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.

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.

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.])

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.

Panana?

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!

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.

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.)