Tag Archives: Eric Robert Nolan

Uncategorized

My review of “Jurassic World” (2015), with Bryce Dallas HowAreYaDarling

5 Comments

“Jurassic World” (2015) was raptortastic and T-Rexific.  It was also fun in another way, but I can’t think of a pun for “Indominus Rex.”  I’d give it an 8 out of 10.

Seriously — this was a fun monster movie.  (I, for one, maintain that these are horror-sci-fi movies at heart, and not the family adventure films that others seem to take them for.  Even the theme music for this entire franchise seems to insist that a zippity good time was had by all, after dinosaurs devour adults and traumatize lost children.)

The kid in me thrilled to this movie’s great special effects and abundance of monsters.  Those raptors are the coolest movie monsters since Aliens and Predators.

The action sequences were good.  Did anyone else think the initial attack/ambush was an homage to the initial attack/ambush in “Aliens” (1986)?  They have the heart rate monitors and helmet-cams and everything.  I kept waiting for Corporal Hicks to yell, “DRAKE, WE ARE LEAVING!!!”

The aerial attack by the winged dinosaurs was outstanding.  (I don’t know the difference between pterodactyls and pteranodons.  Besides, one of them looked like it had a T-Rex head, and I’m not sure that was even was a thing.)  The plight of one plucked victim was pretty damn creative and horrifying — I think that entire sequence was an example of some pretty inspired horror filmmaking.

And all of those things are good, because I honestly don’t think this film has much going for it without them.  This really is … pretty much the same story as “Jurassic Park” (1993).

Smart people do stupid things.  I got a “C” in biology freshman year, but even a guy like me immediately doubts the wisdom of the Raptor Recruiting Plan.  I also have no military experience, but I know what “cover” is, and I know what a “kill zone” is, and I wouldn’t rush from the former to stand stationary in the latter.

Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas HowAboutADrinkLater are both very good actors; this movie’s script has them rattling off humorous lines that are typical of a mediocre sitcom.  The character concept for Pratt’s hunky-extreme-sportsman-naturalist raptor-whisperer is kind of silly.  Bryce Dallas HowDoYouJustKeepGettingPrettier plays another stock character — the uptight corporate princess who needs to be taken down a notch.  Their banter is like the dialogue of a lackluster episode of “Friends,” and it insults the viewers’ intelligence.

The movie’s two most interesting characters are the two young brothers.  Their dialogue was actually touching — this movie would be far better it had focused almost entirely on them.  (And, yes, that is young Ty Simpkins from “Insidious.”)

I keep seeing articles on the Internet alleging that the technology depicted by these movies will soon be possible, but I pretty much don’t believe anything I read on the net anymore.  Because I totally bought into that Mars One fiasco, and now I feel like an idjit.

vuljydbeefmco0ezptwh

Jurassic-World-Bryce-Howard-IG

Uncategorized

“To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow, Creeps in this petty pace from day to day …”

Leave a comment

Thank you, Jaine Sirieys, for sharing this!  🙂  (Nobody crack that “Why so Sirieys?” joke, because I sprang that one on her already, and she’s heard it before anyway.)

She should have died hereafter;
There would have been a time for such a word.
— To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing.

from William Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”

Elisabet_Ney_-_Lady_Macbeth_-_Detail

Photo: “Elisabeth Ney – Lady Macbeth – Detail,” by Ingrid Fisch at the German language Wikipedia. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons.

Uncategorized

When Academics Attack — A review of the Season 3 premiere of “Hannibal.”

Leave a comment

If you catch up with “Hannibal” via DVR or NBC.com, I might actually suggest you begin with the amazing and beautiful second episode, and not the Season 3 premiere.  I enjoyed the season opener, but not quite as much as everyone else did.  (Seriously, guys, if you think I am alone in lauding this program, google a few reviews.)  The first episode falls firmly for me into the “good, but not great” category; I’d give it an 8 out of 10.

