Inside the Brain of E.C. Henry

Life in a Post-Prometheus World

Been almost two months since "Prometheus"came out -- and now what do I hafta look forward to in a post-Prometheus world?  Nada, nothing.  You see, for me, Ridley Scott's"Prometheus" was the most anticipated movie of the year.  I mean prior to its release on June 8, I scoured the Internet reading anything and everything on its build up.  I was hooked.  And who wouldn't be after a trailer like this:

 

But ultimately Ridley Scott's "Prometheus" was quite a disappointment.  It was not the classic I'd hoped going in it would be.  This lead me to reflect on it and other movies that have come out this year to see how the movies, overall are doing so far this year.  Was 2012 a "good" year or a "bad" year for the movies?  Let's see...   

First off, let's tackle the notion if it's fair or not to judge 2012 when not all of it's movies have come out yet.  Fair -- to a point.  The thing is the "big" summer movies have all been released.  And it's not until Thanksgiving - Christmas that I anticipate anymore real, legitimate shot at being a hit movies will come out.  Really looking forward to seeing Steven Spielberg's "Lincoln"and Peter Jackson's "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey".

From what I've seen here's how I rank the big-hitters of 2012 movies this year:

"The Dark Knight Rises": 5 out of 10.  Really didn't care for this movie.  Thought Bane was a poor choice of a villain for Batman to battle.  Was reminded of the movie, "The Siege" for some reason while watching this.  Sure there were some things to like about this movie, but the choice for Bane to raid Batman's fortress to get the necessary arms to hold Gotham hostage wasn't very good.  And why would anyone drive a city to utter chaos on a suicide mission anyway?  Point: bad guys were poorly motivated. 

"The Amazing Spider-man":5.3 out of 10.  This re-boot was pretty much a misfire.  Emma Stone isn't beautiful or captivating enough -- to me at least -- to carry this movie as Peter Parker's love interest.  And the whole build-up to how Peter Parker became Spider-man wasn't done as well as the 2001 "Spiderman."  Did like the re-imagining of OSCORP, but the main villain, the Lizard, was pretty stupid. 

"Prometheus": 7.1 out of 10.  Visually stunning, but the "great mystery" remains just that.  The Engineers were a real disappointment, and I no longer am hyped about seeing a "Prometheus II".  

"The Hunger Games": 7.8 out of 10.  Out here in Washington you could still go to the movies and see this show 3 + months after it was originally released in March.  Talk about a show with legs!!  The Hunger games "world" really didn't work for me: 1800s-esque living in a post-apocalyptic word with cutting edge, state-of-the-art, wizzbang visual computer-generated stuff being made by the government-run TV people.  BUT the teen angle worked, and Jennifer Lawrence did a great job as Katniss.

"The Avengers": 8 out of 10.  Funny movie.  Weak on plot, but the Avenger superheros almost make you forget that.  Loki almost singlehandely sinks this ship.  My gosh, Hollywood has got to come up with better villains than that.  

"Ted": 8.8 out 10.  Very funny movie.  Biggest surprise of 2012 -- by far!  Good love story, and the teddy bear who grows up with the boy who wished him into existence works.  Kinda raunchy, not the kind of show you can take your parents to, but this was definately the best show of 2012 I've seen so far.   

So what comes next?  Well, George Kennedy's "Fury Road" (2013) is filming now.  Mad Max 20-some-plus years after "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" -- which I wasn't too fond of.   BUT I did really like 1981's "The Road Warrior" so I'll PROBABLY go see "Fury Road" when it comes out, but hearing Charlize Theron shaved her head for her role in the movie kinda throws a wet blanket on my enthusiasm for "Fury Road."  Why uglifya beautiful girl?  Not a proponent of that.    

Gosh, I feel such cynicism building up in my heart for movies.  The post-Prometheus let-down is a dangerous thing.  The movies used to be such an outlet for me.  A place to go to get inspiration.  But right now that well looks awefully dry.  

