Category Archives: Illustration

This is a collection of the various paintings, drawings, and pieces of fan art that you’ll find scattered throughout this site.

Sweaty Cartoons – A Cautionary Tale

Posted on by

Gary Went Home postFINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

Tonight’s image is another example of a Chaos Portrait, a series of images born from two drunk idiots passing pen and paper around saloon tables, insisting that neighboring tables of inebriated foolhardy revelers pick up the pen and scrawl-out some lines on paper. I think some of the best art comes from a complete lack of agenda. Spontaneous fits of expression can be remarkably profound, and my associate Mr. Trent Ducati and I put this to the test. We accosted drunk revelers with blank pages and sharpened pencils and asked them to draw. We then took those drawings home and re-interpreted them into this body of work. A lot of interesting shit started to happen.

Chaos portraits. The most dishonest expression of honest emotion any human is likely to see.

Tonight’s image? It was made in my living-room with Mr. Ducati. He had sixty seconds to capture my countenance in charcoal and newsprint paper. We then spent about ten minutes circling the floor, hardening lines and spitting on our thumbs to try and erase lines. We hammered at the canvas, together, until a single, unified visage was lifted from the flakes of chipped charcoal and the agony of lost time. I scanned the image into my computer and added color, chiseling away some lines and accentuating others. The ‘Chaos Portrait’ project became more of an editor’s project.

We took the initial drawing and treated it like a clay sculpture, adding and subtracting information until the final image made sense. I couldn’t even really tell you how this image first started, but it became an emblem, a mascot, of the desperate drunk fools that we encountered every night down at Danny’s Lounge, The Depot, and Shooters – all Tucson watering holes replete with revelers both pathetic, confident, old, young, achieved, and despairing.

We named this mascot ‘Gary.’ Gary is a lonely creature looking for love – or pussy. It’s hard to tell. But he’s based on an image of me, so I guess I’m compelled to be a little protective. He’s a sad, lonely wolf. He doesn’t know how to talk to people. He isn’t a dullard, but doesn’t know how to fly the flag of his brilliance. He is wasted, paranoid, and sad.

Raise a glass. To Gary!

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER

Dumb And Dumber – Don’t Fall Off The Jetway Again

Posted on by

Fell Off The Jetway postFINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
It’s unfortunate when we have to forgive a franchise it’s latter-day sins, but it happens. Sometimes we stand on the shoulders of giants, and sometimes we fall off those shoulders. “Dumb & Dumber” was one of the unique films that was tremendously effective in its comedy specifically because it didn’t know it would be so great. It was earnest in its approach but knew how to take risks. It respected its audience and it never pretended to be anything other than what it was: a story of two dimwits on a road-trip. It’s a “buddy comedy” through-and-through. Even though the sequel appears to have been a nostalgic cash-grab, that alone cannot unseat the genuine brilliance of the 1994 classic.

The real train-wreck is a film that aspires to dramatic greatness when, at best, it’s a soap opera. We’ve all watched a comedy that over-clocked the same joke, much to our boredom and disappointment. We’ve seen humor recycled ad infinitum and we’ve seen movies that desperately hope a successful punchline from one feature will lead to success in another, a laziness and hubris of film-making that plagues the Hollywood circuit to this day. One of the reasons the new “Ghostbusters” trailer has caught so much negative criticism is because of this. The “that’s gonna leave a mark” gag stretches back as far as Jack Benny and Peter Sellers; it has been uttered by John Candy in “Spaceballs,” Chris Farley in “Tommy Boy,” and Michael Richards (Kramer) in multiple episodes of “Seinfeld,” and this is naming only a very select few.

In the end, audiences recognize when a film is out of its depth, trying too hard for an Oscar, or taking its audience for granted. “Dumb and Dumber” never did this. The characters were honest and three-dimensional, with their own histories and aspirations and shortcomings. A quick glance might reveal a flimsy animated cartoon cell, but an honest viewing of the whole movie shows us characters of agency, two outsiders fumbling about in a world they don’t (and because of their intellectual limitations, can’t) understand.

The Harry and Lloyd characters of “Dumb and Dumber” fulfill the “fish out of water” trope on two important levels. On the first level, they’re too dumb to function in society in any meaningful capacity. They struggle to hold down simple jobs, can’t pay their bills on time, are gullible enough to be swindled by a disabled elderly woman on a motorized cart. On the second level is where we, the audience, can actually meet them halfway and begin to relate to them rather than just laughing at them. On the second level, after finding a suitcase full of money, the duo winds up attempting to blend-in with high-society, a subterfuge that clearly doesn’t work but motivates us to think about how wealth is expressed in our society. It’s never the nugget ring or the gaudy fringed cowboy boots, no matter how expensive, that ever expresses refinement. It’s always something more subtle – the brand of watch, the fold of the pocket square, the part of the hair.

The premise of “Dumb and Dumber” is absurd, yes, but the characters are deployed with such gleeful honesty that it’s difficult not to want to see them succeed. That the film is goofy and recognizes that it’s goofy is what makes it successful. So strap into the Shaggin’ Wagon, stock up on your Binaka, and please, be sure not to fall off the jet-way again.

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER

A Word About Dr. Quinzel

Posted on by

Harley in the Hall post

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

Any comic book aficionado or perennial nerd – every video-game, graphic-novel, pop-culture freak – can tell you what they think about this character and why. Most of us can tell you which version of the character we were first introduced to, and which iteration we prefer, from the after school cartoon to the decidedly more gritty and demented video game character from the award-winning “Arkham” series of Batman video games.

The more recent comic book and video game depictions of the character aren’t just grittier, but also much more sexualized, and this appears to have informed the direction of the character for the new “Suicide Squad” film. This makes sense for a film targeting a teenage and adult male audience. The character is perfectly tailored to play the seductive role while maintaining her dignity; complete insanity can be fun that way. What’s interesting and attractive about the character goes beyond sex appeal, though, which is probably one of the main reasons why so many people are interested in her. She isn’t a two-dimensional comic foil in a tight outfit. Or, I should say, she isn’t just a comic foil in a tight outfit. Her character is fully formed, she has agency and motivation, and this elevates her from many of the cinematic adaptations of female super-heroes and super-villains. There aren’t any one-liners to pigeonhole this one.

What we might also consider is that Dr. Harleen Frances Quinzel isn’t a throwback to the 1950s, or any other earlier era of antiquated Americana. Many comic book stories from the early days of Marvel and DC weren’t very kind to women and their portrayal in popular media. This one is very original. Harley Quinn – a pretty ‘on-the-nose’ pun on the word ‘harlequin’ – was created by Paul Dini and Bruce Timm back in 1991. Her first appearance was in an episode of “Batman: The Animated Series” in September of 1992.

The animated series was undeniably for kids, but it adopted a wonderfully dark tone and took it’s subject matter seriously. The show was illustrated in muted tones and was heavily influenced by art-deco design. The stories were also genre-defining, presenting conflicted characters, gothic atmosphere, and emotionally intelligent plots. The production team respected its audience even though most of them were children; this might explain why the series is still considered relevant today. It’s one of those timeless classics that’ll likely extend much further than it’s original run. Heck, it already has.

In the animated series, Harley Quinn isn’t given an origin story. She just appears as an obvious, humorous female sidekick to The Joker, who disregards her extreme admiration and devotion to him. With a thick Jersey accent and an almost innocent, bubbly desire to please the man of her dreams, much of the humor comes from her obliviousness. She scarcely seems to recognize how psychotic the object of her affection is. This worked well in the cartoon format, with a characterization that remained consistent, more or less, throughout the series.

The origin story didn’t appear until the 1994 graphic novel in the “Batman Adventures” series, titled “Mad Love.” We learn that the good Dr. Quinzel began as an ambitious and uniquely brilliant young psychiatrist at Arkham Asylum. Through a drawn-out attempt to psychoanalyze The Joker, she is eventually manipulated by the madman into setting him free. It’s a Stockholm-Syndrome-esque turn-of-events, and the doctor is subsequently twisted into one of The Joker’s puppets. The narrative is under-girded by Harley’s intellectual gifts and her emotional frailty, conflicting characteristics that make her a fascinating victim  – she’s both dangerous and vulnerable. The story was widely praised and won the Eisner and Harvey Awards for Best Single Issue Comic of the Year.

From the look of things, this origin story will not be a part of the new “Suicide Squad” film. The origin story may be hinted at, but it won’t be a focus of the film’s narrative. Not enough is revealed by the movie trailers alone to cast judgement, but commentators and fans appear to be split regarding this new incarnation of Harley Quinn. Some say the look is perfect, others wish there would be a more true-to-comic presence. Others are concerned that she doesn’t have that thick Jersey accent that helped define her cartoon countenance (an understandable critique when we watch the trailer and hear the classic ‘joker laugh’ from actor Jared Leto, a clear homage to Mark Hamill’s voice acting in the animated series).

The only way to know if the new Harley is worth a damn, of course, is to buy the ticket, take the ride, and see if works. I, for one, am optimistic that this is going to be a fun ride.

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER

Trump – The Stakes Are High

Posted on by

Trump Steak postFINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

With the Republican party cannibalizing itself, Trump’s race to the White House has managed to plow forward unimpeded. After the first wave of disillusioned Democrats, scratching their heads wondering how on earth a boorish windbag like Donald Trump could continue to pull off victory after victory, establishment GOP figureheads have themselves joined the ranks of Trump critics. He is a chameleon, a game changer, an insurgent candidate – it’s true. And there is nothing good about it. We can advocate for change in our political process, but this is not the proper path.

At the end of the day, Trump can scarcely claim to be a Republican in the first place. His base is not a contingent of highly educated political scholars. They are average working people who are as fed up with the broken machinery in Washington as anybody else, and they support him from a place of absolute knee-jerk emotion, checking reason at the door. How else could his proven lies stick? How else can a politician, of any stripe, behave the way he has behaved – and continues to behave – without backlash?

It’s a dangerous game we’re playing. There’s nothing wrong with an electorate that’s fed up with political gridlock and economic despair, but flocking to the loudest, meanest bully in the schoolyard is destructive at most, foolhardy at least. We need look no further than what we’ve seen at his rallies – from photographers being choke-slammed and press members being penned in for ridicule to ethnic minorities and protesters being assaulted – and we ought not talk ourselves into thinking that violent rhetoric doesn’t influence violent behavior. We are better than this. There are better people to represent the conservative half, and it is a damn shame that the largest barrier preventing genuine intelligent statesmen (and women) from entering the race is money. A Trump victory will be the ultimate proof; we will no longer be able to say that political positions in America aren’t flat-out bought.

Will tonight’s debate be the same shit-show as the previous dozen?
My money is on continued chaos and a dangerous lack of much-need discussion.
Follow me on Twitter @LenseBender for live updates.

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER

Ghostbusters Reboot – What Are They Thinking?

Posted on by

Ghost Gunslinger postFINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

One week ago, the new trailer for “Ghostbusters (2016)” was released. In the internet age, the release of a trailer is a significant event, an event in which the online community is able to instantaneously react to the the material. Message boards and comment sections immediately begin to swell with the opinions of amateur and professional media prognosticators alike; the fate of many films seem to be decided much earlier than the actual release date. If we remind ourselves of the considerable excitement generated by the “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” trailers, as well as underdog films like “Deadpool” (the trailers of which managed to secure the attention of comic book lovers and total Deadpool neophytes alike) and realize that these trailers translated into record box office numbers.

Since the “Ghostbusters (2016)” trailer debuted, there isn’t even a fifty-fifty split; the people have spoken, and this feature is dead on arrival. With over twenty-two million views (as of this writing), the two minute video has garnered twice as many ‘dislike’ votes than ‘like’ votes. Reaction videos immediately begin to spring up over the past week, and the general consensus is that this film is going to be atrocious.

So what happened?

Many commentators have cast the new film aside as a contrived, politically correct rehash, tailored to the “social justice warrior” contingent and hordes of vapid ‘millennials.’ This is an absurd knee-jerk reaction. Director Paul Feig has already proved his mettle with comedies featuring strong female leads in smash-hit films like “Bridesmaids” and “Spy,” as well as sitting in the director’s chair for several episodes of the hit television series “Nurse Jackie.” The cast itself has a long list of successful projects under its belt, especially Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy, two actresses whose off-beat brand of comedy have attracted a great deal of attention.

A more honest analysis would require a quick discussion of the first “Ghostbusters (1984).” The original film was completely new, with a variety of inventive and novel concepts. It presented a coherent story, blending interesting characters, horror tropes, and comedy in a seamless tapestry. It was an interesting and fun film, unencumbered by audience preconceptions, laden with fast-tongued protagonists and filled to the brim with undeniable creativity.

This is what we would call a “tough act to follow.”

Remaking a genre film is risky business. Consider, as an example, if “The Force Awakens” wasn’t a continuation of our favorite story told in a galaxy far, far away, but actually sought to re-cast and remake the original “Star Wars: A New Hope.” It would not go over well. Fans of the franchise would revolt. While the cult status of “Ghostbusters (1984)” is arguably less pronounced than “Star Wars,” it is a cult classic nonetheless. Nobody wants to see a remake of “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” for a reason. Cult films do not translate well into updates, remakes, or reboots. They too easily threaten to alter the very elements of the original film that audiences have come to know and love.

Another problem with the new “Ghostbusters (2016)” is that the trailer isn’t clear about the universe in which the story takes place. The trailer begins with the line “thirty year ago, four scientists saved New York.” This would indicate that the new feature is a continuation of the narrative from the first and second iterations of the franchise. This is hugely problematic because the new feature is a “hard reboot” of the 1984 film; it’s a stand-alone re-telling of the original story set in contemporary New York with an all-female cast. The four beloved hucksters from the cult-classic do not exist in this new film’s canon. There are rumors of a Bill Murray cameo, but there’s no indication that he’ll be reprising his role. Chances are, he’ll be little more than an easter-egg for fans of the original films.

For almost fifteen years there have been rumors that a third Ghostbusters movie was in the works, a film in which the original cast would reprise their roles. Unfortunately the project never got on its feet and, with the death of Harold Ramis in 2014, the project was abandoned altogether. In the interim, however, it was clearly recognized that there was interest in rebooting the franchise. Once it was known that the original four (Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson, BIll Murray, and Harold Ramis) would not be on board, a whole world of possibilities opened up.

I don’t believe the decision to make the new film all-female was an attempt at political correctness. Rather, it was an opportunity to expand the demographic reach of a beloved property; it’s an attempt at expanding the audience. There would be nothing wrong with this decision so long as the characters are portrayed as whole women, as characters with agency, avoiding stereotypes of female insecurity and competition – this is where the film appears to have failed. Licking gun barrels and insecurely seeking approval (“The hat is too much, isn’t it? Is it the wig or the hat?”), just doesn’t work. It’s difficult to glean adequate character development from a two minute trailer, but it certainly doesn’t seem like these new characters are as three-dimensional as audiences would prefer.

The “social justice” contingent appears to be cannibalizing an earnest effort at updating this property, but this is only because it has been done so ham-fistedly, incorporating the same-song stereotypes of feminine insecurity and uneducated ethnic minorities, and then wrapping it all up in an unpalatable burrito of updated visual effects, gross-out humor, and Joel-Schumacher-eque neon colored light. Licking gun-barrels and competing for one-liners just doesn’t work.

Where the original film was an adventurous blend of comedy and seriousness, this updated film appears to go full-tilt in the direction of physical comedy. Some of the ghosts in the original film were genuinely scary, counter-balanced by goofy ghosts like the ever-so-enjoyable “ugly spud,” Slimer. It disrespects the source material by disregarding the narrative complexity of the original film. The best comedy comes from a place of thoughtfulness, and this film doesn’t appear to take its license seriously.

Part of the reason why “Ghostbusters (1984)” worked is because the characters were unique and relatable. They were brilliant, marginalized outcasts railing against supernatural forces and governmental bureaucracy at the same time. The new “Ghostbusters (2016) is a focus-grouped cash-grab, and audiences can already tell that they’re being taken for granted by Columbia Pictures.

This, my friends, is what happens when you cross the streams.

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER

 

The Walking Dead – “Not Tomorrow Yet”

Posted on by

Abraham postFINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

The most recent episode of “The Walking Dead” once again establishes a sense of peaceful domesticity for the citizens of Alexandria, this time focusing on Carol. It opens with her going through the food pantry, plucking cans from the rack, and gathering acorns in the forested area outside the town walls. The pleasant jaunty folk music doesn’t pause when Carol has to…to machete a walker who interrupts her errand. She sighs at the blood spray on her white blouse in a manner one might expect from tracking mud into the house; there’s a nonchalance, a sense of normality, a sense of frustrated routine.

What the episode establishes here, with it’s folk music & baking montage, is still relatively new. It’s contrasting Carol’s struggle with adapting to living a real life (as opposed to the life she and the group have been forced to live, trying to survive on the road). From the third-person omnipotence of our living-rooms, we already know that Rick and the group are on their way back to the community from The Hilltop. We know that the people of Alexandria are going to have to prepare for war. We know that Carol is going to have to put down the cookies. It’s going to be time to kill people – again.

Carol has her moment with Tobin, we see her smile for the first time in what seems like an eternity, but then the RV pulls up. Her peaceful moment comes to a halt. And these are the rhythms of “The Walking Dead.” As director Greg Nicotero explains: “It becomes ‘Die Hard’ from here on out.”

And he isn’t joking when he says that.

Rick rallies the troops and they plan their attack on Negan’s outpost. A lot happens in this episode, but we still get the feeling that the writers and show-runners are still just setting up all the chess pieces. Glenn loses his innocence by killing his first living human, an action that coincides with plot-points in the comic book. Does this loss of innocence put a target on Glenn’s head, or will the television series diverge from the events of the (already-published) graphic novels in order to keep the audience guessing and the narrative fresh? If so, this certainly wouldn’t be the first time.

And what of Abraham? Since the beginning of the season he’s been showing greater and greater signs of caving into survival stress. He appears unable to adapt to his environment, has private emotional fits, and struggles to understand how or why Glenn & Maggie would actually elect to have a child in this brave new world. There have been moments of drunkenness, abandon, and pathos, as well as moments of unnecessary risk-taking. There was also the PTSD fever-dream on the rooftop with the RPG-strapped walker (an encounter which ultimately saved his life during the encounter with Negan’s foot soldiers on the highway). The show reintroduced Abraham’s problems in last weeks’ episode, and we now see him turning his back on Rosita in a brutal, heartbreaking fashion. He’s a fighter, there’s no doubt, and certainly not a bad man. But the show has gone to great lengths to illustrate that he is a man slowly coming undone. My prediction is that we had all better start saying our goodbyes; he isn’t getting out of the season alive.

If you think I’m wrong, feel free to let me know what you think is going to happen in the comment section below.

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER

Remembering Harold Ramis

Posted on by

Harold Ramis post

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

A little over two years ago news came that a beloved creative personality had passed away. Harold Ramis, widely known as Egon Spengler from “Ghostbusters,” was also an insanely talented writer, a renowned director, and all-around decent human being. His works have undeniably influenced an entire generation of filmmakers, writers, and comedians.

One of the original writers for “Animal House,” his other writing credits include “Stripes,” “Caddyshack,” “National Lampoons: Vacation,” among many, many others. His particular talent revolved around sophomoric, slapstick comedy with an undercurrent moral and social philosophy. His work is known for critiquing “the smugness of institutional life,” a theme exquisitely expressed in his ultimately pleasant, non-fatalistic narrative in “Groundhog Day,” which has since achieved a cult status.

With such a pedigree behind the original “Ghostbusters,” it’s no wonder the May 3rd release of the new “Ghostbusters” trailer – a reboot project with an all-female cast – has been met with intense criticism. The original film was such a monumental, immortal hit (in part due to the genius of Harold Ramis), the deck was already stacked. The cast and crew of the upcoming release have terribly large shoes to fill; it may prove to be an impossibility.

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER HERE

Self-Portrait With Glasses

Posted on by

Self Picasso postFINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

I have hundreds of pages of sketches sitting on my bookshelf. Many of them were produced during a period following the financial collapse of 2008. I was laid off, from three different companies in succession – a bizarre land-speed record, I’d say – and was working in a temporary position at a call center, absorbing other people’s anger and frustration because of their own credit card debt. It was a hard time, but I did the best I could with a worthless education and very few resources of my own. It’s easy enough to satisfy a coffee-shop budget, though, and I re-acquainted myself with a very useful tool: the bicycle.

I was living “on the cheap” during that time. And it wasn’t all-too-terrible.

I met a lot of great people back then, and one of those individuals become a daily collaborator in artistic adventure. We didn’t go to clubs or movies, weekend trips or dinners out on the town. We drank cheep beer and indulged in the most lovely of all free commodities, conversation and creativity. It wasn’t a master’s class in rendering, but rather was a couple of guys occupying various Tucson coffee shops and bars, with mechanical pencils and sketch books at the ready.

We would throw down meaningless – absolutely meaningless – drawing challenges. “Sit here, fool. I’ll sit across from you. Take your pencil. I’ll keep the time. I’ll sit still. You have three minutes. Draw me.”

It was all fun and games. Literally. And it’s actually pretty liberating when you’re guaranteed to fail.

Show me a three-minute ‘perfect’ portrait, and I won’t (necessarily) be surprised; the world is full of genius. But show me that, and you will have shown me one of maybe ten people on earth who can do it. The idea, really, is to short-circuit the very real ‘fear-node’ that prevents one from starting a drawing – or any work of art – in the first place. We wanted to override that fear, eliminate that fear. You have a minute, maybe two. Not many people can sculpt a Michelangelo ‘David’ or paint a ‘Mona Lisa’ in a minute or two. You literally get a free pass. All you have to do is just scribble.

But then I started to revisit the scribbles to see if there might be something worthwhile there. Interestingly, there are a few promising articles, hiding in the piles and piles of otherwise wasted paper.

The image above was a self-portrait challenge. My friend had dropped by the apartment, and it was a woefully empty apartment at the time. My girlfriend – ex-girlfriend – had just moved out to be with a gentleman who played bass guitar in a local band. He was, up until that point, a friend of mine, too. I felt pretty betrayed, pretty alone. Feelings were hurt and I was wounded – my faith in humanity was running shallow. Needless to say, the lack of furniture, the heartache, and the smattering of empty wine bottles about the limited square-footage were probably not resting well with my friends; a few of them were concerned about my well-being.

My buddy Trent was over one day and, after some YouTube time-waste, some cigarettes, and a few beers, he tossed a tattered sketch book at me and instructed me to sit in front of a mirror (plucked from the living room wall, setting on the floor in the living room) and draw myself. The rules for this particular challenge were simple:

1. I wasn’t allowed to look at the paper in my lap; I could only look at my reflection and draw without looking down.
2. I wasn’t allowed to lift my pencil from the page. I had to draw myself without ever lifting my pencil.
3. I had exactly ninety seconds. We both were (are) collectors of stop-watches. He plucked his watch from the pocket of his thrift-store vest, looked up at me, and said…”go.”

I wasn’t surprised by my failure. At the end of the ninety seconds, I looked down and sighed, with relief, that it actually looked like a human being. I quickly buried the sketch with the hundreds of others. It wasn’t until, years later, I started looking at the old sketches, that I started seeing something I couldn’t have seen back then: some of these sketches are actually quite interesting. Our context can blind us, and what seems like a past failure can become a present opportunity. I know that this image isn’t the ticket that’ll save me as a creative professional, but it is interesting to me, today, in a way that it couldn’t have been interesting to me back in 2008.

This image reminds me, in an odd way, of Picasso’s end-of-life drawings. There’s no grandiosity here; I don’t think of myself as possessing the kind of brilliance that Picasso possessed. But there’s a simple, basic, and raw quality to this image, a stylistic quality, that reminds me of some of his lesser works. I’m happy to possess the compulsion to save everything – I would have abandoned this image a long time ago – because I scanned it, archived it digitally, and found it recently while wiping my hard drive.

So here you have it. A broken-hearted man, bespectacled, rendered in pigment and ink on cardboard. A simultaneously confident figure, weighed down with rejection and a crippling fear of loneliness. If you can think of a good title for this piece, please let me know in the comment section.

SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER

The Walking Dead – “What?”

Posted on by

What postFINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

It takes something special to make the audience laugh at violence, but that is precisely what the writers achieved with their most recent episode of “The Walking Dead.” Inured with struggle and bloodshed, Rick Grimes and the group are hardened fighters. Like the group portrayed in the show, the audience is accustomed to the necessary violence that the characters endure. This is why we are able to laugh when Rick, bathed in the blood of a man who tried to kill him, looks around at the benumbed villagers of The Hilltop – people decidedly not accustomed to violence – and says “what?” as though what he had just done was nothing more than cracking his knuckles, brushing his teeth, or tying his shoes.

It is also something of a disarming slight-of-hand that the writers have successfully pulled off. We know we shouldn’t be so amused by what we’ve just seen, but we are. A writer that has perfected this little trick is Quentin Tarantino – I’m reminded of the burning theater in “Inglourious Basterds.” We see the face of Hitler being gruesomely mutilated by machine-gun fire, and we celebrate. A look at a room of people condemned to burning alive, and it is difficult to not find it funny. They were all Nazis, after all.

The show is slowly evolving, breaking from the routine of “find sanctuary, lose sanctuary, hit the road, rinse, repeat.” We haven’t even met Negan yet. Believe me, things are about to get much, much more violent.

SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER

The Walking Dead – “Knots Untie”

Posted on by

Daryl Dixon postFINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE

“Your world is about to get a lot bigger.”

These are the words of Jesus, the previous episode’s newest addition to “The Walking Dead.” And he isn’t joking. The world is about to expand for all of the Alexiandrians as news of other settlements is revealed. As the back-half of season six leaped forward in time, we’re also beginning to get the sense that the walkers are getting ready for a massive die-off. This is hinted at in the comic book series as well; most walkers were made during the initial wave at the beginning of the series, and a rotting body doesn’t last forever. Those who have carefully observed, each season has brought with it walkers in more and more advanced stages of decomposition. The walkers in season six are soft, sticky heaps of bone, showing evidence of butyric fermentation and advanced decay.

It can safely be assumed that walkers, while eminently dangerous, are becoming less of a threat. The more significant threat comes from other survivors, scrambling to organize, secure resources, and defend themselves. We already know how dangerous The Governor was, and we know what happened to the settlement at Terminus. The apocalypse appears to have polarized the survivors, splitting them into one of two distinct groups: weakened survivors (like the Alexandrians) and ruthless tyrants and bands of highwaymen (like the leadership at Woodbury, the cannibals at Terminus, and the raiders led by Negan). Rick and his group have managed to stay somewhere in-between these two extremes, and “The Walking Dead” is constantly examining the morale, and moral turpitude, of the group.

At the invitation of Jesus, Rick and his cohort embark to a community called “The Hilltop” with hopes of striking a trade agreement to solve their food shortage. With the threat of famine looming over them, they have little choice than to risk following their new acquaintance.

The roads aren’t swollen with walkers, but the group is wary that Jesus may be planning an ambush. Rick’s caution is understandable. In fact, the entire ‘Alexandria’ story arc of seasons five and six was intended to illustrate Rick’s developing instincts. We watched him become the capable alpha, a charge he is at first reluctant to assume over the coddled, frightened residents of Alexandria.

In “Knots Untie,” we see who Rick has really become. No longer wrestling with his morals, he is literally baptized in blood. It is perfectly natural for “The Walking Dead” to invite violence immediately upon the group’s arrival at a new sanctuary. The people of The Hilltop are cautious, weak survivors, not unlike how the people of Alexandria were. When one of The Hilltop’s scavengers attempts to assassinate their leader, Gregory, in exchange for the release of his brother (who has been kidnapped by Negan), it is Rick who swiftly intervenes. After knifing a hole into the man’s neck and a literal bloodbath – a spectacle of violence unfamiliar to the stunned villagers – Rick looks around, practically shrugging, and says, quite earnestly, “What?”

It’s a laugh-worthy moment, but a telling one, too. It explains exactly how Rick and his people view the world, from a firm black-and-white perspective: try to hurt me, I will kill you. Period.

The incident is off-putting to the people of The Hilltop; after all, Rick killed one of their people, even the man ultimately was a danger to the community. But this doesn’t prevent the two groups from coming to an agreement. Burdened with paying tribute to Negan in exchange for peace, The Hilltop has been existing under the thumbs of a tyrant. Rather than attempt to broker peace with the Negan and his gang, Rick accepts a kill mission. In fact, he is the chief architect of the kill mission.

“We’ve never had a problem with confrontation,” Rick says. And we know that’s true. The group has a base of operations, lethal skills, and an offer of protection for The Hilltop in exchange for foodstuffs. All-out war is on the horizon.

– – –

The tension is building quickly. Abraham’s narrative begins to resurface – a thread that was dropped before the mid-season finale – and we’re reminded of his tenuous grasp with reality. Along with his irrational risk-taking while guiding the mega-herd away from Alexandria, we see him wearing that curious smile once again. As the bloodshed we expect from the season finale approaches, it wouldn’t be surprising to see our militant slugger marked for death.

We also see Maggie taking a leadership role, acting as the chief negotiator with the knife-wounded Gregory. She recognizes that The Hilltop’s leader, a lecherous coward of a man, has little leverage. She confronts him head-on, standing her ground, reminding us that despite being visibly pregnant, she is a force to be reckoned with.

The group is comfortable with violence. We know this. Combat with Negan and The Saviors is acceptable if it means forging lasting peace with The Hilltop. Establishing safe trade routes between farming communities is the next step toward long-term survival. But I think we all know that the group is underestimating how dangerous Negan really is.

Time will certainly tell.

FINE ART PRINTS AVAILABLE HERE
– – –
SIGN UP FOR THE LENSEBENDER NEWSLETTER