We’ve got an interesting basic story that pays very close attention to Thomas Harris’ source novels and Ridley Scott’s 2000 film treatment, and we’ve got great directing, cinematography and acting.  Gillian Anderson shines, outperforming even the terrific Mads Mikkelsen in the title role.

It was creative and different, with dramatic changes in point of view, tone and setting, as Hannibal absconds from Baltimore to Florence with the extorted Bedelia du Maurier.  It held some nice thematic surprises, as the script humanizes Hannibal unexpectedly — and this is helped by flashbacks in which we actually get to see Eddie Izzard’s bad guy from Season 2 get one up on him in some verbal sparring.  (I am entirely unfamiliar with Izzard’s comedy performances, but damn if he doesn’t make a sweet super-villain.  The guy’s got perfect diction and line delivery, and can be damned frightening when he wants to be.)

But, for me, this episode failed in terms of momentum and tension.  It does very little to move the overarching narrative forward — so little that I suggest it could be seen as ancillary material appropriate for a webisode or DVD extra.  (Yes, I do realize that Hannibal “missing” Will Graham is important in setting up themes and character relationships for the rest of the season, but … whatever.)  This is really a kind of … “milieu” episode that establishes his arrival in Europe and the means to arrive at his cover identity.  The fates of the victims of the Baltimore massacre?  They’re unknown to us.

We can’t feel too much tension — of Hannibal’s two murder victims, one is hardly known to us, and the other is flat out unlikable.  We can’t identify with them.  Nor can we take any pathological satisfaction in Hannibal’s modus operandi.  He kinda shows up and says “Bonsoir” a bit undramatically, and we cut to another scene.

I had the occasional nitpick as well.

1)  The viewer is asked to identify with Bedelia.  For some reason this character has never worked for me.  It certainly isn’t Anderson’s fault.  She’s fantastic.  Maybe the problem is me.

2)  I actually do really like Mikkelsen.  But his stoical approach to the character is nowhere near as satisfying as Anthony Hopkins’ iconic, nuanced, expressive, darkly charming take on the character.

3)  We live in an age of Google image search.  Does no one in Florence notice that “Dr. Fell” looks nothing like an online photograph?

4)  After the climax of Season 2, shouldn’t Hannibal be easily recognized as the world’s most infamous fugitive and alleged serial killer?  Is his image nowhere on CNN.com?

5)  What about facial recognition software?  If a photo of Faux Fell is ever uploaded, might Interpol or the FBI locate him at once?

6)  Seeing Dana Scully (sorry — BEDELIA) sexually harassed at the dinner table just makes me angry.  Fox Mulder needs to appear and kick some ass.  Actually … scratch that.  Send John Dogget.

7)  I don’t like seeing Hannibal appear with even a putative “spouse.”  He’s a lone wolf, to me, anyway.

8)  The dialogue, yet again, is occasionally too overly stylized for me.  Even ingenious people communicate prosaically in their everyday lives.  Do these people sound like Shakespeare when they say “Pass the salt,” or ask what time to set the alarm clock for the next day?

9)  Once or twice, the dialogue is just … bad.  Bedelia:  “Your peace is without morality.”  Hannibal:  “There is no morality — only morale.”  (You can’t call it Shakespeare if it’s trying too hard.)

10)  The symbolism and the references to the feature films are maybe a little too heavy-handed.  I’m talking the hand-on-the-shoulder during the lecture, and seeing one character bashed over the head with a bust of Aristotle.  (“When Academics Attack.”)

Don’t let my compulsive griping get to you if you are a fan of the show, however.  This wasn’t a bad episode, just not the best.  And the second episode of Season 3 is goddam PHENOMENAL.

mads-mikkelson

Uncategorized

Dang it, people are talking about “Watership Down” and now I want to go watch it again.

3 Comments

Thanks, ANNA MARTIN.

“Come back you fools!!  DOGS AREN’T DANGEROUS!!”

And it’s past midnight!!

