Friday, July 30, 2010

Musing on Mab

One has to wonder why Disney didn't use Queen Mab for the name of their fairy queen in their recent Tinker Bell expansions. They call her Queen Clarion.

Not that I am surprised, nor am I complaining. I'm quite glad that they did not, since it keeps Barrie's distinctive from their version. Not to mention my extensions of Barrie, for Mab is an important character in Peter Pan: Betwixt-and-Between.

Then again, Barrie's not responsible for creating Mab. She's first seen in print by Shakespeare in Romeo & Juliet. (Curiously, though, Shakespeare also names the fairy queen as Titania in A Midsummer Night's Dream and there she is the wife of Oberon the Fairy King. ) Queen Mab has made the rounds in other stories and literature since then. Why, then, did Disney not use her? (Again, it's a relief that they did not!)

Know what else is curious?

In Barrie's world (of Peter Pan) there is no fairy king. At least not by name. We only have this passage, which does not seem to relate very well to the rest of the tale [in that there's no other mention of him and it comes suddenly in the text]: They went through the form of thanking her—that is to say, the new King stood on her body and read her a long address of welcome, but she heard not a word of it. Naturally, I have my own theory regarding the Fairy King of Barrie. I can't help but note a word in that passage. The word? 'new' Why would Barrie point out that he is a 'new' king? Perhaps because he, well, is new? As such, to give a little away as to my own take on it, I suggest that Queen Mab reigns eternal and thus has a new king every so often. Of course, given Barrie's line in Peter and Wendy - I expect he was right, for fairies don’t live long, but they are so little that a short time seems a good while to them, there must be a way around that fact in order for that to be so. Well, since Queen Mab is not Barrie's own invention and she permeates literature and art throughout history, I am confident that she is an exception to Barrie's rule. But in order for that to be so, there must be a reason for it in Barrie's world, no? Of course, and I aim to make that reason known, eventually.

I have a slight hint of her immortal status in Peter Pan: Betwixt-and-Between, but in the tradition of Barrie it raises more questions than it answers. Don't worry... it will be brought up again one day -- in a forthcoming NeverWorld book. Yes, Queen Mab will show up in that series as well. It seems Peter Pan's 'true' fairy Denny will face his own light starting to dim and need to unravel the riddle of her perpetuity if he's to remain by Pan's side. [His quest will be a side story within the novel in which it appears, which I'm thinking will be in Book 3.] And for those who think I might be clogging up the works with too much filling-in... I assure you the answer is very simple.

Perhaps I've said too much already?

Queen Mab on Wikipedia
Illustration of Queen Mab by Arthur Rackham

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Taking Notes

Back during the dealings of this post, I had decided I'd better take another gander at Barrie's notes to see what, if anything, could be useful for the situation. I didn't find anything on that subject, but I did look twice at quite a bit of it.

Interestingly, some of the ideas Barrie had about the eternal boy can no longer be a part of his adventures. Either the story now negates the tidbits he jotted down or they're just wayside material that no longer fits.

However, I should be able to work in some of the notes into Peter Pan: Betwixt-and-Between. And even if not, there are certainly some chunks that I can recycle for further adventures on the NeverWorld, a concept to which the magic planet itself would smile upon.

I also found extra 'justification' for the behavior of Peter Pan in Hook & Jill by Andrea Jones. Not that it didn't already coincide with Barrie's Pan, but it's nice to know his notes indeed bolster her depiction.

If you ask me, it's always good to incorporate Barrie's own musings as much as possible. It shall be quite exciting to whip up a story around them...

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Call of the Wild...

I'm a werewolf person.
By which I mean I much prefer werewolves to vampires. (See this post.)

I recently discovered that one of the best werewolf flicks came from a book. Yep, The Howling began as a novel by Gary Brandner. It's a series, in fact. Well, given that a remake of The Howling is coming (and yes, despite my feelings on remakes, this one seems warranted) I decided I should read the book just in case they actually go to the source material for inspiration. Oh, who are we kidding... I'd want to read it anyway.

