Inside the Brain of E.C. Henry

Delving into Realms of the Obscene: the Sad State of the Romantic Comedy Landscape of Today: Exploring Issues in Rom-Com Movies Volume 37

Can you go too far with art?  Can you go too far in a movie genre that the medium as a whole is actually acting to kill itself, rather then meet the desires of its intended audience?  I believe you can.  And we're seeing this phenomenon unfold before our very eyes with current, sad state of the romantic comedy genre.  Case-and-point, recent releases which include:

1. "Warm Bodies" (2013: Nicholas Hoult, Teresa Palmer): a teen rom-com were a zombie boy falls in love with a female girl.
2. "Her" (2013: writer/director Spike Jonze, Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams): a man falls in love with computer operation system.
3. "Don Jon" (2013: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Scarlett Johnansson): a man deals with a porn addiction while dating a good match for him.

Grading art can be tricky.  And it is true that beauty is in the eye of the behold.  But some sights are obscene.  Case and point: I once saw a painted picture of a Crucifix of Christ in a urinal.  Now what would ever possess a person to set his or her artistic skills to such a demented end?  Now alone the two things are not bad.  I LOVE the crucifix of Christ.  I love Christ.  And I wear a golden crucifix to identify with Jesus.  And I use urinals everyday.  But to put a crucifix in a urinal and depict that as art for others to see!?!  That's profane.  And if you cannot see the obsceneness in that, I truly pity you and hope that someday the Lord does a work in your heart so that you can once again define the acceptable from the profane.

I think where the rom-com genre has gone off the rails is at the studio, executive level.  Someone is green-lighting this SHIT, and giving it their blessing to be funded, and mass distributed.  Lack of taste at the highest level.  Sad, very sad.

Now, SOME might argue that artists should be granted the freedom to test and explore the boundaries of movie-making.  Push the envelope.  Go where no one has gone before.  In fact some might argue that these very same three movies raise key issue afflicting modern society.  "Don Jon": men have a problem with pornography and that can affect their modern relationships.  "Wam Bodies": we are romantically dead as society, and need the spark of life to get us going again.  "Her": some people have taken the easy out with technology and let that replace their inherrent need for love by another person.  

Okay, so maybe you see the themes of these three movies a little differently than me, but I'm on the trajectory with issues they raise, right?

Here' the basic inherent problem with all three movies.  All three attempt to fuse elements which tear at the fabric of romance between a man and a woman.  In fact one of them even challenges the notion that romantic love can be found outside the bounds of a man/woman relationship.  And why does a traditional audience of a romantic comedy even go to see a romantic comedy movie in the first place -- to have their faith re-kindled in the love they could find in this world in the arms of a member of the opposite sex.  

All three of these movies: "Her", "Warm Bodies" and "Don Jon" make me sick to my stomach.  Makes me think that those making the movies have pushed the envelope to an obscene level.  That which was once beautiful and inspiring, is now ugly and working against its core ethos.  

The romantic comedy genre is not trending in the right direction.  And you can blame those who greenlit these movies for that.

All three of these movies: "Warm Bodies", "Don Jon" and "Her" fail me at the premise level.  I was able to determine upfront by what the filmmakers where attempting to fuse together was something I would not want to watch.  So of all three movies the only one I've seen so far is "Her".  Good recommendations on-line by people's who opinions I trust, and actors and actresses I admire pushed me over the edge to see it.

My original prejudice of the movie "Her" didn't change much as result actually watching this movie.  Watching Joaquin Phoenix's character fall in love with his computer operating system made me sick to my stomach.  His computer operating system wanted to become more human, and Joaquin Phoenix's character just wanted to get over his impending divorce.  Lonely writer, meets eager computer voice ready to become human.  A love to inspire the masses in 2013 and beyond right?  Absolutely not!!!  Never got over the creepiness of a man opening himself up to his computer -- and falling intellectually in love with it!  Did appreciate the fine acting performances by Joaquin Phoenix and Amy Adams tough.  It's just this movie failed me at the premise level and the execution of the idea no matter how believable and well-thought out it was, was a very hard sell, and indeed, never won me over -- not for a second.

I love the romantic comedy genre, but I hate the direction it is going right now.  Yes, "Silver Linings Playbook" and "About Time" were steps in the right direction in 2013, but "Warm Bodies", "Her" and "Don Jon" were all grave missteps.  

I guess it all stems back to the reason why people go see romantic comedies in the first place.  I'm of the belief that bedrock supporters of the romantic comedy genre to these movies to get their faith rekindled and sparked for romance.  Why do you think women want to see rom-coms?  They want their boyfriends or husbands (as the case may be) in real life to be romantic towards them in real life.  Romantic comedies are meant to inspire, not be these science experiments taking two mismatched, opposing factions and forcing them to co-exist in the same movie together.

1. Zombies do not belong with teenagers foraying into their first romantic endeavor.
2. Pornography does not belong with romance and laughter.
3. Advanced computer technology does not belong as a substitute for a flesh and blood human being in a romantic relationship.

