this is the blog of ADC, creator of KISSING CHAOS. His blog continues to be updated at www.mydestroyer.com
Friday, July 31, 2009
I need a room of my own.
I recently read Virginia Woolf's A ROOM OF ONE'S OWN. I was facinated. The book was essentially Woolf's essay on the development of writer's of the quote/unquote fairer sex. She made some bold statements, such as the "A woman could not have written the plays of Shakespeare during the time of Shakespeare." She dropped some amazing quotes from Jane Eyre, which I MUST now read. Plus, differentiated between "art" and "self expression".
There's so much goodness that as a writer I could relate to. As well, I found myself, though a male, relating to the plight of women through the ages, because as an Asian dude, throughout my life I wasn't exactly treated as on par with white males, who apparently oppressed EVERYBODY! LOL.
Anyway, if you haven't read this book, check it out.
Surveillance intrigued me months ago with it's trailer, and that fact that the film was directed by the daughter of my hero of sorts, David Lynch. Sure, Jennifer Lynch has done a number of films, sadly, when I watched this one, I sorta viewed it as David Lynch-lite. From parts ofthe score, the casting, some of the cinematography and finally to the general uneasy tone, it all screamed like Surveillance was a mainstream version of a Lynch thriller. This is not necessarily a bad thing, mind you. It just felt like a typical thriller dressed up in a D. Lynch costume.
Despite some reviews claiming it to be unpredictable, I guessed the twist right off the bat and ruined the surprise for those I watched the movie with. My bad.
But even then I did enjoy the movie. There was some "bad" acting, and bad stereotyping of basically all the characters, from corrupt cops, to crack addicts, to the nuclear family on vacation. I think this was all intentional, to maintain a strange, unreal feel to the film. I could be wrong, but while the acting at times would make me cringe, I took it in stride. The visuals were great.
In it's most basic, spoiler free form, Surveillance is a thriller about a small town (street with one hotel and a police station) that is terrorized by a serial killer. It straddles the line of being a serious police procedural, and being a satirical take on the genre. After the "twist" I thought the tension and acting ramped up and some of my favourite scenes are near the end. The last line of the film is That's the most romantic thing I've ever heard.", which had me lol-ing in it's brilliance.
I recommend, if you are into this sort of thing.
ADC
Bill Pullman and Julia Ormond are amazing, by the by.
okay. I've been battling a crazy deadline, and I need the moolah, so I missed last weeks KC comic update. This week and next I'll have brand spanking new comics up. They are awesome, in my brain.
Been working on music, and I'll probably post something in the coming weeks. crazy. I know.
umm... starting a prose project, and I'll serialize it here. that'll start soon too.
So, I'm busy busy busy. I'll be in touch. if you don't hear from me, remember that I love you, and everything else I've ever said was a lie.
I've been looking forward to Moon and Coraline for some time. I mean, immensely looking forward to. Both were visually stunning, a pleasure to view. Both left me ultimately, and utterly disappointed.
I'm doing this, sans spoilers, so it'll be brief. Moon had an amazing trailer that showed a twist in the films story that had me speculating for weeks what the story could really be about. I guess my imagination ruined the movie for me, as what actually happened paled in comparison to my speculated version of Moon. Vague enough for you? That said, the film looked great, and the "solo" performance by Sam Rockwell was pretty stellar. Worth a watch if you dig sci-fi. Actually, now that I think about it, there were some really unexpected emotional turns in the script that were great, really moving. These were of course punctuated by great acting from Rockwell.
Coraline, really deserves the exact same review. It's a beauty. The amazing stop motion is truly a sight to behold, especially since we've been bombarded by CG glut the past decade or so. Sadly, the story, characters fall pretty flat. They are adequate in getting across a fairy tale feel, which was totally the goal, so in that respect the film is a success. However, it really didn't bring anything new to the table, in any way shape or form. Still, somewhat entertaining, and worth a watch, I guess.
Oh, no! My comic book pretentiousness is showing...
So, I like to experiment. Whatever I happen to be working on, I always like to explore the medium, how it's used, and how I can approach the work in a creative way.
For Kissing Chaos: 'Til I Die, one of my goals, at least visually, was to explore how comics are used to tell a story. While art styles, visual cues and varying use of layout change over the years, for the most part, the type remains the same. The fonts change, but word balloons, caption boxes are mainstays. This led me to ponder the blurry lines that's define/differentiate comics/cartoons/picture books/ prose as creative story telling mediums.
One of the most widely used terms used to define comics is sequential art. On Wikipedia comics are described as a graphic medium in which images are utilized to convey a sequential narrative. Generally, the visuals take prominence over the type.
I like to think of comics as a synergistic union of text and image. The effects produced by a story told the comic medium is hard to replicate in other forms.
That said, there are some great comics where text is completely removed out of the picture. Powerful stuff, but still considered equal to comics that use text and image in tandem.
This, I find interesting.
