The Tragic Loss of an Adult Performer: August Ames RIP

August Ames

1994-2017

Yesterday evening I was shocked to read that August Ames, a 23 year old adult actress, who had done numerous videos for many adult entertainment companies, since her start in the business in 2013, was dead. 

Wikipedia says that Ames was found dead in her home in Camarillo, California, her death having been ruled suicide by the Ventura County Medical Examiner's Office. Her friends said she had been suffering from depression, when an online discussion about her refusal to work with a man who had previously worked in gay porn led to a frenzy of criticism aimed at her. It is possible that this online bullying aimed at her concerning what was called 'homophobic attitudes', combined with her depression, may have led to her taking her own life. 

Is it a blessing that we have the social media we now have, if they can so negatively impact anyone's life? I can understand that you have an opinion and you want to let people know ( that's why I run this blog ) but think before you write ! Could your story or reaction have unforeseen consequences? Think before you write.
I did not know August Ames personally and she did not know me. I was shocked yesterday to read of her passing and I consider myself fortunate that I can still watch the videos she had done before. But her death was unnecessary. I think she was a beautiful young lady and I liked watching her do her thing. She also seemed to enjoy doing her thing. That is also why I think that in this case aiming criticism or even hateful messages to her, calling her homophobic, in other words bullying, is reprehensible. I understand also that it would not be right to curtail or censor any reasonable criticism but please, let's indeed be reasonable about the criticism and not spout irrelevant hatred in any direction.
Remember......BULLYING is reprehensible ! In my younger days I have been bullied a great number of times in school and I have no sympathy or understanding for anyone who finds this necessary.

Think before you write !

Big John Buscema - A Marvel Legend

Big John Buscema

(1927-2002)

In the early 1960s, Stan Lee and Jack Kirby put the world of MARVEL COMICS on the map. But soon other artists such as John Buscema stepped in, adding their talents to the pool of wonder. John Buscema drew a lot of Marvel comic characters, from the Avengers to Spider-Man, Thor, to Fantastic Four until he found his niche with CONAN THE BARBARIAN in the 1970s.

A duel between two titans in the pages of FANTASTIC FOUR.

Taking over Namor from Gene Colan, John revitalized the look of the Atlantean Prince.

Thor, the mighty God of Thunder, drawn with great power by JB

John Buscema's rendition of CONAN and his mate Beylith

from the 1970s.

Rest In Peace, John, we miss you !

Review : THOR RAGNAROK !

My friends know I have read a great number of Marvel Comics in my time. Although I also read a lot of  DC Comics in the day, Superman and Batman never seemed to touch me as much as the Heroes in the Halls of Marvel did. I had a special click with Peter Parker a.k.a. Spider-Man because I felt for a time that I was just as much the nerd as he had been in his first few years. In the early years, THOR shared his existence with the crippled Doctor Don Blake, who would knock his ancient cane to the floor and lo and behold, THOR would appear. Oh, how wonderful those early Stan Lee - Jack Kirby yarns were.

But the series got so much better when Jack Kirby was followed by BIG JOHN BUSCEMA, who wielded a mighty pencil in the late sixties and seventies, aided and abetted wonderfully by various inkers of the times, from the likes of little brother Sal Buscema to Joe Sinnott (with whom he also did a good number of FANTASTIC FOURs in the 1970s), from Ernie Chan (on his magnificent CONAN magazine artwork) to John Verpoorten (as seen in the opening page above).

One of these wonderful yarns was an early depiction of what RAGNAROK would be, the downfall and ultimate destruction of Asgard visualized so impeccably by Big John Buscema, as you can see in these legendary panels of original art ( all copyrighted Marvel Comics ).

The sheer power envisioned here was a wonderful piece of enormous drama, wrought in the depths of sheer imagination and vision, of none other than John Buscema.  

RAGNAROK thus serves as the end of all we know of Asgard and its heroes as Surtur, the merciless God of Fire would burn away all of the past, to allow for a regeneration of new heroes to come forth from the ashes of an old one burned away. If done properly, I felt this could make for a wonderfully powerful film.

