Daily Archives: November 27, 2011

‘Walking Dead’ mid-season finale ends with a bang

There’s been a lot of second-guessing of the second season of “The Walking Dead,” and I understand most of it.

The first season of the AMC series about the aftermath of a zombie apocalypse was straightforward “I Am Legend” stuff, survival and regrouping in the early days and weeks of the end of the world.

But by the second season — although still only weeks since the end of the world in the show’s chronology — had to do something different. And there was also the matter of budget cuts and turmoil behind the scenes, including the departure of writer/producer Frank Darabont.

So much of the second season has been set at a farm, where kindly farmer/veterinarian Hershel first provided assistance to the group of refugees then posed several problems for them. Would the members of the group succumb to the dangers of false hope, as Hershel has? Would they be allowed to stay in this comparatively idyllic spot even if they wanted to? And what about the missing girl and, oh yeah, the walkers that Hershel keeps penned up in his barn?

The first half of the season, which ended tonight with new episodes set to begin in February, prompted a lot of restlessness among both the human refugees and the audience. When would they find Sophia, the missing girl? When would Rick and Shane clash over Lori? When would the show get. on. with. it?

I’ve enjoyed the show and enjoyed tonight’s episode, “Pretty Much Dead Already,” even the soap-opera dynamics of love triangles and threatened betrayal. I like the characters and feel for their predicament.

No spoilers if you haven’t seen it, but tonight’s episode feels like a resolution, like a turning point. The ending was heartbreaking if not entirely unexpected.

But the glimpses of the farm in previews for next February’s episodes left me more than a little frustrated. I expected tonight’s episode to get them off the farm, back on the road and out of this storyline. Instead the preview seems to indicate more rural dithering is ahead of us.

I’ve enjoyed “The Walking Dead” so far and I’m looking forward to February, although not as much as I expected to.

But I’m really hoping that the show doesn’t continue to spin its wheels. The survivors need to move on to the next storyline and they need to do it soon.

 

The heyday of the monster world

I grew up with monsters. The good kind. Frankenstein, Dracula, the Wolf Man, all  lurching around in foggy black-and-white graveyards and misty moors. The kind that were celebrated in Famous Monsters of Filmland magazine, shown by TV horror movie host Sammy Terry and frozen in time in Aurora model kits.

There’s a lot of Internet space used to describe the “monster kid” phenomenon. It’s the loosely defined generation of us — mostly boys — who grew up right about the same time classic monster movies of the 1930s and 40s were sold for airing on local TV stations in the 1960s.

Pop culture aimed at kids and kiddish hobbies permeates our culture today — entire TV channels are devoted to science fiction, young people and geeks, for pete’s sake — so it’s hard to figure out how monster kid culture became pervasive when I was growing up. Without benefit of cable TV and the Internet but thanks to magazines and late-night movies, we somehow knew everything about these old monsters.

We knew which movies featured Boris Karloff as Frankenstein’s monster (easy) and which featured Glenn Strange. We even hollered and pointed when Strange showed up as the bartender at the Long Branch saloon in “Gunsmoke.” Here was a rare moment of our monster world intersecting with the real world and we wanted the grownups to acknowledge it.

For a big part of my childhood and young adolescence, I immersed myself in monster world. I loved to draw back then and, using movie history books for reference, lovingly recreate the Universal movie monsters I love.

I collected not only Famous Monsters magazine but Castle of Frankenstein, the Monster Times and lesser-known publications. Sometimes my need to create led me to, foolishly, cut up those now-valuable magazines and reassemble the pictures into scrapbooks that looked like magazines.

My friend Jim and I even created our own monster magazine he sold at his school. It was painstakingly — and somewhat hilariously — written and illustrated by the two of us.

I haven’t drawn much in a few years and — after having paid to recreate my collection of Famous Monsters magazine, then subsequently selling it — don’t buy monster magazines anymore. The closest I get to publishing a fanzine about old Universal horror films is when I mention them here.

My Aurora model kits — my Wolf Man, Dracula and Mummy — survived my childhood and gathered dust on a shelf until about 20 years ago, when, in a whirlwind of clearing out stuff before moving, I put them in the trash.

I don’t want to recreate those models — although you can buy a vintage 1963 Aurora Mummy model on eBay for “only” $124.95 — and I don’t want to recreate those times.

But I don’t mind dipping into the monster nostalgia once in a while.

 

 

 

 

The Great Newspaper Comics Challenge Part 2

For a moment there, I thought I had slipped through some kind of time portal into the distant past.

Here in front of me, in an Indianapolis community newspaper called the Eastside Voice, was the old “Flash Gordon” newspaper comic strip.

I hadn’t seen “Flash Gordon” in years. No newspapers that I knew of carried it. Yet here it was, in this little neighborhood newspaper.

Upon doing a little research on the Interwebs, I figured out why I hadn’t heard of the strip lately. “Flash Gordon” hasn’t been an actively-published newspaper comic strip since 2003, when artist Jim Keefe — following in the footsteps of classic “Flash Gordon” auteur Alex Raymond — stopped drawing it. Papers like the Eastside Voice run reprints of Keefe’s strips, which ran for several years.

So no danger that I’ve been missing new adventures of Flash, Dale and Ming the Merciless all these years.

So if “Flash Gordon” is still stuck on Mongo, what is in the comics lately?

A few weeks ago I acknowledged that I haven’t been reading newspaper comic strips regularly since the passing of “Calvin and Hobbes” and “The Far Side” and vowed to remedy that.

Well … I haven’t been reading the funny pages daily. But I thought I’d check out the Sunday edition today.

In “Peanuts” — a rerun, of course, since the passing of Charles Schulz a few years ago — takes a page from Calvin’s book by having Linus make a realistic snowman figure of Lucy. But instead of destroying it, Linus says he’ll get back at Lucy’s latest bullying by standing and watching the Lucy effigy “slowly melt away.” Yikes.

In “Garfield,” Jon insults Garfield’s bulge. Check. Garfield says talk about his waistline is making him hungry. Hmmm. Check, I guess.

In “Zits,” the teenage son in the household complains about having to take out the trash. Weirdly, however, the artists show the guy’s naked butt in the shower. Do we normally see naked butts in comics? Not since the great “Sgt. Snorkel Goes Streaking” incident of 1975, I would bet.

“Dilbert” looks at smartphone rage. It leads to a silly gag but it’s a good idea.

Jeff and Bil Keane’s “Family Circus” is a good execution of a simple idea. One of the kids — Billy? Jeffy? Honestly I can’t tell them apart — is seen giving a recitation of excuses about how he didn’t make his little brother cry.

More to come next time. Hopefully.