7 tips for future collaborators

If you're reading this, it's most likely because: a) you read this blog regularly, and/or b) we're teaming up to create something together--a video, a blog post, a play, whatever.

At this point, I probably already have a good feeling about you. Trust me, that's a big step. You've already proven that you're not an asshole, a flake, or full of shit. Treat yourself if you got this far.

Now that we've cleared the deal-breakers, let's talk more about the sort of working relationship I want to have with you. With that in mind, let me give you a few tips on how to work well with me.

1. Good fences make good neighbors.

I'm very particular about boundaries--my own and someone else's. I hate feeling forced or coerced into doing something I don't want to do, and I certainly don't want to make other people feel forced or coerced into something. That's one reason why I'm not too good at sales. I take, "No, thank you" at face value. It's not a challenge to my skills of persuasion. It's a clue to back off.

2. Getting what you want is as simple as asking, but once you make demands, forget it.

"Could you do me a favor?" is the best way to ask me to do something. If it's something that doesn't make me deeply uncomfortable or spreads me too thin, I'll more than likely do it. If it really helps you, I'll even go way out of my way. But as soon as you start barking orders at me, I'll suddenly have a lot that I need to do before I can get to whatever it is you're asking me to do.

3. Spare me your feelings.

This probably sounds cold and harsh, but I've found that it's necessary for my peace of mind. Whatever we're working on is hard enough without having to navigate moods and emotions along with it. That doesn't mean that I'm going to make like the Gregory House and ignore or stomp on your feelings every chance I get. It does mean that the words "I feel" are not going to be a primary factor in how I make decisions when it comes to the work I do.

4. Don't borrow trouble.

Chances are we have enough to do that worrying about things we have no control over is a waste of time and energy. Feel free to work yourself into a frenzy, bite your nails, and pull your hair out way out of sight and out of hearing from me.

5. Focus on essentials.

I tend to mentally prioritize every decision I make into 3 categories: need to do, want to do, and would be nice to get around to doing. Aside from the way my mind naturally works, being broke has solidified the difference between need, want, and nice to have. Differentiating between these and putting the bulk of our time and energy into essentials works better than just doing whatever comes up just because it's there to be done.

6. Be easy to reach.

If I call, pick up your phone, even if to tell me, "I'm sorry. I can't talk right now. Call me back at [time]." If I e-mail you, let me know you got it even if to say, "I'll get back to you on [date and time]." I don't expect anyone to be available 24/7, and I'd hate it if people expected that of me. That said, at least give me an idea of when I can consistently reach you if we need to communicate.

7. Don't do me no favors.

I don't believe in committing to projects or relationships out of obligation. If you're going to work with me, do it because there's something in it for you that makes it worth the time and energy you'll put into it. Chances are it won't be the money or the fame. Whatever it is, make sure it's for you. Don't do it for me. Because the moment you say, "I'm doing this for nothing/so little/not enough!" I'm through with you. People who are dishonest or unclear about their motives are people I can't deal with. I want no working relationship that is revealed to be based false pretenses--or worse, a lie.

Of course, this is not the end-all, be-all of working with me. But it's a lot like what someone said about voting for Obama versus voting for Romney. Obama's not perfect, but you can have a conversation with him. The same principle applies here. Doing these things won't guarantee a perfectly smooth working relationship, but it will be something I can work with.

And that's all I'm really asking for.

Linked without comment

Rowe Entertainment, Inc. vs. The William Morris Agency, Inc.

The sad news is that I discovered something similar with someone else I was working on a play with.

Required reading

This review of Limitless at Movies by Bowes.

White Woman Feminist, an essay by Marilyn Frye from Willful Virgin: Essays in Feminism.

Go After the Privilege, not the Tits: Afterthoughts on Amanda Wallace and White Female Privilege at Racialicious.

Save the date: April 9 for Movie FUNraiser

I've been really busy with Crossroads Theatre Project and the Planet Connections Theatre Festivity. If you're going to be in town, I'd really like to see you at the staged reading of Tulpa, or Anne&Me. If you've seen it and know some people who should see it too, please tell them - even if you can count them on one hand.

