Tag Archives: Eric Robert Nolan

A tiny review of “Stake Land II” (2016)

“Stake Land II” (2016) can’t match the magic of the original, but it’s still good enough to recommend, I guess.  I’d give it a 7 out of 10.  (I’m told that an alternate title is “Stakelander,” but I refuse to call it that, because it sounds too much like a spoof of either “Zoolander” or “Highlander.”)

This sequel has a direct-to-video feel to it.  Set a decade following the events of the original, the movie reunites Connor Paolo and Nick Damici, as the now-adult Martin and the enigmatic, vampire-killing powerhouse, “Mister.”  Paolo feels flat this time out, the movie is occasionally slow, and the action sequences are a little underwhelming.

Still, Damici shines.  And I couldn’t help but find myself engaged by the movie as a whole.  Even if the film isn’t a classic, the brutal, unflinching “Stake Land” fictional universe is still front and center.  The post-apocalyptic setting and character backstories are so dark and unpredictable that the film is still fun for a seasoned horror fan.  It’s at least as interesting as an average episode of AMC’s “The Walking Dead.”

 

stake-land-2-movie-poster

“Consciousness Haiku,” by Eric Robert Nolan

Consciousness Haiku:

Self-aware atoms
in a byzantine system —
Neurons feign a man.

(c) Eric Robert Nolan 2017

800px-crystal_mind
Photo credit: By Nevit Dilmen (talk) – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1510783

Two cents from a former news reporter.

I spent time as a newspaper reporter. It was only a couple of years, but it was a demanding job that I “lived” more than worked. And it was my first professional job after college.

I loved it. It was a priceless experience for learning about the world and about my fellow human beings. And I honestly think it shaped me.

Let me tell you something — public figures who vilify the news media should not be trusted.

They are few and far between. (You might be surprised to hear me tell you that plenty of “politicians” are actually good, admirable people, working hard and doing their best to serve their community.)

But those who blast the media, or seek to control it, tend to be power-hungry individuals who are simply unaccustomed to having their authority questioned. They also tend to be less intelligent than their colleagues who are more at ease dealing with reporters. I swear it — local officials or staff who have poor relationships with reporters definitely tend to be less educated and more extreme in their views.

You know, of course, whose tweets (sigh) prompted me to write this. (It’s getting so that my abhorrence for the man makes me cringe at even typing his name.)

Of course I may be biased as a former “newsie.” But bias in America lately seems to be all the rage.

Seriously. Like June.

I don’t know what these are (Japanese Mazus?  Birdseye Speedwell?), but they arrived today to brightly pepper the hills around Roanoke.

Maybe it’s because this February feels like June.

“Birdseye Speedwell” sounds like a hillbilly superhero.

[UPDATE: a friend of mine has informed me that this is “Blue Star Creeper.”]

 

20170217_141021

20170217_141026-1

 

 

 

 

“One pill makes you larger, one pill makes you small.”

Random Rabbit says hello.

20170215_091346

Salem, Virginia, February 2017

I took these shots last night, before I joined some great friends for great conversation and a great dinner on a balmy midwinter weekend.  Every February should be as kind.

 

20170211_173738

20170211_174419

20170211_174935

20170211_173919

20170211_174448

20170211_173930

20170211_173940

20170211_174208

 

A few quick words on “What We Become” (2016)

“What We Become” (2016) is a competent, serviceable Danish horror film that nevertheless could have been better.  (The film’s original title was “Sorgenfri.”)  It’s capably written, nicely filmed, and well performed by its actors, and there is genuine suspense once its zombies are allowed to run amok.

The trouble is, that takes far too long.  Like America’s “Viral” (2016), this is a zombie movie that spends so much effort on its setup that there is little time left for enough payoff.

This is another thoughtful apocalyptic monster movie that pays a great deal of attention to the media and military response to the emerging crisis.  (And it’s creepily effective the way this is told exclusively from the point of view of a Danish suburb’s residents.)  It will hold your attention as a kind of “slow burn” horror film — it reminded me a little of the first season of AMC’s “Fear the Walking Dead.” Ultimately, however, the zombies get too little screen time.  And that’s a shame, because what we do see as a horrifying, tragic climax is actually very well executed.

