Was Martin a bit of a bad boy (I know that’s an understatement) too? On that basis he could also be a ‘Robert Downey Junior’.
Girls:
I am your one and only man.
Anyway:
love ya, man:
i look forward to spending the next year with you
Actually:
I meant that for Kris and Mag.
Happy new year, girls.
My girls.
Happy new year, my friends.
Mag & Kris:
my girls.
love ya.
It was hard to come up with anyone, but I relate myself a lot with Tadanobu Asano from back when he wasn’t playing a dude that kills people.
He played a string of really awkward characters.
Looks like I didn’t totally get by without getting on here New Years Eve. I knew I should have had myself banned for the night.
Guys, I’ve been thinking a lot about this, and it’s kind of taking off for me. I feel within my element. For one thing, I’ve tried writing the great American novel. But, as inspired as I started out, I found myself bogging down in the 3rd chapter. As I’ve recently accepted, I’m alright with projects that take a short amount of time to finish. But when it edges beyond a month or two, maybe 3 at the outside, I find myself ready to move on to something else and doing little more than kind of grinding away at the present project with little inspiration. And it gets worse as I get older and find myself under a quickly decreasing timeline. I’m now committed (perhaps too late for my great American novel) to converting any story idea that begins to feel like more than a short story to a screenplay. That way, I can utilize the swooping method I’m use to, approaching it in different ways (dialogue, summary, etc.), until I have enough to fuse it into a kind bricolege. And since one, it would probably be done for personal pleasure anyway, and two, since movies are sometimes brought into production with little more than an outline (Lynch started Mulholland Drive without even that), the resultant hodge-podge would be all that would be required since then it would be little more than a guideline for the director, actors, and production crew to work from. It would allow me, emphasizing process over a finished product, the degree of looseness I work best with and lies at the heart of my passion for this. Besides, whenever these stories come to me I tend to think of them terms of movie scenes anyway.
But more important, it now seems the perfect medium for me to put my level of philosophical competence to work for me. As I have said before, having been a late starter with divergent interests and self taught, and given my age, I just don’t see me writing articles for the Harvard Review of Philosophy. Nor do I really have any interest in pushing to that level of technical abstraction. Being more of right-brain creative type, I’m interested in the feel, personality, and articulation of my beliefs than I am in revealing any profound truths. And that makes this project perfect in that it will be done in a semi-surreal montage manner with either a voiceover by the main character or his breaking the fourth wall. This will allow me to do as Sartre does in Being and Nothingness and move back and forth between narrative and philosophical exposition. Except, in this case as compared to B & N, the exposition will be secondary to the narrative. The idea of this to tell a story that also works like an essay, switches from movie to documentary, but which can be done with humor. For instance, at one point the main character relates how he first got into philosophy. He first explains that he started as a musician looking for difference influences then claims that his first book was Durrant’s The Story of Philosophy at which point the cover of his book appears on the screen.
The idea at the time he further explains was something like I wanted to see how Aristotle’s Categorical Imperative would affect my music.
At this point it would break to black screen on which the words would be typed:
Categorical Imperative: ethical concept proposed by Immanuel Kant
Some [such & such] years after Aristotle.
It then breaks back to the voiceover that says:
It seems clear to me now how little I knew at the time.
To give another example, when the main character breaks into his exposition, the movie would switch to documentary style in showing various images that support what he’s saying.
But most important is how it allows me to represent the kinds of dialogues we engage in on here. Instead of doing something like voiceovers or just showing the posts, it would break to a close-up of the character reciting the post monologue style. This would make it an actor’s movie much as the expositions would make it a writer’s movie –not to mention an editor’s nightmare.
In a sense, as we have seen done before in movies, it would glide back and forth between strait up movie story-telling and expositional montages peppered with visual parenthesis.
Furthermore, I’ve been mapping out a few storylines and many of the characters. But before I go into this, I need to explain a few things. First of all, I approach this project in the same manner I have approached a creative act (including this board): assuming I’m doing it purely for personal pleasure while pretending I’m about to change the world (a line, BTW, that may make it into the script). Otherwise, there would be no point. To do anything with the idea of fame and fortune hanging over your shoulder could only stifle the process, not to mention lead to likely frustration in the face of long, long, long odds. At the same time, to succumb to casual nonchalance would make the act so trivial as to render it pointless. The primary pleasure in it comes from that feeling of approaching the greats that one is influenced by. Secondly, as you read the following, it is important to keep in mind that everything is standing. In other words, there is first the question of whether I’ll actually, and much much less that it would ever be made into a movie. And if it did, there is always collaborative process that may well include those with more influence having other ideas. Therefore, when I say what actor or actress would play a particular part, it is as much as saying that they are the one I’m using as a tool to develop a particular character. Furthermore, I have chosen to use most of the suggestions offered by you guys. But it is important, for the sake of your feelings and our friendship, to recognize that this is purely a work of fiction. It has to be as, one, the effort to shape this to your reality would be way too much work. It would just be much easier for me to work from imagination and less stifling to the creative process. Plus that, if it was purely about portraying you guys, too much of it would turn into a glowing and over romanticized love fest which doesn’t make for very good story telling. You’ve got to go for a subtle mix of the positive and negative. And the character were too attached to any of you, it could turn to resentment on your part for something that was purely a fiction on mine. Therefore, when I say “Magji-like” or Kristwest-like” character, this is merely to say the character is inspired by you, that there is a connection, but beyond that, they are little more than creations of my imagination. Also, I am right now in the process of coming up with imaginary usernames for the characters that will play a key role in the story in that nowhere in it will anyone be referred to their real names. It will be the only way these characters relate to each other.
- The Board: this is the standing title of the script. Have also considered Across the Board. Furthermore, the standing name for the board will be Philosophy Freaks or PF. KTS: the other board, will play a role in it. But haven’t come up with a name for it.
- The main character: with him, I’m thinking of taking the Kafkian route and simply calling him d63. This seems appropriate since he will basically serve as a mouthpiece for my own ideas about philosophy and the Board.
- The Lizbeth-like character: played by Susan Sarandon. She will be the first character d63 visits and will act in a doorkeeper capacity often seen in movies: as the character that sets the protagonist off on their adventure. Like Lizbeth, she will have a kind of colloquial elegance like that of Alice in Wonderland, while having a forward tilt when it comes what d63 calls “the tribal response” in which she has proved a worthy ally whenever there was an invasion on the board by a troller. He approaches her apologetically since, because of her Alice-like way of dealing with more hostile characters on the board (much as Alice did in wonderland) and d63’s middle age which has inspired him a paternal response, he tends to, in a well intended way, respond to her on the board in condescending manner –something she deals with in the same way underlies her forward tilt. Furthermore, she is a character that comes very close to d63’s expectation in that she is a professional married to another professional: a black man which will explain the nature of Magsi’s character which I will explain next. She lives what d63, being Marxist in nature, knows to be a bourgeoisie life. She lives on the west coast and, with her husband, frequents a lot of small wine towns –in fact, this is where d63 meets her. But this never presents a problem. One of the undercurrents of this is the instability of the present economy that has brought her and her husband to recognize the difficulty involved in maintaining their present fictions.
- The Magji-like character: played by Thandie Newton: successful daughter of LIzbeth-like character and husband (and why he had to be black). Not sure if I want her to be a model or someone successful in the entertainment business. But the meeting will come about because of the workings of her mother. She’s intimidating, because of her beauty, but has the same affability that Mag has shown throughout the time I have known her. She is the one that invites d63 to a high-scale party in which he meets Persistent Darwinitus: someone she shows a lot ideological differences on the board yet maintains a real-life relationship. It was Persistent Darwinitus that turned her on to the board.
- Persistent Darwinitus: based on KTS posters like Flannel Jesus: played by Quentin Tarrentino. D63, of course, has had conflicts with him. In fact, Darwinitus, along with Poison IV-character who kept coming on to Philosophy Freaks to antagonize d63 over debate between him and Satyr-like character. However, d63 finds him an interesting character who deflects the conflicts they have had. Persistent explains to him, in a Tarrentino way, why d63 should have taken the debate further. It is also Persistent that sets d63 up for the encounter he has with the satyr-like character’s crew back in America.
- Pride of Pan: based on Satyr. Pride, in the post monologues, is presented a little differently. As he is being described throughout the story, d63 makes a point about Pride’s obsession with Hannible Lector. In fact, it would cool to have Anthony Hopkins do the dialogues. However, when d63 actually meets him, he looks more like Kevin Smith. Please bare with me on this point.
- The Joker-like character: not sure who should play him. It would be tempting to say Giovanni Ribissi. But he has been used in that capacity to the extent of becoming cliché. I’m actually thinking more in terms of the actor that played with Kevin Smith in the Jay and Silent Bob movies. But d63 sees him as a Bukowskie-like character with whom he forms a kind of paternal like need to take care of. But it is Joker’s character that acts as bait to draw d63 into Pride of Pan’s trap. But when d63 first encounters him, he finds him on a city street acting like madman screaming: Zombies; you’re all a bunch of fucking zombies; have you no soul.
- StrychnineDrip: based on Poison IV: played by that weird girl on Park and Recreation who has that goth air about them. Hot, but one of Pan’s entourage. There when Pan fuck’s d63 over.
- James-like character: played by Alan Rickman: is the one that leads d63 to Joker-like character. Also represents a lot of the older professor-like people we have on these boards. Also there when Pan fucks d63 over.
- Kriswest-like character: played by Kathy Bates: the one d63 is most comfortable with because of his Midwest upbringing. On the board, they start off turbulent because of their different political views. But they warm up to each other because of their common love of beer. It is her character that d63 turns to after getting fucked over by Pan.
- Along the way, d63 will meet a Ambig-like character, his nihilistic ally, who looks like a poet from the early 80’s who was also a Vietnam vet. His character will be sophisticated and zen-like.
- When d63 goes to Europe and meets Magji’s character, it will be because he went there to meet a Marxist komrad based on pirouette. It will be based on my own mistake of thinking them a female which d63 claimed to have fell in love with until another poster pointed out they were a dude. This character would be played by Jason Stratham and is the one that manages to arrange a flash riot on d63’s arrival.
- Neuromaniac would be based on Vol, and a kind of obsession on d63’s part since he spends most of the story to understand him. He would be played by Jim Parsons from the Big Bang Theory. Furthermore, d63 would nickname him Neuro to refer to Nero the roman emperor.
- The pav-like character will be played by Ben Affleck and be the one that introduces d63 to Karl, the inventor of the board based on Carleas (which could be played by Matt Damon). It is Pav’s character that show’s d63 who Neuro actually is. This is what will provide the final scene of the movie.
Anyway, guys, this is a work of fiction. It’s not about you. It’s about you inspiring me to create something in my imagination. Therefore, any contribution you make will be helpful. But please do not take anything I do here as an insult to you.
And sorry about the typos. I haven’t the window left to correct them right now. But, hopefully, you’ll get the point.
Can I’ve the guy on the couch like Stephen wright in half baked?
Should I need such a character, you’ll be first on the list.
Anyway, new developments:
The Ambig character would be played by Vincet Dinofrio. I’m sure he’s looking for work.
The tentative username would be Ambivalence.
Also, I’m considering turning Strychnine’s username to Goth Chicks Don’t Smile.
But they do smile when you act like you like vampire shit.
Ambivalence (putting his hands on d63’s shoulders): anyway, just keep your cool, man. Remember: it’s nothing. You hear me? Nothing.
d63: you know how I am.
Ambivivalence (with more emphasis): Nothing man!
Ambivalence gets on his his boat, then before he turns on the motor, turns back to d63 and says again:
nothing!
Then rides off in his boat.
Magjs:
Zen Candy.
Call after d63 gets fucked over: from Zen Candy:
Zen Candy: I am so sorry d63. I knew I shouldn’t have given Darwinitis your number. That fucking asshole!
Are you alright?
d63: Yeah. I think they just wanted to fuck with me a little.
Zen Candy: I can’t believe he did that.
d63: it’s alright, I’ll get over it.
Zen Candy (after pause): you want me to kick him in the balls? I often think about it.
d63: No. Not on my behalf anyway.
The scene that raised my enthusiasm for this comes towards the end and involves the KTS crowd including James F Angel (as in fallen angel), GothChicksDon’tSmile, Pride of Pan (Satyr’s charcter), and Joker. But first some background.
First of all, it is important to know that d63 had always respected joker to the point of concern upon learning that he was on the streets. In fact, at one point, when Joker posted that he had been living with a toothache for several weeks, d63 had PMed him and offered to help get it taken care of. It was an offer that Joker graciously refused, thereby increasing d63’s respect for him.
Pride of Pan played by Kevin Smith, throughout the earlier story, is approached differently in that when he is shown in the close-up posts, he is portrayed as d63 imagines him: as Hannibal Lector who Pride seems to have a deep seated identification with. It should also be noted that one of Pride’s idiosyncrasies in responding to d63’s challenges is constantly referring to him as “little girl”.
Goth Chick’s (played by that girl from park and rec –the sort of creepy negative one) is approached in a similar manner in that in close-up posts, she is portrayed as the hot chick she uses for her avatars (someone like Faruza Balk or something). The important thing to note about her is that, like Zen Candy and her mother, Lizbeth’s character, d63 has engaged in the regretted habit of referring to her as “sweetheart”.
James (played by Alan Rickman) is pretty much the same James he has been in d63’s previous encounters with him on the board, encounters, given James’s social Darwinism, that were not exactly cordial, but not exactly aggressively hostile due to James’ tendency to deflect d63’s challenges and his propensity for short negative comments. Also, to get a visual feel for him, you have to imagine Rickman in an unbuttoned suit jacket and having the feel of English guy who had fallen in with a group of con men.
The scene starts with a call from James to d63 to tell him where Joker is since d63 had several times on the expressed concern about it. This surprises d63 since, for one, he’s wonders how Jame’s got his number and, two, he’s a little surprised that James would care what d63 is concerned with.
However, Joker is right where James tells him and d63 finds him clearly mad on a city street screaming at passers by:
“Zombies! Your all a bunch of fucking Zombies! Knock, Knock! Anyone at home!”
D63 (approaching him): Joker?
Joker breaks from rant and turns to him: Are you a Zombie?
D63: Not as far as I know. D63.
James (from behind): Sad isn’t it? Like you, I tried to get him to take care of that toothache, but he refused. Some silly notion about him being like Dostoyevsky’s underground man. Unfortunately, by the time he got help, the infection had worked its way to his brain. I try to help him out. But he has that same independent streak.
James by the way.
D63: Jesus. Is he stable enough for a meal and a beer?
James: what animal isn’t? (Turns to Joker) Come along now, Joker. Let’s get this over and rot away the few brain cells you have left.
When they get to the bar and grill, it is at this point that Pride and Goth Chicks show up, except d63 is completely unaware since no names are mentioned. This part is in the outline phase, so the only dialogue I have is Goth Chicks rearing from Joker and telling him he needs to take a shower and Pride being one of those obnoxious fat guys who likes to make negative comments about the food. It is important to note that d63, when he is drinking with other people, is in the habit of giving his keys to the bartender. This is important for future reference; since it is during this that the group he is with slips a strong sedative into his drink. Soon, James asks if he too will be in the article to which d63 responds of course. It is at this point that James suggests a much better place down the street that is within walking distance and that he will pay.
As they are walking along, the sedative takes effect, at which point James grabs him and carries him into the alley. As he lays him down on a pile of trash bags, the camera perspective switches to d63’s with effects to suggest his state of mind. The whole scene moves from right to left, starting with James who is crouched in front of him.
James: had a little too much, huh? I’m sure the effects will wear off. You’ll be alright. But before you go, we should make a few formal introductions.
The camera pans slightly left where Goth Chicks’ face approaches the camera.
Goth Chicks: Goth Chicks Don’t Smile. And by the way, I know what you look like. So if you ever call me “sweetheart” again, I’ll hunt you down and slit your fucking throat.
The camera then pans left to Pride who stands right where he’s at with his arms crossed.
Pride: Pride of Pan to you, little girl.
The camera then starts to pan left at which point Joker is seen, vaguely in the peripheral, crouching beside him to grab his wallet. But the camera pans back to Pride and lingers. It then pans back to Joker who speaks more normally.
Joker: of course, you know who I am. Oh! (grins and points to his head) Don’t worry, my mind’s just fine.
Joker gets up at which point the camera shows all four of them looking down at him and grinning: Joker going through his wallet, Pride glaring at him as well as Goth, and James standing sideways with hands in the pocket of his jacket and holding them out.
Joker (as he goes through the wallet): Good luck with that article.
Pride: Article? This little girl couldn’t write his own name.
Joker (folding the wallet back up): By the way: love ya, man!
They all chuckle as Pride forms a mocking face and makes a masturbating gesture before Joker tosses the wallet at the camera.
At this point the screen darkens and initiates a dream sequence that is also shown from d63’s perspective:
Fade in of foggy wood.
Switch to seemingly abandoned village.
Switch back to foggy wood where silhouettes of 4 mange ridden dogs appear.
Back to village where howling is heard.
Back to scene of pack in which the mechanical sound of heavy breathing is heard as they run together.
Back to village where 2 dogs are seen fighting.
Turn to village where other dogs are seen gathering and staring at camera.
James (from behind causing camera to pan towards him): The story is wrong from end to end.
At this point, d63 awakes in the alley with his wallet on his chest and finds himself wearing a bra and panties.
I’ve also come up with another character based on the guy that does the Philosophy Now podcast and inspired by Humean. The main thing about him is that when people say things to him, he always punctuates it in a British accent:
Well now, that’s interesting.
The thing is he says it in such a dry way that you’re never sure if he’s being sincere or sarcastic.
As I see it now, that character could be easily played by Russell Brand.
The cool thing about it that when d63 first encounters him, he is in the studio interviewing real philosophers. I’m thinking Chalmers, Dennett, and Searle. And during the discussion, there would be a few snipes. But then it would end with Brand saying:
Well now, that’s interesting.
Revision of conversation with Ambivalence. As they’re walking towards Ambivalence’s boat:
d63: sorry about last night.
Ambivalence: Just that Irish swagger of yours. Don’t sweat it. (As they get close to boat, Ambivalence turns to d63.) Listen man, try to keep your cool out there. Remember: it’s not worth insisting on. It only pisses people off and you’re probably wrong anyway.
d63: Yeah, but you know how I am: that Irish swagger and all.
Ambivalence (moving towards d63 and grabbing his shoulders): It’s nothing, man. You hear me? Nothing.
Ambivalence pats d63 on shoulder, gets confidently on boat and, as he turns it on, turns back to d63 and yells:
Nothing.
Chuckles, triumphantly, then rides away.
The thing is, guys, art, as much as it is an act of witchcraft, is an act of love. (The 2 are are probably more tied together than we might realize.) If a writer feels anything less than love for his characters, it’s hardly worth doing. Real humor, as Thurber demonstrates, is impossible without it. And this is why I love this project so much. It gives me a chance to redeem myself.