As we're gearing up for the reading, we're planning a FUNraising event to pay for rehearsal space. On the evening of Saturday, April 9 (let's say 8pm), we'll be screening a movie at Houndstooth Pub. The theme for the event will be girl power - movies with women in lead roles who don't need a man to be awesome. We're looking at showing

1. Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland,
2. Heathers (starring Winona Ryder and Christian Slater), or
3. Quentin Tarantino's Death Proof.

We'll choose the movie based on which one gets the biggest donation. So even if you can't be there, your vote will count! Simply click on the button below to donate:



Don't worry - this isn't going to be one of those "siddown and shaddup" movie-going experiences. You can laugh, talk at the screen, boo/hiss and otherwise act like a complete groundling with no culture at all.

It's going to be a lot of fun! Where else can you go out and catch a cool movie, drink beer, and meet great people at the same time?

I'd love to see you there and catch up on what you've been up to. Even if you can't be there, your support would mean a lot. Whether it's donating $10 or just letting 5 people know that beer and food and a movie will happen at the same place, every little bit helps, and I appreciate it.

Hope to see you in April (and also in June)!

(By the way, you can visit Off Book Market to get your own copy of Tulpa, or Anne&Me. Quite a few people have some great things to say about it.)

helen mirren does not worship the 18-25 year old male penis

Helen Mirren proves that older women are fierce:



Source.

you know you wanna see this

The only thing that can make this more awesome? Lightsabers.

tropes done to death

Isaac at Parabasis is done with a trope that feminists and feminist allies know and hate the shit out of:

I am not sure I can put into words how fed up I am by the whole "the guy's an asshole, but the woman sees something in him and through fucking him a lot, redeems him" thing. And furthermore, I'm a bit fed up by male critics not realizing that this is blatant wish-fulfillment for male audiences .

Typepad won't let me post a comment, so I'm responding here.

Rather than talk about male fantasy wish fulfillment blah blah blah, I'm going to lay out a scenario that would have me leave the theatre feeling like I saw something truly worthwhile. James would see where this is going.

For about the first half, the movie will be this trope. But just at the moment when the female lead would fall for the male lead's roguish charm, things will take a different turn and start going wrong. Horribly, horribly wrong. Like this . . .



Or this . . .



Or this . . .





ETA: See what I mean?

"The Social Network" in under 90 seconds

The translation is hilarious!

Julie Taymor does "The Tempest"

Magic. Helen Mirren. Fairies. Chris Cooper. Magic. Wizards. Spells.

*faints*

I think I'm going to have Julie Taymor's baby. Like, right now.



Labor pains never felt so good.

You know you wanna see this: Juan of the Dead (Juan de los Muertos)

For my straight White male friends re: Ramona Flowers (may contain spoilers for "Scott Pilgrim vs. The World")

(H/t: neo_prodigy, re: "What If Scott Pilgrim Wasn't A Straight White Male?")

Dear Straight White Guy Friend:

Are we friends? I mean friend-friends? Like we can be honest with each other about things?

That Ramona Flowers girl you keep ogling as soon as her scent is in the air? Can't stand her ass. I hate her guts. I hate her fashionably pale, barely legal-looking, wig-wearing, roller-blading, spiritual-but-not-religious ass. Seriously, whenever I get a whiff of her, I'm like this:



It's enough to make me forget I like women! And considering my taste in women, that's just wrong.

I hate Ramona Flowers for what she says to the rest of womankind. She says to us, "Don't take responsibility for your life. Cultivate worldly innocence and play muse to some random lowlife instead." She says to us, "Don't fight your own battles or use your own strength. Pretend to be helpless and get some pathetic slacker to do it for you." She says to us, "If you're cute and skinny and White enough, you won't have to do anything for yourself." She says to us, "Don't make choices and accept consequences! Wait around for the right people to pick you and feel like the victim for not getting the life you wanted." She says to us, "If you want to be loved, you must first and foremost be a fantasy. You are not allowed to be a complete and complex human being."

