The Fandom Menace

Fewer film franchies are as big, bold and beloved as STAR WARS.  George Lucas tapped into something very primal with his story of heroes and villains set "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away", something that sparked a flaming torch that fandom not only embraced but spread.  But as with all things, the clamor for MORE lead the flames to become a full blown forrest fire, and now threaten to splinter and destroy the very fandom that started the blaze to begin with.

Few franchises are as big, bold and beloved, as STAR WARS, and few are as belittled, battered and embattled.

First, some back story:  George Lucas was an up and coming film student fresh out of USC in 1968.  He was part of the bumper crop of filmmakers that included Walter Merch, John Milius, and Steven Spielberg. He interned with Francis Ford Coppola and later made his first two films, THX-1138, which was not successful for Warner Bros. but earned him a shot with Universal to make AMERICAN GRAFFITI.

The latter was a huge hit for the studio, and Lucas began developing a space story of his own, being unable to acquire the rights to remake the old FLASH GORDON serials he enjoyed as a child.  He was paid a mere $150,000 for writing and directing STAR WARS, and while friends encouraged him to renegotiate for more money, he settled with the studio instead for licensing and merchandising rights to the film.  20th Century Fox was more than happy to allow it, not knowing the firestorm that would latter erupt around the eventual toy line, the first time in history film merchandising became big business.  STAR WARS went on to become the highest grossing film of all time (upsetting his friend Steven Spielberg's hit JAWS, and was eventually re-upset by Spielberg again with E.T.)  But the film's success was only kindling for the merchandising of lunch boxes, action figures, playsets, towels, bedsheets... if it could be branded with STAR WARS, it was.  Upset with the way Warner Bros. and Universal handled his first two films, Lucas determined to never again be at the mercy of a studio. He parlayed the funds into founding his own studio, Lucasfilm LTD, and kept the special effects department from the film intact, founding ILM.

Two more films created a trilogy, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and RETURN OF THE JEDI, but Lucas wasn't done recapturing his youth.  He paired up with Spielberg with the idea of a swashbuckling archeologist who fought Nazis.  RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and it's sequels INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM and THE LAST CRUSADE cemented him as one of the premier storytellers of our generation.

Fandom embraced each nugget that came down the pipe with a... well, fanatical approach.  It wasn't enough to buy the merchandise, you had to buy ALL of it.  Anything and everything you could get your hands on.  It wasn't enough to have seen the movies, you had to have watched them hundreds of times. That galaxy may have been far, far away, but it was a bonafide religion here on Earth.

And then the announcement... Lucas wasn't done with STAR WARS.  The films were not what he wanted, were in essence, released unfinished.  He planned on touching up the films, improving the special effects and making various tweaks.  The new special editions would be rereleased on the big screen, the first time in 20 years they could be seen in that format.  One look at the eye-popping magic served up before us and we were all hooked, all over again.

But that's where things start to fall apart. For Lucas, the Special Editions became the "official" definitive versions of the films.  For most of his fans, a mistake had been made.  They didn't mind most of the new effects, they enjoyed the additional scenes cut into the film, BUT--and they will yell this from the rafters... HAN DIDN'T SHOOT FIRST!  I myself don't mind any of the changes in the original trilogy except for that one.  Lucas argues that because Han is a good guy, he shouldn't gun down Greedo in cold blood.  I (and most of fandom) disagree.  By having Greedo shoot at Han from across the table (and miss horribly) two things happen.  One, Greedo is now officially the worst bounty hunter in the galaxy.  I mean his target is across the table from him.  What, like two feet!?!  And we're not talking something small like a death stick, we're talking a full grown human, two feet away.  But Greedo misses, his blast careens back and to the left like JFK in the Zapruder film.  Two, Han no longer gets to have the defining character arc of becoming a good guy, because of this whole "do not fire until fired upon" idea.  Never mind that he is a smuggler (and its implied running drugs for Jabba The Hutt,) but he can't shoot first? George, WTF?  While still reeling from this change, another bombshell is dropped: The Prequel Trilogy.  Films 1, 2, and 3 in the franchise will explore the origins of Darth Vader, how he turned to the Dark Side, and finally give some answers to that mythical period time called the Clone Wars.