So will Hollywood ever learn?  I hope so.  I LOVE all the hyper-talented people over there: directors, actors, film editors.  I truly believe that if they want to they can still make romantic comedies of exceptional value that meet people's needs.  What is needed is better taste from the people at the top.  If you have the power to green light movies, you have the power to affect millions of people.  With that power you can inspire them to live more happier and complete lives, or you used as a vessel which helps solicit disharmony and discontentment in society abroad.       

I do not believe that romance is dead.  And don't  believe for a second that movies like "Her", "Warm Bodies" or "Don Jon" advance the genre to greater heights.  Rather, I believe that obscene premise movies like "Her", "Warm Bodies" and "Don Jon" are dragging this beloved genre through the mud and taking it to new depths of depravity such has never been seen before.  Just the fact that movies like these three get a wide release makes me sad.  It makes me feel like those at the top of the Hollywood movie making chain are dead, dead inside.  Hollywood needs to take to heart what they're releasing.  Consider their legacy down the road.  These three movies: "Her", "Warm Bodies" and "Don Jon" prove that you can think you're advancing the romantic comedy genre to a new level, but in reality you're undermining the entire ethos of the genre and dragging it to an obscene end, a grave valley of depravity.

 

Seattle Enjoys Its 2nd Christmas in January thanks to the 2014 Seahawks

They're coming out of the woodwork.  I swear they're coming out of the woodwork.

And who am I talking about?  Overzealous Seattle Seahawk football fans.  This shit's gone waaay beyond the 12th man, we're taking 12,000 man or something like that.

I guess in way you can chalk it up to an esteem boost: this city -- nay this state is reveling in the Seattle Seahawks' success this year.  

When I drive home from work one house even has Christmas light on -- in Seattle Seahawk blue and green.  And one batch of light is even spelling out the number twelve!

And the people are joyous.  The Seahawks' success this year HAS brought people a lot of joy this time of year.  And trust me, if you live in the Seattle area you NEED an artificial joy in January.  It's cold.  It's gray.  It's miserable, and the weather has been his way since before Thanksgiving.  

I can't help but think, what if the Seahawks had lost right off the bat in the playoffs to New Orleans?  Where would we be then?  Joyless.  But this city recovers.  We lost in the playoffs to Atlanta last year and I remember it took me about a week to get over that.  But then again I am not your typical Seahawk fan.  

Who is you typical Seahawk fan?  Brash.  Unaware of reality.  A lot like Richard Sherman, without the athletic talent.  With a lot of Seahawk fans you can't talk reality, they're not ready for it.  They only wanna ride the wave, believing that their team can't loose.  Try telling a Seahawk fan that Denver Bronkos are a good team, and Seahawks could lose to them, and you're likely to get booed out of the room.  No room for reality by those riding the wave...

So why am I such a killjoy?  I'm not.  I WANT the Seahawks to win, I just realize that sometime your opponent has skills too.  I was watching Colin Kapernick run again my Seahawks on Sunday, and thinking, "O man, we're in deep trouble, he's carving us up just like he carved the Green Bay Packers' defense on two separate occasions."  Colin Kapernick is very good, and we're lucky we beat him.  Sure we deserved to win, but it's not like we blew the 49ers out.  We won 23-17, and trailed most of the game.  

Just don't tell that to the average Seattle Seahawk fan.  Just pander to them what they wanna hear; they beat the arc rival in the NFC championship game.  New Years Eve party extraordinaire, one guy from my job didn't make in to the work the next day after the Hawks/49ers game.  

So how did I, E.C. Henry, watch the Seahawk/49ers game?  With my dad, my sister-in-law, and her two infant children.  But when Richard Sherman tipped that pass Colin Kapernick was trying to get to Crabtree and Seahawk Malcom Smith intercepted the ball I  litteraly jumped up and down and spun around screaming, "We're going to the Super Bowl!  We're going to the Super Bowl!"  So much for being the calm and demure, writer type.  At that instant 25+ years of watching a mostly metiorce franchise was rewarded; the Seattle Seahawks had punched their ticket for a date with the Denver Bronkos for Super Bowl XXXXVIII.  

So how do I like our chances?  I'd say we have a 65% chance of winning.  The only thing that scares me about the Denver Bronkos is Payton Manning.  But if we can cut off his quick hitting short, three step drop passing game, we're gonna win.  Payton Manning is a great quarterback, but at this stage of his career he's also pretty much a statue back there.  If we can get some of our quick defensive players in his grill... but then again I wonder how many other teams have tried to do that and failed.

There is one other x-factor that may tip the favor for the Seahawks on Super Bowl Sunday.  Remember this name, Percy Harvin.  Percy Harvin was the Seahawks BIG acquisition in the off season.  He's a wide receiver, kick off and punt returner.  And he's very explosive.  Unfortunately I think the man is also made of paper mache.  BUT if we get him on the field, is a difference maker.  And better yet, Percy Harvin is a FRESH difference maker.  Percy only played in two games...  What I'm saying is, we've got THE PERFECT secret weapon.  This is the last game of the year, and Percy Harvin has a lot to prove -- and EVERYONE knows it!  THAT'S some drama that I can't wait to see unfold on Super Bowl Sunday.  Kit gloves off, Percy whatchu got on the biggest stage you're ever going to see?  