Suffice it to say, when we heard that the title THOR RAGNAROK was also to feature the Hulk, I was a bit concerned. It also proved to be true that the story of PLANET HULK ( a story in the pages of The Incredible Hulk that lasted a full year before it came to a conclusion ) was to be incorporated in the film and the choice for TAIKA WAITITI as director was, to say the least, worrying. Yet, an early trailer proved interesting. In the meantime now, the film has been playing for some time and reviews were rather positive, especially so with regards the humor of the film but alas, in my eyes, THOR RAGNAROK is the least interesting of Thor movies so far. 

You see, if you read the comics, it can easily be seen that the world of Thor is probably the closest any Marvel hero gets to Shakespearean staging, most certainly with regards the language uttered. That should not be seen as a drag but as a challenge. A challenge that was well met by Kenneth Branagh when he directed the first film and Alan Taylor when he injected science fiction into the Asgardian lore in THOR THE DARK WORLD.

PLANET HULK would easily have merited a film of its own, when the Hulk is considered. I can't give a shit as to the why Marvel can not do any Hulk movies ( the rights still being in the wrong place for that) but in  my eyes pairing the Hulk with Thor is not the right choice. The Hulk is a creature with a pathos all its own, one that was very interestingly captured in the 1970s television show. Yet in the comics there is so much more that was done with the Hulk, which was very interesting. Peter David had him have Bruce Banner's brain !!!

The choice of injecting PLANET HULK into THOR RAGNAROK, coupled with the overabundance of humor, hurts the characters because this in all aspects reflects missed opportunities. A PLANET HULK film or even mini-series could have been wonderful. A more faithful RAGNAROK could have even outshone the upcoming AVENGER: THE INFINITY WAR. 

The humor in the film serves when it befalls the characters ( Thor telling Loki "Let's do 'Get Help' is priceless, even though it diminishes the stature of Thor greatly ) but in many instances it also falls flat on its face. Jeff Goldblum simply does not come across as a character. Stan Lee, in his obligatory Cameo,  however, is priceless ! May You Live Forever, Stan!

The action plays okay but where for me the film fails is in the choice of the director, one who is not suited for this kind of material. Both Kenneth Branagh and Alan Taylor were up for the grandeur of the material but Waititi is a far too much idiosyncratic director to grasp the pathos of the material.

People who say Thor ( the first film) was too stuffy, don't worry. I'm sure there will be plenty of Twilight-like material for you to find elsewhere but Marvel should take more pride in its  Asgardian heroes ! Do not be afraid to be Shakespearean Stuffy !  There will always be fans of Shakespearean drama and finding this in Marvel, that's what you go to THOR and ASGARD for.

I am pleased to see that the film will lead directly into the next AVENGERS film and look forward to that.  But for me, the influence of John Buscema's legendary art (as seen above) should have been followed much more in this film. It is a great shame that Buscema passed away too soon. I miss you, John. 

As a final note, Hemsworth, Hiddleston and Ruffalo, you guys are great together. Karl Urban, you are great as Skurge. Cate Blanchett, you make a really wonderful Hela ! It's just a shame that lack of the proper direction allowed this film to fall short of its required ambitions. Now, we move on to the next step. In February, we will have THE BLACK PANTHER and in May, AVENGERS - THE INFINITY WAR. And in the meantime, now on Netflix, THE PUNISHER. I will be back on this blog shortly.

Return of an Icon: BLADE RUNNER 2049 - a critical review

Sometimes in a lifetime you will see a film that over time has become so iconic that it has gained a reputation it never earned while it was in theatrical release.  The Original BLADE RUNNER, directed by Ridley Scott in 1982 was such a film. While the film did have its fans while it was in theatres, it never gained the success or accolades at that time that it got in the years following. 
If you look at what made BLADE RUNNER a great movie, there are lots of elements that contributed to it iconic stature: story elements of the original novel of Philip K. Dick, although these have been loosely interpreted and placed into a new narrative, the creation of androids, replicants, that are made as slave labor force, for work in the hazardous and dirty jobs no human would want to take up, the grounding of a detective story with film noir elements combined with mysteriously interesting characters and a story that is less than black and white so it can easily be subverted, and the idea of killer robots on the run, to be portrayed with good actors. Dress it up with a sauce of VANGELIS music and you end up with an unforgettable classic in the field of science fiction as well as thriller/ adventure. Of course, if you know the film a number of years, it is easy to imagine that one would start thinking of making a sequel. Expectations however easily grow high when the sequel is indeed going to be made.

