If you need me, send a search team.
Lots of work to do.
If you need me, send a search team.
Lots of work to do.
Taking a breather and a step back, in short, yeah, there are different issues in society that do fluctuate (like your Canada in Afghanistan example) and those which do not (like abortion). We’re faced with something that no matter what you choose (i.e. what “rule” is passed), someone is going to be unhappy. Ah, the wonderful world of politics. If I read your reply correctly, a summary would be to basically reach a compromise of some sort amongst the masses on 50-50 issues. It may not float everyone’s boat but it’s the best we got and all other alternatives are substandard in that regard. The only thing I can think of to say is that a compromise would be a “best case” scenario or an ideal. My only concern (or anybody’s concern, for that matter) would then be to ask if the “compromise” is the right decision (meaning was it truly right in the purest sense of the word or was it either not-right but something else, or absolutely wrong). And I think that’s the real issue when dealing with such sticky subjects. The old saying of, “What I think is right is not necessarily what you think is right” and vice versa, comes to mind. And that’s what I meant right from the get-go about the “fluff” of society, or the gray stuff as we’ve been calling it. Either something is white (right) or something is gray (not-right) or black (wrong), but either way, the latter two aren’t white. It’s basically the quest for truth in the end on how things really and truly are, what things are really and truly right, and what things are really and truly wrong. So then the shift/goal would be to ask how we can discover what is the right course of action and what is the wrong one. And answering that is a huge topic on its own, depending if you’re talking to a “religious” person or a “secular” person. And even if we did present a way that proved “this is right” or “this is wrong,” it’s still up to that individual to accept it or not. The only danger in a person not accepting a proven point would be them putting themselves in a position of denial and/or self-delusion on how things really are. Either something is or it isn’t. It can’t be both.
Thanks for answering the question on your decision to self-publish. I’m of the same mind in that I’d rather get my stuff out there than have it sit in a drawer or make its way through the mail from one publication to another on submission. And by getting it done on my own, it’s opened up doors for me that wouldn’t have been opened had I played the “traditional” writer’s game of writing, submitting, waiting, writing, submitting, waiting, and so forth.
This is the second time I’ve apologized to you for my tardy reply. I got your letter beginning of April but with tax season demands, looming deadlines and my recent business trip to Florida (of which I just returned from), I wasn’t able to write to you. Have you been to Florida? Aside from the business aspect of my trip, I was also there for pleasure. The major highlight was Universal Studios, namely Islands of Adventure featuring a plethora of Marvel characters and, best of all, an incredible (or should I say amazing) Spider-man ride. You might enjoy something like that if you haven’t done so already.
So, on to our discussion.
Regarding objective standards for continuity in any given manuscript, there has to be some measure of which to adhere to. What I mean is basic commonsense “rules” that apply to any story. I may have mentioned it before as an example, maybe not, but one would be your main character’s hair color should remain the same throughout the entire book unless you specifically state he/she took the time to dye their hair. Or, you can’t have one guy start off as African American (Canadian?) and then turn Caucasian halfway through. Or if you make it clear Character Joe needs to get to Hotel A to solve his crime but then have him go to 7-11 to solve it there without mentioning why 7-11 was a suitable substitute or ever mentioning Hotel A again, it’ll cause a problem. That’s the continuity stuff I was referring to. Just basic things.
On the abortion issue, in short, whatever the jurisdictional rules are regarding having an abortion, they would need to apply to all jurisdictions in the province otherwise it would open doors to the gray issues again, which could lead us right back to where we started from. Your rules in Kitchener-Centre are the most rigid I’ve heard of, and of which I side with. (Though on a personal note I’m against abortion regardless of the circumstance leading up to it; after all, adoption once the baby is born is a possibility.) To be frank, I don’t know if we’ll be able to continue this “debate” based on that because killing is killing no matter which way you slice it. I don’t think I’m trying to reclaim the moral high ground (I freely admit I’m far from perfect) in comparing abortion to murder or drawing lines between the two. It’s more just me calling a spade a spade. Whether it’s abortion or the intentional pulling of a trigger, the result is the same: loss of life. One has taken the initiative to deny a human being their existence whether just a baby or a full grown person. Who are we to decide who lives and who dies? Who or what gives us that power? My original intent in writing you was not to get into any heated debate (I don’t think we’re at that point at present) but if this abortion discussion will take us down that road, then I politely withdraw from it and we can move on to something else. So that said, in summary, yeah, the jurisdictional approach would be best provided all jurisdictions are on the same page. I like the idea that if you had sex, had an unwanted pregnancy, now it’s your problem not society’s. That I agree with because, to me, it seems far too many folks (at least here in Winnipeg) dump their issues on “society” versus taking responsibility for them themselves. And that’s one of the things it really comes down to in the end when it comes to this thing called life: taking responsibility for one’s actions. Too many people are passing the buck and pointing fingers instead of raising their hand and saying, “Yup, that was me and here’s what I’m going to do to fix it.”
The idea for the Cerebus e-volumes was just that–an idea.
Opening the book of another discussion, I know the story of how Cerebus came to be so I won’t ask you to repeat it. However, I was wondering what prompted you to self-publish it instead of trying to sell a publishing firm on the idea? I always enjoy hearing the motives behind a self-publisher’s ventures. For myself, it was the age-old thing of being unable to sell my first manuscript, which led to my originally being duped by a vanity press. But after that, I took control, started the company and went from there. Since then I’ve found the experience rewarding despite some of the more trying days. The knowledge and experience gained is something you can’t buy nor learn from reading a how-to book on the subject.
