For the past few months, I've had a pair of men knock on my door wishing to speak with me about Jesus Christ. They're nice people.
The Mormon twins, I consider them.
They're young, maybe 19 or 20. Short blonde hair, cut by a woman in a kitchen. They were wearing white dress t-shirts and ties that I'm convinced are clip-ons. I assume their backpacks are just filled with more books and pamphlets. Maybe sandwiches for lunch.
So today they knocked on my door again, Book of Mormon in hand. They caught me off guard. The last time they were standing at my door I convinced them I was on my way out, apologized, then un-paused my video game. But this time I was eating lunch watching TV, and had no excuse readily available. I was caught with my pants down. Not literally, but that would been a decent way out of that.
So they invited themselves in the only way they know how; by kindly forcing you to.
They spoke to me about Jesus Christ, and the impact he had on their lives. They brought up their church, and the Book of Mormon.
Then came the inevitable.
--------------
"So are you very religious at all?"
--------------
Now my momma taught me well. I have a rehearsed answer I've used my whole life when asked this question. I guarantee every atheist has an answer they use whenever this happens. A smoke bomb, readily stored in the corner of their brain to be used at a moment's notice.
---------------
"....yes. I am."
---------------
I've lied to a lot of people, for a lot of reasons. Everybody has. Lying to them was something I felt necessary if I didn't want to devote the rest of my afternoon to have a conversation that would go nowhere. Plus how awkward is that? My atheism, to them, is a challenge. If not, it better be, for the sake of their jobs. They want to convince you to follow their path of righteousness, right? Finding an atheist is the ultimate challenge for them. Stepping up to the plate for what they'd believe to be God's ultimate test of their ability to convert the "misdirected". Leaving me alone could be easily understood as "giving up", and you don't want to anger the man upstairs, right?
So I lied. Made up a whole story about going to church my whole life. Don't worry, I made it believable. Told them I went all the time as a kid, but sort of stopped going in college. Didn't have time. But hey it's still important. I guess my parents were the religious ones. I mean, it's supposed to be but... you know... homework and all... and hey you know I try my best.
They smiled and nodded. Gave me a Book of Mormon. Invited me to their church. Asked for some water. Reminded me how life-changing Mormonism is. Left.
----------------
"Could I trouble you for a glass of water? It's a scorcher out here."
-Mad Men, Indian Summer
----------------
I think we have a knee-jerk reaction to associate lying with "being bad".
I've never thought lying in and of itself is wrong. I believe lying is wrong when used for personal gain, or for the degradation of another. But lying is the means to an ethical choice, and not the ends. Lying to benefit the greater good is possible. Lying for the sake of a clearly better outcome is possible. I lied to avoid a situation I believed would have the possibility of negative consequences for one or both of the parties. I lied to enter a situation I believe would end with a more positive environment. The opportunity for us all to move on with our lives, worry-free. Am I allowed to make this choice?
Growing up my family was not religious. My brothers and I had a perspective of religion very few have: from the outside. Without the conditioning church executes so effectively on children, my brothers and I saw religion for what it was, and there was no changing that. They're stories. Stories that make us feel better. Tell us that whatever we're doing is okay.
So... was that fair?
Lets look at what's fair.
Is it fair that I feel the need to lie to the face of strangers in my apartment?
Is it fair to them that I'm dishonest?
Is it fair that I'm bothered in the middle of the afternoon and asked to have a philosophical conversation?
Lets I spent the rest of my life going door to door asking people if they enjoy eating carrot cake. Ask them if they eat it. Tell them how much my life has changed since eating carrot cake. Give them a recipe I believe yields the perfect carrot cake.
So what's the discrepancy between these two scenarios? That carrot cake is trivial? That someone's opinion on cake has no lasting consequence on their live? After all, at the end of the day, who cares about carrot cake?
This is something many religious people don't understand about the atheist perspective.
Religion is carrot cake.
-Ryan
Friday, June 26, 2015
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
Opinion: We Need To Do Better.