BLADE RUNNER 2049 shows the same world again a good 30 years after the original film. A number of things have happened that have great consequences for the story but its characteristics are followed in similar tones to the original film in order to maintain continuity (meaning the film moves slowly and takes its time to tell its story). A current Police Officer ( who no doubt about this, is a Replicant as he is practically introduced as one ) is put on a case that leads him to uncover a truth that may have dire consequences to human life on this planet, for whatever it is worth ( the weather is always awful, life on earth having turned into almost a nightmare). The story then leads to Deckart, our protagonist from the original film , who then brings us to the crux of the story. Although the story we are introduced into is very interesting ( I was astounded at the end of the film that more than 2 and a half hours had passed – I hadn’t noticed ), the narrative hints at the global consequences of the story McGuffin. ( It turns out that one Replicant in the past has given birth to a child. If this news goes out, the Replicants of this world may arise in a revolution, claiming their own rights and mankind would be out of its slave labor force and into a whole lot more trouble as these Replicants will also want improved quality of life !)  Yet, when the story  continues it only opts to follow the more personal storyline as it pertains to DECKART, which is a bit strange and maybe a little unsatisfying.  Still , the story is very interesting and  maybe even moving,  even though it goes at less than a snail’s pace, one cannot deny that you do want to see what happens next, even at this pace.

The actors are very good in their role.  Jared Leto plays one of the most interesting roles of his career. Ryan Gosling is also incredibly appealing as a good COP – Replicant and Dave Bautista and Ana de Armas (who wouldn’t want to have her naked hologram waltzing around in their bedroom? )  both have interesting parts. It is however in the music that this film strongly disappoints as the music is totally incoherent, does not develop any themes and does nothing but present digital farting sounds of varying loudness. The absence of VANGELIS ( who had been asked but wanted to have no part of it) is unmistakable as what goes for music now only hints at what we had in the original film.  The camerawork of Roger Deakins is quite good on the other hand but with the bleek circumstances ( Poor weather, desperate settings and low visibility ) impacting this, who would take notice?

BLADE RUNNER 2049 is a long film at 163 minutes but the story retains its interest. Still it does not rise to the same level as its predecessor, which is a shame and a disappointment but still, it is a mighty interesting film to watch. Maybe  in a few years’ time, this film will also have the same increased stature but so far, no, this one is not on my shortlist for the best films of 2017. I would like to add however that Denis Villeneuve is a good director, who might however be better off trying to express his own cinematic voice. (It seems he is working too much in Ridley Scott's imagination here and I would rather have seen Villeneuve bring more of himself to the picture.)

Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford

Rest In Peace, Hugh Hefner !

 It is with great sadness that I heard this morning, 28 September 2017, of the passing of Hugh M. Hefner, founder of the Playboy Magazine. Hugh Hefner was 91 years old and died of natural causes.

Hugh Hefner in the 1950s

Hugh Hefner is well known for having started the PLAYBOY magazine in the mid-1950s, in a time where sexuality did not yet have a voice of its own. Hefner found that by putting what he felt should be important to a man of that era on a forum for discussion like this magazine, he would also genuinely be contributing to society. It was a difficult fight for Hefner who time and again had to explain that his magazine was not your ordinary run of the mill porn mag.

Hefner in the early 1960s

Not only by talking about issues like sexuality but by getting involved in the sensitive issues of the time period as well,  ( like the racism that was still rampant in the southern states or the civil rights issues that were a hot potato during several riots in the early sixties ) PLAYBOY MAGAZINE found itself having followers who not only enjoyed the erotic lifestyle of Hefner but also discovered that the magazine stood for something, a philosophy or even a lifestyle. Hence, the magazine was no longer just a nudie magazine, it had become the top Lifestyle Magazine of the USA.

Hefner and Dorothy Stratten, 1980

Of course, Hefner's lifestyle was also criticized by feminists, but by giving women the choice to also show much more of themselves than normal, he opened doors for them that allowed the women to grow, develop and become stronger persons themselves.
Hefner stepped down as Editor in Chief of the Magazine and as CEO of the company in the 1980s, when his daughter Christie Hefner took over, but he remained a figurehead for the Magazine and the Lifestyle. He re-married several times and despite having stepped down, he stayed in the public life for as long as he could. But at 91, Hugh Marston Hefner has now finally gone on his last sailing voyage, into the hereafter.