This will be A-W-E-S-O-M-E! More STAR WARS!?!?  YES!!!  May 19, 1999, THE PHANTOM MENACE hit theaters and there was a collective joygasm from fandom that quickly soured the morning after into a feeling of "oh-my-god-did-I-really-just-wake-up-next-to-THAT?"feeling.  You've heard of Coyote Ugly?  Yeah, it was kind of like that.  But we went and saw it again, just to make sure we understood it.  I mean, this was STAR WARS right?  It just couldn't... suck.  Could it?

Two more films followed, ATTACK OF THE CLONES and REVENGE OF THE SITH.  And once  the collective dust had settled, Fandom bared it's ugly teeth and went to work chewing up George Lucas for the mistakes he's made.  A fourth Indiana Jones film, KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL managed to polarize things even further.  Fans cry out at the absurdity of Indy fighting aliens, and surviving a nuclear blast inside a fridge.  They were already out for blood, and when South Park did an episode claiming "George Lucas raped my childhood," it became the rallying cry heard round the galaxy.

The irony here, is that Lucas wanted so hard to fight against the studio system, to do things his way and stand up against the "evil empire", that he became his own evil empire, trapped inside a studio system of his own devising.  And the fans have become so quick to leap to the attack, spitting venom and ire, they're like the Sith Lords so despised from the myth they claim to love.  That's how you can tell who the "real" STAR WARS fans are.  They're the ones who HATE the series.

So now what?  Lucas sits in his crystal palace overlooking the empire, supposedly looking to retire from the biz all together.  Has the loyal dog bit the master?  Did the very people that supported and built Skywalker Ranch wind up abandoning their god?  Or did he pull a Zeus and abandon them first, no longer concerned with the fate of mere mortals, content to live out his life on Olympus?

I'd like to offer my own two cents on the matter for both sides...

To the fans:

Regarding CRYSTAL SKULL:  1) You didn't get it.  The Indiana Jones movies were based on (and in some ways, parodied) the old serialized adventure flicks of George's youth.  These films were over the top, action packed, and not in the least believable which is what we get throughout RAIDERS, TEMPLE and CRUSADE.  When it came time to do the fourth film, 19 years had passed, and Harrison Ford said he had to play Indy at his current age.  Okay, so we move the film 19 years beyond CRUSADE.  In the real world, if we moved 19 years beyond the pulp serials, what do we find was popular in the 50's?  Science Fiction films with aliens like THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL and EARTH VS THE FLYING SAUCERS, followed closely by the ones that prayed on the public's fear of atomic radiation, THEM, THE GIANT GILA MONSTER, etc...  So we put all of that together in a blender to create the action set pieces for this film.  Big deal.  I can live with that.  2) To you guys out there screaming at the top of your lungs about how unbelievable and unrealistic aliens in an Indy flick is, and I point to TEMPLE OF DOOM and quietly remind you a guy had his heart ripped out of his chest... while still alive... and lived in that one.  3) As far as the infamous "nuked the fridge" reference that has now become pop nomenclature in the same way as "jumped the shark", again, I disagree.  Evidence from the scientific community suggests with a lead lined fridge, as long as he didn't break his neck on impact the survival rate is 50/50.  Those, my friends, are better odds than Indy faces most of the time.

4) And let's be honest.  You're not really pissed over this film, you're pissed over STAR WARS and looking to take it out on this film.

Regarding STAR WARS at large, but specifically the prequels: You know what?  No, these films aren't what you remember from your childhood.  They come from a different time, portraying a different time. "A more civilized age" according to Obi-Wan.  I enjoy the political maneuvering that brought Palpatine to power, I like the feel of the more formal, stilted dialogue that would have preceded this great galactic upheaval.  No, the films aren't perfect, yes there are things that I would have done differently and wish had been.  But I can still enjoy them.  I wish you could too.  But name calling and claims of "George Lucas raped my childhood" are not only hurtful and mean, but blatantly false.  George gave you your childhood.