Huge fan of Richard Sherman, but there is no excuse for how poorly he treated Erin Andrews Fox's sideline reporter who just wanted to interview him after the 49er game.  Richard Sherman was WAY out of line in bad mouthing 49er wide receiver Michael Crabtree.  Dude, you just made the play of the game, show some class, don't embarrass yourself.  Let your play tell the world your the best cover corner in the game.  

My respect factor for San Fransico 49er head coach Jim Hardbaugh went up exponentially after I heard how tastefully he answered questions from the Fox reporter after the game.  Total class act.  Really didn't expect that from Jim Hardbaugh, I thought he'd take some swipes at the Seahawks, maybe the refs, but he didn't.  He gave the Seahawks some credit for playing a good game, and came across very well in a spot where he must have been raging inside or deeply disappointed.  To have such composure in a tough spot like that is admirable.  When I loose I hope I act half as classy as Jim Hardbaugh acted in his post-game interview with the Fox reporter.  What a pro.  I tip my hat to worthy adversary, and hope if I'm ever in situation like Jim was in on Sunday night that I can handle it half as well as he did.

Jim Harbaugh, you gotta stop doing that!  Don't you know you're our top adversary.  Can't have you starting to be likable!!!  

Sports.  They bring some of strangest reactions out of us all.  But up here in Seattle, trust me we're in the midst of our 2nd Christmass and we don't want the magic of the season to leave us before it's time. 

Is Star Wars Episode VII Gonna Suck?

From what I'm reading on-line, YES, it is sounding like "Star Wars: Episode VII" is gonna suck!

Hats off to J.J. Abrams for TRYING to revive this beloved saga, but if you're going to have a movie that has Hans Solo, Luke Skywalker, and Leia as the MAIN CHARACTERS using the original actors and actresses who originally portrayed them: Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, and Carrie Fisher; at the current age they're at, buddy, from where I see it, you're heading in the wrong direction.

• Harrison Ford: 71 years old (born 1942)
• Carrie Fisher: 57 years old (born 1956)
• Mark Hamill: 62 years old (born 1951)
• Billy Dee Williams who played Lando Calrissian: 76 years old (born 1937)

Sure, all look GREAT for their age.  BUT it's their age in leau of having them be the featured leads in a the continuation of the Star Wars saga which has me up in arms.  Having read some of the their age is up there.  I fear centering a story around Hans Solo, Luke and Leia risks the continuation of the series going the route of a "victory lap" story.  EVERYONE loves the original collection of Luke, Hans Solo and Leia, but that was a LONG TIME AGO.  Re-tinkering with them now risks a lot.  And to read that J.J.Abrams wants Luke, Hans Solo and Leia to have a "fitting send-off" makes me really think what's going on here is that J.J.Abrams and his creative braintrust don't have enough original ideas to staff the plots of Star Wars movies episode 7 - 12, which apparently was George Lucas' original cannon vision for Star Wars as complete set.  And it pains me to read that Michael Arndt has not only been let go of writing on the project, but currently isn't even credited as a writer on the project anymore, despite the FACT that he sent in a draft for the script.  Michael Ardnt was the genius who wrote "Little Miss Sunshine" (2006: Abagail Breslin, Toni Collette, Greg Kinnear).   Come on, dude, don't be stingy, Michael Ardnt gave you his vision for Episode VII -- give him credit for that!!

Ah, yes, that tricky beast of creating new worlds and situations for key confrontations, a key hallmark that every previous Star Wars movie was known for, Hoth and Daggobah in "The Empire Strikes Back" (1980), the Ewoks in "Return of the Jedi" (1983), Couresant and the Gargauns in "The Phantom Menace" (1999), Genosis and the clone aliens in "Attack of the Clones" (2002), and the lava planet in "Revenge of the Sith" (2005).  In my opinion, J.J. Abrams biggest task is creating new worlds that a mass audience hasn't seen before and gets to experience for the first time.  

But in light of ALL of this, I say know your villain, know your story.  If I was J.J. Abrams and his creative team I would key on delving into the mystery of the Sith.  Where did Darth Maul come from?  And the Emporeers' demonic and psychic freakazoid associates, what's their story?  I think one of the emphasis on the continuation of the sago should delve more into these creatures worlds.  Why they are the way they are, and how did they get to be the way?  Lots of interesting stuff there.  Hopefully J.J. Abrams and Lawrence Kasdan won't sugarcoat things so much that they gloss over the orogins of the bad guys.       

Now as for the rumored offspring of Luke, Han Solo and Leia.  If J.J. Abrams goes with the twins Jaina and Jacen: from Leia and Han Solo.  With that, J.J. Abrams can't go wrong.  From what I've read and seen pictures of on-line, Jaina Solo as this swashbuckling heroine and Jacen as her twin who has a hard time telling right from wrong and ends up getting seduced by the dark side.  THAT is definitely on the right track and worthy of making the final cut.  I imagine Jaina Solo as this being a young Kate Beckinsale type, athletic, pretty, and very good at marshal arts.  I also think her character will be the main one in the Star Wars saga moving forward.