I recently came across an article written by a medical student regarding her depression. In her article, Lindsey describes her own struggles, along with a growing relationship between medical students and depression. If you haven't, give it a read.
She detailed her depressive symptoms in the article: the usual suspects. After a conversation with her parents, her next step was to begin taking an SSRI. The medication seemed to help, and eventually allowed her to gain some structure and control back in her life. Her story ends on a high note, but sheds some light into depression's presence in medical students.
So lets talk about depression for a second.
Depression is the Justin Bieber of the mental illnesses. It gets the most attention, and subsequently the most turned cheeks. So many people think they know and understand it, so our society is quick to form biased, universal opinions about it.
Unfortunately, we oftentimes don't see depression in those suffering until we wish we had. Thus is the nature of the disease.
But this blog post isn't about society's view of depression. That's an easy target. Obviously, our society lacks insight into mental illness. Obviously, we need to fund agencies that promote awareness. Obviously, we need to encourage everyone suffering to speak up and find help. These are all important, and worthy of mentioning.
But I wanted to bring up a different point, and something few people are talking about.
In Lindsey's story, something interesting stuck out to me. She realized she was depressed, and did something about it. So she began medication.
What about therapy?
Turns out, it was a simple matter of time management. She's a medical student. Books to read. PowerPoint slides to stare at. Cadavers to pretend like they aren't freaking you out. People with barely enough time to fix themselves a PB&J certainly wont have time in their week to sit in a room and talk.
But this isn't a problem specific to medical students. As a children's case manager and therapist in training, I had countless clients leave due to time and money constraints.
"Sorry Ryan, I just can't afford the gas to drive my son to therapy every week."
"Sorry Ryan, I need to work more hours to keep my job, so I can't see you as much"
"Sorry Ryan, it's been a few months and nothing has happened. I think I'll just do the meds."
People just don't have time for therapy. If so many people in therapy are unable to find time for it, it's clear there are a vast number of people that are not in therapy that are unable to find time for it.
The only time this wasn't an issue with my clients? When I worked in a jail. My client had to be literally and lawfully detained for me to have a caseload of clients that were able to make it to every session.
Sure we can blame this on the bad job market. People have 9 to 5's. families to support. It makes sense that mental health would take a backseat when you're trying to get food on the table for your daughter that, oh my god, is totally going to need braces next year, and I need to make those cupcakes for her bake sale, and I can't forget that her soccer team needs that due paid by tomorrow and...
...hey. no wonder you're so stressed.
But for the sake of argument, lets pretend that excuse is just a rationalization made by those in the mental health field. and lets do something about it.
People needing therapy don't have time for it. Okay. How about instead of shrugging our shoulders we start asking ourselves what we can do.
How can we fix the inherent impracticality of therapy?
We should be looking into what keeps people in therapy and what doesn't. We should find ways to minimize the time it takes to see results, and maximize the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions. Fight insurance companies to allow clients more time in therapy. Explore new therapeutic methods that go beyond our offices. Create new techniques that can be utilized in a communal sense, rather than an individual one. Make what we do accessible.
It's not like we don't have enough mental health professionals. In fact it's the opposite. We have too many.
This field needs to spend more resources on finding ways to reach those in need. Finding the most effective form of therapy is important, but so is finding the best way to offer whatever therapy that is. It doesn't matter if you've invented a form of therapy that works 99% of the time if it's only going to be used on 1% of those that need it.
The demand is clearly there. It's our supply that's lacking. As therapists we are selling a product that is in desperate need of a Don Draper.
Lindsey's willingness to discuss her depression is a minority, when it shouldn't be. For our society to truly shift its perceptions of mental illness, we need to first establish an environment where those suffering from mental illness are willing to speak up. But at the same time, mental health professionals need to recognize that we are simply not helping enough people.
We can't expect society to trust us until we learn to do our jobs better.
Maybe then, I wouldn't have to spend my birthday at a funeral.
