Previously when I talked about comics on this blog no one really cared. Even when I briefly contributed to Laplume's blog not many people really cared. But that's not going to stop me! So here's a good chunk of comics I've read after my exile from Comics Reader. Most of them are Spider-Man related because with the new movie and such there have been a couple big sales, which is when I buy most of my comics.
Black Widow: Name of the Rose: It's a Black Widow solo story that was probably the lead-in to a series that probably folded up soon after. Anyway it was interesting as she goes on the hunt for an assassin who seems to know a lot about her. It was also confusing in that it seemed to suggest Black Widow has been around since before WWII and not aged at all. Um...OK then. (4/5)
Justice League Dark Vol 1: I read a couple of Justice League Dark comics previously so for the hell of it I bought the first volume when it was on sale. It really wasn't very good. Like the new Justice League of America it basically takes the whole series for the team to get together and even then they aren't much of a team. (3/5)
Shazam! Vol 1: This title is misleading as to date there is no actual Shazam (aka Captain Marvel, the DC version) series. This was actually part of the Justice League line and is a rebooted origin story for Captain Marvel, who's a kid named Billy Batson who is chosen to become a big strapping Superman-like hero when he says the magic word. It was pretty fun and with all the crap they have in the "New 52" I have to wonder why they don't have a standalone Shazam series. Maybe it's that whole name thing, which has plagued him for like 50 years now. (4/5)
Green Arrow Vol 1: Since the New 52 started in 2011, this really has no similarity to "Arrow" except it involves Oliver Queen as Green Arrow, who goes around shooting arrows at people. Other than Oliver there really aren't any other characters who appear in the TV show, but maybe they will in the future. He has two henchpersons, one to design weapons and one who does computer hacking and stuff, which I suppose was the basis for the Felicity character. Anyway, it was OK but largely not as good as the TV show. (3.5/5)
Green Arrow Vol 4: I missed a couple volumes--because they weren't on sale. This involves mostly a bad guy named Komodo who is an old friend of Oliver's dead father. He is conveniently another archer, who also takes over Queen Consolidated. It seems they're trying to dovetail this more with the TV series, introducing Shado, Diggle, and Count Vertigo. I'd have liked it better but the abstract art style employed by Andrea Sorrentino (who is apparently a dude) is annoying. I prefer the more traditional styles and can tolerate even the more Manga-like styles, but I couldn't get behind this. (2.5/5)
Flash Vol 1: This is another New 52 volume but like the Batman ones it's not a reboot, so I was pretty damned confused, having never really read any Flash comics. I really had no idea what was going on most of the time. The first story involved clones of this soldier guy and pigs for some reason. I don't know. Whatever. (2/5)
Aquaman Vol 1: What's great about this kickoff of the New 52 Aquaman series is it immediately confronts our misconceptions about Aquaman from Superfriends, SNL, Family Guy, or Robot Chicken. (Series writer Geoff Johns actually has contributed to the latter.) He doesn't "talk" to fish (he telepathically "pushes" them), he doesn't wear an orange "shirt" (it's scale armor that is bulletproof), and he has a trident that can lift a whole truck. The first three issues involve some piranha people from "the Trench" who start wreaking havoc and only Aquaman can stop them. Another involves Aquaman ending up in the desert after recovering an artifact. And another involves his wife (or girlfriend or whatever) Mera going to buy dog food, which naturally takes a circuitous route. The biggest accomplishment is by confronting our misconceptions about Aquaman, Johns actually makes the character a little deeper. (5/5)
Green Lantern Vol 1: Another New 52 non-reboot. So somehow Hal Jordan pissed off the Guardians and lost his ring to his archenemy Sinestro. And then Sinestro begins using his ring to take down his own evil Sinestro Corps with Hal Jordan's help. There's also a lot of setup for the "First Lantern/Third Army" stories that apparently followed this. (3.5/5)
Future's End #0: After "Forever Evil" that just wrapped up, the next big event at DC Comics is Future's End. For Free Comic Book Day they were giving away this preview issue. But they also gave it away online so I didn't have to go to no icky comic book store. Anyway, it's pretty much a ripoff of Marvel's Age of Ultron story that is being made into Avengers 2. That involved an artificial intelligence called Ultron that takes over the world until Wolverine and Sue Storm go back in time to stop it. DC's version has Brother Eye taking over the world in the future and assimilating all the superheroes like the Borg. So Batman Beyond goes back in time to stop it. Besides Age of Ultron, this also brings to mind the Terminator franchise and even DC's own Final Crisis and Flashpoint events. Look, I know comics are not very original, but they could try a little harder. (2/5)
Captain America Reborn: This came after Captain America was killed following the "Civil War" series. It's a lot like what Grant Morrison did with Bruce Wayne in "The Return of Bruce Wayne" but this is far less confusing. Like Billy Pilgrim, Cap has become unstuck in time. It's all part of a needlessly complicated scheme by the Red Skull that I highly doubt will ever become a movie. (3/5)
Carnage: I got this because it's written by Zeb Wells, who's also a writer of Robot Chicken. I had no idea who Carnage is but apparently he's the spawn of Venom, only this symbiote is red and takes over a serial killer. In this story Spider-Man and Iron Man have to stop Carnage after a stupid industrialist retrieves the villain from space. Mayhem ensues. (3.5/5)
Carnage USA: Carnage is back and this time he takes over a small Colorado town, assimilating its population. When the Avengers (Captain America, Wolverine, Spider-Man, Hawkeye, and Thing) go to stop him, all but Spidey are assimilated. So then it's up to Spider-Man, some of the town's residents, a sort of anti-Carnage A-Team, and the new Venom (Peter Parker's old nemesis Flash Thompson) to stop him. More mayhem ensues. (4/5)
Amazing Spider-Man Masterworks, Vol 1: These are reprints of the first 11 Spider-Man stories written by Stan Lee. Despite that they're from the 60s they have that Golden Age cheesiness to them. It features the familiar story of Peter Parker getting bit by a radioactive spider to become Spider-Man and then Uncle Ben dies and yadda yadda. In this volume he tangles with Vulture (twice), Doctor Octopus, Sandman, Lizard, and Electro. No Green Goblin yet. No Norman or Harry Osborn. No Gwen Stacy or Mary-Jane Watson either; the closest he has to a girlfriend is J Jonah Jameson's secretary Betty. But there are a few appearances by the Fantastic Four. The annoying thing is they put the original Spider-Man origin story (Amazing Fantasy #15) at the end so to read them in order you have to go the end and then back to the beginning. Why? (3.5/5)
Spider-Man House of M: The House of M storyline was where the Scarlet Witch used her powers to recreate the world so mutants are in charge. Spider-Man becomes a huge celebrity because people think he's a mutant. But when he's outed, it spells trouble for him and his family. The cause of his outing is where it gets kind of weird. (3.5/5)
Amazing Spider-Man: Big Time: This story arc is only like three issues but it launches a new phase of Peter Parker's life where he isn't a total loser. He gets a job at a lab where he has creative freedom to do pretty much whatever he wants. The first thing he does is create a "stealth" suit to take on a new Hobgoblin who has a sonic scream like DC's Black Canary. Of course while things seem to be going good we know in hindsight this was meant to set up another FAIL for Peter when his body is taken over by Dr. Octopus, the Superior Spider-Man. Still it was nice to see things going better for him and for him to use his brains for once. (5/5)
Amazing Spider-Man: Spider Island: This was a big event story where bedbugs carrying a virus give all of New York Spidey powers--except for superhumans and mutants. There's some awkwardness for Peter Parker when everyone else can start swinging around on webs, especially when it's his current girlfriend Carlie and his ex-girlfriend MJ. But only one Spider-Man can save the day! OK, actually two...and Anti-Venom. The end is reminiscent of what I did in the 8th (and final) Scarlet Knight book. I swear Dan Slott must have read my books. Anyway, I didn't read all the issues involved with this but what I did read was fun even if I didn't really know who some of the characters were. (3.5/5)
Amazing Spider-Man: Ends of the Earth: Conveniently they had lots of Spidey comics on sale at the time of the series relaunch with Peter Parker at the helm and the sequel to the movie of the same name. Anyway this continues Dan Slott's run on the series (which is still going) as a dying Dr. Octopus seemingly has a way to stop global warming and save the Earth. But of course it's a trick! So Spider-Man, Black Widow, and Silver Sable have to stop him and the Sinister Six. It's a fun globetrotting adventure that illustrates why it's too bad Sony's ownership keeps Spidey out of the Marvel universe. (5/5)
Amazing Spider-Man: Dying Wish: The Superior Spider-Man thing begins with this, where Dr. Octopus is dying in prison. The moment he switches brains with Peter Parker is anticlimactic. It's like oh, this just happened? I thought there'd be like a big flash of light or something. Whatever. So then Peter spends pretty much 2 issues trying to save Dr. Octopus's body by calling on supervillains to break him out of prison. But in the end he does a "The Crow" on Doc Ock so that at least he'll continue being a good guy--sort of. It was nice how they worked in some flashbacks and callbacks to events and people from Spidey's past, though really the whole "afterlife" thing was something I already did in the Scarlet Knight books (3 and 8 mostly) so once again I am ahead of the curve. Because I am superior! (5/5)