As it seems to be as scarce as a real wolf-man, I procured a used copy of it and it just came in the mail. I'm pretty darn excited.

I recently showed the original movie of The Howling to Buttercup. She liked it very much, and agreed that it's one of the best lycanthropy flicks. It's been a great while since I saw it. Thus, my perceptions of it had gotten a bit skewed. For instance, I didn't remember that some parts (one of which had been my favorite of the entire film) were accomplished back in the day [1981] via animation! That's not to say there isn't miraculous and deliciously horrifying special effects otherwise. What's more, said favorite part doesn't look like I remember. Still cool, though. (If you're wondering, it's a very brief shot toward the end when we see a trio of werewolves, kind of in shadow.)

I've read up on it, and apparently the movie has some noticeable differences from the book. (Imagine that!) So it will be very fun to see how it all plays out from the mind of the one who originally conceived it. Apparently the movie called Howling IV: The Original Nightmare is not so much a sequel than a more faithful adaptation of Brandner's novel. I did not see any of the movies beyond the second, for which the term "abomination" is too generous. It's possible I saw clips of others.
At any rate, I'm ready to let the fur fly and delve into the real story of The Howling. Maybe, just maybe, Hollywood will do it justice. And if not, chances are it will be one hell of a ride no matter what. I'm hoping they have a similar design for the werewolves, for the 1981 film's remain my favorite and are still how I picture werewolves to this day.

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Leaf It Alone?

I've just been doing a little thinking about how to fix a particular event in Peter Pan: Betwixt-and-Between. I had the suspicion that something had been wrong with the playing out of it. Anon flagged it as well, and also pin-pointed exactly why it didn't work. I gave a suggestion back, and Anon deemed the idea better. Well, I've expanded on it a little bit since then... and as I said, I'd moments ago been tinkering with it.

What is it? It's Peter Pan's outfit. He essentially comes to be naked in Kensington Gardens. Yet we know he wears leaves in the Neverland. I believed I'd bridged the gap. Then, I went poking around on Neverpedia and I came across this line: 'In the play, Peter's outfit is made of autumn leaves and cobwebs.' I must have caught Peter Pan's forgetfulness, as that detail seemed new to me. (I tend to concentrate on the novel since I am working in that medium and it's Barrie's 'fixed' form of the story.) Yes, I did then recall it as part of the play, but could not shake off the "hmm." So I hunted the novel. Nope. No mention of cobwebs. (And for the record, it's now "skeleton leaves.") No reference to cobwebs in Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens either. As in the word itself does not appear in both books.

Chalk it up to another of Barrie's own tinkerings. But it got me to thinking... could I, or even should I, use cobwebs as part of the story in Peter Pan: Betwixt-and-Between? To be honest, cobwebs give me the creeps. And the thought of wearing them...eech. But then, Pan is not my second name, and he's the one who would be sporting the spider spun spats. (Okay, they wouldn't be used as spats but I love a good alliteration.) If I do use it, it will serve as an extra bridge, no? To the play in addition to the two books. When it makes sense to do so or can provide helpful information, I like to incorporate the play or screenplay.

And while I'm on the subject of his outfit... I find it a pity that most people equate Peter Pan with a tunic, tights and a hat with a feather. A suit of leaves with juices that ooze out of trees (and cobwebs?) is much more intriguing.

Anyway, I've give the scene a little more thought...

The photo is a close up shot of Jeremy Sumpter's costume in the P.J. Hogan movie.
The other is a Disney costume. [They have (or had) several versions of a 'Peter Pan' outfit, most of which don't look like their cartoon.] I do like the rather large leaf aspect of the costume shown, though.

Saturday, July 24, 2010

Oh Captain, Our Captain...

Yesterday I mentioned that I found something interesting regarding Peter's first nemesis, Captain Hook, in relation to him appearing in Peter and Wendy.

