STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN

(June 1982, U.S.)

Here is my first important memory of the first sequel in the STAR TREK franchise, and that's that kids in school did not know how to keep their damn mouths shut! The word all over high school was, “Spock dies in this movie.” Well, thanks a lot, people! Did you have to give that one away before I had a chance to see it for myself? The other scoop was that this wasn’t so much a sequel to THE MOTION PICTURE, but rather a direct follow-up to an 1967 episode of STAR TREK called “Space Seed”, which I’d never seen before, in which Ricardo Montalbán had previously played the notorious Khan. It looked like I’d enter the new movie without the benefit of the story that preceded it. That didn’t stop me, however, from buying my ticket to what was already marketed as the most spectacular sci-fi movie for the summer of 1982.

The movie was, indeed, a fresh start to the franchise, in which seeing the first one was not a prerequisite. The crew we all knew and loved was aboard the USS Enterprise, including a new Vulcan character named Mr. Saavik, who also happened to be female (a female who went by Mister??). Within minutes, though, it appeared they were all dead from a Klingon attack. Oops, false alarm! Just a simulation test for the new cadets under Spock's command. Still, things are never quiet in space for very long. Trouble starts when two members from the USS Reliant (one of them Pavel Chekov) accidentally encounter Khan Noonien Singh and his loyal followers on what they believe to be the dead planet of Ceti Alpha VI. Turns out, it's really Ceti Alpha V having turned into a barren sand heap after Ceti Alpha VI exploded. Again, having not seen "Space Seed" yet, this is where I learned of the backstory in which the Enterprise discovered Khan's ship adrift in space and Kirk exiled Khan and his fellow supermen to Ceti Alpha V after they attempted to take over the Enterprise. Prisoners now, Chekov and Captain Terrell are put under a suggestive spell when indigenous creatures are inserted into their ear canals (geez, that really gave me the shivers!) and have now revealed the secret of the new Genesis project to their captor. The Genesis device can create life where life doesn't exist, but can also destroy life where it already exists. Not a good weapon to fall into the hands of the most dangerous man in the galaxy, who's also hellbent on finding and killing Admiral James T. Kirk for what he did to him fifteen years ago. All I can say is, thank goodness for movie dialogue that explains the backstory for those of us who (apparently) didn't watch enough STAR TREK on TV!

Okay, so things were about to change now for STAR TREK fans who felt less than satisfied with the slow pace and boredom of THE MOTION PICTURE. We wanted speed, we wanted juice and we even wanted a little blood, and Paramount Pictures heard us. War was about to be declared between Kirk and Khan, battles would now begin and revenge would be, as Khan put it, "a dish best served cold!" Along the way, we'd learn that Kirk had a grown son named David who was also one of the creating scientists behind the Genesis project. We'd also learn some valuable life lessons in which "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." Still, even as the story and the action progressed and the crew of the Enterprise ultimately won the day over Khan, we who were watching knew it was all just building up to the dreaded inevitable...the death of Spock! With warp drive restored just in time to save the ship, we also witnessed the magic of the Genesis device as it transformed the lifeless planetoid into a living, breathing, blue and green planet. The ship was out of danger, but this was the moment everyone in the theater dreaded. Spock was dying of radiation poisoning and Kirk was the last one to be with him, though they were separated by glass. The two of them shared their final words of friendship before Spock died in front of Kirk’s eyes (and ours). Following a funeral (in which even Mr. Saavik, a Vulcan with seemingly no emotions, shed some tears), Spock’s coffin was shot into space and orbited around the newly-created planet. The final moment was the coffin resting peacefully on the planet’s surface. Spock was dead.