O, well.  Hopefully over time my heart will heal and learn to trust again.  It's just hard.  And what about my beloved rom-com genre.  Sigh...  Not seeing enough good ones of those coming out, though one could argue that "Ted" was a rom-com in a coming-of-age buddy movie -- which I just saw for the 3rd time tonight and STILL laughed at the jokes even when I knew they were coming.  My favorite: when the Ted locks his brakes then apologizes to the driver he nearly hit, "Sorry, I was sending a Tweet."   

As far as my own contributions go perhaps that line from Norman Osborn in "Spiderman" 2001 best sums it up, "Back to formula?  You want to take the whole line back to formula?!" My current spec. script is a bit of a mess right now.  I'm over 90 pages in and off my original outline that should be the near the beginning of Act II.  Not good.  What I've written so far is very herky-jerky; a product of too many start and stops, with not enough consecutive, back-to-back, days of writing.  Example: a bad guy I introduced at the beginning of the script gets lost for about 60 pages then comes back in the story.  Don't know how keen you are about story development, but that isn't good.

"Back to formula."  Means going deeper into my outline to try to refine the story down.  One of my biggest problems in my own writing is that I tend to have A LOT of characters.  I like people, I guess, and this is just my own warped way of showing that.  I have a tendencyto really want to get into each and every character too.  So what ends up happeing is that these characters are real important, than another character comes along and they become real important.

Another big problem with my writing is that I don't write strong enough protagonists.  Yikes, that's not good.  Why?  Because protagonists are your lead actor or actresses roles.  The lead protagonist is the star.  The hero that the audience members are supposed to root for.  And as a writer, that right up near the top of the deck of things you must have: a top-flight protagonist.  But a lot of the times that's where I fail the most -- and I realize that.

One of the other developments in my life is that I'm starting to feel a sequel to "The Commune" building momentum in my heart.  Unfortunately "The Commune" is dark place too, and I'm not sure if I really want to revisit that.  The mind is a frustrating place.  I need to find more uplifting stories to tell.  The thing is, I've got one.  It's an animated, animal coming-of-age movie.  I rough sketched the story out to my mother when she was cooking one night, and she really like it.  YES, if your mother likes something that does count.  It counts for a lot.   

So what comes next? Well, I continue to put one foot in front of the other.  Soldier on.  Try to refine the story I'm working on now.  Try to hone in and center the story more on my main protagonist, and minimize the affect of the others.  I think this story is going to take a bunch of drafts to really nail.  Right now it's just all over the place, and definitely not ready to show.  I had hoped to be wrapping up this story by the end of July, but now it looks like I'm going to have to cut myself some slack, and push out the completion date of this project. 

I'm no quiter.  What I start, I will finish.  Not sure how the final product of his teen comedy will look, but I am committed to seeing it through.  Why stress about how long it takes to write anyway?  I mean I'm on no one's clock.  This whole spec. script thing is a do-at-your-own-pace kind of thing anyway.  No one really cares what I do, so I may as well just commit to making the best piece of art I can.  Then show it to the world when I'm ready. 

And don't get me wrong.  There are a lot of things about the current spec. script I'm working on that do excite me.  For once in my life I've written, what I think will be, a really cute, cute meet.  A cute meet is beat in a romantic comedy where the audience sees the two leads interact in a romantic way for the first time.  And besides that cute meet I've also got another romantic exchange later in the script that I'm genuinely happy with -- on first draft/not-yet-all-the-way polished yet.

So I soldier on into places unknown.  (Well, with an outline the place is kinda known, but all the details of the map are not all filled in yet).  And hopefully all the magic hasn't left my wand yet and I can still...

We'll see.  Stay tuned...

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

 

The Teenage Romantic Comedy: Exploring Issues in Rom-com Movies Volume X

Know who this guy is?  (Almost looks like a police mug shot, eh?)  This is a picture of John Hughes.  John Hughes lived from Febuary 18, 1950 until August 6, 2009.  His significance? 