Superior Spider-Man Vol 2: I reviewed the first volume on Laplume's comics blog. The short version: I really liked the new Dr. Octopus Spider-Man because he finds solutions to problems instead of whining about them. At the end of Volume 1 Superior Spidey had killed the evil Massacre with a gun. This and beating a couple of super pranksters to a pulp on live TV/Internet brings down some heat from the Avengers, which in the comics universe Spidey is part of. Though strangely there's not a whole lot of fighting involved with that. After the Avengers let him go with a warning, Superior Spidey has to fight the battle within against the last vestiges of Peter Parker. Since there are about 20 more issues, guess who wins? Anyway, this continues the fun of the first volume and the growth of Otto Octavius as Spider-Man. (5/5)
Superior Spider-Man Vol 3: This is sort of like Arkham Asylum, where Superior Spidey is locked in a prison with a lot of the villains he's beaten to a pulp. Doc Ock's arrogance makes things a little difficult in combating the Spider-Slayer, but in the end he's able to prevail. Now that he's free of Parker's influence, Doc Ock is giving in to some of his evil urges, like when he blackmails the mayor to give him the prison to use as his private base. In this volume we begin to see the Green Goblin forming an army from the rejects of crime families Superior Spidey has broken up. Overall it's not quite as good; I kind of miss the interplay between Doc Ock and Parker's ghost. (3.5/5)
Superior Spider-Man Vol 4: Most of this volume focuses on a time rift that sends the Spider-Man from 2099 back to 2013, where he meets the Superior Spider-Man. Like the Terminator, 2099 Spidey has to save an ancestor from being destroyed, even though he knows this ancestor is evil. An annoying thing is one issue promises the return of Black Cat, Spidey's version of Catwoman. Except her return is all of about a page. Superior Spidey finds her stealing jewels, beats her up, webs her up, and leaves. What a gyp. But I suppose part of this was to show how Doc Ock has let go of Parker's old love interests: Black Cat, MJ, and Carlie Cooper and even his old girlfriend as Doctor Octopus in favor of a super-smart dwarf in his physics class. After the time rift thing Doc Ock is left unemployed, but as he always does, he comes up with a solution--in this case to start his own company. Meanwhile after Superior Spidey leveled the Kingpin's headquarters, the Kingpin's former employees (including the Hobgoblin) have joined forces with the Goblin. But probably nothing big happens with that until the final "Goblin Nation" arc to close the series. And Parker's old girlfriend Carlie along with a hero known as "the Wraith" are closing in to find out how Spider-Man has been funding his toys. Anyway this felt like more of a grab-bag volume that is building stuff for the future but isn't so interesting at the present. (3/5)
Ultimate Spider-Man Vol 1: This is the 2000 reboot of the franchise, not the 2011 re-reboot with Miles Morales. Except this being Marvel it's not a reboot, it's another universe. Whatever. So basically we again get the familiar origin story of Peter Parker. Since it predates the movies you can see where maybe some of the seeds for the 2002 movie were planted. I don't think it's really that much of an improvement to the original. Like the 2012 movie reboot it doesn't add that much of value. (I don't consider giving Uncle Ben a ponytail added value.) (3/5)
Ultimate Extinction: I didn't like "The Ultimates" comic this was a sequel to so I probably shouldn't have bought it but it was on sale and I was reading the Galactus-themed third Girl Power book so I thought this might be educational. Anyway while in the original comics Galactus is a big dude who strips planets clean, in this it's referred to as "Gah Lak Tus" and is a swarm of killer robots, which actually fits into what I did with my book. Anyway, Mr. Fantastic works on a way to kill the thing while Professor X and Jean-Grey try to contact it psychically, which only pisses it off. And Captain America, Nick Fury, and the Falcon kill a bunch of clones who worship a Silver Surfer, because I guess there's more than one, which is good since Iron Man rips the head off one. It occurred to me what these "Ultimates" books are missing compared to the Marvel movies is the fun. There's not really the banter or humor that makes the movies so watchable. Basically it's a bunch of squabbling and then punching and/or blowing shit up. Author Warren Ellis said in an interview included with one issue that British writers like him didn't really read all those old Silver Age comics (like the ones originating Galactus) so maybe that's part of the problem. (2.5/5)
Green Arrow Year One: Unlike the first New 52 comics, this actually has some relevance to the TV show. Although in this Oliver Queen goes with his British bodyguard on a yacht, but the bodyguard betrays him. Oliver ends up on an island, where he constructs a crude bow to survive. The plot is far less labyrinthine than the TV show. Basically China White is using the island as a base for growing heroin and Ollie has to save the day. There's no mention of his family or anything like that. Though I suppose there might be an Easter egg in the TV show in that this comic is written by Andy Diggle. (4/5)
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
Monday, May 19, 2014
Selling Out
Speaking of selling out, if you ever wanted to read my Tales of the Scarlet Knight series, now is the time. The first collection (not omnibus since that word pissed off Michael Offutt and as he's my VP of Common Sense on these things I decided to not use that term, but it is an omnibus by definition) is FREE on Amazon this week. Volume 1: The Call That's the first 3 books in the series, plus two prequels, for FREE. That is literally 1,200 pages of superhero action for nothing. So go download it, freeloaders! And then maybe leave me a review that doesn't suck.
It can't be free again for like 3 months, so act now! Operators are not standing by! (Because this is the 21st Century and we have this newfangled Internet thingy)
And if you like it, June 16-22 the second "collection" Volume 2: The Wrath of Isis will be on sale for 99 cents as my first ever use of the new "Kindle Countdown Deals" thing. That's 2,000 pages of superhero action for only 99 cents! Of course right now it's only $2.99, which really isn't that much more expensive, but I know how much people hate paying for books.
And now the rest of the entry...
This is in part another review of a movie I watched about a month ago. "The Wolf of Wall Street" was pretty much what I thought it was: Martin Scorcese's version of "Wall Street." It never really rises above the cliche Every Wall Street Movie Ever plot of young guy with big dreams goes to Wall Street, makes a lot of money, does a lot of blow/hookers, and then his empire crumbles. Except in this case Jordan Belmont (Leo DiCaprio) only made his fortune on his second tour on Wall Street. His first ended on Black Monday in 1987.
Then he went to Long Island to a little hole-in-the-wall company selling penny stocks. I'm sure Michael Offutt could define those better but they essentially are stocks too worthless to be listed on any exchange because they are worth literally pennies per share. Idiots buy into these thinking they'll get rich. It's like going to a racetrack and betting on the 100-to-1 shot.
Jordan seals his interview by grabbing the phone, calling some random schmuck, and then getting him to buy $4000 worth of a crappy stock called Aerotyne, which was literally operating out of a garage. Then he recruits some buddies and they buy an old garage and start their own penny stock operation, which becomes a huge Wall Street firm.
Early on Jordan gives all his guys a script. First they call the schmuck and start out blatantly lying about some great company that is of course worthless. This is something I remember Tuesday Morning Quarterback on ESPN talking about a lot, how people love to think they're getting privileged information, that someone has a "secret" that will make them a fortune. It's why so many people signed up with Bernie Madoff and the like. Then to cinch the deal Jordan has his guys buddy up to the schmuck saying how they're going to make sure the stock does well because it's their neck on the line too. In the large part the idea is to act like they care what happens because they're an ordinary schmuck too. (Meanwhile their buddies are laughing their asses off in the background.)
The other prong of Jordan's attack is to rebrand his company. He renames it Stratford something or other and uses a symbol of a lion and moves the company into Manhattan. This is supposed to make people feel the company is legit, because no firm with a lion for a symbol would be some fly-by-night operation, right?
At the end, after Jordan has spent a paltry 3 years in a country club prison, he goes to New Zealand to give a seminar to would-be salespeople. His intro is to challenge them to sell him his pen. Earlier he plays this game with his buddies. One takes the pen and asks someone to write his name on a napkin, to which the guy is like, "I don't have a pen." Well there you go. Supply and demand, right?
For many people writing a book is easy; selling it is hard. Like the other salespeople in Long Island or those at Jordan's seminars most of us are pretty clueless about how to sell our books. We could all learn something from his tactics, no matter how sleazy they might seem:
A good trick you can use that I learned from my "publisher": if your book was on an Amazon best seller list in the UK or another country for a couple of hours, you can declare yourself an "International Best Selling Author" on your book covers. It's not really a lie, is it? I was on a best seller list in the UK for a few hours! Just last night a book under one of my pen names was beating those by Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, Clive Barker, and Edgar Allen Poe on the short stories bestseller list in the UK. So there. You might feel squeamish about it, but that's why most authors are so terrible at selling; you have to be willing to exaggerate and to go out there and toot your own horn if you want to really become a best selling author.
