Tag Archives: Eric Robert Nolan

“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.

 

A review of “The Man in the High Castle” Season 2

[This review contains spoilers for Season 1 of “The Man in the High Castle.”]  Despite my love for its first season, I was surprised to find my interest waning for Season 2 of “The Man in the High Castle.”  But while the earlier episodes felt a little slow, the second season gained a lot of momentum as it progressed, and then went out with a satisfying bang.  Overall, I’d rate it an 8 out of 10.

By the time Season 2 began, some of the novelty of the show’s premise had worn off.  Its unique milieu — a post-World War II, occupied America in which Germany and Japan are triumphant — was already explored in depth.  The show also felt scattered for much of this season … we follow disparate protagonists trying to negotiate or survive the alternate-history dystopia.  Their individual stories felt like subplots, while the central plot line — the nature and purpose of the mysterious newsreels — was left in the periphery.

Compounding this problem is the fact that the characters themselves weren’t always interesting or terribly likable.  Juliana Crain is always engaging to follow, given the strength and vulnerability brought to the role by actress Alexa Davalos.  Far less so, however, was Joe Blake, a character as flat and boring as his generic name.  (And this isn’t helped by actor Luke Kleintank’s wooden performance.)

There may be a few things that I am missing, as well.  For one,  various characters view the newsreels, which depict separate events in parallel universes.  They then try to prevent those terrible futures from coming to pass in their own timeline.  But why are they so certain those events will come to pass?  They know they are viewing events in an entirely different universe, and not their own.

Also, it becomes clear that certain characters can actually travel back and forth between parallel universes, but there is virtually no exposition about this.  Why do some people have this gift, but not others?  How rare is it?  What would happen if a character met their own double in a parallel universe?  Why don’t people in power recruit these talented “travelers” themselves, instead of relying on the newsreels they bring back?  Or are they doing that already?

Despite my misgivings above, however, “The Man in the High Castle” is a terrifically smart TV thriller, full of frightening ideas and detailed world-building.  Its depiction of a mid-twentieth century America conquered by the Axis powers is unflinching.  There are some really good performances by Rufus Sewell, Brennan Brown, Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa and the awesome, scenery-chewing Callum Keith Rennie.

The show is inspired enough to challenge the viewer with a lot of moral ambiguity, as well.  American resistance fighters act as ruthlessly as the Nazis, while the worst secret police from both the German and Japanese sides cooperate to try to prevent a nuclear war.

“The Man in the High Castle” is still pretty intricately plotted, too — the last two episodes surprisingly do reveal how some of its scattered subplots tie together in the context of the larger story.  And those final two episodes are damn dramatic and thrilling.  I’m glad I stayed with the show.

 

man-in-the-high-castle

More stories from Eric Robert Nolan

If you happened to enjoy “Shine Now, Fiercely, Forever” last week, then stop by the “My stories” section right here at this website.  It has links to all of my published stories, and some of them can be read for free:

https://ericrobertnolan.wordpress.com/stories/

A review of “Grendel Omnibus: Volume 2: The Legacy”

“Grendel Omnibus Volume 2: The Legacy” can’t match its predecessor.  Where the first amazing Omnibus edition focused gorgeously and exclusively on creator Matt Wagner’s first “Grendel” character, the arch-villain Hunter Rose, this second collection focuses mostly on supporting characters and Rose’s successors.  “Devil Child” shows us the cruel fate of an adult Stacy Palumbo, while “Devil’s Legacy” and “The Devil Inside” follow Christine Spar and Brian Li Sung’s turns as both heirs and victims of “Grendel’s” identity.   The “Devil Tales” coda of two stories at the very end are told from the perspective of Albert Wiggins, who was first introduced in the Spar and L Sung story arcs.

There are decent stories throughout; all except the first were written by Wagner himself.  And I do think a serious “Grendel” collector would need to at least read these stories to grasp the overall continuity of Wagner’s seminal work.  (We see for the first time, for example, how “Grendel” is a conscious entity jumping from person to to person.)

But nearly all the stories have great pacing problems.  I get the sense that Wagner wrote these during an experimental stage as a creator.  There are all sorts of departures from standard comic book storytelling, in format, scripting, paneling, and point-of-view.  These departures are interesting, but don’t always pay off.  Some of the stories were cluttered with too much text, too many panels, or even an unnecessary speaker.  (Wagner himself appears to interject as a speaker in one of the closing “Devil Tales;” a distracting kind of narration runs throughout it, in scrawled overhead text that looks like … an author’s outline?)

A few of these felt a little too long.  “Devil’s Legacy,” which follows the career of Christine Spar, was a great tale, and important to the overall mythos.  Yet the otherwise brilliant Wagner seems to struggle structuring it over 12 issues … it is often too slow, with unnecessary dialogue and drama, and with too much attention paid to minor plot points.

A lot of the artwork simply wasn’t my cup of tea.  While Tim Sale and Teddy Kristiansen shine in the first entry, most of the following artists do not.

Ah, well.  Wagner’s brilliance still shines through, particularly with the two closing stories, which he wrote and illustrated.  And all of the stories themselves, with their complex themes of aggression and identity, remain some of the most unique and interesting things in comic books as a medium.  This was a good book — despite its relative failings.  I’d give it an 8 out of 10.

 

51grycqvdnl-_sy344_bo1204203200_

A few quick words on “Resident Evil: The Final Chapter” (2017)

If you can look past the silliness, there is some fun to be had with “Resident Evil: The Final Chapter” (2017).  Critics everywhere are skewering it, but I think it’s a fun throwaway monster movie.  I’d give it a 7 out of 10, while cautioning you that I’m biased because the franchise has always been a fond, guilty pleasure of mine.

The monsters are cool enough, and Milla Jovovich alone sustained my interest with her screen presence.  (No, she isn’t the greatest actress ever, but she’s a strong, suitably intense leading lady for an action film.)

I was also surprised at how this movie attempted to bring closure to the entire series.  The story structure for the “Resident Evil” films strayed into the barely comprehensible several sequels ago, but this final installment did its best to bring the convoluted mythology full circle.  Surprisingly enough, it worked … I myself might have tweaked the final few minutes, but it was satisfying finale.

 

refcposter2