BUT filling the screen with good guys means you hafta have a stable of bads for the good guys to overcome.  Which gets me back to the villains.  I hope J.J. Abrams and crew spend a lot of time developing good, bad guys.  Know the villain, know the story.  The villains evil desire fuels the plot and makes the good guy have to do heroic things to thwart the bad guy's plans.  And I just LOVE what the last Star Wars installment did with the General Grevious character, having him be this lizard type who was imprisoned in a robotic outer structure -- like Annakin ended up being later when he got "saved" by the Emperor, only to know be a dark knight in a robotic body.  Brilliant stuff.  I don't think George Lucas gets the high praise he deserves for that interlinking: Generial Grevious as a predecessor to Darth Vader.  As a matter of fact, I don't think George Lucas gets enough love for giving us Star Wars in the first place.  I've got LOTS of love in my heart for George Lucas and his vision in giving the world his Star Wars opus.  

Episode 7 really can be a showcase and set-up for the rest of the series IF J.J. Abrams plays his cards right.  I so hope he does not resort to reprising the Emperor all over again.  I really think a new master villain is needed.  You can't just suck off the nipple of the past and not expect some serious criticism.     

You see I see Star Wars Episode VII as a real opportunity to BREATHE SOME LIFE back into the saga as a whole.  And to do that you need to distance yourself from the easy  traps of having the Emperor still trying to control everything, and Luke and Leia trying to stop him.  What if in the collapse of the Empire there was a power vacuum?  Who would rise up to fill that void?  New good and bad guys would emerge.  

So would E.C. Henry like to be a writer on "Star Wars"?  NO!  I'm just not passionate enough about "Star Wars".  Yes, as a fellow creative I have some ideas of where I think the franchise should go, but I'm not just not passionate enough about "Star Wars" to do a "Star Wars" script of my own.  "Planet of the Apes"?  Now that's a different story, I'm more of an "Apes", post apocalyptic guy, then a soft, sci fi guy.

Still, Jaina Solo is a STRONG PLACE to set the future of this franchise.  Following her around the galaxy is going to be a fun ride: high stakes, swashbuckling fights -- and maybe even some romance...  We'll see.  It's just I really don't want to see another movie with Luke, Leia, and Hans Solo as the primary leads.  Their time has come and gone.  Sure, reprised them back as supporting characters, mentors, but as leads?  Come on, dude, that's weak!  It's time to move on and go beyond that.  And that's where I'm coming from in doing this post.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

P.S. Had a cold this last week.  Thus it was a real grind for me, going to work then coming home and having little energy than other to just crash and go to bed.  Did however start the script for the epic fantasy novel.  Lot of fun doing that, lot easier then making the novel work too.  And hey J.J. just so you know, I'm not all about myself as event by me saying this; right now my opus, the epic fantasy novel I'm writing SUCKS!  No, not the plot -- but my writing of it!  Don't know if I can ever elevate my own writing so that it's worthy of mass production, but right lemme tell ya I'm not even close.  Gonna be a long time before I'm ready to take my novel to a publisher.  The script, however.  Now that I should be able to knock out much earlier.  So just know, J.J. Abrams, I'm not just hard on you, I'm hard on myself too.  I just want Star Wars Episode VII to be good, and I know that you're getting a lot of different opinions thrown your way...

I just hope you choose the best ideas and don't resort to easy crutches.

Practice Your Righteousness

The word of God is a constant source of inspiration for me.  I love reading the Old Testament and learning more about God, and why He does what He does.

Why do you think God wrote the bible?  

Sure, there were a lot of different writers along the way who contributed, but through it all there was One God who inspired them all, then after they were done authenticated their work as His inspired word.  And inspired to do what?  Reveal God, that's what!  The bible is God's word designed to reveal Himself to us.  Through all of the bible's stories and time periods a greater story is shown, and its the story of God and man, and more specific to us as men reading God's word, who God is, what He likes and what He doesn't like.  

Huge fan of the Old Testament -- especially the prophets.  Love reading what the prophets (Isiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel) had to say.  Why?  Because, if you believe what prophets are, they reveal to us what God wants us to know about Him.  And from reading and studying the prophets you get way more than just forecasts on what is to come and God's judgements against various peoples.  You get to know God's nature, and it is a beautiful nature.  

In attempting to read through the bible, in the book of Ezekiel, I ran across a chapter of  scripture that really got me to think.  In my New American Standard bible chapter 18 of the book of Ezekiel is summarized as "God Deals Justly with Individuals".  And in this chapter God deals with the subject of the righteous and the unrighteous.  The image above is a rendering of Ezekiel in the valley of dry bones, which the Lord had Ezekiel prophesy over to become a mighty army.  You can read that story for yourself in Ezekiel 37: 1-14. 

Through reading chapter 18 of the book of Ezekiel I was astounded at how easy it is for us in eyes of the Lord to have our sins forgotten, or our righteous deeds to be forgotten and for us to lose our status.   It all depends if you practice righteousness, or if you're practicing sin.  You bear that responsibility yourself.  You chose to be righteous or you chose to be a sinner.  With God it is all or nothing: are you are either counted as being righteous or are counted as being a sinner.