Okay, just forget J.J. Abrams’ pointless attempt at rebooting the STAR TREK franchise that began with his 2009 film. Those of my generation know that THE WRATH OF KHAN was the first true STAR TREK reboot. Though I only occasionally and modestly followed STAR TREK during reruns as a kid, I never considered myself a so-called “Trekkie”, so I cannot fully take into account or appreciate the reaction those type of fans had when they learned Spock would die in the new film. Many wrote letters of protest to Paramount at the time, one even paying for a trade press advertisement asking them to revise the film’s plot and Nimoy even received a death threat, or two. This, in my opinion, is where being a film fan takes a turn for the totally unreasonable (no matter what your feelings are, in the end, it’s just a movie). While I never take sci-fi and fantasy too seriously or too much to heart, the film does have its recognizable themes of life, death, friendship, sacrifice, regret and the emotional turmoils of aging. It’s impossible not to recognize how much older our beloved STAR TREK characters were since TV, as well as our own age. The first time I ever heard of or watched an episode of STAR TREK, I must have been six or seven years old. Now fifteen in 1982, I was a high school teenager with feelings of confusion and doubt that often accompany that age. Upon realizing his son David’s existence, Kirk’s immediate emotional reaction is to feel “old and worn out”. By the film’s end, however, even in the shadow of Spock’s death, Kirk feels young again in the shadow of the newly-formed Genesis planet. I suppose human emotions, like so many other things in life, are subject to change and reversal.

Ricardo Montalbán's return role as Khan Noonien Singh is perfect. His performance of pure anger, revenge and power surely carry the film, though not to take away from equally-engaging performances from William Shatner and the late Leonard Nimoy. There are elements to Khan’s vengeance that I didn’t fully understand as a kid. Some of his dialogue that includes, “He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him. I'll chase him round the Moons of Nibia and round the Antares Maelstrom and round Perdition's flames before I give him up!” and “To the last, I grapple with thee. From Hell's heart, I stab at thee! For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee!”, I had no idea were direct paraphrases from Herman Melville’s MOBY DICK. It’s a deliberate homage by Director Nicholas Meyer, even making sure that we see a visible copy of MOBY DICK on the shelf inside Khan’s dwelling on Ceti Alpha V. Though, to consider a good man like James T. Kirk the sinister white whale is surely a stretch, while considering Khan the more obssesed version of Captain Ahab who continuously pursues his prey against his crew’s wishes seems more logical. He also manages to recognize Pavel Chekov upon seeing him on Ceti Alpha V, despite the fact that Chekov was not only an absent crew member in “Space Seed”, but also didn’t join the cast of characters until the show’s second season (it’s amazing, the little film flubs we in the audience are meant to try and conveniently overlook when they occur).

For me, a true film reboot is what literally saves a franchise from falling on its ass, which is what would’ve likely happened to STAR TREK were it not for THE WRATH OF KHAN. The interest was renewed and the films continued to thrive, even into the NEXT GENERATION phase and beyond. The second film incorporates a better pacing than its slow predecessor, though it’s pointless to compare such a film with something like STAR WARS. The battle sequences are lukewarm and unenthusiastic, at best. With this film, or any other STAR TREK, for that matter, it’s the dimension of drama (or even melodrama) we’re meant to give our higher level of attention to. The dramatic death of Spock grabs us, as we not only (temporarily) say goodbye to a beloved character, but also understand the deeper meaning of friendship and sacrifice between not only Spock and Kirk, but also Spock’s feelings of responsibility and devotion to those aboard the USS Enterprise.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Khan: "I've done far worse than kill you. I've hurt you. And I wish to go on hurting you. I shall leave you as you left me, as you left her; marooned for all eternity in the center of a dead planet. Buried alive...buried alive!"
James T. Kirk: "KHAAANNNN!"

STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE

(December 1979, U.S.)

Well, I'm about to really get into "sci-fi heaven" now. Beginning with the first STAR TREK movie, it's going to be an entire string of STAR TREK and STAR WARS movies. Oh, what fun!!!

When STAR TREK went off the air after only three seasons in 1969, it re-surfaced in reruns and a cult following developed. The success of STAR WARS and CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND demonstrated to the heads of Paramount Pictures that science fiction was pure box office gold. When it was announced that STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE was being made and that virtually the entire television cast would return, the anticipation for those of us already familiar with STAR TREK was staggering. For myself, one who’d watched only an occasional rerun episode here and there on New York’s WPIX Channel 11, and maybe even had a merchandising toy or two lying around in his bedroom, the prospect of the final frontier and boldly going where no man had gone before on the big screen kept me eagerly waiting for many months. Even the marketing tactics in the local newspaper knew just how to grab me and keep me hanging on the edge of my patience by printing a caption like, YOU ARE NOW TWO WEEKS AWAY FROM STARDATE 7912.07 AND THE 23RD CENTURY (I didn’t catch this at the time, but 7912.07 switched around, spelled out 12.07.79, the movie’s release date). By that time, the marketing behind it was in full swing (including a happy meal at McDonalds).

As a boy in 1979, I didn’t know what to expect at all. If STAR TREK was trying to compete with STAR WARS on any level, it would have to be filled with fast-paced action and excitement. As Mr. Spock himself would’ve said, that seemed logical. I couldn’t have been more wrong. The movie moved at a very slow pace, much too slow for a twelve year-old boy’s taste. It looked great, of course, but I (and I’m sure many others in the movie theater) were getting impatient for things to pick up. It just wasn’t happening. Maybe I was judging things too quickly, but I was starting to feel cheated by those who’d made this movie. By the time it was finished at just over two hours, I’d reached the point where I decided it was pointless to try and understand every detail behind the story I'd just watched, particularly that of V-Ger and the mysterious cloud inhabited by living machines seemingly bent on Earth's destruction. I left the theater disappointed, though not regretting having seen it. You see, when I was a kid, all sci-fi movies mattered to me, even the ones that turned out to be dull. If nothing else, THE MOTION PICTURE enabled me to talk about the movie with my friends at school. Most of us agreed that it was awesome because of how it looked with its special effects. We also agreed that it was a real bore, too. Still, we loved all the recent sci-fi hits of '79 and we eagerly awaited THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK just five months away.

The movie premiered on the ABC Sunday Night Movie on February 20, 1983. Despite my lackluster reaction to it when I was younger, I watched it again with eagerness because there was additional footage not shown in theaters (this extended cut was also released on video that same year and was the only version available for many decades). While it didn’t improve too much the second time around, even with the added footage, it was still a fun and worthy throwback to the screen world of the Starship Enterprise, just the same, even on a small TV set. As I got older and I continued to see STAR TREK movies on screen and tape them on video when they aired on HBO, I deliberately avoided THE MOTION PICTURE due to what I considered a low tolerance for boredom.

These are the memories of a boy. Now let's take a look and see if things have changed since then...

Any appreciation I have now for STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE wouldn’t exist at all were it not for my deep love of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY. Frankly, if it wasn’t my favorite film of all time, I don’t think I’d ever have given Robert Wise's final film another chance or a fresh and fair perspective. Not to suggest that it’s a classic in the world of STAR TREK films; it’s simply that I’ve managed to develop a more patient, intelligent and high-concept attitude in how I view it as science fiction cinema. First and foremost, I consider the genre a visual art, not necessarily dependent on speed or action. The special effects of STAR WARS films and such are, in my opinion, a very different experience than the visual effects of films like CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, ALIEN, BLADE RUNNER, DUNE or even George Lucas’ slow-paced sci-fi debut film THX-1138. To watch THE MOTION PICTURE now is to do it with the same interest and patience as 2001. Its visual effects by Douglas Trumbull are astounding, particularly the Enterprise’s journey through the massive cloud that clearly echoes the journey of the U.S. Discovery through Jupiter and beyond at 2001’s climax. And I must confess, the great ship shooting into Warp Speed looks pretty damn awesome...

Both films don’t exactly invoke story content and understanding of such content to grab hold of and keep our attention. We’re asked to follow along on a journey of striking visual wonderment and mystery and even, if possible, to ask a question or two about man’s place in this vast and dark universe. For this film in a long line of franchise films, we have what’s best described as the convenience of familiar characters we’ve previously known and loved on TV. And hey, in what other film can you see the legendary James T. Kirk dressed for command in what clearly looks like a white tennis shirt...

This same point, perhaps, serves to work against us, as well, because we’re likely to hold those same beloved characters to a higher standard of screen action and excitement. Clearly, those who made the film, including director Robert Wise, storyteller Alan Dean Foster, special effects artist Douglas Trumbull and even scientific consultant Isaac Asimov sought to make a film of thought-provoking knowledge and high-concept scientific possibility, while maintaining a visual feast for the eyes and the senses. I cannot claim they didn’t succeed in such a bold undertaking. All of this is, of course, my own opinion. Die hard TREK fans, or “Trekkies”, as they’re affectionately called, would likely call me crazy and insist the first film of the franchise is still the worst (my personal vote goes to STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER!). Others may see my point entirely. If absolutely nothing else, they might agree the movie poster's artwork by illustrator Bob Peak is the finest and the most striking of all films. They may also agree that Jerry Goldsmith provides the most influential soundtrack with its sweeping orchestral fanfares and energetic compositions that truly define the world of science fiction and its deep space journeys.

The human blog adventure is just beginning...

Favorite line or dialogue:

Captain James T. Kirk: "Well, for a man who swore he'd never return to the Starfleet..."
Dr. Leonard McCoy: "Just a moment, Captain, sir. I'll explain what happened. Your revered Admiral Nogura invoked a little-known, seldom-used "reserve activation clause." In simpler language, Captain, they drafted me!"

STARMAN

(December 1984, U.S.)

One of the biggest questions circulating Hollywood during the 1980s must have surely been, "Hmmm, let's see...how can we copy E.T. and reap the rewards?" John Carpenter may have been one of the first ones to answer and quite possibly the only one to make a decent job of it. It was a mighty stretch from the string of horror films he'd made since HALLOWEEN in 1978 and the first true sign that the man had a beautiful heart. STARMAN is also, in my opinion, Carpenter's last great film. Nothing he ever did after that caught my attention as anything worthy, despite whatever cult status BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA may have achieved since its release (I've still never seen it).

The film begins with the premise of the actual Voyager 2 space probe that was launched in 1977, carrying a welcoming message of peace to all intelligent life in the universe. As a sample of our good will, the gold phonographic record includes greetings in various languages and even a recording of "Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones (hey, if the Stones don't get us a visit from other planets, then I don't know what will!). The invitation is interpreted and answered by an alien ship. Of course, leave it to our boneheaded government to panic before thinking and shoot the poor visitor down, causing it to crash somewhere in Wisconsin. Our visitor, whatever it is, starts out as a floating ball of glowing energy before it settles into the isolated home of recently widowed Jenny Hayden (played by Karen Allen). Using a lock of hair from Jenny's deceased husband Scott (played by Jeff Bridges), the alien clones himself a human body in the form of Scott while Jenny watches in horror. The alien "Starman" is also carrying several small silver spheres which provide him with energy and also perform various miraculous feats. "Starman" is not on Earth for only a few minutes before he realizes our hostility and summons his people to come and get him right away. Arranging a rendezvous with them in three days in Arizona, he gets Jenny to drive him there against her will.

Jenny starts off as frightened and hostile, but of course, eventually comes to understand and appreciate the "man" she's with. As they make their way across America against those who seek to capture "Starman", he learns to communicate and inevitably finds his way into Jenny's heart. Like E.T., he will die on our planet if he doesn't escape our government hostiles and make the rendezvous at the Arizona crater in time. Along the way, as a sign of their newfound attachment, they make love aboard a boxcar train and Jenny learns that she's now pregnant with "Starman's" child, a boy, despite the fact that she's not supposed to be able to have children. A true miracle, indeed (and one that would eventually lead to a short-lived ABC-TV series of the same name). Like E.T. also, the film's climax has its own form of excitement as Jenny and the now dying "Starman" reach the crater while Army helicopters mercilessly shoot at them. As they're finally surrounded, a large, spherical spaceship descends, magical light surrounds the couple, "Starman" is restored to perfect health and it's now time to say goodbye. His departure may not have us in tears like Spielberg managed to do to us, but it's still heartwarming, nonetheless.

I think back on STARMAN, and I think back to the end of 1984, when there was other science fiction dominating the big screen with DUNE and 2010. Carpenter's film, with Jeff Bridges' Oscar-nominated performance, stood out the most for the very reason that E.T. did two years prior; heart, humanity and love. David Lynch's film and the sequel to 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY were great, but hardly touched us on such an emotional level. With STARMAN, sci-fi is mixed with quirky drama and the promise of love and understanding between what is, in reality, two different species. Bridges and Allen share a very sweet chemistry and sympathy for each other's characters, and Bridges proves that a role of this sort is meaningful (on a galactic level) to make a difference in his career. Still, it was the end of John Carpenter for me, but I'm grateful, nonetheless, for the small string of back-to-back hits he gave us (or me!).

Favorite line or dialogue:

Starman: "You are a strange species. Not like any other...and you'd be surprised how many there are. Intelligent, but savage. Shall I tell you what I find beautiful about you? You are at your very best when things are worst."

(Hey, "Starman", come visit us NOW, and tell us if you still feel that way!)

STARDUST MEMORIES

(September 1980, U.S.)

By 1980, Woody Allen had established himself as a filmmaker of successful comedies, beginning with the slapstick ones of the early 1970s. His streak of comedy was broken in 1978 with the very serious (and very depressing) INTERIORS and returned a year later with MANHATTAN. One can only imagine what his critics and audience must have been wondering when he made the very provocative STARDUST MEMORIES. Had Allen gone off the incomprehensible deep end? What was he trying to say with this one? Was he truly an artist alienated and fed up with his audience? No one understood any of it and it failed miserably at the box office and with his fans.

Time passes, though. Look harder, look deeper, and as a prerequisite, take the time to view and appreciate Federico Fellini's 8 1/2, which Allen's black and white film clearly parodies and pays homage to. In fact, I've discovered over time that it's with great affection for 8 1/2 that one can approach STARDUST MEMORIES with any clear understanding and appreciation. The film follows famous filmmaker Sandy Bates (played by Allen himself), who is constantly plagued by fans who are never shy about declaring that they prefer his "earlier, funnier movies" to his more recent artistic efforts, which is, I suppose, how many of Allen's true fans felt by now. While Sandy tries to reconcile his conflicting attraction to two different women, one of them the artistic and intellectual Daisy (played by Jessica Harper) and the other being the French woman with two small children Isobel, he's also repeatedly haunted by the memories of his neurotic, unstable and often insatiable girlfriend Dorrie (played by Charlotte Rampling). Like Fellini's alter-ego, Sandy must contend with the conflicts of his personal life while trying to make a movie the studio heads are fighting him on every step of the way. Sandy is a stagnant artist, and such art often means self-indulgence, depression and very non-Hollywood endings, something studio execs just don't understand, and don't want to when box office figures are at stake.

Not to suggest that STARDUST MEMORIES doesn't contain the Woody Allen wit, humor and insanity we've come to expect. There are great photographic moments of dreams, flashbacks, nostalgia and fantasy that are purely outrageous, particularly the moment when Sandy is chasing down his own escaped hostility (in the form of a hairy beast) that's just murdered his ex-wife. We can't help but recall Allen's fear of live lobster in ANNIE HALL when he suddenly panics with a fire extinguisher when a pigeon unexpectedly flies into his apartment. And just what are we supposed to make of that morbid and murderous image from the Vietnam War on the back wall of his dining area??

Is Allen attempting to express humor with this shot or merely call attention to just how incomprehensible his character is in a world that seems to be constantly in his face and out to get a piece of him? We're likely not meant to understand, at least not the first time we watch it. Perhaps this is what makes an art film true to its intentions. Like a great painting without any direct meaning, we're left to our own interpretations and feelings. In 1980, those feelings were very negative. Today, with a better understanding of who Woody Allen is, and with an equally good understanding of Fellini's 8 1/2, STARDUST MEMORIES, like a fine wine, greatly improves over time. It does for me, anyway.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Sandy Bates: "It's funny, because in my family nobody ever committed suicide, nobody. This was just not a middle-class alternative, you know? My mother was too busy running the boiled chicken through the deflavorizing machine to think about shooting herself or anything."

STAND BY ME

(August 1986, U.S.)

In 1986, when learned that Rob Reiner's new film STAND BY ME was based on a short story by Stephen King, I was convinced that a mistake must have been made somewhere. By then, I'd read my fair share of King's horror novels and nothing I'd seen so far even closely resembled the idea of a coming-of-age tale between young boys (I mean, not unless these young boys killed each other, or something!). Still, because I'd already enjoyed Reiner's first two features (THIS IS SPINAL TAP and THE SURE THING), I figured I had nothing to lose by giving his third one a try, especially since it was conveniently playing across the street from my college dorm in Buffalo, New York.

To my pleasant surprise, the film started out with Richard Dreyfuss. There was definitely something I loved about this guy since I was a kid. As he flashback'd his story of when he was a kid with his three best friends back in 1959, I found that getting caught up in the past of one's life on film was an easy, if not welcomed, appreciation. Because the power of the motion picture can often provoke our own memories of the past, our own childhoods can soon flash vividly before our eyes (but I'll get into that later). Dreyfuss's character of young twelve year-old Gordie (played by Wil Wheaton) is a quiet kid blessed with the gift of telling and writing entertaining stories, but cursed with the trauma of his older brother's death and the parents who have no feelings of love to give him in the wake of such a tragedy. Gordie's friends, for each of their own personal reasons, are just as messed up as he is. Chris (played by the late River Phoenix) comes from a family of local hicks who's not expected to ever get any further than the shabby little town of Castle Rock, Oregon (Maine in King's story) he lives in. Teddy (played by Corey Feldman) is a wild trouble maker who's unstable father (a World War II veteran who stormed the beach at Normandy) has been known to abuse him. Vern is, well...fat, and therefore suffers his own demons of being a kid who often feels like an outsider, despite the apparent closeness he feels with his immediate friends.

With the simple question of, "You guys wanna go see a dead body?", the journey of these boys begins; a overnight hike and camping trip to go feast their eyes on a corpse (now THAT sounds like the Stephen King I know!) and maybe even get their pictures in the local paper for reporting the discovery. Along the way, it's the traditional banter and exchange of verbal abuse that one might expect between close buddies, including plenty of profanity and the degrading of each of their mothers. However, Reiner wants to remind us that twelve year-old boys, immature though they usually are, are still people that feel, that hurt, and that ultimately want to be understood by those who know them best. Fears and weaknesses are revealed between them, and for at least the duration of twenty-four hours, they have a better knowledge of what makes each of them tick, though I can't honestly say that we end up knowing too much more about Vern at the end than when we first meet him in the gang's tree house.

By the time they're reached the dead body of Ray Brower, they not only have to fight for themselves against the older (and far more abusive) gang of high school boys (headed by a young Kiefer Sutherland), but also have to fight the dark side within themselves of why they made this journey in the first place. Twenty-four hours ago, it was about discovery and glory. Now it's about the life of a young boy who was violently struck down by a moving train, and there's no denying that these four kids are different (and even sadder) people because of this. There's something very poignant about this self discovery because it's only a matter of a single day after Labor Day weekend that the four of them will likely be separated by the new demands and friendships of junior high school. When it's over, our full grown Gordie (Dreyfuss) tells us of the inevitable drifting apart and failures of what we thought might have been life long friendships, as well as potential life successes. We also learn that Chris, the one most likely to fail in life, did succeed as a lawyer, only to die a young man when he was stabbed to death in a fast food restaurant. Such irony...and such a waste.

It occurs to me that one must truly accept STAND BY ME as autobiographical of Stephen King himself in order to fully appreciate its intent, otherwise we're likely to accept the film as nothing more than traditional narrative drama. The performances are satisfying enough from children, but again, we must go beyond the obvious here and try to understand what a man like King was when he was a boy. Small boys very likely don't have writing horror on their minds. At this age, they're simply going through the glory days of their life enjoying the pop cultures of fast cars and rock and roll radio in a small town. This was the simplicity of King as a boy and Rob Reiner clearly understands it. Perhaps this is why King called STAND BY ME "the best film ever made out of anything I've written". Whether you agree with that or not is completely up to you and your taste in King-made films. Personally, I'll still always go with Stanley Kubrick's THE SHINING (the one film adaptation King prefers the least!).

Now for myself and my own childhood, I had my very small group of friends at twelve years-old, but that sort of camaraderie mostly took place during the summer when my family occupied our former home in Westhampton Beach, Long Island. The days were endless as me and my buddies spent our time at the beach, swimming in the ocean, riding our bikes along the shore and playing video games at the local merchant's store. We may never have left home for an overnight's journey, but it was still our time. As Dreyfuss writes at the end of the film, "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve.", I can't help but think that wasn't necessarily the case for me. There were good friends in my life at twelve, but there were others that were better when I got older. Some of them are still in my life today. I thank them for that.

Favorite line or dialogue:

Ace Merrill: "Okay...okay...you've stated your position clearly. Now I'm gonna state mine. Get in the fucking car, now!"