-Ryan
She detailed her depressive symptoms in the article: the usual suspects. After a conversation with her parents, her next step was to begin taking an SSRI. The medication seemed to help, and eventually allowed her to gain some structure and control back in her life. Her story ends on a high note, but sheds some light into depression's presence in medical students.
So lets talk about depression for a second.
Depression is the Justin Bieber of the mental illnesses. It gets the most attention, and subsequently the most turned cheeks. So many people think they know and understand it, so our society is quick to form biased, universal opinions about it.
Unfortunately, we oftentimes don't see depression in those suffering until we wish we had. Thus is the nature of the disease.
But this blog post isn't about society's view of depression. That's an easy target. Obviously, our society lacks insight into mental illness. Obviously, we need to fund agencies that promote awareness. Obviously, we need to encourage everyone suffering to speak up and find help. These are all important, and worthy of mentioning.
But I wanted to bring up a different point, and something few people are talking about.
In Lindsey's story, something interesting stuck out to me. She realized she was depressed, and did something about it. So she began medication.
What about therapy?
Turns out, it was a simple matter of time management. She's a medical student. Books to read. PowerPoint slides to stare at. Cadavers to pretend like they aren't freaking you out. People with barely enough time to fix themselves a PB&J certainly wont have time in their week to sit in a room and talk.
But this isn't a problem specific to medical students. As a children's case manager and therapist in training, I had countless clients leave due to time and money constraints.
"Sorry Ryan, I just can't afford the gas to drive my son to therapy every week."
"Sorry Ryan, I need to work more hours to keep my job, so I can't see you as much"
"Sorry Ryan, it's been a few months and nothing has happened. I think I'll just do the meds."
People just don't have time for therapy. If so many people in therapy are unable to find time for it, it's clear there are a vast number of people that are not in therapy that are unable to find time for it.
The only time this wasn't an issue with my clients? When I worked in a jail. My client had to be literally and lawfully detained for me to have a caseload of clients that were able to make it to every session.
Sure we can blame this on the bad job market. People have 9 to 5's. families to support. It makes sense that mental health would take a backseat when you're trying to get food on the table for your daughter that, oh my god, is totally going to need braces next year, and I need to make those cupcakes for her bake sale, and I can't forget that her soccer team needs that due paid by tomorrow and...
...hey. no wonder you're so stressed.
But for the sake of argument, lets pretend that excuse is just a rationalization made by those in the mental health field. and lets do something about it.
People needing therapy don't have time for it. Okay. How about instead of shrugging our shoulders we start asking ourselves what we can do.
How can we fix the inherent impracticality of therapy?
We should be looking into what keeps people in therapy and what doesn't. We should find ways to minimize the time it takes to see results, and maximize the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions. Fight insurance companies to allow clients more time in therapy. Explore new therapeutic methods that go beyond our offices. Create new techniques that can be utilized in a communal sense, rather than an individual one. Make what we do accessible.
It's not like we don't have enough mental health professionals. In fact it's the opposite. We have too many.
This field needs to spend more resources on finding ways to reach those in need. Finding the most effective form of therapy is important, but so is finding the best way to offer whatever therapy that is. It doesn't matter if you've invented a form of therapy that works 99% of the time if it's only going to be used on 1% of those that need it.
The demand is clearly there. It's our supply that's lacking. As therapists we are selling a product that is in desperate need of a Don Draper.
Lindsey's willingness to discuss her depression is a minority, when it shouldn't be. For our society to truly shift its perceptions of mental illness, we need to first establish an environment where those suffering from mental illness are willing to speak up. But at the same time, mental health professionals need to recognize that we are simply not helping enough people.
We can't expect society to trust us until we learn to do our jobs better.
Maybe then, I wouldn't have to spend my birthday at a funeral.
-Ryan
Monday, June 22, 2015
leaving home.
I'm moving to California.
-------------------
"Home is where I want to be, but I guess I'm already there."