To get back to the movie, I can't really recommend it as at nearly 3 hours it's well over an hour too long. Did Scorsese even have an editor on staff? Yeesh. And as I said it doesn't really rise above the cliche. Andrew Leon said he didn't know what the movie was about; I think in the big picture it's supposed to evoke the Occupy Wall Street frustration. Jordan lies, cheats, and swindles a lot of people and yet he only does 3 years of time. This point is made by the FBI agent who worked for years and years to bust Jordan and then has to ride home on a grungy subway while Jordan gets out after his 3 years and starts making money again from his seminars. But that point certainly didn't need 3 hours to make.
It can't be free again for like 3 months, so act now! Operators are not standing by! (Because this is the 21st Century and we have this newfangled Internet thingy)
And if you like it, June 16-22 the second "collection" Volume 2: The Wrath of Isis will be on sale for 99 cents as my first ever use of the new "Kindle Countdown Deals" thing. That's 2,000 pages of superhero action for only 99 cents! Of course right now it's only $2.99, which really isn't that much more expensive, but I know how much people hate paying for books.
And now the rest of the entry...
This is in part another review of a movie I watched about a month ago. "The Wolf of Wall Street" was pretty much what I thought it was: Martin Scorcese's version of "Wall Street." It never really rises above the cliche Every Wall Street Movie Ever plot of young guy with big dreams goes to Wall Street, makes a lot of money, does a lot of blow/hookers, and then his empire crumbles. Except in this case Jordan Belmont (Leo DiCaprio) only made his fortune on his second tour on Wall Street. His first ended on Black Monday in 1987.
Then he went to Long Island to a little hole-in-the-wall company selling penny stocks. I'm sure Michael Offutt could define those better but they essentially are stocks too worthless to be listed on any exchange because they are worth literally pennies per share. Idiots buy into these thinking they'll get rich. It's like going to a racetrack and betting on the 100-to-1 shot.
Jordan seals his interview by grabbing the phone, calling some random schmuck, and then getting him to buy $4000 worth of a crappy stock called Aerotyne, which was literally operating out of a garage. Then he recruits some buddies and they buy an old garage and start their own penny stock operation, which becomes a huge Wall Street firm.
Early on Jordan gives all his guys a script. First they call the schmuck and start out blatantly lying about some great company that is of course worthless. This is something I remember Tuesday Morning Quarterback on ESPN talking about a lot, how people love to think they're getting privileged information, that someone has a "secret" that will make them a fortune. It's why so many people signed up with Bernie Madoff and the like. Then to cinch the deal Jordan has his guys buddy up to the schmuck saying how they're going to make sure the stock does well because it's their neck on the line too. In the large part the idea is to act like they care what happens because they're an ordinary schmuck too. (Meanwhile their buddies are laughing their asses off in the background.)
The other prong of Jordan's attack is to rebrand his company. He renames it Stratford something or other and uses a symbol of a lion and moves the company into Manhattan. This is supposed to make people feel the company is legit, because no firm with a lion for a symbol would be some fly-by-night operation, right?
At the end, after Jordan has spent a paltry 3 years in a country club prison, he goes to New Zealand to give a seminar to would-be salespeople. His intro is to challenge them to sell him his pen. Earlier he plays this game with his buddies. One takes the pen and asks someone to write his name on a napkin, to which the guy is like, "I don't have a pen." Well there you go. Supply and demand, right?
For many people writing a book is easy; selling it is hard. Like the other salespeople in Long Island or those at Jordan's seminars most of us are pretty clueless about how to sell our books. We could all learn something from his tactics, no matter how sleazy they might seem:
- Confidence! If you don't believe, why should anyone else?
- Don't be afraid to lie. You're a writer; you should be good at making stuff up.
- Know who you're selling to. Hopefully that's more than your friends and family.
- Dress for Success: Make sure your books and website look as professional as you can make them. Which I try to do with my website here
A good trick you can use that I learned from my "publisher": if your book was on an Amazon best seller list in the UK or another country for a couple of hours, you can declare yourself an "International Best Selling Author" on your book covers. It's not really a lie, is it? I was on a best seller list in the UK for a few hours! Just last night a book under one of my pen names was beating those by Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, Clive Barker, and Edgar Allen Poe on the short stories bestseller list in the UK. So there. You might feel squeamish about it, but that's why most authors are so terrible at selling; you have to be willing to exaggerate and to go out there and toot your own horn if you want to really become a best selling author.
To get back to the movie, I can't really recommend it as at nearly 3 hours it's well over an hour too long. Did Scorsese even have an editor on staff? Yeesh. And as I said it doesn't really rise above the cliche. Andrew Leon said he didn't know what the movie was about; I think in the big picture it's supposed to evoke the Occupy Wall Street frustration. Jordan lies, cheats, and swindles a lot of people and yet he only does 3 years of time. This point is made by the FBI agent who worked for years and years to bust Jordan and then has to ride home on a grungy subway while Jordan gets out after his 3 years and starts making money again from his seminars. But that point certainly didn't need 3 hours to make.
Friday, May 16, 2014
Finales: Arrow vs. Agents of SHIELD
This post contains spoilers if you haven't watched these episodes already. You've been warned!
This week saw both big comic book-related TV shows, "Marvel's Agents of SHIELD" and "Arrow" wrap up with their season finales. As has been the case most of the year (since I started watching it at any rate) "Arrow" was the winner in terms of superhero action. But Agents of SHIELD wasn't terrible either.
I had stopped watching Agents of SHIELD in February or so when they took a break for the Olympics or whatever, but I started watching again after "Captain America 2" came out because I heard there was a seismic shift in the show. Which there was as SHIELD crumbles in the wake of discovering Hydra has infiltrated it to its highest levels, including uptight supposedly straight-arrow Agent Grant Ward. This made the show slightly better as the team was fighting for their lives instead of the bogus X-Files ripoff crap from earlier in the season.
In the last episode Coulson and company are tracking down the evil Garrett, who's trying to make an army of supersoldiers like the cyborg assassin Deathlok. For the last couple of episodes they've been tracking him down but now they finally reach his base of operations. And then mayhem ensues. I already knew about the Nick Fury cameo in advance, though I was surprised it came so early in the show. I thought it'd be another one of those where he shows up at the end. Not that he necessarily DOES a whole lot except talk and give Coulson the BFG (Big Freakin' Gun in Doom) to shoot at supersoldiers.
There was one part of the episode I found absolutely ridiculous. In the prior episode Ward has ejected dorky scientists Fitz and Simmons (do not ask me which is which) in an escape pod that sinks to "the bottom of the ocean." Well apparently the bottom of the ocean is as deep as a motel swimming pool because they blow the window in the pod (why does it even have a window?) and manage to swim out to the surface. From the bottom of the ocean. Without any scuba gear, just a single oxygen mask. Are you freaking kidding me? I'm not Jacques Cousteau here (which is good because he's dead) but I know you can't go to the bottom of the ocean without a vehicle. The pressure down there can crush you like a freaking grape. Even subs have a maximum depth they can go before the pressure gets too much. It's like saying they could jump out of a space shuttle and go through the atmosphere without burning up. I ain't buying it. But maybe I need to consult with Neil deGraase Tyson on this.
Besides that it was a good episode as far as this series is concerned. And now that Coulson is the head of SHIELD they have a chance to reinvent the show and maybe make it not suck as much as it did most of the year. There are still questions left unanswered like what the deal with Skye is. Has she ever shown any potential to do anything special? Was her daddy bathing in blood? Nasty. And what was that thing Coulson (and Garrett earlier) were going all A Beautiful Mind drawing? Since Avengers 2 is coming out in May, around the time when season 2 of this show should be wrapping up, do you suppose they'll use the next season to help set that up?
Probably the second most ridiculous thing is that apparently the Patton Oswalt character had an identical twin. Who are both SHIELD agents. Who both maintain out-of-the-way hiding places. Maybe they're robots? Or clones? It was kind of lame. (3/5)
By contrast the "Arrow" finale was a lot more epic in terms of action. It channels "The Dark Knight Rises" a bit as it basically involves the bad guy (Slade Wilson aka Deathstroke) and the good guy (Oliver Queen aka the [Green] Arrow) throwing down in a street fight. Oliver's army is made primarily of assassins from the League of Assassins (aka the League of Shadows from the Nolanverse) who have made a deal with Sarah (aka [Black] Canary) that means she'll have to rejoin them in exchange for their help.
The real focus of the action is between Oliver and Slade. Employing the Sam Raimi Spider-Man playbook, Slade kidnaps first Laurel and then Felicity to kill the woman Oliver loves. His confusion is understandable since Oliver has pretty much screwed every woman on the show--except his half-sister. Except Oliver cruelly used Felicity as bait to get her close enough to use the cure for the Mirakuru super-steroid on Slade. Total dick move there, brah. I liked how they intermingled flashbacks of Slade and Oliver fighting on the sinking freighter to them fighting in the present to give you an idea of how they've come full circle.
