I cannot say this enough:"I HAVE ALWAYS SUPPORTED ROBOT MARRIAGE RIGHTS! PLEASE REMEMBER THAT IN YOUR CYBERBRAINS!"
I'm just trying to stay off my Dyson's list of six.
(h/t BoingBoing)
Monday, September 06, 2010
Sunday, September 05, 2010
LEVERAGE #313 'The Morning After Job" Question Post
And sure, we'll slip a spoiler or two in about the winter eps if you're clever. Go for it.
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Netflix Friday #13: STRANGERS WITH CANDY
"... lather."
Oh, yes, you all know David Sedaris. Meet his funnier sister.
Amy Sedaris co-wrote a clutch of plays with her brother, did the hip improv circuit for a while, then transitioned to television. As the story goes, one night her friends Stephen Colbert and Paul Dinello ...
... yeah, sure, I'll let that sink in for a bit.
... Stephen Colbert and Paul Dinello showed her a tape of an inspirational speaker, one of those women recounting a life of prostitution, drug addiction, alcoholism and sexual antics far beyond the safe paths walked by men such as Keith Richards. They dreamed up the idea of such a woman -- the hyper-addicted, racist, omniverously sexual Jerri Blank -- returning to high school.
Strangers With Candy was born.
Each episode of Strangers is framed like an Afterschool Special or ABC Family show gone horribly, horribly wrong. You know the episode of your standard family sitcom, where the high school student is given an egg to care for, to teach them the responsibility of caring for a baby? Hijinks ensue!
On Strangers, they run out of eggs. So Jerri and her female best friend get a real baby. Which, at one point, Jerri attempts to sell, all as her relationship with her female best friend spirals into an abusive white trash sexual burn. She makes drugs so she can be friends with the cheerleaders. She tries to seduce her study partners, male and female, using her ... ugh ... "Liberty Bell." She puts on a puppet show for a "crippled boy" that ends in a bloody apocalypse. She joins a cult that ultimately rejects her after she urges them on to mass suicide. Her father's in a coma; her stepmother's a raging alcoholic; Stephen Colbert and Paul Dinello play teachers who share both a forbidden love and a deep hatred of their students.
Sedaris is remarkable in this show. Her Jerri is over the top and also logically consistent within the perverse alternate reality of the show. The physical transformation is amazing; Sedaris really stands out as a comedian willing to toss away her own good looks and join the British tradition of homely self-mockery.
All the episodes end in tragedy, a fair number in death.
Oh, and in dance. They all end in a dance number.
The show is monstrously politically incorrect, but for a point. The real versions of these shows, even the modern iterations, are part of the Agnewization of television (hello, Glass Teat). They all end with messages that reinforce conforming to the existing social order. (And yes, I'm looking at you supposedly subversive Glee on supposedly risky Fox)
The beauty of each Stranger episode is that, in theory, the plot is played straight. Despite the bizarre characters moving within the world, the events arrange themselves to impart a valuable lesson. And, wonderfully, Jerri manages to come to exactly the wrong conclusion at the end of every episode. Because she is horrible.
Strangers with Candy, Seasons 1-3, are your Netflix Streaming recommendation for this weekend.
Wednesday, September 01, 2010
LEVERAGE #308 "The Boost Job" Post-Game
Before we start, I'd like to note that the snark levels are getting a little spiky in the Comments. Keep it even, people.
This episode was actually written fairly early in the season. Albert Kim came in with the story of how stolen cars are being cloned and stolen interstate, along with a ton of research about car theft rings. It was a great Leverage pitch. Clear bad guy plot set in an interesting location with naturally dangerous threats. We'd actually scouted the speedway the year before, and had it up on the board in the "To Do" column of cards. Once written, though, its scope demanded that it be moved back, to where we'd built up a little safety room before tackling something this big.
Every writer breaks story different ways. Downey has the high concept premise in his head. I pitch plot. Boylan comes at it purely from charactery goodness. Veach also likes high-concept, while Geoff comes at it almost from a wish-fulfillment "what would be fin to watch the Leverage team do?". The Wonder Twins and Albert are both research hounds. Both pitch up so much solid info about the real-life crimes that story and character fall out of reality. It's worth noting these different styles because it's worth reinforcing that there is no one right way to break a story (except mine) or be a television writer. Know your toolbox. Work to expand it. But at the end of the day, as my grandfather said -- "A man's got to know his swing."
This story allowed us to homage our favorite Rockford Files episode "Never Send a Boy King to Do A Man's Job." This one is the ur-Rockford. Richie Brocklemaan. Rockford saying "I'm not going to get involved"... and then laying out the whole con in a "if you were gonna do it" scene. Multiple long cons, shady characters from Rockford's past, Downey's favorite scene -- the "audition" of con men, like a casting call -- and the infamous "Get Hittite pot" on Rockford's "con to-do" list.
He has a to-do list. It's hilarious.
And Rockford hooks the bad guy by out-racing him. Seriously, all that's missing is the silver racing suit.
We were very pleased to have Bill Engvall for a bad guy. We'd been talking about having him on for ages, and his schedule finally worked out for us on this episode. I used to do stand-up with Bill back in the day -- never hung together, but bumped into each other often enough that we recognized each other at the upfronts. There, among the professionally pretty people and powerbrokers in suits, I asked him "You ever think you'd be standing here?" He shook his head and said "No way." He's a good, honest, hard-working funny son of a bitch. Pleasure to see him doing so well, and beginning to stretch into one hours. I think his performance on Leverage shows he's going to have a great career doing dramas.
Also ridiculously lucky to have Malese Jow. Because I am a cranky forty-year old, I had no idea who she was. On the first day of dailies, I emailed Albert and said "Good GOD, does she have a development deal?" He then had to explain to me that Malese was ridiculously famous and was doing far better in her career than I ever will. Ah, obsolescence, I welcome your sweet embrace.
The EMP car-killer is, of course a lot bigger than what we built, but it's real enough. As are the "cheat codes" and about 90% of the tech we throw around in this one. It really is amazing how little we know about cars now, and how high-tech they are.
This is also one of the places where we establish the limits of the earbuds. Not that the limits are consistent, of course, but that sometimes they don't work. They were getting a little too reliable, and we really need to make sure not everything works for the team all the time.
Other than that it was a pretty straight-up Leverage episode. Oh, and Hutton really drove the racecar. And Kane did his own car hit. So other than the cast trying to kill me with stress, very ordinary episode. Let's jump into the questions.
@Jennifer: Was the Shelby Cobra on tonight's episode an original or a kit built?
Kit built, but for legal reasons we couldn't name it in the episode. Which meant we had to come up with another name; we chose "Veronica". In theory that was a pain in the ass, but serendipitously led to one of the best jokes of the night: "Who knew Betty was the fast one?" Always something good in the barrel.
@Anonymous: My question - what are we seeing exactly between Parker and the teen - mentor, older sister, seeing "herself"?
Seeing herself, and acting on her nascent sense of family. Hell, five years ago she probably wouldn't have been self aware enough to see the resemblance.
@Sherri: What's with the humanizing of Parker? Seriously, I love the development, but it's playing with my head.
I think it's just the natural reaction to having people in her life that care about her. Don't worry, she'll never be quite right.
@Anonymous: Have we ever seen Eliot kill someone? I don't really recall we did, but it seems like we are going to, real soon.
No, you have not seen him kill anyone while working with the Leverage team. Yet. Considering his headspace, they would have to be in real, real trouble before he'd kill anyone again.
Very, very bad trouble.
@Andy: "They hit me with a car!" If I remember my Venture Brothers dialog correctly, there was a line from the first episode (not pilot) that went, "They hit me with A TRUCK!" Has Eliot entered Brock Sampson levels of resilience?
He is the Leverage-verse Brock Samson.
@Whimseyrhodes: when Eliot zapped the cars on the big rig, how did he avoid hitting the rig itself? Are we to assume it was a very-super-ultra-uber localized beam like a bullet, and wouldn't stray from it's trajectory?
It is indeed a tight linear beam, just like the real one.
@Rick: The EMP Cannon; Ledger or Black Box?
See above.
@Oona: 1.) Nate has been fairly easy on Parker, both in the Inside Job and here, when she made rash decisions that turned out badly. Is Parker sort of the "favored" baby of the family to him or is he just feeling the most protective of her because he knows she (seemingly) has had the toughest time of it or something else? The ending with the big dinner was awesome - such a nice throwback to the Wedding Job. 2.) Was that scene fully scripted or did the cast just riff?
I don't think he's gone easy on her. I think being a good manager is knowing when to let the horse run. And he is much, much more cognizant of his own failings this year than last. 2.) As Albert notes in his Twitter feed, the final scene was a Gina pitch. We're now at the point where the actors have very canny senses of who these people are and what we need to see them do. Making the show is far more interesting at this point in a show's arc.
@Bethia: At the beginnning, the guy in the truck was said to be a school teacher on the "newscast". At the end, Nate said something about the client's landscaping business. I'm confused. Thanks!
He does landscaping part-time to pay the bills, as we criminally underpay our schoolteachers. The victim was named Mantlo, btw, after ROM writer Bill Mantlo. We have a bit of a ROM thing int he room. I will torture the writer's room for hours with my "Rom-com".
@SueN: 1) Why didn't Eliot zap his truck's system when he zapped the cars? (Oh, and much love for Eliot with a raygun! *g*) 2) The Challenger was Eliot's. So, did he trade in his truck from last season, or does he collect vehicles? (And will he get the Challenger back from Nate? *g*) 3.) For two and a half seasons now, we've heard Eliot bitch and bark at Parker and call her crazy (and tonight threaten to kill her). And, granted, annoyed!Eliot is funny!Eliot. To us. But what about Parker? Does she take his barking and bitching and "there's somethin' wrong with you" seriously, or does she understand that anger is Eliot's particular kind of craziness?
