Got this in my email today:

Impeachment. The 2000 Election. The California Recall. The pattern is becoming clear: there's a group of men in power who will do anything to consolidate that power, including undermining our democratic institutions. We've got to fight back. In Texas, they are fighting back. And while the world is focusing on the California mess, they are fighting alone. They need our help.

A partisan plan pushed by Karl Rove and Tom Delay will redistrict up to 7 Democrats out of Congress. Right now, 11 Democratic State Senators are hiding across state lines -- with the Texas Governor calling for their arrest -- to prevent this illegitimate plan from being strong-armed into law. They have put their reputations and careers on the line for all of us. A letter below from State Senator Rodney Ellis explains the situation in detail. Please read it, and then please help us launch a hard-hitting ad campaign to fight back in Texas. Whether you donate $5 or $5000, you will be helping to hold accountable reckless leaders who think they can get away with anything. Please contribute to this effort now:

http://moveon.org/texasads

The Texas special session that was called to gerrymander the Texas congressional districts ends early next week, and the pressure is building. These courageous leaders need to see real support now, or they won't be able to hold out.

Our numbers our great enough now to fight back effectively against these attacks on democracy. Please get even more people involved by forwarding this email to everyone you think would like to help.

Thanks,

--Zack and Wes
MoveOn.org PAC
August 20th, 2003

Below is the letter from State Senator Rodney Ellis.
___________________
August 18, 2003
Dear friends,

I am writing to you from a hotel room in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where I and 10 of my colleagues in the Texas Senate have been forced to reside for the past 20 days. If we return to our homes, families, friends, and constituents, the Governor of Texas will have us arrested.

I know, it sounds more like a banana republic than the dignified democracy on which we have long prided ourselves. We are effectively exiled from the state due to our unalterable opposition to a Republican effort -- pushed by Tom Delay and Karl Rove, and led by Texas Governor Rick Perry -- that would rewrite the map of Texas Congressional districts in order to elect at least 5 more Republicans to Congress.

You may not have heard much about the current breakdown in Texas politics. The Republican power play in California has obscured the Republican power play in Texas that has forced my colleagues and me to leave the state.

Recognizing that public pressure is the only thing that can break the current stalemate, our friends at MoveOn have offered to support our efforts by sharing this email with you. In it, you will find:

Background information on how the situation in Texas developed;
Analysis of what's at stake for Democrats and the democratic process; and
How you can help by contacting Texas politicians, signing our petition, contributing funds, and forwarding this email!
The Republican redistricting effort shatters the tradition of performing redistricting only once a decade immediately after the Census -- making redistricting a perpetual partisan process. It elevates partisan politics above minority voting rights, in contravention of the federal Voting Rights Act. It intends to decimate the Democratic party in Texas, and lock in a Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. And Republican efforts to force a vote on this issue by changing the rules of legislative procedure threaten to undermine the rule of law in Texas.

We do not take lightly our decision to leave the state. It was the only means left to us under the rules of procedure in Texas to block this injustice. We are fighting for our principles and beliefs, and we can win this fight with your support.

Sincerely,

Rodney Ellis
Texas State Senator (Houston)

Background

During the 2001 session of the Texas Legislature, the legislature was unable to pass a Congressional redistricting plan as it is required to do following the decennial Census. A three judge federal panel was forced to draw the plan. Neither Governor Rick Perry or then Attorney General John Cornyn, both Republicans, objected to the plan, which was reviewed and approved by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The 2002 Congressional elections, the first held under the new redistricting plan, resulted in a Congressional delegation from Texas consisting of 17 Democrats and 15 Republicans. However, five of the 17 Democrats prevailed only because they were able to win the support of Republican and independent voters. All statewide Republican candidates carried these five districts. Most experts agree that the current plan has 20 strong or leaning Republican districts and 12 Democratic districts.

Meanwhile, the 2001 redistricting of Texas legislative seats (which was enacted by the Republican-controlled Legislative Redistricting Board, after the legislature again gridlocked in its efforts) resulted in wide Republican majorities in both the Texas House and Texas Senate. Now Tom Delay has made it his priority to force the Republican-controlled Legislature to enact a new redistricting plan to increase the number of Republican-leaning Congressional districts. Republicans believe they can manipulate the districts to elect as many as 22 Republicans out of the 32 member Texas Congressional delegation. They achieve this by packing minority voters into as few districts as possible and breaking apart rural districts so that the impact of independent voters will be reduced and suburban Republican voters will dominate.

During the regular session of the Texas Legislature, Democratic members of the Texas House of Representatives exercised an unprecedented parliamentary move to prevent the House from passing Tom Delay's redistricting plan. While Democrats are in the minority of the House of Representatives, the state constitution requires that at least 2/3 of the House be present for the House to pass a bill. Because it was clear that the Republicans would entertain no debate and brook no compromise in their effort to rewrite the rules by which members of Congress are elected, the Democrats were forced to break the quorum to prevent the bill from passing. Because the Republican Speaker of the House and Governor called on state law enforcement officials to physically compel the Democrats to return, the lawmakers removed themselves to a Holiday Inn in Ardmore, Oklahoma -- outside the reach of state troops(1). In there effort to apprehend the Democrats, Tom Delay officially sought the help of the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation and the Department of Justice.

The House Democrats (nicknamed the "Killer D's", based on an earlier episode in Texas history in which a group of Democratic state senators called the "Killer Bees" broke the quorum in the Senate over a similarly political stalemate) succeeded in stopping Delay's redistricting plan during the regular session, returning to Texas after the legislative deadline had expired for the House to pass legislation. However, because the Texas Legislature meets in regular session only every two years, the state constitution gives the Governor the power to call a 30-day special legislative session at any time between regular sessions. Despite statewide protests from Texas citizens who oppose Tom Delay's redistricting plan, the Governor has called two special sessions(2) already this summer to attempt to force the legislature to enact a new plan.

The first called session expired in a deadlock, as 12 of 31 Texas Senators(3) opposed the plan. Under Senate rules and tradition, a 2/3 vote is required to consider any bill on the floor of the Senate, giving 11 Senators the power to block a vote(4). The Republican Governor and Lieutenant Governor then determined they would do away with the 2/3 rule, and called another special session, forcing 11 Democratic Senators to break the quorum and leave the state.(5) These Senators have spent the past 22 days in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The Governor has indicated he will continue calling special sessions until the Republican redistricting plan is enacted, despite the fact that the Republican-controlled Texas Supreme Court recently rejected the Governor's writ of mandamus filing to compel the Senators to return to the Senate. Meanwhile, eleven Democratic state senators are exiled from their state, unable to be with their families, friends, and constituents, for fear of being arrested as part of a partisan power play by Republicans. In the most recent indignity, Republican Senators voted to fine the absent Democrats up to $5,000 per day, and to revoke parking and other privileges for their staffs as long as the Senators are away.

What's at stake

At stake, on the surface, is whether Tom Delay will succeed in exploiting Republican control of the Texas Legislature to add to the Republican majority in the United States Congress. But deeper issues are also at stake.

