Bad TV Shows

I was talking about bad TV shows the last time I blogged, but I was getting tired of writing about them after dissing my once favorite TV show, The Blacklist. Another one I was going to condemn is the reboot of Lost in Space, now airing on Netflix. And yeah, what a joke that is.

Original cast for the original show, (minus the robot.)
Set a precedent.

Lost in Space, when I was little, was one of my favorite TV shows. SciFi adventures were an intriguing concept and I was thrilled to watch anything on TV or the movies that dealt with futuristic stories, especially when they were about space travel and alien worlds. The 1960s Lost in Space series filled that bill.

It featured strong male characters such as the leader of the family, Professor John Robinson. He was a family man with a dominant personality, leading his family, as a father should. The image to the left describes actor Guy Williams as Professor Robinson to a tee: "...the ultimate father figure symbol, powerful enough to handle himself in perilous situations, yet sensible and compassionate in matters of the heart..."




In today's Hollywood, this kind of actor (or the role he played) is shunned. In fact, it's the opposite of what they want to portray. But in the Sixties, even secondary male characters held their own. As in the pilot of the spacecraft, Major Don West. He was another strong and competent male character. And there was the "boy wonder" Will Robinson, who was just an adolescent, and the family's only son, but he was a progeny of sorts, as he was a scientific genius even at that age.

But wait. There were strong female characters too. Maureen Robinson, the mother of the family, was a strong personality, herself. Meaning she was not a whimpering, frightened female that would draw the ire of women's libbers. Not at all.

There were the two older daughters as well. I might confess here that their roles were minimal, and that was a shame because the oldest daughter, a beautiful blonde woman named Judy was the love interest for Major Don West. There could have been many story arcs that featured these two, but again, sadly, the producers or writers missed that one. Then there was the middle child, the teenage daughter Penny. She had more interactions with her younger brother Will than any other cast member and her role was never elaborated as it should have been.

And there was the "bad guy" Dr. Smith. He was the traitor hired by the enemy faction of the world order at the time to sabotage the spacecraft upon launching. But he was stuck in the ship at take off and became a permanent crew member and cast member from then on. He was always the one trying to do whatever he could to get back to earth even at the expense of the safety of the others. I remember thinking back then that if I were the captain of that ship, I would have killed the dude from the get go. And there were several times he should have been offed, but I guess the writers figured the story needed his comedic element. (It didn't.)

Lastly there was the robot, which was an important element of the cast as well. It was one of the first shows to feature a robot as a main character, and the precursor to later "robot characters" like the android "Data" from the Star Trek Next Generation series.

So the show was great, until it wasn't. Meaning it devolved into a farcical tale of goofy antics fit for a slapstick comedy. The show phased out all the serious elements of an adult SciFi series and turned it into a weird (and stupid) tale of Will and Dr. Smith. They even turned the robot into a joke. That wasn't what I ordered. And it faded into obscurity. Which was a shame.

Cast of Lost in Space the movie.
(Minus Judy, Will, and the robot.)
No complaints here.

But it had a legacy from which a movie some years later was released. It featured pretty much the same cast of characters who were all pretty much true to the original series. There were some differences in the way the story evolved, but it was a one and done story so what the heck. It passed.

But the Netflix reboot is a sham. Because they are doing what the Star Wars and Star Trek franchises have done. Which is they turned the men into weak and incompetent characters. It's the women who lead and who are the heroes now. I quit watching when it was revealed that Maureen Robinson is the professor now, and she is the one with the brains and she is the leader of the crew. And John Robinson is just another idiot, much like we've been seeing in pretty much every show from Hollywood over the last twenty years.

The new leader and hero of the crew of
Lost in Space from Netflix. The professorship has been
transferred from the man to the woman.
I wouldn't have minded if both were professors.
But Hollywood doesn't work like that.
Not anymore.

So the Netflix version of Lost in Space is great if you're a women's libber and you love to see weak men dominated by strong and heroic women. But that's not me. I will say once again, that I believe women are strong. They can be just as strong and just as heroic as men. BUT....that doesn't mean that when they are strong, the men have to be weak and dominated by them. That's a very tiring element from Hollywood, and I'm wondering when they will figure it out. The answer is they won't as long as the money keeps rolling in. And such is life, full of goose-steppers willing to call a show good just for its title.

New Star Trek Coming to TV in 2017

Just learned about the new Star Trek show coming to CBS next year. Right now I have mixed feelings. I say that because usually the powers that control the Star Trek universe fail to recreate the Star Trek universe in movies or TV shows to the same degree of quality as the original. And by that I mean the writing, the stories, and even the characters. I'm sure a lot of people disagree with me. But as an example, I mentioned recently how the Next Generation was a very uninteresting version of the Star Trek universe. I based that opinion on the uninteresting characters and the boring storylines.

Chief among the characters of the Star Trek universe would be the starship captain. The very words are intensely impressive. Starship captain. Wow. And the prototypical starship captain is, of course, Captain James T. Kirk, played to perfection by a thirty-four year old William Shatner. I mention Shatner's age, because when he got older, (once they finally decided to make Star Trek again,) William Shatner didn't seem to "have it" anymore. But that was probably because of the horrible scripts they wrote for those horrible Star Trek movies. So I'll give Shatner a pass on that. (Although one of those horrible scripts was written by him.)

But Shatner's younger version of Captain Kirk was tops of all starship captains that have followed. None have been able to match William Shatner's portrayal of Captain Kirk in the original series. In the Next Generation, Patrick Stewart's Captain Picard was laughable. He was always insecure, always second guessing himself, never conveyed confidence or an authoritative personality. It was like they were deliberately DEBALLING the role of a starship captain. That was Capt. Picard in a nutshell.