Thank you for taking the time to reply to my letters. It’s always good to find a reply from you waiting in my mailbox.
I wish you all the best, Dave. I look forward to your reply.
It’s been a long, long wait for me for this teaser. The past few weeks I’ve be regularly googling for news as to when specifically it’s coming out. When I found out it’s playing in front of The Dark Knight Rises, I knew I was in for not just one awesome Bat-movie, but also a super preview. Unfortunately, the midnight showing of Batman didn’t have any trailers and jumped right into the flick.
But here we are, two The Man of Steel teaser trailers officially released by Warner Bros. They’re both the same, but each have a different voice-over. One by Jor-El (Russell Crowe), the other by Jonathan Kent (Kevin Costner).
And they’re incredible. They show you next to nothing and are a mood-setter for sure, but, to me, they show this will be a story about Clark Kent’s journey leading up to Superman, everything from his important heritage, to his place in the world, to the discover of his power, and, based on rumors, plenty of action to boot.
Henry Cavill looks like Superman. To me, he actually looks like a more mature Tom Welling, though Tom is older than him in real life. Nice transition from Smallville to Superman for this fanboy.
I’m excited, but now I have to wait a whole year until it’s release. Actually, about 11 months as I believe it’s coming out June 20, 2013. Still.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you TWO The Man of Steel teaser trailers.
5 out of 5
It has been eight years since the Batman took the wrap for the murder of District Attorney Harvey Dent. Eight years since the last time the Dark Knight was spotted in Gotham. The streets are safe, the police are receiving praise for doing a good job–except Commissioner James Gordon knows it’s all based on a lie. About to come clean of what really happened that fateful night, Gotham is suddenly thrown into chaos at the hands of a mastermind, muscle-loaded criminal named Bane. With the city about to fall, the Batman must return to restore order to his beloved city otherwise it will fall into the hands of a sadistic genius bent on its destruction. To complicate matters, a mysterious female cat burglar is working out an agenda of her own and her endgame is tied into the legacy of Bruce Wayne.
Will Batman rise from the shadows to defeat evil once more, or has he had his day and should have stayed in the dark?
Saw the midnight screening of this gem before it hit theatres all over the world. This movie is epic on a scale that is hard to fit into a simple review, especially since I don’t want to give away any key plot points and/or spoilers.
The Dark Knight Rises picks up immediately after The Dark Knight storyline-wise, and eight years later in movie-time. Running throughout the whole flick are threads from Batman Begins and Dark Knight, plotlines that reach their ultimate climax in what I have to say is one of the best endings to a trilogy I’ve ever seen. It’s on par with, third-movie-wise, Return of the Jedi and Return of the King. All comes to a head as we’re led down a deep tunnel into who Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) truly is and what being Batman has done to him. Glimpses of his scarred psyche were hinted at in the previous two movies, but really get hit home in an emotional and powerful way throughout this final installment.
Batman himself also shines as he gets to show off his physical skill against a villain that can truly stand toe-to-toe with him, something we never saw in the previous two films. The battle with Bane (Tom Hardy) is realistic, strongly-delivered, and one where this reviewer felt the punches thrown as if it was happening to him. Yeah, it was that good of a fight.
The other Bat-flicks struggled with having two villains in the same movie. To be honest, I never thought I’d see the day where a superhero movie would have more than one villain and be just as good of a movie as if it had just one. Anne Hathaway’s Catwoman is the best rendition of the character I’ve seen on screen, both in movies and on TV. She had to play multiple roles given her identity as a thief and work her deception in such a way that a lot of the time we weren’t sure who’s side she was on. I’m an Anne Hathaway fan, but this movie easily contains her best career performance to date.
Bane was a crazy good villain, a kind of cross between Joker–intelligence-wise–and Ra’s Al Ghul–combat-wise–of the previous two movies. Especially since most of his face was covered with a mask throughout the whole flick, Tom Hardy had to act with his eyes in such a way as to deliver a performance as if he wasn’t wearing a mask at all. It was something he did in spades. Bane was one of those on-screen villains that you were afraid of because he’s that smart and that powerful and that sadistic.
Gary Oldman did an amazing job, as usual, as Jim Gordon, and Sir Michael Caine nailed it once again as Alfred. In fact, I’d be shocked if Sir Michael didn’t get an Oscar nomination for his emotional portrayal of a hard-headed vigilante’s butler.
It’d be so easy to give away several key plot points in this review, but I’m keeping it vague on purpose because you simply need to see this movie for yourself. You might think you have it figured out, but you’d be wrong, my friend.
All dangling story threads from the previous two movies are resolved, the SFX did its job but the movie didn’t rely on it, and The Dark Knight Rises had one of the best movie endings in history, to me, one equal to the incredibly-satisfying ending of The Shawshank Redemption.
Hats off to director Christopher Nolan and crew for the amazing stories and respect they delivered to Bat-fans everywhere throughout the entire Dark Knight Trilogy.
Good watch Batman. You must return to Gotham.
With The Dark Knight Rises coming out this Friday–I have my tickets for tomorrow’s midnight show!–I thought the below is fitting, and also a chance to show a couple neat takes on the Dark Knight, ones you won’t see in theatres.
Batman vs Batman vs Batman
The Batman Complex
The Dark Knight Rises: Batman the Animated Series Style