If the Republicans succeed in redrawing the Texas Congressional lines to guarantee the election of five to seven more Republicans, it will ensure that Republicans hold the majority in the U.S. House of Representatives for the entire decade and will likely result in Tom Delay becoming Speaker of the House.(6)
The Republican advantage would be gained by removing many African American and Hispanic voters from their current Congressional districts and "packing" them into a few districts that already have Democratic majorities. The voting power of these minority voters would be dramatically diluted by the Republican plan, in contravention of the federal Voting Rights Act. If the Republicans succeed, over 1.4 million African American and Hispanic voters will be harmed. It would be the largest disenfranchisement of minority voters since the Voting Rights Act was passed.
Redistricting exists for the purpose of reapportioning voters among political districts to account for population shifts. The purpose of this reapportionment is to ensure a roughly equal number of voters in each district, to preserve the principle of "one man, one vote."(7) For this reason, redistricting has always been conducted immediately following the U.S. Census' decennial population reports. Tom Delay now proposes a new redistricting plan two years after the Census report simply because Republicans gained control over the Texas Legislature in 2002 and now have the power to enact a much more Republican-friendly plan than the one drawn by the federal courts two years ago. This is an unprecedented approach to redistricting, one that subordinates its original purpose of ensuring the principle of "one man, one vote" to the purpose of perpetual partisan politics. Redistricting, in this model, would never be a settled matter, and districts would constantly be in flux depending on the balance of political power in the Legislature.
The Texas Legislature has traditionally been defined by a spirit of bipartisanship and cooperation. This issue has polarized the legislature in a way that threatens to destroy that tradition. The Republicans have effectively exiled their Democratic counterparts in a power play that makes our state look more like a banana republic than a dignified democracy. The arbitrary decision to discard the 2/3 rule in the Senate sets a precedent that undermines that body's tradition of consensus and cooperation. The deployment of state law enforcement officials to apprehend boycotting legislators erodes the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government, and diminishes legislators' ability to represent their constituents as they see fit. The unilateral Republican effort to penalize Democratic Senators and their staffs
What is needed

The Democratic Senators currently in Albuquerque have two critical needs. The first is to generate increased public awareness of the situation. By all reason, every day the Senators are out of the state this story should get bigger. Instead, news media have gradually lost interest in the story. The California recall has dominated the attention of the national media, and the Texas media has largely lost interest in the story -- out of sight, out of mind. Without public attention to this story, the Republicans have all the leverage -- if it does not cost them politically, it costs them nothing(8) to continue calling special sessions until the Texas 11 are forced to come home.

The second critical need is funding. The cost of hotels, meeting rooms, staff support, and public relations efforts is mounting. In addition, the Senators must defend themselves legally against Republican efforts to compel their return, while also filing legal claims against the Republican power play. The Senators are actively raising money for the Texas Senate Democratic Caucus Fund to offset these costs and prepare themselves for a stay of indefinite duration in Albuquerque.

Notes

1. A recent Department of Justice investigation chronicled Republican state officials' illegal attempts to use federal resources -- including anti-terrorism resources from the Department of Homeland Security -- to compel the Democratic lawmakers' return. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51520-2003Aug12.html for a news report on the Justice Department investigation, or http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/03-08a/final.pdf for a copy of the complete Justice Department report.
2. At a cost to taxpayers of over $1.5 million per session.
3. House Republicans passed a redistricting bill in the special session despite an outpouring of public opposition in hearings across the state. All 12 Democratic state senators opposed the plan, along with Republican state senator (and former Lieutenant Governor) Bill Ratliff.
4. The "2/3 rule" requires the Senate to reach broader consensus on difficult issues than a simple majority vote. It is a combination of official Senate rules and tradition. The rules of the Senate require a 2/3 vote to suspend the "regular order of business" to consider a bill that is not the first bill on the Senate calendar. By tradition, the Senate has always placed a "blocker bill" at the top of the Senate calendar, so that every bill requires a suspension of the regular order of business to be considered. The process requires compromise and consensus to achieve a 2/3 majority on each bill. One Texas insider has said that the 2/3 rule is "what separates us from animals."
5. In fact, the Governor and Lt. Governor attempted to "surprise" the Senators by calling the second special one day early and "trap" them in the Senate Chamber. The Senators were able to escape the Capitol with literally minutes to spare.
6. Republican party activist Grover Norquist, head of the Washington D.C.-based Americans for Tax Reform, was quoted as follows in the August 17 Fort Worth Star Telegram: "Republicans will hold the House for the next decade through 2012 if Texas redistricts…It depresses the hell out of the Democrats and makes it doubly impossible to take the House and probably depresses their fund raising…Anything that helps strengthen the Republican leadership helps DeLay become speaker someday if he wants it."
7. Established in the landmark case Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962)
8. Notwithstanding the millions of dollars it is costing taxpayers.

Click on this link and read it.

Made me smile.

This is just odd...: "BATMAN has done a flit from Gotham City. Last night police in Oxford were hunting the Caped Crusader after he knocked a man unconscious in the street.
A police spokeswoman, familiar with the exploits of Gotham City's Dark Knight, said: 'It was really a case of 'Kapow!''"

Apparently, my guess about the Tremors season finale being the series finale was correct... I'd feel sad, if it had been a better series. Still, it was fun...
Stampede Entertainment - News Roundup: "Tremors The Series will not return to SciFi but Tremors 4 will be here Christmas 2003. (8/8/03)
To our loyal Tremors Fans -- GOOD NEWS/BAD NEWS. Well, fans, the numbers are in and Tremors: The Series didn't quite hit the demographics and
market share SciFi was looking for (it was SO close!). We're sorry to report that the rumors are true, the show will not be back for a second season.
But the Good News is that Tremors 4 will be coming soon. It's all new, all different, and Universal is extremely happy with it (as are we at Stampede, of course). They like it so much they moved its release to near Christmas, so you all know what's going to be in your stocking this year. "

Blackout's Box LIVE! is on TONIGHT!

And they said it wasn't an act of terrorism...

Victorian Sex Cry Generator

Which Lord of the Rings Character am I?

Just more useless crap on a day I don't feel like writing much...

The Blackout
Check out the Great East Coast Blackout, live, as it happens!

Check out artbomb.net for a preview of a new historical crime graphic novel by two of my favorite creators. I'm really looking forward to this one, so please, check it out.

Tonight , the Sci-Fi Channel is showing what they're billing as the Season Finale ofTremors, a show which doesn't seem to have set the world afire, ratings-wise. Me, I kinda liked it. Wasn't a great show, but in these days of every show being a copy of every other show, it was kind of nice to see something that wasn't being duplicated anywhere else. Not brilliant television, but easily the best "people getting et by giant underground monsters" series currently out there.

Neil Gaiman: "It occurred to me today that the biggest problem with the way the future is visually presented is it's either hi tech or low tech; whereas most things are a sort of hodgepodge. This is the kind of revelation that occurs to one when staring at an iPod that only works properly when the headphones are attached by a rubber band to a piece of plastic cutlery, which pulls the connector into the right position...."

I was at the Suncoast Casino buffet for lunch, and on my way back to my table, I had to push past a big (read: fat) guy waiting at the dessert counter eating a plate of fried shrimp he was holding. While he was standing at the dessert counter waiting to be served his dessert. So, two thoughts: One: They have tables for that; get out of my way. Two: Take a break, man! Geez!

Got this in my email today:

Why did the chicken cross the road to Baghdad?

GEORGE W. BUSH "We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road or not. The chicken is either with us or it is against us. There is no middle ground here."

COLIN POWELL "Now at the left of the screen, you clearly see the satellite image of the chicken crossing the road."

HANS BLIX "We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we have not yet been allowed access to the other side of the road."

SADDAM HUSSEIN "This was an unprovoked act of rebellion and we were quite justified in dropping 50 tons of nerve gas on it."

BILL CLINTON I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What do you mean by chicken? Could you define chicken, please?

