A Few Thoughts on Frank Miller

You know Frank Miller? Guy who wrote and directed The Spirit, who gave us the graphic novels that Sin City and 300? A guy basically known for creating stories full of hyper-machismo, and not a whole lot else? Well, in the 1980s, he was right up there with Alan Moore as one of the pioneers of modern comics. 

He was applying mature themes and storylines to the superhero genre, asking the question "What would someone who put on tights and beat people up really be like?".  He turned Daredevil, a title on the brink of cancellation, into one of the hottest selling books of the era and elevated DD to the status of an A-list Marvel hero, thanks to his stylish, film-noir influenced take on the character.

Even more famously, Miller went on to write and draw the classic graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns, a dystopian future look at the Batman, filled with political satire and sensitive characterization - as well as crowd-pleasing action. He followed this up with another landmark Batman comic Batman: Year One, which re-examined and modernized the character's origins. (Year One was a big influence on Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins.) Then he went back to Marvel to pen another classic Daredevil comic, the landmark "Born Again" storyline.

Miller then struck out into the world of creator-owned comics, most notably his stylish "hyper-noir" comic series Sin City, which is pretty much the apotheosis of Miller's style, both his style of writing and his artistic style, which had both been continually evolving since the 1980s.

A cover to Sin City, featuring the iconic character of Marv, by Frank Miller. 

Arguably, he's been on a downward spiral ever since, and I'd argue its because he's basically forgotten how to write anything EXCEPT Sin City. There are a couple of stylistic tics that have always been present in Frank Miller's work:

- the protagonist is a tough-talkin guy in a trenchcoat (or a cape). This character is usually a loner or an outcast or a social misfit. Often, said protagonist is cheerfully insane and violent, but kind of loveable anyway. Marv, from Sin City is a perfect example, as is Batman

 - the women are 

                      a) hyper-sexualized femmes fatales who use their feminine wiles to achieve their aims. They're cast as just as tough as the men in the story, often skilled martial artists, or out and out psychos. HOWEVER, they still need rescuing, by and large. And these women are often literally (or figuratively) whores. Examples include Seline Kyle in Batman: Year One, Elektra, and every Oldtown girl in Sin City, including Gail.
                     
                      b) saints. Sometimes literally. Women who are entirely perfect and flawless, a kind of Madonna figure. Daredevil's mother and Bruce Wayne's mother are the most prominent examples.

 - the setting. A grim, dark urban hellhole - the worst excesses of city life magnified. Crime and corruption are rampant. It's never sunny or cheerful - in fact, it's usually raining. Gotham and Sin City spring to mind.

 - the dialogue is sparse, terse and full of what can only be termed machismo.  Stylization, repetition and hyperbole are the order of the day.

Now, by no means am I suggesting that any of these qualities necessarily make Frank Miller a bad writer. Because I actually think that his stuff from the 1980s holds up really well, and taken in the context of what he's trying to achieve, so does Sin City. But that's because his work from the eighties has substance to compliment Frank Miller's style. Miller creates complicated, ambiguous and interesting heroes, and his prose often has a reverent mythic quality. Indeed, Miller is well known for treating superheroes as living modern myths, and in that context, the hyperbolic quality of his prose makes a lot of sense.

It seems to me that in the last fifteen years or so, the intelligent, literary qualities of Miller's work have largely evaporated, leaving behind … what? A hyper-masculine, reactionary, misogynist body of work, pretty much devoid of real artistic merit.

As an example, I'll compare Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns with his much more recent (and still-unfinished series) All Star Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder.

The Dark Knight Returns - cover to the collected edition from the 1980s by Frank Miller.


