Virgil's All-Night Diner has moved (again). For the foreseeable future, the Diner will now be hosted at wordpress.com. http://virgilsallnightdiner will now direct you to the new site, as will http://virgilsallnightdiner.wordpress.com . If've you've been a fan of this page, please follow us at the new location.
September 12, 2010
June 19, 2010
June 16, 2010
June 15, 2010
And the Boobie Prize Goes to Criminal Minds!
Congratulations, Criminal Minds Producers! Your decision to dump AJ Cook and shove Paget Brewster to the sideline is long overdue. Let's face it - that was way too much estrogen in the field to be plausible. It's just not reasonable to expect such dainty flowers to handle the brutal and ugly work of men. I know, I know, there are those who say that AJ Cook's "JJ" (and how smart of it was you to give her tiny woman brain such a easy name to remember) was mostly a public relations person and didn't really face much danger, but those reporters can be a nasty lot and JJ should be on a wide front porch, sipping mint juleps and protecting her fair skin with a broad brimmed hat, making babies that some nanny can look after and keeping herself pretty and dumb for her gentleman lover.
Don't even get me started on Paget Brewster's "Prentiss" - a butch, rough and tumble field agent who mostly just slows the guys down because they don't want her to feel bad about not being able to keep up. It just sends the wrong message. I don't mind girls playing field hockey in high school, but I draw the line when they start taking college scholarships away from real athletes, and characters like Emily Prentiss just encourage this kind of faulty logic. I'm sure the plan is to make Prentiss more of a secretary for the team - perhaps she can clean the plane and prep dinner while the boys are off doing the real work, and for that I applaud you.
There's still the problem of Kristen Vangsness and her "know-it-all" character Penelope Garcia. While I simply cannot accept this idea of the team being dependent on Garcia's "intelligence" and "technical skill," at least the producers have the foresight to keep her behind a large desk filled with computers so we don't have to partake in the sight of her woman parts. I'm not worried, though. I know in time you'll find a way to dispatch of her, as well.
It's a new day for television, one free of the XX bonds of tyranny that have long held sway over my television programming. At long last, swarthy manly men can take center stage. The Terrible Day of the Woman is over!
So, congratulations Criminal Minds Producers and enjoy this Boobie Prize from Virgil's All-Night Diner.
If you would like to join me in celebrating this most progressive of casting moves, please consider signing the petition found here: http://www.petitiononline.com/cmwomen/ (I did not create this petition - I'm just trying to spread the good word.)
June 13, 2010
Philly Comic-Con: A Tale of Two Panels, Part 2 - Bruce Campbell
His name is Bruce, and if you ask a stupid question, you will hear him roar. Where James Marsters was down to earth and so very unlike his characters during his Q&A, Bruce Campbell comes off even larger and more grandiose than the characters he plays on screen.
From the word go, those is attendance know they are in for something special. Campbell offers five dollars to the person with the best Evil Dead tattoo, then proceeds to bring up several audience members and engages in an impromptu tattoo competition. He alternately admires and mocks the contestants. He lets the audience choose the winner, but his bias is glaringly obvious, which is all part of the fun. The five dollars goes to a young woman with a "stick figure Ash" on her leg.
Contest aside, it's Q&A time. One of the first questions out of the gate concerns Bruce vs. Frankenstein and Campbell confirms that this rumored followed to instant cult hit My Name Is Bruce is indeed being made. Riotous applause follows. Later, fans ask if he'll be involved in the new Spiderman reboot. He does nothing to hide his utter disdain, going so far as saying, "There's no reason to do a man-in-tights film without Sam Raimi," and definitively stating that if Sam's not involved, then neither is Bruce. Another fan would later ask if Raimi made a mistake dropping out of Spiderman. Again, Bruce pulls no punches, saying, "Not if they want to make it like Twilight." Oddly, I find myself wondering what Twilight would look like with Bruce and Sam and I wish more than anything for such a movie to exist.