If we use the Opera as an example, if one were to remove one of the key elements, whether it be music or the stage performance, it would cease to be Opera. Yet, we remove text from comics, and it's still comics.
With KC:'TID, I wanted to explore what would happen if we did the opposite.
Early on in the webcomic, I would use artsy fartsy typography to present text in a visually interesting manner, all the while moving it to the forefront of this particular comic's experience. I went so far as to have almost an entire chapter be entirely comprised of type. What I did there was quite literally, remove the artwork, so we were left with the words that would normally be there, if it were a normal comic.
Though that seems a little extreme, it was basically one small change to the comic formula.
What I attempted to do with the latest episode of KC:TID, was truly strike a balance between text and image. I tried to combine prose story telling (text proper, if you will), with sequential artwork. Hopefully, the text and the visuals filled in the blanks for each other, creating a seamless storytelling experience.
Who know. I'm just fucking around. Though, personally I'm happy with this weeks results, and I think I'll keep exploring comics on this tangent.
This flick is a liberty taking adaptation of a mostly true story based on an author writing a fake autobiography about a crazy recluse billionaire.
Good stuff. There's some great acting, and the story is paced very well. (like I know what I'm talking about). I think as a writer who is constantly dealing with publishers and seeking to get books published, I could especially relate to the plight of the main character, Clifford, played by Richard Gere. Basically, in an effort to get a publishing deal with McGraw-Hill, Clifford claims to have been commissioned to write the official biography of the eccentric billionaire Howard Hughes. At the time, I believe in the 70s, Hughes was such a commodity that a bidding war, and all types of publishing politics heat up, and all of a sudden Clifford is the most famous writer in America.
This is totally a stroke of genius. I love when writers pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Isn't that the job description?
I really dug the movie. It had a nice mix of humor, satire and conspiracy theory. And the changes from the novel to the film seems to have served the movie quite well. The subplot of Cliffords extra marital affair was well written and acted.
I don't know where to start. So, So flawed, yet, so, so good? There could've been a great lesson to be learned for every shy, introverted, teenage nerd, if the movie wasn't so ridiculously fabricated from the remnants of 40 year old loser's teenage wishfulfillment. The message is good. Enjoy life. Don't let it pass you by. But the means of showing the virtue of said message is so steeped in fantasy, it might as well have been Lord of the Rings: The teenage years.
But, for all it's pre packaged, maudlin, end of highschool ruminations, prototypical insane teenage antics and let's not forget the obligatory singing while driving scene, there are some moments of pure, heartfelt teen sentiment, scattered throughout ILYBC. Like, glimpses of real people, real life. Fleeting moments, just as they are in reality. It's these glimpses at reality that really sold me on the movie. I had chills at one moment. Seriously.
That said, 90% of the movie was utter science fiction as far as teen movies and teen life go, for that matter. The kind of stuff that would only happen in a million years, and only in the least self deprecating of dreams of a hopeless romantic loser. The movie is an accurately captured dream, but a dream nonetheless.
Now, if Beth Cooper was real, if this perfect cyborg of a teenage girl was to actually exist, that is to say, the highschool cheerleader with a heart of gold, wow. And if you ever get close to her, for the love of god hold on for dear life. Cuz, I'm pretty sure that would be some history in the making. Imagine a nerdy loser proclaiming love for a girl he's never spoken to in 4 years of school, and her finding that sweet. Whaaa? I'd say that would make fighting her older, roid raged, coked up military boyfriend totally worth it.
It's kinda sad that such accurate characterizations, the occasional guininely funny moment, and some relatively true to life teen drama had to be pre-fabricated in a typical over the top teen hijink comedy package. This effectively rendered any of it's truthiness to that of a dream. Question is, is it the dream of a hapless science nerd obsessed with the cheerleader? Or is ILYBC the dream of the, lonely on the inside, beautiful cheerleader longing to be truly, and unconditionally loved?
Part the fourth in my ongoing story development blog: Being ADC.
So, previously, I was wondering if I should make the main character from the pseudo autobiographical book/comic that I'm working on Asian, to reflect my own Asianness. I was also stuggling with the fact that with both publisher and film interest in the story, I've been stressing the writing of the story, which is normally fodder for my diary/journal. That means it's usually for MY EYES ONLY.
Currently, I have yet to decide to make the dude asian or not. Haven't really thought about it, and will probably only deal with that once I do some character designs for the comic. I realize this is a decision that could impact the story a great deal, I just haven't come to terms with making this story truly about me. It's based of all true events in my life, only a mashup of my memories. It's quite literally taking one memory, replacing the people with people from another memory, and letting the story play out.
Perhaps I'm too chicken shit to just write the story of my life, as is.
Re: the stress of this project.
Let's just say I spent three weeks writing one conversation.
I don't know why, but I dig this track. Okay, I know why, but I'm not telling. ;p
In other news. I want to grow my hair long, but it's so hot during the summer, I keep shaving the sides to keep cool. So now I have a weird mohawk thing, and I'm stuck.