Thanks for everything, Mr. Hefner.

Rest In Peace, you've earned it.

Review: STAR TREK DISCOVERY

STAR TREK DISCOVERY aired this past weekend in the United States. Those who know me, know I am a big Star Trek fan and most of those also know I don't much care for the J.J. Abrams films. So, I was very pleased to hear that this story takes place in the original timeline and it plays about 10 years before Classic Star Trek.

Without going too much into detail on story elements ( for those among you who still want to see it) I can say that the Story Arc seems to be well constructed and the Characters well chosen and developed. I am pleased to see that also with these new characters we keep building in a world and time-frame that we have gone into before. The direct links to Classic Star Trek are not even much of a controversy in this way. ( Is it a controversy that by way of SAREK a link is laid with the characters of Classic Star Trek ? Maybe controversy is too strong a word, if I don't have any issues with it.)

courtesy copyright Variety magazine

The production design is very good and the continued story-telling is not at all a problem. I find myself only longing more directly for the next episode as we are thrust into a dire situation of the Federation, which definitely needs resolving. 

There are a few things that require some getting used to. The new look of the Klingons is one of them. But that is not something that cannot be overcome. There was plenty of variety in earlier Star Trek shows that these new Klingons should not be problematic. The actors are also excellent in their roles, especially Sonequa Martin-Green, whom I knew already from The Walking Dead. I hope to see more of these faces in coming episodes.

If there is one thing I am not quite overjoyed with yet, it is the theme and the music. While the music in the show is functional and satisfactory, the major theme, played in an equally lacklustre opening sequence, lacks grandeur and sophistication. But then, maybe I am just too much of a Jerry Goldsmith fan to be easily accepting of a new Star Trek theme. We will see if future episodes will change my opinion on this but so far, I do think this is the kind of STAR TREK I would want to see.

Thank you to all the talent involved !! 

DOCTOR WHO: RE-GENESIS OF A TIME LORD

Consider if you will the concept of an interplanetary traveler, who comes and helps people out in the most curious of circumstances. This perfectly describes the nature of the character of DOCTOR WHO, who travels around in his own TARDIS (not only serving as a space vessel but as a time machine as well). When DOCTOR WHO was started in the 1960s, it was not only meant to be a science fiction show but educational in nature as well.

"Educational? Certainly, it's been that!"

DOCTOR WHO was a television show with a unique advantage: the identity of this mysterious helper was kept nebulous and effusive as the Doctor was a man who could change his appearance once his current identity was 'used up' for lack of a better term. This would make it possible to change the lead actor, although this had not been intentional from the beginning of the show. But once an actor would want to exit the part or could no longer function in the role, he could be written out, and replaced by the next incarnation of said Doctor.

The first 12 Doctors:

William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton, Jon Pertwee, Tom Baker

Peter Davison, Colin Baker, Sylvester McCoy, Paul McGann

Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant, Matt Smith and Peter Capaldi

In the country that I live in we have not always had the adventures of the Doctor on television here. We were only introduced to the character with the coming of Tom Baker in the role, meaning we were also left in the dark about the earlier adventures. However in the years of Tom Baker, the nature of the show was quite often that is was scary for young children and so, yes, in my country parents complained that their children were having nightmares because of the show and the show was taken off the air. Bunch of Wusses !

Doctor Who and Clara Oswald with a few Daleks

Once we finally got access to the BBC, it was no longer a problem to follow the adventures of Paul McGann, Christopher Eccleston, David Tennant, Matt Smith and up til now, Peter Capaldi as the Doctor. Another interesting improvement since the early days is that before the cancellation of 1989, the show was always made on a shoestring budget, which naturally resulted in cheesy special effects and flimsy sets ( which admittedly added to the charm of the show ). But with the 1996 television movie starring Paul McGann, the BBC apparently saw what a decent budget could mean for the show and so, starting with the 2005 revival, the show has always had a decent budget. 

Jodie Whittaker as DOCTOR Nr. 13

Naturally, if a main character has always had the opportunity to change his/her appearance, it would of course come to a moment in time where the first female Doctor would be seen. And now, with the coming of Chris Chibnall as the new showrunner for the next year, JODIE WHITTAKER has been selected as the new Doctor.