I, E.C. Henry, choose to be righteous -- and I sincerely hope you choose the same.  

And what does the word righteous mean?.  From my New American Standard Dictionary:

Righteous: Meeting the standards of what is right and just.

From The Free Dictionary Online by Farlex:

Righteous: morally upright without guilt or sin.  In accordance with virtue and morality.  Morally justifiable.  

And since my mind went to an area of study, the importance of practicing your righteousness, here's a few other scriptures on righteousness I want you to consider:

1John 3:7 "Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous; just as He is righteous;"

 

John: 5:20 ""For I say to you unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.""

John 5:16 ""Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.""

Points I glean from these scriptures:

• God wants us to TRY.  Practice righteousness, try to do what's right; put in an effort to be righteous.  Realize your own human limitation, but strive for the higher ideals of being righteous, trying to do what is right and just.
• There are false forms of righteousness out there, perhaps even dwelling in your midst.  People of high religious esteem in the eyes of the people, yet they DO NOT meet the righteous standard of a Holy God.  
• God wants you to shine for Him.  The object you should be striving for in doing good works is glorifying God.  

I don't know what it is, and I can't put my finger on it, but I have a real strong desire for righteousness.   Sure I have a very black heart in spots, especially sexually sometimes and in crass thoughts in my mind, but I've come to realize that's my flesh.  Every man has two different natures: your fleshly, human nature; and your spiritual nature.  Now, you can be completely blind to that reality, but that's a fact for everyone regardless of whatever religion or religious practice that are your own.  We all have the same nature: a physical body, and a spirit that resides inside of it.  But back to my own personal weaknesses.  I no longer get too down about that; God is greater than my fleshly nature.  Someday all my struggles in this life will be a distant memory.  To God be the glory.  

Don't ever think you can't do what is right.  I believe in the universality of rightness.  What I mean by this is that a right act, a righteous can be done by anyone regardless of their religious preference.  

Example.  Say a Satanist helps a little old lady across the street and load her groceries in her car, does that make it any less an act of righteousness than if a born-again Christian did it?  NO!  In fact, from on high, I honestly believe the Holy Father is more impressed by the Satanist who does acts of righteousness than had an upright Christian.  

But doing good works and being right standing with God, though related on some levels, are different.  God didn't write the bible and give us His Son, Jesus, for no reason.  I believe Jesus is a true marvel, and that everyone needs to have an opinion about Him.  Yes, He is that important.  

I don't know how God judges people who were born into various religions.  This is a subject I have grappled with for years.  You see I was born into a family who knew God, my mom came from a devout Catholic background, and my dad's family went to the covenant church.  (Covenant churches are one of the sects under the general Christian umbrella)    

But what about the person who grew up in deep, darkest Africa?  What about being born Muslim?  What about being born Jewish, of the Jewish faith that doesn't recognize Jesus as Lord?

Thoughts such as these, were the primal coals which fueled a script I wrote years ago, "Indians of the Ancient Plains".  

But when it comes to judging the people, and deciding who's who, and where people belong, such delineations belongs to God.  He knows who belongs in heaven.  He knows people's past, and the amount of slack they should be granted.  And He knows those who reject the truth of their own accord and don't deserve to go to His wedding feast.  We are called to love people.  In fact, God calls those who claim to know Him to a more perfect love, one that involves even loving your enemies!

I, E.C. Henry, believe that our righteousness should stem from a heart-felt desire to please Jesus Christ.  The more our heart is inclined towards Him, the more our acts with be righteous and pleasing to the Holy Father.  Jesus didn't come to the Earth and give us His example for no reason.  He is the vine, we are the branches.  Branches produce fruit, which are acts of righteousness.  

I pray the fruit of your life, whatever that is, brings glory to God.

Sincerely,

P.S. Watched the Seahawks vs. the New Orleans Saints divisional playoff game with my dad, brother and his family.  Glad the Seahawks won, but their passing offense is really stinking it up -- even with the return of Percy Harvin.  Still, one more HOME game to go, if we win that we're in the Superbowl.   Doesn't matter to me who wins San Fran. vs. Carolina.  If the 49ers win, that really sets up a fun, yell-your-lungs-out game; as the San Fransisco 49ers are the Seattle Seahawks arch enemies right now.  But Carolina would probably be the easier team for the Seahawks to beat in the NFC title game.  Anyway, glad the Seahawks won today so our local sports radio guys will have a fun week playing up next Sunday's game, which will decide whether or not the Seahawks go the Superbowl this year.  

A Good Time to Work on My Writing Muscles

Ah yes, the beginning of a new year.  And o how the weather sucks these days.  You don't wanna go out, but just stay inside.  And what do you do when you stay inside?   And now that we're into January, gone are the days when you had the good Christmas releases to look forward to seeing at the movies.  Now all we get is the lame-o offerings until May rolls around...