No, it's not some arcane extra tidbit that will unlock the riddle of his past. Rather it's just an unexpected truth. It seems that "Captain Hook" only appears once in the novel! By which I mean those two words together. And it's not even called out during a battle scene or some similar grand part. It comes at the end, when Wendy is trying to get Peter Pan to remember their (The Darlings') great adventure. Otherwise he's just refered to as Hook, or James Hook (or, of course, Jas. Hook) Hmmm.

To think... one of my favorite bits of P.J. Hogan's movie version is when Peter Pan flies in a swooping arc toward the Jolly Roger cooing out "Oh Capatain HooOO00oooOOK!" right as he's about to taunt him by zipping about and causing general mayhem. No, the scene isn't specifically in Barrie's novel, but none can say such a moment doesn't belong or didn't happen at some point in the rivalry between the famous foes. Sure, I knew the scene had been added, but I didn't necessarily realize that Pan calling out "Captain" along with Hook is 'less correct' as per the novel. For the record, I also really enjoyed such scenes as played out in Fox's Peter Pan & the Pirates.

I hope I'm not the only one who finds this a little fascinating. We're all so quick to say "Captain Hook" when in reality it's more likely that he's just referred to as Hook.

(My picture is of Hook as played by Jason Isaacs since he's by far the best [on screen.])

Friday, July 23, 2010

Worth the Pryce

Just a little shout out about excellent actor Jonathan Pryce. He's currently playing the role of Captain Hook in Peter Pan the Show, which is the touring production of the new adaptation that began in London as Peter Pan at Kensington Gardens. (You might recall Bart and I went to London to see the historical stage show.) While I would not have thought of Mr. Pryce right off the bat to play Barrie's fearsome pirate lord with a claw, he's certainly got the talent and the power to do it. Especially given the presentation of Hook in this production.

Jonathan Pryce is always great in films and plays in two I especially like: The Adventures of Baron Munchausen and Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl.* He's in lots more worth seeing as well. And I am currently enjoying his singing. Yes, really. He played Guido in a concert performance of Nine, and you can bet that Bart has it. (I rather like "Guido's Song.")

So HOORAY for Mr. Pryce as the infamous Captain Hook, break a leg, sir!

Two side notes:

#1 My niece and nephew went to see Peter Pan the Show in San Francisco, where the touring of the U.S. began. The general consensus is that they liked it. However, I found it rather satisfying that they, too, were annoyed at the visible puppeteers (for Nana and other creatures.) Nice to know kids do have discriminating tastes. For as I mentioned in my review, although there is a time and place for the operators to be seen without ruining the 'magic' on stage (such as Chicago's Redmoon Theatre Company), it just seems to kill the mood in a showing of Peter Pan.

#2 I'd gone to Peter and Wendy to search for a fun description of Peter's first nemesis... and discovered an interesting bit of trivia instead. I'll let you in on it tomorrow.

* Yes, he also plays Governor Weatherby Swann in other PotC films. But let's face it, the first one is so far the best.

Wednesday, July 21, 2010


Perhaps you remember me hinting about Peter Pan's NeverWorld showing up in an unlikely spot for sale?

Well, I now reveal that spot as Bananas Foster Café. It's a fabulous restaurant in my neighborhood. Bart and I have been going since it first opened, and it never fails to bring us back. Whether it's the delectable, innovative and delicious dishes or the fun, friendly and cool staff who make it a treat to be there, I'm not sure. Does it matter? Nope, just that it's all true.

OH. Right... you simply must try the Bananas Foster. I mean, come on, the place is named that. You know they're going to make that damn well... and they certainly do! Get ready for bliss.

I even went with Andrea Jones (Hook & Jill) when she visited. If I remember correctly, I made sure she tasted the Hot Cakes. (You need to taste them, too.)

A special thanks to the owner, John, for the opportunity. It's especially nice considering it's not a bookstore, nor even a coffee house in the traditional sense. So to have a book on sale is a little out of the ordinary. Thus, I appreciate it muchly.