Jodie Whittaker as revealed (as a blonde Doctor ) in 

the clip shown at the conclusion of Wimbledon

Although reactions were mixed, I think it may be interesting to see where this will take us. Nearly all of the currently still living actors who have played Doctor Who in the past have expressed their joy and enthusiasm for Jodie Whittaker and have wished her good luck in the part. I hope to see her take the part in new and interesting ways and I am certainly hoping for an improvement on the lacking stories of the last few years. But I will also be sad to see Peter Capaldi go, as I think he is a good Doctor. Ah well, you can't win them all. We will see what next year will bring; won't the Daleks be surprised !!! Ha ha ha !.

SPIDER-MAN : HOMECOMING - a Critical Review

With the recent casting of Tom Holland as Peter Parker (Spider-Man), MARVEL has now got Spider-Man back in its own ranks. Tom Holland plays Peter Parker as a 15 year old high school student with way too much chip on his shoulder but with also exactly the right level of do-gooder naiveté, which is also evident now in his first film, SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING.

The film starts off recapping what happened before in CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR, but when Peter is back in his own world again ( Queens, New York ), he finds himself way too obsessed with awaiting his next Avengers mission. Trouble is, like a true teenager, he doesn't realize how obnoxious he is to his contact person for Tony Stark, Happy ( a wonderful role for director/actor Jon Favreau, who has a nice part in this as well ) in his eagerness to please.  It is here also that the film delves a little too much into its attempts to be funny and wisecracking, rather than just have Spider-Man do what he does best. Web-swinging, for instance. No, we get too many moments where it becomes awkwardly clear why the suburbs are not for Spider-Man ( he can't attach his webs to any tall buildings so as to swing around and has to walk or run ).

I was also surprised at how different the whole Queens setting was for Peter, this time around. All of the characters we know from the comics are basically ditched.  We only get Tony Stark and his associates, Peter Parker, his buddy Ned, his aunt May, who now is awfully young and lovely ( Tony Stark even has the hots for her, which admittedly is very funny ) and that is basically it. No  Daily Bugle or J. Jonah Jameson newspaper antics, no Betty Brant, Gwen Stacy, Mary Jane Watson to play around with, a Flash Thompson who is decidedly unlike we have ever seen him before and no Harry Osborn. Instead we get his buddy Ned, no last names given, Liz, again, no last names and Michelle or rather MJ - but this is NOT Mary Jane Watson.

Where the film goes villain-wise, Michael Keaton as Adrian Toomes, aka The Vulture, is fantastic, even if his Vulture is a rather liberal depiction of his talents in the movie. Tom Holland and Robert Downey Jr are both also excellent in their respective roles but  would I say this is an entirely succesful film? No! The story tries definitely too hard to do too many things at the same time and what basically also hurts the film is that we do not see Spider-Man in his element, between the skycrapers of New York. No, he actually turns up in Washington DC ( what is so special about Washington DC that could not be done in New York ? That elevator sequence could easily have fit into any skyscraper of any name in the Big Apple), in Maryland, in the suburbs, even at the Avengers compound outside of NYC !!!

And what is worse: in his battle with the Vulture we again get such special effects camera positions that at times you can't even clearly see what it is you are looking at. And with films as costly as this, who would want that in the first place? The music by Michael Giacchino starts off poorly already with an orchestral version of the 1960s cartoon Spider-Man theme and never recovers. Stan Lee's cameo is also very short and unfunny. Sure, I chuckled at seeing him but not because he was so funny.  And the post credits sequences are not all that funny either.  And although I think it is a wise choice for Spider-Man to NOT JOIN THE AVENGERS officially at the end of the film,  I do think there is an awful lot of room to improve on for the next film. So until then, my favorite Spider-Man film is still this one :

Spider-Man 2, directed by Sam Raimi.

Adam West, one final time as BATMAN! Also: Apologies from Joel Schumacher!!

Last week the world was saddened by the loss of ADAM WEST, the actor who played BATMAN in the campy television series of the 1960s.

Adam West and Burt Ward as Batman and Robin

Last year we got to hear Adam West and Burt Ward one more time in the BATMAN: RETURN OF THE CAPED CRUSADERS animated flick, which was very enjoyable indeed and showed the heroes as they looked in the 1960s television series. The website www.darkhorizons.com now also reports that Adam West did complete another audio adventure that will be released as an animated film very soon: BATMAN VS TWO-FACE, which will star William Shatner as Harvey Dent / Two-Face. Seeing as how William Shatner will also be shown the way he looked when he was shooting STAR TREK in the mid-1960s, this will definitely be something I will look out for.