RUSH LIMBAUGH "I don't know why the chicken crossed the road, but I'll bet it was getting a government grant to cross the road, and I'll bet someone out there is already forming a support group to help chickens with crossing-the-road syndrome. Can you believe this? How much more of this can real Americans take?

JERRY FALWELL Because the chicken was gay! Isn't it obvious? Can't you see the plain truth in front of your face? The chicken was going to the "other side." That's why they call it the "other side." The liberal media hides that fact from you.

ERNEST HEMINGWAY To die. In the rain. Alone.

DR. SEUSS Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes, the chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed, I've not been told!

COLONEL SANDERS I missed one?

MARIA MONTESSORI The chicken was responding to a directive from its inner psychic being which manifested itself in this spontaneous, independent action. What is marvelous is that it crossed the road again and again, with no prodding or urging from anyone but its own inner voice. ("Help me to cross the road by myself!")

Yahoo! News - Vatican Slams Moves to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

Which would have some meaning and carry some weight in a universe where the world was ruled by, you know, the Pope...

Damn. Just read an email from Warren Ellis where he says that Spooks chokes in its second season. Which is a shame, because I've really been enjoying the first season.

On the other hand, Mr Ellis and I have disagreed on what makes for enjoyable TV many times in the past, so I'm not really going to worry about it...

USA NETWORK | The Foreigner

Steven Segal's new action movie premiering as a USA Original? About damn time he found his own level...

Yahoo! News - Bush Sees New Al Qaeda Threat, Democrats Critical

"Oh, geez, has my approval rating dipped a precipitous amount? Did I just come out in public against gays? Are even the dullest members of the public starting to wonder about this whole 'weapons of mass destruction' thing, and why so many American soldiers continue to die in a war I declared over months ago? Oh... I... Oh... shit... I... Oh, look over there! Terrorists! Really!"

Yahoo! News - Bush Rejects Calls to Legalize Gay Marriage
That's okay. I reject expensive, unjustified, unpopular, poorly-planned wars. I reject politicians who lie to the American people. I reject legislation designed to rape and pillage our natural resources in the name of making the rich industrial cronies of Our President richer at the expense of our children's futures. I reject the notion of tax cuts for the rich while schools are digging under the couch cushions for spare change to buy books for their students. And I reject a president who insists on putting his own religious beliefs over the basic freedoms from religious oppression that this country was founded on.

Ordinarily, I pretty much reject the whole Judeo-Christian mythos thing, because dickweeds like this fucking hand puppet believe in it so ferverently, they give it a bad name. But sometimes, I really, really hope that it turns out that there is one big God, one Heaven, and one Hell, and that their God is really, really pissed that all these self-righteous, "Oh, I completely support everyone's freedom to believe whatever they want, as long as it's my way!" mother fuckers have taken Her word and gotten it completely wrong. And I hope there really is a Hell, so that all these folks can find themselves slow-roasting over an eternal barbecue pit with roasting spits shoved up their arses.

I Love My Husband's Journal

Who says romance is dead?

your librarian hates you

Just in case you were wondering...

Weapons of Mass Redaction: It's nice when the New York Times writes my blog entries for me...

Okay, not saying that Lara Croft: Tomb Raider: Cradle of Life is a great movie, or even a good one, but damn, did I enjoy it. I was in a lousy mood when I left the house to go see it, but by the time I exited the theater, I had pretty much forgotten all about the whole "brand new email address from Cox Communications Complete With Fifty Brand-New Pieces of Spam Sent to An Address I've Never Given Out Ever" thing. And it was way better than the first Tomb Raider movie.

The cardinal sin most of these movies commit is way too much plot, way too many complications heaped on top of complications, just to prove that they're so much more sophisticated than the typical adventure movie or their video game source material. The result? A frelling mess. Look at the Street Fighter movie, which takes place in a James Bond villain's headquarters and is almost totally devoid of street fighting. Or Mortal Kombat, devoted to way too many details about some universe-saving something-or-other and nowhere near enough mortal combat. Sometimes, simplicity and clarity of plot is better. I mean, I can tell you what the goals were in each of the three Indiana Jones movies, but I can't for the life of me remember what happened in the first Tomb Raider flick.

Fortunately, this sequel has learned from the first's mistakes. The plot is straightforward and elegant. The complications arise organically and naturally, rather than being grafted on. We don't get sequences shoehorned in because they come from the games, or because they look cool. The movie doesn't stop dead for ten minutes while Basil Exposition fills us in on information that should have been emerging from the story as it went along. The movie doesn't stop dead to shoehorn in romantic scenes just because there's a male and female lead. (There's a romantic subplot, but it's kept confined to its proper place within the overall story, instead of feeling like it's there to prove that Lara Croft isn't a lesbian.)

Best of all, Angelina Jolie is great. This is the second movie I can think of this summer featuring an Oscar winner playing an action heroine (the first being Halle Berry in X-Men 2), and she proves that she's really trying. It's the opposite of Willem Dafoe in Spider-Man playing Tommy Lee Jones in Batman Forever playing Jack Nicholson in Batman, apparently believing that he doesn't have to really try since he's in a comic book movie. Jolie sells Lara Croft as a real, full-blooded, three-dimensional human being, and that goes a long way to making the movie work for me.

It should be obvious, from this and the other movies I've written about this summer, that this is a season of escapism for me, and I'm not going to make excuses for that. True-life thought-provoking works of drama that illuminate the human condition have their place, but that place isn't on my cinematic agenda right now. The big, action-packed explodey, special-effectsy, stunt-filled spectacles do, and that's what I'm interested in seeing. The quiet, human dramas... that's for television, for shows like Red Cap and Spooks, and for the books I read. Cradle of Life managed to completely deliver exactly what I asked of it, and better than I had expected. And, considering that this week's other choices included surer bets like Pirates of the Caribbean, Seabiscuit, and Spy Kids 3-D, that's a good thing.

Lacking the energy to write something this morning, I instead post this bit of email wackiness...

Time Killers at WalMart

Fifteen Things to do at WalMart while your spouse/shopping partner is taking their sweet time:

1. Get 24 boxes of condoms & randomly put them in peoples carts when they aren't looking.

2. Set all the alarm clocks in Housewares to go off at 5 minute
intervals.

3. Make a trail of tomato juice on the floor leading to the restrooms.

4. Walk up to an employee and tell him/her in an official tone, "Code 3 in housewares"...and see what happens.

5. Go to the Service Desk and ask to put a bag of M&M's on layaway.

6. Move a 'CAUTION - WET FLOOR' sign to a carpeted area.

7. Set up a tent in the camping department and tell other shoppers
you'll invite them in if they bring pillows from the bedding department.

8. When a clerk asks if they can help you, begin to cry and ask 'Why can't you people just leave me alone?

9. Look right into the security camera, use it as a mirror and pick your nose.

10. While handling guns in the hunting department, ask the clerk if he knows where the anti-depressants are.

11. Dart around the store suspiciously while loudly humming the theme from 'Mission Impossible.'

12. In the auto department, practice your "Madonna look" using different size funnels.

13. Hide in a clothing rack and when people browse through, say "PICK ME! PICK ME!"

14. When an announcement comes over the loud speaker, assume the fetal position and scream "NO! NO! It's those voices again!!!"

And last but not least:

15. Go into a fitting room, shut the door and wait a while and then yell loudly "Hey! You're out of toilet paper in here!!"