John is from the UK, so you'll find quite a bit of English meals and foods on the menu. I especially enjoy the Bubble & Squeak, and their fish and chips is not to be missed. When Bart and I went to London last year, John gave us wonderful advice on things to do and places to see.

Right now (unless one sold since) there are actually only five copies available at Banasas Foster Café. It just might progress that there will be more later - and John also spoke of a book signing! Time wil tell...

So, if you're in the Chicago area, you owe it to your taste buds to visit Bananas Foster Café. It's at the corner of Broadway and Granville. (And see if you can pick up a "ticket" back to the Neverland!)

Like the dust jacket cover of the hardcover of Peter Pan's NeverWorld says, Bart and I love going to brunch. Maybe we'll see you there one day!

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Scooby Don't?

I’m a fan of Scooby Doo!... well, some Scooby Doo. “Old School” Scooby for sure. And some of the “old new stuff” as well. I also really enjoyed the live-action movies (the ones that came to theaters, not the made-for-TV kind), although Monsters Unleashed should have been the first movie released. The rest of it… no thanks.

Cartoon Network has brought Scooby-Doo back to television in the cartoon form with Scooby Doo! Mystery Incorporated. I admit that given the “newer” Scooby Doo out there, I’d been a little more than skeptical of it. But at the same time I wanted it to be good, since we can always use more good Scooby.

Well, I’ve watched two episodes now and I haven’t quite made up my mind. This Scooby ventures into territory where no Doo has gone before (at least to my knowledge… which does not include most of the new animated movies. [I’d seen most of one and dismissed them.]) I’m not sure if I like the changes or not. I’ll get to the uncharted parts in just a moment.

First, the animation. I think it’s wonderful. They certainly look “old school” in terms of their (desirable) “flatness” (and retain their original outfits unlike some manifestations) and yet they reside in a pseudo-3D environment with obvious computer enhancement (but not CGI in the sense of Pixar). It works. Sometimes the blending of these two styles is distracting and sloppy, but not here. It’s a very pleasing and seamless world. Bravo.

The opening is wonderful. It's slick, true to the characters and fun without being too cutesy. I even like seeing Velma with a laptop computer - it works. The theme is good, too, quite unobtrusive... with no lyrics. This might been seen as veering from the original, but hey, the original themes were always a LITTLE silly, no? (Yes, that had been their charm, but this proves we can do without the lyrics.)

Next, the voices. On the whole, very good. Mindy Cohn has been doing Velma for quite some time now. Her rendition is quite on the mark and I’ve come to accept her as Velma. Matthew Lillard, who portrayed live-action Shaggy, provides the voice here as well. Excellent job, just as in the movies. Daphne is fabulous, too, as the comparison in my head is negligible if different at all. Brava, Grey DeLisle! Frank Welker has done justice to Scooby Doo, but his Fred, on the other hand, seems like it's gotten a bit too nasal over the years. However, it’s not like it isn’t acceptable. Oh - and Patrick Warburton is the Sheriff. I adore Warburton, but honestly, he’s too damn ubiquitous.

Okay, now for the “uncharted territories.” All of the ‘kids’ parents are in it. If they’ve ever been shown before I didn’t know about it. I don’t really like it. I found it much more compelling with the er, mystery, of what the deal is with these ‘kids.’ We’d heard about (and seen) their extended relatives on the show before (such as Daphne’s cousin) but this is outright killing the mystery of their home life. Plus, all of their parents seem to ignore them, too busy in their own affairs. Velma’s mom, for instance, puts her horses ahead of her daughter. Fred’s dad wouldn’t help because he just got into the reclining position in his favorite chair. Similar put-offs happen with the other two as well. The way I see it is if you’ve got them as negligent, then why have them at all? (And what's with Daphne having four or so nearly identical sisters?)

Another change (at least to my knowledge) is that Fred’s dad is the mayor. Adds a nice twist, since the kids poke their noses into other people’s business all the time and such a reputation can be construed as counter-productive to a public official. So far, however, it hasn’t really come into play.

They’ve also added a sassy African-American "chick" with quite an afro who is a DJ that the kids will hang out with… pretty cool, but not sure of the point of it yet.

The final change that doesn’t quite sit right with me (and again, if this had been done before it had not been so in Old School) is that Velma and Shaggy are an item. Or they want to be, and Shaggy tries to keep it a secret from the others, especially Scooby. We all know that Daphne has the hots for Freddy, but do we really need to pair off Velma and Shaggy? In this version (and probably others, although I never got that impression from the Old School) Freddy seems oblivious to Daphne’s advances, too wrapped up in his precious ghost trap designs. I’m just not ready for a romance between Velma and Shaggy.

All righty, now for the alteration that intrigues me in a good way. They’ve added an element to the Scooby Doo universe that we’ve never* had before: A story arc. I had just about dismissed the show as not having to be seen (for even though it’s not bad as I said, I try not to pick up more stuff to watch if I can help it), the first episode ended with a phone call. It had been about the locket that Daphne found in the episode that didn’t connect to the mystery at hand. The caller told them to beware, that they should have left the locket alone and that they are in deep trouble. My proverbial antennae perked up. And to follow suit, the second episode is indeed called “Chapter 2.” There’s also now a (cough) mysterious fellow named “Mr. E.” He sends them hints and such [with a big wax seal of an E.] For instance, in the second episode he sends them an alligator handbag that leads them to the place of the next mystery at hand and later, they found the engine of the Mystery Machine fixed, with a note from Mr. E saying their adventure has just begun. Whether or not he is the caller, I’m not sure. I guess I have to keep watching to find out. But I really like the idea of a "story arc Scooby." It seems to be (unlike the other changes) just what this show/premise needed to make it fresh again. For it’s certainly what led me to watch another episode.

All in all, they’ve put a wild spin on a classic, and it just might be worth it.

* Conceivably The 13 Ghosts of Scooby Doo! counts in this vein, but I don’t think it really does, since that did not use the standard gang nor “solve the mystery” episodes. 13 Ghosts is one of the “no thanks” of Scooby shows.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Finished From Done

Well, Anon has given a thumbs up to the rewrite of the fairies' "explanation" of the Neverland. Hosah! There are some tweaks suggested, but none of them were in order to Barrie-ize it. Thanks very much, Anon!

Onward to the revisions of the story part...

Then it will be off to Andrea Hook & Jill Jones to see if she likes it as much as Anon.

From there... well, it all depends on how much or little Andrea suggests. :)
I've also been asked by another fan of Peter Pan's NeverWorld to have a gander at this new (or old, depending on how one looks at it!) Pan adventure. It would be wise to take him up on his offer, so chances are I will when I'm once again satisfied with the book. Plus, Bart will be reading it in there somewhen as well.

(The title of this post is also the title of Chapter 16 of Peter Pan's NeverWorld.)

Thursday, July 15, 2010

DISappointedNEY Again...

Apparently Disney is concocting a live-action movie called Tink.
It will be a romantic comedy and reportedly strays from the traditional story/setting of Peter Pan.

I've not much to say about it. I'm not much of a Tinker Bell fan, but then I am not really a fan of the Disney version of Pan either.

Elizabeth Banks will play the infamous fairy.

Either way, there is lot riding on this, since many people are Tink fans who could conceivably be disappointed. I pretty much already am...

This is an update from Hollywood, it seems... other post.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

It'll Show Up Where Now?

Here's what's going on in my world of Peter Pan...

Still working on the revisions. I've been dilligently honing the other "speech" part of Peter Pan: Betwixt-and-Between to better fit into Barrie's style. Every time I think I'm done with it, I find a new word or whole sentence, perhaps even a new idea to tweak into it. Usually just a word or phrase here and there. But it's going nicely. If I don't have it quite yet, I have it just so. Anon's critiques have been most useful, as I've said. This particular reworked section is a both pivotal and delicate, and Anon is familiar not only with Barrie's style, but how this book works in cohesion with it. Which is a roundabout way of saying I've decided to have Anon have a look at this scene's rewrite. Afterward, I'll continue on to the rest of the novel. It should be a welcome change to tinker around with actual story bits again. (Rather than "explanatory bits" for lack of a better term.)

Also, I just had a talk last night with someone delightful... and cutting to the chase, Peter Pan's NeverWorld will be showing up in an unlikely place in the near future. You might even say it's a little bananas to be there, but the owner is fond of me as I am of him, and he wants to foster my plight of Pan. I'll keep you posted as things develop, but I will say clues are in this paragraph.

Monday, July 12, 2010

Reaching for the Asteroids

If you're my age or up, you'll remember a little vector graphics video game taking the world by storm. Yes, even before the famous Pac-Man. Asteroids.

You're the triangular ship surrounded by asteroids. Fly and shoot your way through endless space (and levels) and see an occasional U.F.O. that shoots back. That's the whole deal.

Any guesses why I'm bringing it up? That's right! A live-action movie's in the works. Do I even need to rant on this one? All I can say, in earnest, is that if they can pull it off (and be a successful film to boot) then we have found the next Hollywizards.

And it sounds like their dreaming is already explosive:
I had an immediate reaction 'Yes.' The reason was not because playing the game, we thought somehow that game could be translated into a movie, it can't. The word 'Asteroids' connotates a large-scale experience, so the challenge, which was great, was 'Okay, so how do you get a mythology that will support that? We really went after a mythology on the level of Star Wars and we'll see if we succeeded or not but it's not a simple thing of the asteroids are going to hit the earth. We never come to earth. The entire movie takes place in the asteroid field. We do some homages to the game for sure, but I like the sense of scale.*

So says producer Lorenzo di Bonaventura. Writer Matthew Lopez, a sincere best of luck. You did a great job with Race to Witch Mountain.

Here's an excellent game "re-invention" of Asteroids. Enjoy: Vectoroids

I rather like this video. It's a trailer for Tetris: The Movie. I don't know if it would sustain itself for a whole film, but Bravo to BLACK20 STUDIOS for this wonderfully awful take on Tetris as a narrative. I had stumbled across it and will admit I'd been fooled at first, dreading its coming... all the while hoping it to be a joke. Thank goodness.

* Quoted from this page.

Thursday, July 8, 2010


The title is the question, and there on the left is the answer.

Jeopardy! really seems to like Peter Pan.

I knew this tidbit, but I don't know terribly much about it. I recall hunting for more once upon a time... but since the project had been abandoned/altered, as I remember it, information is limited.

What's my opinion of such a project, i.e. a rock opera/musical of Peter Pan?

I don't doubt that it could be done. But as I've stated in one way or another before, I tend to think adding narrative music to Barrie's tale just becomes cumbersome and silly. As in no, I don't particularly like musicals of Peter Pan.

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

On the Page...

Last night I went to see Josiecat. She’s in the throes of finishing her thesis and wanted me to take a gander at what she’d written, as well as sought advice on what direction to channel the rest of her efforts. Not that she doesn’t have a handle on her material. She’s so in the thick of it that her mind wound up in a jumble, trying to approach it from many directions at once and she needed a fresh eye to help smooth it out. So I rewrote the whole thing for her. I’m kidding, of course. I’d read practically the rest of her work, so it’s not as if I went into it cold. Together we hammered out some of it… and Josiecat seems to have a sense of how to proceed. Best of luck, Josiecat!

