Dr. Horrible Nano

I realize this post is past-due to the point of irrelevance, but I'm still a little proud of this Halloween costume and the treat bag, so here it is.

Fun with Charcoal

I don't know if this is "done" or not, but it turned out OK.... worked from a cool photo in a magazine (can't remember which, and I'm sorry not to be able to credit the photographer).

Footlong?

I really hope you can make it out... this is an erotic bar (see the girls in the second-floor windows?) next to a Subway. Well, I thought it was funny.

Montréal Graffiti/Mural Art

Of Human Bondage

Went to see Quantum of Solace this past weekend. There has been a lot of ink devoted to this movie, and it did not disappoint me. The theater experience itself sucked pretty thoroughly, but I always feel that way. O Netflix, I love you so.

I relish Bond films, but I am far from a Bond expert or purist. I just think it's a great character, and I've seen all the actors that have brought 007 to life with varying degrees of success: Sean Connery (the whole package), George Lazenby (great fight scenes, not so much the charmer), Roger Moore (suave), Timothy Dalton (needs further review), Pierce Brosnan (more of a dandy), and Daniel Craig (more of a badass). Each actor, of course, brings his own interpretation to the world's greatest lover and spy, but lately the moviemakers have strayed from the formula.

Casino Royale--Daniel Craig's first foray into the world of Bond--left me somewhat at odds. I say now as I said then: I loved it for what it was, but it wasn't a Bond film. This, naturally, begs the question "So what is a Bond film?"

Most would probably argue that Connery is still the best Bond. He was tough in his fight scenes, walking away with nary a scratch, and still had enough energy for a romp with one or two lovelies before the end credits rolled. He was the ultimate male fantasy combination of man's man and ladies' man, and both parts of him transitioned back and forth smoothly. Fast-forward to Craig's Bond: smooth and cold as a marble countertop, his charming lothario more of a grafted appendage than a natural part of him; a more human Bond, complete with travel-size emotional baggage.

Of course, one could point out that after this many decades of beating down bad guys and getting women killed, such a life takes its toll. So a more human Bond is not an unreasonable leap. But that was the point of Bond, wasn't it? The superspy/love machine whose emotional arc lasted one film, and moved on; no regrets.

Quantum was a great action film, but again, not Bond as I know him--this was more Bond Supremacy than Dr. No. Foremost, it was a sequel to Casino Royale. (Again, I'm no expert, but is that a first for the franchise?) It's neither good nor bad, necessarily, just a new direction. Some will like it, some will long for the old Bond who spends as much time in bed as he does trading smirks with his enemies over cocktails and gambling. And I miss Q and Moneypenny... but as far as I'm concerned, keep bringing the Bond films--shaken or stirred.