Still got the distractions of the NFL playoffs, speaking of which great games this weekend KC vs. Indianapolis, and I thought the end of the New Orleans vs. Philly was good too.  Brycen is still a distraction, when he comes into my room and demands that I play with him, which lately is either "Star Wars" or "Batman" related -- o, and I hafta take him the "Lego movie" when it comes out.  Still got the day job thing too...

Gone are the distractions of the holidays too, with all those family obligations and "quality time".  Hope you got all wanted for Christmas.  Not looking forward to getting my Visa bill later this week, though as a preemptive strike I did cash in over a $200 statement credit which should lessen the blow a little bit.

The dog days of winter.  Eeek, I hate this time of year.  Wish I had a girlfriend I would so cash in a 2 weeks of vacation and go off to Hawaii.  Never been to Hawaii.  The dog days of winter in the state of Washington, where it ALWAYS rains (though lately its just been cold) will make one think quite a lot about Hawaii.  

Anywho, the reality of the here-and-now lends itself to re-dedicating one's self to the craft of writing -- if you have a bend in that way.  And I do.

So it's time to knuckle down and make some real progress on the epic fantasy novel.  Been working on it for a couple weeks now.  And though it's getting a little easier, I find myself still thinking and writing like a screenwriter too much.  Guess 9 + years at it, and away from the novel will do that to a guy.

I need to build my writing muscles back up.

You know, when the going was good.  Only way to do that is to put in the time behind the seat.  I don't know what it is, but sometimes it's like there's a north baring magnet on my butt and a north barking magnet on the seat before my computer.  But as Scott Myers over at "Go Into the Story" would say, "The only way through it is through it."  I'm not sure if that's his exact words, but it's close enough.  You can pay Scott a visit there yourself and check me on the quote -- if you're so inclined.

Anywho, in re-reading some of my stuff I am amazed at how bad it sounds.  Fuck, I got a lot of work ahead of me.  But at least I see that.  Just re-writing the prolog right now.  My story starts off with a bang, a epic fight between an occupant of a world and a monstrous creature from there I lay the framework and stakes of the outer, greater battle, then in the next couple chapters after that I get into the inner stake of the two main characters of this story.

Sorry for being so vague but you must realize that I try to be a showman.  So if I tip my hand too much, when you read my story the surprise factor will be gone.  And I hate that.

Hopefully this week I'll finish a fresh draft of the prolog that I'm actually happy with.  Time to pimp up my game and start doing some major pages everyday.  But writing is a lot like working out.  You gotta get those mental muscles re-acclimated to doing it everyday.  

I also think I'll the prolog as a screenplay scene too.  I don't wanna lose my screenwriting skills as I try to re-hone my novel writing skills.

One thing I really like about writing novels is writing in third person omniscient, which is where you bounce around and get to go inside the head of more than one character in the story.  I love that.  That's actually one of my biggest strengths as a writer; I can usually easily get inside a characters head and see the world through their point of view.  

I HATE 1st person narratives.  Drew a keen disliking to them which dates back to my grade school days.  It's so limited JUST following one character.  Sure it sets itself up for a movie with a star actor or actress who whats the world to revolve around them, BUT that's not nearly interesting enough for a person like me.  I like knowing what hero wants, going deep inside the villain, and even spending some time with the supporting characters.  I like stories with a lot of balls in the air; drama on multiple fronts.

Was having a lot of fun in the prolog, on the 2nd draft, going deeper into the villain and giving his take on what was going on.

I'm a pretty deep person.  I can easily slip back and forth between characters and know what they're thinking and what they want in a given scene.  

But I know what I really need to work on is DETAIL.  One of the things you're called on to do as a novel writer is to paint pictures with words, vivid pictures which spark the mind of the reader to imagine the story you're telling.  And with a novel you can get as detailed as you want.  There's a lot more freedom there, then in screenwriting, where you have to be painfully brief about describing anything.  

So right now I find myself highly challenged.  I think my first draft pretty much sucks, and I'm trying build my novel writing muscles up again, while not letting my screenwriting skills go to shit.  The one thing that I do have in my favor is that the plot of (what I think is) a great sotry is already laid do, I just need to describe it better.  

There is a lot of skills a writer must master:

1. You have to be able to imagine fresh, never been done before scenes.
2. You have to be able to combine a bunch of scenes together and get them to reach some kind of meaningful crescendo; a plot that builds to a satisfying climax.
3. You have to be able to touch people at a personal level that can relate to and find some measure of pleasure with.  A universal appeal.
4. You have to be able to use words to form pictures in the readers mind.  Sentences build upon other sentence which form meaningful paragraphs.
5. Your words need to have a kind of poetic rhythm to it.  Pacing.  

I do not consider myself a masterful writer.  Rather, I always feel like a beginner looking up the steep side of a mountain.  Luckily, I'm a dogged person; I don't give up easily.

I may never achieve my dreams, but I always try.  As one thing I've learned about writing; continued expose to the same thing with chipping away at it attitude can go along way.  Just try to make that much better every time you sit down to right.