1.) Noted above. 2) He collects vehicles. Which he occasionally gives away, to prove he is not attached to them. 3.) She both takes him literally and interprets him differently than normal people. There is something wrong with her.
Ian: I just wanted to say that the decision to make the EMP gun have the same warm-up sound as the Ghostbusters' proton packs -- and then have Hardison say "this chick is toast" -- was pure genius.
I believe that was our creative post humans riffing off the dialogue line. They're like little comedy elves. We show up for the first cut, and there are the bonus jokes, under the tree, utterly unexpected.
@Marquis: I'd like to ask if the Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A Start for cars really exists but I'm kind of afraid of the answer.
Not quite that combo, but yes, those cheat codes exist.
@Courtney: Gonna take a guess here and say that Eliot has had dive training at some point? I'm starting to wonder if he wasn't a Navy SEAL in another life.
Army boy. But yeah, he can handle himself in a variety of settings.
@MacSTL: One question for now - We have seen the team use the bar much more for the con. We know Hardison owns the building. Did the team work out some special deal with Cora? What is the relationship now?
Cora still owns the bar, but the Leverage team are trusted friends. Family, practically. If no one's using the place, it's theirs to use how they will.
@USRaider: My question is: you probably write at least a half an episode more than what we see on the screen. What are the decisions that go into what actually makes an episode and what happens to the material you don't use?
Good Lord, we're too lazy to do more work than necessary. Now, although we often wind up with more story than we need when breaking an episode, we are writing to a specific production budget, which means a certain number of shooting days and certain number of pages per shooting day. Our scripts run from 50-55 pages, generally. 56 if they're dialogue-heavy. When shooting, we're rarely more than a few minutes long on the first cut.
@USRaider: Noticed that, after the job was finished and Nate and Sophie were discussing Parker's "punishment," when Nate called Parker over, she seemed to have that "revering" look that she had with Archie at the end of "The Inside Job." Does this mean that Parker has accepted Nate as her new tutor or is it more of the familial dynamic that the team has created?
I think it's more that Beth Riesgraf admires Tim Hutton for his magnificent leadership and ... oh, never mind. I think it read more as a reserved attitude, sort of an emotional waiting space you can read a lot into.
@Joe Helfrich: "You can hack anything with a battery, right? ... You now have 1 minute thirty seconds." This is how Parker flirts, isn't it?
The poor boy is doomed.
@LawMonkey: Interesting to see the 360 on the evil duo of evil (plus potential proto-Parker). Was that a first, or did we have a 360 on the 2 Live Crew Job?
... you know what? Great catch. I think that was a first.
@Rebecca: Parker told Eliot she'd been a thief since she was 9. Now we find out she was boosting cars at 12 and was a getaway driver before that (sometime between ages 9 and 12). She was a pickpocket when she met Archie. How old was she when she met up with Archie? We know she lost a brother as a child, will we ever see what happened to her real parents and why she was in the foster system? In the pilot, did she blow up her real parents' home or her foster parents'?
Remember, on Leverage you will never see Wolverine run into the woods in a poncey nightshirt. Or, for those of you who have lives, we will never nail down their backgrounds in one linear narrative. Although I will say those were (one set of) her foster parents she blew up in the pilot, I'm not going to confirm or deny that the boy who died was her real brother or one of her foster brothers.
@Odie: I also enjoyed the final scene with the team eating together. Which leads to questions: 1.) why wasn't Eliot eating? 2.) In scenes like that, where they're all talking at once, or like the one where Nate told Sophie to stall, are their lines scripted, or do they just improvise? 3.) Who hit Eliot with the car?
1.) He had his 500 calories for the day. 2.) It depends. They usually improv when so many of them are talking, it's very hard to script that. 3.) A drunken pensioner who then raced off to hider her sin.
@Moxie: If Hardison's EMP gun was directionalized enough that it could disable the cars without disabling the auto-carrier, how is it that it knocked out Eliot's earbud (which was in the opposite direction)?
The earbuds are more sensitive, and were closer to the gun. EM bleed. If he wore a watch, he would've noticed that it stopped. (And no, he doesn't ever wear a watch.)
@BobRoland: John, First I wanted to thank you both for Leverage and the comic Blue Beetle. I took my son to a comic book store last week (he just caught the bug) and found back issues of the book. I bought them all, and both my son and I loved him. The humanity you brought to the character was refreshing.1.) I recall reading some talk about a live action Blue Beetle show. If there was such a show, would you ever have an interest in writing for Jamie again? 2.) About the episode, I loved it, but I had some concerns about the EMP gun. I get that technology in the Leverage universe is a bit more magical than in ours, but are you worried about having to explain away in future episodes why they just don't use this device on a regular basis? It seems to me that having access to a magic "make electronics not work for a half hour" device would we too easy a way out for many stories.
1.) I'd love to write for Jaime again. We'll see what happens if the show goes forward. 2) The EMP gun has very specific uses -- and you will actually see it again.
@jimbo: Brief question - was Gina saying "nicking" in the script, or her addition? On a similar note, do you have anyone in-house to help with the English slang or is it just Gina?
"Nicking" was in the script, but we've had Sophie use the word before. There's probably a reason she prefers that word. Although our amazing Mary Mac helps with accents, we write the slang and Gina tells us if it's off or not.
@Lily: I've noticed in all the episodes Eliot always gives Parker the fed up look or just the I can't stand you look. Eliot gave Hardison the high five for morale in the last episode so will there ever be a time when he actually supports/tolerates Parker?
He and Parker have a very different, very professional relationship. if anything, he gets along with her better 80% of the time. Watch the pairing scenes when we break them off in episodes. Eliot always feels he has to keep an eye on Hardison. He relies on Parker.
@Nina May: (question about Sophie's rings that is incredibly complex and well though out)
Although Gina has Sophie wear different rings for different personas, I'm not sure it's as codified as you think it is. Kind of a halfway point between the methodology you posit and Gina and Nadine Haders coming up with what feels right for the persona.
@jenks: I know this question should have come with the Inside Job, but we've now met at least one person from everyone's past except Hardison. Is that ever going to happen? (Please say yes. . . )
Season 4
@Katie: I'd like to chime in about when the heck we're going to get to see more of Sophie's background. In my head she's actually a girl from a very small, very poor mid-western town that chose an English accent and a French name to make herself feel more sophisticated. Far fetched I know, but I'm just throwing it out there, would explain a few things, most specifically how well she understands the American high school system. And also it makes me giggle a little. 1.) But for serious, when do we get to see her background story? 2.) Will we ever get to see more flashbacks of Nate chasing the team. If my memory serves we've only seen him actually chasing/catching Sophie, but it could be fun to see more of their past that led them together.
1.) You got big hints of it in "The King George Job" as you know know. And she is, indeed, British. 2.) I think "Rashomon" counts, but we'll see what else comes up in S4.
@babysmoke: Come to think of it, maybe I do have a question for Mr. Rogers. Has a crossover ever been tabled or carded for future shows/seasons? If yes, which shows have been tossed around?
Well, the main problem is that all the other shows on TNT are made by giant studios, who may or may not want to play nice with our little indie studio, by which I mean the crazy guy financing the show. But yes, we've discussed it, and I'm not going to name names because I don't want to queer the deal if we try to do one for S4.
@Katie: One more question, how much of Nate and Sophie's stalling fight (kneeing him was brilliant btw) was Sophie legitimately being pissed at him and airing her grievances while she had the chance? The comments about him being drunk and her paying made me think she was being serious. And what's with Sophie being violent with Nate lately? There's been a couple slaps and now a junk-shot. Oh, and was Sophie honestly pissed about him slapping her ass? Did Nate do it just to cop a feel? He seemed pretty unashamed about it...
Sophie works Method.
@Sullivan: Your twitter tease re. the "Saint" story is tantalizing. But, now I'm wondering if I can reread all of my Saint collection before the finale airs. Do you realize that there were over a hundred "Saint" stories? So can you narrow it down a bit? Was it post-Patricia Holm? Pre- or post-WW2? Was Teal or Fernack involved? Please don't keep us in suspense forever - as the bishop said to the actress.
For those who don't know, I mentioned on Twitter that my half of the season finale is inspired by an old Simon Templar story -- hell, I think you can point to the Saint as a direct influence on the birth of Leverage. I will say the story is from later in the series.
@Dawn?StL-MO" Has there ever been a scene you wrote that ended up being totally unworkable - one or two you would have loved to have pulled off?
Most of the time we find ways to do at least SOME version of the scene. There are a few times where physical production stops us -- there was a zipline beat in the Christmas episode that was cut. But generally, no, we find a way to do almost everything, just to scale.
@AMY:This is a more general question, but will we ever see how people come to find the Leverage team? You have episodes w/ victims from all over the place and I've always wanted to see at least one of them show how they found the crew.
The Leverage team tends to find them, as mentioned in "The Homecoming Job". Hardison has trackers set up with both the news feeds and with legal aid departments, etc, that help them find clients.
@Anna: 1. A 12-year-old as a getaway driver? Was that like the world's worst foster father (and most definitely the stupidest)? 2. Those laser transponder car thingies don't seem like they should've been around during Parker's stint as a car thief. I thought she was exclusively a diamond thief when she joined up, so does that mean she had a 'thief' relapse during her time with the crew? Or did she just steal cars and tell no one? 3. NLP again! Yay! Will we see other characters using this technique as well?
1.) There have been dumber criminals. 2.) Parker stays up on her thief tech. She's a hobbyist at least in that stuff. 3.) That tends to be Sophie's territory. The rest lack the subtlety to use it.
@Heather: what happens to the employees of the big corporations that the team takes down? Like the sexting dude from the wheat company or the receptionist that Eliot flirted with in the pilot. They were able to send the rival mom and pop salespeople to Tahiti or Hawaii or whatever, but they can't do that for everyone. Is this ever going to come back to bite them in the ass? Are they going to be contacted by someone who's been unemployed and gotten in debt and then find out the client lost their job because of something the team did?