I was disappointed they didn't kill anyone, but at least they did write out a couple of characters for a little while. You know Sarah, Thea, and Slade will all reappear at some point in the future. The way they potentially killed Laurel/Sarah's dad was probably the weakest point of the episode. I mean he's saying goodbye to Sarah and then all the sudden he's like, "Ooh my tummy hurts...I'm dying!" Hurm, probably should have gotten an X-ray after being punched in the gut by a dude hopped up on super-steroids. And the second weakest moment was when they reveal that unfortunately there's more to Oliver's time away from home. Now he's in Hong Kong in Amanda Waller's clutches? WTF? Seriously, could we just end these flashbacks already? It's getting a bit ridiculous.
It'll be interesting to see where they go in season 3 after the fallout from Starling City being ravaged--again. Oliver kind of sucks at being a superhero. (4/5)
During the "Arrow" finale they had a teaser for "The Flash" which is debuting next year. Apparently "Arrow" and "Agents of SHIELD" have done well enough that 5 more comics-related series are premiering next year: The Flash and iZombie on CW, Gotham (a Batman prequel) on Fox, Agent Carter (a SHIELD prequel I think) on ABC, and Constantine (vaguely related to that lame Keanu Reeves movie that was vaguely related to the Hellblazer comic) on NBC. On top of that in 2015 Netflix begins showing new Marvel series focusing on Daredevil, Luke Cage, and some others. So now comics are taking over the small screen AND the big screen. And one even stars a woman, so that's progress. But guess which one will probably be cancelled first?
Now to try to get some page views as Briane Pagel and I were discussing on Indie Writers Monthly yesterday, here's a picture of Sean Connery in a swimsuit:
This week saw both big comic book-related TV shows, "Marvel's Agents of SHIELD" and "Arrow" wrap up with their season finales. As has been the case most of the year (since I started watching it at any rate) "Arrow" was the winner in terms of superhero action. But Agents of SHIELD wasn't terrible either.
I had stopped watching Agents of SHIELD in February or so when they took a break for the Olympics or whatever, but I started watching again after "Captain America 2" came out because I heard there was a seismic shift in the show. Which there was as SHIELD crumbles in the wake of discovering Hydra has infiltrated it to its highest levels, including uptight supposedly straight-arrow Agent Grant Ward. This made the show slightly better as the team was fighting for their lives instead of the bogus X-Files ripoff crap from earlier in the season.
In the last episode Coulson and company are tracking down the evil Garrett, who's trying to make an army of supersoldiers like the cyborg assassin Deathlok. For the last couple of episodes they've been tracking him down but now they finally reach his base of operations. And then mayhem ensues. I already knew about the Nick Fury cameo in advance, though I was surprised it came so early in the show. I thought it'd be another one of those where he shows up at the end. Not that he necessarily DOES a whole lot except talk and give Coulson the BFG (Big Freakin' Gun in Doom) to shoot at supersoldiers.
There was one part of the episode I found absolutely ridiculous. In the prior episode Ward has ejected dorky scientists Fitz and Simmons (do not ask me which is which) in an escape pod that sinks to "the bottom of the ocean." Well apparently the bottom of the ocean is as deep as a motel swimming pool because they blow the window in the pod (why does it even have a window?) and manage to swim out to the surface. From the bottom of the ocean. Without any scuba gear, just a single oxygen mask. Are you freaking kidding me? I'm not Jacques Cousteau here (which is good because he's dead) but I know you can't go to the bottom of the ocean without a vehicle. The pressure down there can crush you like a freaking grape. Even subs have a maximum depth they can go before the pressure gets too much. It's like saying they could jump out of a space shuttle and go through the atmosphere without burning up. I ain't buying it. But maybe I need to consult with Neil deGraase Tyson on this.
Besides that it was a good episode as far as this series is concerned. And now that Coulson is the head of SHIELD they have a chance to reinvent the show and maybe make it not suck as much as it did most of the year. There are still questions left unanswered like what the deal with Skye is. Has she ever shown any potential to do anything special? Was her daddy bathing in blood? Nasty. And what was that thing Coulson (and Garrett earlier) were going all A Beautiful Mind drawing? Since Avengers 2 is coming out in May, around the time when season 2 of this show should be wrapping up, do you suppose they'll use the next season to help set that up?
Probably the second most ridiculous thing is that apparently the Patton Oswalt character had an identical twin. Who are both SHIELD agents. Who both maintain out-of-the-way hiding places. Maybe they're robots? Or clones? It was kind of lame. (3/5)
By contrast the "Arrow" finale was a lot more epic in terms of action. It channels "The Dark Knight Rises" a bit as it basically involves the bad guy (Slade Wilson aka Deathstroke) and the good guy (Oliver Queen aka the [Green] Arrow) throwing down in a street fight. Oliver's army is made primarily of assassins from the League of Assassins (aka the League of Shadows from the Nolanverse) who have made a deal with Sarah (aka [Black] Canary) that means she'll have to rejoin them in exchange for their help.
The real focus of the action is between Oliver and Slade. Employing the Sam Raimi Spider-Man playbook, Slade kidnaps first Laurel and then Felicity to kill the woman Oliver loves. His confusion is understandable since Oliver has pretty much screwed every woman on the show--except his half-sister. Except Oliver cruelly used Felicity as bait to get her close enough to use the cure for the Mirakuru super-steroid on Slade. Total dick move there, brah. I liked how they intermingled flashbacks of Slade and Oliver fighting on the sinking freighter to them fighting in the present to give you an idea of how they've come full circle.
I was disappointed they didn't kill anyone, but at least they did write out a couple of characters for a little while. You know Sarah, Thea, and Slade will all reappear at some point in the future. The way they potentially killed Laurel/Sarah's dad was probably the weakest point of the episode. I mean he's saying goodbye to Sarah and then all the sudden he's like, "Ooh my tummy hurts...I'm dying!" Hurm, probably should have gotten an X-ray after being punched in the gut by a dude hopped up on super-steroids. And the second weakest moment was when they reveal that unfortunately there's more to Oliver's time away from home. Now he's in Hong Kong in Amanda Waller's clutches? WTF? Seriously, could we just end these flashbacks already? It's getting a bit ridiculous.
It'll be interesting to see where they go in season 3 after the fallout from Starling City being ravaged--again. Oliver kind of sucks at being a superhero. (4/5)
During the "Arrow" finale they had a teaser for "The Flash" which is debuting next year. Apparently "Arrow" and "Agents of SHIELD" have done well enough that 5 more comics-related series are premiering next year: The Flash and iZombie on CW, Gotham (a Batman prequel) on Fox, Agent Carter (a SHIELD prequel I think) on ABC, and Constantine (vaguely related to that lame Keanu Reeves movie that was vaguely related to the Hellblazer comic) on NBC. On top of that in 2015 Netflix begins showing new Marvel series focusing on Daredevil, Luke Cage, and some others. So now comics are taking over the small screen AND the big screen. And one even stars a woman, so that's progress. But guess which one will probably be cancelled first?
Now to try to get some page views as Briane Pagel and I were discussing on Indie Writers Monthly yesterday, here's a picture of Sean Connery in a swimsuit:
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
Funny Money
I think if they had support groups for spending too much money on stupid Internet games like Candy Crush I would have to enroll. It's obscene how much money I've wasted on that stupid game through Facebook to buy the stupid little power ups to beat a level. I swear it must be a couple hundred dollars in the last few months between that, Angry Birds Star Wars, and Deer Hunter 2014.
The thing is you hardly even notice the money at the time. It bleeds you slow, a dollar here or two dollars here, kind of like gambling really. It's worse because you're not even going to win the money back, so it's just a complete waste of money. But hey, I can quit any time, right? Yeah, probably.
The thing is, those games are designed to continually generate cash for their designers. Like a drug dealer they might let you download the first levels for free, but then they'll start making you pay for the added levels. And they'll make the levels so annoying you spend money on the power-ups to beat them. And they only give you a small number of lives that recharge slowly to bilk you out of more money to keep playing. It's a total fucking scam.
Some people would oversimplify and say, "Well they're not making you spend money." Neither do casinos. But especially when you're playing these games on Facebook there's that pressure to get as far as your "friends" or get a higher score and so forth. And you get to that point where you only need one move to beat the level and it's almost midnight and you've tried it 15 times already, so what's $1.99 to end the hassle and go to bed a winner, right?
It reminds me of a report I wrote for one of my business classes in high school back in 1995 or so. It was about digital currency and one of the potential problems I noted is that when the money is digital it doesn't really FEEL like you're spending money. It's not like reaching into your pocket and taking a dollar out of your wallet, where you can then see how many more you got left. Thus there's no real weight to it.
Playing those games on Facebook or my Kindle Fire, I think my fear has come to pass. Because as I said, it doesn't feel like I'm spending actual money. Then I open my bank statement and holy shit! How did I spend $30 in three fucking days!!!?
