Civilization doesn't end with a bang or a whimper. It ends with a call on your cell phone.

So begins the book description for Stephen King's latest novel, Cell, which will be released later this month.

I first talked up Cell last August. At that time I posted:

King describes Cell as "a violent piece of work, which comes complete with zombies set in motion by bad cell phone signals that destroy the human brain. Like cheap whiskey, it's very nasty and extremely satisfying." Stephen King and zombies! Count me in.

This is the first Stephen King book that I've been excited about in years. I can't wait to read this bad boy.

Stephen King and zombies. Why that's a combo right up there with M&Ms and peanuts.

I like M&Ms. I like peanuts. I really like M&Ms with peanuts. I like peanut butter and I like chocolate... but I really like Reese's Cups. See a pattern?

Ok... now try this...

I like Quentin Tarantino movies and I like Robert Rodriguez's movies... but I really loved From Dusk Til Dawn.

Here's another...

I like movies and I like books about movies... so I really loved Rebel without a Crew by Robert Rodriguez.

So what does all this have to do with today's post?

Well... Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez are joining forces to create a movie called "Grind House." The cool thing is that "Grind House" will actually be divided into two separate movies [like a double feature that you could have seen at the drive-in, back when they had drive-ins]. Tarantino's will be called "Death Proof" and Rodriguez's "Planet Terror." They're even going to make some fake coming attractions trailers for the complete "drive-in" experience.

So how could this get any better, you ask [and I'm glad that you did]. Tarantino and Rodriguez are going to team to create a 250 page hardcover titled GRIND HOUSE:
THE SLEAZE-FILLED SAGA OF AN EXPLOITATION DOUBLE FEATURE that will be filled with cast and crew interviews, hundreds of full-color photographs, never-before-seen conceptual art and an in-depth history of the grindhouse genre by the directors themselves.

So we've got the movie and the book... now if someone will just remember the candy!

I first met Rafael Kayanan somewhere around twenty-five years ago. He was a young aspiring artist. But even then he had the talent and you just knew that this kid was going to make it.

And boy, did he make it!

Raf's had quite an interesting career so far. He's worked for most major comic publishers, served as a fight trainer on George Clooney's "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind;" did the storyboards, served as a trainer, technical advisor and fight choreographer on "The Hunted" starring Tommy Lee Jones and Benicio del Toro; worked on developmental art for the upcoming "Princess of Mars" movie... and so much more. You can see what I mean by clicking HERE.

I recently touched base with Raf and found out he'd just completed art on 250 Lord of the Rings collector cards which will be out in February. He sent me a scan and permission to share it -- so click HERE to see the larger version.

I don't know about you, but I think that someday this kid may go places.

Peter Jackson's King Kong is a worthy successor to the original King Kong.

The original King Kong is considered a classic. It inspired generations of film
makers and paved the way for a new genre of movie which spawned countless
imitations in film and other entertainment media. Consider all of the King Kong
riffs that you've seen in tv, comics, novels, etc. Yeah, the original King Kong is the
gold standard.

Peter Jackson's King Kong is going to be dismissed by some pureists who
won't consider anything but the original King Kong to be the best. For many
film buffs,the original King Kong is THE movie that made them love film.

The original King Kong touched them in a way that no other film ever did before
and when they watch it they recapture that feeling. They're taken back to a time
and a place that was special. No matter how good Peter Jackson's King Kong
is, it won't be able to rekindle those feelings and will therefore fall short. Heck,
I'd feel the same way about any Rocky movie that wasn't made by Sly Stallone.

Ok, so how good is Peter Jackson's take on the big ape?

That I can answer. It's absolutely great. Easily one of my two favorite movies
of the year.

First of all, my hat is off to Peter Jackson. King Kong has been the film that he's
wanted to tackle since before he became a filmmaker. Everything that he'd done
before Kong was just to prepare him for Kong.

Everything about the movie is near perfect. Loved the cast. The special effects
were flawless. The music and editing were as well. The screenplay, while
based on the original King Kong screenplay, kicked up the action and took me
to a place that was familiar but much, much more dangerous. All aspects of the production combined to create a movie-going experience that was truly an
experience.

Before I go on, let me say that if you haven't seen the movie, you may want to
stop reading since I'm going to discuss aspects that contain SPOILERS...

... Still here... ok then...

Some folks have complained that the first hour is too slow. I went in thinking
that this might be the case, but for me, it wasn't. I enjoyed the character
development.

I loved the look of the island. The natives were realistic and frightening.
Come to think of it, even the island looked frightening! And you've gotta love
the way the native got onto the ship!

And then the appearance of Kong. Man, he looks so real. And I'm not just talking
about his physical appearance. He moves like a giant ape should [note I said
should, not does]. His fur gets matted and stuff gets in it.

I think it's cool that Kong's scarred and older looking. He's a warrior on an
island that demands you fight to survive. His battle with not one, but three
tyranesarous rex [at the same time] was nothing short of amazing. All the while
he's fighting them, he's protecting Ann... even as he throws punches, climbs,
dodges and falls. He's not called "King" Kong without reason.

But there's more to King Kong than just the baddest mo on the island. Kong is
the last of his kind and his loneliness is apparent. I also love it that Kong is
intelligent. He has a sense of humor and enjoys the beauty of a sunrise. If you
haven't seen the movie, then my last sentence probably has you scratching your
head. If you've seen the movie then you know it will break your heart before the
movie's end.

I love the search for Ann in New York... the frantic, wild search for just the right
women and then how everything slows down and nothing else in the world
matters once you find her. The escape with Ann is exciting and then the
interlude on the ice. Beautiful. Unexpected and so sweet. It was at this point that
I could feel the tears forming. Because the interlude wouldn't last.

Kong's climb up the Empire State building still had one more surprise. If you
saw the movie, you know what I mean. Kong places Ann in a place of safety and
sits next to her. He looks out at the horizon and sees a sunrise and "tells" Ann it's beautiful. Now the tears were flowing...

... because here came the planes. And you know the rest.

So is Peter Jackson's King Kong better than the original King Kong?

Who's to say? Comparing the original King Kong to Peter Jackson's King Kong
is like comparing an athlete from 1933 to one from today. Odds are that today's
athlete is bigger and faster but does that make him better? Does it really matter?

I guess that's why sports leagues create their own Halls of Fame. Different
athletes from different time periods can be honored and there is room for all who deserve a spot.

Peter Jackson's King Kong deserves a spot next to the original King Kong.
Let others then argue which Kong is King.

As for me, I'll spend my time watching them both!