I remember the film adaptation’s voiceover saying near the end that “General Woundwort’s body was never found.”  I’m not scared.  I have a certain rapport with the truly most terrifying fictional “rabbit” of all time, Donnie Darko’s “Frank.”  (He appears in my mirror from time to time.)  That tall prognosticating hare would PWN Woundwort and his entire Owsla.

Watership3-031115

Pictured:  BROMANCE.

Donnie_Darko_Frank_a_nyúl

Uncategorized

Aphelion Webzine features “Iphigenia’s Womb.”

13 Comments

I’m quite happy to say that the good folks over at Aphelion Webzine today featured my poem, “Iphigenia’s Womb,” in their wonderful free online magazine for fantasy and science fiction fans. The poem can be found here:

http://www.aphelion-webzine.com/poetry/2015/06/IphigeniasWomb.html

“Iphigenia’s Womb” was first published over in Dead Snakes in January 2014.  I am grateful to Poetry and Filk Editor Iain Muir for allowing me to share it today in Aphelion, as it might now be enjoyed greater numbers of fans of Greek mythology.

The piece is an allegory to the death by burning of Iphigenia, daughter of Agamemnon.  He sacrificed her to the Gods to appease them after an offense, as the deities had sent strong winds to beach the Greek warships ready to set sail against Troy.  (Of course, the poem is also about other things.)

If the imagery of the burning girl bothers you, then consider this — there are various versions of the story.  In one, a giant bird appears from the heavens to dive down and rescue young Iphigenia clean away.  It’s the kind of deus ex machina we occasionally see from winged saviors in fantasy; think of both the eagles in J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings,” as well as the wayward seagull in Richard Adams’ “Watership Down.”  (“WHERE’S YOUR WHITE BIRD, *NOW*, BIGWIG?!?!”)

Thanks again to Mr. Muir and the Aphelion community!  🙂

11391365_10153960798644148_259234145065876795_n

Uncategorized

“SARAH CONNOR???” “Yes?”

5 Comments

So this is a little strange …

A woman who I do not know on Google + is “adding” and following every single man she can find with any variation of the name “Eric Robert.”  (Google + remains the poor man’s Facebook, despite its designers’ ambitions.  “Adding” is a lot like following someone on Twitter.)

So I am being monitored along with no fewer than 31 other guys named “Eric Robert,” “Eric Roberts” or “Eric Robert” with a following surname.  I won’t state her name here … for all I know there is a perfectly logical reason for somebody monitoring every Eric Robert on the Internet.  (Is there such a thing as an Eric-fetish?  Or is this maybe an online “bot” programmed to locate a lost sibling?)

All I can think of is the Terminator finding every “Sarah Connor” in the phone book, and then acting like the most inconvenient door-to-door salesman ever.  (If the gender reversal for this analogy is consistent, does that mean that Summer Glau will knock on my door, and Lena Headey must then barge in and fight to save me?  Because I am more or less on board with that.)

Uncategorized

A quick review of “Poltergeist” (2015)

1 Comment

“Poltergeist” (2015) is an unnecessary and generally lackluster remake of the 1982 classic; I’d give it a 5 out of 10.

I wouldn’t recommend seeing this movie out of curiosity about how modern special effects might update the story.  They’re good, but not great.  The 80’s practical effects of the original worked far better.

I also wouldn’t recommend seeing this movie because you’re a Sam Rockwell fan.  The guy is amazing, but the script here doesn’t let him shine.  He’s miscast as a vaguely ineffectual and somewhat unlikable Dad.

I just can’t recommend paying the ticket price for this movie at all, if you’ve got the original lying around on DVD — the first film offered far more charm and spooky fun.

poltergeist_1sht_vera1_large

Uncategorized

My buddy Len met Max Brooks at Phoenix Comicon!!!