Two stories about librarians as action figures... I should probably be irritated at yet another reinforcement of the traditional stereotype, but, to be honest, I can't really be arsed. I do feel sort of sorry for the woman they modeled the thing on, however. I mean, they've pretty much said to her, "We want someone who's as close to the traditional--if misguided--image of the mousy old woman with her hair in a bun librarian that we can find, and you're it, baby!"

Much more interested in the upcoming TNT TV-movie, The Librarian, from Stargate/Independence Day/American Godzilla producer Dean Devlin. I'm sure it'll be about as accurate a depiction of librarianship as his film Stargate was a depiction of Egyptology and linguistics. But if my profession is going to be misrepresented, I'd rather it be as a two-fisted adventurer than an old biddy with her hair in a bun.

Other stuff, briefly: I recommend fans of Buffy and Angel check out Peter David's new comic, Fallen Angel. It's clearly influenced by those shows, without being overly derivative. The first issue is now on sale, and it's well-written, well-drawn, and a good debut for what looks to be a dark, possibly supernatural thriller series.

New must-see TV for me: Red Cap on BBC America. It's about British MPs on a base in Germany. Sort of the UK version of JAG, only darker, harder edged, and better. (And I like JAG.) Also highly recommend a "new" series on A&E, starting this week: MI-5, about British counterterrorist operatives. I just received the British DVDs of the first season (called Spooks in the UK; I hadn't realized A&E was getting the show when I ordered the set, but it's got all sorts of extras that make it worthwhile), and the first two episodes were great. Check it out.

Also enjoyable, though nowhere near as compelling, was the premiere of My Hero on BBC America last night. A romantic comedy about an ordinary woman and the superhero from another planet who falls for her, this one was nothing new. I suppose Red Cap and Spooks aren't really anything new, either, but they're presented with a bit of style and flash. This could have been made any time between 1970 and 2000, and... well, it's Mork and bloody Mindy, really. But the leads are relatively charming, and it's that point in the summer where there's nothing else on anyway. And it's only a half hour.

Okay, my biggest complaint about the movie The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen isn't that it takes huge liberties with a comic that I really, really enjoy. I had expected that, and to be honest, after just a few minutes into the movie, I had pretty much stopped comparing the two and accepted this as something completely separate. In fact, when the movie suddenly veered back to the comic and revealed the surprise identity of the master villain, I was actually caught off guard, because I hadn't expected them to suddenly become faithful to the source material. No, the big problem is that it's just ordinary.

It's pretty sad when you've got a movie featuring Allan Quartermain, Mina Harker from Dracula, Captain Nemo, Dorian Gray, Tom Sawyer, the Invisible Man, and Doctor Jeckyll/Mr Hyde, and come away feeling like it could have starred any six action heroes. But that's exactly what happens here. Sean Connery is just fine playing yet another bad-arsed aging, jaded, world-weary tough guy called back into the fray for one last battle, forced to grudgingly help/work with a bunch of younger partners... you know, just like EVERY OTHER FUCKING MOVIE HE'S BEEN IN FOR THE LAST FIFTEEN YEARS. He plays the part just fine, but at this point, these roles should be an autopilot setting for him. Naseeruddin Shah manages to bring a certain amount of heroism and dignity to the role of Captain Nemo, but every review I've read just talks about his beard. Jason Flemyng, as Dorian Gray, appears to be channeling Johnny Depp.

Ultimately, how pedestrian and unimaginative the movie is feels summed up in the lack of use of the Invisible Man. The most obviously gimmicky character in the whole ensemble, and the movie gives him nothing to do. Instead, we get car chases, explosions, gunfights... Oh, there's a CGI fight between Mr Hyde and another big transformed fighty guy, but that's about it. It just feels like this movie fails to ignite. It's not horrible, and I didn't feel like I'd completely wasted my time and money... but for a movie like this, with the source material being so wonderfully thought out, "not horrible" just isn't good enough.

Oh my God, oh my God, oh my God!

Total Doctor Who fanboy/geek excitement going on, but that's okay. Something has to make me smile, right? More later.

I think I now have a theme to furnish my new home, when I eventually buy one.

I literally just finished Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and I feel like I've run a freaking marathon. Two good things I can now say: I enjoyed it, and I can stop yelling at people to shut up around me whenever they start talking about it. I know some people have told me they were disappointed with it (and then I told them to shut up, because I didn't want to hear anything that might influence my own response) and I can probably guess their reasons for their disappointment. Me, it was pretty much the book I was expecting, although the actual events and details surprised me, so I was pleased. And if the next one takes another three years? Fine. I've got other stuff to read until then.

Saw Terminator 3 the other day. I hear it's getting lousy reviews, although the two I've read seemed to appreciate it for what it is. Again, I enjoyed it. Well-directed and well-acted, with a plot that actually caught me by surprise in places. Claire Danes, as the female lead, wasn't particularly special, showing little of the quirky style she displayed in My So-Called Life or Romeo + Juliet. Nick Stahl made an okay hero, but both were saddled with lines so stiff, they could have been written by Terminator creator James Cameron. But newcomer Kristanna Loken was every bit as impressive as the evil female T-X as Robert Patrick was in Terminator 2. And Arnold Schwarzenegger? It's like he's hardly aged a day since the original movie.

Interestingly, the movie feels more like the low-budget original film than the big-budget sequel. So I guess that makes it an art-house movie, like The Hulk is an art-house movie. I don't know; it was a nice, big, noisy, explodey action movie very much in the spirit of the original movies. I thought it was a worthwhile sequel, and I'm still a fan of Jonathan Mostow as a director.

So, it's official: according to the highest court in the land, it's no longer okay to look at porn at the library.

Okay, I hear America saying, so what's the big problem? Pornography isn't readily available at bookstores or video stores or on library shelves. How is insisting that libraries install filters on public-access computers to block pornography any different?

Just so we're clear: I'm pro-good porn, anti-bad porn, and pretty much anti-any creepy dude that's so desperate for his/her porn fix that s/he needs to go to a public library to view it. And if that porn fixation leads to them feeling comfortable enough to then lead a kid into a bathroom somewhere and act out their wildest fantasies... well, I'm thoroughly anti that as well. I also don't believe that anyone has a basic right to view porn at the library. Most public libraries have their public access computers out in the open and, well, public. Not everyone wants to look at porn, and quite a few people find it offensive, even if they don't want to abridge an individual's right to choose to view it in the privacy of their own home. If we're supposed to support the right of someone to look at hot nekkid Asian chicks performing fellatio on '66 Mustang engine blocks, then we also need to support the rights of the folks who don't want to have to catch a glimpse of that while sitting next to it trying to register for community college classes online, or send email to their grandkids.

I'm also not entirely comfortable with the semi-official library stance that this is a censorship issue. The thing is, we libraries practice a similar form of censorship all the time. For example, our library has a fairly large selection of videos, which grows larger every week. However, it doesn't include a great deal of pornography. We don't get Hustler Magazine, either. We make excuses for exclusion (don't have the budget, don't have the space, not enough demand, blah, blah, blah) but we're still not catering to anyone's freedom to read/view whatever porn they want.

