Poor Jud Is Dead

Okies

When the throes of campaign season are upon us, I’m often reminded of a musical I tend to strongly dislike. It’s called Oklahoma!, and it’s about the struggle over the source of two men’s affections, Laurey Williams. It’s considered a classic, written by the famous musical dynamic duo of Richard Rogers and Oscar Hammerstein II, and I dislike it because I can’t stand the protagonist, Curley McLain. He’s the all-American meathead asshole. He’s boisterous, self-aggrandizing, outspoken and selfish, evident by a scene where he tries to remove his competition for Laurey by trying to convince the other party (Jud Fry) to hang himself.

But everybody loves Curly. Every person in town (except Jud) sings Curly’s praises, and yet, as an audience, we don’t see Curly do much beyond puffing his own chest. Jud, on the other hand, is cast as the roadblock to everything Curly wants and the main antagonist. Jud’s crime? He’s a loner weirdo who lives on the outskirts, and nobody likes him. This breeds obsession in Jud to protect what’s his, and it drives him to act erratically and ultimately violently when the woman of his dreams switches sides and joins team McLain.

Oklahoma! is a simple story we’ve seen played out over and over again. The “good guy” overcomes the “bad guy” and saves the girl. Everybody in town cheers, not really bothered that it took someone’s death to resolve the plot. And since it’s a musical, people break into well-choreographed bouts of plot-driven dancing.

Ok1When I first saw Oklahoma!, I didn’t necessarily like what I watched, but there was something about it that embedded it deep within my brain. It was the Jud character. In the production I saw, Jud was a tall, tubby oaf. He looked like a walking egg, and he dressed in what appeared to be burlap sacks. These were our cues to join the townspeople in hating him, and these were the reasons we had to suspend our judgment when Curly took the coward’s road in trying to convince Jud to hang himself, thereby securing an indirect route to freeing up Laurey as a partner at the local dance.  It was a heavy-handed tactic for such a petty end result, but Jud was the burlap sack-wearing oaf, so…

Nobody thought Curly bad or wrong or evil for his promotion of suicide. None of townsfolk rethought their support for everyone’s favorite cowboy. It was a strange experience for me, and sitting in the audience, I couldn’t help but balk at some of my fellow attendees who were cheering for Curly. And near the end, when Jud turns violent, the exultations of joy emitting from my fellow attendees reached a crescendo.

“See?!” they cried. “Jud IS the bad guy!”

Though strange as this experience was for me, it’s not entirely out of the ordinary. In fact, it’s a very human thing to do and is something we do all of the time.

Think about it. More often than not, we create our own enemies. When we consolidate into exclusionary groups, when we chastise people for differing politic opinions or lifestyles or interests, we’re pushing Juds to the far reaches of society. We’re fueling the fire, piecing together ticking time-bombs who will own venture deeper and deeper into that black abyss we claim to stand firmly against.

I see it often around election season on Facebook. I see it in the comment sections of topical news stories. I see it in public when people are waiting in line to see a movie. People gang up on each other, some choosing to even to go so far as to publicly shame the person they were having a heated argument with. Though we might feel “right” because our values are reinforced by our friends, family or that one Salon.com article that agrees with us, doing these things aren’t exactly helping us. Even if we’re reacting to a fight we didn’t start.

At the end of the day, these battles are dividing us. They’re pitting us against ourselves, pocketing us into exclusionary groups that can be easily marketed to. Who wins when the town has been gerrymandered into cliques too busy with ousting one another over bullshit Facebook trends? Unscrupulous, silver-tongued opportunists with something to sell. Self-indulgent Curlys not beholden to any one group or way of life.

If someone in town brought a bottle of whiskey to Jud’s shack with the offer of simply hanging out, Oklahoma! might not have ended the way it did. The musical certainly didn’t need to end violently. It was only a date to a dance, after all.

As a species, I often feel that we’re getting better at being human, that we’re evolving. I’m an optimist like that, and I hope that one day I’ll see an adaptation of Oklahoma! that doesn’t end with one person trying to knife the other, that the townspeople learn their lesson and discover a way to break bread with that loner weirdo on the outskirts of town.