William Shatner and Adam West 

As a related Item, www.vice.com reports that their reporter spoke to director Joel Schumacher, the director of BATMAN FOREVER and BATMAN & ROBIN in the 1990s. And Schumacher again apologized for having made one of the most appalling movies of the 1990s, BATMAN & ROBIN.

Alicia Silverstone, George Clooney and Chris O'Donnell

When Tim Burton made his first BATMAN movie in 1989, he was very much able to put his dark stamp on the film. This was so successful that he was given almost free range for the sequel BATMAN RETURNS. However, Danny De Vito as the Penguin was rather bizarre and Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman in her kinky bondage costume very family-unfriendly so the producers wanted Burton off the franchise. They asked Joel Schumacher (who had done some very succesful smaller films) to bring the series into much more family friendly cinematic waters. Schumacher had a hit with BATMAN FOREVER, starring Val Kilmer and Chris O'Donnell as Batman and Robin. When this film did well, everyone at Warner's felt Schumacher should do another one and amp up the commercializing as well as the campiness. After all, this would pull in lots of kiddies who'd want to see the film over and over again. But when Schumacher got the suggestion to also bring in female viewers by introducing BATGIRL, the scales started to tilt the other way. Schumacher went with it however and made BATMAN & ROBIN an efficient sequel to his earlier film, but  the film went totally overboard storywise, characterwise and humorwise. End Result: BATMAN & ROBIN soured the fans on the franchise and Warner Brothers put the franchise on ice for the time being. 

Bat-Nipples, anyone ??

Both Clooney and O'Donnell had their doubts: O'Donnell felt he was making a childrens' toy instead of a good film and Clooney later said it was hard to be good in it. On his defense though, Clooney was an excellent Bruce Wayne, much better than Val Kilmer. But, true, the film turned out to be a disaster, souring the fans on the franchise and while Schumacher was even still talking to Nicholas Cage to play the Scarecrow in the next film, Warner Brothers pulled the plug. 

On the special editions of the films on DVD and BLU RAY, Schumacher has already apologized to the fans years ago on the commentary tracks for his film. Now, also 20 years after the fact, on this interview on www.vice.com, he again apologizes.  That almost makes up for a lot. Want to read the interview ? Go to : 

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/twenty-years-later-joel-schumacher-is-very-sorry-about-batman-and-robin

All Rights Reserved of course to DC for any Batman and Robin and related character rights and to www.vice.com for the mention of their wonderful interview. Thanks, guys, great work !!!!

And thank the lord for Christopher Nolan, who brought realism back into the Batman world, 7 years later. But that's another story again. One I will certainly come back to soon.

Roger Moore, 89, passes on.

Roger Moore is a name that had a lot of impact on me, when I was 10 years old and saw my first James Bond film. It was 1977 and the film was THE SPY WHO LOVED ME.

At first I thought Roger Moore was James Bond. In a few years time, I would read of the other films and the earlier actors involved. But I liked Roger Moore's interpretation because he did not make him a coldblooded killer as Fleming had always described him as. Moore's Bond was much more a gentleman, a lover instead of a killer, a dangerous man with a very sharp wit and sometimes also a dirty mind.

As a film THE SPY WHO LOVED ME has always remained special to me. But when I got to see the other films as well, I enjoyed those too. (The above picture is from THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, which I thought was very good. Of course, the critics ravaged it. Well, I was 11 when I saw it. What did I know? The Top picture is from FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, Moore's last great Bond film. And below, his appearance in OCTOPUSSY.) I will certainly acknowledge that his acting was not method acting, but what does it matter? He got the point across! And he did it with Style ! In every role he played.

Of course, Roger Moore was just an actor who had played many roles. He was IVANHOE on television, Beau Maverick, Simon Templar aka the Saint and Brett Sinclair, all before he was selected to follow in Sean Connery's footsteps. And Roger Moore made the part definitely his own.

Having seen all of the Bond movies many times, having read so much about them, also having read the autobiography of Roger Moore ( "My Word Is My Bond" ), I may think he is not the best of the James Bonds but I do think he was very good in his heyday. 