The thing is, we're not talking about pornographic videos or books or magazines here. We're not talking about a self-contained physical unit that a library can choose to include or exclude from its collection. We're talking about the Internet, and that's another beast entirely. (Actually, to be pedantic, which is de rigeur when talking about all things computerized, we're talking about the World Wide Web, which is yet another beast, but let's not get too bogged down in details.) The Web is pretty much an all-or-nothing deal. We (libraries) can either choose to provide access to it, or not. So much information is available electronically through the Internet and the Web, it has become impossible for libraries to ignore it. But once you decide to accept the Web, you have to accept all of it. That means the useful, authoritative information sources, the crappy Hello Kitty and B2K Geocities pages made by eight-year olds, the nerdy Doctor Who message board sites, the pointless rambling blogs by childrens librarians who should be reading Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, shopping sites, and porn. You can't pick and choose which parts you want, because it's all interconnected, which is why it's called the World Wide freaking Web in the first place.

So the thing about this Supreme Court decision is it's just stupid and ignorant. It treats the Web as something that can somehow be partitioned up, and completely ignores reality. It treats filtering software as something that works, that effectively blocks all offensive sites and doesn't block anything else. And that simply isn't so. Software gets outdated. Web developers will come up with new and interesting ways to defeat the blocking. And the software will continue to block sites that have nothing to do with pornography. (In the children's library, our filter routinely blocks students from accessing their school sites. Go figure.) And it doesn't take a lot of research to support this.

And yet, the highest court in the land chooses to behave as if it makes sense to require libraries to install blocking software. Instead of doing the research and acknowledging that this doesn't solve the intended problem, and in fact creates others, and consequently proving that the Court possesses some understanding of technology, they choose this path. This namby-pamby decision that shows that they side with religious conservative whiners who can be easily placated by non-solutions that they can cram down other people's throats rather than taking a greater view of the whole situation. And that's why this whole thing bugs me. Not because of what it means to libraries, and not because I'm shocked at yet another whittling away at American freedom. (I'm becoming pretty numb at this point, actually. But only in the sense that it means I can fight harder if I can't feel the pain.) It's just another sign that our decision-makers don't care about looking at the big picture and making what's ultimately an informed decision. I don't have to agree with everything our government does, but that's okay, as long as they can show real, logical reasons for what they've done. Once again, they've failed to meet that test in my eyes.

I didn't have a whole lot to say today. Working on an entry raving about the new Special Edition DVD of Disney's The Love Bug, but mostly, I feel like I should be reading the new Harry Potter book. (It's 900 pages long, and I know two people who have already finished it, thus offering further proof that I don't have enough time to do all the things I want to do.)

But there are some links that were meant to be shared...

To follow up on my Hulk comments from yesterday: Last night at Borders, I heard some people talking about it, referring to it as an "art-house" movie. This morning, I read a review from the New York Post describing it as "artsy." What, just because it's not balls-to-the-walls action? I mean, come on, we're not talking Chien Andalou here. This isn't the Babette's Feast of Hulk movies, for God's sake. Is this what we've come to? Is any movie that isn't just plain stupid now an "art-house picture?" You can't have a movie that appeals to mainstream audiences that isn't dumb as a bag of hammers?

So it's about 12:30 in the morning, and I'm waiting at Borders for my copy of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. I got here at about ten to midnight, and I'm number 232 in line. The place is packed with kids giddy with enthusiasm, some wearing costumes, makeup, or cardboard Harry Potter glasses. Some cute college girls in witch outfits. And there are some twenty-something guys making farting noises, but I guess that's to be expected.

And then there's the parents. For the most part, they seem pretty well-behaved. But I swear, I just heard someone say, "They better hurry up!" Like they're willing to haul themselves out to Borders at midnight for the book, but that's it. If they have to wait any longer than that--at a store which usually closes at eleven--it's a huge inconvenience to them. Please.

(Written on my palmtop.)

As might be expected from the complete comics/film nerd, I saw The Hulk today, opening day. I saw it at 11:00 in the morning, in a mostly empty theater, with a bunch of families with large numbers of kids. When I saw Daredevil, my quickie, high-concept review was that it was Spider-Man for grownups. In that spirit, The Hulk is The Hulk for grown-ups. Which makes it pretty unfortunate that there were so many kids in the theater, because this is by no means a big super-hero action movie in the Spider-Man vein. Which is fine, because the Hulk isn't that kind of character.

The thing about the Hulk (the character) is that he isn't some guy who develops super powers and goes out to fight crime. He's this guy who can't stop himself from turning into this uncontrolable creature of pure primal emotion, mostly anger and rage. Something happens to Bruce Banner, he turns into the Hulk, havoc is wreaked because the Hulk isn't a rational being--which is the whole point--Banner eventually regains control, and he tries to go on with his life. It's a people story, and Ang Lee's movie is a people movie. It's a two and a half hour long movie about people talking and relationships, and periodically one of them turns into this big green guy who goes on a crazed rampage, smashing up buildings and helicopters and tanks and so forth. And the movie really works. It's a good Hulk story, and it's a really bad movie to bring kids to if they're expecting wall to wall Hulk action. (Trust me; I was witness to this.)

Word on the 'net, which, as what regular readers I have will know I give very little credence to, is that Universal Studios were upset that this film is, well, what it is, and not, say, Spider-Man. And I suppose they should be upset, because this isn't necessarily a big, crowd-pleasing actioner that'll bring in huge audiences and guarantee multiple sequels. I could have told them this going in, and I don't work for Hollywood. You can make Spider-Man movie after Spider-Man movie, because he's a crime fighter. In the first movie, he fights the Green Goblin. In the next one, he fights someone else. In the third, he fights someone else again. Same with Daredevil, same with Fantastic Four, same with Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, and so forth. The Hulk? There's one big movie-sized story for him, and that's his origin. He's not a big action movie franchise character, and assuming that he is, just because he has his own Marvel comic book like the others is just narrow-minded and stupid. And if that's the sort of reasoning Universal went in with, well, they deserve whatever disappointment they get.

So, enough of the studio politics stuff out of the way, and on to what I thought about the actual movie: I really enjoyed it. And not just because Jennifer Connelly is in it, although that's usually enough for me. No, this movie impresses because it feels like an honest effort to make a real movie, with a real story about real characters. It has one or two over-the-top moments, mostly courtesy of Mr. Nick Nolte, but for the most part, it's a very human film. It could, arguably, be trimmed in places, but compared to the rushed feel of Daredevil's final act, I think I'd rather have too much than too little. Comics purists will, no doubt, be upset with the changes to the Hulk's origin, but then, complaining about that stuff in public probably doesn't make them any less likely to get laid, so I guess there's no harm done. Within the context of this story, it all works.

While this is the least super-heroic of the three recent big Marvel movies, it's the one most consciously designed to look like a comic book. Many scenes play out with multiple images appearing together on the screen, a la TV's 24, and--according to interviews with Lee--is meant to resemble comic book panels on a page. For the most part, the effect works, creating some effective and distinctive transitions, unlike what we normally see in a major motion picture. Every now and then, it doesn't quite work--at one point, we see the same character from two different angles, something not normally seen in a comic--and the technique draws attention to itself. Still, I give Ang Lee credit for attempting something that worked most of the time rather than making a movie that looks just like every other movie.

And then there's the CGI Hulk... He works. Obviously, you have to go in understanding that you're seeing a movie called Hulk, and it's about this big, green guy. If you aren't prepared to accept the green guy, if you need the movie to completely convince you, if you aren't prepared to at least meet them part of the way... well, you still might be surprised, because he's pretty effective. Especially when we see his expressions in close-up. Considering he could have been, well, Shrek, this is impressive.