So, I just updated my webcomic. For longtime fans, this is somewhat of a monumental event. Not that I updated my comic on time, (okay, that might be a reason to celebrate), but the fact that the main character of the whole shebang, Angela, actually spoke in this comic. For the uninitiated, Angela has been mute for the entire series. Okay, I kinda cheat by having her thoughts narrate the first volume of Kissing Chaos, as well as at least one one-shot comic. But she has never spoken to another character. The closest she's come is via txt message and email in various instances.
I think, part of the hook of the series was the fact that she was mute, and the narrator. It definitely added to the, dreamlike ether that prevaded the series 16 page debut, and set the tone for the countless pages that followed.
Why did I have her speak? I can tell you, and you'll most likely think I'm nuts. But here goes...
The story for 'Til I Die was written a while back, when I was still working with Oni Press. All I've been doing for the webcomic is drawing out a meticulously crafted tale, four years in the making. This elevator scene with Damien and Angela was originally going to be silent, with both of them staring at each other during the course of the elevator ride. It was going to be cute.
Well, this morning, when I got out of bed, I awoke from a dream where I and this girl, who'll remain unnamed had were at a bar with a group of people. I had to leave early, and she walked me out where we said out good byes, and proceeded to have the exchange that Damien and Angela have in the elevator.
D:Angela...
D:Don't go.
A:What's that supposed to mean?
D: I don't know.
D: Just, don't go.
I dunno. I like it. LOL
18 more comics til I finish up 'Til I Die!!! can't wait!!!
Allright. Here we go with some movie slash TV reviews!!!
I saw Public Enemies over the weekend. Well, I quote/unquote saw it. I had a long and crazy day with only 2 hours of sleep max the previous night, so by the time we rolled into the theatre for the last showing of the Johnny Depp vehicle, I was pretty beat. Honestly, after the first fifteen minutes or so, I started dozing every 2 minutes. I know nothing of John Dillinger, other than what the trailers for this very movie have divulged, so about halfway through the movie I absolutely had no clue what the hell was happening.
I think I like Michael Mann, I think. He's one of those directors that's considered to be "good", but really, has he done anything truly stellar? Within his given genre, I suppose he's tops, but does that make one a great creator?
The one qualm I can actually legitimately have against this movie that I slept through, was the extensive use of digital, as opposed to film. Mann has been doing this with all his recent films. There's a distinct, seeming low budget look to his recent work like the Miami Vice movie, and Collateral, due to the digital cameras, and the appearance of using only existing light sources (I dig the lighting for this fact alone). This aesthetic is perfect for a film like Collateral, adding to the grit and grime, giving the film an almost cenema verite sort of look.
However, for a gangster period piece, a time when there were no digital cameras, the look is a fail, IMHO. Some scenes felt like we were looking at Dillinger through the lense of a papparazzis camera. This totally ruined the immersion of the film.
All this said, the movie could be fucking great. Who knows? LOL
I've been marathoning the second season of Breaking Bad the past few days. For those unfamiliar, BB follows Walter White, an aged high school science teacher who, due to cancer, has been given but months to live. Walter's been dealt a horrible hand in life, with his former business/science partner stealing his work and screwing him out of a massive fortune.
So, in order to make some money to leave his family when his number is up, Walter uses his chemistry skills to cook meth, and with the help of a former student who is now a small time drug dealer, he enters the seedy under belly of the meth trade and Mexican gangs.
The show is gut wrenching, but incredible. Even if the subject matter isn't your cup of tea, the characters are fantastic. Seeing Walter balance the life of crime and his family woes is brought to life with some exceptional acting.
So, I get fashion. I understand the need to "look the part", to look "cool". I get it. However, I do have an issue with sunglasses. Sure, with the oversizeness, they do have the uncanny ability to make the average man look like celebrity or socialite, and if that's your prerogative, then accessorize away, my friends.
For some reason, I can't get past the fact that sunglasses are primarily functional, fashion being their secondary use. And because of this fact, from my perspective, it smacks of insane doucehbagery when I see people use sunglasses in situations beyond their function. Mainly indoors. Like, seriously, there's no need for sunglasses indoors, so why wear them? Can one person be that vain? I've been with friends, and had entire conversations with them in their sunglasses, indoors. WTF?
For a brief moment, I thought, perhaps the effort exerted to remove glasses when one gets indoors and put them back on is too tasking, and not worth the time.
So, the other day, I put this theory to the test. I went into a Tim Horton's to get some coffee with my sunglasses on. I stood in line and went up to the cash and waited for the cashier to take my order. But as soon as it was my turn to talk, I couldn't do it. I HAD to take off my sunglasses to look the person in the eye. Call me old fashioned, but... whatever.
Does this make me crazy? Sunglasses indoors aren't that evil, are they?