Make it suck a little less with each passing day.  Eventually you will wear yourself out, your trying will reach a point where you're no longer helping the piece of art improve, but you're actually hurting it.  You as a writer need to recognize when you've reached that point of burnout.  And I think if you've never reached that point of burnout, you've never pushed your work as far as it needs to go.

You need to put everything you have in every story you ever write.  Push yourself farther.  Don't rely on someone else to do the work that you yourself should be doing.

Alot of where I'm coming from dates back to my high school days.  I was never the smartest person in my class.  I had to stay extra after class to get the B grades I got in higher math: Algebra through trigonometry, my Podunk high school didn't have calculus, I had to wait until college for that.  I got kicked out of a upper level, writing class in junior high school.  My spelling isn't the greatest.  I don't do very many things, writing wise very well.  And I'd be the first to admit that.

I'm not going to be liar.  I'm just going to start down that path of boasting.  Rather, I'm going to keep my integrity and apply some good ol' fashioned hard work into my writing.  If I fail and never break in, well, that because of forces out of my control; you can't make someone love.  BUT what is in my control is how hard I try.  And I totally plan on doing my best, and leaving the rest up to God.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA 

P.S. Totally geeked up about the potential return of Percy Harvin to the Seahawks line-up for their next playoff match against the New Orleans Saints up here in Seattle this upcoming Saturday.  He COULD be the x-factor that pushes us over the top.  Then again he might sit out completely and be a non-factor.  Lotta talk about Percy Harvin here on Seattle's sports talk radio.  Personally, I think he needs to play.  Opportunities like this don't come around every year.  This year the Seattle Seahawks finished the regular season with a 13-3 record, tying the franchise best all-time, AND more importantly getting them the # 1 seek in the NFC.  We may never to this point ever again, thus we must do EVERYTHING we can to win the two games it would take to get to the Super Bowl.  If Percy is medically cleared to play, he needs to be in there.  He always regret it if he doesn't play in the playoffs.  It's now or never -- and we need Percy Harvin to be that x-factor that helps us win NOW, now a year or two from now.

Saving Mr. Banks: Movies that Move Me: Volume V

Who would have thought that the LAST movie I saw in 2013 would be the BEST MOVIE I saw in 2013.  BUT such was the case with "Saving Mr. Banks" (2013: Emma Thompson, Tom Hanks, directed by John Lee Hancock, written by Kelly Marcel and Sue Smith).

So what was "Saving Mr. Banks" all about?  And what justifies it as E.C. Henry's favorite movie of 2013?  

Okay, me sorting out all the feelings I've got for this movie is going to take some time, but bear with me, I'll try to make it worth the ride.

The first thing that struck me about this movie, "Saving Mr. Banks" was the concept of how an author of an original work can make things difficult on those trying to adapt the authors work in a collaborative medium.  

P.L. Travers made it difficult for Walt Disney and crew to adapt her novel into a movie.  They showered her with gifts.  Caved in to her whims.  And she just strung them along.  What I saw transpiring between the Disney team and P.L. Travers is a near polar opposite of what I've come to know ever since I started out as a novelist then went into screenwriting.   

Who wouldn't want the affection that author was given: a hotel room decorated with Disney stuffed animals, prime delicacies brought in a hordes while you're making creative decisions with Hollywood's "magic makers", having everyone hang on your words and listen intently to everything you say earnestly trying to satisfy your every whim?

Someone please fire-up the wayback machine or get Michael J. Fox to dust off that Delorean 'cuz I need to go back to the future and get so some o' dat Disney love that P.L. Travers got showered with.  Sure, the culture of the early 1960s is gone, but can't that circumstance still exist in some capacity?  At least for me...  I've been good, been eating my broccoli.  My karma's gotta turn around at some point, right?  "Give It Up for Chimpy," my "Mary Poppins" and guess what Hollywood, E.C. Henry is no P.L. Travers.  I'm ready to sell, baby!  And I'm more collaborative too, I guarantee you that.

Note: by now you should be noting one key difference between P.L. Travers and E.C. Henry: E.C. Henry is open and desperate, whereas P.L. Travers was closed and reserved.  Which kind of writer do you prefer?

Anywho, just reflecting back on the hash treatment P.L. Travers gave Walt Disney and his crew makes me sigh and shake my head.  Even if the story brain-trust of this movie: John Lee Hancock, Kelly Marcel and Sue Smith embellished what actually happened in the early collaboration between the Disney team and P.L. Travers in the making of "Mary Poppins" I just have a hard time wrapping my head around how P.L. Travers behaved and conducted herself in the presence of established pros.  That environment and dichotomy is foreign to me and is a direct opposite of the entertainment world I see before me today.  A world of hordes of people trying to sell their stories, where those with the power to make that a reality are so indifferent, uncaring, and cold.

But that's why we go to the movies, right?  To see our fantasies played on the silver screen.  And P.L. Travers star treatment in light of the current culture in Hollywood is more fantasy than "Fantasy Island" (TV series 1977-1984: Ricardo Montalban, Herve Villechaize).

Okay, time to get over myself and my own inner drama and TRY to focus on what the movie, "Saving Mr. Banks" was really about...