To George Lucas:

George, we love you, but you make it really hard.  I understand your compulsive need to recapture these films from the public at large and make them yours again.  I get it, I really do.  It's the studio thing all over again.  You never felt STAR WARS was finished, but the public got it, and loved it, and you kept yelling inside "but that's not the way it should be!"  As an artist and a writer, I am NOT going to tell you you can't change your work.  It's your baby.  And I understand we, the fans have not been as... delicate in presenting our argument against those changes as maybe we should have been.  But you knew about the controversy, you knew we were upset, and then you ran around in a "Han Shot First" T-shirt without fixing the issue.  Kinda a dick move, George.

You said in 1997: "There will only be one.  And it won't be what I would call the 'rough cut', it'll be the 'final cut.'  ...The other versions will disappear...  To me, it doesn't really exist anymore...  A hundred years from now, the only version of the movie that anyone will remember will be the DVD version [of the Special Edition]"

But you yourself argued against the colorization of old films in 1988 saying:

"In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be "replaced" by new altered negatives.  This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten."

George, we agree with you.  Alterations to classic films is dangerous, wether through colorization or editing.  You've done the equivalent of Leonardo Da Vinci taking the Mona Lisa off the wall of the Louvre, and "finished" her with a fresh coat of paint, oh, and fixing the smile, cause that was never right.  We respect your artistic vision, all we're asking for is a BluRay release of the original films remastered to that quality.  Include it with the special editions.  Hell, give us a box set with the originals, the special editions and the new 3D jobs.  We'll pony up the cash for that, George.  We have before.  It's not that we don't like the Special Editions, we'd just like to have the option so that we don't feel like our cultural history, our childhood was rewritten.

That decision would go along way toward healing the rift between you and your fans.

Hopefully it will happen before the fires of fandom burn the place down... <>

Star Trek 101

Over on Traveling The Vortex, we focus mainly on Doctor Who, but each of the three of us are very well versed in other areas of fandom as well.  My particular cornerstone is Star Trek.  Many of our listeners have requested that we do a primer for Star Trek, so as to facilitate their watching of that series as well.  After all, this year marks the shows 46th anniversary (it started in 1966) it's spawned 7 television series, 11 movies, and a massive merchandising empire, to say nothing of it's effect on Geek and pop culture.

And so, with all humility, I present my short audio cast, (it comes in at 31 minutes, so if you are time conscious or would prefer to download it for listening in the car during a commute or something, check out our iTunes feed) or what we've come to term a "side trip", for those interested in dipping their toes into the waters of Star Trek...

Star Trek 101 Podcast...

Fictional Geography

Did you ever notice that fantasy novels tend to include maps of their fictional locations?  It's become quite the trope now that when you crack the cover to the latest adventure novel you are bound to find some sort of line drawn map within it's pages, usually on the inside cover with clearly marked notations as to where parts of the adventure will take place.  Now, I'm no expert, but I have always thought the writer's job was to tell a story, and tell it well.  Surely part of that job description is to make the course of the narrative clear enough for the reader to follow WITHOUT A MAP!

And yet, there they are.  From the classics going all the way back to R. L. Stevenson's Treasure Island on...


Ever had a hankering to walk Narnia?  Not from the movies, but as portrayed in the authentic book series The Chronicles Of Narnia by C.S. Lewis?  Cause there's a map for that.  (Pity there isn't one to help me find my way out of the back of the wardrobe.)

Of course, the 900 lb. Gorilla of fantasy novels is J.R.R. Token's The Lord Of The Rings trilogy.  It's map has become the go-to design for style and substance in the mythical world, with it's stylish details of The Shire, Rivendale, The Misty Mountains, The Sea Of Rhun, The Lonely Mountain, Rohan, Gondor, Mirkwood forest, and even Mordor, which one does not simply walk into, apparently even with a map.

Stephen King avoided the issue through most of his entire magnum opus The Dark Tower, (mostly because the geography of Mid-World is finicky and changes) but finally provided a map in the seventh installment.  It's inclusion may be because the reality of the tower is based so much on King's own memories of reading Tolken and being inspired to write something equally as massive, an homage to King's inspiration.  Or it may be a case of jumping on the band wagon.  Since then, a plethora of maps have been produced, mostly coming out of the Marvel comic book series, but since comics are a visual medium, that's a bit more acceptable.