-------------------
-Ryan
Monday, June 8, 2015
clearly a big fan of Mad Men.
I've taken a break from writing shorts, and have spent most of my time devoted to two TV pilots. Screencraft is accepting TV pilots for consideration this month, and my plan is to submit both of them by the deadline.
TV pilots are alien to me. They have a heavy focus on character development, something you commonly don't rely on with shorts. Shorts are about telling a compelling story in as quick of time frame as possible. I've struggled to keep myself from doing this.
One pilot is an adaptation of a feature I wrote about two years ago. I knew when I wrote it then, the concept was more of an established universe than anything else. It took some convincing from my friend Yvonne Saenz to turn it into a TV season.
The other pilot is a lot more ambitious. A year ago, I placed 5th in a short screenplay competition with a 12 page screenplay about a family trying to survive in a post-apocalyptic world. I wanted to turn the short into a feature, but decided instead to attempt a re-write to turn the script into a spin-off of The Walking Dead franchise.
I am of the opinion that a writer's confidence can make or break their career.
Drake has this saying he uses in his songs, "in my feelings". He uses it to describe when he feels emotional, and believes that his actions and beliefs are being influenced by what he is feeling. I don't know why, but that always stuck with me. I consider it a lot while I'm writing.
I don't believe emotional writing is good writing when it comes to screenplays. I know that art typically benefits when it is derived from things like emotion. I'm not saying emotional stories are uninteresting. But, what's compelling to you may not be compelling to others. As a screenwriter, it's important to recognize when you've crossed the threshold between telling a compelling story, and telling a story you find compelling.
I see it a lot when I read other screenplays from amateur writers in /r/readmyscript. You feel the emotion the writer is clearly tapping. The break-up they're trying to get over. Car crash they have nightmares about. But that doesn't mean the reader is feeling a similar emotion. Even though emotions are the same to everyone, experiences are individual. Reliving your moments wont compel the reader. It's not their experience. But when you can tell a story that ignite those experiences...
---------------------
"The pain from an old wound"
----------------------
...the reader can feel their emotion.
----------------------
"It's a twinge in your heart. Far more powerful than memory alone."
----------------------
The best stories don't provide you with emotion, they make you tap into your own.
-Ryan
TV pilots are alien to me. They have a heavy focus on character development, something you commonly don't rely on with shorts. Shorts are about telling a compelling story in as quick of time frame as possible. I've struggled to keep myself from doing this.
One pilot is an adaptation of a feature I wrote about two years ago. I knew when I wrote it then, the concept was more of an established universe than anything else. It took some convincing from my friend Yvonne Saenz to turn it into a TV season.
The other pilot is a lot more ambitious. A year ago, I placed 5th in a short screenplay competition with a 12 page screenplay about a family trying to survive in a post-apocalyptic world. I wanted to turn the short into a feature, but decided instead to attempt a re-write to turn the script into a spin-off of The Walking Dead franchise.
I am of the opinion that a writer's confidence can make or break their career.
Drake has this saying he uses in his songs, "in my feelings". He uses it to describe when he feels emotional, and believes that his actions and beliefs are being influenced by what he is feeling. I don't know why, but that always stuck with me. I consider it a lot while I'm writing.
I don't believe emotional writing is good writing when it comes to screenplays. I know that art typically benefits when it is derived from things like emotion. I'm not saying emotional stories are uninteresting. But, what's compelling to you may not be compelling to others. As a screenwriter, it's important to recognize when you've crossed the threshold between telling a compelling story, and telling a story you find compelling.
I see it a lot when I read other screenplays from amateur writers in /r/readmyscript. You feel the emotion the writer is clearly tapping. The break-up they're trying to get over. Car crash they have nightmares about. But that doesn't mean the reader is feeling a similar emotion. Even though emotions are the same to everyone, experiences are individual. Reliving your moments wont compel the reader. It's not their experience. But when you can tell a story that ignite those experiences...