Thank you, Sir Roger Moore, for all your wonderful efforts on film and television.  You have earned your rest, Sir.  Rest in Peace and do not worry:  You will be remembered !  

Becoming Bond

In the history of the James Bond films, there are many names that will return from one film to the next. Whether you look at the films of the 1960s, 1970s or later. But there was one actor, who only had one opportunity to shine. George Lazenby, who took over the role after Sean Connery had tendered his resignation following You Only Live Twice, only did one film: ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE. Lazenby played Bond with a nonchalance ( he certainly did not seem to want to bother copying Connery's acting style ) that accentuated his good looks and gave him a man's man image. But that was also the problem. Lazenby looked good in pictures because he was a model, not an actor. He couldn't project any grief at the essential moment at the end, where Blofeld's associate, Irma Bunt, has shot and killed Bond's wife, Tracy. Still, On Her Majesty's Secret Service is seen by many as one of the best Bond films of the 1960s. In this very entertaining Hulu documentary, we hear from George Lazenby himself how he got to be Bond and also, most surprisingly, why he said no to a 6 movie deal that would have netted him millions of dollars. The film is also very funny and I am sure it has to be taken with a grain (or a pound) of salt here and there but this is definitely something for the James Bond enthusiasts. And seeing Lazenby himself also brings you to the point where you say "Not bad, George, not bad at all !" 

A Great Loss for the Arts and Comics: Bernie Wrightson R.I.P.

It is with a heavy heart that I would like to attend you to the loss of one of our greatest talents in the world of comics and drawn arts. BERNIE WRIGHTSON, Master of the Macabre, has passed away this March 18th, aged 68.

Bernie Wrightson

Bernie Wrightson was born in 1948 and made his way into the world of comics in the mid to late 1960s. Wrightson's talents seemed for a long time to specialize into the black and white macabre comics of Creepy and such magazines. His wonderful artwork seemed to be perfectly suited to this.

  

In the early 1970's, he worked with Len Wein on creating a mythical monster/superhero for DC Comics, the Swamp Thing. The Swamp Thing was a  unique creation in that it was a cross between superheroics and the macabre and it immediately was copied by Marvel Comics with a similar creation that was less memorable.

Wrightson also had the time to do a lot of BATMAN and his version of the Caped Crusader allows for immense long bat ears and a wide and flowing cape (which is very impractical for superheroes but it looks great).

The 1970s also saw Wrightson create a portfolio for one of the most influential horror novels, Mary Shelley's FRANKENSTEIN. Wrightson worked for many years to create a wonderfully macabre body of work of black and white, highly detailed, finely sketched pieces of art, that were finally collected in one tome in the early 1980s. 

Although real superheroes never seemed to interest Wrightson, he also created some wonderful examples of combining superheroes with the macabre, such as in the Spider-Man graphic novel HOOKY.

That Wrightson was equally adept at humor becomes evident in another superhero mash-up:

And no, it is not misspelled on this graphic novel: Bernie Wrightson initially always spelled his first name Berni to be able to make the distinction from another Mr. Wrightson with the same first name, who was an olympic swimmer in the early 1970s. With Jim Starlin, Wrightson also created the best BATMAN epic I have ever read, BATMAN: THE CULT. The Cult dealt with Batman finding himself opposite an underground leader of the forlorn, Deacon Blackfire, who manages to totally destroy the Batman legacy. Yet, Batman finds himself again and returns to triumph in this extraordinarily brutal saga, also wonderfully colored by Bill Wray. 

With the popularity of ALIENS on the film screen, Wrightson also found it interesting to adapt his craft to fit into the annals of science fiction with his highly detailed art for the Aliens. 

An unusual side effect of this was the later combination of superheroes opposite the aliens:

Now and then, Wrightson also did work for film related projects, such as the comic book version of the George Romero film CREEPSHOW and he worked on designs for the Reavers in SERENITY.

In January 2017, Wrightson retired from the business because of his health issues. Unfortunately, this past March 18th, he passed away after a long battle with cancer. 

With the passing of Bernie Wrightson, we find ourselves again facing the loss of incredible talent of the likes of Bob Kane, Will Eisner, Jack Kirby, John Buscema, Frank Frazetta and Gene Colan.

You will be missed, Bernie !  

All Art Copyright DC Comics, Marvel Comics, Dark Horse Comics, Warren Publishing