Overall, I’d rate this a 7 out of 10.

 

 

large_fdm3dawxz9kkpg2gybnu0ui3gba

Check out the art of Jennifer Shepit.

Social media is wonderful for getting acquainted with a variety of new artists to follow, but I must say that my friend Jennifer Shepit’s work has especially struck a chord with me.  Jen is a wonderfully talented (and sometimes darkly inspired) artist from British Columbia, and her work is always engaging and sometimes startling.

She has a unique muse, I think — and I think many people with a taste for horror or dark fantasy would enjoy what she creates.  I hope I get the opportunity to collaborate with her one day.

Below are several of Jen’s recent pieces that I have asked permission to share.  You can find more of her prints, oil paintings and watercolors at her Etsy shop right here:

https://www.etsy.com/ca/shop/JenniferShepit

 

16406777_1286663758087403_8108418981190245737_n

16423124_1283301075090338_2975103691062517022_o

16472868_1288479641239148_4418556740218413330_n

16299306_1281935558560223_7378432925340939503_n

A short review of the premiere of “24: Legacy” (2017)

Jack may not be back, but the premiere of “24: Legacy” suggests the magic of FOX’s flagship serial thriller can survive without him.  The first one-hour episode was damn good — I’d give it a 9 out of 10.

Maybe it’s too early to gauge how well the show will follow in its predecessor’s footsteps.  It indeed feels different with its new hero (Corey Hawkins as former U.S. Army Ranger Eric Carter).  Kiefer Sutherland is a superb actor who masterfully portrayed a disturbed-yet-noble antihero, the now iconic Jack Bauer.  Hawkins doesn’t shine much in this initial outing, but there will be time for the actor to grow along with the character.  (In the long ago series premiere of “24,” Sutherland’s debut as Bauer wasn’t terribly interesting yet either.)

But the creators of “24: Legacy” have carefully assembled nearly all of the components of “24’s” greatness: the real-time urgency and the frantic pace; the surprising violence; the twists and betrayals; the cool technology; and the converging plotlines as various actors affect key outcomes in the story.  A more critical viewer might complain that that these feel like common tropes after nine years of the original show.  (And “24’s” unique mode of storytelling kind of defines it as its own sub-genre.)  But these signature elements of the show, however predictable, are exactly what will keep fans coming back.

The only thing missing is an interesting villain.  The bad guys here are suitably nasty, and drive the plot from the story’s opening minutes.  But, so far, they’re fairly generic terrorists.  Like the Hawkins’ character, it remains to be seen whether the script can develop them further.

I had a blast with this.  If you’re a fan of the original “24,” then you ought to check this out.

 

A very short review of “Rings” (2017)

“Rings” (2017) actually begins with great promise — it looks like the rare horror “threequel” that could live up to its two predecessors.  (And the early millennium’s “Ring” films were indeed good movies.)  It starts with a truly fascinating story device that I won’t spoil here, except to say that it’s macabre and thoughtful and involves an intrepid college professor (Johnny Galecki).

Inexplicably, the movie abandons this unsettling stroke of genius about 20 minutes in, and instead falls back on a by-the-numbers plot that too closely parallels the first films. What follows is pretty average stuff.  Instead of the lovely and talented Naomi Watts, who was the capable heroine of the first films, we get two flat, college-aged protagonists portrayed by two mostly flat young actors.  (Alex Roe is particularly bad.)  Not even the arrival of the great Vincent D’Onofrio in a supporting role can redeem “Rings” past the direct-to-video level of quality.

Oh, well.  This still wasn’t the worst horror movie I’ve ever seen, and it did have some creepy parts.  (I thought the movie’s closing moments were pretty effective.)  I’d call “Rings” an average outing and rate it a 6 out of 10.

Postscript: D’Onofrio has a damned cool voice.  I’m serious.