In other news... Well, there isn't much other news. Looking forward to the release of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix tonight at midnight at my local Borders. And Tuesday, Michelle Branch's new CD comes out. I suppose I'm supposed to be all hip and independent and looking down on populist entertainment like the Harry Potter novels, pop artists like Michelle Branch, and even movies like Hulk. But that's okay; I'm planning on watching episodes of Spaced this weekend, and I'm looking forward to not one, but two new Paul Magrs novels this summer. So there. Still won't be shaken on the whole pop music thing, though...

The other week, I was at Wal-Mart, helping a friend buy a car battery. (By "help," I mean I gave him a lift; obviously, he couldn't drive himself, since he needed a new car battery.) While waiting for him to pay, my eyes were drawn to a combination corn-dog/Twinkie maker. Curious, I investigated further. Apparently, it isn't a thing with which you make your own twinkie cakes. (You know, the delicious golden sponge cake gently cradling a tasty cream filling.) No, it's a device for deep-frying corn dogs and twinkies on sticks. Because, it seems, this is a new snack craze sweeping parts of the nation that aren't Las Vegas: the deep-fried Twinkie.

And I have to wonder: who comes up with this stuff? I mean, it's not like the Twinkie was at the forefront of the health food charge to begin with, but who suddenly thinks, "Hey, you know this concoction of sugar and chemicals that's so bad for me but tastes so good? I wonder if there's any way I could possibly make it any less healthy for me... I know! I'll dip it in batter and fry it up in a vat of hot grease!" Brilliant! I mean, you could eat a hamburger and a Twinkie, but that's two steps where only one is needed. (I now have a vision of the meat-filled twinkie.)

And, incredibly, it doesn't stop with the Twinkie. No, according to a CNN article from last year, the deep-fried Twinkie is actually a further development from the deep-fried chocolate bar. Because, you know, it's almost like those fancy desserts you see in fancy restaurants, all prepared and cooked from ingredients and stuff, but way easier, you know?

This being the last day of my vacation, I don't plan on spending a whole lot of time writing. However, there's this comic book coming out called Faction Paradox that I'm really looking forward to, and you can expect to hear me pushing it in the very near future. In the meantime, you can read the first five pages of the first issue online here, as well as some general information about the series.

Irony, thy name is the web... I just checked this journal's web page, and I see that the ad at the top, the one that keeps me from having to pay for this service, is for a commemorative Iraqi Freedom Coin...

Rather than write up something on the President's tax cut plan, pointing out how cutting taxes in economic hard times is about as courageous as giving out cotton candy at a circus (thank you, Doonesbury, for writing my jokes for me) Im just going to steal the piece from somewhere else. Since that was all going on during my "too tired to write" phase, I never commented on the tax cut issue here in this journal, but I did phone my senators in Washington and let them know that I opposed the tax cuts. I haven't checked the record to see how they actually voted, but the end result can definitely be described as a qualified victory, I think. Here's an excerpt from an article in the Wall Street Journal from Thursday, May 22:

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows the
high-profile, postwar
debate on tax policy in recent weeks has moved public
opinion -- away
from the White House position. Not only have Americans
drifted away
from Mr. Bush's cherished repeal of taxes on stock
dividends, but
majorities also assign tax cuts a lower priority than
other measures
to spur the economy and spending on health-care
benefits.

"The tax cuts are clearly not viewed as the answer" to a
weak economy,
says Republican pollster Robert Teeter, who conducts the
Journal/NBC
poll with his Democratic counterpart Peter Hart. The
president has
"banked everything on selling the tax cut, but he hasn't
sold it," Mr.
Hart adds.

...

Indeed, the survey demonstrates that Mr. Bush has made
little headway
in cross-country advocacy of his approach to spurring a
sluggish
economy. Fully 57% of respondents name strengthening the
economy as a
priority for the White House and Congress, exceeding the
36% who cite
fighting terrorism. Yet an even more robust 64% say
there are better
ways to strengthen the economy than by cutting taxes;
just 29% say tax
cuts are the best solution.

On specific tax measures, a 48% plurality says
eliminating stock-
dividend taxes wouldn't be effective in stimulating
economic growth,
outpacing the 40% who say it would. That is a retreat
from the showing
Mr. Bush's centerpiece proposal received in January,
when Americans
split at 44% on the matter.

...

Some 53% of Americans say Mr. Bush's 2001 tax cut has
had no real
effect on U.S. economic performance, while an additional
15% say it has
hurt; only 25% say it has helped the economy. On Mr.
Bush's general
approach to economic policy, more than six in 10 say it
shortchanges
job creation in favor of tax cuts, benefits the wealthy
more than
average people and will increase the federal-budget
deficit. By a
narrower 54% to 43% margin, Americans say the president
has been too
preoccupied with the war on terrorism and hasn't spent
enough time on
economic matters.

[End of Wall Street Journal excerpt]

Back from Disneyland, I was still in a Disney mood last night. So I watched the DVD of The Country Bears, the recent movie based on the (former) Disneyland attraction, Country Bear Jamboree. The movie is about a young bear who has been adopted by a human family, but realizes that he is different. Determined to find his place in the world, he sets off to Country Bear Hall, the performance home of his idols, the Country Bears, one-time greatest country rock band in the world. When he learns that an evil banker (played by always-reliable Christopher Walken) plans to tear the Hall down, he hatches a plot to reunite the band and raise the money to save the Hall. Of such simple stories greatness is born.

Told in a straightforward manner, it is very much in keeping with the tone and feel of the original attraction. If memory serves, it didn't do particularly well at the box office, and critics didn't particularly like it. Me, I thought it was a lot of fun. It's a movie for kids about a rock band starring a bunch of bears. It's entertaining, the music is good, and the bears (done by Jim Henson's Creature Shop) are very nice. This bodes well, I think, for future films based on other Disney park attractions, like the upcoming Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl and The Haunted Mansion.

First things first: Happy birthday to me!

Second: Saw The Matrix Reloaded this morning. I enjoyed it, but in that way you have to enjoy the middle part of a story. I watched the first movie yesterday, so I was pretty much up to speed, memory-wise, on what had happened previously, and this feels like a pretty good continuation. However, I'm going to reserve final judgment until I see the third part, because otherwise, I'm judging an incomplete work.

I will say this, for anyone who hasn't seen it yet: be sure to stay all the way through the end credits.

Three months later, and I'm back. It's been a tough couple of months, both personally and for the world, and they've both affected my ability to write blog entries on a regular basis. The personal stuff is, well, personal, so I won't be talking about it much here. As for the rest of the world.... Over the last few months, I've been collecting a whole bunch of links to news stories about the "war" in Iraq, the steady erosion of personal freedom in the US, and the concurrent erosion of humanity's soul as we (apparently) just sit back and allow this to happen. I would read some news item which would inflame my righteous fury, and I'd record the link and prepare to write a blog entry, when I'd come across another one. And another, and another and another. Pretty soon, I started feeling completely wore down and depressed, and I didn't want to write about any of it because I didn't want to be dragged down any further. I suppose I could have written about comics or TV or movies or whatever, but that seemed trivial and frivolous in face of what our government was doing to our country. So I didn't write about that stuff, either. Plus, like I said, life intervened, and ultimately, it was just easier to set the blog aside for a while.

Today, though, I discovered that my pal Jim has me listed as a blog of note (or whatever) on his own blog site, so I feel sufficiently motivated to get back to work. You know, just in case anybody decides to come check me out from his site. So, without further ado, here's the links I've been saving the past few months...