John Hughes was probably the most infulential teen writer for the movies of all-time.  John Hughes wrote all of these movies, and directed all but one:  "Sixteen Candles" (1984: Molly Ringwald, Anthony Micheal Hall), "The Breakfast Club" (1985: Emilo Estevez, Judd Nelson, Molly Ringwald), Wierd Science (1985: Anthony Michael Hall, Kelly LeBrock), "Pretty in Pink" (1986: Molly Ringwald, Jon Cryer, Andrew McCarthy), "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" (1986: Matthew Broderick)

Pretty prolific burst in the mid-80s.  But to be honest the only one that really registered with me -- and I was part of the teenage demographic these movies appeal to was "The Breakfast Club." 

So why am I bringing John Hughes up?  Because I think the teen romantic comedy sub-genre is a very important one, and John Hughes work helped shaped that genre into what we it know it being today.  AND in my own pretentious-as-fuck way I want to enjoy success in this genre like John Hughes enjoyed, as I'm currently penning a teenage rom-com, much in the vein of "Weird Science" (more details to come when the script is further along), and I've also already penned an excellent teen rom-com that would rival ANYTHING out there, "Revenge of the Fat Chicks."  Scoff all you want about the title, but get past that and actually READ the script and you'll see it's much deeper than you think.  Worthy of being compared to ANYTHING in the teen rom-com world. 

So why is the teen rom-com so important?  Well, because where most people have their most powerfull romantic feelings is in their teenage years.  Search your heart, when was it that you first started getting interested in members of the opposite sex?  Chances are that was in your teenage years.  Hence, the teenage years are linked in a powerful way to one's romantic development, and worthy of exploration in the movies. 

Ithink the teen romantic comedy is the most neglected of all the sub-grouping under the rom-com umbrella.  Though not the staple center of the genre, the teen rom-com is very important, and I think Hollywood should be making more of them.  Period!

In his book, Writing the Romantic Comedy, under the "What More Can a Romantic Comedy Be?  The Cross-Genre Hybrid" section, Billy Mernit actually does an EXCEPTIONAL job stating doing a brief overview of the teen rom-com and its characteristics on page 28 of his paperback book:

Wild parties, major peer pressure, sibling and parental interference, angst ridden self-examination, and lot of great rock 'n' roll...  What makes these movies particularly compelling is the deeply, soulfully over-the-top passions of its teenage protagonists; these are usually first-love stories...

Yes!  Brilliant.  I love it!  Conflict: angst ridden self-examination, major peer pressure, sibling and parental interference.  X fun-factors: wild parties.  Compelling characters: over-the-top passionate teenagers.  As a story writer myself this is the kind of stuff that perks my interest.

And I see the teen  rom-com as fertile ground for the launching of careers of up-and-coming actors and actresses.  Case-and-point: "Mean Girls" (2004: Lindsay Lohan, Rachel McAddams, Amanda Seyfried).  Sure Lindsay Lohan may have flamed-out of own accord, but Rachel McAddams and Amanda Seyfried have truly blossomed into great actresses in their own right.  Now if only Lindsay would get her act together...

BUT in the same breath I also do realize therein lies yet another challenge of this sub-genre: finding bankable stars in the teenage ranks.  Movie stars help a movie have some credibilty BEFORE its even released.  Casting relative no-names IS risky.

Right now I don't see enough teen rom-coms being made.  Feels like there's a dark shift towards what Hollywood is putting out to entertain today's youth.  The whole "Harry Potter" bullshit.  Sorry but you will NEVER get me to say a nice work about a series the acclimates teenagers to witchcraft, and portrays witchcraft in a positive light.  Then there is the "Twilight" franchise.  The bullshit continues only now vampirism gets glamorized and tailored to fit today's youth.  And now we have "The Hunger Games" captivativating a massive teenage audience.  And what really is "The Hunger Games"?  It is youth slaying each other in brutal hand-to-hand combat in front of a mass broadcast audience.  Kinda of sick, if you look at it in that light.