Simply put, she's a fake, a phony, a passing fancy. There's nothing real about her but the damage she does. I could almost respect her game if there was anything new in it, anything of substance that would make her appealing besides not being like your parents. I won't even say weird. Wednesday Addams is weird. The Ramonas of the world are merely quirky.

Speaking of damage, what kind of person has seven evil exes? I'm not going on that "What did she do to turn them evil?" nonsense. For real, what kind of person would choose to have a relationship with somebody evil who has superpowers? Not just once - seven fucking times!

Let's take the superpowers out of it. As a matter of fact, let's flip the script and make it your mom or your sister or some other woman you care about but don't want to sleep with. If she were seeing someone who had seven evil exes, wouldn't you be just a little bit concerned about her? Let's take this to the real world where instead of seven evil exes with superpowers, it could be seven evil exes with hardcore underworld connections. Would your assessment of the situation be different? I'm not saying you should judge people by who they used to date, but you should wonder about the company they keep, especially if said company will fucking kill you!

*sigh*

File this under Dumb Shit Guys Do They Wouldn't Let Their Mom or Sister Get Away With.

The next time you see Ramona Flowers, wipe the pixie dust out your eyes and take a good hard look at who you're with. You might not feel so enchanted when you realize the hell you'd be putting yourself through for something that's really not worth it.


Yours truly,

Me

P.S. For my feminist and womanist sisters, the next time you see Ramona Flowers, kick her in the cunt and beat her over the head with bell hooks until the words sink into her brain.

What friends are for (aka Dear God HELP ME!!!)

I was in Union Square today, and I actually walked into the movie theatre to pay money to see . . .

Twilight Saga: Eclipse.

Yes, the one with Edward Cullen the Sparkly Vampire. Yes, the one with Bella the Emo. Yes, the one where Jacob the Washboard Werewolf will eventually (in Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn) fall in love with a baby.

If you are any kind of friend of mine, you care about me even a little bit - I am clearly insane and need serious help. I must not be allowed to enter a cineplex unsupervised. Please, please, please don't let me pay money to see this movie. You have my permission to use bribes ("I'll get you one of those huge subway posters of the White Queen if you see The Last Airbender instead!"), deception (You can even go, "Hey, let's watch it together!" then get 2 tickets for something else), threats (such as, "If you take that card out to get a ticket to that shit, I'm revoking your womanist card!"), and physical restraint. But whatever you do - DO NOT ALLOW ME TO PAY TO SEE THIS MOVIE.

Please.

Please.

Pleeeeeeaase.

Guilty pleasure film: Willow

Willow is one of my favorite fantasy movies to this day.

Say what you want about the plot or the special effects, I've always loved the shit out of this movie.

Once again, like The Golden Child, there are intriguing things about this movie that I didn't notice as a kid but that, as an adult, strike me as pretty progressive.

Let's start with the title character.

Willow is the first and only movie I can think of where a Small person has a leading role as the hero.

Let that sink in for a minute.

In just about every Western film, particularly American films, Small people are presented as set pieces (hello, munchkins and Ewoks!) and symbols of the grotesque (hello, every film featuring sideshow freaks!), but never the heroic protagonist. They're rarely characters, let alone the star.


Not only that, but his size is presented as a relative trait. To "regular" humans (called Daikini's by the Nelwyns, who are Willow's people), Willow is tiny, a "peck"*. To brownies, he's a giant. In an intriguing sort of way, Willow shatters the idea of what normal is with regards to size by presenting a world where Nelwyns and fairies and shit are walking (flying?) around.

("Peck" is the only invented slur that carries the same punch as some of the real-world slurs I've come across.)

