've ever seen, but I was won over by both of them even if I felt like it was a little too much friction.

Hugo-The main negative is that pretty much everyone says the movie starts off pretty slowly. It's over two hours and you could easily come in 45 minutes in and not miss much. This is somewhat of a problem because it's a mystery and the film works best on first viewing as the clues come together.

Other than that, it's an excellent film. The colorful cast of characters and excellent actors behind them are the film's biggest strength.



Descendants-This film is really two stories that don't connect as well as they should. It's not really a negative, though, because both stories work very well. One story is about a man coping with his wife's death and the other is about the responsibilities of the descendants of a land-owning clan to preserve the land. It's material that falls really well in Alexander Payne's ball park (co-written by Dean Pelton on Community of all people).

Both of the two central performances are overrated in terms of the Oscar buzz they're receiving. As I've written extensively, I'm finding the hoopla surrounding George Clooney to be overpowering of him whenever he is on screen. His performance is good but doesn't show many new notes in comparison to Up in the Air or Michael Clayton. Shalene Woodley is good but not great.

Directorial Progress Report

My annual progress report for 2011. New additions over the last two years added at end:

18 Alfred Hitchkock-Family Plot, Torn Curtain, Rebecca, 39 Steps, North by Northwest, Sabetour, The Wrong Man, Strangers on a Train, Shadow of a Doubt, Topaz, The Birds, Psycho, Lifeboat, Spellbound, Vertigo, The Man Who Knew Too Much (both versions), Rear Window

14 Stephen Spielberg-Color Purple, Raiders of the Last Ark, Jurassic Park, Temple of Doom, The Last Crusade, The Terminal, Catch Me If You Can, Schindler's List, Hook, ET, Jaws, War of the Worlds, Indiana Jones: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
PLUS: Saving Private Ryan
14 Woody Allen-Hollywood Ending, Curse of the Jaded Scorpion, Manhattan, Annie Hall, Small Time Crooks, Sweet and Lowdown, Mighty Aphrodite, Manhattan Murder Mystery, Melinda and Melinda, Ants, Sleeper, Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex, Bullets Over Broadway

10 Billy Wilder-Spirit of St. Louis, Some Like it Hot, The Apartment, Irma la Douce, Double Indemnity, Sabrina, Ace in the Hole, Major and the Minor
PLUS: 1,2,3; The Front Page

9 Joel and Ethan Coen-Oh Brother Where Art Thou, Ladykillers, Man Who Knew Too Much, Intolerable Cruelty, Big Lebowski, Fargo, No Country for Old Men, Burn After Reading
PLUS: True Grit

8 Martin Scorsesee-Color of Money, Age of Innocence, Goodfellas, Aviator, The Departed, Gangs of New York
PLUS: Hugo
8 Mike Nicholls-Primary Colors, The Birdcage, The Graduate, Working Girl, Charlie Wilson’s War, What Planet Are You From?, Postcards from the Edge, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolff

7 Ivan Reitman- Ghostbusters, 6 Days 7 Days, Old School, Space Jam, Fathers Day, Beethoven, Beethoven’s 2nd
7 Rob Altman-Mash, McCabe & Mrs Miller, California Split, Buffalo Bill and the Indian, The Player, Dr. T and the Women, Prairie Home Companion
7 Rob Zemeckis-Forrest Gump, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Back to the Future I-III, Contact, Romancing the Stone
7 Steve Sodebergh-Erin Brockovitch, Ocean’s 11, Ocean’s 12, Full Frontal, Good German, Ocean’s 13, Informant
7 Clint Eastwood-Mystic River, Unforgiven, Bronco Billy, Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, Invictus, Gran Torino
PLUS: White Heart, Lonely Hunter
7 Howard Hawks-Sgt. York, Bringing Up Baby, Big Sleep, Ball of Fire, Rio Bravo, His Girl Friday
PLUS: Gentlemen Perfer Blondes

6 Mel Brooks-Spaceballs, High Anxiety, Young Frankenstein, The Producers, Blazing Saddles, History of the World Part I
6 Vincente Minelli-Meet me in St Louis, American in Paris, The Pirate, Brigadoon, The Band Wagon, Kismet
6 Frank Oz-Bowfinger, In and Out, Stepford Wives, The Score, What About Bob, Housesitter
5 Terry Gilliam-Time Bandits, Brazil, Fisher King, Monty Python, Brothers Grimm, Baron Muchenhausen
6 Barry Levinson-Tin Men, Rain Man, Sleepers, Good Morning Vietnam, Man of the Year, Wag the Dog
6 Peter Segal-Naked Gun 33 1/3, Tommy Boy, My Fellow Americans, 50 First Dates, Get Smart
6 Jay Roach-Austin Powers I-III, Meet the Parents, Mystery Alaska, Dinner for Schmucks


5 George Lucas-Star Wars I-IV, American Graffiti
5 Gore Verbinski-Pirates of the Carribean 1, 2, & 3, Weatherman, The Mexican
5 Stanley Donen-Take Me Out to the Ballgame (most sources insist that he really was the director, not Bugsy Berkley), On the Town, Singing in the Rain, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, Charade
5 John Huston-Treasure of Sierra Madre, Beat the Devil, African Queen, Man Who Would be King, Key Largo
5 Tom Shadyac-Liar Liar, Bruce Almighty, Patch Adams, Evan Allmighty, Ace Ventura
5 Sydney Pollack-Sabrina, Out of Africa, Tootsie, The Interpreter, Slender Thread
5 Joel Schumaker-Time to Kill, 8 MM, Batman and Robin, Batman Forever, The Client
5 Orson Welles-Citizen Kane, Lady of Shanghai, Othello, Magnificent Ambersons, Touch of Evil
5 Ron Howard-Apollo 13, Beautiful Mind, Da Vinci Code, Frost/Nixon, Angels and Demons
5 Bryan Singer-Usual Suspects, X-Men, X2, Superman Returns, Valkyrie
5 Terrence Young-Wait Until Dark, 4 Bonds
5 John Glenn-5 Bonds
5 Brett Ratner-After the Sunset, Rush Hour 2, Family Man, X-Men 3, Red Dragon
5 Johnothan Demme-Silence of the Lambs, Melvin and Howard, Manchurian Candidate, Married to the Mob, Rachel Getting Married
5 Tim Burton-Batman, Batman Returns, Ed Wood, Charlie and the Chocolate Factor, Alice in Wonderland
5 Roland Emmerich-ID4, Stargate, Patriot, Day After Tomorrow, 2012
5 Robert Rodriguez-El Mariachi Trilogy, Spy Kids and Lava Girl, Sin City
5 Peter Weir-Witness, Dead Poet’s Society, The Truman Show, Master and Commander
PLUS: Year of Living Dangerously
5 Rob Reiner-Stand and Deliver, Princess Bride, Rumor Has It, American President
PLUS: Ghosts of Mississippi
5 Tony Scott- Enemy of the State, Déjà Vu, Crimson Tide, Top Gun
PLUS: Taking of Pelham 1,2,3
5 Curtis Hanson- LA Confidential, Wonderboys, In Her Shoes, Lucky You
PLUS: 8 Mile
5 Cameron Crowe-Almost Famous, Jerry MaGuire, Vanilla Sky, Elizabethtown,
PLUS: We Built a Zoo
5 Chris Columbis-Mrs. Doubtfire, Home Alone, Home Alone 2, Stepmom
PLUS: I Love You Beth Cooper
5 Sidney Lumet: Network, 12 Angry Men, Murder on the Orient Express, Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead
PLUS: Fail Safe