We live in dark times.  But what if the teen rom-com sub-genre became a catalyst to stem the tide, to entertain yet steer our youth in a positive direction?  Can movies do that?  Damn right they can!  They've been steering people's consciousness since the day they started coming out.  It's just a matter of what kind of messages Hollywood sends out.  Why can't they be good ones?  Life-affirming ones.  Ones that can affect our youth in a positive way, and help them become happy, well-adjusted, productive members of our society? 

Making money doesn't justify wrecking the entire culture that you made that money off.  I want something more wholesome for today's youth to latch onto.  Their heros and people they strive to emulate need to be better than magic practicing wizzards, vampires, and killers. 

Okay, I'll get off my soapbox, and dive back into the heart of this post.

A lot of people MAY think that teenage rom-coms should only be fitted and talored towards one quadrant of people: teenagers.  Go latest technology, infuse cutting-edge, young musical acts.  But I say why not go retro in your teenage rom-com and appeal to a broader audience.  How do you do that?

Appeal to the universal and ageless quest for love.  Older people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, and even 60s can ALL relate to what they felt by that one member of the opposite sex who first got them interested in romance.  How one deals with their first love appeals to a much broader audience than just teenagers.  Sure, they're the ones grappling with the questions now, but the older ones can relate to that first love syndrome.  And I believe will go to the movies to see that so long as the filmmakers don't paint in such colors that only appeal to the teenage demographic.

Jenna Rink from "13 Going on 30" (2004): 

I think all of us want to feel something that we've forgotten or turned our backs on...because maybe we did'nt realize how much we were leaving behind. We need to remember what used to be good. If we don't, we won't recognize it even if it hits us between the eyes.

Pretty profound stuff, eh?  And that's from a Wish-fulfillment Rom-com.  One COULD classify "13 Going on 30" as being a Teenage Rom-com, but since so much of the movie takes place in the adult world of 30-year-old Jenna, I think that's a little disingenuous to the teenage rom-com  sub-genre.  Yes, the central question is will Matt and Jenna end up a couple.  Hence, "13 Going on 30" is deserving of being labeled a rom-com.  I just think the central device of the wishing dust which flash-forwards Jenna in her life helps label the sub-genre. 

But in the Jenna Rink quote from the movie.  Do you see how that appeals to an older demographic than teenagers?  Hope you do, because its stuff like that, that helps broaden the quadrants your movie appeals too. 

The biggest attraction in the teenage rom-com arena is the issues surrounding that one great love interest.  Will the guy get the girl?  Will the girl get what she really wants?  The pursuit of what you feel is your great love is the coolest thing the teenage rom-com has going for it.  And you know what, it's something I think EVERYONE can relate too.

Do you remember that one girl, (or guy if you're a chick) that you had your heart set on in high school?  I can still picture them all in my mind.  They were angels.  Literally to me, they were unobtainable, celestial beings.  They floated past me.  Congregated with other people, and only socialized with me if I could help them academically.  I was the plague.  But they were angels.  Only time I got to really interface with them was once in some English assignment we had to put on a little play, so I wrote one up about Russia and America.  They all knew their lines, and performed them awesomely.  Whereas I fucked everything up during the presentation.  That happened during my senior year; guess it was God's way of giving the girls something to remember me by: the fuck-up who fucked up the drama skit that they were forced to do with me.  But that's what fuck-ups do; they fuck up -- it's to be expected!  NEVER been real smooth with the ladies.  And even now in my 40s the beat goes on. 

But even if your real love life sucks (like mine does), the movies always offer some relief.  The teen rom-com is much bigger than movies just for teenagers.  Because the issues in teen romance are universal and be enjoyed by a much larger group then just teens.  

 

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

 

P.S. Sorry for not posting last weekend.  No real excuse, I had two days off, just was doing other things.  Will try to post again on Wednesday or Thursday.  Will the goal always being one content post on the weekends, one smaller post during the week.

P.S.S. Still working on the latest spec. script.  Didn't get a lot of writing in last week.  Will try to do better this week.  Chugga-chugga, chugga-chugga.  