---------------------
"The pain from an old wound"
----------------------
...the reader can feel their emotion.
----------------------
"It's a twinge in your heart. Far more powerful than memory alone."
----------------------
The best stories don't provide you with emotion, they make you tap into your own.
-Ryan
Tuesday, June 2, 2015
opinion on The Walking Dead
Over the course of several years, I have spent a lot of time learning about story writing, screenwriting, and what it means to tell a good story. Because of this, I like to think I have a somewhat reliable opinion when it comes to that sort of thing.
Now...
I rarely share my blog on Facebook, but this post reflected an opinion I believe would benefit from being shared to others.
So here it is.
The Walking Dead TV show is an accurate reflection of what is wrong with modern storytelling.
First, let me say I am a HUGE fan of The Walking Dead. If you don't think so, I encourage you to read my most recent blog post about how I fell in love with the graphic novel. And I would also encourage anyone to read it (or play the video game by TellTale).
It's not like the show is lacking available content. The writers of the show literally have pages of interesting story arcs at their disposal. But they're pigeonholed by AMC to write content that makes the most money, not tell the best story. In a world where quality storytelling should be the variable that's maximized, money is.
The graphic novel is thick and dense with story arcs and character development. Constantly moving from environment to environment, characters growing and changing from each experience. By the time you settle into a place of comfort with each character, Robert Kirkman rips you out, tells you everything sucks, and forces you to get comfortable again. He wants you to stay on your toes, totally oblivious to what's going to happen next. Exactly how the characters feel in the story.
The show doesn't do this at all. It refuses to flush out the characters in the book, insisting on keeping characters two-dimensional for the sake of plot devices. It skips out key points in the book that are too expensive, or run the risk of being too inappropriate for the average viewer.
Below are 3 examples:
1. The Farm
In The Walking Dead TV show, the cast is on a farm for the entirety of season 2. In the book, they are only on the farm from issues 10 to 12 (of a currently published 150). They leave the farm almost as soon as they get on it.
Why? Because the farm is boring. And Robert Kirkman knew that. The farm is the kind of place a story teller does NOT want their characters. No drama to drive the story. No reasons for characters to interact.
So why did they stay on the farm in the show? To save money. AMC gave the second season production such a small budget that the writers were forced to cut every corner, and couldn't afford to shoot anywhere besides a farm.
2. The relationship between Michonne and The Governor.
In the show, Michonne hides in the Governor's room, and gets into a squabble with him that results in the Governor losing an eye. (it's never really explained why she felt the need to go there in the first place).
In the graphic novel? Oh man. (graphic novel prison arc spoilers next paragraph!)
After getting imprisoned, raped, and tortured by the Governor, Michonne escapes and, instead of running away, patiently waits in the Governor's room. She proceeds to torture him in disgusting fashion. Scooping out his eyeball with a spoon, sawing off his entire arm, ripping out fingernails one at a time. You name it.
And I loved it. Because this scene is a perfect representation of how the women in this universe behave: like everyone else. Everything Michonne and Andrea do in the graphic novel is entirely dependent on their character, and never their gender. Their characters could be replaced with men and do everything the same, and you couldn't tell the difference. To me, that's an impressive quality that the graphic novel possesses, and something the show completely missed.
Speaking of...
3. Andrea
Andrea in the graphic novel is unrecognizable to the Andrea in the show. A cool-headed, powerful leader of a community, She struggles through pain, loss, and a nasty scar on her face.
The show turned Andrea into a love interest to the Governor. Why? Because the show didn't have one. The show wasn't filling the "cute girls in underwear whining about boy trouble" quota AMC was forcing on the show to maximize viewership. At the time, season 3 was not peaking in views like the previous season, and needed a way to attract more males. This resulted in Andrea's character getting boiled down to scenes of her naked under covers, and complaining about her struggling relationships. AMC was aware of the character Andrea becomes, and sacrificed her so that more people will tune in.