I'm not going to single out Candy Crush and other games. It's really digital commerce in general. I can't even begin to contemplate just how much I've spent on Amazon in the last 13 years or so. It has to be well into the thousands or perhaps 10 thousands. It's a book here, an album there, a graphic novel there, and so forth. The financial death by a thousand cuts. But hey it goes on my credit cards so it's not REAL money, is it? Aye, there's the rub.
I imagine the problem is only going to get worse. I haven't looked into Bitcoins, but that and other such things are the next step in fully digital currency. I think recently in Europe some country declared Bitcoins aren't real currency, but it's only a matter of time before it happens. That will make fiscal responsibility even tougher. Another decade or so and even the bums will probably be sitting there with signs saying, "Will Work for Bitcoins."
In the meantime, maybe I should get a sponsor to help me get through Candy Crush withdrawal.
The thing is you hardly even notice the money at the time. It bleeds you slow, a dollar here or two dollars here, kind of like gambling really. It's worse because you're not even going to win the money back, so it's just a complete waste of money. But hey, I can quit any time, right? Yeah, probably.
The thing is, those games are designed to continually generate cash for their designers. Like a drug dealer they might let you download the first levels for free, but then they'll start making you pay for the added levels. And they'll make the levels so annoying you spend money on the power-ups to beat them. And they only give you a small number of lives that recharge slowly to bilk you out of more money to keep playing. It's a total fucking scam.
Some people would oversimplify and say, "Well they're not making you spend money." Neither do casinos. But especially when you're playing these games on Facebook there's that pressure to get as far as your "friends" or get a higher score and so forth. And you get to that point where you only need one move to beat the level and it's almost midnight and you've tried it 15 times already, so what's $1.99 to end the hassle and go to bed a winner, right?
It reminds me of a report I wrote for one of my business classes in high school back in 1995 or so. It was about digital currency and one of the potential problems I noted is that when the money is digital it doesn't really FEEL like you're spending money. It's not like reaching into your pocket and taking a dollar out of your wallet, where you can then see how many more you got left. Thus there's no real weight to it.
Playing those games on Facebook or my Kindle Fire, I think my fear has come to pass. Because as I said, it doesn't feel like I'm spending actual money. Then I open my bank statement and holy shit! How did I spend $30 in three fucking days!!!?
I'm not going to single out Candy Crush and other games. It's really digital commerce in general. I can't even begin to contemplate just how much I've spent on Amazon in the last 13 years or so. It has to be well into the thousands or perhaps 10 thousands. It's a book here, an album there, a graphic novel there, and so forth. The financial death by a thousand cuts. But hey it goes on my credit cards so it's not REAL money, is it? Aye, there's the rub.
I imagine the problem is only going to get worse. I haven't looked into Bitcoins, but that and other such things are the next step in fully digital currency. I think recently in Europe some country declared Bitcoins aren't real currency, but it's only a matter of time before it happens. That will make fiscal responsibility even tougher. Another decade or so and even the bums will probably be sitting there with signs saying, "Will Work for Bitcoins."
In the meantime, maybe I should get a sponsor to help me get through Candy Crush withdrawal.
Monday, May 12, 2014
We Need Nabobs of Negativity
Nobody likes getting a bad review. I mean I gave Tony Laplume a bad review and he gave me the silent treatment for two months. But this blog article praising the banning of ANY negative book review is taking it a bit far.
I'll be the first to say I want to slit the throat of anyone who gives me a 1-star review. At the same time, giving someone else a one-star review sometimes feels really, really good. Because if a book sucks (ie it's so slow and dull that you want to pitch your Kindle out a window) it feels good to vent about it.
No, it's not nice to say bad things about a book, which is why usually I restrict such reviews to authors who can take it. I mean come on, Dean Koontz is probably never going to see my one-star review of Longest Evening of the Year. And other times someone just really, really deserves it because their book SUCKS. Not any of my books, of course. They all rule and you should give them five-stars on every website on the Internet...what are you waiting for? Go do it!
Anyway, as much as I hate getting bad reviews, simply eliminating every bad review ever makes book reviews in general worthless. To take it away from books for a moment, imagine if you buy a toaster on Amazon but it's defective and nearly shocks you to death. If Amazon had a "only nice reviews" policy, how would anyone know this toaster is a defective piece of shit? As much as we might not want to admit it, sometimes bad reviews serve a purpose.
But only if that bad review has substance. There are certainly some bad reviews that should be banned. Like if my whole "review" is a ten-page rant about how much I hate Tony Laplume, that's not a book review; it's a personal attack. Or like some people I could name, your "review" says "This isn't the kind of book I read. I read [authors who write completely different subjects.]" Well hello, if you usually read thrillers then you probably aren't going to like a cozy mystery about a crime-solving tabby cat. That's just common sense.
By all means get rid of the flame wars and the morons, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water. That's as dumb as when Kobo banned all self-published erotica because a few titles had illicit material. Stuff like that is just damned lazy, not to mention overly reactionary.
(Despite what I just said, I still reserve the right to deck the next person who gives me a 1-star review. And I will do it with the boxing gloves I got from Amazon, which I rated at 3 stars because they're tight on my fat hands.)
I'll be the first to say I want to slit the throat of anyone who gives me a 1-star review. At the same time, giving someone else a one-star review sometimes feels really, really good. Because if a book sucks (ie it's so slow and dull that you want to pitch your Kindle out a window) it feels good to vent about it.
No, it's not nice to say bad things about a book, which is why usually I restrict such reviews to authors who can take it. I mean come on, Dean Koontz is probably never going to see my one-star review of Longest Evening of the Year. And other times someone just really, really deserves it because their book SUCKS. Not any of my books, of course. They all rule and you should give them five-stars on every website on the Internet...what are you waiting for? Go do it!
Anyway, as much as I hate getting bad reviews, simply eliminating every bad review ever makes book reviews in general worthless. To take it away from books for a moment, imagine if you buy a toaster on Amazon but it's defective and nearly shocks you to death. If Amazon had a "only nice reviews" policy, how would anyone know this toaster is a defective piece of shit? As much as we might not want to admit it, sometimes bad reviews serve a purpose.
 |
| The Smokey Mysteries...Coming Soon! |
By all means get rid of the flame wars and the morons, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water. That's as dumb as when Kobo banned all self-published erotica because a few titles had illicit material. Stuff like that is just damned lazy, not to mention overly reactionary.
(Despite what I just said, I still reserve the right to deck the next person who gives me a 1-star review. And I will do it with the boxing gloves I got from Amazon, which I rated at 3 stars because they're tight on my fat hands.)
Friday, May 9, 2014
Formatting for Kindle: Advanced Tips
My books on Smashwords I always think look pretty good, but when I download one from Amazon they look like crap. I kept wondering why Amazon's program couldn't figure out how to center chapter headings or put the chapters in the Go To section. Now I know...and knowing is half the battle. I could probably charge some idiot publisher thousands of dollars for this knowledge, which is about the only reason I can see they charge so much for ebooks--other than people are dumb and buy them for $9.99 or more.
Anyway, here's the first thing: Headers.
Basically if you want Amazon to read your chapter titles as centered instead of left justified, ie:
Then you need to use the Heading style. It's pretty easy to find in Word 2007 or later: it's a big box on the right side of the home menu. Like this:
Ideally it'll already be set up to center and perhaps underline any words if that's what you want. If it's not then it's slightly trickier as you have to right click on where it says Header 1, go to Modify, and then change it to however you want.
Then you go through and change all your chapter headings to the Heading 1 style.
On top of that you can add more styles like Heading 2 or Heading 3. Say for instance your book has 4 parts and so you make Part 1, 2, 3, and 4 as Heading 1 and then the Chapters you make Heading 2. Or if you're doing a book of short stories and those stories have chapters then you can have each story title as Heading 1 and the chapters as Heading 2.
Pro Tip: Newer versions of Word have this stupid feature where it won't show Headings 3-9 until it thinks you need them. So if you want Heading 3 to show up, you have to have something in Heading 2 format first. And if you want a Heading 4 you need something in Heading 3 format...and so on.
Now why would you do that? For part 2 of this operation: Table of Contents.
In old paper books the table of contents is at the front and indicates what page numbers chapters or stories or whatever are on. That doesn't really come into play a lot in ebooks where you don't have page numbers, but the Table of Contents is important with ebooks if you want it so when people push "Go To" they can see the chapters. (This comes in handy when the Kindle starts freaking out and skips pages or I accidentally make it go back to the beginning or end or something.)
Making a Table of Contents is pretty easy. First you go to "Reference" on the menu and then on the far left is the Table of Contents icon. Like this:
You can just use one of Word's default styles, but you're better off scrolling down to "Insert Table of Contents" where it will bring up a screen of options. There's a check box on the left side for "Show page numbers" which you should turn off because duh you don't have pages. Like this:
All you have to do now is load your file on KDP and you're done. Now some people say to save it as HTML first but I tried mine as Word DOC files and they didn't have any problems, so I don't think you need to bother with that. Then you can look your book up on a Kindle and it will look pretty much like the pros!
