Set to Kill, Chapter 11 Excerpt

Yes, this is yet another excerpt from Set to Kill, my sequel to It was only on Stun!

Sean has killed yet two more people. I've decided to get rid of the fight scene here because, well, it has a nice punchline, and I can't give you the ENTIRE book.

Right now, I have 41,000 words written. I think I'm not doing too badly for a book I announced two months ago. Though I need to have fewer distractions. Now that I don't have to worry about monitoring Sad Puppies for right now, I'm good. Yay. Maybe this will go faster.

Enjoy.

* * * *

Sean lowered the gun, and swept the area once more with his eyes. He expected screams, some yelling, maybe some stampeding.

Instead, he found everyone on the floor staring at him.

Without any preamble, a tall CosPlayer, wearing SWAT gear and a Cookie Monster mask, started clapping. Others were merely taking footage on their phones and uploading it to YouTube, live.

The door burst open behind him, and Sean started, and was about to bring his gun up when he saw that Gary Castelo had charged through the door, tetsubo held high. The author, stopped, looked at the bodies, and said, “Sorry I'm late. I was caught up in a discussion about midichlorians. Jesse was particularly loud.”

Matthew Kovach was right behind him, peeking his head out the door. “Show's over already? Nuts.” He took two steps out the door, and looked around. “They only sent two guys? What? They're figuring that their odds would have improved after the first four waves of douchebags?”

“No idea.” Sean slid his gun away. “I'm just hoping they didn't follow me here, but I can't see any other way to have known where I was. I didn't really know until I checked the schedule.”

Kovach rolled his eyes. “At this moment, we're the greatest concentration of Tearful Puppies in any one place, in public, at the entire convention. Where else would you have been?”

Sean frowned. “Point.”

“I'm just wondering why you didn't shoot them in the first place,” Castelo said.

“I didn't want to get into a gun battle in the middle of a convention, duh.” Sean rolled his eyes. “I might have gotten the critic fan over here, but these guys are professionals. I prefer to close on the guys with the guns, and shoot the ones with the knives. Better than having a swordfight, that's for darn sure.”

“Sean,”Wilhelmina Goldberg said in his ear, “Overwatch. We've just got abomb threat at the Weston hotel.”

Music blog: This is Your Fight Song (Piano guys)

Flashback blog: Setting things on fire

Originally posted last February, this was before I had 6,000 readers a week, so there may be one or two who haven't seen it originally.

[If you've seen this before, well, don't be surprised. I have jury duty today, so my time's a little backed up. Sorry for the rerun, folks.]

The Mad Genius Club is going to force me to actually work. I don't mean they're holding a gun to my head, but they are making me up my game with their most recent posting of their year's topics.

If they're going to up their game, let's see who can out-blog who. Ha!

… Which, sadly, makes me think “Who ha's? Didn't Sarah Hoyt talk about this once?”

If you'd been to Cedar's blog last week, you've already read this one. If you haven't ... why haven't you?

Anyway...

If you're interested in pacing an entire series, you could do much worse than look at the fantasy novels of Terry Goodkind. In his case, the solution to one, world-ending doom leads to the next world ending doom. I did that in one series, the Pius trilogy, where book one ends nice and happy and yay the bad guys are gone … then that lead into book two, where the bad guys had a backup plan, which led into causing problems in what would be book three.

But for pacing an individual novel, the short version is, I like putting pressure on my characters. I have to, otherwise I don't get the best out of them. After all, these are thrillers. Even when I'm going through character moments, the moments have to keep the tension on – on the protagonist or on the reader. It is perfectly and completely fair to have a long conversation about love and emotions, and politics and economics. It can go on for as long as you like … though the reader might find it more interesting if there's a bomb in the room. (For those of you who don't know who I mean, watch the Tommy Lee Jones film Blown Away, and pay particular attention to the kitchen scene. What scene is that? You'll know it when you see it.)

With my Pius trilogy, I take the “machinegun through the door” a little too literal at times. The first chapter opens with a gunman picking up tech expert at Rome's airport, and leads into a body being blown out of a window and landing on their car. Then I reveal that it's the head of Papal Security picking up a Secret Service agent. When I'm not dropping bodies out of windows, everyone has just barely enough time to analyze what's going on before they're attacked again. Or they have a nice quiet conversation about their past, their feelings, their character exposition … did I write that out loud? Oh well … and then somebody is mugging them, or shooting at them, or performing strange gymnastic attacks with a halberd. 

 Yes, that last part is a long story. Read A Pius Man for that one.

With my other project, Codename: Winterborn (yes, after the Cruxshadows song), my protagonist, Lt. Kevin R. Anderson has more internal pressures driving him. At the opening of Codename: Winterborn, send Kevin and his team of spies into the Islamic Republic of France (the IRF … or the Irritating, Revolting Frogs).

Then I kill off almost everyone Kevin likes, because some politicians thought that blowing the cover on his SpecOps team would be just a great idea for political points, and their bank accounts.

Hollywood Racists

Last week, we saw the biggest collection of racists in Hollywood since The Birth of a Nation, where the Klu Klux Klan rode to the rescue (reviewed by President Woodrow Wilson as "History written with lightning, and my only regret is that it is all so terribly true" -- partially explaining why I hate Wilson).

The week started with the second round of bitching about Iron Fist.
For those of you who don't know who and / or what Iron Fist is, it's another Marvel property. The premise is that Danny Rand, billionaire, has the power of the Iron Fist -- the ability to focus his chi so that his body is like iron.

Obviously, someone at Marvel really likes that element. That and mercury (quicksilver).

Anyway, the entire premise is watching him deal with racism. Yes, really. He learned martial arts as a child, growing up in Asia. He was actually adopted by a Chinese leader in a Shangri La knockoff, raised to be as much of one of their own as possible. He was the outcast, the minority. He had to overcome the same obstacles of every child, compounded and made concentrated even more by being the wrong race. Handled well, it is a powerful, moving thing.

Then you have the "in" crowd bitching that it sucks that Iron Fist is white.  No, no, not that he's too white. But that he's white at all.

Yes, really.

The key paragraph?

Yes, it’s true that the comics character Iron Fist is white, and thus it is indeed technically accurate for a white guy to play the role on TV. But technical accuracy does not equate “the right thing,” for lack of a better term. Because as with so many superheroes, there is nothing about the character of Iron Fist that requires him to be played by a white person. Nothing. It is fundamental to no aspect of his personality, his origin, his powers.

I think we call that completely missing the point. In fact, not only is that missing the point, I think that's someone who googled Iron Fist, skimmed the Wiki page, and discovered nothing that said the word "race" or "racism" and decided that meant that they could go forward.

And, wait a second -- The character of Iron Fist was a nod to the Hong Kong, Wire-Fu exploitation movies of the 70s, and would pair him up with Luke Cage as a pairing with Blacksploitation films of the same period.  These schmucks would demand that the character be rewritten so that ... surprise, they can put Chinese people back in their place as martial artist characters.

Strange, I thought that making him white would remove stereotyping the character, but apparently, the good leftists would rather the stereotypes be put back into place.

However, that was completely overshadowed in the mainstream community by Nina,  It's a biopic about black singer Nina Simone. The complaint? The actress isn't black enough to play the part!

The actress?  Zoe Saldana.

So, let me get this straight: A character who is an outcast because of being white shouldn't be played by a white guy because "it has nothing to do with the character," but Saldana isn't black enough.

I'm sorry, I haven't seen this level of racial purity regulations since the Klan.

But then again, what do we expect from the party of both President Wilson and the KKK?

The Amazing Idiocy of Stephen Davidson

I've never had an issue with Amazing Stories until about five minutes ago (4:10 pm, March 7, 2016). Apparently, that's because I never paid attention to them.

In an article called "Puppy See, Puppy Do-Do," Stephen Davidson wrote

Of particular note is Honor At Stake by Declan Finn. He wasn’t shy at all about recommending his own work and apparently working the room works! Honor came in at #2. Funny how the same thing that was done to the Hugos last year popped up in SPIV, huh?

Wow. I "wasn't shy" about recommending my book? Um ...

1) Is any writer?

2) If Davidson learned how to read, perhaps he would have noticed that Honor At Stake wasn't nominated by me in the first place. It was nominated by an account calling itself "Zev," on September 8th, last year. 

On November 11th, I learned that I had several votes for Honor At Stake, and I figured "I should at least vote for my own freaking book."

On November 30th, I even debated with myself if the Hugos were even worth it.

Then I forgot about it. It was a nice idea. It was fun thought. But I had no chance. I knew I had no chance. How many hundreds of votes would come in? I had maybe a dozen or two reviews at the time?

Then, everyone who reads my blog learned about it at the exact same time as I did. Somehow, I was #5 in the top ten list. Without any help from me. Huh?

Then I figured I should put up a token fight.

I only started my "campaign" (ie: posting on the blog) about voting for Best Novel after learning Honor At Stake was even in the top ten list. Heck, my real goal for SP4 was "best related" for Sad Puppies Bite Back. I never expected to get anywhere with best novel, and suddenly I was in the top ten. So I went for it. And he's bitching about me saying to my fans (all two dozen of them) "Hey, if you think it should be nominated, vote here."

Geez. Seriously, dude, learn to read a calendar. Heck, learn numbers, particularly dates.

And "Working the room." I posted three, maybe four blogs, and that's working the room? Uh huh.  Yeesh. Stephen King himself said he didn't want a Hugo because it was all about working the room, and suddenly Davidson is annoyed with what very little I did? Repeat after me, Davidson -- "It's fair for me, but not for thee." You've already declared that anything SP4 does is cheating and unfair, even if it's the exact same stuff you do. 

But, what do we expect from the Puppy-Kickers? These guys barely think we're real people. I'm almost certain they believe that the "Evil Legion of Evil" versions I used in Sad Puppies Bite Back is actually real. I'm sure there are some who think SPBB is a documentary. Lord knows the 770 crowd think that SPBB is "revenge porn" (talk about missing the point)

Frankly, I'm disappointed. I expected more from the Puppy-Kickers. Poop jokes? Really? Snide insinuations that the game is rigged by glad-handing? Please, I expected better quality BS from them. If this is the best they can do, they need to up their A-game.  Or do my death threats only come after I get a Sad Puppy recommendation? Because I was looking forward to fisking the poorly-worded threatening letters on my blog.

This is pathetic, moronic, and just plain "ick."

Besides, Davidson doesn't have anything to worry about. After all, I'm going to get trounced by Wright and Butcher, and Stephenson, and probably Novik and Williamson.

But I would like to apologize to Mr. Davidson.  I'm so, so sorry that I have fans and friends who enjoy my book and will vote and campaign for me. But again, it doesn't matter how many votes I get. It only matters how many of your friends are counting the votes.

Set to Kill, Chapter 9 excerpt

This is just a small fragment of chapter 9. Otherwise, there would be too many spoilers.

I'm now on 33,566 words. Enjoy.

*****

Faith and Sophia James burst into the hotel, charging through the Hyatt with all the exuberance of children.

They knew exactly where their group was going, they knew exactly where they were going to be, so the two teens darted straight for it, knowing full well that their parents, and the entourage they came with, would be swamped with fans for a while now.

So when they were attacked by a Ninja Turtle with a four-foot staff, they were all alone.

The first swing came from relatively nowhere. First they were dashing down the stairs, and then, the staff came at them, shoulder-high.

Sophia dropped and rolled under the swing, and Faith burst back, narrowly missing the attack.

But this left the attacker with Sophia behind, Faith in front, and the turtle in the middle.

Faith burst in, slamming her shoulder into the turtle's chest padding, checking his arm with hers, so he couldn't swing back.

Sophia grabbed a chair and smashed it over the turtle's head. Faith took the staff away, then thrust it into the attack's face. Blood and teeth went flying. Faith swung the other end of the staff into the turtle's leg, just missing the knee.

“Kids! Stop attacking that man!”

Faith and Sophia stopped, and looked up the stairs as the turtle wandered away. Barbara James stood at the top of the stairs, hands on black, leather-clad hips, looking like Blue Sonja.

“But mom!” they cried. “He started it!”

Barbara's eyes narrowed. “Oh did he?”

She charged down the stairs, looking like nothing so much as a Valkyrie in full swing.

They looked around, and he was already gone.

Stormtroopers came down the stairs, “blasters” at the ready. “Is there a problem, ma'am?”

Barbara looked at them. “Yes. A man in a turtle costume went after my children.”

The Stormtroopers looked at the staff, then each other, nodded, and sent out a BOLO order for Donatello.

LibertyCon or Bust

In case you hadn't heard -- and to be honest, I may not have made that big a deal about it -- I'm going to be attending LibertyCon 29, this July.

Most importantly, I'll be there as a guest.

And, as I look down this guest list, it's pretty damn awesome: Larry Correia. Sarah Hoyt. Julie Cochrane. Lou Antonelli. Jason Cordova. Burkhead,  Gannon, Grant, John Ringo, Tedd Roberts, David Weber. Toni Weisskopf, Michael Z. Williamson.

And these are just the people I've read or are aware of.

And I'm going to be there as a guest....

And if everything goes like I think -- #1 Sad Puppy recommended for best novel....

And if a miracle happens, a Hugo nomination....

I think I'm going to lie down now.

Hollywood Nazis

When Spotlight won the Academy Award for best picture this week, my first response was "What the hell is Spotlight?"

Once I was told that it was about last century's child abuse scandal, my first thought was "Really? Is there nothing new to make films about? It's almost as bad as the 90-year-old Nazis in films!"

And which point all I could think was: Can we please stop with the Nazis?

Not sure if you've noticed, but there are still films trying to harp on World War II and Nazis.

But keep in mind, I grew up in the 90s, where there was a deluge of 100-year-old Nazis. Bulletproof Monk, for example, literally had a Nazi in a wheelchair, who had to have been at least 100 years old. And, sorry, if I want old, wheelchair-bound Nazis, I'm going to stick with Doctor Strangelove.

If you think that this premise is gone, nope. Hate to break it to you. But you've still got The Lady in Gold, a film with Helen Mirren and Ryan Reynolds released just last year. Yes, 2015 had a film about hunting down art stolen by Nazis. And that premise has been the plot of at least one episode of every other television show in the last ten years.

But don't worry.  As the film Three Kings turned the hunt for Nazi gold into the hunt for Iraq gold, I'm certain that there will be films in a few years that boil down to hunting down pieces from the Iraqi museum (most of which, by the way, was actually hidden by the caretakers of the museum, but it'll work because few people actually know that).

So, part of the question becomes ... why? No, really. Why? Do we not have enough bad guys in the nearly 80 years since World War II? You know, that whole Cold War thing? War with al-Qaeda?Terrorists?

First of all, we have to recognize that this isn't new. That's been part of my problem for a while with films in general. Hollyweird likes to ignore the elephant in the room -- or the actual threat in the crosshairs. Hollyweird has lousy target recognition.

During the Cold War, how many films had bad guys who were Soviets and good guys who didn't look as douchey as the bad guys?  Hell, the closest you get to even having Soviets as bad guys were in films based off of John le Carre novels, and even then, those plots shoe-horned in enough moral ambiguity that you wondered if le Carre could figure out who the good guys were if there weren't a literal map telling him where the bad guys resided.

Don't even try to talk to me about The Hunt for Red October. It was made in 1990, when the Cold War was like five minutes away from ending, and they could get away with it after 8 years of Reagan kicking ass and taking names (seriously, half the news articles of the time were about how Reagan was going to destroy the world by pissing off the Soviets; "Hmm, the Soviets didn't nuke us. Maybe we can make one film....").

And yes, there was Red Dawn. But at the end of the day, for every Cold War film that was actually ABOUT the Cold War, there were a dozen films about evil militias or evil generals. For every Hunt for Red October, or Red Dawn, there's at least one Seven Days in May, about the United States military taking over the government. Even Missing in Action or Rambo films were less about Vietnam and more about how the United States has mistreated veterans (yes, before the VA scandals of Obama. Surprise), or how all veterans are deranged psychopaths (First Blood was just ... ugh).

No, no.  The "real" enemy wasn't the Soviet Union. It was people who really wanted to defeat the Soviet Union. They were the problem. Communists (who were already working towards their ultimate casualty list of 100 million dead -- yes, Communism killed 100,000,000 people last century, look it up) were not the enemy.  Anti-communists were the enemy! And thus the phrase was born that "I am not pro-communist or Anti-Communist, I am anti-Anti-Communist."

Yes, anti-anti-communist.  It was a thing. Really. Look it up.

As much as I liked the mid-90s films The Rock and The Long Kiss Goodnight, both of them wonderfully mindless action flicks, look at who the enemy was in each film. The Rock had a collection of US marines taking US citizens hostages, and the latter had a black ops US government agency creating a fake terrorist attack to increase their funding.   And yes, if you've heard that second plot before, it's only been duplicated about a dozen times since then, perhaps more.

Keep in mind -- both of these films came out within five years after the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993.

(For those of you who want to feel old? This year's college freshmen weren't even alive when it was bombed the first time).

Luckily for Hollywood, one lone atheist militia member blew up an FBI building in Oklahoma City, and the 90s became the decade of the evil militia. Every. Five. Freaking. Minutes.  A cliche that continues to this day, even though it has been superseded by events. And history was rewritten so that bomber Timothy McVeigh was a "Christian." So, double-bonus point for the PC jackpot.

Then there was The Siege, where a campaign of terror is ongoing in New York City, and martial law is declared, and the Muslim community is thrown into internment camps. Funny enough, even though the man in charge of the military occupation of New York (played by Bruce Willis) started the film by saying "Martial law is a very bad idea, you do not want to do this," at the end of the film, he is the "real" enemy, and is arrested for torturing a terrorist to death. He is yet another crazy general. Because that's never happened in cinema...oh, wait, it's a recurring cliche.

After 9-11, when "the world had changed" ... the Tom Clancy novel The Sum of All Fears, where jihadis nuke the Superbowl and try to kick-start World War III, was turned into a film about Neo-Nazis.

Yes, that's right.  At the height of awareness about Islamofascist psychos, they made a film about Neo-Nazis.

See? Hollywood loves them some Nazis to kill. Even when they're almost entirely irrelevant in the real world.

And since 9-11, what films have actually dealt with Islamic terrorism? Aside from historically-based films? Not a lot. American Sniper was a biography. I'm told The Hurt Locker might as well have been a documentary. Zero Dark Thirty? A history. SOrt of.

And then there is Valley of Elah, or Syriana, which are anti-war agitprop, and one film called The Kingdom, the punchline of which is "this is a never-ending, vicious cycle."

Oh yay.

You know how bad it is when Hollywood has finally decided to make Cold War films. Currently. Heck, I'm certain that Hollywood loves Russia right now, and the new Cold War we have going for us, because Hollywood would rather fight Russia than talk about Jihadis. It's the only way I can explain the last Jack Ryan film even existing. Hollywood would rather perform icky sex acts upon Vladimir Putin than do a film where Jihadis are the bad guys. And EVEN THEN, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit made certain that the antagonist was a little sympathetic, and not part of the Russian government, but a billionaire.

How does one explain all of this?

To some extent, Hollywood was firmly in the pocket of the Soviet Union. If I recall correctly, the Soviet Union had cut them some checks, especially to penetrate the Screen Actors Guild. And you don't offend the guys sending you cash.

But there is of course, always one constant -- Hollywood's initial reflex is always, "America is evil, and we don't want it's enemies to be angry with us and kill us." During the Cold War, it started as "There are no enemies on the left -- Soviets are our friends," and there was an actual public stance where they stated "We don't want the Soviets to be angry with us and nuke us."

Oh look -- Islamofascists go insane over political cartoons and comic strips of "Hagar the Horrible." Mustn't offend them, lest they cut heads off of some Hollywood execs. Or Allahu Akbar a movie studio with a suicide vest.

Hollywood always needs an enemy for the movies. When they can't come up with the standard religious nut / crazy General / White Supremicist Militia / big business (what they see as Conservatives, basically), they seem obligated to utilize some variation of Nazis.

"But Declan," I hear you say, "what about books made into films?"

What about them? They come with their own villains. As most of them are sci-fi / fantasy, there is little connection to the real world.

But if you wantto think about them in a political fashion?

The Hunger Games? Fascist dictatorship.

Harry Potter? Villains stressing racial purity, and idiots looking like Neville Chamberlain.

Lord of the Rings? Evil armies trying to take over the world, based off of Tolkien in World War I, published after WW2.

Marvel films? Hail Hydra.

I'm sure if it ever comes up, there's someone around to say, "Hey! Nazis did this!"

But, on the question of fighting Jihadis? Sure, there are always some ways around this.  300, for example, could be seen as allegorical for going against the villains of the Middle East in the Persian Empire.  Though you're never going to get away with having James Bond go after Osama bin Laden. Or anyone who even looks like Osama.

As John Ringo once wrote in his book Live Free or Die, as someone tries to explain to an alien why reporters hate his guts...

"I'm what her culture, her tribe, has long seen as the bad guy. Wealthy, self-made, conservative. White. Male. I'm a more comprehensible evil—and it is viewed as evil—than the Horvath. ... The difference is, I try to understand them. They don't even try to understand me. They see my motivations as being theirs. I'm rich because I'm greedy. I have power so I must be ambitious for domination.”

Also, he continues, at the end of the day, this conservative (okay, really a libertarian) concludes that the good liberal reporters know that the conservative and the Christians behind him, aren't really going to kill them. The aliens? They will.

Conservatives and Christians are not going to cut off the heads of Hollywood people who hurl names at them, nor will we start shouting Gloria in excelsis Deo before detonating a suicide vest.

So at the end of the day, the endless use of the Nazi is the endless, desperate search for any villain that won't get them killed. It is the search for the "correct" enemy, so the film has the "right" message. It is a search for a cartoon character villain who seems somewhat real. Because Nazis don't need depth. They don't need motivation. They're Nazis, they're evil.  And most importantly, Nazis are completely irrelevant in regards to any major world event, or any real contemporary evil.

After all, not all villains can be evil conservative religious billionaires. Though you'd know they'd try to get away with it if they could.

Flashback blog -- On the Oscars, and why we don't care.

After seeing this year's Academy Award train wreck, I had this sudden urge to repost a blog from last year. Though let's be honest, the Oscars were both better and worse this year.  The Martian, but all accounts a good, fun movie, had a whole bunch of nominations. I'm told that Leo DiCaprio earned his Oscar. 

I find it interesting that their "more nomination slots" actually did open up to real movies -- you know, ones we've actually seen.  I mean, a Mad Max film was even nominated for best film... ?

And then, in their infinite lack of wisdom, they went and gave it to a film nobody heard of, about a news story that's so last CENTURY.  Speaking of which, is anyone else getting tired of Nazis?  Long story. Maybe my post for tomorrow.

And honestly? Who has Michael Keaton had to sleep with to get two Best Picture Awards back-to-back?

****

Has anyone seen the Oscar list and gone "Huh" "Who?" and "What?" lately, or is it just me?

The Imitation Game is the second highest box office holder of the current slate of nominees. It's about the World War II experience of Alan Turing ... and is currently ranked 44th out of last year's box office list. The Grand Budapest Hotel, a comedy of sorts, is 55th.

The number one box office holder among the candidates? American Sniper ... which is #3 of the top ten highest grossing movies last year.  And who honestly thinks it has a chance?

What would happen if the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Scientists nominated the six highest-grossing films of 2014 for Best Picture?  Seriously?  You know, instead of a dozen movies no one watched?  Yes, I know it's (probably) not a dozen, but it doesn't matter. The Oscar slate was opened up so it would be more inclusive.  Instead we get ... a lot more of the same.  A lot more.

But imagine if the Academy gave a crap about films that people HAVE SEEN?  The highest-grossing films list would make the field  consist of The Hunger Games: Mockingjay -- Part One; Guardians of the Galaxy; American Sniper; Captain America: The Winter Soldier; The LEGO Movie, and The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies. I haven’t seen anything on that list but The Winter Soldier, but I think most would agree that this is a pretty good list, when you treat each as they were intended to be -- Guardians of the Galaxy (epic space fantasy) or The Lego Movie (funny, fast-paced kids movie with a lot of heart).

But hey, who are we kidding, now?  The Academy hasn't given me a roster I gave a damn about since Return of the King. If it makes money, that means it must be evil, right?  Sigh.

Of late, the Oscars hate space fantasies (Star Wars: A New Hope was nominated for best picture, did you know that?), kids movies, and superhero movies ... And no, Heath Ledger’s posthumous Oscar award for playing the Joker in The Dark Knight was more about Brokeback Mountain, an award I'm certain they wanted to give him, but didn't want to be too overt about in rewarding for politics.

And let's say screw box office and the top six. Let's make it the top 20 ... but even that opens it up a bit. How about Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar? Gone Girl? Sound familiar?

Create a Best Picture slate nominees that has Mockingjay, Guardians of the Galaxy, The Winter Soldier, The Lego Movie, Interstellar, Gone Girl, and ... I dunno, pick number six. American Sniper? It's grossing out at around number 3 of last years's top twenty. Casual moviegoers would actually care, and viewership for the Oscars would be through the roof. 

But the Academy can’t nominate a bunch of little-seen, heavy art-house dramas and then wonder why nobody’s watching the Oscar ceremony. Birdman seems the most reasonable of the nominations, since it's basically Michael Keaton making fun of his time as Batman ... but did anyone see it?

Then there's The Grand Budapest Hotel ... which is probably nominated because (like every Grand Hotel film since the beginning) everyone is in the damn film.  But while it looks like a quirky little comedy ... did anyone see it?

Don't even get me started on Boyhood. Just don't.

Of the actual list, people I know tell me they like American Sniper. Good luck with that.

Maybe when Hollyweird is done breaking its arm to pat itself on the back, everyone else will care.

Music to Write to: Into the West (Peter Hollens)