To the show's credit, they did a decent job establishing Glenn and Maggie's relationship, and had the first Asian/White kiss ever on television. They also did a a decent job with Aaron and Eric's relationship, not turning them into just "the gay couple" that the audience giggles at.
As the consumers of their product, we need to demand more. When AMC bought The Walking Dead they had an opportunity to either make money, or tell a compelling story. Why aren't we as viewers, the ones screwed by their decision, angry about this? Why are we settling for mediocre storytelling?
Maybe it's just that not many people have read the graphic novel in comparison to the show. I think to better understand the faults in the TV show, you need to read the book or play the Telltale game. But I think there's a deeper issue here that comes to light. The show falls flat, and the blame should clearly fall onto AMC. But why is no one talking about this?
Why did The Talking Dead spend a month promoting the terrible Activision Walking Dead: Survival Instict game, and never even mentioned the TellTale game winning game of the year? Why are we joking about riots if Daryl dies, but not blinking an eye at the horrible Hyundai Tucson placements?
I think awareness is key, and I hope more people recognize the flaws.
For more information, I encourage you to watch the 4 part YMS video review of The Walking Dead. It discusses a lot of things I didn't have the time for in this blog.
Thanks for reading.
-Ryan
Now...
I rarely share my blog on Facebook, but this post reflected an opinion I believe would benefit from being shared to others.
So here it is.
The Walking Dead TV show is an accurate reflection of what is wrong with modern storytelling.
First, let me say I am a HUGE fan of The Walking Dead. If you don't think so, I encourage you to read my most recent blog post about how I fell in love with the graphic novel. And I would also encourage anyone to read it (or play the video game by TellTale).
It's not like the show is lacking available content. The writers of the show literally have pages of interesting story arcs at their disposal. But they're pigeonholed by AMC to write content that makes the most money, not tell the best story. In a world where quality storytelling should be the variable that's maximized, money is.
The graphic novel is thick and dense with story arcs and character development. Constantly moving from environment to environment, characters growing and changing from each experience. By the time you settle into a place of comfort with each character, Robert Kirkman rips you out, tells you everything sucks, and forces you to get comfortable again. He wants you to stay on your toes, totally oblivious to what's going to happen next. Exactly how the characters feel in the story.
The show doesn't do this at all. It refuses to flush out the characters in the book, insisting on keeping characters two-dimensional for the sake of plot devices. It skips out key points in the book that are too expensive, or run the risk of being too inappropriate for the average viewer.
Below are 3 examples:
1. The Farm
In The Walking Dead TV show, the cast is on a farm for the entirety of season 2. In the book, they are only on the farm from issues 10 to 12 (of a currently published 150). They leave the farm almost as soon as they get on it.
Why? Because the farm is boring. And Robert Kirkman knew that. The farm is the kind of place a story teller does NOT want their characters. No drama to drive the story. No reasons for characters to interact.
So why did they stay on the farm in the show? To save money. AMC gave the second season production such a small budget that the writers were forced to cut every corner, and couldn't afford to shoot anywhere besides a farm.
2. The relationship between Michonne and The Governor.
In the show, Michonne hides in the Governor's room, and gets into a squabble with him that results in the Governor losing an eye. (it's never really explained why she felt the need to go there in the first place).
In the graphic novel? Oh man. (graphic novel prison arc spoilers next paragraph!)
After getting imprisoned, raped, and tortured by the Governor, Michonne escapes and, instead of running away, patiently waits in the Governor's room. She proceeds to torture him in disgusting fashion. Scooping out his eyeball with a spoon, sawing off his entire arm, ripping out fingernails one at a time. You name it.
And I loved it. Because this scene is a perfect representation of how the women in this universe behave: like everyone else. Everything Michonne and Andrea do in the graphic novel is entirely dependent on their character, and never their gender. Their characters could be replaced with men and do everything the same, and you couldn't tell the difference. To me, that's an impressive quality that the graphic novel possesses, and something the show completely missed.
