![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Which is going to get the attention of ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
mdg1, fajrdrako, shanejayell and a few others reading this regularly. There's already been some discussion re: which characters are going to get the nod as part of the core cast for this pilot movie...which many of us want to see get the "ongoing series" nod from ABC(Disney) already and never mind all the hemming and hawing.
(Also, forfajrdrako: here's the improved version of my SHIELD LJ icon. Use it in good health so long as you don't sully the reputations of the Directorate, the UN Security Council, Marvel, ABC or Disney...)
Ahem.
Okay, casting.
I have no inside sources. No scoops. Forget it. I'm speculating wildly here just like the rest of youse.
I can't see them springing for Jackson to play Fury half a year every year for the next five to seven. Not unless some serious horse-trading happens. Also, Jackson's got work outside of the Marvel movies to keep doing, if only to keep from going crazy from boredom. He's a hardcore comic book fan, but he and his agent(s) have to be well aware of the perils of burning out on too much of a good thing. So there's that.
Smulders, playing Maria Hill as Fury's right hand...is perhaps more likely. They might even use that recently-released clip of Hill's after-action report to the "World Security Council" on the Battle of Manhattan as a plot springboard. Her regular TV gig may be about to go into its final season, in which case Smulders might be looking for a change of scenery medium to long-term. And playing an action heroine soldier-spy would certainly be a change from her serial soap-comedy gig on How I Met Your Mother.
Johansson and Renner as the Widow and Hawkeye...are, I suspect, similarly out of budgetary reach despite their depiction in the Marvel Movie'verse as SHIELD agents first, super-heroes second. If Marvel surprises us, so be it. But I'm not expecting that to happen.
Maximillio Hernandez as Jasper Sitwell? Probable. He's new to my knowledge and they can probably afford to nail him down for a few years if everything goes according to hope and plan.
Clark Gregg returning as Phil Coulson? Well, despite how Coulson made his exit from Avengers - and a well-staged exit it was, final or not - there are ways to get around that. Some of them already suggested in the movie itself as presented at the theatres. And the character's got a lot of goodwill built up with the audience.
So there's those considerations.
The next thing is this: three characters alone will not, I think, make for a successful series. SHIELD feels like it ought to be an ensemble show. So they're going to need to fill out the hand somewhat. And over the past half-century, a lot of characters have been created as SHIELD agents, or later became such after their creation. So Marvel and Whedon's production team have lots of options.
A poll on which characters are most likely to be used might be in order. Or, if you'd rather not wait for that, speculate away in the comments!
mdg1, fajrdrako, shanejayell and a few others reading this regularly. There's already been some discussion re: which characters are going to get the nod as part of the core cast for this pilot movie...which many of us want to see get the "ongoing series" nod from ABC(Disney) already and never mind all the hemming and hawing.(Also, for
fajrdrako: here's the improved version of my SHIELD LJ icon. Use it in good health so long as you don't sully the reputations of the Directorate, the UN Security Council, Marvel, ABC or Disney...)Ahem.
Okay, casting.
I have no inside sources. No scoops. Forget it. I'm speculating wildly here just like the rest of youse.
I can't see them springing for Jackson to play Fury half a year every year for the next five to seven. Not unless some serious horse-trading happens. Also, Jackson's got work outside of the Marvel movies to keep doing, if only to keep from going crazy from boredom. He's a hardcore comic book fan, but he and his agent(s) have to be well aware of the perils of burning out on too much of a good thing. So there's that.
Smulders, playing Maria Hill as Fury's right hand...is perhaps more likely. They might even use that recently-released clip of Hill's after-action report to the "World Security Council" on the Battle of Manhattan as a plot springboard. Her regular TV gig may be about to go into its final season, in which case Smulders might be looking for a change of scenery medium to long-term. And playing an action heroine soldier-spy would certainly be a change from her serial soap-comedy gig on How I Met Your Mother.
Johansson and Renner as the Widow and Hawkeye...are, I suspect, similarly out of budgetary reach despite their depiction in the Marvel Movie'verse as SHIELD agents first, super-heroes second. If Marvel surprises us, so be it. But I'm not expecting that to happen.
Maximillio Hernandez as Jasper Sitwell? Probable. He's new to my knowledge and they can probably afford to nail him down for a few years if everything goes according to hope and plan.
Clark Gregg returning as Phil Coulson? Well, despite how Coulson made his exit from Avengers - and a well-staged exit it was, final or not - there are ways to get around that. Some of them already suggested in the movie itself as presented at the theatres. And the character's got a lot of goodwill built up with the audience.
So there's those considerations.
The next thing is this: three characters alone will not, I think, make for a successful series. SHIELD feels like it ought to be an ensemble show. So they're going to need to fill out the hand somewhat. And over the past half-century, a lot of characters have been created as SHIELD agents, or later became such after their creation. So Marvel and Whedon's production team have lots of options.
A poll on which characters are most likely to be used might be in order. Or, if you'd rather not wait for that, speculate away in the comments!
Eleven Nations?
Aug. 15th, 2012 01:18 pmEvery so often, you come across a map that makes you stop, think, scratch your brain-casing for half a minute - or perhaps five minutes - and leaves you either more or less confused about your place in the worlds.
One such map came to my attention two days ago, by way of one of my acquaintances at the National Capital Freenet. Pointing to an article in the Tyee, that attention was drawn to a map done up for an author named Colin Woodward, so that he could present his case that North America from Mexico's southern border up to the Arctic Sea was not quite made up of three nations, but rather eleven cultural groups.
And this puts me back to discussions I've had withjoe_szilagyi, james_nicoll and a couple of other people about the possible futures of North America in general, and of the USA and Canada in particular. Some of those discussions were echoes of the Ex Unum Pluribus project, others of the US of Canada/Jesusland map.
I'm not really convinced that either of those latter two options are going to happen. Certainly not as proposed. If the like happens, it'll be by a series of incidents and accidents will only look inevitable after the fact in the eyes of historians.
Still, it's useful on occasion to look at where you are, but through other people's eyes. Especially as a student of speculative fiction.
One such map came to my attention two days ago, by way of one of my acquaintances at the National Capital Freenet. Pointing to an article in the Tyee, that attention was drawn to a map done up for an author named Colin Woodward, so that he could present his case that North America from Mexico's southern border up to the Arctic Sea was not quite made up of three nations, but rather eleven cultural groups.
And this puts me back to discussions I've had with
joe_szilagyi, james_nicoll and a couple of other people about the possible futures of North America in general, and of the USA and Canada in particular. Some of those discussions were echoes of the Ex Unum Pluribus project, others of the US of Canada/Jesusland map.I'm not really convinced that either of those latter two options are going to happen. Certainly not as proposed. If the like happens, it'll be by a series of incidents and accidents will only look inevitable after the fact in the eyes of historians.
Still, it's useful on occasion to look at where you are, but through other people's eyes. Especially as a student of speculative fiction.
rfmcdpei just pointed out something that suggests I was in error about Russia's stance re: the UN Security Council Resolution re: the no-fly zone in Libya:http://siberianlight.net/medvedev-rebukes-putin-over-libya/
No small attention-getter to see those two figures in Russian politics in particular have an open dispute over this of all things. The temptation to speculate over possible consequences is strong, although I admit to a lack of information that might help to shape those imaginings in a useful, constructive way.
Someone asked a question about economic bubbles and where they might be popping up next...
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/08/what-is-the-next-bubble.html
Frankly, being - like many of the rest of you here - in a somewhat vulnerable state these days, I thought keeping an eye on that discussion was a prudent thing to do. Also, working - or trying to work - in both speculative fiction as either writer, artist or both, and in writing on urban infrastructure issues, there's a story idea mine percolating away there.
So...rather than clutter upantipope's space any faster than he can handle, setting up a branch discussion here on the same subject seems a good thing, too.
Where should we be watching like hawks? Or vultures, perhaps?
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/08/what-is-the-next-bubble.html
Frankly, being - like many of the rest of you here - in a somewhat vulnerable state these days, I thought keeping an eye on that discussion was a prudent thing to do. Also, working - or trying to work - in both speculative fiction as either writer, artist or both, and in writing on urban infrastructure issues, there's a story idea mine percolating away there.
So...rather than clutter up
antipope's space any faster than he can handle, setting up a branch discussion here on the same subject seems a good thing, too.Where should we be watching like hawks? Or vultures, perhaps?
Can-Con Day 2
Aug. 21st, 2010 10:37 amDay one was busy enough, and definitely fun. The panel discussion on manuscript preparation was as educational for me as for almost anyone else in the room, in fact.
I'll be there this afternoon for the "Copyright and Ownership in Speculative Literature" discussion with Marie Bilodeau and Farrell McGovern. 3 PM, TraveLodge Hotel on Carling, across from the Westgate mall.
I'll be there this afternoon for the "Copyright and Ownership in Speculative Literature" discussion with Marie Bilodeau and Farrell McGovern. 3 PM, TraveLodge Hotel on Carling, across from the Westgate mall.
A question about ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
canfandom
Aug. 16th, 2010 08:28 pmHow is it that I only see about 10 or 20 people signed up with that community?
I know of plenty of SpecFic fen across Canada, so there ought to be a bigger roster, no?
I know of plenty of SpecFic fen across Canada, so there ought to be a bigger roster, no?
Speaking of Nation-Breaking
Feb. 14th, 2010 01:33 pmI blame joe_szilagyi and for this.
Joe's been musing over the prospects of a break-up of the American Union of late. He's not the first and won't be the last to consider the prospect any time in the foreseeable. I've been guilty of the practice myself, whilst parochially considering the prospect of my own nation going to pieces out-of-bounds. I freely admit this chauvinism in spite of separatist movements that have been afoot from one end of Confederation to the other ever since I was old enough to understand a newscast on either TV or radio(particularly in the Prairie provinces, Québec and Newfoundland+Labrador).
Anyway.
Bought this book collecting and updating several dozen items from by Frank Jacobs yesterday, which reminded me of Matt Kirkland's Ex Unum, Pluribus! Some of the proposals are intriguing, others laughable. Which ones go in which columns? I'll leave that to you to debate, possibly at Mr. Kirkland's or Mr. Jacobs' websites more often than here.
Back to you...
joe_szilagyi and for this.Joe's been musing over the prospects of a break-up of the American Union of late. He's not the first and won't be the last to consider the prospect any time in the foreseeable. I've been guilty of the practice myself, whilst parochially considering the prospect of my own nation going to pieces out-of-bounds. I freely admit this chauvinism in spite of separatist movements that have been afoot from one end of Confederation to the other ever since I was old enough to understand a newscast on either TV or radio(particularly in the Prairie provinces, Québec and Newfoundland+Labrador).
Anyway.
Bought this book collecting and updating several dozen items from by Frank Jacobs yesterday, which reminded me of Matt Kirkland's Ex Unum, Pluribus! Some of the proposals are intriguing, others laughable. Which ones go in which columns? I'll leave that to you to debate, possibly at Mr. Kirkland's or Mr. Jacobs' websites more often than here.
Back to you...
Three or four years back, I commented on Mark Waid's approach to Metropolis c. 3005 or so in his version of LSH. This, before I knew that it was going to become the Metropolis of 31st Century Earth-Prime per Final Crisis: Legion of Three Worlds.
Looking back at that discussion, some of you in the audience took that earlier bait and went off in several interesting directions with it. Took me with you, in fact.
itsokimasenator inspired me to go back to that earlier posting with today's commentary on LSH v.4 # 29. Got me thinking again about what that version of the planet looked like back then before all the chambers went BOOM.
I still feel that the aforementioned Lo3W mini-series is wider-ranging in its implications of which toys are available for play again than some might believe. Hoping I'm right about that.
Looking back at that discussion, some of you in the audience took that earlier bait and went off in several interesting directions with it. Took me with you, in fact.
itsokimasenator inspired me to go back to that earlier posting with today's commentary on LSH v.4 # 29. Got me thinking again about what that version of the planet looked like back then before all the chambers went BOOM.I still feel that the aforementioned Lo3W mini-series is wider-ranging in its implications of which toys are available for play again than some might believe. Hoping I'm right about that.
You probably figured I'd address this question eventually in the wake of 52. Or that I should have well before now.
This interview with Jerry Ordway on Newsarama implies some interesting possibilities for each of the fictional universes now under the DC umbrella. Granted, "Earth-Wildstorm" is playing with them in passing in its own way. Still, I have to admit to wondering what permutations on existing DCU-specific cities and nations Ordway and others following in his footsteps will establish for this new edition of "Earth-2"...
This interview with Jerry Ordway on Newsarama implies some interesting possibilities for each of the fictional universes now under the DC umbrella. Granted, "Earth-Wildstorm" is playing with them in passing in its own way. Still, I have to admit to wondering what permutations on existing DCU-specific cities and nations Ordway and others following in his footsteps will establish for this new edition of "Earth-2"...
I spotted a thread on Warren Ellis' Engine forum entitled "New Orleans: Doomed". In the course of the discussion therein to date, a link to a couple of blog postings elsewhere that might be of interest came up. The blog's title is Future Imperative, the author is one Ralph Cerchione, and the series of posts is collective entitled "Where Will You Be When the Floodwaters Rise?"
On the subject of the effects upon Canada.
On the subject of the effects upon the USA.
Regardless of how convinced I am of this scenario being an inevitability, and to what degree - and I count myself as convinced enough to worry - I think I'll be incorporating this into my space opera novel as backstory material.
On the subject of the effects upon Canada.
On the subject of the effects upon the USA.
Regardless of how convinced I am of this scenario being an inevitability, and to what degree - and I count myself as convinced enough to worry - I think I'll be incorporating this into my space opera novel as backstory material.
Every so often, some pundit or other gets it into their noggin that Canada might swallow up, with the informed and pleased consent of the affected populations, some part or another of the current United States. And many of us have, as a matter of course, seen the satirical map of the "United States of Canada" in the wake of the 2004 USA elections.
One of the latest treatises on this subject popped up in the pages of the Toronto Star this past week. Here's the link. Time-limited, it may well be, so read it and save it quickly if you can.
What I'm wondering, if I may, is just how plausible or workable is this currently considered to be? Throw in your thoughts on the desirability of it as well if you like -- some of you are going to do so anyway -- but I'm wondering if the author hasn't misread a few things.
One of the latest treatises on this subject popped up in the pages of the Toronto Star this past week. Here's the link. Time-limited, it may well be, so read it and save it quickly if you can.
What I'm wondering, if I may, is just how plausible or workable is this currently considered to be? Throw in your thoughts on the desirability of it as well if you like -- some of you are going to do so anyway -- but I'm wondering if the author hasn't misread a few things.