I won’t hold my breath for Curly realizing he’s an asshole, though.  I won’t hold my breath for finally liking Oklahoma!, either.
//platform.linkedin.com/in.js

Holiday Updates!

It’s been busy over this holiday season. With the workload hitting me heavy, reviews needing writing, editing jobs to finish and finding time to scrounge up some creative writing of my own, I’ve been buried under many, many tasks. I haven’t had much time to catch up on the fun things I like doing… like writing at the personal site. Hopefully work will ease up enough to where I can get back to this regularly, but in the meantime, I have a couple of updates I’d like to share.

613feea389b5c723-brick_masons_RGB-01

The Brick Mason’s Sons

Several months back, a writer I greatly respect asked if I would write a blurb for his upcoming novel. To say I was honored was an understatement. I was floored. It was the first time anyone ever asked me to write a blurb. M-m-m-me?

I’ve since read the book, The Brick Mason’s Sons,  twice now (it’s really damn good), and I only hope my blurb does it justice. You can find it over at his website at BenSpencer.org or buy the book from Amazon and read the blurb from the back cover. I recommend the latter, as it’ll be a great addition to any personal library.

 

Literary Orphans Issue 22: Jane

The December issue of Literary Orphans is LIVE. It’s spectacular! One of the best we’ve ever done with stupendous and stunning artwork. It’s also the first time we’ve released a regular issue in December. Check it out!

‘Arkham Knight’ Isn’t the End for the ‘Batman: Arkham’ Series

BatmanArkhamKnight

It dawned on me during the Robin: A Flip of the Coin DLC, spawning from something Oracle kept repeating during the game. She kept honing in on Robin’s similarities to “him,” to the former Batman that once protected Gotham City. It was innocent enough at first — a quip to keep dialogue going and add a layer of story to a pretty simplistic episode. The repetitious, however, made me wonder: Oracle what are you really suggesting?

And that’s when it dawned on me.


All of these little 12-minute episodes Rocksteady has been releasing? All of these minor campaigns starring supporting characters that take place primarily after the events of Arkham Knight? These aren’t just clever microtransactions for Bat fans. These DLC story packs are clues. Think about it. While Rocksteady may be “done” making Arkham games, the franchise is far from over, and Warner Bros. knows it. There are more stories to tell, more arcs to pull from recent Batman comic book history.

What that silver-tongued Oracle was suggesting goes beyond Robin’s duty to protect Gotham from Two-Face in A Flip of the Coin. Her references to Robin being like “him” are posturing. It’s setting Tim Drake (Robin) up for a possible run at the mantle of the Bat. We, as the gamers, are supposed to think about it, to mull over the idea of Tim Drake donning that classic cape and cowl.

But there’s more.

Red Hood? Nightwing? Catwoman? Harley Quinn? All of these short DLC story packs take place either before or after Arkham Knight. Harley Quinn’s story directly ties into how Poison Ivy winds up in Gotham in Arkham Knight. It’s a fun side-story and nothing more than background information for rabid fans. Catwoman’s story is a follow-up to her captivity under The Riddler. Again, another side-story. In the Red Hood and Nightwing stories, much like in Robin’s, we see three members of the Bat family taking up the reigns of a city without a Batman. Two of these Bat family members even have their own teams. Robin has Oracle reporting (presumably) from the clock tower, and Nightwing has Lucius Fox reporting from Wayne Tower. Nightwing and Fox even make a passing joke about all of the parties Fox is throwing, now that Fox owns everything. (Hint. Hint.)