As I noted a while ago, they usually take down individuals. The times they've dinged a whole company is when the company itself has been based on a lie, and so is hurting the integrity of the free market system. (Don't snicker, I take that seriously). Sexting dude from the wheat company didn't lose his job, and even if he did, it was because of the layoffs already coming, not ones that the team initiated. Our guys drifted in behind those facts on the ground, using them for cover.
That said, they've definitely left some collateral damage around them. They just see it as acceptable when considering the damage done by the bad guys. They may be wrong. They are not always very nice people.
@mad: While I love happy endings the teacher just taking Josie on as a landscaping assistant was a little too neat...and somehow a little creepy. He just took the race car and the girl and was going back home to his family?? And Josie just blithely went along with him? There must have been a long conversation we weren't in on!
Yes. A long, boring conversation devoid of drama, and hence unworthy of your valuable entertainment minutes.
@Codger: And I just thought of a question from the way-back machine. In the pilot Nate was about to fly out of Chicago, which happened to be where Sophie was living and Nate knew where she was working. Was Nate in Chicago to try to work up the nerve to go see Sophie and chickened out before Dubenich came to hire him?
No, but he certainly knew she was there. And if he got the job, well, no harm in calling...
@lily: (1) to what extent was the emp gun based on feasible technology? and (2) was Eliot truly upset with Parker? i wasn't sure how much was him deciding that he was sick and tired of her being crazy and untrustworthy as opposed to him just being understandably pissed about getting hit by a car and giving her shit because it *was* her fault. and (3) did Sophie's talk with Nate actually influence his decision to give Parker a break? or did he appreciate for himself how significant Parker's screwup was in terms of her interpersonal skills?
1.) See above. 2.) See above 3.) Sophie has a huge influence on Nate.
@RevTrask: Wasn't there a big risk of another "Cousin Jimmy" complication cropping up? With Penzer's history as a race driver, it would seem as though he'd have had the sources and connections to check out Nate's cover.
There's always that risk. But he did check out Nate, and this time Hardison's cover held.
Crescent: Twice Parker says "Outta my way, you old bat!" and in the Gone Fishing Job the wallpaper on one of the computers Parker is using is a cat saying "Outta my way, you old bat!" Is this an in-joke with the writers?
Nope, that's the computer guys having a bit of fun, having seen the upcoming script.
@ACK: 1) Why did the car alarms not ring when the cars were initially stolen at the parking lot? 2) If they had the keys to begin with, why go through the scene of them breaking in and hotwiring the cars? 3) Why didn't the gun kill the big rig?
1.) Because those were very ordinary alarms, and so easily circumvented by Parker. 2.) They didn't have all the keys. We just shortened the sequence/montage in the edit. 3.) Answered above.
@Anonymous: Can Hardison hack a PS3? The whole "hack anything with a battery thing" got me thinking of the deemed unhackable device.
Sure, but why?
@Heather: 1-Hardison hacked Sterling's car in the Two Horse Job, so why was he so freaked out when Parker asked him to do his thing on the one in the Boost Job?
2-If they had the keys, why did they have to break into all of those cars? Did they make the keys later, or yoink them from a valet board?
1.) Sterling's hack wasn't that difficult, or carrying a death sentence 2.) answered above.
@ChelseaNH: At the race track, Hardison reacts to Penzer's protest that no one could be his record by 15 seconds. Did the team put the bug on Penzer or his pit crew?
Nope, the track guy.
@Kris: Random question: That accent Sophie used when she was getting the dealership owners out of town--I guess I'd call it her go-to American accent? Is it supposed to be region-specific? Just curious. I don't have a great grasp on that sort of thing, and that's just one of my favorite Sophie voices. Something about it is very... not exactly calming or soothing, but reassuring, I guess? Definitely a voice you want to trust.
No, not region-specific. Generic newscaster American. You'll see that when she's not doing a specific regional accent, she has about three she cycles through depending on the social status/con role of the person she's doing.
Right, let's see if I can blow through another one of these tomorrow and at least get into double-digit episodes before the summer finale. As always, thanks for your time and attention.
This episode was actually written fairly early in the season. Albert Kim came in with the story of how stolen cars are being cloned and stolen interstate, along with a ton of research about car theft rings. It was a great Leverage pitch. Clear bad guy plot set in an interesting location with naturally dangerous threats. We'd actually scouted the speedway the year before, and had it up on the board in the "To Do" column of cards. Once written, though, its scope demanded that it be moved back, to where we'd built up a little safety room before tackling something this big.
Every writer breaks story different ways. Downey has the high concept premise in his head. I pitch plot. Boylan comes at it purely from charactery goodness. Veach also likes high-concept, while Geoff comes at it almost from a wish-fulfillment "what would be fin to watch the Leverage team do?". The Wonder Twins and Albert are both research hounds. Both pitch up so much solid info about the real-life crimes that story and character fall out of reality. It's worth noting these different styles because it's worth reinforcing that there is no one right way to break a story (except mine) or be a television writer. Know your toolbox. Work to expand it. But at the end of the day, as my grandfather said -- "A man's got to know his swing."
This story allowed us to homage our favorite Rockford Files episode "Never Send a Boy King to Do A Man's Job." This one is the ur-Rockford. Richie Brocklemaan. Rockford saying "I'm not going to get involved"... and then laying out the whole con in a "if you were gonna do it" scene. Multiple long cons, shady characters from Rockford's past, Downey's favorite scene -- the "audition" of con men, like a casting call -- and the infamous "Get Hittite pot" on Rockford's "con to-do" list.
He has a to-do list. It's hilarious.
And Rockford hooks the bad guy by out-racing him. Seriously, all that's missing is the silver racing suit.
We were very pleased to have Bill Engvall for a bad guy. We'd been talking about having him on for ages, and his schedule finally worked out for us on this episode. I used to do stand-up with Bill back in the day -- never hung together, but bumped into each other often enough that we recognized each other at the upfronts. There, among the professionally pretty people and powerbrokers in suits, I asked him "You ever think you'd be standing here?" He shook his head and said "No way." He's a good, honest, hard-working funny son of a bitch. Pleasure to see him doing so well, and beginning to stretch into one hours. I think his performance on Leverage shows he's going to have a great career doing dramas.
Also ridiculously lucky to have Malese Jow. Because I am a cranky forty-year old, I had no idea who she was. On the first day of dailies, I emailed Albert and said "Good GOD, does she have a development deal?" He then had to explain to me that Malese was ridiculously famous and was doing far better in her career than I ever will. Ah, obsolescence, I welcome your sweet embrace.
The EMP car-killer is, of course a lot bigger than what we built, but it's real enough. As are the "cheat codes" and about 90% of the tech we throw around in this one. It really is amazing how little we know about cars now, and how high-tech they are.
This is also one of the places where we establish the limits of the earbuds. Not that the limits are consistent, of course, but that sometimes they don't work. They were getting a little too reliable, and we really need to make sure not everything works for the team all the time.
Other than that it was a pretty straight-up Leverage episode. Oh, and Hutton really drove the racecar. And Kane did his own car hit. So other than the cast trying to kill me with stress, very ordinary episode. Let's jump into the questions.
@Jennifer: Was the Shelby Cobra on tonight's episode an original or a kit built?
Kit built, but for legal reasons we couldn't name it in the episode. Which meant we had to come up with another name; we chose "Veronica". In theory that was a pain in the ass, but serendipitously led to one of the best jokes of the night: "Who knew Betty was the fast one?" Always something good in the barrel.
@Anonymous: My question - what are we seeing exactly between Parker and the teen - mentor, older sister, seeing "herself"?
Seeing herself, and acting on her nascent sense of family. Hell, five years ago she probably wouldn't have been self aware enough to see the resemblance.
@Sherri: What's with the humanizing of Parker? Seriously, I love the development, but it's playing with my head.
I think it's just the natural reaction to having people in her life that care about her. Don't worry, she'll never be quite right.
@Anonymous: Have we ever seen Eliot kill someone? I don't really recall we did, but it seems like we are going to, real soon.
No, you have not seen him kill anyone while working with the Leverage team. Yet. Considering his headspace, they would have to be in real, real trouble before he'd kill anyone again.
Very, very bad trouble.
@Andy: "They hit me with a car!" If I remember my Venture Brothers dialog correctly, there was a line from the first episode (not pilot) that went, "They hit me with A TRUCK!" Has Eliot entered Brock Sampson levels of resilience?
He is the Leverage-verse Brock Samson.
@Whimseyrhodes: when Eliot zapped the cars on the big rig, how did he avoid hitting the rig itself? Are we to assume it was a very-super-ultra-uber localized beam like a bullet, and wouldn't stray from it's trajectory?
It is indeed a tight linear beam, just like the real one.
@Rick: The EMP Cannon; Ledger or Black Box?
See above.
@Oona: 1.) Nate has been fairly easy on Parker, both in the Inside Job and here, when she made rash decisions that turned out badly. Is Parker sort of the "favored" baby of the family to him or is he just feeling the most protective of her because he knows she (seemingly) has had the toughest time of it or something else? The ending with the big dinner was awesome - such a nice throwback to the Wedding Job. 2.) Was that scene fully scripted or did the cast just riff?
I don't think he's gone easy on her. I think being a good manager is knowing when to let the horse run. And he is much, much more cognizant of his own failings this year than last. 2.) As Albert notes in his Twitter feed, the final scene was a Gina pitch. We're now at the point where the actors have very canny senses of who these people are and what we need to see them do. Making the show is far more interesting at this point in a show's arc.
@Bethia: At the beginnning, the guy in the truck was said to be a school teacher on the "newscast". At the end, Nate said something about the client's landscaping business. I'm confused. Thanks!
He does landscaping part-time to pay the bills, as we criminally underpay our schoolteachers. The victim was named Mantlo, btw, after ROM writer Bill Mantlo. We have a bit of a ROM thing int he room. I will torture the writer's room for hours with my "Rom-com".
@SueN: 1) Why didn't Eliot zap his truck's system when he zapped the cars? (Oh, and much love for Eliot with a raygun! *g*) 2) The Challenger was Eliot's. So, did he trade in his truck from last season, or does he collect vehicles? (And will he get the Challenger back from Nate? *g*) 3.) For two and a half seasons now, we've heard Eliot bitch and bark at Parker and call her crazy (and tonight threaten to kill her). And, granted, annoyed!Eliot is funny!Eliot. To us. But what about Parker? Does she take his barking and bitching and "there's somethin' wrong with you" seriously, or does she understand that anger is Eliot's particular kind of craziness?
1.) Noted above. 2) He collects vehicles. Which he occasionally gives away, to prove he is not attached to them. 3.) She both takes him literally and interprets him differently than normal people. There is something wrong with her.
Ian: I just wanted to say that the decision to make the EMP gun have the same warm-up sound as the Ghostbusters' proton packs -- and then have Hardison say "this chick is toast" -- was pure genius.
I believe that was our creative post humans riffing off the dialogue line. They're like little comedy elves. We show up for the first cut, and there are the bonus jokes, under the tree, utterly unexpected.
@Marquis: I'd like to ask if the Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A Start for cars really exists but I'm kind of afraid of the answer.
Not quite that combo, but yes, those cheat codes exist.
@Courtney: Gonna take a guess here and say that Eliot has had dive training at some point? I'm starting to wonder if he wasn't a Navy SEAL in another life.
Army boy. But yeah, he can handle himself in a variety of settings.
@MacSTL: One question for now - We have seen the team use the bar much more for the con. We know Hardison owns the building. Did the team work out some special deal with Cora? What is the relationship now?
Cora still owns the bar, but the Leverage team are trusted friends. Family, practically. If no one's using the place, it's theirs to use how they will.
@USRaider: My question is: you probably write at least a half an episode more than what we see on the screen. What are the decisions that go into what actually makes an episode and what happens to the material you don't use?
Good Lord, we're too lazy to do more work than necessary. Now, although we often wind up with more story than we need when breaking an episode, we are writing to a specific production budget, which means a certain number of shooting days and certain number of pages per shooting day. Our scripts run from 50-55 pages, generally. 56 if they're dialogue-heavy. When shooting, we're rarely more than a few minutes long on the first cut.
@USRaider: Noticed that, after the job was finished and Nate and Sophie were discussing Parker's "punishment," when Nate called Parker over, she seemed to have that "revering" look that she had with Archie at the end of "The Inside Job." Does this mean that Parker has accepted Nate as her new tutor or is it more of the familial dynamic that the team has created?
I think it's more that Beth Riesgraf admires Tim Hutton for his magnificent leadership and ... oh, never mind. I think it read more as a reserved attitude, sort of an emotional waiting space you can read a lot into.
@Joe Helfrich: "You can hack anything with a battery, right? ... You now have 1 minute thirty seconds." This is how Parker flirts, isn't it?
The poor boy is doomed.
@LawMonkey: Interesting to see the 360 on the evil duo of evil (plus potential proto-Parker). Was that a first, or did we have a 360 on the 2 Live Crew Job?
... you know what? Great catch. I think that was a first.
@Rebecca: Parker told Eliot she'd been a thief since she was 9. Now we find out she was boosting cars at 12 and was a getaway driver before that (sometime between ages 9 and 12). She was a pickpocket when she met Archie. How old was she when she met up with Archie? We know she lost a brother as a child, will we ever see what happened to her real parents and why she was in the foster system? In the pilot, did she blow up her real parents' home or her foster parents'?
Remember, on Leverage you will never see Wolverine run into the woods in a poncey nightshirt. Or, for those of you who have lives, we will never nail down their backgrounds in one linear narrative. Although I will say those were (one set of) her foster parents she blew up in the pilot, I'm not going to confirm or deny that the boy who died was her real brother or one of her foster brothers.
@Odie: I also enjoyed the final scene with the team eating together. Which leads to questions: 1.) why wasn't Eliot eating? 2.) In scenes like that, where they're all talking at once, or like the one where Nate told Sophie to stall, are their lines scripted, or do they just improvise? 3.) Who hit Eliot with the car?
1.) He had his 500 calories for the day. 2.) It depends. They usually improv when so many of them are talking, it's very hard to script that. 3.) A drunken pensioner who then raced off to hider her sin.
@Moxie: If Hardison's EMP gun was directionalized enough that it could disable the cars without disabling the auto-carrier, how is it that it knocked out Eliot's earbud (which was in the opposite direction)?
The earbuds are more sensitive, and were closer to the gun. EM bleed. If he wore a watch, he would've noticed that it stopped. (And no, he doesn't ever wear a watch.)
@BobRoland: John, First I wanted to thank you both for Leverage and the comic Blue Beetle. I took my son to a comic book store last week (he just caught the bug) and found back issues of the book. I bought them all, and both my son and I loved him. The humanity you brought to the character was refreshing.1.) I recall reading some talk about a live action Blue Beetle show. If there was such a show, would you ever have an interest in writing for Jamie again? 2.) About the episode, I loved it, but I had some concerns about the EMP gun. I get that technology in the Leverage universe is a bit more magical than in ours, but are you worried about having to explain away in future episodes why they just don't use this device on a regular basis? It seems to me that having access to a magic "make electronics not work for a half hour" device would we too easy a way out for many stories.
1.) I'd love to write for Jaime again. We'll see what happens if the show goes forward. 2) The EMP gun has very specific uses -- and you will actually see it again.
@jimbo: Brief question - was Gina saying "nicking" in the script, or her addition? On a similar note, do you have anyone in-house to help with the English slang or is it just Gina?
"Nicking" was in the script, but we've had Sophie use the word before. There's probably a reason she prefers that word. Although our amazing Mary Mac helps with accents, we write the slang and Gina tells us if it's off or not.
@Lily: I've noticed in all the episodes Eliot always gives Parker the fed up look or just the I can't stand you look. Eliot gave Hardison the high five for morale in the last episode so will there ever be a time when he actually supports/tolerates Parker?
He and Parker have a very different, very professional relationship. if anything, he gets along with her better 80% of the time. Watch the pairing scenes when we break them off in episodes. Eliot always feels he has to keep an eye on Hardison. He relies on Parker.
@Nina May: (question about Sophie's rings that is incredibly complex and well though out)
Although Gina has Sophie wear different rings for different personas, I'm not sure it's as codified as you think it is. Kind of a halfway point between the methodology you posit and Gina and Nadine Haders coming up with what feels right for the persona.
@jenks: I know this question should have come with the Inside Job, but we've now met at least one person from everyone's past except Hardison. Is that ever going to happen? (Please say yes. . . )
Season 4
@Katie: I'd like to chime in about when the heck we're going to get to see more of Sophie's background. In my head she's actually a girl from a very small, very poor mid-western town that chose an English accent and a French name to make herself feel more sophisticated. Far fetched I know, but I'm just throwing it out there, would explain a few things, most specifically how well she understands the American high school system. And also it makes me giggle a little. 1.) But for serious, when do we get to see her background story? 2.) Will we ever get to see more flashbacks of Nate chasing the team. If my memory serves we've only seen him actually chasing/catching Sophie, but it could be fun to see more of their past that led them together.
1.) You got big hints of it in "The King George Job" as you know know. And she is, indeed, British. 2.) I think "Rashomon" counts, but we'll see what else comes up in S4.
@babysmoke: Come to think of it, maybe I do have a question for Mr. Rogers. Has a crossover ever been tabled or carded for future shows/seasons? If yes, which shows have been tossed around?
Well, the main problem is that all the other shows on TNT are made by giant studios, who may or may not want to play nice with our little indie studio, by which I mean the crazy guy financing the show. But yes, we've discussed it, and I'm not going to name names because I don't want to queer the deal if we try to do one for S4.
@Katie: One more question, how much of Nate and Sophie's stalling fight (kneeing him was brilliant btw) was Sophie legitimately being pissed at him and airing her grievances while she had the chance? The comments about him being drunk and her paying made me think she was being serious. And what's with Sophie being violent with Nate lately? There's been a couple slaps and now a junk-shot. Oh, and was Sophie honestly pissed about him slapping her ass? Did Nate do it just to cop a feel? He seemed pretty unashamed about it...
Sophie works Method.
@Sullivan: Your twitter tease re. the "Saint" story is tantalizing. But, now I'm wondering if I can reread all of my Saint collection before the finale airs. Do you realize that there were over a hundred "Saint" stories? So can you narrow it down a bit? Was it post-Patricia Holm? Pre- or post-WW2? Was Teal or Fernack involved? Please don't keep us in suspense forever - as the bishop said to the actress.
For those who don't know, I mentioned on Twitter that my half of the season finale is inspired by an old Simon Templar story -- hell, I think you can point to the Saint as a direct influence on the birth of Leverage. I will say the story is from later in the series.
@Dawn?StL-MO" Has there ever been a scene you wrote that ended up being totally unworkable - one or two you would have loved to have pulled off?
Most of the time we find ways to do at least SOME version of the scene. There are a few times where physical production stops us -- there was a zipline beat in the Christmas episode that was cut. But generally, no, we find a way to do almost everything, just to scale.
@AMY:This is a more general question, but will we ever see how people come to find the Leverage team? You have episodes w/ victims from all over the place and I've always wanted to see at least one of them show how they found the crew.
The Leverage team tends to find them, as mentioned in "The Homecoming Job". Hardison has trackers set up with both the news feeds and with legal aid departments, etc, that help them find clients.
@Anna: 1. A 12-year-old as a getaway driver? Was that like the world's worst foster father (and most definitely the stupidest)? 2. Those laser transponder car thingies don't seem like they should've been around during Parker's stint as a car thief. I thought she was exclusively a diamond thief when she joined up, so does that mean she had a 'thief' relapse during her time with the crew? Or did she just steal cars and tell no one? 3. NLP again! Yay! Will we see other characters using this technique as well?
1.) There have been dumber criminals. 2.) Parker stays up on her thief tech. She's a hobbyist at least in that stuff. 3.) That tends to be Sophie's territory. The rest lack the subtlety to use it.
@Heather: what happens to the employees of the big corporations that the team takes down? Like the sexting dude from the wheat company or the receptionist that Eliot flirted with in the pilot. They were able to send the rival mom and pop salespeople to Tahiti or Hawaii or whatever, but they can't do that for everyone. Is this ever going to come back to bite them in the ass? Are they going to be contacted by someone who's been unemployed and gotten in debt and then find out the client lost their job because of something the team did?
As I noted a while ago, they usually take down individuals. The times they've dinged a whole company is when the company itself has been based on a lie, and so is hurting the integrity of the free market system. (Don't snicker, I take that seriously). Sexting dude from the wheat company didn't lose his job, and even if he did, it was because of the layoffs already coming, not ones that the team initiated. Our guys drifted in behind those facts on the ground, using them for cover.
That said, they've definitely left some collateral damage around them. They just see it as acceptable when considering the damage done by the bad guys. They may be wrong. They are not always very nice people.
@mad: While I love happy endings the teacher just taking Josie on as a landscaping assistant was a little too neat...and somehow a little creepy. He just took the race car and the girl and was going back home to his family?? And Josie just blithely went along with him? There must have been a long conversation we weren't in on!
Yes. A long, boring conversation devoid of drama, and hence unworthy of your valuable entertainment minutes.
@Codger: And I just thought of a question from the way-back machine. In the pilot Nate was about to fly out of Chicago, which happened to be where Sophie was living and Nate knew where she was working. Was Nate in Chicago to try to work up the nerve to go see Sophie and chickened out before Dubenich came to hire him?
No, but he certainly knew she was there. And if he got the job, well, no harm in calling...
@lily: (1) to what extent was the emp gun based on feasible technology? and (2) was Eliot truly upset with Parker? i wasn't sure how much was him deciding that he was sick and tired of her being crazy and untrustworthy as opposed to him just being understandably pissed about getting hit by a car and giving her shit because it *was* her fault. and (3) did Sophie's talk with Nate actually influence his decision to give Parker a break? or did he appreciate for himself how significant Parker's screwup was in terms of her interpersonal skills?
1.) See above. 2.) See above 3.) Sophie has a huge influence on Nate.
@RevTrask: Wasn't there a big risk of another "Cousin Jimmy" complication cropping up? With Penzer's history as a race driver, it would seem as though he'd have had the sources and connections to check out Nate's cover.
There's always that risk. But he did check out Nate, and this time Hardison's cover held.
Crescent: Twice Parker says "Outta my way, you old bat!" and in the Gone Fishing Job the wallpaper on one of the computers Parker is using is a cat saying "Outta my way, you old bat!" Is this an in-joke with the writers?
Nope, that's the computer guys having a bit of fun, having seen the upcoming script.
@ACK: 1) Why did the car alarms not ring when the cars were initially stolen at the parking lot? 2) If they had the keys to begin with, why go through the scene of them breaking in and hotwiring the cars? 3) Why didn't the gun kill the big rig?
1.) Because those were very ordinary alarms, and so easily circumvented by Parker. 2.) They didn't have all the keys. We just shortened the sequence/montage in the edit. 3.) Answered above.
@Anonymous: Can Hardison hack a PS3? The whole "hack anything with a battery thing" got me thinking of the deemed unhackable device.
Sure, but why?
@Heather: 1-Hardison hacked Sterling's car in the Two Horse Job, so why was he so freaked out when Parker asked him to do his thing on the one in the Boost Job?
2-If they had the keys, why did they have to break into all of those cars? Did they make the keys later, or yoink them from a valet board?
1.) Sterling's hack wasn't that difficult, or carrying a death sentence 2.) answered above.
@ChelseaNH: At the race track, Hardison reacts to Penzer's protest that no one could be his record by 15 seconds. Did the team put the bug on Penzer or his pit crew?
Nope, the track guy.
@Kris: Random question: That accent Sophie used when she was getting the dealership owners out of town--I guess I'd call it her go-to American accent? Is it supposed to be region-specific? Just curious. I don't have a great grasp on that sort of thing, and that's just one of my favorite Sophie voices. Something about it is very... not exactly calming or soothing, but reassuring, I guess? Definitely a voice you want to trust.
No, not region-specific. Generic newscaster American. You'll see that when she's not doing a specific regional accent, she has about three she cycles through depending on the social status/con role of the person she's doing.
Right, let's see if I can blow through another one of these tomorrow and at least get into double-digit episodes before the summer finale. As always, thanks for your time and attention.
Monday, August 30, 2010
GAME OF CAGES, sequel to CHILD OF FIRE
One of the few urban magic books -- for lack of a better term -- novels I enjoyed last year was Harry Connolly's Child of Fire. And I loved it.
Where too many of the genre have fallen into the Buffy Trap, Child of Fire's tone is much more straight-up noir with a magic bent. Ray Lilly is a convicted felon working off some undetermined debt to vicious, manipulative magician Annalise. He's a hard lad, she's a bastard, and unspeakable and irrevocable things are happening in a small town that need fixing.
Some people have compared it to Jim Butcher's books, this is magic Chandler or Thompson to Butcher's Hammett.
The next book in the series is out tomorrow. Do yourself a favor and grab it. In the Comments, toss in your latest fave fantasy/scifi read.
Where too many of the genre have fallen into the Buffy Trap, Child of Fire's tone is much more straight-up noir with a magic bent. Ray Lilly is a convicted felon working off some undetermined debt to vicious, manipulative magician Annalise. He's a hard lad, she's a bastard, and unspeakable and irrevocable things are happening in a small town that need fixing.
Some people have compared it to Jim Butcher's books, this is magic Chandler or Thompson to Butcher's Hammett.
The next book in the series is out tomorrow. Do yourself a favor and grab it. In the Comments, toss in your latest fave fantasy/scifi read.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
LEVERAGE #312 "The King George Job" Question Post
Hey, it's ol' blighty! Questions and Comments below.
Friday, August 27, 2010
LEVERAGE #307 "The Gone Fishin' Job" Answer Post
I have to admit, I didn't have a ton to do with this one. I was directing #305 -- or rather, watching very talented humans point cameras at other very talented humans and occasionally asking them to move on to the next shot -- while Downey and the room broke the episode. They did a great job, and all I did was come back and bat a little clean-up in the fifth act, wielding some old Boy Scout knowledge and a bit of geography. Oh, and the molasses thing. Don't ask why I know that.
The episode was born from two ideas. First Rebecca Kirsch, or "Filthy Assistant" as she's fondly known in my more drunken Spider Jerusalem moments, had come in with a bunch of pitches. She'd gone through a couple that didn't quite land -- pretty standard ratio, to tell you the truth, we've had twenty-year veterans pitch a half dozen ideas that aren't quite right -- and was just wrapping up, almost on her way out, when she said: "I have this one thing. The IRS decided to use private debt collectors for a while, who acted like, well ... private debt collectors. When they stopped the program because of abuses, there's no evidence the government got the lists of taxpayers back. So there are bad guys out there who still have the lists of people who owe the government money and --"
"WHY THE HELL DIDN'T YOU START WITH THAT ONE!?" I bellowed.
At least a few of the research beats Kirsch found are here:
So we had a villain. The problem was, some bad guys crimes automatically imply the con setting. Guy burns horses to death, we do a horse scam. Guy sells stolen cars, we wind up doing racecars and boosts. How do you scam a guy who just runs an evil collection service?
At this point, you go to the big board of "stuff we've been talking about for a couple years." There are a few cards up on the board that are beginning to yellow with age. "Rashomon Job" has been up there for close to two years, as has "University Job" (whatever the hell that may be), "Fake a space launch", "steal bull semen", and "The Defiant Ones" ...
Oooh, wait.
Readers, say you're breaking a plot where you want Hardison and Eliot running through the woods handcuffed. They're being chased by ... by cops? Well, we already did our prison break episode. Corrupt cops? Okay, put a pin in that. Who else is in the woods? Soldiers for a corrupt government. Good, but we're, ah, holding off on that one for a certain season finale ... and then we have your rural American options -- which led us to militias. Militias are in the woods.
Once we hit that, the thematic link between taxes and people who have a, let's say, antagonistic relationship with taxes became too good to resist. Then at the same time, the Hutaree story broke:
@SueN: My only question (so far) has already been asked – when did Hardison set that bomb?
Before their distraction/assault. They were trying to draw in the border patrols and make sure everybody was in the center of camp for the boom. There's a gap in the story timeline there, and we probably should have shown that in flashback. But that was one of those things we just assumed would be self-evident, as it's logically the only time he could have set up the bomb. Our bad.
@whimseyrhodes: How much of the chatter on twitter do you pay attention to in regards to episode tweaks, ideas and so forth? Does the cast actually read any of our posts?
We tend to view the Twitter chatter, Livejournal and forums stuff as your conversation and creativity using what we make, like, ah, we're the starter stock on your entertainment soup. We do our thing, you guys do yours, and we appreciate you dig the show. I think that works best. The cast blows through here at the blog intermittently, but we've got them working 14 hours a day, so they're pretty stacked. They do read all their Twitter posts, though.
@Stacy: Really loved Eliot and Hardison being chained together. No real question, but I was hoping you could narrate on the genesis of the idea of Eliot/Hardision being chained up and forced to work together like this. Did it grow out of the original bill collector/militia bad guy story, or was it a separate idea floating around that just worked for this episode?
I think I covered that up top.
@RevTrask: Wait...at the bank, did Eliot introduce himself and Hardison as Agts Brody and "Quint"? It was hard to make out the second name. I may not have heard him correctly but a "Jaws" reference would have fit: after all, when their fishing expedition went so horribly awry, they were "gonna need a bigger boat". *g*
Got it in one.
@markz: This episode finally won me over near the end - the precise spot was when Clancy Brown started fiddling with his car remote - but up to then, I was concerned that the level of reality that used to be in the best episodes of the first two seasons has been lost, this year, to some extent. By this time, the team's been through so much that I can't really picture that Parker WOULDN'T be aware that someone could be monitoring her call phone. I think that no matter how much fun the bickering is between Eliot and Hardison, by this time in their history they'd be acting more professionally on a job.
There seems to be some confusion on that -- Parker meant to tip the bad guys with the phone call, unless I'm totally misremembering. As far as Eliot and Hardison? That is Hardison in a way, way more stressful situation than he's used to. But, also, that's the dynamic.
@tgvcomic: Y'know, I'm a little surprised that Hardiphone 3.0 doesn't have Caller ID spoofing built in to each and every member of the team's smartphones. I mean, I even knew a person that actually had that in their Blackberry, and I know I've heard you say Apollo has done that to you a couple of times.
He does. Chalk it up to Hardison not exactly being in charge of the comms with his usual process.
@Calla: Why was it Hardison who stops them from getting on the train, when it was Eliot who'd sussed out the bomb earlier on and knew the militia would be using it very soon. It seems like Eliot should have been the one to make them go back rather than having Hardison need to convince him. It came off a bit like Eliot cared more about getting himself to safety than he did about saving civilians from a bomb - and, given what we know about him, coupled with his speech about how real soldiers act - that seems contrary to his character.
A lot of the other Commenters got this right: Eliot's priority was to get Hardison out of their, whether he'd admit it or not. Hardison's decision to go back probably did more to cement their friendship than anything else in the last two years. Although, again, neither would admit it.
The episode was born from two ideas. First Rebecca Kirsch, or "Filthy Assistant" as she's fondly known in my more drunken Spider Jerusalem moments, had come in with a bunch of pitches. She'd gone through a couple that didn't quite land -- pretty standard ratio, to tell you the truth, we've had twenty-year veterans pitch a half dozen ideas that aren't quite right -- and was just wrapping up, almost on her way out, when she said: "I have this one thing. The IRS decided to use private debt collectors for a while, who acted like, well ... private debt collectors. When they stopped the program because of abuses, there's no evidence the government got the lists of taxpayers back. So there are bad guys out there who still have the lists of people who owe the government money and --"
"WHY THE HELL DIDN'T YOU START WITH THAT ONE!?" I bellowed.
At least a few of the research beats Kirsch found are here:
IRS Website - March 9, 2006 - IRS Selects Three Firms to Take Part in Delinquent Tax Collection Effort
IRS Website - August 23, 2006 - Simple Steps Can Prevent Tax Scams as Private Debt Collection Begins
IRS Website - August 23, 2006 - Simple Steps Can Prevent Tax Scams as Private Debt Collection Begins
CNN - May 23, 2007 - IRS collection program draws fire
ABC - July 11, 2008 - IRS Refuses to Stop Using Private Debt Collectors
IRS Website - March 5, 2009 - IRS Conducts Extensive Review, Decides Not to Renew Private Debt Collection Contracts
USA Today - March 6, 2009 - IRS to drop private debt collection program
At this point, you go to the big board of "stuff we've been talking about for a couple years." There are a few cards up on the board that are beginning to yellow with age. "Rashomon Job" has been up there for close to two years, as has "University Job" (whatever the hell that may be), "Fake a space launch", "steal bull semen", and "The Defiant Ones" ...
Oooh, wait.
Readers, say you're breaking a plot where you want Hardison and Eliot running through the woods handcuffed. They're being chased by ... by cops? Well, we already did our prison break episode. Corrupt cops? Okay, put a pin in that. Who else is in the woods? Soldiers for a corrupt government. Good, but we're, ah, holding off on that one for a certain season finale ... and then we have your rural American options -- which led us to militias. Militias are in the woods.
Once we hit that, the thematic link between taxes and people who have a, let's say, antagonistic relationship with taxes became too good to resist. Then at the same time, the Hutaree story broke:
In June 2009, authorities allege, Stone and his youngest son David Stone Jr. began teaching other Hutaree how to make and use the explosives. They were to have been used against law enforcement officials as they drove in the funeral procession for the first officer they intended to kill as bait.
The first alleged target was not named. Among their plans for the first murder, according to court documents, was to kill the officer at a traffic stop, kill the officer and his or her family at home or make a phony 911 call to lure the officer into a trap
Guys who were planning on using Iraqi insurgent techniques to kill American cops. Repeat -- kill American cops. These are bad people, I think we can all agree. Guys who we will not mind watching Eliot kick the snot out of. And I will admit, coming from a military family background, having close friends serve both when we were younger and also in the last thrillfest, I have a very low tolerance for people who play dress-up in camos and misunderstand the Constitution and Thomas Jefferson. Always with the "blood of patriots and tyrants", never with the letter to the Danbury Baptists. I was a pretty avid libertarian in my youth and still firmly believe that the government is best that governs least. (Side note: I preferred Emerson's Self-Reliance to Thoreau's Walden. Make of that what you will.) So I'm a bit more sympathetic to the cause than most. But, c'mon -- kill American cops. These assholes are fair game.
This led us to a not uncommon challenge in the early days of breaking a split story. One half almost writes itself, the other requires serious work to keep the pace and threat levels up. The room did a great job of intersecting the plots (and learning how to go about stealing a train). The money laundering scam through a fitness club was an idea Downey had been saving up for a while. (Sometime we'll go over the basics of money laundering. They're fascinating) But the threat level on the B storyline was tough. Then we got the big win: Clancy Brown as our villain. You can cast Clancy Brown as a piano teacher, and he will be a fucking terrifying piano teacher. Clancy not only did voices in Jackie Chan Adventures for me back in the day, he played a crucial role in my first one-hour pilot, Red Skies, which aired as a backdoor pilot on USA back before they were really doing one-hours, in 2003 or so. He did the Kurgan laugh for us one day. I may have wet myself, from glee or terror I'm not sure.
The shoot was grueling; it rained pretty much every moment the boys were out in the woods. That said, it's a hell of a pretty episode, and our last minute director John Harrison did an amazing job with practically no prep. Fun Parker stuff, big danger and action, good buddy emo from the boys, and we blow shit up. Not much more you can ask for in an episode of Leverage, I'd say.
So let's go to the phones:
@Anonymous: Did Hardison just kill a guy?
Nope. But he messed him up.
@Nicole: I did wonder why it was no one noticed they weren't having to hear Eliot and Hardison in their ears - especially since you've stated Hardison keeps his earpiece in all the time. Since they're *usually* not out of range, are there a lot of off-screen jobs that would have shown them not living with chatter in their ear? And... was that an XKCD reference? "Science, it works bitches"??? XD
The earbuds are linked through their cells (established in "The Mile High Job", I think) so when they're out of cellphone range, they're out of luck. Also, they don't always have them in when doing scutwork. And yes, that's totally an XKCD shoutout.
@Anonymous: What were we suppose to assume was Parker's motivation to hanging up with the one guy and deleting his, and what appeared to be several other, files? What happened in her past or was it just her feeling sorry for these people? Cause we don't usually see Parker doing that kind of thing - except w/ children.
Chalk it up to Parker's growing conscience.
@Codger: Great episode, but I'll admit I would have loved it more if Taggart and McSweeten had shown up at the end leading the FBI crew.
Unfortunately, shooting in Oregon means we can only afford to fly the boys up so often. You will see one of them again very soon, however ...
@Christina Lollobrigida: Now, I've been on set. I know that the exterior to McRory's isn't a physical location. I actually had to go back, pause and compare to my set-photos to see if I could figure it out myself. So - how'd you work that amazing lighting trick/building thing for the exteriors toward the end? I'm guessing that you just moved a portion of the exterior set to an actual location? If not, how'd you pull it off?
The sign moves, so we put it up on the real building we use a couple different times of the day to get different looks. That shot was in the bank, waiting to be used.
@Jim Kiley: I'm pretty sure that my favorite moment in tonight's episode was the sheer joy and satisfaction in the voice of the rail transit authority woman as she got multiple confirmations of rocks on the tracks. By god, this was an issue and she was going to get it resolved. It implied an enormous amount about her! Great acting / direction on such a tiny little point!
Seriously, the Portland actors have been consistently knocking it out of the park. That's a big part of the reason the cons work, because good actors ground the scenes. Case in point -- the guy who winds up as Sophie's con partner in the finale is devastatingly good. Like, "congratulations, enjoy your offers for the fall season shows" good.
Jen_Ann_W: Can you tell us the location that was used for the militia camp? Ya'll picked a beautiful area - I'm guessing closer to the coast, Tillamook or Clatsop? Makes me want to go camping. :-)
I know the crew map is kicking around in my inbox somewhere. But hopefully Kirsch will hop in on the Comments to this post and clarify before I have to go digging.
@SueN: My only question (so far) has already been asked – when did Hardison set that bomb?
Before their distraction/assault. They were trying to draw in the border patrols and make sure everybody was in the center of camp for the boom. There's a gap in the story timeline there, and we probably should have shown that in flashback. But that was one of those things we just assumed would be self-evident, as it's logically the only time he could have set up the bomb. Our bad.
@whimseyrhodes: How much of the chatter on twitter do you pay attention to in regards to episode tweaks, ideas and so forth? Does the cast actually read any of our posts?
We tend to view the Twitter chatter, Livejournal and forums stuff as your conversation and creativity using what we make, like, ah, we're the starter stock on your entertainment soup. We do our thing, you guys do yours, and we appreciate you dig the show. I think that works best. The cast blows through here at the blog intermittently, but we've got them working 14 hours a day, so they're pretty stacked. They do read all their Twitter posts, though.
@Stacy: Really loved Eliot and Hardison being chained together. No real question, but I was hoping you could narrate on the genesis of the idea of Eliot/Hardision being chained up and forced to work together like this. Did it grow out of the original bill collector/militia bad guy story, or was it a separate idea floating around that just worked for this episode?
I think I covered that up top.
@RevTrask: Wait...at the bank, did Eliot introduce himself and Hardison as Agts Brody and "Quint"? It was hard to make out the second name. I may not have heard him correctly but a "Jaws" reference would have fit: after all, when their fishing expedition went so horribly awry, they were "gonna need a bigger boat". *g*
Got it in one.
@markz: This episode finally won me over near the end - the precise spot was when Clancy Brown started fiddling with his car remote - but up to then, I was concerned that the level of reality that used to be in the best episodes of the first two seasons has been lost, this year, to some extent. By this time, the team's been through so much that I can't really picture that Parker WOULDN'T be aware that someone could be monitoring her call phone. I think that no matter how much fun the bickering is between Eliot and Hardison, by this time in their history they'd be acting more professionally on a job.
There seems to be some confusion on that -- Parker meant to tip the bad guys with the phone call, unless I'm totally misremembering. As far as Eliot and Hardison? That is Hardison in a way, way more stressful situation than he's used to. But, also, that's the dynamic.
@tgvcomic: Y'know, I'm a little surprised that Hardiphone 3.0 doesn't have Caller ID spoofing built in to each and every member of the team's smartphones. I mean, I even knew a person that actually had that in their Blackberry, and I know I've heard you say Apollo has done that to you a couple of times.
He does. Chalk it up to Hardison not exactly being in charge of the comms with his usual process.
@Calla: Why was it Hardison who stops them from getting on the train, when it was Eliot who'd sussed out the bomb earlier on and knew the militia would be using it very soon. It seems like Eliot should have been the one to make them go back rather than having Hardison need to convince him. It came off a bit like Eliot cared more about getting himself to safety than he did about saving civilians from a bomb - and, given what we know about him, coupled with his speech about how real soldiers act - that seems contrary to his character.
A lot of the other Commenters got this right: Eliot's priority was to get Hardison out of their, whether he'd admit it or not. Hardison's decision to go back probably did more to cement their friendship than anything else in the last two years. Although, again, neither would admit it.
@Marquis: (various logic problems that are kind of YMMV but ending with ...) Or the sheer idiocy of the client. How on earth did these guys manage to get that many people to fall for something like that? A guy shows up at your house in the middle of the night flashes a badge you wouldn't be able to tell is authentic because you never see them, demands a credit card or he's going to get your house locked up. Sorry, even if you think the guy is for real you have to know there's something fishy in the way he's pulling money from you. How do you not call someone or call his bluff. (It's so easy to fix too. You have someone in a sheriff's outfit waiting outside for him to point to. At least that might scare people into not thinking that this is a scam.)
Ah, the victim. Got a lot of flack on the victim. Who the hell would fall for a scam like that?
Most of you.
Here's the thing that may be biasing the writers. We spend a LOT of time researching con men. And they pull off some pretty amazing stuff on a regular basis.
Like so many rural communities in the country’s middle, this tiny town had wrestled for years with the woes of methamphetamine. Then, several months ago, a federal agent showed up.
Mayor Otis Schulte of Gerald said Bill A. Jakob went to great lengths to make police officers think he was a federal agent.Busts began. Houses were ransacked. People, in handcuffs on their front lawns, named names. To some, like Mayor Otis Schulte, who considers the county around Gerald, population 1,171, “a meth capital of the United States,” the drug scourge seemed to be fading at last.
Those whose homes were searched, though, grumbled about a peculiar change in what they understood, from television mainly, to be the law.
They said the agent, a man some had come to know as “Sergeant Bill,” boasted that he did not need search warrants to enter their homes because he worked for the federal government.
But after a reporter for the local weekly newspaper made a few calls about that claim, Gerald’s anti-drug campaign abruptly unraveled after less than five months. Sergeant Bill, it turned out, was no federal agent, but Bill A. Jakob, an unemployed former trucking company owner, a former security guard, a former wedding-performing minister, a former small-town cop from 23 miles down the road.
Now, are all those people idiots? No. But Americans have a very specific relationship to authority and trust. If some guy shows up at your house, knowing things only the government should know, and you're already intimidated and threatened, like that single mom ...
Let me illustrate. A while ago, I was sitting in my TV room, which has a clear view of my next-door neighbor's front lawn. I look out, and see two rough-looking guys about my age standing in their yard, peering in the front window.
They see me looking at them as I reach for my phone -- at which point they badge me.
I open my front door and the two LAPD detectives explain that a fugitive gave my neighbor's address as one of his. They show me the mugshot. I explain that my elderly Asian neighbors are not harboring meth-heads. They thank me and depart.
Or ... they were thinking "Man, we would like to home-invade this joint, but nobody's here. Oh wait, there's some dude at that house." I open my door, they force their way in, kick my ass, and rob me blind.
I literally spend 14 hours a day thinking about crime and con men. But my grandfather was a cop, I know cops, and I opened the door to those badges out of instinct.
So, your mileage may vary -- but the number of people who would fall for that is innumerable. We always struggle with orange box and ledger, and sometimes that extends to human behaviour, not just story details. Although I understand shooting the scene at night may have muddied the waters, personally I think we're okay on this one.
@Oona: Sophie seemed to almost lose character at a couple tense moments, and she has seemed more emotionally affected during cons this season. Is this something that will be developed throughout the course of the season?
I think, like"Inside Job", scrambling to help teammates is affecting her more. In general, she's changed quite a bit since she abandoned her old persona, and a lot of the defenses that were inherent in that lifestyle.
@Odie: 1.) What happened in Juarez? 2.)How long do the people Eliot hits stay down? 3.) How did Hardison and Eliot climb the tree while handcuffed?
1.) Unpleasant, moist things. 2.) As long as he wants. 3.) Carefully and shirtless.
@Daisy Bookworm: Oh! Wait ... one question: Did you seriously just give us the two main ingredients in a very effective bomb? Shame, shame. And whose idea were the pinatas? Parker's reaction to Eliot ripping off the head of the donkey was just perfect.
Um, no. Well, yes. But nothing you can't find on the internet. The writers came up with the pinata. Although I think Kane relished that a bit much.
@Anonymous: I don't understand why everyone is going crazy over eliot's "Real soldier" line. It's jingoistic bravado and nothing more. You know who else were "real soldiers" by that definition? The Nazis, the USSR and the Viet Cong.
The Nazis were "willing to die to defend someone else's rights?" I do not remember that part of World War II. I must admit that.
@SueN: Brooke's dissatisfaction with the portrayal of the militia types reminded me of a question (instead of me hanging about and nosing into other people's posts while waiting for my caffeine buzz to die). As she said, it was a bit hinky for these guys to have captured Eliot (and Hardison) a second time. But the guys needed to get to the camp to blow up the bomb. So, was the second capture part of the plan, or was it evidence that even Eliot/Deep-Woods Batman is fallible?
The second capture was part of the plan. Thought that was clear once the bomb went off. If not, we missed that.
@Mega: Not that I'm complaining at having Eliot and Hardison cuffed to each other but... well... why didn't they just pick it?
That is not in their thief portfolio, sadly. As you can see in the pilot, where Hardison has to wait for Parker to hand him the keys before he can escape the handcuffs in the hospital.
@briddie: Eliot's complaint about just getting back from ten days in Juarez and now having another job makes me wonder - who's going to explode from the stress first? Or is this another way of showing drunk Nate is a mean bastard?
Mostly a way of showing that Eliot is indeed human, and can be worn down.
@JoJo Dancer: I worked at a state agency in the tax dept. And I have gone to homes and collected debts. I would never go to a person's house at night but anytime from 8am to 5pm. People would pay in check or cash. We didn't accept credit cards because we didn't have the functionality. But the only thing I would do is show my badge or a business card and people would give me a payment. I just wanted to post this to give people a point of reality for reference on the initial scene. I want to also say that states vary in their methods and the IRS is a totally different animal, so expect some differences.
So, that then. And we forgive you, JoJo.
@Tori Angell: When Hardison speaks of "serious regrets," was he referring to anything specific or was that line written for the lulz?
I would say going on this part of the mission with Eliot would be one of those regrets.
@CindyD: For those of you questioning the victim's action, I found it credible and I should know. I spent many years representing or counseling consumers in financial trouble and it is amazing what people will do under such stress and what some debt collectors will say to make them do it. Smart, no, but facing that kind of extreme stress, literally in terror at times, their brains are not functioning normally. Like a deer in headlights. I've had them call me at night hysterical, believing the ass that told them the sheriff was coming to arrest them right then (apparently to cart them off to the nonexistent debtors prison). Add to that it's the IRS, a single Mother, it involves her child and home, then without a lawyer present, many would have given him anything he required.
Okay, I know you people are being helpful, but now I'm just getting goddam depressed.
@Shazza TW: Questions: I've been reading Twitter posts from yourself and the cast/crew and you're all working hard on the S3 finale.... 1.) have you had word yet about a Season 4? I've just caught up on all things Leverage & would hate for there not to be any more. 2.) Also, how much of the characters personality traits are written and how much are the actors input/own personalities? In particular, I'd love to know how much of their own personalites Aldis and Beth put into Parker/Hardison. 3.) And speaking of which, please tell us there'll be more of these two before season 3 ends? The pretzel episode was the most adorable thing I've seen on TV in a long while, and I'm not a 'shipper' on any show. But I just love these two.4) Finally - will Season 3 end on a cliffhanger or will you tie up some loose ends in case, God forbid, the powers that be dont give you a fourth Season?
Welcome from the UK! 1.) We are picked up for Season 4. 2.) The actors very much inform the characters. Beth very much redefined Parker in her choices early in the year, even in the auditions. Aldis definitely brought more con-charm and physicality to Hardison than we originally anticipated. 3.) Wait until December. 4.) We don't do cliffhanger endings. Although changes in status, well ...
@Oona: I know that debt collectors can be vicious and I understand the psychology of being desparate in THAT situation but as I pointed out up - post, this is not THAT situation.
Her debt is with the IRS - NOT a private debt collector. This is a tax debt she had a payment plan on. Someone will have to refresh my recollection on whether she said she had other debt was being pursued by other debt collectors and therefore may have been under the weight of paranoia and fear from private debt collectors' intimidations?
But the government does not send people to your homes at night to take your credit cards. And if that was the only debt she was dealing with, then it was EXTREMELY gullible to let some skeevy dude into her house at night
Oooh, we definitely should have made that clearer. That was a private debt collector collecting on the behalf of the IRS. Which was a real policy, and exactly as bad an idea as it sounds.
@Tyler: My only question is, How awesome is Clancy Brown for real? 'Cause I bet he's really awesome.
He is super-awesome. And will work in any show I make, ever.
@la_ma: Sorry, because I LOVE you and I LOVE this show. BTW, great tweet reply to that nimrod that called you a socialist. But I digress. Marquis is so hard core right...on every point. Don't get me wrong, some things ALL shows do--like have the FBI travel at impossible warp speeds to locations. But we can presume that some enforcement agency already had an eye on this group. But the other stuff--a smart enough guy to run this scam and be untouchable considers giving all his money to a Jersey Shore style Curves gym owner within a matter of hours of meeting him? And this is after within minutes of meeting him he engages in that way TMI conversation. And the train thing especially. I mean if Hardison had hacked in and found the routes...but Nate? I totally just sat back and said, "Whatever. Man Hardison and Eliot are on it tonight. God I love this show." But my roommate, a Lev virgin until that night kept saying, "Umm...is it just me?" It was still a great ep and I guess my main question is, why did you add some parts while condensing the time span for others? And I really mean it--from a creative perspective, what was the drive? The train thing wasn't necessary was it? After they came in to range and Eliot communicated where they were... and yet Sophie usually spends some time building a relationship, why did it have to be THAT day? Don't crazy militia people keep more stuff at home than the office, but Parker, Nate, and Sophie all seem to need to be in the same place for some reason? Again, I finished this ep with a smile on my face and felt the need to tweet back at that nimrod myself. But the pace felt...well, how come?
The show comes together as the show comes together, with roughly two normal TV plots crammed into one, shot in 7 days and requiring the actors to be in the same sets for some scenes for scheduling. The parts we show are the parts we found interesting or necessary, and the parts we compress are the ones it makes sense (to us) to compress. That's the fun -- and frankly, the responsibility -- of filling blank pages on a relentless schedule. Sometimes you'll agree, sometimes you'll disagree; sometimes the fun train is invisible, sometimes it bigfoots on your lawn (while being invisible to others). I think it's a fine ep, and while some of you will put it at the tops of your lists, some will nod and move on to others. That is cool. Some of the fan favorite lists are frankly boggling to me, and I make the goddam show.
@Gina: Are we going to eventually see that any of the jobs the team has worked so far have actually been bringing them a step closer to Moreau? Oh, and I don't suppose there will ever be a chance for those of us on the east coast to get our hands on the Leverage t-shirts at Comic Con? Pretty please?
1.) Due to structure and actor scheduling, most of the Moreau plotline resolves in the back third of the season. But there are some clues to which cases you've already seen link to Moreau. 2.) Afraid they were one-timers, sorry. But there is plenty of t-shirty goodness at the Leverage store.
@Kim Henry: So, not about 307- more about comic con. It seems you're going to damage Eliot's warmer and fuzzier exterior. Can you promise us that we won't go screaming into the night? And how long will we have to wait?
December. And he will probably find a way to redeem himself.
@Leviathan: Oregon doesn't quite look like central Massachusetts, but I give you props for using real central MA towns for the train theft sequence, and double down on the props for the accurate MassDOT logo. I live in the area, and seeing the electronic map zooming in past Lunenburg to focus on Fitchburg was a lovely nod at reality, and now doubt thrilled my neighbors as much as it did me.
That was all based on some lovely research done by Kirsch, and is perilously close to how one goes about stealing a train.
@Kim H: This is actually a question from my husband. He is wondering if there is a reason why the team doesn't use guns. Clearly, the don't want to kill people and Eliot has an as of yet to be explained adversity for them, but they face off so often against people who get the drop on them that it's becoming almost silly that they don't get shot. For example, in this show, if any of those guys had their fingers on the trigger of their rifles when the bomb blew, it's highly likely they would have shot as they got blown forward. Would Eliot or Hardison been shot as a result? Maybe or maybe not. The same holds true for The Boost Job. Does TNT have a political bent against guns? Because if Eliot is ex-military and is as good as he is, he would certainly KNOW how to use a gun and probably how to use one without killing people if necessary. (italics mine -- JR) And clearly both Nate and Sophie have a history of carrying when necessary. After your questions about racism and rape last season, please know that neither of us mean any disrespect. We LOVE the show.
No disrespect taken. But it's a mix. First off, it's a family show. It's a show you can watch with your kids, or your parents. And so we don't use guns because --
-- when guns come out, people die. This attitude very much comes out from traditional American crime literature, and also from talking to our professional criminal friends. Guns are messy, when they show up things escalate, you take a longer, harder fall when doing a crime with a gun -- professional criminals are pathologically averse to carrying weapons.
But I'd like to focus particularly on your statement: Because if Eliot is ex-military and is as good as he is, he would certainly KNOW how to use a gun and probably how to use one without killing people if necessary.
No. You do not point a gun at anything or anyone you are not willing to kill. I don't know if you've ever handled or been trained to handle a weapon, but I had that drilled into my head at an early age. A gun has two settings -- holstered and murderous. "Wounded" is an accidental condition. Eliot in particular is aware of this, and one of the many reasons he does not use a gun is because he is trying to, well, not kill people anymore. Hardison is magnificently awful with weaponry. Although Parker is probably a fine shot, she's trying to play nice by the new rules, and only brought a weapon to the meet in the pilot because she wanted to get paid.
@Beth Pettit: your casting department deserves raises for the guest stars they get for this show. Almost every episode there is an actor/actress that have done one-ofs or short guest runs on other shows and knocked it out of the park and made me want to see them more and they ALL turn up on Leverage at some point. From Mark Sheppard to Gaincarlo Esposito to Kari Matchett to Richard Kind to Richard fucking Chamberlain (WHAT!)I'm always just as excited to see the guest stars on an episode as I am the main cast. Now if you can get Garret Dillahunt (Terminator: SCC, Burn Notice, Lie to Me, White Collar, Damages) then I think you'll have hit just about every amazing actor that I know that deserves more screen time. Side from them, you've introduced me to more actors I've fallen in love with. Also, does your costuming lady have a blog or something? If not, you should suggest it. They do an amazing job helping the characters come to life (especially Parkers Bjork costume) and I'm sure I'm not the only one who is interested in hearing what goes on behind the scenes in her domain.
I'll pass on your love to our fine casting friends, and I will hit Nadine Haders up to blog. I think she probably lacks the requisite spare time and narcissism I possess to do so, but I'll take a shot.
@Kate: Two questions really, first being part of an observation. 1.) It seemed to me like Parker was a little bit... different, in this ep, not un-Parker-y, but there was something going on. And then a theory that fits scarily well popped up from our group of watchers. Was she channeling Hardison? Since he was gone or just to experiment with acting like him? Because that's what me and my friends suspected. 2.) And secondly, I would like to know if it's a card in the writing room for the Leverage cast to steal a Convention of some kind. Because making any of them dress up for a cover(Thank you for the duck dress in The Studio Job) would be soooo much fun. And we can't get enough of Hardison geeking out.
1.) If that theory makes you happy, go with it. I like it. 2.) We've been trying to break the Convention Con for a while. Maybe next season.
On that lovely bit of praise for some very unappreciated people on the show, we'll wrap up. Very very soon, "The Boost Job", as I burn off more of my hiatus talking baout the show I'm on hiatus from.
As always, stay safe, and thanks for watching.
I Have Always Supported Robot Marriage
We lost control of a drone the other day. Near Washington DC.
For a really interesting bit of fiction based around the future of autonomous and automatic warfare, I recommend diving into the Autumn Rain Trilogy.
A Northrop Grumman MQ-8 Fire Scout UAV strayed into restricted airspace above Washington DC after departing Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Maryland on August 2, the result of a software logic flaw that caused the operator to momentarily lose contact with the drone. Programmed to circle when communications are severed, the chopper failed to follow its failure protocol, instead heading twenty-three miles on a north/northwest trajectory ...Sure we just lost control of it. Suuuure it wasn't hacked.
For a really interesting bit of fiction based around the future of autonomous and automatic warfare, I recommend diving into the Autumn Rain Trilogy.
Thanks to the Artists ...
... who responded to the bleg. LOTS of great work. I'm reviewing everyone, and I'll give you a yell soon if your stuff matches the style of the project.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Satoshi Kon Has Died
I have to say, given the choice of Inception or Paprika, I'm going to fall on Paprika every time. Look at the creativity in the opening goddam credits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)