Sony to cash in on Iraq with "shock and awe" game: This one was pretty irritating when I first read it. The other day, when I heard a car dealership urging car buyers to come in to be "shocked and awed" by their low prices, it all came back. Bad enough we invaded, fought the war, killed uncounded--by us--numbers of civilians based on a flimsy tissue of lies and fabrications that nobody really believed in the first place, and nobody is commenting on now that they've completely turned out to be false. But could we possibly wait, I don't know, an eternity before commercializing it? This is the world in which we live.

Library Public Policy Manual 2004: Like a lot of things in life, we laugh because it's funny and we laugh because it's true. Or because it all too possibly could be. This is the world in which we live.

US soldiers in Iraq asked to pray for Bush: Because, you know, he's in such a tough, difficult place that he needs the hopes and prayers of the people he sent in to be shot at by Iraqi troops based on a flimsy tissue of lies and fabrications that nobody really believed in the first place, and nobody is commenting on now that they've completely turned out to be false. Yeah, they should have been praying for him, sitting safe and sound in the White House, desperately trying to learn to count to ten using all his fingers so he can at least pretend to understand numbers and math as he tries to explain to the country on how tax cuts for the rich will somehow benefit the nation as a whole... Soldiers should be praying for him during that difficult time instead of nervously eyeing Iraqi civilians around them, trying to sort out which ones might be disguised suicide bombers and which ones just hate the American soldiers for coming and and killing innocent men, women, and children without just cause...

You see why I didn't feel like writing anything for three months? It's just so easy to get started, and so hard to stop, and then I just get to feeling angry and tired and depressed. I swear, it's enough to make me hope that this life really is some sort of virtual reality illusion and we're all batteries for the machine. It isn't as if I've turned my back on the world in hopes that it'll just get better on its own. Last week alone, I found myself calling my state's senators in Washington, urging them to vote against tax cuts and FCC deregulation. I just haven't felt like writing about any of it.

And this week I'm on vacation, and I want to relax. I don't want to get all worked up and foaming at the mouth over the latest outrage committed by our government. I want to relax, I want to go see The Matrix Reloaded on my birthday, I want to go to Disneyland, and I want to read a huge stack of comic books. And that's what I'll be writing about this week.

It occured to me while eating dinner (the burger part, anyway) that tomorrow morning marks one week since the destruction of the space shuttle, and I haven't thought about it very much. From the headlines, there does seem to be a refreshing absence of finger-pointing, and maybe we're seeing this for what it is: an expected by-product of the business of tucking a bunch of people in a tiny metal container attached to a massive amount of explosives, igniting those explosive, launching that container millions of miles into the air, and then letting it fall back to the ground. This is a horrible tragedy, and should be examined to make sure it doesn't happen again. It should also serve as a reminder of how many times it didn't happen before, of how many times NASA got it right. It should also serve as a reminder of how heroic these pilots and scientists are, because these are the risks they take every time they undertake these missions to further our understanding of the universe in which we live.

And it's almost time for Farscape, so that's all for now.

Boy, I'll tell you, you can't go wrong with any blog entry that involves George W Bush and a chimp.

Just killing time until Roswell comes on. Got comics from two weeks ago yesterday, and have been working through those at a fairly rapid clip. Particularly noteable: the first issue of Venture by Jay Faerber, writer of the fantastic Noble Causes (fantastic, that is, if you like superhero comics), and the new issue of Global Frequency, which is just a bloody great, bloody action movie. This week's shipment was particularly heavy on graphic novels, including the new Channel Zero book, Jennie One written, but not drawn this time, by the great Brian Wood, who has become one of my faves. Really looking forward to that. In the area of the completely gonzo, there's the first new issue of the new Nevermen miniseries from Dark Horse Comics, written by Phil Amara and drawn by Guy Davis, sort of the Shadow meets Fritz Lang's Metropolis. Then, also cowritten by Amara, there's a new Sky Ape book, which, if previous volumes are any indication, promises to make Nevermen look like a photorealistic documentary drama. Plus a couple of horror books from Avatar Press that promise some serious creep-out moments. Yeah, looks like a good week for comics.

Planning on having a combination of sushi and burgers for dinner tonight, and I'm not entirely sure how that combination will work out.

Speaking of Ed Brobaker's Catwoman comic, there's a nice interview with him about it here, which everyone should read. And then, of course, everyone should go out and read the actual comic, because it's great.

Okay, this week has pretty much been crap. However, things could be worse. I could be living this guy's life.

Just finished reading a great interview with groundbreaking comics writer Alan Moore in the second issue of Eddie Campbell's Egomania. (For folks not in the know, Campbell is a particularly talented Scottish comics writer/artist, who collaborated with Moore on the brilliant graphic novel From Hell, basis for the recent Jack the Ripper movie. But to describe it as just a book about Jack the Ripper is like saying Jane Austen wrote early Harlequin romances...) It's a great piece about Moore's beliefs and theories about magic (which, like all good things, spread much farther and wider into other areas), but far and away my favorite quote is:

"While religions may indeed offer valuable and worthwhile ideas on how one should proceed in one's spiritual journey, there's no obligation to buy the whole package. Take whatever is spiritually useful or sustaining from any system and use it as a building block in the construction of your own. Or at least, that's my Transcendental Tip for Today."

This came via Warren Ellis's mailing list, and I thought I'd pass it on. It's from comics writer Ed Brubaker, writer of probably one of my favorite current mainstream comics, Catwoman. (Seriously, Catwoman. I mean, I always thought he was a good writer, but his work on this book is just incredible.) It's about his new series:

Ed Brubaker has a new series out from Wildstorm called SLEEPER.
This is the premise of SLEEPER:

"You are an undercover agent. Your assignment is go deep undercover
with an organization of pure evil. Imagine that your assignment is so deep
cover that only one person in your organization knows about it. Now imagine
that that person is suddenly put in a coma. You now have no way out.
Even worse, you don't know if you want out."

Ed Brubaker wants you to try SLEEPER. And this is the deal:

"I think when my publisher is willing to spin the wheel by trying
something new by me, like SLEEPER, then I should be willing to
put myself on the line with it, too. So, in the hopes that it will get
readers and retailers to take a chance on it, and because I love this
book and have total faith in it, I'm going to offer a money back
guarantee on SLEEPER: If anyone buys SLEEPER #1 and is
unsatisfied, they can email me at: edbrubaker1@hotmail.com and
I'll send them their 3 bucks back.

"If you like shows like THE SOPRANOS, ALIAS, or THE SHIELD, or
comics like 100 BULLETS or ALIAS (again), then give SLEEPER a try,
because it's right up that alley, I swear."

So take Ed up on it.

Once again, it's been a while. Circumstances beyond my control, believe me, and not pleasant at all. Still not back to 100%, but in the meantime, I cannot urge you strongly enough to check out this article on SUVs and their owners. Just the idea that research exists proving that SUV owners are, for the most part, self-centered, dickless arseholes just fills me with glee. Every time I see some brain-dead frelling moron making a right turn from the left-turn lane without pause, or making an illegal u-turn, or anything else that shows a complete disregard for the safety of the people around them, it's always somebody in one of these big fuel-guzzling, war-supporting monster death coffins on wheels. The article talks about a whole book dealing with the seduction of the weak-minded, image-conscious, no-self-esteem, incapable of earning respect on their own mindless consumers by the automotive industry, even though these useless behemoths are responsible for significantly more road-deaths than any other vehicles, are just as unsafe for the passengers as they are to other motorists, and have poor enough gas mileage that they can probably be singled out as a major contributing factor to our current troubles in the Middle East. (And they seem to be the vehicles most likely to sport an American flag, too. Ah, sweet irony...)