Even George R.R. Martin and his Game Of Thrones books features a map of the realm, masterfully depicted in the animated opening of the HBO series based on the stories.



There are a few exceptions to rule, J.K. Rowling for example did not include one single map in the Harry Potter novels.  No Hogwarts floor plan, no Hogsmeade village, no shopping map of Diagon Alley.

Now, I'm not knocking the practice, per-say.  These maps are well thought out, beautifully drawn and highly imaginative.  I myself used to spend hours doodling my own made up maps to lands that didn't exist anywhere but within my creative subconscious.  The question is why?  Why are these maps necessary?  I mean, yes, when I read a book I will go and check out the map to position the players in my mind's eye.  But is that just an automatic reflex just because the map is there?  If there was no map would we comprehend or enjoy the story any less?  Is it part of the human need to categorize and label everything, even that which we know to be fake?  Or does the inclusion of a map make the fictionalized world that much more real? Does it allow the fan to touch a part of the story that would otherwise be left foreign and unknown?  And which is preferable?

How much is too much?  When does including a map for a fictional location become less helpful to the audience and more an exercise in vanity?  Hey, check out the location map for Waterworld!

View Larger Map

For my own thoughts, I think the world should be best left to the imagination.  The paint brush of my mind is quite happy to rise to the challenge of filling in those blank empty spots that simply read: "Here there be dragons"...  <>

A Mad Man With A Box

This week, something extraordinary happened. I'm not referring to a successful preseason game for a football team, or the reuniting of a loving couple, or even a political rally, thou those things too undoubtedly happened. I'm talking about the return of Doctor Who.

For the uninitiated, Doctor Who is a British science fiction series that started all the way back in 1963. Keep in mind, 1963 was not exactly a bumper year for science fiction. The heyday of films like THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, FORBIDDEN PLANET and EARTH VS THE FLYING SAUCERS was long past, Star Trek had yet to air an episode, and the juggernauts like STAR WARS and CLOSE ENCOUNTERS were far off in the future. So, without a built in audience, this was considered quite the gamble. Add to the mix that Doctor Who started (and in many ways remains) a children's show. Dedicated to tossing in some education with it's entertainment, many early episodes traveled back to historical Earth, and encounters with The Aztecs, or The Romans were common place. The show enchanted, captivated and scared the little ones.

 And it's been doing it for nearly fifty years. It ran continuously on BBC from 1963 to 1989, when it was put on hiatus... and never returned. A co-produced TV movie for FOX television was made in 1996, (Steven Spielberg had a hand in bringing it back) with the idea of a new series launch, BUT, it was up against the episode of Roseanne where Dan had a heart attack. Viewing figures were not kind in the states. But it did well enough that hope remained for the show to return. Finally, it did in 2005. Not a reboot, but a continuation from where we left off, though with a faster pace and better effects. This is the longest break between episodes since the show was revived. Partially because of the summer Olympics in London, partially because current show runner Steven Moffat has something planned for the last half of this season, which will actually air NEXT year in 2013 for the show's 50th anniversary. Current episodes air Saturdays on both BBC and BBC America. So naturally, there's a huge amount of hype built up right now, and many people are wondering, why?

 The show is pure magic. Unlike Star Trek, which almost prides itself on it's techno-babble, there are times when the Doctor just gives up. An example: "We're just entering conceptual space. Imagine a banana. Or anything curved. Actually, don't, because it's not curved or like a banana- FORGET THE BANANA!" and then the matter is dropped. Most episodes deal with the Doctor and his friends landing on Planet X to discover Problem Y which must be solved by Time-Frame Z. The odd thing, is that at any point in time, the Doctor could just climb back into his ship and fly away. They've made jokes about it. But he doesn't, because he's curious, and because we wouldn't have a show if he did. A hero who runs from trouble just isn't all that exciting.