In Deep Space Nine, Avery Brooks' Captain Sisko was competent, at least. If it were a quiz, he'd have passed. Brooks made a good authoritative figure, and as a black actor, playing a black captain, I'd say he was cast well. I have no problem with creating a black character. Where I do have a problem is changing the race of an established white character with the belief they are appeasing the black audience. They've done that with several characters from the comics world. It would have been too creepy bringing Captain Kirk back to the big or small screen played by a black actor. Just create a black character. And they did. So that's one thing the Star Trek universe got right.

So with the race card checked off, it was time for the woman card to be checked off, too. Enter Kate Mulgrew and her role of Captain Janeway in Voyager. I've never been a fan of women in combat, nor of women in combat roles. I consider a starship captain a combat role, since starships are futuristic versions of battleships. Yeah, I know the Star Trek universe tried to get away from that with the Next Generation show at first. They tried to make the starships "exploratory" ships, rather than military ships. Thus, the reason for the mealy-mouthed Captain Picard. But it didn't work. The story lines in Next Generation were so horribly boring, they found themselves forced back into the military mindset to keep their ratings up. And it worked with the introduction of the Borg as an enemy of the Federation. If not for the Borg and the militaristic story lines that pertained to them, the Next Generation would have been a complete failure.

As an authoritative figure, Kate Mulgrew's Captain Janeway was convincing enough, but again, not as a starship captain fighting enemy starships in a space war. She'd have been fine as a school principal, or even a captain commanding a non-military vessel. Because in my opinion, a woman is not a commander of men. At least not in a battle or any war time scenario.

Jonathan Archer played by Scott Bakula in Enterprise ranks under Avery. It's another passing grade, but he's light years behind Shatner's Capt Kirk. I didn't see all of the Enterprise TV shows, but even though Bakala's Archer seemed pretty authoritative, he also seemed like the kind of captain who would get his ship blown up. And, hey, that happens, right? Not all captains come back with their ships intact. Archer gives the impression he'd be one of them.

As for bringing Captain Kirk back like they did in the new movies, with a retelling of Captain Kirk in the Star Trek reboot? Ugh. Christopher Pine was a terrible failure. But as was the case with Statner's Star Trek movies, it may not be his fault. The stories sucked. The writing was just horrible and I don't understand it. Why can't anyone out there write a decent Star Trek story anymore? Where's D.C. Fontana? She's a woman, yet she could write a better Star Trek story than anyone since. Go figure.

Eternal Life and/or Immortality in Literature

In movies and literature, the concept of immortality is used often. You see it everywhere. Of course, ancient civilizations celebrated the concept with their mythic gods. The Greek gods, the Norse gods, and other mythic gods of which I'm less familiar, but the concept of immortality is ever present in them all. Then of course, you have the Christian belief in the resurrection of Christ and being "saved" by Christ will grant everlasting life. That one's in the Bible.

And over the years, the concept has been revisited time and again in the movies, in books, and the way to which this is brought about is through various means. Technology, magic, science, and the good old vampire methods, which began with Dracula. Actually, the vampire storyline has entertained the eternal life concept over and over. You had Barnabus Collins, in Dark Shadows, and countless other variations of the vampire story, up to and including the horrible Twilight series which warped and twisted the mythos in a horrible way. But whatever. The vampire thing has been made into more movies and more books than any other twist on the immortality concept.

Then you have zombies, but that's not really immortality. They're dead! Just reanimated. They're walking dead bodies, like the TV show calls them. The Walking Dead.

The first time I saw the concept of eternal life and/or eternal youth in the movies, other than the Greek gods, and Christianity, was the movie "She" which starred Ursula Andress as an Egyptian queen who had bathed in a magical fire, which gave her eternal youth. I was intrigued by that movie, and I had never forgotten it. The premise was great. The fire was caused by a meteor that struck earth in a remote area, which resulted in a temporary blue fire. And if you walk into that fire, your body is changed to where it never ages from that point on. The meteor strikes once every five thousand years or so. But the blue fire only lasts about ten minutes. Of course, the Egyptian queen met a ghastly end at the climax of the movie, when the meteor struck again. It turned out that going into the blue fire a second time takes away your immortality. Sorry for the spoiler. But the handsome protagonist, who was also the love interest of the queen had the opportunity to bathe in the flames himself for the first time. And so he gets immortality. But without the love interest, what was the point of living forever? That was the paradox.

Anyway, it's a concept that fascinates all of us. We love life. We don't want to give it up. We would love the opportunity to live forever, as young men or women, in our prime. And that concept is in my Killer Series. Killer of Killers and Killer Eyes. So if you haven't read my Killer Series, I should tell you it's more than just a martial arts action adventure. It's more than just a love story between Trent Smith and Samantha Jones. It has to do with the drug named Eternity. Yeah, the Eternity Drug. It stops aging. How? It's explained in a very scientific way. I researched the concept and came up with the most logical way for science to conquer the aging problem. I ought to get a patent on it, really, because the way I explain it in the book makes sense. Why haven't the scientific experts figured it out? I gave them a head start in the book, so maybe they will.

So you might ask what happens to Trent Smith in the book? You'll have to read both of them to find out. The story is wrapped up in Killer Eyes. But that doesn't mean the story can't continue in a third episode. Read Killer of Killers and Killer Eyes. It's a new and fresh take on the age old concept of Immortality. And in my opinion, it's the best take on the concept of eternal life, eternal youth, and immortality that has ever been written. Imo.

Era of Great Action Shows

As I recall the past year, and the past several years, I realize that TV and the movies have had a wonderful run of action/adventure shows. And I'm not referring to the slew of superhero/comic book shows that are currently all the rave. I'm referring to the wonderful action adventure movies like the Bourne franchise, the Transporter franchise, the new Mission Impossible franchise, and independent films like John Wick and Jack Reacher.

We also had Sylvester Stallone's comeback with his latest Rambo film , and his newer franchise The Expendables. The list goes on, to be sure, because I haven't even mentioned any of the martial arts shows that have been popular for several decades.