 

Rom-com Pairing: Exploring Issues in Rom-com Movies Volume VIIII

There are more romantic comedy movies out there than you think.  In today's post I'm going to explore the issue that many movies out there may be promoted by Hollywood as one kind of movie, when all reality they are romantic comedies at heart.

What I'm getting at is the issue of genre pairing.  And as pertains to the world of all things romantic comedy, this is one one genre is fused with the romantic comedy.  Lately when Hollywood has chosen to do this I'm finding that they chose to promote the movie they've come up, not as a romantic comedy, but rather as the genre they've decided to fuse in.  Confused yet?  This issue really isn't that confusing, as I hope to explain.  Rather, it's just a matter of marketing: Hollywood markets romantic comedies as something else to avoid alienating people who have a bias against romantic comedies.

Face it, romantic comedies have a stigma -- especially amongst the ranks of men.  Get excited and go tell a bunch of guys, "Hey let's go see this romantic comedy, it's getting good reviews.  Sounds like it might be fun."  And you're like to get smirk of disappointment, or an outright brush-off. 

So how does Hollywood work around many people's biases.  Simple: market the romantic comedy as being something else. 

My favorite romantic comedy of all-time, "13 Going on 30" (2004) was marketed as a comedy -- "for the kid in us all."  Which is true in a sense, Jenna Rink (Jennifer Garner) does start out as a teenage girl, and her character is supposed to be the 30-year-old version of herself with the mentality of her 13-year-old self.  But "13 Going on 30" is a romantic comedy.  It's central plot is one of Jenna getting a peak into her future so she will choose not to alienate the guy who really loves her, the great love of her life, Matt Flemhaff (Mark Ruffalo). 

Why package "13 Going on 30" as being a comedy instead of the rom-com that it clearly is?  Because more people will come out to see a comedy that something branded from the get-go as a romantic comedy.  Hollywood knows that, so they emphasise the mass appeal elements of a given movie, and gloss over its core.  And they do this purposely. 

Yeah, but couldn't "13 Going on 30" also be labeled a coming-of-age movie, or maybe even a fantasy?  Yeah sure.  I mean it does have coming-of-age and fantasy elements in it.  And if you lobby for such a branding maybe that's the movie you choose to see when you watched "13 Going on 30".  I do the same thing, Holmes.  Why, because because a movie made well can co-exist on different plains.  It'll be rich enough that it can be enjoyed on more than one level.  Kinda like a good tiramisu, where you can savor different levels of the delicacy: the light whip cream middles, the foundational cake, the rich chocolate, or even the accenting berries. 

So how would I classify the movie "13 Going on 30" using my own pairing paradigm?  I classify "13 Going on 30" as being a Destiny Rom-com as I alluded to in an earlier post while classifying the movie "Sleepless in Seattle."  Destiny applies in the theme of "13 Going on 30" not its external look of a girl who flash-forwards in her life as a warning of sorts.  Now "Sleepless in Seattle" and "13 Going on 30" take uniquely different approaches and usage of the theme of romantic destiny, but it's definitely there in both cases.  Anne is destined to be with Sam in "Sleepless in Seattle," and Jenna Rink is destined to be romantically joined to her best friend, Matt, in "13 Going on 30."

Point: a romantic theme can be so strong that it's the thing the rom-com can be classified as being paired with. 

Take for instance the other sub-genre under the romantic comedy umbrella that I coined, the Ego Rom-com, in an ego ro-com the beliefs and strivings of a potential couple are so strong that they are thing which is coupled with the inner romantic comedy story: "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days," "Hitch," and "The Ugly Truth" are all what I would classify as being Ego rom-coms.  Again, ego is a dominant theme and all three of these movies it's a clash of egos that dominate in a romantic comedy structure.   