Speaking of...
3. Andrea
Andrea in the graphic novel is unrecognizable to the Andrea in the show. A cool-headed, powerful leader of a community, She struggles through pain, loss, and a nasty scar on her face.
The show turned Andrea into a love interest to the Governor. Why? Because the show didn't have one. The show wasn't filling the "cute girls in underwear whining about boy trouble" quota AMC was forcing on the show to maximize viewership. At the time, season 3 was not peaking in views like the previous season, and needed a way to attract more males. This resulted in Andrea's character getting boiled down to scenes of her naked under covers, and complaining about her struggling relationships. AMC was aware of the character Andrea becomes, and sacrificed her so that more people will tune in.
To the show's credit, they did a decent job establishing Glenn and Maggie's relationship, and had the first Asian/White kiss ever on television. They also did a a decent job with Aaron and Eric's relationship, not turning them into just "the gay couple" that the audience giggles at.
As the consumers of their product, we need to demand more. When AMC bought The Walking Dead they had an opportunity to either make money, or tell a compelling story. Why aren't we as viewers, the ones screwed by their decision, angry about this? Why are we settling for mediocre storytelling?
Maybe it's just that not many people have read the graphic novel in comparison to the show. I think to better understand the faults in the TV show, you need to read the book or play the Telltale game. But I think there's a deeper issue here that comes to light. The show falls flat, and the blame should clearly fall onto AMC. But why is no one talking about this?
Why did The Talking Dead spend a month promoting the terrible Activision Walking Dead: Survival Instict game, and never even mentioned the TellTale game winning game of the year? Why are we joking about riots if Daryl dies, but not blinking an eye at the horrible Hyundai Tucson placements?
I think awareness is key, and I hope more people recognize the flaws.
For more information, I encourage you to watch the 4 part YMS video review of The Walking Dead. It discusses a lot of things I didn't have the time for in this blog.
Thanks for reading.
-Ryan
a big fan of The Walking Dead
I'm a huge fan of The Walking Dead. I have been for a very long time. I started reading the graphic novels back in 2008. Jose Artiaga, a friend that lived in my scholarship hall with me, decided that our bathrooms needed reading material and stacked all of the books in a stall one day.
The best way for me to tell you how much I loved the graphic novel is with a confession. I hate reading. The act of reading has always been boring. I was never stimulated by the words. I spark-noted every single book in my high school and college career (If you're reading this, apologies to Ms. Cigler and Dr. Klayder).
But I was hooked on The Walking Dead. I binge read the entire prison story line in one night. I loved everything about it. Constantly pressured Jose to buy the newest compendiums. Scavenged the internet for any information on more material.
Obviously, I was excited when I learned that there were rumors of The Walking Dead being turned into a movie. I was even more excited when I learned that Frank Darabont would be directing that movie. I was apathetic when I learned that AMC had bought exclusive rights to the movie, and turned it into a 6 episode season. But nonetheless, it premiered on October 31 2010, and became one of the biggest cable TV shows ever.
And hey, Season 1 was pretty good. Not great, but for the budget, it was a good start.
For 2 years I was in love with this story line so few people knew about. And overnight,, the whole world just... knew about it. It lost it's significance. But hey, whatever. I got what I wanted!
But then Season 2 was announced. And AMC refused to give Frank Darabont a bigger budget (even though the show single-handedly saved the network). Then AMC fired Frank Darabont after he complained, and replaced him with Glen Mazzara, a terrible director. Then the show became terrible.
It reminds me of the second episode of Black Mirror, 15 Million Credits. This young, talented woman tries to sing to the world, and instead is forced to slab on make-up and is objectified by the world for profit. To me, and to many other graphic novel readers, it pains us to see what happened to The Walking Dead. This amazing story was picked from obscurity, and it's talents are completely wasted, only to be used to promote a network for money, and sell Hyundai Tucsons.