But it's not just size that sets Willow apart. In terms of gender and heroism, Willow is one of the only male heroes (aside from Jen in The Dark Crystal) who tends to eschew violence as a way to solve problems. No, he doesn't talk to his enemies and help them get in touch with their feelings. He outsmarts them. His greatest successes in the film have more to do with wits, cunning, and agriculture than they do with being stronger or faster or more powerful than his adversaries*. Willow is a trickster hero - a rare treat in a fantasy film. Willow Ufgood brings to mind figures like Brer Rabbit and Eshu, and the film is, I believe the better for it.

Now, I know that the temptation is to say that if they made Willow a woman, the movie would've been a lot more progressive. (Which is interesting, since Willow can also be a girl's name, and that other Willow does magic too. Coincidence?).

I'm going to buck that trend and say that it's actually more interesting for Willow to be a man. As a character, Willow is incredibly nurturing, not violent (except at great need), and is devoted to his family and community. Without necessarily being aware of it, Willow presents a model of masculinity that does not require domination over others (particularly women) to define itself. Willow still gets to be a protector and provider, and he doesn't need to buy into any bullshit Real Men Don't Change Diapers machismo to do it. He still slays the evil dragon (more about her in a bit), but he never set out to do so. He achieves Man Stuff like honor and glory, but he was not motivated by it. Willow's devotion to Elora Danon is an outgrowth of his compassion. He and his family were ready to raise this big-assed giant fucking baby as their own. And the only reason why he consents to take the baby from the village is because keeping her would mean that giant rat-dogs with rabies would come and tear everyone limb from limb.

The next great thing about Willow? Bavmorda.

Hollywood has always had an issue with women in authority.

However, that does not mean I can't admire the sheer awesomeness of Queen Bavmorda's special brand of evil. She remains, to this day, one of my favorite villains. Why?

Let's start with her goals. Bavmorda is trying to kill a baby and destroy her soul. Even Palpatine never did anything that fucking evil. Bavmorda is so evil that the one henchman who would have a moral qualm about killing babies is like, qualm-less. He'd be like, "Isn't killing a baby a little . . . nevermind." Bavmorda is so evil that - you know how the villain sometimes has to make a statement to their minions about how evil they are, or make a threat, or even give a look - Bavmorda doesn't have to bother with that bullshit. She's so evil that the thought of betrayal doesn't even cross their minds, which is why Sorsha's turnabout was such a shock.

Bavmorda's Evil Quotient is firmly established here. But it doesn't stop there.

Many villains fall into the trap of toying with their enemies instead of just destroying them. Apparently, Bavmorda used her arcane powers to peek into the future and watch Die Hard. And after hearing some prophecy about a baby who's going to lead to her downfall, she is not fucking around. She doesn't even wait until the babies are born. She rounds up pregnant women, throws them in a dungeon, gives them no prenatal care (just to make the odds of survival even slimmer), and has people waiting on that baby as soon as she pops out. No bath, no smack on the ass, nothing. Just: baby comes out; bad guy catches baby; kill baby and destroy her soul. You really gotta hand it to Bavmorda. It's a rare treat to witness that kind of brutal efficiency in cinematic evil these days.

But that's not why I love the fuck out of this sublime specimen of villainy. What really sealed the deal?

"You're not warriors. You're pigs!

As far as one-liners by badass women in movies goes, this is right up there with, "Get away from her, you bitch!"

There's all sorts of cool shit to love about this fucking movie. And you can probably find it on sale for like, seven bucks.

Burton's "Alice in Wonderland" - now with less flying poop

Now that I've had a chance to think about it (and see it again - yes, I'm a sucker. I wanna make sure I didn't like it), I can kinda sorta pinpoint why Burton's Alice in Wonderland left me cold.

As in a lot of films (as Joshua James would tell you), the weakness was story.

Burton's Alice in Wonderland is one of those rare film failures that combines two contradictory mistakes: too much story and not enough story.

Carroll's books don't make sense. Why does this happen? What does that mean? Who the fuck knows - that's the point! You're supposed to be swept up in this crazy world where you never know what will happen next or who will cross your path. That's why it's called, you know, Wonderland. Talking caterpillars smoking hooka on a mushroom. Queens and cards and flamingo croquet. Mad Hatters at tea parties with March Hares. And so on and so forth. Alice in Wonderland is supposed to make about as much sense as this . . .