On the subject of Sam Raimi, Campbell says, "There's nothing fun about working for Sam," but that it is the most creatively fulfilling work that he does. He talks about how physically grueling Raimi's movies can be and says this of Army of Darkness: "I wished my mother had never met my father during that movie." His blunt commentary is refreshing. "A movie that is easy to make is hard to watch," he goes on to say, and one gets that sense that as miserable as it may have been to make those movies, Campbell wouldn't trade the experience for anything. When asked if he will be part of Raimi's upcoming World of Warcraft film, Bruce quips, "Is Sam involved? Then I'll probably have some stupid part."
A handful of questions concern Burn Notice, the USA show featuring Bruce Campbell. Bruce says he is contracted to the show through seven seasons and that the show has already been renewed through Season Six. Campbell jokes about having to live and shoot in Florida, openly mocking hurricanes with the expected Campbell bravado. Campbell also confirms that there are plans to do a spin-off tv movie based on his character Sam. Again, there is much applause.
Another fan asks if he will be writing another book and he throws out the title Vagabond: The Gypsy Life of an Actor. He hasn't started writing the book yet and I almost get the sense that he made up the title on the spot.
At one point he is asked about his time in Iraq as part of a USO tour for the troops. Campbell's bravado cracks just slightly here. Though still joking and keeping the crowd energized, it's easy to see that he takes this experience seriously. He talks about going to Afghanistan next and when another fan asks if he would be willing to do something for stateside troops, he takes the request seriously and seems eager to follow up on that.
The heart of this Q&A, however, is Campbell's strange relationship with his fans. As a b-movie legend, Campbell's had his share of flops and disappointments, and fans relish asking him questions about such experiences. Campbell, in turn, takes great pleasure in mocking these fans and their questions with adoring cruelty. At one point, Campbell starts to openly heckle a female fan for asking an overly drawn out and complicated question that was really just a series of statements. This was my first experience at a Bruce Campbell panel, but I get the sense that this is really what it's all about: seeing who can ask the question that can draw the biggest insult from Bruce. He comically laments the early demise of his television shows Briscoe County and Jack of All Trades. Again, he keeps his comments light and mocking, but there is perhaps a touch of real bitterness here, too. He's something of a Hollywood outsider; it's what makes him a cult icon, but is it also why mainstream success has been elusive for him? Would he have traded in his current icon status for seven seasons of Briscoe County and an Emmy nod?
But Bruce Campbell doesn't seem to have time for regret. When asked if he would erase Congo or McHale's Navy from his resume, he replies, "Why? The checks cleared."
His name is Bruce. Any more stupid questions?
Philly Comic-Con: A Tale of Two Panels, Part 1 - James Marsters
Don't let the scowl fool you. James Marsters is not a cranky man. In fact, the man knows how to make quite an entrance. The star of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Smallville, Torchwood, Caprica, etc, etc, etc... tears into the Philadelphia Comic-Con panel like a rock star, arms raised, screaming, "This is gonna be fun!" ... And for the next 45 minutes, Marsters stays true to his word, delivering a high energy Q&A filled with fun stories and great insights.
Right off the bat, Marsters is asked which of his shows he enjoys playing most. Without a beat - "Torchwood." The crowd goes wild. Marsters professes a love for the subversive. With a gleam in his eye, he proudly boasts of his relish over playing such a controversial character as Captain John, simultaneous rival and lover to the show's lead, Captain Jack, played by John Barrowman (more on him later...) In animated fashion, he relives the joy he felt when learning there had been "backlash" to his on-screen snog with Barrowman. "We have backlash!", he shouts to the crowd.