Now, I've dealt with the hard stuff up front.  It gets easier from here on out.  Take for instance the recent release of the movie, "Ted" (2012: Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis).  And what's one of the focal attractions of this movie?  Why it's the relationship of John Bennett to his teddy bear, whose come to life, named Ted.  So on one level this clearly a buddy, coming-of-age movie.  Yet when you watch the movie you find that John Bennett (Mark Wahlberg's character) is clearly in love with Mila Kunis' character, and a love story is playing out. 

"Ted" also has a distinctive raunchy side to it.  And in another movie poster you see Mark Walhberg and his teddy bear at the urinal taking a whiz.  Lots of gross-me-out humor is implored in "Ted."  So in one hand it's a lot like "The 40-Year-Old Virgin" (2005: Judd Apatow, Steve Carrell), but I would say that "Ted" is more of a romantic comedy than "The 40-Year-Old Virgin."  The plot structure in "Ted" is much more like a classic romantic comedy than the "The 40-Year-Old Virgin."  I would say "Ted" is a raunchy comedy paired with a romantic comedy, whereas "The 40-Year-Old Virgin" is simply a raunchy buddy comedy with a romantic comedy secondary plot line.  Why?  Because the Andy/Trish secondary plot line starts late in the movie and carries it to it's finish, but at the beginning this a buddy flick where Andy's so-called "friends" jump in to help Andy get laid and get a stigma off him.  And that stigma is what carries the film, not the Andy/Trish storyline.  Get it?

Classifying some rom-com can be tricky, and there is a lot of room for debate.  Again it's what the movie says to YOU. 

Some rom-com pairing are fairly obvious, "Romancing the Stone": an action/adventure paired with a romantic comedy or say "Enchanted": mythical fantasy paired with a romantic comedy.

The whole idea of rom-com pairing involves fusing another genre inside a romantic comedy construct.  The rom-com element is then devalued in marketing, and other aspects of the film are accented to draw in a wider audience. 

I've seen the affects that this kind of pairing has on people too.  Typically their reaction after seeing a rom-com paired movie is, "Hey it was kind of funny, and they was thing between the guy and the girl in there too."  The rom-com stigma didn't keep them away, and didn't end-up offending them either.  Rather, they saw the movie they wanted to see and weren't disappointed. 

So hopefully now I've given you something to think about.  Billy Mernit introduced me to this way of thinking.  He calls it a "cross-genre hybrid" in his Writing the Romantic Comedy book.  I just didn't think that was snazzy enough name, AND there were a few other points I wanted to make about this topic, hence this post.

Do realize that Billy Mernit has been studying this beloved genre WAY longer than I have.  Thus his opinions are much more concise, well thoughout, and formulated than mine.  AND Billy is currently doing a series on the romantic comedy as pertains to today, so go check out his site for yourself.  Hopefully though I've given you something to think about with this post.  I do try.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA 

P.S. Didn't get as much work done on the latest spec. script I'm still working on this past week.  Really need to amp it up.  Right now I'm kinda lost in the vastness of it all.  I know I've got A LOT of rewriting to do.  Currently in the 80+ page mark, early my outline where ACT II should just be beginning.  Ouch!  That's not good.  But then again 1st drafts are often times called exploratory drafts, and I'm definitely venturing all over the place right now.  Part of the problem has been work: I put in a lot of hard, stenuous hours at work.  The other is just a matter of self-discipline.  Regardless.  Need to amp it up.  Really can't wait to have this script done and sent off to my guy in Hollywood to see what thinks about it. 

The Little Train Mantra of Creative Writing

I'm always on the lookout for writing mantras I can latch onto.  And on occasionI'll see the correlation between a story and how it "can" apply to writing.  Like the story of Little Train, and how it "could" apply to writing 1st drafts.

In using this metaphor, let me start right off by saying I'm little train -- not that dipshit clown riding atop the engine's roof!  What a fuckin' dipshit.  I mean who does that, ride onto of moving train -- even in a cartoon.  Must be a clown, and indeed it is. 

 Moving on with the analogy, which will get better as this post progresses I promise.  When endeavoring to write and complete a given work, one needs persistence, and the inner fortitude to fight through it when the going gets tough and more uphill, like when the euphoria of writing wears off, and the processes becomes more of a grind. 