And Red Hood? Some fans have argued that the Red Hood DLC story pack is a nod to the comic story Batman: Under The Hood, since the DLC features Black Mask as the villain. What’s unclear about the Red Hood story pack is when it takes place. Is it before the events of Arkham Knight? Is it after? We have no official ruling, but I personally feel this story takes place after the main game. Why? Because Batman didn’t know Jason Todd (The Red Hood) was alive until mid-way through Arkham Knight. No one in the Bat family knew, nor any of the villains, except for maybe Scarecrow. Even the best “ghosts” leave footprints somewhere, and since this game features Jason Todd’s big return this version of Batman’s timeline, to Gotham, I’m thinking Todd hasn’t picked up the mantel of the Red Hood until after he made amends with Batman. And with Batman now gone, it would be the perfect moment for Black Mask to make his move back into his old stomping grounds. Not to mention, placing the Red Hood story after the events of Arkham Knight fits in perfectly with the idea behind Robin and Nightwing’s stories. All three former Bat children are working independently to quell Arkham rogues looking to seize control, once again, of the city. These heroes are each bearing the burden of Batman, each positioning themselves to take a shot at wearing the cape and cowl.

 

What’s the next logical step then? 

“Arkham: Battle for the Cowl.” Think about it. A game divided up among three teams, each one  staking a claim and solidifying a foothold in Gotham. Robin has Oracle’s network. Nightwing has Lucius Fox’s financial backing and hideaways. Red Hood, the gun-toting former sidekick who was taken away from the family tree, has a more permanent solution to the criminal problem. Each one of them is different from the other, and each one has a legitimate claim to the bat-eared crown. These DLC vignettes weren’t just 12-minute teasers; they were clues showing us each one of Batman’s “offspring” operating on his own terms.

 

 What about the Batgirl DLC though?

Ahhh, yes. Batgirl: A Matter of Family. The story is clearly set before Arkham Knight, as it takes place when The Joker was still alive. Beyond that, it has nothing to do with the rest of the game, other than it shows the budding relationship between Batgirl and Robin. The core narrative is mostly a one-off tale featuring Batgirl in an abandoned amusement park that isn’t on the Arkham Knight map. The only thing I can make of it is that it’s a nod to what may be The Joker’s last laugh. In A Matter of Family, The Joker wants to rid Gotham of the “Bat frauds” (Batgirl and Robin). He wants to dissolve the family. In the wake of the Nightwing, Robin and Red Hood story packs, it seems The Joker finally got his wish. The team is fragmented, operating independent of each other. Is it poetic? Maybe. Admittedly, it’s a bit of a stretch.

Still, all other signs tease a battle for the cowl. We’ll have to wait and see what December’s Season of Infamy brings.

Star Wars, Updates & General News


I saw SPECTRE with my brother over the weekend, and I thoroughly enjoyed myself. Before the film, however, the new trailer for Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens played. It was one of those rare moments in a theater where I was overwhelmed with emotion. When that slowed down version of Han and Leia’s theme hummed as the Millenium Falcon weaved through Imperial debris, I’ll admit, my eyes watered. I looked over at my brother, and I could see it in his eyes, too.

There we were, two grown men in a matinee showing of a James Bond film, succumbing to a flood of imagery reminiscent of another time, so very long ago.

I never thought I’d see the Millenium Falcon (or its crew) on the big screen again. After the original Star Wars trilogy ran in theaters for the last time in the mid 90’s, I thought that was it. No more. Finito. Finished. Adventures with my childhood heroes would be relegated to the whims of my imagination at home. I’d have to carry on the tales alone with my action figures or pretend when reading a piece of glorified fan fiction. Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Peter Mayhew and Billy Dee Williams were still around, but they had moved on to different things. Indefinitely.

But here they were again.

I know many people feel the same. The Internet is overflowing with reaction videos, blog posts and articles about this, and it all boils down to the same idea: our old friends are back.

They were a big part of our collective childhood. They were our heroes, teaching us the ways of the galaxy, the power of attitude and ability to reach out and overcome the impossible. These heroes were plucked from the richest well of imagination, and they were given to us to share visions of another way of experiencing the world around us. To put it simply, they brought us magic and the gift of perspective.


Chewie

 

I’ve been away for some time, learning the ropes of my new promotion as manager of my copy department (at the day job). I’m back now, bringing with me a wonderful discussion with the fine folks at Drunk Monkeys about Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. I’m not a fan of the prequels, but I do my best to make amends, to find peace with this lackluster trilogy.

I have more in the pipeline, too. At the end of the month, a “writing tips” column will pop up at Drunk Monkeys. With any luck, some more short stories should start appearing on the Internet.