4 Harold Lloyd-Safety Last, Feet First, The Freshman, Kid Brother
4 Guy Hamilton-4 Bond movies
4 Peter and Bobby Farrelly
4 Kevin Smith-Chasing Amy, Mallrats, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, Dogma
4 D. Herek-Mr. Holland’s Opus, Three Musketeers, Mighty Ducks, Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventures
4 John Lynn-Whole Nine Yards, Trial and Error, Sgt Bilko, Trial and Error
4 Barry Sonnenfeld-Men in Black I, II, Wild Wild West, Big Trouble
4 Wes Anderson-Rushmore, Royal Tannenbaums, The Life Aquatic, Darjeerling Limited
4 Penny Marshall-Awakenings, Rennisance Man, Big, League of their Own
4 Ernst Lubitsch-Shop Around the Corner, Ninotchka, Merry Widow, Trouble in Paradise
4 Lasse Holstrom-What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, The Hoax, Cider House rules, Shipping News
4 James Mangold-3:10 to Yuma, Walk the Line, Kate and Leopold, Night and Day
4 Dennis Dungan
4 Sam Weisman
4 Christopher Guest-For Your Consideration, Mighty Wind, Best in Show, Waiting for Guffman
4 John Lasseter-Lady and the Tramp, Toy Story 1, Cars, Toy Story 2,
4 Jon Favreau-Elf, Iron Man
PLUS: Iron Man 2, Cowboys and Aliens
4 Adam McKay: Anchorman, Talladega Nights, Step Brothers
PLUS: The Other Guys
4 David Lean-Lawrence of Arabia, Bridge on the River Kwai, Passage to India
PLUS A Passage to India
4 John Ford-How Green was my Valley, Stagecoach, The Searchers
PLUS The Hurricane
4 Michael Moore-Roger and Me, F 411, Sicko
PLUS Capitalism: A Love Story

Once Upon a Time....

“Once Upon a Time” is an interesting show to watch in a vacuum (what I call watching a TV show or a movie without having read any reviews, reading commentary, or internet message boards). So many questions are popping up that I can’t turn to the convenience of the internet for: Does Regina know that she’s an evil queen? So the bail bondswoman’s stated reason for being in town is to stalk the kid she gave up for adoption ten years ago against her mother’s wishes? Is that the crazy guy from Prison Break as the town sheriff?

ON TO THE REVIEW:

Once Upon a Time is a show about the residents of modern-day Storybrooke, Maine, who previously inhabited the world of familiar fairy tales before being banished by the evil queen from the Snow White story.

In the modern-day world, that evil queen goes by the name of Regina Mills (Lana Parrilla) and she is the town's mayor. The narrative is complex and highly confusing which is due to the fact that the plot is dictated almost entirely by Regina's 10-year old adopted son, Henry. The other characters all have amnesia and somehow he is the only one to have figured this all out.

Thus, the story is told from two conflicting perspectives and that's a very interesting scenario that the show delivers on. From the point of view of everyone else, Henry is a troubled child with a big imagination and from the POV of Henry, these are lost fairy tale characters who haven't figured out their true identity.

Because Once Upon a Time jumps back and forth between Storybrooke and the actual fairy tale world (I'd estimate the screentime is split 70-30 between the two universes with Maine getting the 70%), the show is on the side of Henry and we know it's only a matter of time before the rest of the town starts seeing things from his point of view. This is the central conflict and that's reinforced by Henry's belief that the characters will all be happy when they discover their true nature. Thus, it's a show of characters awakening to their true nature and works on that level.

This also makes Henry the guy who's always right. He's also a giant exposition machine. The person who he's doing most of his expositioning to is Emma Swan (Jennifer Morrison). Swan is a cynical 30-something bounty hunter who discovers in the pilot episode that she is Henry's birth mother.

Emma's a key figure in the story, but the reasons that she impulsively uproots from Boston to Storybrooke after the pilot episode aren't particularly well hashed out. There's not really a strong case for why she's there. Emma's concerned that Regina doesn't have her son's best interests at heart but, then again Regina doesn't want her to take an active role in the kid's life ten years later and Emma has no rights to do otherwise. It's a good thing the show's fantasy, because if we looked at Emma's rationale from a realistic ethical or legal standpoint, we might not really be on her side at all.

Regina is eventually revealed to be somewhat malignant, but the show starts off with some genuine thematic confusion as we're left wondering why we should be behind a woman who voluntarily gave up her kid in a closed adoption process, and is now upending everyone's life on a hunch that the boy's adopted mother isn't all she seems. This is made iffier by the fact that Emma reconnecting with her son is one of the key conflicts in the story. If you can discount the clunky set-up (the key to enjoying much of this show), it's not such a bad story either).

Besides, the pilot at least establishes Emma's motivation, although somewhat weakly. The "why" of what Emma's doing in Storybrooke, is more of a "Why not?". One of Emma's key characters traits is that she's being rootless and having close to no support system (she's adopted herself).

The show's biggest strength is that it works both as an overarcing storyline, and as a series of entertaining one-off episodes. The fairytale land sequences are having diminishing returns with me for each episode, but it frames the story well.