"I think I can.  I think I can.  Chugga-chugga.  Chugga-chugga.  Toot!  Toot!!"

A lot of people are under the misconception that all writers do is dream stuff up, licky-split.  They think it and -- poof!  It exists in a finished, polished form.  That is how people who are very distant from the actual writing process.  I've talked to some people in my family, who hear I'm "a writer" and their eyes get glassy, they have a sense of wow and ill-placed awe.  They have no real idea of what it takes to take an idea from start to finish, and be creative.  Not to diss these people, as they do have other skills and attributes that I lack, but we are notable different. 

Writing requires persistence.  Writing requires adding fuel to the fire to keep the train moving.  This fuel comes in the form of butt-in-seat time put in.  Wanna add pages to your page count?  Gotta be behind the keyboard to do that, Holmes.  

What's fun is that once you get the 1st draft train moving sometimes as you sail through the creative writing landscape you discover beauty akin to this --

 Is this picture ever beautiful or what?  It's like the train finally arrived at something worth while.  And that's the draw of the writing train.  The cool, unexpected discoveries that come along the ride.  You see it's not not all clown hoping on top of the roof trying to take credit and slow you down.  No, there's joy to be had in the journey. 

Why just the other day, I wrote off my outline and discovered a really cool scene.  Unfortunately too many of my writing days don't look the scenic picture I posted.  No, most of my writing days look like this:

Twists and winds, valley and peaks.  Does that look like a grind to you?  Well, that's part of my mental struggle with writing.  I tend to to look too far out over the horizon and get overwhelmed by all the difficulties I imagine myself having as I try to bring this writing train to its last destination. 

I think I can.  I think I can.  Chugga.  Chugga.

But where's the toot-toot!  Gotta have a toot, toot.  What is the toot-toot, you may be wondering.  That's the joyous feel of forward momentum as you push towards the goal.  Bet you never had Little Train broken down to that degree before.  But that's what us highfalutein, pretentious-as-fuck writers do; we over-analyze things and draw deeper conclusions that the surface material deserves. 

I love the toot-toot feeling of accomplishment.   Need to "toot", "toot" some more in my life.  It's important.  When you toot it means your proud of what you're doing.  Do I take pride in my writing accomplishments?  Damn-straight, Skippy.

But right now, in all honesty, I'm kinda pissed at myself for my own slow progress in penning the current story that I'm working on.  Truth be told I thought I'd have it done by now.  NOT still working on the 1st draft that I began in March!  I need to get faster.  I need to spend more time in the engine room of my creative writing train.  I need to take responsibility for my writing productivity and get more done.  I do have desire.  I do want to see the finish line and produce another story that I'm proud of.  Need reasons to toot, toot. 

I think one way I can get faster is to stop drinking beer.  Gunna be a sacrifice, but a needed one.  Another way I can get faster is get back to doing mind-engages at work.  This is basically setting the stage so that when I'm behind the keyboard my mind is already in the story, and I'm ready to move on to deeper levels and the creative train is poised to discover new sights. 

"I think I can.  I think I can.  I know I can.  I know I can."

The Little Train that could, kicked into gear E.C. Henry style.   Whaddya think?  Am I nuts or what?  Don't tell me you think I'm more like that clown on top of the train, than the train itself.  That would make Hulk very angry indeed!

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

P.S. Saw the movie, "Ted" (2012: Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis) last night at the Bonney Lake Multiplex.  Laughed a lot.  "Ted" is kinda raunchy in spots, but what needs to work, works in this film.  Namely Mark Wahlberg's character's believable bond to his Teddy bear, and Mark Wahlberg's character relationship to his girlfriend, Mila Kunis' character.  And as for the title character, Ted; he hams it up quite nicely in spots, is likeable and funny at the same time, and the image I took away from this film is a grown man smoking his bong with his Teddy bear.  Believe me it's in the film.  Here's a taste of what you can expect: