In my last post I ranted long about the overuse of the term fanboy, how its misuse resulted in trivializing their psychosis while elevating their status as barometers of pop culture. My claim was that Hollywood has made true fanboys far more influential than what they are due. And I stated that I have proof.

That proof is the movie adaptations of works by Alan Moore. For those of you who don’t know who the heck that is, shame on you!

In short, Mr. Moore is a very influential, and truly gifted, storyteller, particularly in the realm of comics. We’ll get to his titles in a moment. Just know that he’s opinionated, and generally considered cranky (I recently heard him referred to as a brilliant douche), but you would be cranky too if you had been treated as poorly in the business as he has over the years.

As for his works, they are the proof. The movie adaptations include From Hell, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, V for Vendetta and Watchmen. He also one of the men responsible for the creation of the character John Constantine, though the movie Constantine is not an adaptation of any of his writing.

Really, I don’t even need to deal with the works collectively, since the nature of the proof is the same with all of them. So I’ll just stick to what might be the worst of the adaptations: The League of Extraordinary Gentle.

The movie follows the exploits of a team of Victorian era literary characters under the leadership of Allan Quatarmain as they race to uncover the sinister plans of a villain known only as ‘The Phantom’.

Do you remember seeing the trailer for this? I remember thinking ‘Damn, that could kick ass.’ Mina Harker, Captian Nemo, Jekyll/Hyde, an invisible man, Dorian Gray, and Tom Sawyer. Awesome.

Then I saw the movie in the theater. Well, I can’t say I disliked it. It was a lark, I liked the actors, I liked the action and the effects. Hell, I even kind of liked the convoluted story. So, okay, I liked it. In and of itself, it was an okay movie, though incredibly flawed and disappointing.

But whether the movie was any good or not doesn’t really matter. What matters is that it varies so wildly in characterizations from Alan Moore’s source material that it begs the question why name it “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen” at all?

Interestingly enough, the makers of the film were sued by a writer whose screenplay entitled “A Cast of Characters” was very similar. The producers settled, which was really insulting to Moore, whom they never defended after being attached effectively as a plagiarist.

The stupid thing is why they didn’t just drop Moore, and his title altogether, and just go with “A Cast of Characters” since they mangled Moore’s source material to nonrecognition. It probably would have cost less in legal fees. And, the filmmakers wouldn’t have to worry about pissing off fans of the source material. Which comes to the point.

LXG was a popular comic, but not THAT popular. Any fan of the source could have told a producer “I know it sounds like fun, but I just don’t see how you’ll be able to do it.” That isn’t to say it couldn’t be done, just that if the goal was to make a butt load of money, this wasn’t the thing. Almost any reasonable person who read and liked the comic book could recognize that it was not suitable for mainstream film franchising.

So why? Okay, so I confess I don’t have proof. I lied. But I’m fairly confident that the producers listened to the fanboys who were clamoring for anything LXG at the time “Oh, make it. It will kick ass. Just don’t have Nina be the leader, I don’t get that.”

In the end, source material is only as good as the film makers ability to comprehend it. So here’s my suggestion to studio executives. The next time a property is present to you, you read it and find yourself thinking you don’t get it, but it has a solid core following, then pass. Just steal the premise and hire some hacks to develop a knock off. Even if it’s modestly successful, in 20 year, when someone wants to do a gritty reboot, you’ll be able get the fees with an entanglement with the creator and you wouldn’t have to listen to the alienated laments of source materials fan base.

A theme which I seem to repeat frequently is the value of source material in movies and entertainment. What is source material, anyways?

Apparently, if you are a studio executive, source material is comic books.

In all fairness to Hollywood, plenty of movies get made with source material other than comics. Sometimes it’s old television shows or video games. Toys, board games, or other movies. Occasionally, the material is from books, mostly pulpy vampire or legal dramas… But mostly comic books.

Am I complaining?

No. I love comics and I love a well executed comic book movie. But that is the major difference between me and those Hollywood studio execs. Or between me and general audiences for that matter. They don’t really care for the comic books themselves.

I’m fine with that, actually. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and comics are definitely an acquired taste – Just like all art that isn’t totally spoon fed to the participant. Sorry, that was a cheap shot. What you may have taken away from my comment is that comic books, just like music, theater, literature, sculpture, and, yes, movies, are art. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying the graphic novel, despite that fancy name, is high art. Most titles are, and always have been, commodities meant to be rapidly devoured with a new course served up as quickly as possible. But among the trash, there is perhaps 10% of the material that really shines. Sometimes that material can be a series, sometimes it can be the story but not the art, sometimes it can be the character premise, but not the story, or just the art. And on the rarest of occasions, the whole package will be great.

Just like movies. So it would seem that comics would be the perfect source material for movies. More times than not, though, that hasn’t proven true. Which is why I seek to liberate the movies from their comic book source material.

To explain how, and why, I first need to follow what I’m sure will seem like a tangent to you, but trust me, it’ll come back around.

There are two terms I dislike, mostly because of their current misuse. Please stop using the term fanboy for any person who has a nerdy hobby or is slightly more fanatically about some aspect of pop culture.

Have you ever met a fanboy?

They are borderline dysfunctional. He doesn’t just like something a lot. In fact, he doesn’t even love it… All he has is the compulsion to purchase every painted die-cast miniature figurine at the comic shop, even though he already owns two dozen others that are also exactly the same. His office desk will be decorated with toys, not just a few items from his youth there to remind him of simpler times, but junk he just purchased off eBay last week. He’s memorized the entire cannon of a title, but won’t understand any of it, like an ape quoting Nietzsche (A Fish Called Wanda reference.)

You get the point.

Although the term fan boy has been around since the early 20th century, its resurgence came in the 1990s when comic book editors began to feel the creative oppression from these sad individuals’ demands. Fanboy is the derogatory form of Marvel Comic’s term of affection ‘true believer’. In Japan, the equivalent term is otaku. In the United States, otaku has come to be a general term for anyone who is a big fan of anime and manga, just as fanboy has lost most of its negative meaning.

Fanboy is kind of like the word fetish. Now of days, a fetish is described as any slight affinity for anything. When it is applied to sex, it’s usually for anything kinky. Guess what? A fetish is a compulsion which without sexual arousal and/or performance is impossible. As I understand the meaning fetishes are not kink. At best, fetishism is kind of sad, and at worst, well… Think the Tooth Fairy. No, the other Tooth Fairy… That’s not the Rock… The serial killer from Red Dragon.

I’m an adult (sorta) and I recognize that word meanings evolve. Now, here is where I’ll start to connect this with my topic on source material. The term fanboy has evolved to quickly encompassing anyone who really likes video games or comicbooks or scifi and zombie movies. But the original fanboys, those troubled souls, are still out there.

My theory is that these freaks command a much greater influence than they should over the use of source material in movies. It’s a theory, but I have evidence, which I’ll save for part two of this post.

Approximately 25 years ago I began playing with sound on the computer. The hardware and software has come a long way since then, but sometimes I long for the good old days, before the dark times… Before the Empire. Sorry, Star Wars geek moment. What I mean is who doesn’t hear an 8-bit video game soundtrack and grin a little?

Like most computer freaks in the 1980s, I programmed computer music on the C64. I’ve mentioned before on this blog my fond memories of the C64, which, by the way, is the best selling personal computer of all time. At its height, commodore had a 40% market share, and that’s hardware, not software. Moving on. As it turns out, the SID chip, which gave the C64 its three glorious oscillator voices, has a profound place in the history of modern music.

As those of you who follow Dirty Sprocket have probably learn, we’re developing a video for my song “One More Disaster”. The video will be set in a retro-futuristic, 1980s IT department, and to accompany the production I’m preparing an 8-bit style video game, complete with 8-bit version of the song. The 8-bit version of “One More Disaster” is done, but it’s technically not 8 bits. Alas, I use four voices, and because I’m a lazy slob who uses “just doing this for fun” as an excuse to exploit current technology, I simulated the sound by dumbing down the ES-1 virtual synth in Apple Logic Studio. So sue me, hardcore nerds. NERDS.

I’ve posted booth the 8-bit and the modern synth version of the song on the Von Varagon Society facebook fan page. Take a listen if you get a chance.

I recently purchased the Blu-Ray edition of Steven Spielberg’s classic Close Encounters of the Third Kind and finally got around to watching it this past weekend. The disc contains three versions: the original theatrical release, the special edition and the director’s cut. I went right for the director’s cut, having seen the other two versions many times.

And the director’s cut is definitely superior, though, with the exception of the very end, the differences in versions are subtle. It’s amazing what five minutes more can do for character development. If you’ve seen CETK before and liked it, then the director’s cut is definitely for you. And if you’ve never seen CETK, then don’t even bother with the theatrical or special edition, go straight to the director’s cut.

But this post is not a review. Having grown-up with this movie, I can’t be objective about it. Plus it holds a special place in my heart due to the film’s finale setting at Devils Tower, which is just a few miles from my mother’s hometown of Hulett, Wyo.

This post is to share the major beef I have with one of my favorite films. Actually, it’s a beef I have with a many of my favorite films – the misplaced southern accent. You know the scene. Roy Neary arrives at the train depot which is crowded with evacuees. Amongst the crowd is a huckster salesman hawking gas masks. And he’s doing so with a loud, thick southern accent. Argh!

With a little research, I’ve determined that it is probably a Texas accent, but it doesn’t matter… No one from Wyoming, South Dakota, Montana, North Dakota or Idaho sounds like this. I get stuck on this more than any of the geographic continuity problems that riddle the movie. I start wondering, so this guy hears there’s a toxic spill in Wyoming, goes to his Lubbock, Texas army surplus store and buys a pickup load of gas masks, grabs his hound dog and travels 950 miles to take advantage of the panicking evacuees? Huh?

I haven’t listened to the commentary track during this scene, perhaps Spielberg has something profound to say about this that will help me get pasted this stumbling block. If not, then to reconcile this in my mind I’ve decided to develop a back story for this character, making him part of the ham-handed UN/Army cover-up. I would like to think that on his return trip he stops in a bar in Moorcroft and is severely beaten by a couple of roughneck’s he tries to cheat at cards.

Aw. I feel better.

As Derek and I continued to discuss the DirtySprocket.com visitor statistics he revealed that lists also do very well.

Hmm. This gave me an idea, which I’m testing with this post, hence the headline and content.

So, if you are easily embarrassed (like you would be at DirtySprocket.com if you were) or if you personally want to maintain the common misconception of my character as prudish and puritanical, then go to one of my other posts, because here comes my picks for… Five Favorite Movie Sex Scenes.

Okay, I know this whole post seems gratuitous so far, but stick with me because you’ll notice the title calls for favorite, not the best gratuitous sex scenes (like I could name just five.)

So, obviously, my first criteria is that the sex scene must be warranted or at least making more sense than the gardener getting a drink of water from the kitchen tap, if you know what I mean (Come on, he could have just drank from the hose.)

My second criteria is in the title as well. They must be scenes, moments in the film, not representative of the entire film itself. Although, I appreciate films such as The Dreamers and Crash, those belong on another list: five best motion picture that seem like they’re about sex but are really about something else which I haven’t quite figured out.

My next criteria is that the scenes need to be straight sex. No offense meant to gays or lesbians, I just don’t swing that way. While the sense of tortured homoeroticism in The Talented Mr. Ripley or outright ridiculousness of Bound are effective, they just don’t belong on this list.

My final criteria is that the scenes have to be believable in the expression of making love, with clear chemistry between the principles. So really the title of the list such be Five Favorite Motion Picture Love Scenes in no particular order, but somehow I don’t think the Google ranking will be quite as good without the word sex.

Monster’s Ball (2001)
Okay, this is a gimme. I defy you not to include it on you list. I’ve only seen the unrated version, but the love scene is aggressive and long enough that I soon forgot about the nudity and mostly remember being happy for the characters for the first time in the movie. It’s sad too much as been made of this scene for the wrong reasons. Yes, Halle Barry is stunningly beautiful and Billy Bob Thornton is a little goofy looking, but get over it. Believable scene in a good movie about life’s strange path to love.

The Name of the Rose (1986)
I was 16 or 17 when I say this on VHS at a friends house with a couple guys, needless to say we were transfixed by the clumsy and ripe love scene between Christian Slater as Adso the novice and Valentina Vargas as simply the girl. But in all fairness, we were transfixed by the whole atmospheric film. The scene is absolutely critical because if we didn’t see it, we would not have accept Adso’s confession in a later scene, or even the point of the movie.

The Big Easy (1986)
This is a good example of chemistry, as the movie has little ease going for it. It’s been a few years since I’ve seen it, but as I recall the love scene between Ellen Barkin and Dennis Quaid is awkward yet steamy. Actually, it was really more of a foreplay scene with not really nudity. I think that’s why it works. Too often, love scenes dive right into the act, with foreplay being little more than ripping off clothing, and both parties are satisfied after 30 seconds. By showing the preliminaries in The Big Easy, we’re pretty convinced that the act itself was stellar. Okay movie with some likable characters and loads of great music.

An American Werewolf in London (1981)
I think this was the second rated R movie I ever say. My mother gave me permission to watch it on HBO at a friends house. I must have been 12 or 13 and I really wanted to see it because, at the time, the big deal was the groundbreaking special effects of the lycanthrope transformation. And for good reason. The effects still holdup well, and more importantly, they did not overshadow all the other elements in this wickedly fun scary movie. The romance and love scene between David Naughton and Jenny Agutter makes this horror film also very tragic and touching. Though the main character of David Kessler is in lust with the english nurse Alex Price, I still find myself wondering if it was much more than lust for her. The sex scene is fairly brief, and initially seems by the numbers, but subtly becomes foreboding and bittersweet.

The English Patient (1996)
I’m starting to see a pattern forming in the choices. Apparently, I like love scenes in movies where the romance is tragic. There are a couple sex scenes between Kristin Scott Thomas as Katharine Clifton and Ralph Fiennes as Count Laszlo de Almasy, and they’re all good. In the first love scene, Almasy violently tears Katharine’s dress, then later in the scene, post-coital, the Count mends the dress. Later in the film, the two have a lusty, brief romp when they meet a Christmas party. As Katharine returns to the party she is meet by her husband, who eventually notices marzipan in her hair. It’s wicked little details that make this movie. Okay, The English Patient is long, but if you’re an adult you find it far more engaging the films of similar length, such as, oh, I don’t know… Avatar.

There you have it. Now, I feel I’ve taken something of a risk, so I encourage you to post your comments, but please keep them PG-13.

I’m not jumping on the Avatar bashing train, especially since I haven’t seen the James Cameron epic and probably won’t for a couple weeks, but I’m really getting sick of all the hype placed on the supposed advancement in cinema technology.

I have no doubt that as one, if not the most expensive movie ever made ($230,000,000 to $250,000,000), Avatar will be visually stunning. I have no doubt it will be impressive and entertaining. But I really doubt the hype that this will redefine 3d since, guess what, it’s the same fundamental REAL 3d technology that we’ve seen before. NERD ALERT: REAL 3D is the brand name for a single projector/silver screen system where viewers wear polarized glass. Although a single projection source is an advancement from 5 years ago (think Disney’s Chicken Little), the polarized 3d glass method is basically the same as the 3d craze from the 1950s.

My point is this: Doing something better doesn’t necessary mean doing something revolutionary. Avatar uses existing technologies, to greater extent than previous CGI/live action efforts. That’s not saying much the last live action 3d movie release was The Final Destination.

All I’m saying is enough with the hype already. The artistic achievement should be enough.

Maybe I’ll feel differently after seeing the movie, but I doubt it. So what would be deserving of the hype?

Well, there are advancements in LCD displays which could lead to 3D movies without the viewer having to wear glasses. That could be something. An as a non-projected surface, it could represent a real standard for home 3d.

I think the point of cinema technology like 3D is to create more immersive realism, which is cool, but so what?

My issues with 3d are typical of film critics. If 3d is necessary to carry a movie, then the movie probably isn’t that great. And if a movie is that great that it can hold up without 3d, then what is the 3d for?

The answer: because it’s cool. I’m a sucker for shiny stuff, so I’ll admit that even if Avatar is a big pile of mildly amusing derivative crap, I’d go to it just to see the 3d.

And if I want to see an truly immersive experience which connects with the audience, I’ll go to live theater.

My favorite part is modeling, that is creating the 3d model. My least favorite part is lighting, which, in my humble opinion, is really the most import part of creating a stunning render.

Anyhow, I’ll be posting some of my rudimentary experiments. I hope you enjoy.

Oh, and comment telling Derek to post some of his old 3d experiments.

I purchased an Epson PowerLite projector a couple years ago and planned to setup a home theater in my basement. I used it many times, projecting onto my unfinished basement walls and testing which video source worked best. I took it to a few Corduroy Vinyl gigs and projected some visualization generated using software called G-Force. Even without having ever setup a formal home theater I’ve definitely gotten my money’s worth.

This past Father’s Day, the wife and kids gave me a Samsung Blu-Ray player. It was a nice gift, but as we didn’t own a Hi-Def television, I considered returning it. Instead I decided to finally get the home theater going.

I should explain some technical stuff and my reasoning on this project. My projector has a resolution of 1024×768. Blu-Ray discs can have resolutions up to 1920×1080. Many HD televisions match that resolution. This means that Blu-Rays and HD televisions have superior resolution and, in theory, superior image quality to my projector. But in practice, when factoring in viewing distance, the image quality from my projector comes close… well, acceptably close to rivaling a HD television.

Viewing distance is an important quality equalizer in video, much as it is with print media. Generally, the further away you get from the source, then less resolution is necessary. At two feet from a printed page the human eye can’t tell the difference between 300dpi and 1200dpi (except in representation of gradients, but I digress). The entire ink jet printer industry was based on this principle.

In my opinion resolution isn’t nearly as important as pitch. Pitch is the space between pixels. Excessive pitch produces what I’ve heard called screen door effect. Fortunately, viewing distance does help minimize this effect some. About the only time I really notice pitch with my projector is during brightly lite scenes with little camera movement.

There are a few other considerations with projection. Ambient light needs to be controlled, and by controlled, I mean eliminated, otherwise the image will be washed out. Even reflective surfaces need to be minimized. Now if you’re setting up a home theater, you probably won’t have any objections this, because you’re trying to emulate the cinema experience. Projector location matters, too.

Sound like a lot of trouble? Well, yes and no. Yes, there are plenty of consideration. But no, despite what AV geeks might tell you, it doesn’t take a millionaire or a rocket scientist to set up. It’s mostly a matter of trial and error, hopefully not too much error.

I purchased an affordable projector mount online. The mount has four points of articulation and was very easy to attach and position. I secured the mounted projector to the ceiling about 13 feet from where the screen would be.

For the screen I used an eight feet by four feet sheet of masonite, with a wood frame for rigidity. I brush painted the smooth side bright white. I’ll very pleased with the results, however, someday I may redo the screen using a reflective paint, specifically for projection screens, which I believe should be sprayed. But for now, I’m very satisfied.

I hung he screen from the ceiling with adjustable eye-bolts and leveled it. Then I adjusted the projector and quickly setup the surround sound. That’s where I stopped for awhile. I watched a couple movies on Blu-Ray. I was okay with the size, and positioning, but the picture quality… Well, it sucked. Why? I didn’t happen to have the correct cable, so I was using RCA video. The guys at Radio Shack really wanted to sell me three separate adapters to go from HDMI to VGA, totaling $85. It took me a week, but I finally located a component to VGA for $12. It worked perfectly and instantly the image appeared perfect.

We decided for my sons ninth birthday to have a movie party. This made all the difference because it made me hurry to get currents strung behind the screen, as well as a valence across the top. I also cleaned up the surround sound cabling.

Now, I can honestly say the experience at home is so good I have little desire to go to the cinema. I still have a long way to go with remodeling, and I’m seriously considering upgrading to the Espon 6100, a true 1920×1080 projector, but for now, I’m just going to sit back and bore my co-workers with my constant bragging. If you have a basement, I encourage you to do the same.

A couple weeks ago my son Miles and I were walking around the D.C. Booth Fish Hatchery in Spearfish (where I spend probably 20% of my leisure time) when I was hit with an idea for a story. Story ideas come to me all the time, but not like this. It had a beginning, a middle and an end. It had defined characters.

When we got home I shared the idea with Michelle, my wife. The next day, I shared the story idea with Derek. Neither of them said it sucked, so I figured I better write a synopsis, which you’ll find below. This will be the base from which I work, but what form it will take I haven’t decided, perhaps a screenplay or a chapter story. Regardless of form, considering that usually I dive into a writing project with little more than a premise and vague ideas for characters and an opening, I’m feeling good about its chances for completion.

Before you read this synopsis, please forgive the names of the characters and locations (those haven’t hit me). I’m not a big fantasy reader, so if you are, please let me know if this is overly similar to another story. Let me know what you think.

* * *

Mitchell is baron in the Kingdom of Mira. Although he has served his king faithfully and has been generously rewarded for his loyalty, Mitchell is not satisfied with his station. He is bold, boastfully and has made no secret of his ambitious for the ancient King’s throne.

One day, Mitchell receives the royal messenger with the King’s command for an audience the next day. Mitchell has no doubt the King has heard his agenda. Late in the evening, Mitchell confides in his older brother Marcus that although he believes he could claim the throne in a long, sustained coup, at the present the King would have little difficulty destroying him. Marcus reminds Mitchell of their family’s generations of loyalty to this King line and what with the most recent sacrifice of the life of their youngest brother, surely that would keep the King from crushing the Baron or his family.

The next day, Mitchell, as commanded, appears at the royal court. Mitchell is lead into a private meeting chamber with the King, who even dismisses the assassin guard. The King thanks Mitchell for his and his family’s service. The King expresses his condolences to Mitchell at the lose of a brother, but also reminds him of the tribute that has been paid to Mitchell’s family. The King bluntly asks why Mitchell thinks he should be king instead of himself. Mitchell boasts that with the combine of his youth and strength he would greatly expand the Territory for a kingdom of which his subjects could be proud.

The King points out his extremely long region, his happy, content and successful subjects. The King tells Mitchell that although he could easily replace him, he has something else in mind. The King acknowledges his own advanced  age, but that his only son is but an infant. The King knows he is not long for this world, and therefore, his son will not be old enough to ascend to the throne. He fears for the safety of his family in the power struggle that is likely to follow.

The King states he would yield the crown to Mitchell on two conditions. The first charge is that Mitchell would protect and provide for the King’s family as his own. The second charge is a quest the King promises will be more difficult.

The King presents Mitchell with a small, locked orb chest. Mitchell’s charge is to deliver the Orb to the Enchanter’s Keep at Pax Noir, a distance protectorate of the Kingdom. Once again, Mitchell is boastfully, and pridefully accepts the charges.

Mitchell, his older brother Marcus, and their teenage nephew, Leon, set out on their journey to the distant province.

Two weeks into the journey, Marcus begins to get spooked by rumors of the Enchanter and his keep. To keep Marcus from turning back, Mitchell agrees to stop at a nearby abby to consult with a holy man.

At the Benedict of Faremira, they meet a monk named Charles who claims to have anticipated their arrival. He is a scholar in the subject of evil enchantment. Charles explains that almost nothing is know about the Enchanter of Pax Noir, only that he is ancient and has been entangled with doings of Kings of the region for centuries. It is well know, however, that his keep is guarded by a powerful magical creature. The beast will only allow passage on one of three conditions: Payment in each visitor’s weight in gold; a human sacrifice for the ogre to devour; or defeat in combat. As the beast is a magical being, only another enchanted being could defeat him. Should a man somehow manage to best the creature, the curse of guarding the keep would be transfered to that man, who would himself become the creature.

Marcus is even more fearful now, but Mitchell laughs at the notion of magical creatures and “fairy folk”. The monk can tell that Mitchell will not be swayed from his charge, and therefore, insists that he accompany the party. Mitchell agrees, as the monk’s presence will placate Marcus, but he will not be responsible for the Monk’s safety.

After nine weeks journey, the party arrives in Pax Noir. Even though he claims to doubt the existence of magical creatures, Mitchell has the group hide near the Enchanter’s Keep to perform reconnaissance. The entrance gate to the Keep appears to be at the end of a long, stone bridge across an abyssal mote.

They observe a party of five approach the bridge to the Keep. Suddenly, a hideous monster charges down the long bridge from the Keep’s entrance gate door. The lead member of this group charges with his sword. The creature slashes with claws that quickly shreds the man to ribbons of flesh.

The beast has a long exchange with the rest of party, with much gesturing. Finally, the two front members gesture to the rear members to step forward. Mitchell and his party watch in horror as the beast swiftly devours the two men alive. The beast allows the remaining two men to pass. They run down the long bridge and disappear into the Keep’s gate.

After a great deal of coaxing, Mitchell leads his group to the edge of the bridge. Again, the creature appears. The beast presents the terms of passage. Charles, the Monk, takes no comfort in the terms being the same as he understood them to be.

Mitchell taunts the beast shouting that in combat he could easily best a feeble minded “troll”, magical or otherwise. The beast laughs at Mitchell’s boasting, but corrects one point in the statement, that he is no troll, but an Orcus. Charles mutters the more common term – ogre. At this, the Ogre bursts into a rage demanding the party make its terms or depart. The other members of the party drag Mitchell away as he continues his boastful shouting spree. Still the Ogre laughs calling back that the “little baron” not return until he is ready to put his words to task.

As dusk settles, the group arrives in a small village and enters an inn. As the party dines Mitchell complains of the sorry condition of the province, blaming this on the weakness of the protector’s lord. He asks the inn keep who is the lord of this land. The inn keep respectfully tells Mitchell that the Lord was killed many years ago, but his widow is a kind and beloved warden. The inn keep tells Mitchell if his party would like to met the Lady they should return the next even, that a man will be there to make the arrangements.

Although Marcus wants to abandon the quest and begin the journey home that very evening, Mitchell and Charles want to see what aid might be gained from an alliance with the Lady of Pax Noir.

The next day, Mitchell instructs his nephew, Leon, to observe entrance to the Enchanter’s Keep while the rest of the group surveils the complete parameter. By late afternoon, bored and lonely, Leon dozes off into a dream that is seductive, lurid then horribly frightening. It is nearly dusk when he is awoken by his uncle Marcus, who is very cross at the boy for falling asleep. The boy asks his uncles how the search went but they remain silent.

At the inn, the keeper introduces Mitchell to Rais, a handsome young man with obvious charisma. Rais leads the party to the manor of Lady Pax. As Rais leads the party into the hall, the Lady rises from her chair and comes forward to greet them.

As the night proceeds, the members of the party are increasingly impressed with the Lady, except for Mitchell, who remains disdainful. It becomes clear that she and Rais are in love. Mitchell bluntly questions this and the Lady is direct in her disclosure: she would wed Rais if by doing so she would not have to relinquish her title, as is the King’s law. She says it is her only compromise. Mitchell points out that her tolerance of the Enchanter’s wickedness is also a compromise. The Lady corrects Mitchell that the Enchanter and the Ogre are not a compromise, but a curse. Then she commands Rais to escort them out.

The next day the party takes another look around the Keep. Even Mitchell seems like he might give up. As they are about to return to the village, Leon wonders aloud what the Ogre does at night. Mitchell forces the party back to the hiding spot near the Keep’s entrance.

Just after dusk, the party witnesses the young man Rais emerge from the Keep. After Rais crossing the bridge, it vanishes and Rais makes his way to the Lady’s manor. The party tails him. From the shadows they watch all night until just before dawn, when Rais exits the manor to return to the Keep.

The party confronts Rais, as the Ogre. Mitchell tells him they know his secret. The monk begs the Rais repent. Rais explains that he made the deal with the Enchanter to become the Ogre to gain the means to win the love of the Lady. He continues to devour human flesh since that is what gives him his power of transformation. He begs them, for the sake of that love, to maintain his secret. In return, the Ogre promises great wealth. Otherwise, he promises death. Mitchell tries to bargain for entrance to the Keep, but the Ogre can not grant that outside of the regular terms.

The party fleas from the Keep. As it is daylight, the Ogre can not pursue them. Mitchell is determined to see the Lady. Charles the monk also thinks its a good idea, so Marcus allows it. Mitchell sneaks into the manor and confronts the Lady. He explains to her that Rais is the Ogre and beg her to help destroy the deceiver with the aid of her guards. She threatens to call her guards if he doesn’t leave now and never return.