The Dark Knight Returns

It's theme remains groundbreaking - Cold War paranoia doesn't stop being relevant just because the Cold War's over. Otherwise, you might as well say the same of Watchmen. Furthermore, the central theme of Batman's journey - a man struggling to reconcile his past with the present, an old man trying to recapture his days of glory, an old soldier seeking a glorious death, the last stand of a once-mighty hero - those things never go out of style. Indeed, this is Frank Miller's attempt to craft a worthy end to Batman, in the vein of King Arthur's climactic battle with Mordred, or an elderly Robin Hood firing one last arrow into the Sherwood Forest to mark the site of his grave. These themes are ever present, woven into the super-heroic narrative.

In terms of plot, the four acts could not be more skillfully paced and structured:

Act 1: We establish the future-Gotham, and the state of our main players. The first chapter not only reflects the incurability of evil, but also the inevitable return of Bruce Wayne's own obsessive-compulsive nature.  One of the things I love best about DKR is the interesting look at Batman's psychology. Miller's Batman is not necessarily a hero because he wants to be - but because he is compelled to be. Seeing his parents die drove him a little bit nuts, and the way he copes is by dressing up as Dracula and beating the crap out of people. Without that release, he has no direction and no purpose. So an elderly Bruce Wayne simply can't stay retired - and his return to prowling the rooftops of Gotham coincides with the resurrection of one of his deadliest adversaries - who also struggles with a split personality he cannot control.

Act 2: In this, we see the establishment of what might be the new 'status quo' of the DKR world - if it were not doomed to eventual destruction by the intervention of Superman. Batman encounters a new menace - one for which he is not wholly prepared - and he has to adapt his methods to cope. He's not a young man anymore - but he's still Batman. This chapter also fleshes out the supporting cast (Jim Gordon, Robin, Alfred) and the larger political environment Batman finds himself in. Here Miller satirizes the state of the media in the 1980s (and it's still a pretty effective satire of the left/right political discourse in the 21st century). The simpering left-wing kooks blame Batman for unleashing all these aberrant personalities, and the ravening right-wing nut bars use Batman to push their own bigoted agendas. Both sides fail to understand the fine line Batman walks, somewhere between the two.

Act 3: Batman confronts his deadliest nemesis for the last time, and considers doing what he's wanted to do his whole life - and he resists. The psychotic urging of the 'batman persona' doesn't over come Bruce Wayne, the man, the hero. The rising action of the cops pursuit of the vigilante who is bringing real ustice to their nice, semi-fascist, ordered world - this is but prologue to the big showdown in ACT 4.

Act 4:

Basically, the Supes/Bats showdown is an ideological war. America (and humanity in general) cannot deal with a hero who demands REAL social change, frightening social change, lasting social change. So they send in their mascot to deal with the scary man who wants to change them. 

Batman's quest for a meaningful death ends in triumph, and Bruce Wayne, cleansed of his darker impulses, can plan for a new and brighter future. 

Frank Miller's panel layouts were revolutionary at the time, and I feel they have a lot to reccomend them in terms of pacing and mood. His imagery-choices are iconic and impressive, though some might say his skill at rendering them is lacking. I don't know that I agree - but i concede that Frank Miller's pencils are not to everyone's taste. Still, his stark style, which emphasized light and shadow, was certainly influential, and you can see it evolve over the course of 4 books. 

As for his dialogue - I might concede, perhaps, that some of his lines read awkwardly, but he also has moments of sheer pulpy brilliance. His style vacillates between mythic and awe-inspiring and the kind of hard-bitten teeth-grinding one-liners you'd find in a pulp dime novel. However, these stylistic flourishes are tempered by Miller's interest in characterization and (for him, at least) psychological subtlety. Some of my favourite lines ever written for Batman appear in The Dark Knight Returns. And so much of Miller's characterization of Batman (and the other players) through his dialogue was instrumental in defining those characters for generations of readers to come.

Here's a sample - compare it with the ones below from All Star Batman. 

Batman, remembering the gigantic, primal bat he encountered as a little boy: "When you came for me in the cave I was just six years old. You were ancient, nothing could kill you, but the war it didn't begin then. No it was two years later, when her necklace caught on his wrist, when he shoved his pistol to her jaw and pulled the trigger. And everything my mother was struck the pavement as a bloody wad." 

Batman, on coming out of retirement: This should be agony. I should be a mass of aching muscle — broken, spent, unable to move. And, were I an older man, I surely would... But I'm a man of 30 — of 20 again. The rain on my chest is a baptism. I'm born again.

The Joker's internal monologue: They could put me in a helicopter and fly me up into the air and line up the bodies head to toe on the ground in delightful geometric patterns like an endless June Taylor dancers routine — And it would never be enough. ... No, I don't keep count. But you do. And I love you for it.

Kid: Batman! He's getting away--get up. You got to kick his--
Batman: Watch... Watch your language, son.

Cover to the first issue of All Star Batman and Robin, The Boy Wonder.

All Star Batman and Robin, The Boy Wonder

First of all, where as Dark Knight Returns is rich with thematic significance, All Star Batman is ... not. It's a retelling of Robin's origin, and at the same time, the origins of Batman meeting a bunch of other superheroes. But there doesn't seem to be any underlying theme ... at all.

 The plot, such as it is, moves at such a glacial pace that in 9 issues, there is no significant advancement of it, really. The only conflict that is really set up at all, that one might assume will be the thrust of the narrative, is the death of Dick Grayson's parents, and Batman's attempt to solve their murder. However,  there is no sense that this is a focus of the characters or the plot - when any progress is made on this 'case' it feels like a coincidence, not something that arises out of the actions of the characters. 

As for the characters: Most of them are superfluous. Batman often feels like a bit player in his own book (especially in, say, issue 3, which focuses entirely on Black Canary). Furthermore, these characters act so out of character as to be characterized as insane. 

The prime example is Batman. In DKR, Batman is a flawed social outcast wrestling with his inner demons. In All Star Batman, he's a stubbly, cop-hating, child-smacking maniac. He's Marv in a Batman suit. He talks in a string of tough-guy cliches, and his idea of crime-fighting seems to be 'beating people up who get in my way." He seems to hate everyone around him, even the boy he rescues. He also refers to himself, without irony, as The Goddamn Batman. 

This alien and frankly, disturbing characterization of Batman might make sense if we assume that Robin (a.k.a. Dick Grayson) is meant to be our POV character. Maybe this is how Batman first seemed to the naive ten year old. But that assumption doesn't hold water, because Dick Grayson isn't characterized in any more appealing a manner. He's a pain in the ass, frankly. He's entirely unsympathetic - he spends the whole book deriding everything in it as lame, or queer.   

Other examples of woefully mis-characterized characters include: the bimbo-ish Vicki Vale (who spends most of her time swooning, parading around in her underwear, or both), the man-hating Wonder-Woman, the dumb-as-a-sack-of-hammers Green Lantern, and the Irish sex-kitten Black Canary.

Another major problem is the dialogue and narration. It has Miller's stylistic flair for hyperbole and 'grittiness' - but without any kind of filter based on who's saying it, or whether it's appropriate to the story. And believe me, most of it isn't. In no way is it tempered by subtlety or a larger sense of the mythic.

 And everyone has an annoying habit of repeating what they just said. Five different times. In other words, what comes out of everyone's mouth is Sin City Speak. Which isn't really appropriate for ANY of the characters in the book. To give you an idea what I mean:

Batman, by way of introduction: "What are you, dense? Are you retarded or something? Who the hell do you think I am? I'm the goddamn Batman."

Batman, ruminating on his make-out session with Black Canary after they've beaten up some thugs: "We keep the masks on. It's better that way."

Wonder Woman, to a male passer-by: "Out of my way, sperm-bank."

The Joker: "Gotham's an old, used up whore. But she's beautiful when she cries. I love her only when she cries." 

Dick Grayson: So what do you call this thing, anyway?
Batman: The Batmobile.
Dick Grayson: That is so totally queer.
Batman: Shut up.

Now compare those lines to the ones from DKR. See what I mean? Miller's thrown any sense of characterization or, God help us, coherency, out the window. 

(A word on the art in All-Star Batman - it's gorgeous. Jim Lee is a superb superhero artist, and he's never better than when he's drawing Batman. it's a real shame that his talents are wasted on such a complete train-wreck of a comic.)

In other words (or other pictures, which are apparently worth a thousand words) Frank Miller's rendition of Batman went from this:

to this:

Now some people claim that this incarnation of Batman is meant to be a self-parody, or a satire - but when you compare it to Frank Miller's creative output of the last couple of years, it's really similar. Which could mean that Frank Miller has been doing nothing but parodying himself in films like The Spirit, and comics like the forthcoming Holy Terror (which was originally intended to feature Batman fighting Al Qaeda) ... or as other people believe, Frank Miller has gone the way of  George Lucas. 

Either he's become deeply greedy, and is making things just because he knows people will buy them, and he's simply no longer invested or interested in telling compelling, well-crafted stories ... or, he's actually gone insane. This debate has been going on for some time in the fan community, and I don't expect it will stop any time soon. 

I'm not really sure where I stand. But I do think it's a shame that one of my favourite comic creators, who really made me appreciate the craftsmanship and passion and pure creative energy that goes into creating a comic, who made me look at my favourite fictional character in a whole new light ... I think it's a shame that now a great many people think he's a hack, and that I, personally, haven't been able to enjoy anything he's written since Sin City. 

Obviously, all this is just my opinionated ruminating. I'm sure many of you out there disagree. So please, feel free to share in the comments section!

The Glamorous World of Showbiz - Part 2

And I did. Tuesday morning, up at 4:00, cab at 4:30 to get the shuttle to set at 5:30, dozing all the way to Hamilton for my 6:30 call time, and my first shot was at 8:00.

Tuesday was a sunny day, not a cloud to be seen. And I was doing pretty much the same thing I had done yesterday morning. They were filming the same morning scene as yesterday, the scene with the hotdog vendor - only this time, the series lead was on set (he hadn't been yesterday). The scene suddenly made more sense to me - he went into the bank and was taken hostage, and the other paramedic was his partner, buying a hotdog while his buddy gets involved in, like, crime!

So once again, I was walking down the street, or standing around in the park, or fake chatting with my fellow background people. (They don't want you to really talk unless you're far away from the mike - the mikes can pick up such ambient sound). Today, at least, we had far more frequent breaks in holding - but they were of much shorter duration.

One part of the whole process that I found a bit bemusing is that, on both days, for all the shots, they had a series of hoses set up to spray steam into the air. Now, one doesn't really see steam shooting out of the ground. We don't have the same sewer ventilation systems that, say, New York City has. The only time one might actually see smoke or steam rising out of the ground is in the dead of winter. Ah well - we'll just chalk it up to movie magic.

The most exciting part of the shoot - I missed. They blew up a van! (There was a bomb in it). I didn't even hear the explosion - but I spent the rest of the day reacting to it, in various parts of the crowd. This involved a lot of fake flinching, fake being blown back, fake reeling and clutching my ears.

I feel like I really committed to my performance.

They filmed this sequence from several different angles, so there was a great deal of re-deploying the cameras, and the extras, to make sure we were in the shot. This also accounted for the back and forth from holding to the set, and back.

After they'd filmed all they wanted to of the explosion, they filmed the aftermath scenes. Which was pretty cool, because they'd done up the van with fake burn scoring - and the pyrotechnicians had set up a system to fill the windows of the van with fire. And for a few shots, fake chunks of debris were put on the ground and set alight. But between takes, all this stuff on fire had to be doused.

Another oddity is, even though the shoot on Monday had been meant to simulate a rain-free day, it had rained. So on Tuesday, they had guys spraying the ground with hoses to make it look like it had rained! Presumably for the purposes of continuity. Irony, yo.

At one point, the main actors were filming a scene where one of the crooks is taken away in a stretcher. I was placed in background, directly behind the actors, facing the camera - and, as it happened, the lead. And I'm afraid I may have ruined a take when I caught his eye. For whatever reason, when I saw he was looking at me, I smiled - and he corpsed (which is when an actor smiles or breaks character during a scene). Woops! Then again, his character seemed a pretty genial guy, so maybe I didn't ... who knows. Anyway, that's my closest brush with TV stardom.

During the filming of the same scene, at least one more take was ruined. I couldn't hear what was being said, but everyone's expressions indicated the scene carried some serious dramatic heft - and then Bob Marley's "One Love" came blaring from the restaurant behind us. The actors exchanged some bemused smiles, and the director, looking understandably irritated, shouted "cut". This was towards the end of the day, and he was losing daylight.

Anyway, eventually "That's a wrap" was called. Once again, the mad line up to get our sign-in slips filled in. I made my way to the transport van. This time, it was jam packed with crew needing a ride back home to Toronto - perhaps the location in Hamilton was wrapped? I never did find out.

So long story short, I actually quite enjoyed my time on set. I was bone tired, true, and making my way out to Hamilton was a pain, but I met some neat individuals, nearly finished reading a novel, and got to learn a bit more about how a film set works. And I got paid for it. So that's a win.

I'm shooting something else, another TV show, on Friday. We'll see how that goes.

The Glamorous World of Showbiz - Part 1

So, I know I said I wouldn't be doing this often ... but today's post is about my experience over the last two days, in which I was working as a 'background artist' ... or as most people call them ... an extra.

I only moved back to Toronto recently, and I decided I needed a means of gainful employment while I'm here. Can't live in the parents' basement forever, even if I legitimately am composing a novel. Or a screenplay. Or a comic book script. Or several short stories. Point is, I needed a job. I knew that despite my shopping about of my resume to all the likely retail outlets, times are tough right now, and not a lot of stores are looking to hire. And I also would ideally like a job that is somehow arts-related. No slinging burgers, thank you very much.

A couple of my friends had worked in background in high school, and the way they told it to me, the process is fairly simple. You find a background agent (as opposed to a principal agent, who works with the actors who, you know, get to say lines.) In Toronto, there are over 20 such agencies. All they need from you who is a headshot and a registration fee (plus a 10% commission once they start getting you work) and you're an extra.

So I got my friend, photographer Devon Jeffs, to take some headshots of me - one of which appears on this very blog. I printed off a few copies, and made some calls to the various background agencies in town. I trekked out to the boonies of Scarborough, filled out some info, took some measurements, and I was registered with an agent.

From there, I figured it'd be a few days before I saw anything approaching regular work. But not two hours later, I got a call - regrettably not soon enough. By the time I'd answered my phone, the opportunity had passed me by. But I was encouraged! I'd already gotten a call-back. And later that same evening, I got another call - this one I answered. And just like that, I had two days of background work on a TV show.

The one drawback was that this shoot was taking place in Hamilton. And I don't have a car. At least the production had a shuttle to transport people from Missisauga (on the edge of Toronto) the hour-long drive. Unfortunately, my call time was at seven thirty. Which meant I had to meet the shuttle at 5:30. Which meant I had to leave my house at 4:30. AM. Oy.

So I arrived at the production offices of the TV show in question. There was a people-carrier van - the kind that's halfway between a bus and a minivan. I was a bit early, but already there were a couple of crew members and fellow background cast piling into the van. An hour of half-sleeping later, and we arrived, blearily looking out the windows at the basecamp of the show. A whole parking lot filled with several trailers, cars, a firetruck, an ambulance, four or five police cars, plus one of those big black vans for the ERT (Emergency Response Team, the Toronto Police Department's special operations unit). So that was pretty cool.

A young woman, who I believe was the extras wrangler - though the credits will likely name her as 'background casting liason' or some such, told me I could follow her to 'holding.' Which turned out to be a gay dance club the production company had rented out for the purpose of having the extras have somewhere to go when they weren't on camera. There were fold out chairs and tables set up for the 85 people who'd likely be occupying the space. The bar was set up with instant coffee, tea, and all the fixins for a peanut butter sandwich. Also fresh fruit - but that went fast.

 So I signed in, filling out a little slip so the production company would know when I'd signed in, and where to mail my cheque - and then I waited. As you'll discover if you keep reading this post (indeed, if you're still reading by now ...) my two days on set involved a good deal of waiting. As I did, various other people filled in - of all ages, shapes, sizes. Most were background. There were a few wardrobe, hair, and makeup crew as well, and one Assistant Director (the show had four or five) whose job it seemed, was to keep an eye on us.

We'd been told in the booking information to bring fall colours, and three changes of clothing. My agent had told me 'business casual', so I brought ties, dress shirts, etc. Of course, the first outfit I tried on for the wardrobe department was fine, and it ended up being the same outfit I wore for two days. So I lugged that garment bag out there for nothing.

There were a couple of featured background, who required specific costumes. Most of these were dressed as cops, ETRs, and one of them was the proprietor of a hot dog stand.

Then came a lot more waiting - an opportunity for me to read my book (Truth, an Australian crime novel, if anyone's interested). Finally the AD, a rather grumpy fellow, called out all background.

The first shot was of a paramedic buying a hotdog, and then walking up to the door of the bank. All the scenes we were shooting were outside of this bank, which over the course of the story became a crime scene. It was meant to be at Spadina and College - an intersection in Toronto. But the street we were filming on in Hamilton - leave us say the resemblance was minimal. The art department had redecorated a real Hamilton Bank as the fictional First Bank of Toronto - complete with advertisements in the windows and a banner with a logo on the canopy. The set was a block-length section of the street that the film company had taken over. Background were also placed in the park area across the street - but the public were allowed to walk through there, and cars were allowed to drive past.

The background artists were directed to various points around the set in preparation for the first shot - which was at 8:00 AM, more or less. I was placed in deep background, across the street, given a prop briefcase, and given an action by another AD. It was terribly arduous - my task was to walk down the street, miming talking to another BG performer. We crossed the street, passing the actor (one of the show's prinipal cast) who was meant to be purchasing a hotdog. Once we passed him, we crossed the street (once we were out of shot) and walked back up the other side. There were about 85 other background people, all given similar assignments, to give the illusion of a bustling urban morning scene.

They filmed the same scene a few different ways. Each take took maybe one minute to film. The wait between takes was easily 10 minutes each, I would say. usually more. And this scene seemed fairly simple. So there was a great deal of standing around, waiting to hear "Background action", in which I chatted with my fellow BGs, and with one of the ADs, who was no older than me, and quite a cheerful fellow.

Eventually, the angle of the shot changed, and I was told to cross the street ... and basically do the same thing - walk down the street and cross it. Once you were off-camera, an AD would usually direct you to walk across camera again - the goal, I suspect, being to create a sense of movement and population.

So THAT scene went on for a while. At some point, the shot was complete, and while the crew set up for the next one, the ADs called "Back to Holding", and my co-workers breathed a collective sigh of relief.

My fellow background artists were a varied lot.
I met a young man who had come to Canada by way of Bristol, Paris, and Cameroon, and who was earnest and positive about his desire to become a serious actor. He was just as adamant that his agent not book him as background on Degrassi, a popular high-school soap opera that shoots in Toronto, and who is always on the hunt for background to play the population of the school.

I met several people who had been doing this for a long while, and who had been on the set of the Total Recall reboot that is shooting in Toronto. (One related to another co-worker, in tones of relish, her scene with Colin Farrel.)

I met a guy who had gotten into the biz after he and some friends had driven for hours to film a stadium scene in Pittsburgh for The Dark Knight Rises. 

I met quite a few actors who were slumming it as background in order to make some cash. 

There were quite a few retired people, and at least one stay-at-home Dad, who worked background to make some extra money while his kids were at school.

 Some of these had a certain air of been-there-done-that, and I had to wonder if they were so jaded about the whole extras gig ... why did they still do it? There are certainly easier ways to make a living.

(Okay, it actually doesn't get easier than literally being paid to stand around ... but there are certainly jobs that offer more reasonable and consistent hours ...)

As varied as all our backgrounds were (no pun intended) there was a certain cameraderie. People greeted each-other with smiles, hugs, and backslaps. Everybody asked: "how long have you been doing this?" "Who's your agent?" "What do you do when you're not doing this?". For the most part, my fellow background people were a friendly bunch to work with.

At some point, we went back out to film more coverage, of extras walking around. And then lunch was called. We ate in the basement of a very nice cathedral a few blocks away. There was one buffet line for the non-union background artists - and another for the ACTRA extras, cast, and crew. One was probably better than the other - but the food we lowly peons got was still very good! Once lunch was finished, back to holding we went.

Anyway, it seemed like only ten minutes had passed before we were called out of holding to the set. Now the firetruck, the cop cars and the ambulance were all there, lights a-flashing. Police barricades were set up. We, the background people, were positioned at the barricades, cast in the role of rubberneckers at the scene of a bank robbery turned hostage scenario.

 (The irony, of course, is that the scene attracted no shortage of real life rubberneckers, begging the question "Don't you people have anything better to do on a Monday morning?")

Here began the long series of shots in which my job was literally to stand and point. The director decided that he wanted one of the principals, a cop, to walk through my section of crowd. And since I managed to position myself near the front of the barricade, I'm sure that at the very least, my forearm appears in one shot.

Once we were all assembled outside, of course, it began to rain. And then pour. And this was pretty much the theme of the day. Various scenes and moments were shot - the ETR guys approaching the bank, a wounded hostage being taken out of the bank, grim looking police detectives discussing the hostage scenario ... and in all these scenes, there were a bunch of us background folks, standing in the rain, pretending to look concerned or interested. However, very quickly, most of us just wanted to get back inside. Because the scene was intended to be taking place on a clear day, we weren't even allowed to be under umbrellas. We could have them out between takes - but not once action was called. Towards the end of the day, a lot of the extras were getting pretty fed up and bored, which led to some chatter and smiles during a take, for which they got a stern talking to from an AD because they ruined a take. I warned a couple of my co-workers to cut the chatter when I heard the AD call the start of the next take - and I got a stern talking to from one of the other extras.

"Careful," she warned me. "Some of these people [the other extras] won't like you doing that. I mean, I don't mind, but ..." I could only shake my head and laugh. I could get in trouble for not wanting people to get in trouble. ...

At last, we were told that the day of shooting was wrapped! There wasn't a cheer from the background people - but there might as well have been. Everybody lined up in front of the background liason and the AD who was in charge of us, and they marked on our slips when we had wrapped, so they'd know how much to pay us - background artists are paid 11 bucks an hour in Toronto - but they're paid for a minimum of 8 hours, no matter how long you're actually on set.

I was pretty much bagged - made my way to the shuttle back to Toronto, and split a cab with a fellow co-worker to get to the TTC, and got home at a quarter to ten. Secure in the knowledge that tomorrow, I'd be doing it all over again.

Hello, My Name is Jeremy Large, and I ... am a Writer

So I'm Jeremy, and I'm going to be trying out this blogging thing for a little while. I'll be posting ... well, I'm not sure what exactly I'll be posting here. It'll likely be a mix of:

1) ranting (which, as those of you who know me in real life can attest, I sometimes do, at great length).
2) journalling, in which I reflect on something interesting that may have happened to me (don't worry, it won't happen often.)
3) actual work - it occurs to me that this blog would be a pretty simple way to get some of my work out there. So I may be posting some short fiction, or scripts, or excerpts from something. I welcome critique - I certainly feel like my writing is far from perfect. All I ask is that it be fair and constructive.

So there it is. I'm one more voice added to the blogosphere. I feel like, occasionally, I have something interesting to say. Let's see if anyone out there agrees.