Month: September 2005

I’m sorry, but I simply cannot accept the idea of Geena Davis as president.

I think it is grossly unfair that she is able to become President of the United States without having been properly vetted through the rigorous campaign process of the “West Wing.” The fact that she has not had to slug it out with Alan Alda or Jimmy Smits for the candidacy, and that she has not had her campaign managed by anyone who worked for Martin Sheen, casts–in my opinion–a pall of illegitimacy upon her entire presidency that cannot be ignored, even if a decision comes down from a full majority Supreme Court featuring Glenn Close, Edward James Olmos and Sally Field.

PAD

If someone is standing in a shallow pool, and the leads of a taser are fired into the water, will it discharge electricity through the water that will stun the person standing in the pool even though the leads never touched the person himself?

PAD

After a slightly shakey start, I thought Ellen did a very nice job hosting the Emmys this year. Glad that “Daily Show” did as well as it did (although comparing what Hugh Jackman did in one show to what John Stewart does night after night seems ridiculous to me.) I’m glad that Felicity Huffman won for DH, and pleased/stunned that Shatner won for Boston Legal.

And speaking of Shatner, his expression mirrored mine for the winner of the surprisingly entertaining Emmy Idol competition. TRUMP? For his off-key rendition of the theme of “Green Acres?” No f’ing way. Shatner was my sentimental favorite for the theme to “Trek,” although Kristen Bell’s rendition of “Fame” showed anyone who missed “Reefer Madness” that she has singing and dancing chops (although…what? Neither Irene Cara nor Erica Gimpel were available? I mean, c’mon.) But DONALD TRUMP? Sheesh.

They’re missing a bet. They could make a whole prime time special out of the theme song thing. I once did that at an August Party convention years ago: Organized an entire afternoon entertainment that was like “Side by Side by Sondheim” except we sang TV theme songs. People were so dubious at first, and by the time we finished our program, we had volunteers lining up wanting to do more songs.

PAD

Back in the “West Wing” episode “A Proportional Response,” Leo and Bartlet have a blistering confrontation over the proper use of armed military might by the lone remaining superpower trying to maintain a degree of conscience. It’s a fascinating sequence, especially in light of Bush’s actions several years later. When Leo presents certain actions as essentially the worst thing someone in power can do, and then you realize Bush did it, it’s sobering to say the least.

In the second season, “In the Shadow of Two Gunmen,” the director of the NSA states–after a shooting incident involving the President–that they do not know the whereabouts of several key terrorist leaders, “including bin Laden.” This was a reference that meant nothing to most viewers (including me) because it was pre-9/11.

And now, in the current ramrodding down the nation’s throat of John Roberts, I am moved to remember the first season episode “The Short List” wherein Bartlet is looking to fill a slot on the Supreme Court. The initial prospect, played by Ken Howard, seems good to go…until it’s discovered that he does not believe that the right to privacy is a fundamental right of American society. The INSTANT that they determine that, Bartlet and his people show him the door because, to them, the right to privacy is such a given, such a necessity, such an obvious and basic right for any number of reasons–not just abortion, but mandatory drug testing, illegal search and seizure, internet activity–that putting Howard’s character on the bench is simply unthinkable.

Funny how the real life administration is 180 degrees from that, embracing a candidate who does NOT believe in the constitutional right to privacy…a belief that would nicely erode everything that bothers the Bushies, ranging from legal abortion to protections from the intrusiveness of the Patriot act.

Every single place where, on the “West Wing,” the Bartlet administration–an administration of conscience–zigs, Bush’s administration zags. I just find that interesting.

I wonder if the next real-life election will involve a youthful Hispanic lawyer/cop going head to head with a likable former surgeon from a MASH unit.

PAD

I have three deadlines crashing up against each other. I’m working on finishing “Fall of Knight,” the third Arthur book; a rewrite on my “How to Write Comics” book; and a teleplay for an animated pilot which I won’t go into.

So I’m jumping from one project to the next to the next. Every time I slow down with one, I put it on hold and move on to the next one. Going to be a pretty exciting two weeks.

PAD

Conclusion to the “House of M” tie-in. Whad’ja think?

PAD

Studio executives have been sitting around scratching their heads or their backsides and wondering why in the world movie going is dropping off. They’re blaming DVDs, they’re blaming cable, they’re blaming all kinds of things.

Well, we just came back from the premiere of “Green Street Hooligans,” a film that every single major studio passed on distributing, and I can tell you with full confidence that at least one factor in audience erosion is that studios can’t discern quality when it’s right in front of them.

And quality is what “Green Street Hooligans” most certainly is. It’s easily the most riveting two hours I’ve spent at a movie this year. Elijah Wood plays a disconnected, frustrated college dropout who sojourns to England and becomes involved in a “firm”–a gang, if you will, of cocky, proud, hard-drinking, fight-seeking football (not “soccer,” please) hooligans. When Wood’s character tries to compare the rivalry between certain rival firms as “Yankees and Red Sox,” he’s corrected with “More like Israelis and Palestinians.”

What unfolds is a fascinating tale of brotherhood on numerous levels, and the ultimate futility of lives lived in violence and vengeance. It is, quite simply, a brilliant piece of movie making.

Yet every major studio passed. Insanely, they claimed that it glorified violence, making it seem like a positive means of solving problems. Any person with an IQ above that of a kumquat who sees this film will realize that the studios completely and totally botched it. It takes some serious stupid to think this movie is a celebration of violence.

You absolutely must see this film. You must get all your friends to see it. And as soon as you do, you must go and plug it long and loud on your own blogs and get the word out. Not just because it’s a fantastic movie. You must see it to send a message to movie executives, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent. They have to be told that they are insane to pass up high quality films such as this one. They have to be told that audiences are not getting it up for the movies because they want to see something other than the latest paint-by-numbers action flick or play-it-safe romantic date movie. That movies such as “Green Street Hooligans” deserve studio support and audience attention.

Also, on Kathleen’s blog, she’ll be writing about the film as well (and since she used to hang with football hooligans in London, she knows about this stuff personally) and also posting a photo of Ariel with Elijah Wood.

PAD