 

GEEK PITCH: Spider-Man

Editor’s Note: GEEK PITCH is an irregular column on ScottWaldyn.com that re-purposes what would normally be a nerd-fueled fever dream into a movie pitch.


Ultimate-Spiderman-banner

We all know a new Spider-Man film is coming now that Spidey’s been welcomed to the Marvel Cinematic Universe (through a deal reached between Marvel Studios and Sony Pictures). With the little bits of news filtering through the pipeline, we’ve learned that Tom Holland is our new web-head, with Marisa Tomei as Aunt May. We also know that the joint film team is eyeing a new villain audiences haven’t seen on screen yet, with the rumor on the street fingering Kraven the Hunter as our criminal operator.

But that’s it. Beyond these small morsels, the doorway is wide open, with a plethora of questions waiting to be answered. Who will write it? What’s the story about? Are Sony and Marvel interested in reading a movie pitch from some guy on the Internet?

Before anyone can say no to that last question, I’m going to lay my cards out on the table. Take a moment to grab some popcorn or refill that soda. You ready?

AHEM.

In this universe, Peter Parker is still new to the dual identity game, having been Spider-Man for only a year. Uncle Ben has already passed, and the funeral is long behind Peter and his Aunt May. They’ve moved on, picked up the pieces, and are now making life work. At school, Peter is just another forgettable face, tucked away in a sea of students. Only Harry Osborn pays him any attention, and at that, it’s mostly to “study” Peter’s homework. It’s okay, though. Harry is dating Gwen Stacy, the nerd queen, science geek, and idol of Peter’s eye. When she comes over during their “study” sessions at the Osborn place, those few moments of nirvana are enough to keep Peter perilously toeing the line of expulsion.

Outside of school, Parker’s a low-level hero who’s a thorn in the side of common crooks, bank robbers, and police officers — he’s more of a nuisance than a revered superhero, frequently stepping on the toes of the local law enforcement. But Peter’s trying. He sees heroes like Iron Man, Captain America, and Black Widow, thinks of his murdered Uncle Ben, and dons the homemade Spider-Man mask anyway, looking for ways to aid New York however he can. It’s a compulsion at this point, a way to fill a void.

Continue reading →

I, For One, Welcome Our Board Game Overlords

KentBrockman

There’s an epidemic spreading among the masses. It’s a plague with no physical symptoms. It carries no sores, no bruises, and no discoloration. It doesn’t make anybody stuffy, irritated, or drowsy. This disease works stealthily, hopping from one person to another, invisible to the naked human eye. The only sure-tell way to identify this sickness is when it’s too late. It’s when the epidemic has your friends, your coworkers, and your family locked down, submerged into a full-blown breakout with no way out.

 

Even then, I only know because they tell me. These loved ones finally feel the illness worming its way through their systems, and when it has made its way to their hearts, they lean in real close, their glossy eyes a snapshot of terror, and they whisper, “I don’t know how to tell you, but I’ve traded in my thumbs.”

 

“Your thumbs?”

 

“My thumbs. Both of them. I ain’t the jockey I used to be, brother. I feel different.”

 

It’s happened so many times, I don’t blink anymore. I just ask them to hit me with it. Straight.

 

“You ever play Settlers of Catan?”

 


 

Several years ago, I never thought board games would rise up and challenge video games. The idea seemed silly. What were board games? Monopoly? Sorry? Battleship? Checkers? These were mildly entertaining bonding activities simple enough that even Grandma could participate. These were toys for family parties, a means to pass the time without turning on the TV, and in that, board games were as cool as they were exciting.

 

But then something happened in the early 2010s that changed everything. A staple from my youth started to die out. What once was vogue in the world of video gaming became archaic. It was slapped with a label and lost in most modern games, relegated to a cultural motif of yesteryear. They call it “couch co-op” or “couch multiplayer” these days. It’s the notion of inviting friends over to game, sitting next to each other in the same room, and either working together or challenging each other through split screens on the TV.

Continue reading →

In Memory Of James Horner

[James Horner, composer of countless iconic movie scores, died in a plane crash yesterday. I wrote a reflection piece about his body of work and the way his music has touched me on a personal level.]