1 Comment

At this point, I more or less consider my college alum Len Ornstein as an official correspondent for this blog, even though I hesitate to guess if he’d even care for such a distinction.  Just about anything you see here that is newsworthy or current owes to Len’s helpful vigilance and his e-mails.  (Recall, please, that I recently provided a helpful review of Season 1 of “The X Files.”  Also, I haven’t been able to watch “Gotham” or “Daredevil” because I am lately getting too into “The Lone Gunmen” from 2001.  Seriously.)

Anyway, Len attended the Phoenix Comicon this past weekend, and helpfully shared the experience with those less cool.  And he was fortunate enough to meet the one and only MAX BROOKS.  You guys know that Brooks is the author of the seminal, maybe even genre-redefining zombie apocalypse novel, “World War Z.”  (And if you don’t know that, then get off my blog and go read about Louisa May Alcott or something.)  Brooks is pictured at left below, Len is at right.

I am such a fan of the book that I’ve read it at least three times.  It was like George A. Romero meets Tom Clancy, and it is one of the most fun books I’ve ever read.  Its predecessor (and de facto prologue, I’d suggest) was “The Zombie Survival Guide.”

Len says that Brooks talked about the widespread criticism of the putative film “adaptation” of “World War Z,” namely how it had nothing in common with his book (although Brooks also did say it was entertaining and lucrative).  The author said he couldn’t really claim that Hollywood butchered his novel, because so little of the novel had been used.  After he sold the rights, he had no creative input for it.

I humbly opine that the movie gets just a little too much bad press.  Visit any Internet message boards about it, and you might get the impression that its more commonly accepted title is “The Brad Pitt Zombie Movie That Sucked.”  I myself am a die-hard fan of the original book, but I still loved the movie.

It wasn’t a Romero film, and it wasn’t “The Walking Dead.”   (And it certainly wasn’t the book.)  But … that’s just fine, in my opinion.  It was different.  It was a bangin’, epic, global monster war movie with some amazing action set pieces.  I think the siege of the walled Jerusalem (a subplot that actually WAS from the book), was alone well worth the price of a ticket.  Not every zombie movie has to have the same tone and narrative as Romero’s work or Robert Kirkman’s work.  Arnold Schwarzenegger’s recent “Maggie” film showed us, for example, that very different zombie movies can still be incredibly good.

My only real criticism of the “World War Z” movie was that its plot resolution seemed … pretty damned risky.  Isn’t there a pretty obvious danger connected with the defense employed by Pitt’s character?  Maybe I missed something.

Thanks for checking in with us, Len!!

1907742_1136036069756701_467294712973705578_n

world-war-z-579850     51a8a710d5814_51a504e52d98b_world_war_z_poster03

Uncategorized

Publication Notice: Aphelion Webzine to feature “Iphigenia’s Womb.”

3 Comments

The good folks over at Aphelion Webzine informed me today that my poem, “Iphigenia’s Womb,” will appear soon in its upcoming June issue.

Thanks to Poetry and Filk Editor Iain Muir for another great opportunity to share my writing with fans of fantasy and mythology!

I’ll post a link when the piece appears.

Uncategorized

That girl WAS Debbie Harry, right?

5 Comments

If everybody could stop Facebooking and blogging about “Videodrome” (1983), that’d be just fine.

I will never understand this movie.  It has been described as “postmodern,” and that is a word I cannot understand, despite looking it up and having friends explain it to me.  (Seriously.  And that somehow makes the intellectual emasculation I feel by “Videodrome” even worse.)

I still insist that this “classic” is unpleasant and incomprehensible.  The following is all that I can glean:

1)  There are televisions.  The televisions are bad.

2)  People join a cult or something.

3)  James Woods loses his everlovin’ MIND, and starts shouting … political tirades?  He … wants to start a revolution?  But whose side is he on?  IS HE FOR OR AGAINST THE TELEVISIONS?

4)  This movie makes VHS tapes more disturbing than, say … the “VHS” horror movies.

5)  Debbie Harry is in there somewhere.  Debbie, what’s a nice girl like you doing in a place like this?  Sing me “Rapture,” Debbie.

6)  That girl WAS Debbie Harry, right?

poster