Later in the session, someone would ask Marsters what that kiss with Barrowman was like. This leads Marsters into a comical commentary relating on-camera sex to prostitution. It also leads him to a revealing story about Barrowman. In his own words, Marsters had "blown a stunt," resulting in a badly cut leg. Cognizant that such an injury could take him off stuntwork, Marsters hides his injury, knowing full well he needs stitches. The next day, he starts to bleed through his costume and Barrowman privately calls him out on it. Then, Barrowman, in what has to be the coolest move of the century, sends Marsters to his trailer with a private physician in tow to discreetly take care of Marster's leg. After that, Marsters doesn't have to worry about acting when it comes to that kiss.
There were general questions about acting. On whether he prefers playing heroes or villains: "Dude, I so love the villains," but not perhaps for the reason you're thinking. According to Marsters, it seems that heroes, "have to run a lot," resulting in general tiredness and sweatiness, while villains get to lurk and wait. The downside? The villains have to lose.
When asked about whether he prefers stage or film, he quickly answers, "Stage." As this session alone indicates, Marsters loves the energy of a live audience. He also loves the challenge that live theater brings when things go wrong. Everything about this man screams daredevil. He also has a deep love for Macbeth, which he considers a sophisticated and mature study of evil. I officially want to be his best friend on hearing this, as this too is one of my favorite plays. He professes a deep understanding of this character, even going so far as to say that, while Patrick Stewart is the better actor, Marsters knows he can play a better Macbeth. From anyone else, this comment might seem arrogant, but it's not. Marsters is a man of passion and one of those passions is Macbeth, so why shouldn't he believe in his ability to play this character better than anyone? On a personal note, I would love nothing more than to pick this man's brain about Macbeth - just to see if we're on the same page ...
Of course, many of the questions deal with his time as Spike on Buffy and Angel. He is profuse in his devotion for the writers of the shows, frequently referring to them as "the best in the business." He makes some unexpected comments about Spike. According to Marsters, Buffy creator Joss Whedon hated the Anne Rice vision of vampires and wanted to avoid the angsty, morally conflicted vampire in favor of the savage, animalistic vampire. It turns out Joss was opposed to the character of Angel initially and seems to have wanted to avoid writing Spike as well.
One fan asks about Spike's attempted rape of Buffy in Season Six and Marsters' angst is all too obvious. It's a scene that still troubles him deeply and he goes so far as to say, "I almost committed suicide that day." He clarifies that remark by describing how he wanted to hit his head against the floor so hard that he he could imagine himself going through that floor and into a space far away from that scene. That's really how he talks, and it's absolutely captivating. He also recalls telling the writer of that scene, "Sometimes you don't know what you make us do." Marsters is utterly committed to his craft; he throws nothing away.
Again echoing his respect for the writers on Buffy and Angel, he says there was absolutely no ad-libbing on those shows. Woe be he who misses even a comma. He goes so far as to call it "the best writing" he's encountered in his professional life.
In what is clearly a downer for some fans, Marsters readily admits that he doesn't really keep in touch with his former Buffy and Angel cast mates, citing that all actors are essentially broken people who are terrible at relationships. He says this, of course, with humor and humility, and it draws laughter, not pity, from the crowd.
He then shares some humorous anecdotes about his on-screen relationship with Julia Landau. He likens Spike and Drusilla to Sid and Nancy and comments how their on-screen antics would often confuse new directors. Apparently, neither James nor Julia were shy about being frisky with their hands below the frame.
We know James Marsters as Spike and Brainiac and Captain John and so on and I fear that some might criticize such "genre roles" as beneath the domain of "real" acting. Yet Marsters' passion for what he does cannot be questioned, nor can the skill and commitment he brings to every role he plays. Again I am struck how it takes a truly gifted actor, such as a Marsters or a Stewart, a Dench or a McKellan, to bring to life such fantastic creatures of imagination and make them believable and real. Even more than that, I am impressed with how James Marsters, an actor who has quickly achieved cult status with the convention crowd, treats his fans with respect. He is the type of man who genuinely appreciates the attention he receives and when he shows up for a panel such as this, he gives 100% effort to repay those fans.
June 12, 2010
Philly Comic-Con: A Tale of Two Panels
I had the good fortune to participate in two outstanding panel discussions by two of the biggest names in genre television and film: James Marsters and Bruce Campbell. I will be providing a much more detailed breakdown of these highly entertaining Q & A sessions in the very near future, but I wanted to share some quick thoughts.
First and foremost is how gracious both men seemed. Both actors were committed to showing their respective crowds a good time. Though their presentation styles were extremely different (more on that later), neither man ever put himself above the audience, both acting as if they had an obligation to the audience - and not
the other way around.
It's refreshing to see such humility from two men who must surely know how beloved and revered they are with this particular crowd.
Next Up: The James Marsters Panel
Philly Comic-Con Update: 100% Cotton
For those who know not of this event, "100% Cotton" occurs after the convention hall has dimmed its lights. It's billed as a no-holds barred discussion lead by Wizard editor Mike Cotton and featuring DC Artist-Supreme Ethan Van Sciver. It also features a cash bar, which is just one of the aspects that makes this a particularly unusual event for a comic book convention.
I entered the room to the musical stylings of the multi-talented Van Sciver, as he banged away on a piano. Throughout the two hours, Van Sciver would break into song during the natural lulls that occur in any good conversation. The music was a mixture of song parody and Lite FM versions of Limp Bizkit and it was all entertaining.
The highlight of the evening, however, was that "no-holds barred discussion" that certainly lived up to its billing. It was a fascinating insight into not just the comic book industry, but also into the mind of a great artist. The event was sparsely attended, perhaps twenty or so people, but that only helped the intimate setting.
Mike Cotton proved himself an excellent host, affable and clearly enjoying himself as he led Van Sciver into atypical convention topics such as Van Sciver's conservative leanings and his stance on health care. What really caught my attention was Van Sciver's insight into the workings of the industry today. I had heard tell of "creative summits" held by DC and Marvel, days of power meetings used to steer the storytelling for the next year. What shocked me was the revelation that these meetings were for writers and editors only - no artists. Van Sciver's frustration with this was obvious and he discussed the role of the artist in the creative process, how an image created by an artist can be the catalyst that springs the mind of the writer into untold directions. I know from personal experience just how true this. While developing Shadowknight, the real magic didn't start to happen until the talented Ariel Aguirre showed me what Grace (the main character) looked like. Sadly, Gracie never made it into "a comic shop near you," but I will always be grateful to Ariel for teaching me about the power of collaboration, particulary in comics.
Comic books are a unique medium. The balance between image and text makes for a wonderfully immersive storytelling experience, and one shouldn't hold sway over the other. The 90's saw a wild swing over to artistry in comic books, and the storytelling suffered. The 00's may have proved to be something of an over-correction if artists like Ethan Van Sciver are being locked out of the storytelling process during its most critical junctures, such as these summits.
One of the funnier rants involved Van Sciver's criticism of characters like Ghost Rider and of Marvel's "flexibility" in the rules of its universe, citing how the Spiderman storyline "One More Day" should have resulted in Spiderman becoming a Ghost Rider like figure - he described what his "Ghost Spider" would look like and it's an image the world needs to see. He then went on to describe how he would conceive Ghost Rider. I won't spoil it here in case he ever gets the chance to bring this to life, but I will say this: he approached the character the way a good writer would - by focusing on the character's conflict and clearly identifying what makes him tick, further proof that DC might want to reconsider it policies regarding these creative summits.
It was an entertaining and informative two hours. To be honest, I wasn't sure if I would stay for the whole event, but the two hours passed so quickly that I was a little sad when it ended. And now I'm torn...clearly "100% Cotton" gets two big thumbs up from me, but I fear that my glowing review will lead to a packed house next time (assuming more than my usual four readers actually read this...) and spoil the casual un-"convention"-al atmosphere of this most excellent event.
Recent Comments