Omnibus formatting: For my omnibuses I use 3 Heading styles. I make them all the same: TNR font, 12-point, single-spaced, centered, underlined. You can format them how you like. Anyway, the reason I use three is because when I make the Table of Contents I want three different levels so I divide as follows:
On my Kindle if you go to the Go To button the way it looks is each book title will be displayed with a little arrow next to it. Touch the arrow and it'll expand to show the Parts (if applicable) again each with a little arrow. Touch that arrow and it shows the chapters. Pretty sweet for navigating around.
See how easy that was? Again this is stuff that publishers probably pay someone thousands of dollars for and now you know how to do it on your own for free. Sweet.
Now I just have to reformat 40 fucking books...OK, more like 30 now after doing the Children of Eternity and Scarlet Knight ones. Still, it's a lot!
Anyway, here's the first thing: Headers.
Basically if you want Amazon to read your chapter titles as centered instead of left justified, ie:
Chapter 1
vs.
Chapter 1Then you need to use the Heading style. It's pretty easy to find in Word 2007 or later: it's a big box on the right side of the home menu. Like this:
Ideally it'll already be set up to center and perhaps underline any words if that's what you want. If it's not then it's slightly trickier as you have to right click on where it says Header 1, go to Modify, and then change it to however you want.
Then you go through and change all your chapter headings to the Heading 1 style.
On top of that you can add more styles like Heading 2 or Heading 3. Say for instance your book has 4 parts and so you make Part 1, 2, 3, and 4 as Heading 1 and then the Chapters you make Heading 2. Or if you're doing a book of short stories and those stories have chapters then you can have each story title as Heading 1 and the chapters as Heading 2.
Pro Tip: Newer versions of Word have this stupid feature where it won't show Headings 3-9 until it thinks you need them. So if you want Heading 3 to show up, you have to have something in Heading 2 format first. And if you want a Heading 4 you need something in Heading 3 format...and so on.
Now why would you do that? For part 2 of this operation: Table of Contents.
In old paper books the table of contents is at the front and indicates what page numbers chapters or stories or whatever are on. That doesn't really come into play a lot in ebooks where you don't have page numbers, but the Table of Contents is important with ebooks if you want it so when people push "Go To" they can see the chapters. (This comes in handy when the Kindle starts freaking out and skips pages or I accidentally make it go back to the beginning or end or something.)
Making a Table of Contents is pretty easy. First you go to "Reference" on the menu and then on the far left is the Table of Contents icon. Like this:
You can just use one of Word's default styles, but you're better off scrolling down to "Insert Table of Contents" where it will bring up a screen of options. There's a check box on the left side for "Show page numbers" which you should turn off because duh you don't have pages. Like this:
All you have to do now is load your file on KDP and you're done. Now some people say to save it as HTML first but I tried mine as Word DOC files and they didn't have any problems, so I don't think you need to bother with that. Then you can look your book up on a Kindle and it will look pretty much like the pros!
Omnibus formatting: For my omnibuses I use 3 Heading styles. I make them all the same: TNR font, 12-point, single-spaced, centered, underlined. You can format them how you like. Anyway, the reason I use three is because when I make the Table of Contents I want three different levels so I divide as follows:
- Heading 1: Book Title. When you have 4-5 books in the file it's good to have something to separate them so people can skip to which book they want to read.
- Heading 2: Parts. If the book has a Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, etc I use this Heading style for that.
- Heading 3: Chapters. Also Prologues and Epilogues. Pretty self-explanatory.
On my Kindle if you go to the Go To button the way it looks is each book title will be displayed with a little arrow next to it. Touch the arrow and it'll expand to show the Parts (if applicable) again each with a little arrow. Touch that arrow and it shows the chapters. Pretty sweet for navigating around.
See how easy that was? Again this is stuff that publishers probably pay someone thousands of dollars for and now you know how to do it on your own for free. Sweet.
Now I just have to reformat 40 fucking books...OK, more like 30 now after doing the Children of Eternity and Scarlet Knight ones. Still, it's a lot!
Thursday, May 8, 2014
Indie Writers Monthly--Now With More ME!
The May issue of Indie Writers Monthly magazine has hit the virtual newsstand (by which I mean Amazon). It's 99 cents right now but it will be free for five times in the near future so you might want to wait until then if 99 cents is too rich for your blood or you hate the idea of me earning 7 cents in profits off it.
This month you can get a very non-inspiring interview with ME! I don't do interviews well; I find it hard to take questions seriously.
Anyway, you can find it HERE!
This month you can get a very non-inspiring interview with ME! I don't do interviews well; I find it hard to take questions seriously.
Anyway, you can find it HERE!
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Operation Omnibus
I've been going over the 8 books for another editing pass, which takes a while. I'm not changing a whole lot, mostly just taking out justs and thoughs and things like that. Plus changing the size of Emma's feet because certain people were unhappy about that.
Anyway, something I have been wondering is if instead of all 8 books in one set to maybe make two omnibuses. Which begs the thought: is it really an omnibus if it's not complete? Well according to the dictionary the word means a volume of reprinted works of a single author or of works related in interest or theme. So I guess I can have more than one, which is good.
The obvious idea would be to split it down the middle with 4 in one and 4 in another. But since I always have to do things differently, I was thinking of a 3-5 split. So we'd have:
Tales of the Scarlet Knight Omnibus Volume 1: The Call featuring:
- A Hero's Journey
- Time Enough to Say Goodbye
- The Hazards of Love
THEN
Tales of the Scarlet Knight Omnibus Volume 2: The Wrath of Isis featuring
- Change of Heart
- Betrayal Begets Blood
- Future Shock
- Living Sacrifice
- The Heart of Emma Earl
The logical reason is that in book 4 we set the whole big story wrapped up in book 8 into motion by introducing the multiverse, so it wouldn't see right--to me--to put that with the first three books. The first three books really do serve more as an introduction of introducing the Scarlet Knight, Black Dragoon, witches, and Isis and then the next five build on that while forming a more intricate storyline.
The other thing is I've noted a few occasions where someone will buy just the first three (or presumably they get the first for free and buy the next two) so maybe committing to 8 books is way too much. This way they could sample the first three books and (hopefully) want to read the next five. Plus the first three books are all shorter than the last 5, which are all near the 100,000 word mark or longer, especially books 6 and 8.
An issue of doing it that way is price. The first three right now only cost $1.98 because the first one is free. So really for it to be any kind of deal I'd have to make it 99 cents, which really is like paying for one book and getting 2 free. This of course means less money for me. This is the same issue I'd have with doing the Chances Are books as an omnibus. Since there are technically 4 Girl Power ones that would be slightly less of an issue.
I think the simplest solution for the first Scarlet Knight one would be to include the two prequels: Dark Origins (Volume 0) and Sisterhood, the one that focuses on Sylvia the witch. Then I could charge $2.99 and get the 70% royalty if anyone buys them. As for the Girl Power or Chances Are ones, I need to write a couple more books. I was thinking maybe a Girl Power prequel, but then I remembered prequels are boring so I came up with more of an Agents of SHIELD idea. The Chances Are I have that new idea I still haven't got to yet, so when I write that and maybe a sequel then I'll have enough.
I enrolled it in KDP Select for now since nobody hardly buys from Smashwords or B&N. This week you can get it for FREE! That's 4 books (almost 1000 pages) for nothing. Click the link!
It seems like most of my Blogger buddies don't have a series requiring an omnibus, though I suppose Andrew Leon could use it for all those Shadow Spinner stories.
I found a free program for making 3D boxes for covers. I'm not all that happy with the image quality, especially on the text, but I guess you get what you pay for. I've seen a lot of that style of cover on Amazon, so I thought I'd give it a try. I'm not sure if that's what I'll go with. Here are the prototypes:
Monday, May 5, 2014
Nostalgia Rules
Way back in April Michael Offutt railed against nostalgia in this post. I promised to write a rebuttal and today is the day! (Of course I wrote it a while ago.) And right now I've got the 90s station on Comcast's Music Choice turned on to set the mood.
The gist of Mr. Offutt's post is that newer things are better. That's not really something I agree with. While there are many things that have improved in the last 36 years in terms of technology, the arts are where I would disagree.
Is Captain America The Winter Soldier many times better than Superman from 1978? Duh, of course. But it's not mostly because of the effects or the acting. I mean I like Chris Evans as Captain America but he ain't exactly Olivier. (Which is good because Olivier is dead.) For me the main difference is that in 2014 filmmakers take their superhero movies more seriously than back in 1978. That makes for better stories. If they used 1978 effects well yeah it'd look lame, but I could probably still enjoy it.
Of course a lot of people probably liked Superman II more than Man of Steel. They could probably give a bunch of reasons, but mostly it would come down to nostalgia. The people who still like that movie probably remember when they saw it as kids or teenagers and thus they associate those good feelings with that movie, whereas they have no feelings to associate with Man of Steel.
For a lot more people--including me--the downfall of the Star Wars prequels was largely because of our love of the originals and it's going to be a problem for the new movies too. The original Star Wars movies were some of the first I can remember ever seeing in a movie theater. My brother and I had most of the toys at one time or another. I had an Empire Strikes Back lunchbox. I even dressed as Yoda for one Halloween--and I'm sure my sister will probably load that picture on Facebook at some point to irritate me. There was this huge spiritual connection for me to the movies. Then the prequels come out and it's just not the same.
(But also those movies suck on an artistic level. The biggest sin is they marginalize the greatest villain of all time--Darth Vader--turning him into a whiny bitch who hardly kills anyone and could only beat a couple of feeble old guys in lightsaber duels. And yes Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher were not great actors but Hayden Christensen was a whiny brat and Natalie Portman was a block of wood and let's not even get into Jar-Jar Binks or the Viceroy. Then there's the story, where the first movie was essentially useless and the second, why was it called "Attack of the Clones" if they were the good guys? And those dreadful "love" scenes that seemed like they were written by a third grader. Yeesh.)
It was the same thing with the second Michael Bay Transformers movie. I enjoyed the first one, but the second was so gawdawful. The worst part for me was when they used Jetfire mostly as a comedic prop, turning him into some old geezer whose biggest contribution was giving parts to Optimus Prime. That would not stand for me at all. The 80s Jetfire was so awesome! He was based on a Robotech Veritech fighter, which looked so badass. I still have an original Jetfire in the box along with the original I got. Getting that one for Christmas back in 1985 or 1986 was probably the happiest moment in my childhood. That was my Red Rider BB gun. So no I could not stand them using my favorite character like that; Michael Bay might as well have come over to my house and raped me.
Then there was the reboot of Star Trek. I still remember the part in the ice cave or whatever where I finally said to myself, "You are not Captain Kirk and you never will be!" On the whole Chris Pine is a better actor than Bill Shatner, but he's not Kirk. And yes I suppose nostalgia plays a big part in that. Star Trek II was another movie that was one of the first I remember seeing--in a drive-in theater no less! My dad took us to see Star Trek IV in theaters like five times. Now I'm supposed to just forget all that and accept this other douchebag is Captain Kirk? No thank you.
(Also that movie sucked on an artistic level. There were the gaps in logic, like Starfleet promoting a kid from trainee to captain and giving him the flagship? Spock dating Uhura? And conveniently the Romulan ship that went back in time was hanging around for 25 years before they got their asses in gear to strike. Gimme a break. Then there's the second one that's largely worse. I'm sorry ladies, but I do not get the love of Benedict Cumberbatch. He looks like a prep school kid who'd frequently get wedgies and stuffed in a locker. If even a slob like me hit him once he'd probably run crying to his mommy. I'm supposed to believe he's Khan? Yeah, right. It must be the accent.)
The thing is, I think nostalgia is only natural. Maybe a psychologist could explain it better, but our brains learn to associate movies, songs, TV shows, foods, smells, etc with memories. So when I bought the soundtrack to Transformers the Movie (the 1986 animated one) from Amazon recently and played it in my car I could remember crying in the theater because the bastards killed Optimus Prime off. (Seriously that movie traumatized a whole generation of suburban kids.) A lot of couples have a special song they refer to as "their song." I can remember playing Journey's "Faithfully" and "Don't Stop Believin'" a lot when I was writing the First Contact stories back in 1995 or back in 2008 when I was writing Heart of a Hero, the first story to feature Emma Earl as the Scarlet Knight, I kept listening to "Dream" by Priscilla Ahn.
So we build those associations and if they're good associations then we associate good feelings with that thing. When I watch Star Wars or Empire Strikes Back or the animated Transformers or GI JOE I associate it with pleasant childhood days and thus I'm willing to accept the faults in it. That's just only natural. Reboots usually suck because they change too much from the original, though on occasion a few manage to improve on the original. I would say the Nolan Batman movies, but other people would disagree. And I'm sure everyone has their favorite Bond after all that franchise's reboots.
I think nostalgia makes for a better experience. It makes whatever you're watching, listening to, or reading more emotionally satisfying. Not that that should be an excuse to never try anything new, but on occasion it's nice to revisit those old things; it's like visiting an old friend. Why on Earth would anyone want to condemn that?
Contrary to what Mr. Offutt said, I do not "live in the past." Sure I still have a box of old stuffed toys in my closet and I have my old Jetfire and some other toys, but I don't go around in parachute pants or drive around in a "classic" car; my car is a 2010, so there. (I did once drive around in a 1977 Nova but that was not by choice.) I grudgingly accept new technology, though that's largely because I'm cheap and hate spending a lot of money on a new TV or computer when the old one is still working.
With that being said, I have no problem with nostalgia so long as you aren't going overboard. If you are wearing parachute pants and driving a Fiero then you've got issues. Otherwise it's pretty harmless.
There is one area where I'm anti-nostalgia: the fashion industry. It seemed recently they tried bringing back those awful fluorescent colors from the early 90s. Yuck. If they try bringing grunge back I might have to find a bunker to hide in for a few years. And those stupid kids wearing shirts for bands that broke up long before they were born? Posers! Come on, fashion industry, try something original that isn't terrible. I suppose that might require some work, though, so let's just bring back Elizabethan era gowns and corsets! And powdered wigs for men! That would be totally awesome. Which really kids, "awesome" is OUR word. Get your own fucking word! And rappers, stop "sampling" old songs. Like creating your own beat is that freaking difficult; if you can't do that then get the hell out of the music business!
Here's the perfect song to cap off this entry by the only true Captain Kirk:
The gist of Mr. Offutt's post is that newer things are better. That's not really something I agree with. While there are many things that have improved in the last 36 years in terms of technology, the arts are where I would disagree.
Is Captain America The Winter Soldier many times better than Superman from 1978? Duh, of course. But it's not mostly because of the effects or the acting. I mean I like Chris Evans as Captain America but he ain't exactly Olivier. (Which is good because Olivier is dead.) For me the main difference is that in 2014 filmmakers take their superhero movies more seriously than back in 1978. That makes for better stories. If they used 1978 effects well yeah it'd look lame, but I could probably still enjoy it.
Of course a lot of people probably liked Superman II more than Man of Steel. They could probably give a bunch of reasons, but mostly it would come down to nostalgia. The people who still like that movie probably remember when they saw it as kids or teenagers and thus they associate those good feelings with that movie, whereas they have no feelings to associate with Man of Steel.
For a lot more people--including me--the downfall of the Star Wars prequels was largely because of our love of the originals and it's going to be a problem for the new movies too. The original Star Wars movies were some of the first I can remember ever seeing in a movie theater. My brother and I had most of the toys at one time or another. I had an Empire Strikes Back lunchbox. I even dressed as Yoda for one Halloween--and I'm sure my sister will probably load that picture on Facebook at some point to irritate me. There was this huge spiritual connection for me to the movies. Then the prequels come out and it's just not the same.
(But also those movies suck on an artistic level. The biggest sin is they marginalize the greatest villain of all time--Darth Vader--turning him into a whiny bitch who hardly kills anyone and could only beat a couple of feeble old guys in lightsaber duels. And yes Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher were not great actors but Hayden Christensen was a whiny brat and Natalie Portman was a block of wood and let's not even get into Jar-Jar Binks or the Viceroy. Then there's the story, where the first movie was essentially useless and the second, why was it called "Attack of the Clones" if they were the good guys? And those dreadful "love" scenes that seemed like they were written by a third grader. Yeesh.)
It was the same thing with the second Michael Bay Transformers movie. I enjoyed the first one, but the second was so gawdawful. The worst part for me was when they used Jetfire mostly as a comedic prop, turning him into some old geezer whose biggest contribution was giving parts to Optimus Prime. That would not stand for me at all. The 80s Jetfire was so awesome! He was based on a Robotech Veritech fighter, which looked so badass. I still have an original Jetfire in the box along with the original I got. Getting that one for Christmas back in 1985 or 1986 was probably the happiest moment in my childhood. That was my Red Rider BB gun. So no I could not stand them using my favorite character like that; Michael Bay might as well have come over to my house and raped me.
Then there was the reboot of Star Trek. I still remember the part in the ice cave or whatever where I finally said to myself, "You are not Captain Kirk and you never will be!" On the whole Chris Pine is a better actor than Bill Shatner, but he's not Kirk. And yes I suppose nostalgia plays a big part in that. Star Trek II was another movie that was one of the first I remember seeing--in a drive-in theater no less! My dad took us to see Star Trek IV in theaters like five times. Now I'm supposed to just forget all that and accept this other douchebag is Captain Kirk? No thank you.
(Also that movie sucked on an artistic level. There were the gaps in logic, like Starfleet promoting a kid from trainee to captain and giving him the flagship? Spock dating Uhura? And conveniently the Romulan ship that went back in time was hanging around for 25 years before they got their asses in gear to strike. Gimme a break. Then there's the second one that's largely worse. I'm sorry ladies, but I do not get the love of Benedict Cumberbatch. He looks like a prep school kid who'd frequently get wedgies and stuffed in a locker. If even a slob like me hit him once he'd probably run crying to his mommy. I'm supposed to believe he's Khan? Yeah, right. It must be the accent.)
The thing is, I think nostalgia is only natural. Maybe a psychologist could explain it better, but our brains learn to associate movies, songs, TV shows, foods, smells, etc with memories. So when I bought the soundtrack to Transformers the Movie (the 1986 animated one) from Amazon recently and played it in my car I could remember crying in the theater because the bastards killed Optimus Prime off. (Seriously that movie traumatized a whole generation of suburban kids.) A lot of couples have a special song they refer to as "their song." I can remember playing Journey's "Faithfully" and "Don't Stop Believin'" a lot when I was writing the First Contact stories back in 1995 or back in 2008 when I was writing Heart of a Hero, the first story to feature Emma Earl as the Scarlet Knight, I kept listening to "Dream" by Priscilla Ahn.
So we build those associations and if they're good associations then we associate good feelings with that thing. When I watch Star Wars or Empire Strikes Back or the animated Transformers or GI JOE I associate it with pleasant childhood days and thus I'm willing to accept the faults in it. That's just only natural. Reboots usually suck because they change too much from the original, though on occasion a few manage to improve on the original. I would say the Nolan Batman movies, but other people would disagree. And I'm sure everyone has their favorite Bond after all that franchise's reboots.
I think nostalgia makes for a better experience. It makes whatever you're watching, listening to, or reading more emotionally satisfying. Not that that should be an excuse to never try anything new, but on occasion it's nice to revisit those old things; it's like visiting an old friend. Why on Earth would anyone want to condemn that?
Contrary to what Mr. Offutt said, I do not "live in the past." Sure I still have a box of old stuffed toys in my closet and I have my old Jetfire and some other toys, but I don't go around in parachute pants or drive around in a "classic" car; my car is a 2010, so there. (I did once drive around in a 1977 Nova but that was not by choice.) I grudgingly accept new technology, though that's largely because I'm cheap and hate spending a lot of money on a new TV or computer when the old one is still working.
With that being said, I have no problem with nostalgia so long as you aren't going overboard. If you are wearing parachute pants and driving a Fiero then you've got issues. Otherwise it's pretty harmless.
There is one area where I'm anti-nostalgia: the fashion industry. It seemed recently they tried bringing back those awful fluorescent colors from the early 90s. Yuck. If they try bringing grunge back I might have to find a bunker to hide in for a few years. And those stupid kids wearing shirts for bands that broke up long before they were born? Posers! Come on, fashion industry, try something original that isn't terrible. I suppose that might require some work, though, so let's just bring back Elizabethan era gowns and corsets! And powdered wigs for men! That would be totally awesome. Which really kids, "awesome" is OUR word. Get your own fucking word! And rappers, stop "sampling" old songs. Like creating your own beat is that freaking difficult; if you can't do that then get the hell out of the music business!
Here's the perfect song to cap off this entry by the only true Captain Kirk:
Friday, May 2, 2014
Must Be the Money
Much like every superhero ever, this blog has returned from death--or almost death. At this point I'm just going to do Monday-Wednesday-Friday but no set features. If you want a feature back, let me know! Thanks to the A to Z Challenge, I do have a couple of things that have been percolating for a little while.
First, over a month ago now I watched the latest Coen Brothers movie "Inside Llewyn Davis" which deals with the folk music scene in the early 60s. The movie itself is good, though I think like "A Serious Man" this was something the Coens made more for themselves than for the general public. The lack of buzz it generated with the movie-watching public and critics fits with the titular character, who is a folk singer at a loose end when his former partner jumps off a bridge for whatever reason.
At one point in the movie Llewyn undertakes a perilous journey from New York to Chicago to meet a club owner/promoter played by F. Murray Abraham (the guy who killed Mo Zart as they say in Last Action Hero). He starts off bumming a ride with a weird old jazz musician (John Goodman) and a younger guy who hardly says anything. After they pull off the road to sleep one night the younger guy gets busted by the cops and Llewyn has to make his way alone through cold and snow the rest of the way.
He gets to the club early one morning and waits around for the owner to show up and then manages to get a meeting. He gets out his guitar and sings a pretty folk ballad. And afterwards the owner says, "I don't see any money in this." Boom. After that he offers Llewyn a chance to be part of a trio, basically to be the background guy to help provide harmony, though only if he shaves his beard down to a goatee.
The lesson here is: it's about image and money. Talent is really an afterthought. And obviously this does not only happen in folk music in the early 60s; it still happens today in music, movies, and yes even in book publishing. When they talk about "a platform" they are basically talking about your image and how you need to fine-tune that to cater to mass audiences.
What's frustrated many writers for years and drawn them to self-publishing is this infuriating system that disregards good ideas for profitable ones. You can have a wonderfully written book and not get a single offer from an agent because they don't think it will make them any money. "I don't see any money in this," is what they would tell you if they had the guts, but that's the gist behind all those form rejections. If an agent wants to tell you differently, remind them of all the terrible celebrity books that they've published. (Though naturally that's not always the case; some people are just terrible writers.)
Especially nowadays when there have been all these mergers and profit margins are getting thin, money is far more important than art. So maybe the next time you get a form rejection it wasn't because of your writing; it might be that there wasn't any money in it.
On a side note, in the movie Llewyn Davis might have had more success if he weren't such a Grumpy Bulldog all the time. By the end of the movie he's pissed off pretty much all his friends and family; he's certainly not the affable hero you'd "root for." In the beginning of the movie he gets beat up for heckling a guy's wife during her performance. What confused me was this was shown at the beginning but we find out later it's actually the end of the movie. I hate when that happens.
I suppose the irony is if I had pitched that movie to the studios it never could have got made because they couldn't see any money in it, but when it's the Academy Award winning team behind "Fargo," "No Country for Old Men," and "True Grit" you get a bit more slack. Funny how that works, right?
First, over a month ago now I watched the latest Coen Brothers movie "Inside Llewyn Davis" which deals with the folk music scene in the early 60s. The movie itself is good, though I think like "A Serious Man" this was something the Coens made more for themselves than for the general public. The lack of buzz it generated with the movie-watching public and critics fits with the titular character, who is a folk singer at a loose end when his former partner jumps off a bridge for whatever reason.
At one point in the movie Llewyn undertakes a perilous journey from New York to Chicago to meet a club owner/promoter played by F. Murray Abraham (the guy who killed Mo Zart as they say in Last Action Hero). He starts off bumming a ride with a weird old jazz musician (John Goodman) and a younger guy who hardly says anything. After they pull off the road to sleep one night the younger guy gets busted by the cops and Llewyn has to make his way alone through cold and snow the rest of the way.
He gets to the club early one morning and waits around for the owner to show up and then manages to get a meeting. He gets out his guitar and sings a pretty folk ballad. And afterwards the owner says, "I don't see any money in this." Boom. After that he offers Llewyn a chance to be part of a trio, basically to be the background guy to help provide harmony, though only if he shaves his beard down to a goatee.
The lesson here is: it's about image and money. Talent is really an afterthought. And obviously this does not only happen in folk music in the early 60s; it still happens today in music, movies, and yes even in book publishing. When they talk about "a platform" they are basically talking about your image and how you need to fine-tune that to cater to mass audiences.
What's frustrated many writers for years and drawn them to self-publishing is this infuriating system that disregards good ideas for profitable ones. You can have a wonderfully written book and not get a single offer from an agent because they don't think it will make them any money. "I don't see any money in this," is what they would tell you if they had the guts, but that's the gist behind all those form rejections. If an agent wants to tell you differently, remind them of all the terrible celebrity books that they've published. (Though naturally that's not always the case; some people are just terrible writers.)
Especially nowadays when there have been all these mergers and profit margins are getting thin, money is far more important than art. So maybe the next time you get a form rejection it wasn't because of your writing; it might be that there wasn't any money in it.
On a side note, in the movie Llewyn Davis might have had more success if he weren't such a Grumpy Bulldog all the time. By the end of the movie he's pissed off pretty much all his friends and family; he's certainly not the affable hero you'd "root for." In the beginning of the movie he gets beat up for heckling a guy's wife during her performance. What confused me was this was shown at the beginning but we find out later it's actually the end of the movie. I hate when that happens.
I suppose the irony is if I had pitched that movie to the studios it never could have got made because they couldn't see any money in it, but when it's the Academy Award winning team behind "Fargo," "No Country for Old Men," and "True Grit" you get a bit more slack. Funny how that works, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
