Sunday, July 30, 2017

Apparently, I know nothing about movies, Jon Snow

King Arthur. The Legend of the Sword.  Saw the trailers for this months ago and couldn't wait to see it.  A different take on the old King Arthur legend, we were told.  Fine.  I like some 'different' interpretations of old stories.

When it came out I hurried off and sat in the theater and watched ever second of it.  Loved it.  I mean . . . I really loved it. 

It had snappy dialogue.  Smart dialogue.  It had a riveting cast.  I thought Jude Law's performance as Vortigen, was absolutely marvelous.  Especially those scenes where he tortured himself killing those he loved, his wife and daughter, in order to acquire supernatural power in finding and destroying Arthur.  I mean, baby, to me, that was some set of chops when it came to acting!

And Charles Hunnam as the grown King Arthur.  He made Arthur human.  One smart, tough cookie.  A guy raised in the back streets of a mythological London who grew up to be a natural born leader.

And when he had to be mean, baby . . . he was extremely capable of knocking the teeth out of anyone.  Loved his interpretation of the King Arthur character.

So the movie had an excellent cast. It had excellent writers.  It had, I thought, a visionary directory who wanted to paint . . . and did in my opinion . . . a different look for the Arthur legend. It had academy-award winning cinematographers and academy-ward winning set designers.  It seemed to have all the tools and components for a stunning box-office success.

It flopped big time at the box-office.

Apparently it cost something like $175,000,000 to make the movie.  It earned, at the box-office, only $140,000,000,

And my question is;  How was this possible?

Critics have come forward and said the editing of the movie was terrible.  Somewhere in the middle of the film it broke down.  Where . . . I don't know.  I thought it flowed wonderfully.  Others have said the director's image of Arthur was all wrong.  It was against the traditional cannon of all the previous Arthur movies.  In other words, it didn't fit the accepted mold, or type-casting, an Arthur movie should be in.

I thought the idea for this movie was to do something different? Apparently not.

Okay, okay . . . I get it.  The critics said the movie was terrible.  And we peons should accept their more experienced, more considered, decrees as gospel.


I thought it was a very good movie.  So good I'm going out to by the DVD and watch it again.  If you didn't like it, that's fine with me.  I loved it.  And in the end, that's all that counts.

Cheers, baby!  We're human.  We're not supposed to be clones nodding in rhythm to the same drummer.  Some of us actually like bass guitars instead.

Saturday, July 15, 2017

Maurice is about to hit the scene . . .Yes, THAT Maurice

My god!  I'm actually writing another blog piece! What the Fajita??!!!  Call the Police!  Alert the news media!!  Jesus St. Marie, he's at it again!

Okay, okay . . . calm down.  Me writing another blog is right up there in importance as, say, the news headline; 'The Pope said another Mass in Latin on Sunday.  And wore glasses doing so.'

No big deal.

But it is in a way.  I've got something new coming out soon (July 24th, to be exact).  Near to the Knuckle is the publisher bringing the novella out and splashing it out in all the big namesakes where you can order it.  Actually, I'm excited about it.  I'd like to see this new creation really take off.  He's definitely a different kind of character for me.

His name is Maurice.

Maurice is . . . well . . . odd.   Nobody actually knows much about him.  Or where he came from.  Or how old he is.  Or how rich he is (although indirect evidence suggests he's loaded).  What they do know is that he is an excellent criminal lawyer.  A gifted detective.  Possibly a dabbler in the supernatural (maybe, if you believe the rumors, even a freakin' warlock).  And looks a bit like Buddha.

He loves the color of pink.  He's sartorial splendor in tailored suits fitting his somewhat slightly chubby body is impeccable.  He loves old cars, especially old American iron convertibles of the 50's and 60's (in pink, of course.)  And he sees ghosts.

In fact, he represents in court those who have recently departed.  Or those who are recently possessed.

He has two faithful employees working for him in his law firm.  One living.  One dead.

The one alive is Randall Cooke.  Randall is, shall we say, the catch-all and do-all when it comes to the daily grind of interviewing the living who are of a criminal nature and have no inclination to speak candidly.  His charm is that he's a tough as a piece of well worked leather.  As hard as a diamond drill bit.  And when he has to be, as mean as a Spartan on steroids.

The dead employee happens to be Randall's recently departed daughter, Tammy.  She's a tom-boy in her twenties.  A smart mouth.  Curious. Fearless.  She finds, interviews, and sometimes intervenes on behalf of Maurice's clients in the afterlife.

Investigating the living.  Investigating the afterlife.  With some kick ass Perry Mason-style court scenes thrown in for color.

Maurice is the beginning.  I'm hoping you're going to love these characters