And with popularity comes the double-edged sword. Suddenly everyone had an opinion on The Walking Dead. Some loved it for the wrong reasons. Some called it over-rated for the right reasons. But it pained me to see something I cherished so much become this.
Thankfully, there are alternatives. TellTale Games made an interactive video game set in The Walking Dead universe that is absolutely superb. Both seasons of the game are incredible, and I recommend anyone to check them out. Nothing that the TV show does wrong (and everything that the graphic novel does right) is in this game.
For more information, I highly recommend the YMS review of The Walking Dead. YMS (short for Your Movie Sucks) is a movie and television reviewer, and I personally think he does an excellent, albeit vulgar, job reviewing things. He has a 4-part video review of season 1 and 2 of The Walking Dead, and talks about how overrated the show is. Despite being a fan of the show, I agree with nearly all of his points. I also appreciate that he takes the time to discuss the issues with the show beyond the content, criticizing AMC for their shady, under-the-table dealings that got Frank Darabont fired. He even accuses AMC of actions that could lead to a possible lawsuit, and suspiciously after this review was uploaded, Frank Darabont's lawyer announced that he was suing AMC for damages. Go Frank.
The best way for me to tell you how much I loved the graphic novel is with a confession. I hate reading. The act of reading has always been boring. I was never stimulated by the words. I spark-noted every single book in my high school and college career (If you're reading this, apologies to Ms. Cigler and Dr. Klayder).
But I was hooked on The Walking Dead. I binge read the entire prison story line in one night. I loved everything about it. Constantly pressured Jose to buy the newest compendiums. Scavenged the internet for any information on more material.
Obviously, I was excited when I learned that there were rumors of The Walking Dead being turned into a movie. I was even more excited when I learned that Frank Darabont would be directing that movie. I was apathetic when I learned that AMC had bought exclusive rights to the movie, and turned it into a 6 episode season. But nonetheless, it premiered on October 31 2010, and became one of the biggest cable TV shows ever.
And hey, Season 1 was pretty good. Not great, but for the budget, it was a good start.
For 2 years I was in love with this story line so few people knew about. And overnight,, the whole world just... knew about it. It lost it's significance. But hey, whatever. I got what I wanted!
But then Season 2 was announced. And AMC refused to give Frank Darabont a bigger budget (even though the show single-handedly saved the network). Then AMC fired Frank Darabont after he complained, and replaced him with Glen Mazzara, a terrible director. Then the show became terrible.
It reminds me of the second episode of Black Mirror, 15 Million Credits. This young, talented woman tries to sing to the world, and instead is forced to slab on make-up and is objectified by the world for profit. To me, and to many other graphic novel readers, it pains us to see what happened to The Walking Dead. This amazing story was picked from obscurity, and it's talents are completely wasted, only to be used to promote a network for money, and sell Hyundai Tucsons.
And with popularity comes the double-edged sword. Suddenly everyone had an opinion on The Walking Dead. Some loved it for the wrong reasons. Some called it over-rated for the right reasons. But it pained me to see something I cherished so much become this.
Thankfully, there are alternatives. TellTale Games made an interactive video game set in The Walking Dead universe that is absolutely superb. Both seasons of the game are incredible, and I recommend anyone to check them out. Nothing that the TV show does wrong (and everything that the graphic novel does right) is in this game.
For more information, I highly recommend the YMS review of The Walking Dead. YMS (short for Your Movie Sucks) is a movie and television reviewer, and I personally think he does an excellent, albeit vulgar, job reviewing things. He has a 4-part video review of season 1 and 2 of The Walking Dead, and talks about how overrated the show is. Despite being a fan of the show, I agree with nearly all of his points. I also appreciate that he takes the time to discuss the issues with the show beyond the content, criticizing AMC for their shady, under-the-table dealings that got Frank Darabont fired. He even accuses AMC of actions that could lead to a possible lawsuit, and suspiciously after this review was uploaded, Frank Darabont's lawyer announced that he was suing AMC for damages. Go Frank.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)