Ladies and Gentleman, you can't have a coherent linear narrative of Alice in Wonderland because "It. Does. Not. Make. Sense!" You hear me? It. Does. Not. Make. Sense!!!

OK, OK, fine. So you want to have an actual story with characters and such. Fine. But if you're going to do that, do something we haven't seen before with it. Take an approach we don't see all the time. And here is where Burton's Alice in Wonderland pisses me off. I don't mean a little bit irritated. I mean genuinely pissed off - pissed off at George Lucas for the Star Wars prequels pissed off.

Why? Because like George Lucas, Tim Burton - a director whose work I used to look forward to because he creates such amazing worlds - doesn't know what the fuck to do with actors. And he's married to one of them! So he really has no fucking excuse.

The only things keeping this movie from being a colossal socket-fuck of a disaster are the performances by Helena Bonham Carter and Anne Hathaway. They do what they can with their limited material - it's not like they can up and say, "You know what, Tim? Fuck this. Who wrote this shit? Was it you? C'mere you little maggot! MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?!?!?!?!?! Look at this. I said look at it! Is this the best you can do? Is this the most interesting story you can tell with these characters? Stop looking at Johnny Depp - he won't save you! Is this the best you can do? Now you listen to me, you fucking hack. Every page that sucks is going right down your goddamn throat. Do you hear me? Hm? Good. Don't. Fuck. With. Me."

Remember when I said that Burton's Alice in Wonderland makes too much sense? Right, now here is where it does the Chewbacca Defense all wrong by making sense in the most predictable way possible.

If you haven't seen the movie you might want to stop reading this now if you don't want it spoiled. But if you've seen a Disney movie before, there's little I can do to spoil this movie for you because you already know the formula. In other words: whatever.

Let me take off my vulgar snark hat for a minute and talk about what I gathered from the story here. Then maybe you can see why it pissed me off.

The driving element of the film's narrative is the conflict between the Red and White Queens. Fuck Alice and her name in the title. The two queens are the engines beneath the hood.

These two characters are ideals and political philosophies as much as they are individuals. And I don't mean something as pedestrian as the typical Good (White Queen) vs. Evil (Red Queen) conflict.

The film touches on the question of whether it is better for people in power to be feared (Red Queen) or loved (White Queen). There's also lots of potential for Freudian and Jungian goodness too. Alice/Mad Hatter as Anima/Animus. Red Queen/Alice/White Queen as Id/Ego/Superego. There are tons of possibilities there and the performers hint at it too.

Carter and Hathaway add a touch of something in their performances that make these characters more like a yin-yang than simple dichotomies. Carter injects a self-awareness into the Red Queen that turns her into a tragic character. She's more Richard III than Wicked Witch of the West (pre-Wicked). Hathaway peels away at the White Queen's saintly demeanor, hinting at something far more sinister at work. She's less Glinda the Good Witch and more Palpatine.

With those subtleties in their performances, there's a lot of real potential to explore some mature ideas and themes in an interesting and entertaining way.

The problem? We don't see it.

I'm not John Huston here, but there is something I tend to believe about What Makes a Good Director. This is about as close as I get to an aesthetic philosophy, at least as it applies to film.

If you're directing a film or play that re-envisions a well-known classic, if you have someone - a performer, perhaps - willing to invest that sort of energy and creativity into a role that, on the surface, is pretty fucking bland . . .

 . . . PUT THAT SHIT IN THE GODDAMN FUCKING MOVIE FOR GOD'S SAKE!!!!!!!!!!

But you want to know why we don't see that? Because of Burton's perpetual hard-on for Johnny Depp. Not the Johnny Depp the versatile actor, but Johnny Depp the quirky outsider. The Mad Hatter was a periphery character in the books, and the movies would've fared better if they followed suit. A cameo would've sufficed nicely. Again, Burton's priapism with regards to Johnny Depp gets in the way.