While we wound down on working on it and discussing, Buttercup came home. She joined us in the small room (more of a nook) in the back and sat down. She hadn’t been there very long when suddenly she perked up, eyes shining, and she looked right at me with a finger point and said, “JEREMY!” [She meant my character, as she’s been reading What If It’s a Trick Question?] She followed up this one word with, “You… Okay…” then gave a half laugh and half sigh, rose and with a clear troubled-but-happy exasperation, slapped my arm. YES! In response to how what I wrote made her feel, she SLAPPED me! She then said, “I’ll be back.” I commented before she’d been out of earshot about being physically abused and suffering for my art, jokingly, of course.

When she returned, she explained that she hit me for the emotional roller coaster I put her on. She’d obviously just read an intense part of the story. She told me where… and also that she had to stop reading because it had been too much to bear - in the good sense. In other words, she felt so bad for Jeremy, and having discovered the answer to a long gestating question in the book, got too choked up to continue. And the thing is she’s only just about a third of the way through the story.

I thanked her for the compliments. We then wound up discussing it, with me not divulging any spoiler information. It’s very fun to see what parts impress or touch people. Since I can’t read the novel “fresh” myself, I enjoy “reading vicariously” with them. I like hearing assements of what readers think is going on... which characters they like and who they're suspicious of and such... So thanks, Buttercup, not only for going into my world on the page and your kind words, but for sharing your reading experience with me.

She wound up saying that she can’t remember when she’d last enjoyed a book to this magnitude. Apparently she finds herself thinking about it when away from it, and is quite emotionally invested in Jeremy’s plight. I must say it felt really good to hear. No matter how many times I’m told by someone that they enjoy my work, it always makes me just as internally giddy.

Thanks again, Buttercup! And you don’t know the half of it!

Josiecat - May the Force be with you!*

* I only ever use Lucas's saying with utmost sincerity.

Monday, July 5, 2010

Pixar Doesn't Toy Around...

A couple of posts ago, I said that Buttercup and I went to the movies. I promised to say which one. Toy Story 3, of course...

I adored it. I'd been quite glad to see it in a theater as the other two I saw at home. I had been skeptical of another one when Toy Story 2 arrived. But I heard nothing but good reports on it. And you know what... Toy Story 2 turned out better than the first. Well, nearly the same thing happened with the third. Except by this time I didn't doubt Pixar's ability to come up with a worthy sequel.

For my general views on sequels, it's in this post. The thing about Pixar is that they really care about story. They have stated outright that no sequel will come for one of their tales unless there is a narrative that must be told. They have proved themselves once again with Toy Story 3. All I heard had been praise... no, really, only praise. And I have nothing but praise to give as well.

This new film completes the story of Andy (in relation to his toys.) It's genuinely heartwarming, a little terrifying - yes, I found myself a little misty - and damn hilarious. I'd laughed all the way through (except for the scary parts, of course) and cheered a few times. And you know what? It felt satisfying. The story really did feel like a closed book. Good thing, too, as Pixar says it's the last of the Toy Story movies.

After seeing their masterpiece, I'm extra glad to have three Pizza Planet 3-eyed aliens adorning my house.

Bravo, Pixar!

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Doing it Write!

The rewrites are going well.
So far I’ve only done the one section. I’ve gone over it and over it again, sometimes as many as five tweaking/redoings a day. If it doesn’t sound like much to be just done with the one part, then consider this: It’s pretty much the crux of making the concept of the book work as a whole. I didn’t have to rework the ideas, but rather had to get it to sound more like the ambiguous specificity of the original stories. In other words, it needed to be more Barriesque than it had been. It's a challenge to write 'as'/'like' Barrie in the first place, so to get wild ideas such as these to come out sounding like him is even harder.

Fortunately, I seem to have done a good job. I gave it to Anon to have another gander. The verdict?

Wow. MUCH better! :D After only the first paragraph I was already impressed! It felt like I was reading something new from Barrie! I think he would be proud!

Ah, good. Now I can proceed with the rest of the revisions, knowing that I’m back on track. Next up… the fairies’ description of the Neverland…