I first discovered the name ‘James Horner’ in 1993. I was small and just starting to read, but his name scrolled across the screen during a viewing of The Land Before Time, a favorite film at that time. I couldn’t help but take notice, as I was receiving a film education early, from a father who loved to dissect the working pieces in order showcase and share the many components that made a movie such a mystifying, magical, and surreal art form. One of the elements he zeroed in on was the power of music. He’d blare it from the speakers when my mother went out some nights. My father would play movies in the other room when he made dinner, just so he could hear the sounds…

…because the film’s visuals were already firmly implanted in his mind, and by listening to the music, he could relive the story again.



The Land Before Time became one of the first film score obsessions I’d carry with me. I’d watch the movie constantly, sometimes putting it on in the background while I played with toys. The music hit all the right notes — adventure, terror, courage, curiosity, birth, death, and the breath of wonder of a world around us that was magical and new. In moments of doubt, when the burden of my parents’ divorce weighed heavily on my mind, The Land Before Time was a score that even promised hope, that asked me to endure and climb over the mountain to see what was on the other side. There was a whole world out there, and though the one I was familiar with was crumbling, a new landscape was on the horizon. Always.

Continue reading →

LITERARY ORPHANS ISSUE 19: Letter From The Editor [Reprint]

This Letter From The Editor was originally printed in the latest issue of Literary Orphans on June 10, 2015. It’s my debut as editor-in-chief of the journal, finally coming out of the shadows and getting a little more hands-on with LO. If you follow me and haven’t checked it out, I’d heavily recommend it. Not just because I’m involved. If you read the letter, you’ll see that I intend for it to be something greater than myself, something greater than all of us.

I’ve decided to reprint the letter on my personal site because of all the outpouring of support I’ve gotten for it. I was worried it wouldn’t fly, but people love it. One commentator even said it was reminiscent of Thomas Paine. The comparison made me blush.



blurred-Topsy-1024x728

Dear Orphans & Orphanettes,

When Executive Director Mike Joyce asked me to steer the Literary Orphans ship, I’ll admit, a sense of worry washed over me. Apocalyptic visions of cities crumbling to their foundations rattled me. I had memories of movies I had seen where all that stood of civilization was a weathered Big Ben jutting out of a pile of rubble. Mike was doing a great job, and the last thing I wanted to do was come in like a bumbling lab assistant and mix up the formula.

So I dipped into the LO ether. I revisited our earliest notes three years ago, back when LO was a mere thought, and imbibed those ambitions. I poured through old “Letters From The Editor,” starting with the very first one in Literary Orphans Issue 1: Babe. At times, my journey felt like being reintroduced to an old friend, and at other times, it felt like I had seen a ghost, as if I were viewing stills of a past incarnation no longer with us. It’s true that LO has gone through changes, many of which were cosmetic, but the same heart still beats at its core. It just looks different. The journal has grown into new clothes.

In my many notes I passed back and forth with Mike, one of the constants was this idea of Literary Orphans as a media identity. What were we? Were we a counterculture outfit? Were we a haven for the disenfranchised? Were we the explorers that sailed against the winds?

Continue reading →

Cultured Vultures Guest Post: The Hustler (1961) & Drunk Monkeys: Poltergeist (2015)

Maybe I’m not such a high-class piece of property right now. And a 25% slice of something big is better than a 100% slice of nothing.

I have a special guest write-up at Cultured Vultures today. A while back, I rolled up my sleeves and welcomed the privilege to help with a movie review project the editors over at that pop culture oasis are working on. It’s a series of reviews based off the Top 250 films on IMDB. It’s a daunting construction, as the editors want to hit every film, but I’m grateful for the opportunity to lay a brick or two. I’m even more grateful they hosted my piece, as Cultured Vultures is such a fun zine!

At any rate, enough of my prattling. Here’s The Hustler.

 


 

For those of you who haven’t been following me on Drunk Monkeys…

(Image © 20th Century Fox)

(Image © 20th Century Fox)

…I’ve got a POLTERGEIST review ready for your perusal.