"Saving Mr. Banks" has a really cool, high concept:

A bitter, old woman learns to let go of the pain of losing her father so she can live again.

Kelly Marcel and Sue Smith (the writers of "Saving Mr. Banks") do a good job of blending in a little girl's memory, Ginty (played wonderfully by Annie Rose Buckley) of her father (played by Colin Farrell) v.s. her later in life going from London to Los Angeles and being courted by Walt Disney for the rights to her prized book, "Mary Poppins".  P.L. Travers as a little girl deeply loved her father, as he was conduit to the whimsical and made her believe that she was special in a special world.  But then when he got sick, that little girl started seeing the darker side of her father's nature, he was hitting the booze quite hard.  And for much of the later half of the flashbacks P.L. Travers' character was having it was like this little girl would do anything to get her father back on track, back to the "magical gateway" she knew.  

And if you think about it, isn't that a cool high concept to play with: a daughter's great love for her father?  I think it's genius.  And off that I totally see why a movie like "Saving Mr. Banks" would get greenlit, and get a mega star like Tom Hanks to play the iconic role of Walt Disney.  

Is Tom Hanks, Walt Disney?  Well, he convinced me.  I bought his performance hook, line and sinker.  I think Tom Hanks deserves some Oscar love for his performance in "Saving Mr. Banks".  The insider speech he gave to P.L. Travers after he flew back to London after she left Los Angeles convinced me.  Sure there's great dialog writing on display there: again kudos to you, Kelly Marcel and Sue Smith; but there's also great acting too.  

But surprisingly you know who I thought did perhaps an ever better job of acting in "Saving Mr. Banks"?   Try on for size the creative team at Disney: Jason Schwartzman and P.J. Novak; who had to suffered through working with the cantankerous, P.L. Travers?  Never been a big fan of Jason Schwartzman or P.J. Novak.  And I hafta admit the when I first saw them in this movie thought, "O, fuck!  These two downbeats are going to ruin this film; they're completely miscast."  

You see, I remembered seeing them at first blush I was biased by past movies in which Jason Schwartzman played: "Rushmore" and "I (heart) Huckabees"; and wasn't P.J. Novak that snarky, generation Z, guy from NBC's "The Office"?  

But every time Jason Schwartzman was at the piano playing, more and more of the salty veneer through with I saw him melted away.  He was playing whimsical, silly songs -- and he was damn good at it!  Lesson learned: NEVER doubt the power of today's actors and actresses to surprise you.  Jason Schwartzman DID NOT turn his role into a reprisal of his past roles.  Rather, this guy turned himself insideout and genuinely wowed me with what he had to add to the mix: the piano player who stayed the course and over time warmed the heart of a suffering woman.  Likewise, P.J. Novak was great, it's just Jason Schwartzman was a tad better.

"Mary Poppins" (1964: Julie Christie, Dick Van Dyke) was before my time.  I never saw that movie, let alone read the book which preceeded it.  But after watching "Saving Mr. Banks" I think it's a movie I'm ready to see for the first time -- especially given the season of life I'm in now: trying to create a happy cartoon movie with a good message.   Couldn't let "The Wolf of Wall Street" be the last movie I saw in 2013, it was just sooo foul.  Haven't seen a movie that gross in a long time: orgies at work, graphic blow-by-blow sex, people justifying masturbation.  And all that from an acclaimed film-maker like Martin Scorsese.  I think Margot Robbie is a bona fide hottie, but I don't wanna watch someone having sex with her, blow by blow, for an extended period of time in a mainstream movie!  What about protecting your actors and actresses, Mr. Scorsese?  All falls below the bounds of good taste, and this is from someone who should know better and had the clout not to resort to such low brow tactics.  After watching "The Wolf of Wall Street" I honestly felt like taking a shower -- just to get its stink off me!!

Don't like bagging on the pros, but I can't recommend ANYONE watch "The Wolf of Wall Street".  I even had to warn my parents to stay clear of it and avoid it when it comes out on cable.  You see pros like Scorsese and DiCaprio and immediately think: credibility, this movie's gonna rock!  But if you waste your money and go out to see "The Wolf of Wall Street", trust me your sensitives will be tested; it's like Sodom and Gomorrah broke out amongst the money makers working the stock market.  Wish I could say better things about "The Wolf of Wall Street" but I can't.  This movie is a piece of filth and those involved in making it should feel ashamed by the product they put out for America and the rest of the world to see.  

Thankfully, "Saving Mr. Banks" SAVED me from having "The Wolf of Wall Street" being the last movie I saw in 2013.  "Saving Mr. Banks" is loaded with great performances, and has a genuinely moving, high concept.  In watching "Saving Mr. Banks" you get an inside perspective of the collaborative process involved with making movies.  It may not reflect the world of today -- but why bother doing that anyway?!

"Saving Mr. Banks" makes you believe that there's still some movie making magic out there to be had, and offers authors a cautionary tale about the need for them to let go of their precious vision and trust those involved in the magical world of movie making.

So in this time of celebration let's raise one last glass and salute "Saving Mr. Banks", lets toast to 2014 be filled with more memorable movies like "Saving Mr. Banks".

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA