Want to Hear Daftpunk's TRON LEGACY Soundtrack?

So I've listened to the samples from Daftpunk's soundtrack for Tron Legacy and I have to say, I will be buying the soundtrack. I will be listening to the soundtrack. When I am writing I will be using this soundtrack as part of my regular rotation. If you read anything I've written after December 7, 2011, the odds are I will have listened to this soundtrack while writing part of it. It's that good.

It (intentionally) reminds me of the original music, a bit, although the original music wasn't anything I'd want to listen to apart from the movie. It reminds me of Vangelis, actually, particularly the soundtrack for Bladerunner. It reminds me a lot of the soundtrack Joel Goldsmith is using for Stargate: Universe, which is interesting in and of itself (and I do hope for an album from his SGU music) because it is a traditional score writer known for great convention television scoring channeling Vangelis with an electronic score. (Most of his music for the other Stargate series was electronic made to sound like an orchestra, with Universe he just puts the electronic music front and center.)

Give it a listen! It's awesome!
Daft Punk - Tron: Legacy (OST) [www.SeekSickSound.com] by seeksicksound

Obviously, it's not for everyone. But truth is, it's for this movie and seems to me it will work. But a good soundtrack , for me anyway, works when pulled away from the movie. A good soundtrack sets a mood without the need for visuals, which is why I use them when I work.

~ Ben

PS -- It's available for pre-order from Amazon for just $12: Tron Legacy



You can also get the original Tron soundtrack from them for pretty cheap ($11): Tron

C.S. Lewis on "Choices"

"[E]very time you make a choice you are turning into the central part of you, the part of you that chooses, into something a little different than it was before. And taking your life as a whole, with all your innumerable choices, all your life long you are slowly turning this central thing into a heavenly creature or a hellish creature: either into a creature that is in harmony with God, and with other creatures, and with itself, or else into one that is in a state of war and hatred with God, and with its fellow creatures, and with itself. To be the one kind of creature is heaven: that is, it is joy and peace and knowledge and power. To be the other means madness, horror, idiocy, rage, impotence, and eternal loneliness. Each of us at each moment is progressing to the one state of the other."

C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

I heard this quote from Peter Kreeft, in a podcast about Mere Christianity, while I was on my run this morning, and it stuck with me. Mere Christianity is a dangerous book, of course, because it so concisely cuts through a lot of the bull that surrounds what really matters.

Lewis had a similar quote, using a similar word picture but in a different context, in The Weight of Glory. In that context it was not about personal choices making us into one or the other, beautiful creature or horrific beast, but rather seeing other people's potential as one or the other and helping them toward the better one. I'll post that quote someday.

This quote feeds nicely into a werewolf story I've wanted to write for a long time . . . maybe someday . . .

~ Ben

Power of Words

Spent a bit of time this morning working on a project that may never see the light of day. Because the whole time I've been drawing this thing, some awful words someone said about me keep creeping back. So I'll toy with working on this project, and then push it away . . .

Interesting how I tend to hang on to THOSE words, and not all the encouraging words from other sources.

I don't think that's uncommon for artists and writers. But it IS unhealthy. I've found myself being more critical of this work because of the words from this guy -- words about a similar project from over a year ago! Can it get more silly than that?

I guess the real question is how to use those words. Let them fuel me, to "prove him wrong"? But what if he's NOT wrong? Try to figure out a way to "use them constructively"? But there was no "constructiveness" to them -- they were just mean, with just enough truth to make it bite. Just ignore it? But if it were that easy, it wouldn't be a problem!

I don't have an answer. Maybe I should stop asking the question! I'd love to go to the guy and ask him to just retract what he said. But to be honest, I'd doubt he'd even remember.

So here's one lesson i can take from this: words have power. More power than we'd like to admit, sometimes. The real question isn't "what should I do about HIS words?" The real question is "what am I doing about my own?"

~ Ben

Seeking the Kingdom: Some Thoughts on Prayer

In my reading over the last few days, I made a couple connections I hadn't noticed before.

Many people I know who pray tend to focus on the physical, asking for healing and for the money needed to do this or that. And that's fine. It's something that Jesus actually encourages when he says, "Ask and it will be given to you."

But Jesus also encourages us to go a bit deeper. "And do not set your heart on what you will eat or drink; do not worry about it. For the pagan world runs after these things, and your Father knows that you need him. But seek his kingdom, and these things will be given to you as well."

I find it interesting how little I hear people talking about wanting to "seek his kingdom" and how often I hear people talking about wanting to expand their own kingdom when it comes to prayer. But I don't know that's what Jesus is talking about when he's saying "ask and it will be given to you", especially when he says, "those things" will be given to you as well . . . when you seek his kingdom.

Jesus also says that if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you can ask a tree to move and it will. Often, I hear that verse applied to, again, physical things. Rarely do I hear it applied to internal matters. To the "seek first his kingdom" type things.

We can ask the God who can and does move mountains for us to move those mountains in our hearts. The mountians that get in the way of our honest seeking of the kingdom.

~ Ben

Nano Film Review #28 -- Superman/Batman: Apocalypse

Superman/Batman: Apocalypse. Terrible film. Terrible, terrible film.

I hate it when films have such great potential for being emotional, character driven action films . . . only to decide to forgo any actual emotion beats to make sure they hit all the action beats.

Here's a film about Superman discovering that he's not the last, living person from his planet . . . only to have his worst enemy convince her to turn against him.

But the emotion in this movie is as flat as the animation. Superman leanrs he has a cousin, and he says with no emotion at all: "Uh, I think she's my cousin."

His cousin gets kidnapped by his greatest enemy, after slaughtering a number of people from Wonder Woman's island? No emotion, just, "Uh, let's go get her."

His cousin is turned evil? No emotion, just a flat line reading of, "Uh, you don't have to do this."

Meanwhile, at the beginning, Supergirl wants to learn what it means to be an earthgirl . . . so Superman takes her to the mall and we get a pretty woman montage. Yup, that's what it means to be an earthgirl!

Batman is Batman, and does Batman stuff. Wonder Woman is Wonder Woman, and does Wonder Woman stuff. Superman is Superman, and does Superman stuff. But it all feels so flat. So dry. So lifeless. I want to see character development. I want to see emotional moments with action based emotional payoffs . . . not action moments with action payoffs. I want emotion, not going through the motions.

The fight scenes are impressive. Even more impressive? If they had taken the time to actually let the characters be true to the emotional elements of the plot instead of just crafting brilliant, brutal fight scenes.

~ Ben

Story vs. History

I was listening to Peter Kreeft's "podcast" (in quotes, because technically it's not him podcasting but posting lectures that can be accessed freely) about Imagination while on my walk this morning. Peter Kreeft has become a moprning companion of late. He and I have been talking about story ideas and fundamentals of storytelling and philosophy of fiction. Of course, it's a one way conversation, and he has no idea that he's a part of it.

But he is.

I highly recommend listening to his lectures. They are brilliant and insightful. And he talks about Lewis and Tolkien a lot.

But as I was listening today, I had a thought. It didn't have a lot to do with what he was saying, but I was struck by a thought.

Story is false, but can contain much truth; history is true, but can be interpreted falsely.

There's all sorts of implications that can then be made. History is jaded by our own personal perceptions. Story has power.

And I got to thinking about all these ideas . . . big, philosophical ideas . . . about Art and Truth and Life and Other Big Concepts that I capitalize to make them even more Grand!

And then, I had another thought that brought me back down to earth. With all those concepts and implications and philosophical ideas (which are Good, and deserve thought), there is one Big Durn Ol' Trinity of Truth in Writing:

1. Just write.
2. Do your best.
3. Be honest.

Follow those guidelines, and you're on your way to meaningful fiction . . . or meaningful nonfiction . . .

Just some thoughts. Not sure what they're worth, but there they are.

~ Ben

What They Say; What They Mean

And now, for something completely different . . .

With political ads and debates and all that stuff, here's my little guide to what is really being said:

INDEPENDENT: Both sides will be using this word in their ads. The flip side of this word being just not putting what party the candidate actually belongs to. Why? Both sides don't want you to know what party they belong to. Democrats know people aren't happy; republicans know that people aren't happy. And both sides know that it's going to be close.

TOLERANCE: When this word is used, it means, "I accept everyone except those people who don't think like I do."

FAITH: In other words, "Hey, religious people, I have faith just like you." This IS used by people who actually do ACT like they have faith in God. But it's also used by people who just want votes.

TEABAGGER: Whenever you see someone use this phrase, what they are saying is, "I'm going use this word that is also used to describe a sex act, so I can call people in the Tea Party a totally derogatory name right in public and nobody will care." This is incredibly clever and subversive. It's entered the popular lexicon, and there are many uninformed people who unsuspectingly use the phrase now. In other words, people who should know better (politicians, who have at least had the phrase explained to them) are using the phrase, and causing people who don't know better to use it as well. (EDIT: I should have put this in earlier, but a friendly e-mail from a friend reminded me that I should have given you this warning: don't Google the meaning of the word. It is a work that has been given a pretty nasty meaning -- which is WHY Tea Party opponents are more than happy to use it.) 

"IT'S ALL (STILL) BUSH'S FAULT"/"IT'S ALL OBAMA'S FAULT": Nothing is all anybody's fault. Or maybe I should say it's all everybody's fault. First, I can't believe how hard it's been for Obama to get anything done, considering his party pretty much has control over everything in Washington. His inability to get much done has two by-products: 1. It gives the Democrats an easily identifiable enemy for the people to rally against -- Republicans; 2. The Republicans have really rallied together to obstruct almost everything. But here's the real truth -- nothing is really getting done because no one is willing to work beyond party affiliation. Still trying to decide if this is a good thing or not. On one hand, it COULD mean that people are sticking to their principles . . . except when they vote FOR their party AGAINST their principles. On the other hand, this whole two party thing just means there's only two voices in Washington, and I don't think either voice accurately reflects the average American.

Personally, I'm getting tired of "the lesser of two evils".

~ Ben

THE WAY OF THE WRITER: Just Write

If I were to start this little series of writings about writings again, I'd call it "Just Write". However, I have a feeling that's been taken. Come to think of it, "The Way of the Writer" is probably taken as well . . . but that's just my own little title to let you know that this blog post is about writing and the creative life.

On a message board I frequent (yes, those things DO still exist) one post turned toward a person who had a blank page because he wasn't sure about how to draw a panel. There are other factors involved, but it got me thinking about the blank pages and the blank screens and the false concept of writer's block.

Yes, I believe it's a false concept. I may be wrong. And tomorrow I may change my belief. But today, just walk with me down this path . . .

Writer's block, in some ways, is just an excuse. An excuse not to move forward because I don't have just the right idea. Just the perfect line. Just the ideal word. Just this, just that . . . when really I need to just write.

My biggest project right now is essentially taking what could be a research paper/essay and turning it into a graphic novel. Make it interesting. Make it visual (or why make it a graphic novel at all?). And it's been a struggle.

One particular sequence really gave me some trouble. The twenty or so page sequence I'm working on right now. For a long time I just sat and looked at it. Tried to figure it out. Puzzled over how to make it pop. Nothing. I wanted to make it just right . . .

In the end, I had to just write. (Ugh . . . just typing THAT makes me feel a little ill . . . but I think I'm leaving it in, cheesy as it may be.)

So I just dove in. Wrote the sequence with what was the best idea I could come up with to present the information. Did the whole thing . . . and then, a couple days ago, while working at Borders, ten minutes before I had to pack up and leave so I could get to something in time . . . another idea struck me.

This new idea was eight thousand times better. This new idea allowed for the information to be presented visually and with some quirkiness and fun.

This new idea meant that the entire sequence needed to be rewritten.

But it's going to be SOOOOOoooooo much better. (Eight thousand times better.) If I hadn't gone ahead with things, and just forced myself to write that draft, even though I knew it wasn't what I wanted it to be, I never would have came upon the idea I ended up with.

So was that earlier draft lost work? Wasted time? No. Unlike staring at a blank screen, unlike staring at blank paper . . . creatively, I was working and engaged in a way that just staring and struggling would never have achieved.

Just write. Just draw. Just play. In the creative arts, and maybe in other things as well, sometimes you have to do it wrong to figure out how to do it right.

~ Ben

PS -- That cheese earlier . . . makes me thing I'm gonna have a grilled cheese for lunch, See? Yet another bad idea leading to a great idea!

Bono on the Psalms

I read this years ago, but just recently came across it again.


Bono wrote the introduction to a book that reprinted some of the KJV Psalms from the Bible. His take on the Psalms is interesting, and gives a lot of insight into the music of U2 . . . and also a lot of insight into the Psalms.


Here's some of Bono's thoughts on David:

At the age of 12, I was a fan of David. He felt familiar, like a pop star could feel familiar. The words of the psalms were as poetic as they were religious, and he was a star. Before David could fulfil the prophecy and become the king of Israel, he had to take quite a beating. He was forced into exile and ended up in a cave in some no-name border town facing the collapse of his ego and abandonment by God. But this is where the soap opera got interesting. This is where David was said to have composed his first psalm -- a blues. That's what a lot of the psalms feel like to me, the blues. Man shouting at God -- "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from helping me?" (Psalm 22). 

David was a star, the Elvis of the Bible, if we can believe the chiselling of Michelangelo. And unusually for such a "rock star," with his lust for power, lust for women, lust for life, he had the humility of one who knew his gift worked harder than he ever would. He even danced naked in front of his troops -- the biblical equivalent of the royal walkabout. David was definitely more performance artist than politician. 

And here's some of Bono's thoughts on religion:

Words and music did for me what solid, even rigorous, religious argument could never do -- they introduced me to God, not belief in God, more an experiential sense of GOD. Over art, literature, girls, my mates, the way in to my spirit was a combination of words and music. As a result, the Book of Psalms always felt open to me and led me to the poetry of Ecclesiastes, the Song of Solomon, the book of John...My religion could not be fiction, but it had to transcend facts. It could be mystical, but not mythical . . .

Anyway, I stopped going to churches and got into a different kind of religion. Don't laugh. That's what being in a rock 'n' roll band is. Showbiz is shamanism, music is worship. Whether it's worship of women or their designer, the world or its destroyer, whether it comes from that ancient place we call soul or simply the spinal cortex, whether the prayers are on fire with a dumb rage or dove-like desire, the smoke goes upwards, to God or something you replace God with -- usually yourself. 

Finally, here's some thoughts on the composition of the song "40":

Years ago, lost for words and with 40 minutes of recording time left before the end of our studio time, we were still looking for a song to close our third album, War. We wanted to put something explicitly spiritual on the record to balance the politics and romance of it; like Bob Marley or Marvin Gaye would. We thought about the psalms -- Psalm 40. There was some squirming. We were a very "white" rock group, and such plundering of the scriptures was taboo for a white rock group unless it was in the "service of Satan." Psalm 40 is interesting in that it suggests a time in which grace will replace karma, and love will replace the very strict laws of Moses (in other words, fulfil them). I love that thought. David, who committed some of the most selfish as well as selfless acts, was depending on it. That the scriptures are brim full of hustlers, murderers, cowards, adulterers and mercenaries used to shock me. Now it is a source of great comfort. 

"40" became the closing song at U2 shows, and on hundreds of occasions, literally hundreds of thousands of people of every size and shape of T-shirt have shouted back the refrain, pinched from Psalm 6: "How long (to sing this song)." I had thought of it as a nagging question, pulling at the hem of an invisible deity whose presence we glimpse only when we act in love. How long hunger? How long hatred? How long until creation grows up and the chaos of its precocious, hell-bent adolescence has been discarded? I thought it odd that the vocalising of such questions could bring such comfort -- to me, too. 

 The article in it's entirety can be read here:


http://www.atu2.com/news/psalm-like-it-hot.html


It's quite interesting. If you are a believer, it will get you thinking about some of these common characters and ideas in a slightly different way, I think. 


~ Ben

THE WAY OF THE WRITER: Formula for a Great Story

Thinking about yesterday's blog posting, and I came up with the following formula for a great story:

Character + Circumstances + Choice = Change

Repeat as necessary.

The above equation actually seems to work for both writing and, well, life.

What say you? Writing formulas usually are stifling . . . and there really are no rules. However, I this is something that I've been running my characters through when I write . . . although not in this form. It doesn't always work this way, but when I write I want my character's choices to push things forward. Random chance is okay, but only if it leads to a character choice that will push things forward again. And I think, ultimately, what makes a story satisfying is that when the main protagonist changes, and that change helps them triumph.

In other words, your character's choices should drive a plot, not the other way around. Which would be, you know, the plot driving the character's choices . . .

So, gentle readers, do you agree? Disagree? Have a better way to say it? (I thought about a more complicated equation, but I decided I wasn't smart enough to do some sort of "Character divided by circumstance times choice or whatever . . .)

~ Ben

Samurai art by Tim Baron, (c) 2009