Mitchell rejoins his party. On learning of the Lady’s reaction, Marcus bursts into a rage at Charles the Monk, who begs for forgiveness. Marcus will not grant it, stating that the Monk is damned with the rest of them. Convinced of no other course, the party makes plans to combat the Ogre.

Late afternoon, the party approaches the bridge to the Keep. The Ogre states his disappointment at seeing them return. The party charges the Ogre, which transforms into a many armed beast that thwarts their attach. Charles the Monk is killed in the charge.

Mitchell, Marcus and Leon fall back, then charge again. They are interrupted as the Lady arrives on horseback. She dismounts and walks to the Ogre calling him by name – Rais. She tells him that she knows his secret and loves him for who he is, ogre or not. She will even openly declare their love, but he must stop devouring human flesh or she will never set eyes on him again.

At first the Ogre has an expression of great sadness, but it soon changes to extreme agony. He bellows curses and threats at Mitchell. Then he turns his anger to the Lady, shouting that at first he ate flesh for the power of transformation, but now he does so because he enjoys it. Without saying a word, the Lady turns and begins to walk away. In a rage, the Ogre slays the Lady.

Mitchell and Leon stand frozen in surprise. Marcus quickly steps forward to the Ogre, drops his weapon and states that he will be the toll. Mitchell rushes forward to stop his brother, but it is too late. As the Ogre devours Marcus who screams for Mitchell to save the boy. Mitchell charges to attack, but the Ogre dodges and tells him his toll of flesh is paid so he may pass and that, for the moment, the boy will be safe.

With hesitation and regret, Mitchell crosses the bridge and enters the Keep. Despite the immensity of the Keep’s exterior, inside Mitchell finds a modest sized hall. The Enchanter welcomes Mitchell by name. Mitchell presents the orb chest, which the Enchanter accepts without response. Mitchell demands to know the significants of the quest.

The Enchanter explains that the King owes his long and successful rule to a spell. In exchange, the souls of the king and any blood heir belong to the Enchanter – unless the King finds a worthy substitute onto which to transfer the spell. The Enchanter asks Mitchell if he will accept the King’s “gift.”

Outside, Leon waits, no longer disguising his fear and loath of the Ogre. Mitchell emerges from the Keep. As he nears the Ogre, Mitchell unsheathes his sword. Sensing this, the Ogre turns to Mitchell with a look a resignation. Mitchell slices off the Ogre’s head with one stroke.

Within moments, Mitchell drops his sword and begins to transform into an orcus, while the body of the slain Ogre changes, not into the handsome young Rais, but a homely middle aged man.

Leon stares at his uncle the Ogre. Mitchell picks up his sword and stares back. The tells the boy to go home, that with the kingdom in anarchy, his family will need him. Leon says he does not understand. The Ogre begins crossing the bridge to the Keep’s gate. The boy begs his uncle to stay, but Mitchell shouts back “Leave, now. Make haste”, then disappears into the Keep.

Leon stays and weeps, then suddenly the bridge begins to vanish and the ground shake and rumble. He flees for his mount as the Keep begins to disintegrate, collapsing into the bottomless pit that surrounds it.

Alone, Leon begins the long journey back to his home far from Pax Noir.

That didn’t happen, but I don’t mind. I’m still making progress on the project, and more importantly, I’m having fun doing it… mostly. Most of my projects take forever to complete, when I actually manage complete them. And just as many of my projects die a long, lingering death. Hopefully this latest won’t be one of them.

I mention this project on Dirty Sprocket because we had planned to make a video for the song One More Disaster, but after pushing production back a month three times in a row, I’ve decided to just table that particular task until I get the whole recording much closer to completion. It’s too bad, though, because I was excited about it, and I think other were too. Who wouldn’t be excited about a 1980s retro video with cardboard robots and preppy jerk boyfriends.

I’ve put a link to a sample of my latest work-in-progress here for your enjoyment, a song titled God Bless the Also Ran. Just music right now, as I still need to record the vocals. For more information about my various and current music projects, visit my websites at amende.us and vonvaragon.com. I hope you enjoy.