 I co-host a Doctor Who Podcast, Traveling The Vortex (www.travelingthevortex.com) so I’ve been talking to a lot of newbies about the show, which is riding a crest of unprecedented popularity at the moment (last season it had the highest number of downloads from iTunes). I frequently find myself repeating some of the same things (not that I mind). So here’s my list of the 5 things you MUST know about Doctor Who, and the 5 things you MUST know before you sit down and try to delve into the new Series 7:

 5 Things you NEED to know about Doctor Who

 1) The Doctor is the last of the Time Lords, a race who understands, and can travel through time and space. He does this via his TARDIS, which stands for Time And Relative Dimensions In Space. It’s bigger on the inside, and its outside appearance is locked into that of a 1960’s London Police Box thanks to it's cloaking device--called a chameleon circuit that disguises itself as something in the environment around it--or it would before it got stuck in that form.

 2) Time Lords have two hearts and the ability to Regenerate their bodies depending on the extent of the injury, resulting in a new body (although sometimes the process is unpredictable). To date, 11 different actors have played the Doctor (Matt Smith is the newest), each bringing a unique set of quirks and personality to the role, but it’s always the same man.

 3) The Doctor usually travels with one or more companions.

 4) The Doctor is beyond intelligent, often making “Sherlock Holmes” like deductions with very little available information. Sometimes these are explained, sometimes you just roll with it.

 5) Yes, there are nearly 50 years of history associated with the program, but don’t let that deter you. For the most part if you really need to know, they’ll let you know, and there are always plenty of fans to ask!

 5 Things you NEED to know before you start Series 7…

 1) Amy and Rory are the current companions, and are married.

 2) The Doctor is presumed dead by most of the universe at the moment, which he is only too happy to play into, believing he's gotten too big for his britches as there are legends about him.

 3) One of those legends is about the First Question "It's all still waiting for you. The fields of Trensalore, the fall of the eleventh, and the question. The First Question. The question that must never be answered. Hidden in plain sight, the question you've been running from all your life... Doctor... WHO?" The legend says that silence will fall when the question is asked, leading many to believe it will be the Doctor's REAL death.

 4) The show is unpredictable and quirky, and unlike most science fiction, the “WHOniverse” has things that may not be explainable. Roll with it.

 5) The show is British; yes they have accents, yes sometimes they talk fast and are hard for the untrained ear to understand. Just roll with it and stick with it!

 If you are really interested but afraid to jump into the middle even with the primer, then I suggest "series one" or the 2005 relaunch as an excellent jump off point to familiarize yourself with the show. And since British shows run shorter seasons, there's only thirteen episodes for you to digest in a block. 

In the words of the first... "One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs, and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine." Welcome back, Doctor. <>
  Check out this awesome tribute video from LastWhovian on Youtube...

Rethinking The Reboot

Hollywood is dead, the prophets of doom and gloom will tell you.  And they may be right.  For every fantastic, Oscar winning original idea, there are an equal number of empty headed, big budget blockbusters that just bust.  We've been buried in an avalanche of sequels, prequels, based on, inspired by, and "from the producer of"s...  As as each wave in the tsunami of Hollywood crap crashes ashore in cineplexes around the world, the flotsam and jetsam of the system continues to bring less than stellar quality entertainment and more mind-numbing-why-are-we-paying-for-this crap.

Back in 2004, a new concept word started floating around tinsel town.  The Reboot.  It really began on television, when Ron Moore took a small, beloved but campy and maligned 70's science fiction show and remolded it into a darker, grittier one.  Battlestar Galactica made the Sci-Fi channel into a force to be reckoned with.

In 2006, Christopher Nolan decided to make BATMAN BEGINS, a new, darker take on the Batman legend that would retell his origin story.  Friends, I was so far against this idea when it bubbled to the surface of the Hollywood pond scum I didn't even see it first run in the theatre.  Why retell the story when it's already been told?  Well, obviously I was wrong.  Not only did Nolan craft a beautiful movie, it did it's job of universe establishing very well, and was rewarded with good box office.

Unfortunately, that opened the flood gates, as producers everywhere embraced the "everything old is new again" motif and started looking for projects that were ripe for rebooting.