According to today's entry on Neil Gaiman's journal, A&E Home Video are going to release his BBC TV series Neverwhere on DVD this summer. I've seen a really poor video of this series, and while it's nowhere near as good as the book (which reads like the show is an adaptation of it, rather than the other way around), it's still worth seeing. So I'm all excited. This in June, Alias in September (hopefully)... Now if only someone would do the existing episodes of Firefly...

Ghost Ship Found Packed with Rotting Fish
Ah, it's a funny old world...

The Internet was originally created so that academics could exchange information. It was developed by the Department of Defense so that a communications network could survive if conventional communications were taken out in a war. But I prefer to see it used for inspired lunacy like 2000 AD, starring future lawman Judge Dredd, (a much better comic than the lousy movie adaptation starring Sylvester Stallone would indicate). Right now, the strip is featuring Dredd versus the Aliens of the popular movie series, and part of the result is one of the best Gruddamned comic book covers ever!

I have a real post percolating in my brain even as we speak. (Okay, two, actually: the "true meaning of Christmas" thing is still bouncing around in my head, although that might just be saved until next year, for the sake of season-appropriateness. Expect to hear my thoughts about HBO's newly purchased series, Deadwood in the next day or so, particularly as it relates to a couple of recently-viewed movies starring Molly Parker.)

In the meantime, you could do worse things with your time than check out this preview of Warren Ellis's upcoming comic, Reload, which sounds like a pretty cool action movie in comic-book format.

As you can see from the previous post, thanks to my pal Jen, I now have proof of what I pretty much already knew...

I am Nothing!



Which Enemy of the Christian Church Are You?

Take More of Robert & Tim's Quizzes
Watch Robert & Tim's Cartoons

A slightly belated Happy New Year! Been enjoying all the days off too much to actually write anything, but a friend just sent me this link. It's sick and twisted indeed, not to mention completely un-PC, but it certainly brought a smile to my face

First, Merry Christmas to all my faithful readers, both of you. (I'd say the more PC Happy Holidays, but, let's face it, it's December 24th, Chanukah has passed, and since everything is closed tonight and tomorrow, we're all pretty much forced to celebrate Christmas one way or another anyway. Expect a longer piece, probably tomorrow, on how the whole "true meaning of Christmas/religious holiday" stuff is a bunch of hogwash, anyway.)

Today, though, I want to recommend a particularly cool comic I just got yesterday: Hawaiian Dick, published by Image Comics. Written by B. Clay Moore and beautifully drawn by Steven Griffin, set in 1953, this first issue tells the tale of Byrd, a former mainland US cop exiled to Hawaii as the result of some sort of unspecified scandal. Working as a PI, he finds himself hired to recover a car stolen from some mobsters working to blackmail their boss. The story is lean and taut without going by too quickly, and the art is just gorgeous, combining pen and ink line art with some beautifully painted colors that bring the setting and characters to life. For want of a better hgh-concept catch-phrase, I'll say it's LA Confidential meets Magnum, PI. I don't know how accurate a portrait of 1950s-era Hawaii this is, but it feels the way you'd expect it to feel. This is the first of three issues, and hopefully we'll see many more stories after that. Check it out! (Or, check out these preview comic strips.)

Saw the new Lord of the Rings movie, The Two Towers, yesterday. Definitely another great installment. I refuse to do the Internet thing of announcing whether or not I thought it was better than the first one, because:

• I hate that sort of NASCAR-type evaluation that insists that it isn't enough whether something is enjoyable or not, but whether it's more or less enjoyable than something else. I mean, the logical conclusion to that line of thinking is that there should only be one thing that people should go to for entertainment, because it is the single piece of entertainment to which all others are inferior, and why settle for second best?


• The Lord of the Rings movies aren't really meant to be individual films, any more than the books are individual stories rather than one really long book published in three volumes because the publisher thought the binding would have been unwieldy if the manuscript wasn't split up. It would be like just reviewing the middle third of a story, and ignoring how the first and last parts put the middle into context.



And finally, what's the point? Anyone who enjoyed the first one should go see the second one, because it's the next part of the story. Anyone who hated the first one should probably avoid the second one, because it's the next part of the story.

I also watched the last (and first) episode of Firefly last night. The first episode, because this is the original pilot episode, the one where the story starts, which Fox had held off showing because they didn't think it would hook audiences. The last, because it's been canceled. (As have Birds of Prey and Robbery Homicide Division.) It's difficult to tell how this episode, "Serenity," holds up as a first episode, because I come to it with the benefit of hindsight. I'm already familiar with, and have affection for, the characters, and I have seen how many of the hints about the future will play out. It's definitely frustrating, knowing that we won't get any new stories about these folks or this setting, barring a miracle. Hopefully, we'll have the opportunity to at least see what we had again, either through reruns on the SciFi Channel or, even better, on DVD.

Speaking of quality telefantasy being canceled, next month starts up the final run of episodes of Taken, the 20-hour miniseries about alien abductions produced by Steven Spielberg, they aren't going to follow it up with another miniseries or regular series. And they do show Stargate SG-1, which has matured into one of my favorites. But it's hard not to be disappointed when they stop making something I enjoy. Particularly when it's premature, like with Firefly,FarScape, or even Birds of Prey.

Speaking of BoP, I was watching this week's episode and saw one of those annoying anti-marijuana ads that have been popping up more and more frequently these days. You know, the ones talking about the evils of the Demon Weed, like how it slows your reflexes and dulls your senses. Which may be true, and are things that potential pot smokers should probably be aware of. What bothers me was that the very next commercial showed what a great time could be had by drinking beer--a substance which slows the reflexes, dulls the senses... And let's not forget that, unlike perfectly legal tobacco cigarettes, marijuana doesn't cause cancer.

Finally, I have come up with my own Star Wars tie-in product, and I post the notion here before somebody else starts manufacturing it: Force-in-a-Box. The great thing is, anyone who is convinced that they just have purchased an empty box obviously doesn't have enough midi-chlorians, and that'll show up in a medical test.

Just another quick one right now: Thanks fo the Giant Colon tour, now everyone in the world can see what it feels like to completely disappear up one's own rectum. (As opposed to everyone who voted the Republicans into power, who already have their heads so far up their own... ah, it's just too easy, and not really any fun today.)

First, please ignore the aborted post from 11/26/02. For whatever reason, I can't seem to delete it.

Second, the last few days, I've been getting an average of seven or eight telemarketer calls a day, according to my caller ID. Plus the usual spam in my inbox. So it's nice to see that someone out there is working on a way to make all this junk mail work for me.

Sorry for the prolonged absence. Between my computer being down and some other stuff, this journal just sort of fell by the wayside. With most of that behind me now, expect more frequent (hopefully, almost daily) doses of vitriol and pointless meandering.

And to bring things back in style, let me speak briefly about the government's Big Brother plan to fight terrorism. The whole thing certainly makes me feel a mite queasy (okay, more than a mite), because, after all, aren't the sorts of freedoms that this sort of plan abridges just the things that are supposed to set America above other nations? And is anyone else bothered by the notion that "it would only take one more terrorist attack and public support is assured?" Not that our government would even consider manufacturing some sort of terror threat to allow them to trample on citizens' freedoms in order to further the agendas of special interest groups at the expense of the public at large...

Okay, another dilemma solved: Once Birds of Prey ends, I wasn't sure whether I'd go back to watching The West Wing, which I really haven't missed this year, or whether I'd stick a finger in the eye of traditional big network programming and watch UPN's