Allow me to present for you a hypothetical situation. Let's say I was producing/directing/writing this for the stage. I'm collaborating with the same performers. Anne Hathaway comes to me and says, "Maybe there's something about her whole Nice Queen routine that's an act. Maybe she's afraid of her own capacity for violence and cruelty and is creating this saccharine world as a way of repressing that."

My response, "Cool! Now how about we take that further? What is she really like underneath? What does the strain of that performance do to her? What is she really feeling about herself, about the people around her, about the world she lives in? To what extent is her act a part of her nature and to what extent is it a tool to manipulate people? Is her becoming queen really a good thing?"

If you think about it, there are hints of Luke and Vader in the relationship between the White and Red Queens. "I am your father" means that the bad guy isn't some monster you can kill because whatever is inside them is also inside you. In the White Queen's case, things could actually get worse than when the Red Queen is in charge because people want to do her bidding. Let's see, an entire country driven to commit horrible acts based on the persuasiveness of a charismatic leader without a conscience (or worse - one who sincerely believes in some seriously stinky bullshit). Where have we seen that before?

I would fucking rewrite the script if someone brought something so potentially mind-shatteringly awesome to my work. Think about what's more interesting to explore:

• Alice caught in a conflict between two women of power, each representing different approaches to using that power = the shit.
• Alice forming her own identity and encountering two monarchs who represent opposing yet linked impulses = the shit.
• Alice coming into her own power based on what she learned from her journey to Wonderland = the shit.
• Alice driven by childish sentimentality for a side character in her first journey = the suck.

So we could've had something on par with the Star Wars or Lord of the Rings trilogies.

But what do we get? Flatterwackin'.

After seeing "Alice in Wonderland" (2010) . . .

Fuck you, Tim Burton! I have a new surrealist god-king!

I'm published now!

I wrote a review of Carlos Reygadas' Silent Light for New York Cool. Check me out!

Guilty Pleasure Film: The Golden Child

I have a secret. I love The Golden Child. Say what you want about the acting, the plot, or the production values. It won't change the fact that this movie is a classic. Do you want to know why? Of course you do. You're an intelligent human being, and you want to know why you should care about some movie Eddie Murphy made in the 80s.

Let me get this out of the way: I'm a fantasy movie buff. If there's magic or dragons or elves and that sort of stuff in a movie, I'll watch it at least once even if it's terrible. Maybe twice to make sure I don't like it. I've sometimes paid full price to see horrendous movies (say, Bloodrayne or Dragon Wars) simply because they're in the fantasy genre. I even watch Red Sonja whenever it comes on, and I think I'm one of the few Black people who knew of Brigette Nielson before she met Flava Flav.

I have a soft spot for The Golden Child because it breaks longstanding patterns in fantasy movies. What other Hollywood movie can you name in which the hero is Black, Jesus is Asian, and the Devil is a White man?

Take a few minutes to Google it. Seriously, go ahead and look it up.

Welcome back.

First of all, let's look at the protagonist, Chandler Jarrell. First of all, he's actually the main character. This is rare by itself. Most of the time Black characters are mere functionaries in a White person's story. They're only important insofar as they show off how heroic the White protagonist is or to help said White person find himself. Chandler Jarrell is nobody's Magic Negro. He has no weird powers or special insights. We don't even know if he can dance (though he tries to rap). All he has are guts, smarts, and conscience. But it is his story that is being told, his transformation we are witnessing. To make matters even more interesting, Chandler Jarrell's transformation clearly follows the archetypal heroic journey. It's straight out of Joseph Campbell.

Too bad the trend didn't catch on.

You know what? We should find someone to produce a sequel. Let's call it The Platinum Child. In this movie, D.L. Hughley or Katt Williams will try to save a Native American baby from being sacrificed to summon a demon who looks a lot like our current President.

Then again, that would probably be closer to reality TV, wouldn't it?