And there's more. On the premium channels of TV, which is the latest TV craze, and in many ways even better than the movies, you have the Game of Thrones, Spartacus, Black Sails, Strike Back, and my personal favorite, Banshee. I haven't even checked out Into the Badlands yet.

I love shows where the hero is a cool dude. But more than that, the hero is a great and fearless fighter. In other words, he's a badass. And when I set out to write my Killer books, that was my goal. To create the ultimate badass. In my books, Killer of Killers and Killer Eyes, the main character, Trent Smith, is the ultimate badass, because he is the ultimate martial artist. Of course, he's not the only great martial artist. He's had some run-ins with other great fighters who have gone the distance with him, so to speak. They say a great hero is measured by his foes. So that goes without saying.

But Trent Smith is undefeated. Period. In every category of fighting. Sure there are times when he's not in top form. It's not as if he dominates every fight he's in. That would be boring. Leading the life he leads is a struggle. But he's a great hero. He prevails.

So if you are looking for a great hero, and a great story, whether for fun or for a film project, check out Killer of Killers and Killer Eyes. Read the reviews. I'm finally getting some on Goodreads and Amazon. Perhaps one day I'll post them on here. I promise you won't be disappointed.

Heroes and Cops

To my chagrin, I've noticed that there seems to be a common, and/or overdone theme where the hero is at odds with the local police force. Or there seems to always be at least one particular cop who has some kind of vendetta against the hero of a show.

I've been catching up on Arrow, lately. The entire first season, there was a cop who for his own reasons had to "bring down" the hero, known as the "Vigilante" or "The Hood." I don't know if he'll ever be called his comic book name, "Green Arrow" or not, but the "Vigilante" or "The Hood" saved the cop's daughter's life, he saved several other lives, even saved the cop's life, but the cop is just hell bent on bringing him down anyway.

It's been resolved by season two, but now the cop's daughter is hell bent on bringing down the hero. That gets resolved too, but the whole thing is just overdone. It's old. It's tiring. And I can't stand seeing a cop wanting to bring down the hero, when there's so many other real bad guys running around that really do need to be brought down. I mean these priorities suck. It goes toward a lessening of my appreciation for a show.

In my own story, the Killer of Killers story, that is, sure there's the beautiful blonde police detective, Samantha Jones, who is tracking the hero, Trent Smith, but not to arrest him. I know one of my reviewers said she wanted to arrest him, but that was an error on his part. Samantha Jones never wanted to arrest Trent Smith. What she wanted was to convince him to join her side, meaning, she had a partnership with a certain billionaire who was an enemy of another billionaire, and both billionaires wanted to hire Trent Smith.

To be clear, Samantha Jones was not a crooked cop. She was a humanitarian, and the one billionaire, Abraham Soriah, had already demonstrated a lack of concern for the public at large because he was withholding a wonder drug that cured all disease. It even stopped aging. The other billionaire, Karl Manoukian, who was very much attracted to Samantha, promised to use the drug to help humanity. The question was did he really want to help humanity, or did he just say that to Samantha because he had a big time crush on her?

But the point I'm making is that the cops were not hot on Trent Smith's trail, and there was no cop who was hell bent on bringing Trent down. That's the concept that's overdone, and I'm tired of it. Now that Arrow is over that, here's hoping it doesn't recur in another variation. We'll see. In the meantime, check out Killer of Killers and its sequel Killer Eyes, available now by clicking on the images to the right of this post.

Nice Plot Twist in Ash vs. Evil Dead

I've made a few comments about the STARZ show Ash vs. Evil Dead, mostly about how I thought Jill Marie Jones would be a good Susie Quinn, but for her age. It's a tongue-in-cheek horror show, a type of genre which I usually do not watch. But because of Bruce Campbell's very entertaining performance in the Army of Darkness movie some years ago, I was interested in catching this long overdue continuation of the story.

Army of Darkness, itself a continuation of the two Evil Dead movies, didn't need to be continued, because it was a self contained story. But it had a cult following, so why not take advantage of that? With Bruce Campbell on board, it turned out to be what you'd expect. The same kind of show, the same kind of humor, and the same kind of over-the-top gore. Which all worked quite well.

The show had another pleasant casting to add to the production. That would be Xena, the Warrior Princess, yes, the one and only Lucy Lawless, who STARZ had just used in its SPARTACUS show recently. Since the Evil Dead producer, Sam Raimi, was also the producer of Xena, Warrior Princess, it made sense to use her in the new Evil Dead series.

Spoiler alert: Don't read further if you haven't seen the last episode of Ash vs. Evil Dead. Okay, I will continue. Seeing as how Lucy Lawless is an accomplished actress, and played an iconic role as a "good guy" in her role as Xena, I was fully expecting her to be another good guy in Ash vs. Evil Dead. She was tracking Ash, and the viewer was led to believe she was going to help him fight the evil dead and save the world. After all, as she demonstrated in Xena, Lucy does have a strong heroic appearance, and even though she played no hero in Spartacus, (which was not produced by Raimi,) I fully expected her to return as a hero in  Raimi's show.

But no. In this past episode she turned out to be the source of all of the evil in the show. You see, the original movie centered around the Necronomicon, or the book of the dead, written centuries ago, and has the power to summon demons. So imagine how thrilled I was when the story took a twist and it turned out that Lucy Lawless was the one who WROTE the book. Apparently, she's an ancient priestess or something from the dark depths of antiquity. So she's not a good guy, she's a bad guy.

Which was a twist I didn't see coming, even though the story did foreshadow it when Lucy's character had fallen into a fire and emerged unharmed. That should have told me something. But no. I was just too used to Hollywood doing their Hollywood thing with their regulars, and expected her to be the serious, (or straight) hero opposite Bruce Campbell's comedic relief.

So kudos to Sam Raimi and his latest incarnation of the Evil Dead franchise. Good job to all involved. Again, I rarely go for tongue-in-cheek type of shows. But tongue-in-cheek stories with Bruce Campbell work every time. He was born for the genre. Thumbs up for Ash vs. Evil Dead.

James Bond vs. Trent Smith - Who Would Win?

In a scenario that would never happen, the what if kind of story is nothing more than some fun. You know, the what if the Hulk fought Superman, who would win? It's different than Bat Man vs. Superman, because Bat Man and Superman are from the same "universe," so it's a scenario that could happen, (as it's going to happen in a movie coming out soon,) whereas Superman and Hulk are not from the same universe, so it can only be a what if question.

So for fun, I pose the what if question: James Bond, the world's greatest super-spy, vs. Trent Smith, the world's greatest martial artist, who would win? Well, Trent Smith would win, of course. He's the world's greatest martial artist!

But that's only considering if they were placed in a fighting ring with ropes containing them, and no secret weapons available. As you might remember, in one of the greatest fights in the history of film, James Bond was able to defeat Red Grant, (played by Robert Shaw in From Russia with Love,) only because he managed to use a hidden knife from his "super-spy" attache case.

Other Bond movies portray Bond defeating his opponents while using a variety of other super-spy weapons, but in a ring, with no weapons, Trent Smith will win every time.

And that goes with anyone else put in a ring with Trent Smith. Including the greatest boxing champions, the greatest wrestlers, and the greatest action heroes from any genre. But this does not mean superheroes. Forget Superman, Bat Man, Spider-man and the like. Even though it's all fiction, it's not science fiction, where people have super powers, super strength, or adamantium claws that come out of their wrists.

No. If anyone fights Trent Smith, Trent Smith will be the winner. He's an expert martial artist, a master of the world's deadliest art, and he knows how to disable, paralyze, or kill anyone with the touch of a finger. Good thing he's a good guy. But some people might not agree with that. Some reviewers have questioned whether or not he's a good guy at all. Well, I think he's a good guy, but I wrote the books, so maybe I'm biased. Read Killer of Killers and Killer Eyes and decide for yourself.

Great Heroes Need a Series of Adventures

Great heroes in books, TV, movies, or even comics are not just one and done heroes. They need a stage on which to exhibit their heroism on a regular basis. If James Bond had only one movie for an audience to see, would he be the iconic hero he has been for years now? No. If Bat Man or Superman only appeared in one comic book story, would they be the iconic heroes they are today? No. If Conan only appeared in one short story by Robert E. Howard, would he have been the hero he became? No. If Captain Kirk... Well, you get the idea.

Which is why I feel it is very important that Trent Smith has the opportunity to display his heroic traits in more than one book. He's at two now. And I've already begun Book Three. I'm confident that Books One and Two are great stories. And I'm working on making Book Three a great one, too. That's why I haven't rushed them. Book One, Killer of Killers, was about three years in the making. Killer Eyes another three years, but that period of time was interrupted by my second book, The Vase, so it was more like a two year project. Still, I didn't rush it. And it might be an even better book. Not a better story, as the books are really a continuation of the same story. 

I would call it a story arc. Like the Borg story arc in Star Trek, TNG. And Book Three will pretty much wrap up that story arc. As for books after that? It remains to be seen, but I'd like to see the adventures of Trent Smith continue in some capacity. It may be up to me to write additional books featuring the world's greatest martial artist. After all, Bruce Lee had more than one movie. Unfortunately, his premature death limited his appearances in movies, but I think he was in at least three movies, maybe four.

So Trent Smith will need additional story arcs. After Book Three, I would like to see him in at least one more story arc. That would provide a decent  series for the character. And if I'm up to it, I'll keep it going. It depends on me and my publisher, too, I suppose. And who knows? If the audience keeps growing, maybe there could be another avenue for Trent's adventures. The big screen? The little screen? Either one would be a great development. Bottom line is keep the story alive. And that's what I intend to do.

Killer Eyes Now Available!

Killer Eyes is published! It was released yesterday on Halloween. The digital and print formats are published, and available for purchase. Only 2.99 for digital, btw, so very affordable if you are so inclined to read on an electronic device. More and more people are turning to that format. It's the future, and the future has arrived.

I am also confident that all typos are eliminated, and it's an error free book. Nothing is wrong with that book, and I even feel that it could well be the best book I've ever written. Killer of Killers is my favorite book, but Killer Eyes, really, is a continuation of that same story. It picks up where Killer of Killers leaves off, so it could be considered an extension of the same book. Well, it's called Book Two, after all, so, yeah, it's the second book of a continuing story.

It's a story that centers around the world's greatest martial artist, a man who detests guns, as does this author, and detests injustice. But what moves the plot is the wonder drug Eternity. Called that because of the drug's ability to cure disease and stop aging. But when you have a drug like that, there are people who want to hoard it and administer it to only those people worthy of living forever. It doesn't mean mistakes can't be made and mistakes are certainly made. And it doesn't mean that there aren't side effects. There certainly are side effects.

All in all, the Killer Series is currently a two book run, and yes, there will be a Book Three. Can't say exactly when Book Three will be ready, it's still a WIP. But don't worry. Each book is a self contained story unto itself. None of the books in the Killer Series end with a cliffhanger. I never liked waiting a year to see how a cliffhanger is resolved in TV shows that end a season that way. Nor would I like it in a book. So no, it's not like that with my books. Each book has all the immediate issues resolved. There may be a continuing story arc, but nothing urgent in terms of immediacy.

Buy your copies today. They are both available, and you'll love them if you like Martial Arts thrillers. I can guarantee it.

Popular Stories Abound

When considering what's become a hit in the novel, TV, and movie world, it seems the genres are quite diverse. Often the story becomes popular as a book, and then adapted into a movie or TV show. Even if the writing is suspect, as Stephen King suggested about Twilight, the story was popular enough as a book to become a series of movies. Ditto with Harry Potter, Maze Runner and now Hunger Games.

Interestingly, those novels were MG/YA. But one story was not MG/YA and became movies that even I liked a lot. I'm talking about the Jason Bourne franchise. They started as novels, became movies, and they were terrific. Heck, even the iconic James Bond movies had their start as novels back in the day.

But what does it take to become so popular? You would think the vampire genre was tired by now. What with all the Dracula movies and countless vampire spinoffs, like Dark Shadows, etc. but no. Twilight found an audience somehow, and so did the movies. Who would have guessed a boy wizard at a wizard school playing a type of wizard football game would be so popular? But it was. And what a cash cow it became for the author. I understand she's a billionaire now.

A movie about kids killing other kids, you would think would be a despicable concept. But no. Hunger Games became popular and now it's a movie chain, too. Really? A game where kids go kill other kids, with a video audience following the events. A rather degenerate idea, if you think about it.

But the Jason Bourne franchise--I'm on board with that one. A secret government organization training assassins to do the government's dirty work. No kids killing anyone. No kids getting killed. That's better. Kids should not be killing anyone, let alone other kids.

To me, it's always been about a great character. First and foremost. Then, of course a great story in which that great character can display his/her greatness. That's what made stories great. To me. James Bond was a great character. So was Conan. Captain Kirk. Then of course you have the superheroes, Bat Man, Superman, Spider-man, etc. Great characters in great stories.

Enter Trent Smith. Influenced, perhaps by the likes of Bruce Lee, Chuck Norris, etc. A great martial artist in a great story. Read Killer of Killers. You'll see.

Killer of Killers Moves Up in Amazon Sales Ranking

The sales ranking of Killer of Killers on Amazon Kindle has moved up. It's been pretty static recently at around the 1,700,000 range, but when I checked today, it had shot up to the 225,000 range. I suppose some sales must have taken place last night. That's nice to know. It's happened before. I think the highest ranking it's ever had was in the 100,000 range. I don't think it's ever broken the five digit range ranking.

But since it's not a Big Six publication, I don't think it will. Plus, the promotional efforts on the publisher's part are minimal, as far as I know. I think the publisher, Melange, focuses mostly on promoting their Romance line. That means for thrillers, like KOK, it's only getting exposure on their website. And that means only people who frequent their website will see it. Or people who I tell about it. Which isn't that many people. I should be more active in that regard.

What I'm looking forward to is that first review to be posted on Amazon.com. I see other books have reviews, and some books have tons of reviews. Who are the readers reviewing those books? Maybe those reviews are bought and paid for. Or those authors either have a lot of friends or awfully big families. I'm told reviews, particularly positive ones, help sales. Some people say they don't go by reviews when they want to buy a book. It's more about are they interested in the subject matter.

Well, the subject matter of Killer of Killers is martial arts. I believe a lot of people are interested in martial arts. The main character, Trent Smith, happens to be the world's greatest martial artist. But he's not a secret agent, and he's not a policeman. He's not a movie star and he's not an MMA fighter. But he does have an agenda. It's justice, and it's what drives the story. Trent Smith is a great hero, and he's featured in a great story. Check it out. You'll see.

Outlining Book Three in the Killer Series

Spent the bulk of the weekend outlining the latest adventures of Trent Smith, the world's greatest martial artist. And what better story to include in an adventure like that than a tournament to proclaim the world's greatest martial artist? Actually it's being held by the world's most powerful mobs. I did some research on the matter, and learned who the gangs are and where they are based. Ultimately, I'm thinking it will include a representation of 30 gangs from 20 countries. That should be a good accounting. And, of course, each fighter will be a deadly killer in his own right.

But the question to a storyline like that is how could Trent Smith get involved in something like that, since he works for no one, particularly no gang or mob. Well, there are ways. And I've solved that question. Now I have to flesh out the plot, the subplots, and figure out what role each character will play, and figure out just what new characters I want to include.

Yes, the bottom line is that Trent Smith is my favorite character. He's up there with James Bond, Captain Kirk and Conan. Trent Smith, the world's greatest martial artist, who believes that guns and knives are the weapons of cowards. Let the action continue in Book Three of the Killer Series. I'm working on it. And just in case you've forgotten, Book Two in the Killer Series, called Killer Eyes, will be released as soon as next month! Can't wait for that one. So get your copy of Book One today, and then you'll be ready for Book Two next month, and Book Three sometime in 2016.

Heroes of a Different Sort

I was talking about great heroes yesterday, and I included Trent Smith in the Killer Series, from which Killer Eyes, my third book, is due to come out soon.

But what about my second book, The Vase? It has heroes, too, but I would say heroes of a different sort. The heroes in The Vase are not great martial artists, or assassins, or people who go around beating up other people. Instead, the heroes in The Vase are fathers, mothers, and sons. There's a college professor, too. Sure there's the leader of Kidon. And yes, he can be called an assassin. But it's ironic that in this story, the character who is the assassin is not the featured character. In fact, he botches his "assassin" assignment.

So I guess that could mean that the assassin character is not the hero. At least not in The Vase. Yes, he has a major role in The Vase. But I would call him more of a supporting character rather than a main character. I would say the main characters are a meek and humble Palestinian potter, and a meek and humble university art professor. Note that both are meek and humble. And they are on opposite sides of the fence so to speak. I say that because one is a Palestinian and the other is an Israeli.

But they have more in common than you would think. For starters, each has lost a son in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. And both sons were only fourteen at the time of their deaths. Both fathers have suffered this horrible tragedy, but they respond very differently.

You would think the Palestinian would join the Islamic call for Jihad against the Jews as his reaction to the death of his son at the hands of the IDF. But he doesn't. He doesn't want any part of rebellions or dissent. All he wants to do is run his pottery shop and keep his surviving son safe.

But the Jewish art professor reacts the opposite way. He joins Shin Bet, the Israel Security Agency, and helps them in their counter-terrorist work. He wants revenge for the death of his son. It makes an interesting story. Especially, since it all revolves around a vase in the potter's pottery shop. And the Pope's visit is another instrumental factor in the story.

So what does the Pope, or even a vase have to do with the story? Actually a lot. It's what makes the story a great one, imo. It's a very unique story, too. See for yourself. Buy a copy of The Vase today. But don't expect a sequel to it. It's a stand alone story. If you read it, you'll see what I mean.

Top Three Heroes

One of the reasons I wrote Killer of Killers was I always liked stories that featured a top hero. A top hero to me is a cool character. A person who is the best, or one of the best at what he does. Take James Bond, for instance. He's one of the best secret agents of all time. Take Conan, too. He's the best warrior of all time. Take Captain Kirk. He's the best starship captain of all time. And those three characters are my top three heroes of all time.

Sure there are others. In the comic book world, there's Bat Man, Superman, Spider-man, and dozens more. In the movies, you have the Clint Eastwood characters from just about any of his earlier movies. In TV, you've got a bunch more, like James West, Napoleon Solo, Sgt. Saunders, and that list goes on, and on.

In books, well, that's where James Bond and Conan got started. Jonathan Hemlock, too, from Eastwood's The Eiger Sanction. But in books, I would like to add Trent Smith to that list. He's the best at what he does. I'm not talking about a seeker of vengeance. That list would have to include a slew of others. I am talking about a seeker of justice. And in that, he's the best.

It helps to be the world's greatest martial artist, but Trent Smith is not just a martial artist. He's a driven man. When the courts fail to deliver justice, he doesn't fail. He will deliver justice. Yes, add Trent Smith to that list of great heroes. Read Killer of Killers, and let me know if you agree.

New Twist in Vengeance Stories

In action movies where there's a great hero seeking vengeance, and the story line is centered almost entirely on that premise, it's almost always because someone in the hero's close circle of family or friends had been murdered. I made it a point not to have it be like that in Killer of Killers. And the movie John Wick wasn't like that either. John Wick's wife had died a natural death. And even though John Wick was a former assassin, there was no need for vengeance.

But when thugs stole his car and killed his dog, (a final gift from his wife,) THAT'S when he went on his mission of vengeance. Yeah, really. For a car. And a dog. But hey, I don't have a problem with that. I mean in every other movie, or book, or story, it's because the hero's wife, or parents, or kids, or someone close to him, (or her,) had been murdered. And that's what set him/her off.

So I welcome the new twist in the action genre. It's what I did in Killer of Killers. For those of you who have not read Killer of Killers, Trent Smith, the main character, being a super great martial artist, just happens to use his skills to bring killers to justice, but not because they killed a family member, or anyone he knew. He does it because he can. And he believes it's the right thing to do.

Of course there's a bunch of other reasons sewn into the story line, but you'll have to read the book to learn them. There's intrigue and suspense, twists and turns, and romance that ends tragically. Well, I'm saying too much already. Find out for yourself. Buy Killer of Killers today.

Why are Martial Arts Stories the Best?

Why are martial arts stories the best? Because of the conflict! A story needs conflict. That's one of the first lessons an author will learn. You have to have conflict to make a story interesting. Otherwise it will have no impact. Meaning it will be boring. Would Star Wars have been so successful if there was no conflict? Of course not. And one of the reasons it was so interesting was the conflict. You know. The Jedi Knights vs. the agents of the evil Galactic Empire.

And every great story will have its version of conflict. But with martial arts stories, that conflict is up close and personal. It's deadly, it's exciting, it's hands down incredibly in your face. And the book Killer of Killers has more of it than any story I know. Trent Smith, the world's greatest martial artist, honed his skills in the underground fighting circuits of Asia. But that was only after he had perfected his fighting skills in the Academy of Budo Ju Jitsu where he trained for over twenty years.

He's not just any guy who trained at a martial arts studio. He's particularly suited for martial arts. Take Kareem Abdul Jabbar for example. Kareem was a seven foot two inch basketball star. And being seven foot two inches tall, he was particularly suited for basketball. But he loved the Bruce Lee martial arts movies, and even got to know Bruce Lee. He took lessons from Bruce Lee, and even got to be in a Bruce Lee movie. But watching a man that tall performing martial arts was comical.

Trent Smith is five foot nine inches tall and 195 pounds of solid muscle. And that is the perfect size for a martial artist. He's incredibly fast, too. Not meaning he's an Olympic sprinter, but his reflexes, his reaction time is off the charts. And that's one of the reasons he's the best. He can react much faster than his opponents. Like a mongoose fighting a cobra.

Actually, the cobra/mongoose comparison is an apt one. As fast as cobras are, the mongoose is much faster. When the two animals are squared off against each other, the mongoose wins every time. Because the cobra will strike, but the mongoose dodges the strike, and then strikes back with such lighting fast reflexes, it scores a deadly bite, killing the cobra. It's why people in India often have a pet mongoose around. Ever heard of the Rikki-Tikki-Tavi story? Check it out.

So yeah, Trent Smith is a lot like a mongoose when it fights a cobra. As good as his opponents are, he is even better. But of course being a tenth degree black belt helps. But it's his speed, training, and experience that wins the day for him in all of his fights. And those fights are up close and personal. They're deadly, exciting, and they're incredibly in your face.

Yes, the conflict in Killer of Killers and the upcoming sequel Killer Eyes is all of that. Conflict on almost every page. But I leave enough room in there for mystery, suspense, and yes, even romance. There should always be some degree of romance. Why? Because that's the real world. Men and women coexist, and they fall in love. That's not just Hollywood. Hey, it happened to me. And I'd bet it happened to you. So why wouldn't it happen to Trent Smith, too? It does. Trent is a serious guy, and he's very sincere. He's not like James Bond, who fools around with any pretty woman he comes across. No. Trent Smith is not superficial like that. He doesn't use women. Never. Not like Bond.

Hey, nothing against James Bond, btw. Just saying Trent's interactions with women are not like that. But since women do exist, and Trent is a good looking man, then romance happens. It's life in the real world, and in the Killer Series. Check out Killer of Killers today. Then you'll be ready for Killer Eyes when it comes out. And that is going to be soon.

Martial Arts Stories--the Best Stories

When I consider which movies, (or stories,) I've liked the most throughout my life, I always conclude it was movies or stories that had great martial arts action. That means great characters or great heroes taking on bad guys with something other than a gun. They use their bare hands. Or as martial artists say, empty hands. That, to me, is real fighting, or real self defense. Someone attacks you and you take them on with just your bare hands. And kick the shit out of them.

Movies that come to mind are my favorites like the Transporter movies, and the Bourne movies. There's some great  martial arts fighting in those movies. I would like to include the Bruce Lee movies, but those movies are dated, and they don't really hold up to today's standards, imo.

Which is why I wrote Killer of Killers. Trent Smith, the main character, is a martial artist. The world's greatest martial artist, in fact. He detests guns and knives. But being the world's greatest martial artist also means he's an expert in a lot of different weapons. Not guns, and not necessarily knives, either, but swords, like the katana, and a slew of other weapons used by martial artists. Even so, Trent's weapon of choice is his bare hands. Empty hands. And he's the best. No one can even compare. Not even other master martial artists. It's like he's the undisputed champion.

But to make a movie about the world's greatest martial artist, or a book, it means you have to have a great story. Which is why I worked so hard on Killer of Killers, and its upcoming sequel, Killer Eyes. Can't wait for that one, but I'm making sure it's as good as it could be. It has to be flawless. Not just the spelling, or the grammar, but the story, the sequences, and the prose. Everything. I'm trying harder than ever. And it's working, because I've learned so much about writing since I began writing books. It's like anything. The more you do it, the better you get. And I'm better than ever as a result. Stay tuned. Killer Eyes is coming soon. But if you haven't yet, start with Killer of Killers. After all, that one is Book One in the Killer Series. Killer Eyes is Book Two.

Jack Reacher withTom Cruise--Good Movie

I was looking for a movie to watch on Netflix the other day, and decided to watch Jack Reacher with Tom Cruise. It was a good movie. Jack Reacher turned out to be a pretty cool character. And that's what I like in movies. A cool main character who's a great hero. That's why I liked most (but not all) of the James Bond movies, the Clint Eastwood Man with no Name movies, and the more recent Jason Bourne movies with Matt Damon, and the Transporter movies with Jason Statham. They all have a cool main character who knows how to fight and how to be cool. They're great heroes.

I did like Tom Cruise's Mission Impossible movies, but Jack Reacher isn't a spy. He is an ex military man, though, and uses those military skills to get to the bottom of murders which he at first thought were committed by someone he knew in his military days. He hooks up with a defense lawyer whose father is the prosecutor, btw, to uncover the facts in the case. And wouldn't you know, this defense lawyer is a real hot chick. No, really, she's beautiful. A very beautiful blond woman. But that's okay. Who said a woman can't be a good defense lawyer, and also be a beautiful blond woman? I say it's possible, so let's run with it.

And run with it Tom Cruise does. Sure there's romance brewing between Jack Reacher and the defense lawyer, but why shouldn't there be? After all, the blond lawyer is young, single, and did I mention very beautiful? And, of course, Jack Reacher is the perennially eligible bachelor! So, there you go. A perfect setting for a romance. BUT--the movie does not focus on romance. It focuses on the case, which is getting to the bottom of the murders. Jack Reacher does, and that's the plot of a very well written story.

Btw, I'll admit to envisioning these two actors playing the roles of Trent Smith and Samantha Jones in my book Killer of Killers. They may not be perfect for those roles, but the way they handled the roles in Jack Reacher proved they would have worked well in Killer of Killers, too.

As for the movie Jack Reacher, it's intriguing, engaging, full of action, and never boring. I liked it, and I might even put it up there on my favorite movie list which includes Transporter, Bourne, and Bond. Yeah, it was that good. At least to me. Jack Reacher with Tom Cruise--good movie.

What Do People Read?

When it comes to books and reading, just what do people read?  I keep hearing that women read more than men. Thus, the popular women's books, like Romance, Chick Lit, and even women-targeted erotica. Every time I research publisher's websites, it's very common to find large sections that feature books with shirtless men on the covers. I've mentioned this before, because it seems ridiculous to me. I'm an artist, myself, although I never focused on book covers as my subject matter. Still, if I were to be a book cover artist, I would like to believe I could be more imaginative than to have shirtless or naked men on every single cover. Is that what draws a woman's interest to read a book? Shirtless men? I can't believe that. I just can't.

But whatever, the point is that women read books. More than men. That is something I do believe. Because most of the male friends I've had, in the past and even now, don't read books. Not even one. Not even if their life depended on it. Maybe one or two read books. One or two out of twenty. That's not a lot. But women? That figure would rise to ten or more. Significantly more. So... What does an author do? Write books that women would read. What else? I write books that women would read, but I don't target women as readers. So I don't write Romance, Chick Lit, or erotica for women. My books are action and suspense oriented. Yeah, there's some romance in them. In all of my books there's romance. Not erotica, though. Although in a couple the romance scenes do get a little steamy. But not too steamy. Nothing graphic. But I think women will like my books. Those women who have read them have told me that they like them. Some said they even "loved" them.

And why wouldn't they? There are strong female characters in all of my books. Even the Killer series. Samantha Jones, for instance, in Killer of Killers is a strong-willed police detective. Sure, she is beautiful. But who said a woman can't be both beautiful and strong? I can think of a lot of women in real life who were both beautiful and strong. In the sequel, Killer Eyes, the main antagonist, Ming Sang, is a very strong woman. She is evil, but she is very, very strong.

In The Vase, there are a couple of strong women. Mary Levin is an Israeli woman who works for Shin Bet. You don't work for Shin Bet, whether you're a man or a woman, unless you are strong. And in the John Dunn story, John Dunn's wife, Catherine Pierce, is a very strong woman. She had to be. Otherwise, how could she deal with 49 of her husband's other wives?

John Dunn is a Historical Fiction novel. I've heard women do read those kinds of books. And there is romance in there, with Dunn's fifty wives. Clearly I can't document all fifty of his romances, but I do touch on a few of them. The focus, however, is his first wife. Catherine Pierce.

But when it comes to what women read, I remember when a female friend asked me what I was going to write next. It was when I was planning the John Dunn story. I told her I was going to write the story of John Dunn. I explained he was the best friend to the Zulu king Cetshwayo, and how he had fifty African wives and a hundred and fifty children. She seemed taken aback by that. She countered with a suggestion. She suggested that I write instead about an African queen who had fifty husbands. It was like...really? I told her she could write that book.

Look, I said that the John Dunn story is based on REAL HISTORY. REAL LIFE. If you want to write some fantasy about a woman with fifty husbands, be my guest. But that's fantasy. John Dunn, and the African kings really did have fifty wives. EACH. Some had even more. Does that offend women? Maybe it does. And if it does, don't blame me. I've only got one wife. I've only ever had one wife. So let's move on, shall we? The point is that in this real life historical event, there was  real romance. Albeit with a lot of wives. That's not the point of the story. The Zulu wars are. And it's an exciting book. Can't wait to get back to it.

But first, I've got to finish revising and polishing Killer Eyes. Every time I get to that book, I'm reminded just how strong a woman can be. But the woman in Killer Eyes just happens to be evil. Now don't tell me women can't be evil. They sure can. And Ming Sang is one of them. Stay tuned. Killer Eyes should be out soon. I'll keep you posted.

Villains as Protagonists?

After watching and enjoying Cable TV shows like Game of Thrones and Spartacus, I've been trying to catch up on some others that I didn't watch. I just completed the full five season run of Breaking Bad, and I'm just about finished with the second season of House of Cards. And with those latter two, I find myself confused. Why? Because it seems that the new trend is to make villains the protagonists. And here I was thinking that heroes were supposed to be the protagonists. Silly me.

When I say hero, I mean that the protagonist is supposed to be a good guy. A person with whom the audience can empathize. You know, someone who is basically a good person, someone who may not be perfect, but someone you're rooting for because you believe that he or she is doing something you can believe in, and has a goal that is something you hope that he or she can achieve.

But what is happening now? Well, in Breaking Bad, the protagonist is a manufacturer of illicit drugs. And it's one of the worst drugs out there--crystal meth. I've never tried that drug myself, but I've known people who did, and their lives were ruined as a result. It's a horrible drug. And not only that, this "hero" becomes a murderer, and is responsible for the deaths of several more people, and indirectly is responsible for the deaths of hundreds.

And still, he's the protagonist, the hero, the main character who the audience is supposed to be rooting for, empathize with, and hope he achieves his goal, which is nothing much more that to make a lot of money. And he admits in the end that he made crystal meth because he enjoyed it, made him feel alive, and he was good at it. Yeah, he was a drug dealer, basically. And a murderer. One of the worst elements of human society, and we're supposed to be rooting for this guy?

Now that I'm watching House of Cards, I'm finding out that it gets even worse! The protagonist is a conniving politician who lies, cheats, undermines his allies, and yes, even murders people. Innocent people. On top of that, he is a closet homosexual, which isn't an evil thing unto itself, but he's a married man, (to a woman, who also has extramarital affairs,) he's the vice president of the United States, and he engages in threesomes with his wife and another man? Come on. I'm supposed to be rooting for this guy? I don't want to pull for people like that. He's crooked, he's vile, he's a murderer, like I said, and he's the protagonist!

Sheesh. What happened to the real heroes? Heroes who were flawed, but basically, they were still good people who you wanted to succeed. Russell Crowe's character Maximus in Gladiator was a hero like that. Even Michael Corleone in Godfather was someone like that. Spartacus in Spartacus was a hero like that. And maybe Spartacus is a perfect example of a great hero. He was a good person, a leader with a great cause, and someone who you could look up to.

Yeah, those are the heroes that I'm used to seeing. Those were heroes I was used to rooting for. Not vile murderers, cheaters, liars, perverts, and destroyers of other peoples' lives. What is Hollywood throwing at us? I'm not sure. It's weird to say the least. The new heroes seem to be the villains. Villains as the heroes. To me, it's backward. Villains are the antagonists, not the protagonists.

I know there's the antihero. The Hulk, Wolverine, even Michael Corleone could qualify as as antihero. Antiheroes are flawed heroes who are good on the inside, but are outcasts, or act outside of the law, but not because they're evil. In fact, they are not evil. They are just different. Flawed, certainly, but they have good hearts. Good souls. Not like these new "heroes" in Breaking Bad and the protagonist in House of Cards!

Well, Breaking Bad's protagonist, it could be argued, didn't have a bad heart, but it could also be argued that his heart wasn't so good. For example, he stands by and watches an innocent girl drown to death in her own vomit when all he had to do was turn her onto her side. He also orders the murder of an innocent man to save his own skin. How good is your heart when you do things like that?

So I'm just wondering why villains are becoming the protagonists. They should be the antagonists. Give me a hero I can root for. Leave the vile characters as the antagonists where they belong.