Take James Bond, an action franchise juggernaut, with 20 films under it's belt.  Actors have come and gone, but the core remains the same... until producers decide to Reboot the franchise in 2006, starting over with a younger, more inexperienced Bond in CASINO ROYALE.  While most critics and fans agree this was a good move, I remain skeptical, not only of Daniel Craig who hasn't won me over as 007 yet, but also of the concept of taking an icon and "moving in a different direction" with him.  Um, is that really necessary?  After all, doing what worked (and to a certain extent, repeating the formula) is what made him an icon in the first place.

2008 begat THE INCREDIBLE HULK, starting over since HULK underperformed at the box office.  And while it's a better film, I still don't understand why we need to continually retell the creation story.

In 2009 we got STAR TREK, which had me so wound up in knots I couldn't sleep.  This is my baby, one of the corner stones of my geekdom. The idea of seeing Kirk and Spock in their academy days has been floating around since 1989, and there was a good reason the idea never moved forward.  No one wanted to replace William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy.  After all, they were ICONS.  But Paramount moved ahead... and found a way to make the reboot work.  In a nifty trick involving time travel and parallel universes, they have allowed the existing Trek continuity to stay continual. This new, hipper, younger STAR TREK wasn't treading on the hallowed ground of fandom, it revered it, and allowed it to exist in it's own right, while still moving into uncharted territory and new directions, truly going where no one has gone before... (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

By the time 2010 rolled around, TV started Hawaii 5-0 and La Femme Nikita (in itself based on a film) over, and even more films cropped up in the pipeline. CONAN, PLANET OF THE APES, SPIDER-MAN (really?  SPIDER-MAN?  We're gonna reboot a movie that's only ten years old?) and more retold the story of how things began.

The kicker is, that most of these have actually been decent, quality entertainment.  Oh sure, there's a few clunkers in the mix, (FRIDAY THE 13TH anyone?) but I've been pleasantly surprised by most despite shuddering every time I hear a new one has been announced.  It's a very polarizing idea, some people literally giddy with excitement over the idea of a new... whatever, and others paralyzed with fear that they'll find a way to screw it up.  I think most of geek fandom feels the same way, one way or the other depending on the project at hand.

Next year brings MAN OF STEEL, a rebooted Superman story.  And a retelling of the origin.  Again.  And I think to myself... "What?  Why?" I mean, unless you yourself ARE an alien from another world, you should know Superman is an alien from another world.  I have NEVER read a Superman comic in my life and I know this.  I know he has the worst disguise ever and fights for truth, justice and the American way. What is there to reboot?  WHY?  To allow a fresh perspective on it?  Okay, but why cant that fresh perspective come without retelling a story we already know?  And then changing it to make it fit your new ideas?  Why cant it be:

Act One, Scene One: Exterior Metropolis - A nuclear ICBM roars into frame, fiery contrail blotting out the sky as it nears the great city.  SUPERMAN flies close behind, straining to catch it...

See?  We're with you already.  We get it.  You don't need to start everything all over again.  Just go.  The irony is the film is produced by the afore mentioned Nolan and directed by Zack Snyder (of 300 and WATCHMEN) so I should be all over this, but I just cant get past that starting over point.

And now Hollywood keeps branding about the idea of doing old classics like THE WIZARD OF OZ, CASABLANCA, and THE GODFATHER, to which I reply, would you "reboot" the Mona Lisa?  I mean, surely some digital paint would clean that old print right up.  Or maybe you'd like to take a stab at rebooting the Magna Carta or the Declaration Of Independence.  Surely those could be made fresh and new for today?  I myself have been thinking long and hard about tackling Hamlet, cause that one's ripe for updating, don't you think?

It's a slippery slope Hollywood.  When you get it right, your silver cinematic magic brings us together as no form of art on this earth can.  But when you get it wrong.... ugh.

I submit the following motion: The term reboot should be used for a complete change of style, NOT substance.  Origin stories are origin stories for a reason. We all had to begin somewhere.  You want a new "fill-in-the-blank" film?  Fine.  But don't make me pay for a story I already know, and don't change it to fit your needs.  Just make a new one and make it good.  Focus on storytelling, the rest will take care of itself.  And for god sakes... LEAVE THE CLASSICS ALONE.  THEY'RE CALLED CLASSICS FOR A REASON!!!

Okay, I'll put away the soap box now. <>