After 4 years of writing, off and on, about a variety of things such as odd thoughts, close calls, success (and failure) and other things now relegated to the archives, it’s time to switch directions and start anew.

From the get go I’ve always envisioned this site as an outlet for experimental creativity and to share the results of such with whomever was interested.

This site’s focus was never meant to be excluded to just a blog, but due to my interests in creative writing it just remained. Like Anton, I’ve been ready for quite some time to move away from just being a blog and realign (not that kind of realignment) my interests and the intentions of this site.

For historical preservation, I’ve decided to select the best articles from the archives and compile them into a book because I’d hate to see those disappear. Besides, I’d like to do some self-publishing and Lulu has me more than intrigued.

A Fresh Restart

What this means is that I’ll be transitioning the blog, or what you’re reading now, into a small, but important portion of the site. If you can think of it as the conversation that takes place after you’ve consumed a three-course meal, then you’ll understand what its purpose will be.

The main course of the meal will be the illustration and design, wrapped together in a fresh and fun layout that’ll hopefully immerse you in what I’ll have to offer. (Speaking of which, have you seen the new Squidfingers design?)

As corny as this might sound, I do appreciate each and every one of you who continues to subscribe to, read and interact with kartooner. There are plenty of you who should be proud of your design prowess and measure of intellect. Without you, I’d just be a guy with one of them-there blog thingies here in New York. In other words, channeling the mantra of Chris J. Davis, “You rawk!”.

Catching up with Goals

Part of the reason I’m so adamant about changing some things is because I need to finally meet my goal of finishing my comic. Yes, that comic, the one I’ve been talking about for a little over 2 years! After mixing it up with my friends at SXSW this year and absorbing the enthusiasm, I’ve come to the conclusion that I need to not just pursue, but chase after and tackle my goals.

I could just keep making excuses or continue playing trash basketball to bide the time, but that wasn’t why I chose this career in the first place. This is a journey of exploration and fascination that we’re all on, and I’m moving up a couple seats to see the full view.

Process and Innovation

On my panel at SXSWi this year I mentioned doing conceptual sketches for Sideville, using the movie Pirates of the Carribean as one of my source materials. I foresee using the blog to post my work in progress, kind of like Carson System’s Bare Naked App but without the app and the bare nakedness. It seems like people are interested in the process and craft of developing a project and appreciate that mistakes are made along the way.

As perfect as the end result might be, success needs to be constantly fine-tuned and recognizing trail and error is part of that process. Every brilliant and successful business or idea has to be built from the ground up and the visionary at the forefront of things needs to keep innovating and moving forward.

Sure, a lot of what success can be might seem serendipitous, but it’s the crucial element of keeping one’s eye on their goals that makes it both challenging and rewarding.

To sum it all up, I’ve got an idea and it’s time to take that from concept to reality. Join me.

If you grew up in the mid-80s like I did, you probably remember Full House, a wholesome family sitcom that first aired September 22^nd, 1987 and had a run of almost ten years, ending in May 1995.

The premise of the show was rather simple and mostly sugar-coated and the issues were, for the most part, contemporary. Basically, it centered on a widowed father named Danny Tanner (performed by Bob “America’s Funniest Videos” Saget) who is responsible for raising his three children; D.J. (Candace Cameron), Stephanie (Jodie Sweetin) and Michelle (famously performed by both of the Olsen Twins; Mary-Kate and Ashley) after his wife is tragically killed in a car accident.

To help raise his children and soothe the healing process over losing his wife Danny enlists support from Joey Gladstone (Dave Coulier), his best friend from his old high school days, and his wife’s younger brother Jesse Katsopolis (John Stamos). Throughout the course of the show, every character–especially the children–deals with typical sitcom issues like drug use, safe sex, morality, dating, you name it, it was most likely covered and then discussed with sincerity and emotion.

It seems like everyone can associate themselves with a particular character or rather disassociate themselves for some reason or another. Whatever your reasoning might be for liking or disliking a character, it’s an interesting study nonetheless.

Consider for a moment that you happen to like a character purely because they seem sociable and agreeable in most cases and likewise you consider these virtues a part of your own personality.

On the other hand, you might enjoy a character because they aren’t like you at all. They may be dishonest, heartless or shallow and you enjoy this because it’s an alternate version of yourself or it’s just entertaining, that or the actor performs the part in a dysfunctional and yet appealing manner, maybe comedically or straightforward, whatever the case you enjoy that character.

Which is why I’m conducting a random poll (by random I mean, hey you had no idea I’d do this) on who your favorite character is from Full House is. There is no scientific reasoning behind this other than just for curiosity and fun. Please, feel free to participate in the poll and leave any comments as to why you chose a particular character over another.

I’m using PollPub, a shiny Web 2.0 polling service to see how this turns out.

The Poll

Please use the direct link (served by PollPub on their servers) for the poll: Who is your favorite character on Full House?.

If you haven’t seen NBC’s Heroes, I’d suggest either Tivo’ing it or watching it every Monday (9PM/EST). Next to Lost, it’s been one of the only shows in recent years that I’ve been so involved with — including having side conversations with friends and family — and that’s due to a few factors that make the show so engrossing.

Apart from the great acting, the writing continues to amaze me because the story is chock full of interesting twists, turns and free falls.

There are so many layers and angles the writers have chosen to explore and the story itself is rich in character exploration and interaction. At it’s surface it seems like just a show about people with various talents and powers, but if you look further you begin to unravel the puzzle and mythology that is Heroes, which transcends the small screen in the form of an online comic and web blog.

Over the course of the first season I’ve made some mental notes (mostly spoiler-free) and I’d like to share some of those with you. In turn, I invite you to share your own, as I know we all have our own thoughts and theories on where the story arch might lead and where it’ll continue to go.

Theories on Heroes

• Biblical names used for some of the main characters; Gabriel (arch angel), Mica, Eden and Peter.
• Overall story arch (so far) has a deliberate sense of urgency and foreshadowing: some plot points uncovered, questions both answered and unanswered
• Reminds me a bit of Steven King’s The Stand in that a group of people, who previously had no contact with each other, have come together for a greater purpose
• The writing is multi-faceted and intriguing, much like Lost, and while it’s intentionally serialized it does seem more self-contained than Lost.
• The characters themselves and their stories are intriguing because of the emotional state they share; urgency and for the most part a deep rooted nonacceptance of their talents, almost a resilient self-doubt.
• Hiro (named appropriately) comes across as the glue holding everything together. He seems to be the favorite for most viewers and that’s because of his personality and willingness to work within the limitations of his power.
• Mr. Bennett (Claire’s father and codenamed: HRG for Horned Rim Glasses) seems almost as if his alignment is neutral. He’ll protect those he cares for, but also obeys his superiors’ wishes. The writers have mentioned that he is a but a cog in the bigger wheel that is his employer and at the moment their true intentions and/or motives are still unclear
• The Haitian, while mysterious and obeying of HRG’s commands, seems like he has his own motives beyond the scope of his employer

Now, what about your theories? If you have some, please share by commenting or sending me an email at erik(at)kartooner.com.

KCRW’s The Business hosted by Claude Brodesser-Akner is both a radio show and podcast dealing with the inner workings of the business of Hollywood.

Claude’s interviews with directors, screenwriters, advertising executives and actors/actresses are often fascinating, if not enlightening, especially if you share an interest in how films are created like I do.

In his interview with actor/director Jon Favreau entitled “No Special Effects, It’s Really Director Jon Favreau”, Jon reveals his love/hate relationship with CGI effects and why home brewed effects are still relevant and useful. His philosophy is that while computer generated imagery has its place (namely a toolbox of endless possibility) it can also cloud the visual aesthetic of a movie.

While CGI has improved over the years, providing the backbone for things like sci-fi vistas and mythological creatures as well upping the ante on disaster sequences it’s also — in most cases — immediately recognizable if it doesn’t blend in with live action.

Recently Favreau was chosen to direct the film adaptation of Iron Man, a task not to be taken lightly and even though the film itself has a much bigger budget than his other films, he’s also made the decision to budget the special effects. His reasoning is two-fold; that the film’s budget is targeted at a specific amount and to effectively blend CGI with live action without going overboard.

In all honesty, this is something that I wish more directors (including George Lucas) would come to terms with. Audiences are typically overwhelmed with joy when a superb CGI sequence is pulled off but to echo Favreau’s thoughts, in most cases it’s easily noticed and can take you out of the movie, detaching you from the film’s otherwise engrossing atmosphere and aesthetic.

Yet, to play devil’s advocate I suppose it’s a tricky thing to avoid and I’d imagine why most directors and producers go out on a limb blindfolded, hoping that whatever is put together by their masters of illusion comes across successfully not only in a visual manner but also allowing various CG elements to interact with live action in a realistic way.