All my bags are packed, I'm ready to go.

Tomorrow, Jan.13.08 I leave for London. I arrive 11:00am Jan.14.08 though. There I will meet up with Luis Castanon, Tyler Naugle and Michael Swain and I dunno who else, to head over to the flat and have yet another swell week with some pints and friends. I come back Jan.21.08. We'll probably put up the 'NG stickam' throughout the week, so keep yourself updated on the Forums if you're at all interested to be jealous of our fun times and somehow cyberly be there.

Before I go I wanted to point out that this post I made is very important so that I get everyone's address to send the artists who participated their own rightful copy. If you know any of these people tell them to read this post. If not, spread the word so that I can get their info. I'll be shipping the copies when I come back from the NG London Meet.

Also, I made a post about all these protests against Israel's attacks on Gaza, if you're at al interested, I'd like to know your feedback of my little story.

I can't really think of much else to say except.
-HVH

I was riding the 'Bart' (train) to spend a day in the city. And while on there sitting in front of me were a couple of middle-aged women holding picket signs on their way to a protest against Israel's attack on the Gaza Strip. Some african american homeless drunkard asked about their signs and the middle aged women responded saying that what Israel was doing to the people of Gaza was a 'homicide' and a 'massacre'. A large and humble looking woman sitting next tom me opposed her beliefs, saying that Israel's actions are only reactions to the numerous attacks they've received from people of Gaza. More people joined in the fun of argument and I quietly observed what their beliefs and reasons were. Most of them demonizing Israel. At some point, the Gaza sided majority of the people cornered themselves with their points and constantly humiliating this woman with a different opinion. And the following words spilled out of one of the middle-aged, sign wielding broads:

"Your opinion is a minority now!"

I couldn't contain myself and spoke out, responding with.

"That doesn't mean you're right."

There was a silence span of about 5 seconds in everyone who was arguing and listening. That silence was broken by the same middle-aged woman.

"Yes it does!" [I died a little inside, seeing how ridiculous people can be.]
She continued...
"Israel is supplied with more guns, missiles, and weapons than Gaza. It's unfair for Israel to attack them. We're rooting for 'the little guy'."

I replied.

"Equalizing the fight isn't going to stop it. That will only make the endless pendulum of war continue."

Anyways. I kinda went back to listening mode because there was no use trying to let these people realize that in war there is no hero team and villain team, there's just two sides of the coin. And being extreme about it is no where near fixing the problem. It's just throwing more wood to the fire. That's what fuels wars, two extreme opposing sides. These people's demands were for Israel to basically give in. But once they give in, the Gaza will take over Israel, then Israel will be the victims, etc. Again, pendulum.

I believe that the root of the problem is the United States. Simply because in the 1950's the world felt sorry for the Jews because they were victims. The Jews said that their reason for being persecuted was because they had no home country. So the U.S. did them a favor and pushed aside some Middle eastern countries (literally) to make room for Israel, which happened to be located in the dead center of 3 different religion's promised land.

Now, people are saying it was unfair for the Jews to have 'taken' that land. I put 'taken' in quotations because it wasn't stolen, it was negotiated by the oh so great U.N. Asking for the Jews to leave now is like some prick telling you to get out of the house you reasonably moved into because it was their great great grandfather's. So kicking the Jews out is not a solution. Period. The only solution is the one that should have been known had to be dealt with one way or another when this settlement was made. Like a pack of stray dogs over an old box of chinese food in a dark alley, fight for it.

I have an Israeli friend who was nearly killed and lost a few people close to his family because of suicide bombers in Tel Aviv. His brother is in the Israeli army and has to patrol the wall that divides Israel from Gaza and kills numerous approaching attackers every other week. So these people who complain about Israel mercilessly attacking Gaza have no idea what they are talking about. Because for all I know, Israel has been dealing with the situation very politically correct, but more importantly, defensive. While Gaza has been nothing but offensive. Like in basketball, a good defense makes a good offense.

Israel is protecting their home, however it is they might have gotten it. It sickens me how people are demonizing them. It shows how there aren't villains, they are picked, picked by radicals who have nothing better to do.

At the protest I walked by and saw a bunch of people with the israeli flag, and replacing the Star of David was a Nazi Swastika. It sickened me how people lost touch of that symbol so much that they had the guts to misuse it like so. That symbol was the epitome of how humans live among and believe in the biggest contradictions.

Sad, but true. America forgets that the majority of the U.S. voted for the war 'Against Terror" at first. Maybe they regret it now. But their first impulse was to bite back after 9-11. Israel is just doing just the same, biting back. Except they are biting back to truly protect their home. Because the little guys, which people forget, are the Israelis. doesn't matter how many missiles and Jets they have. Israel is a cowboy cut steak in a pit of starving angry bums.

I believe that these people's protests are just their own way for shouting at their insecurity for ever deciding to go into the Iraq War. Israel just fits the mold.

The large and humble looking woman said something to me that I will never forget. And today it never felt more apparent.

"The radicals have taken over."

-HVH

I saw The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button on Christmas Day. And let me say this first, the trailers have been amazing. That first easer trailer attached to the horrible Indiana Jones 4 was one of the best, if not the best, of trailers my eyes have seen. It had this perfect mixture of creepy, beautiful, and a surreal and believable magic to it. The Concept of being born young and growing young seemed genius.

It dealt with a concept I've had in mind for a long time. In that life is an arch when it comes to a physical stand point. When you are an infant, you are dependent, frail, fragile, and can't walk. You grow up to middle age and from then on it's back downhill to the same, or very similar stage when you're old. Now what this 'growing young' concept does it display the similarities of that cycle but propose the idea of an immature old man, and a mature young boy, and how everyone else would deal with this persona. Would it be something too odd to explain to people constantly enough so that this person would be on the move all his life? How would this effect a person's life?

I made the mistake I normally don't do of setting an expectation before I watch the movie. But this movie was a Love story, and not a Life story. Plot 'A' was his love for this woman, and the 'B' Plot was his life. I am not sure if that is necessarily a mistake but 1: I didn't expect David Fincher to turn this concept into a Love plot. And 2: I, personally, believe there was so much more to explore with the idea this movie proposed. This movie had the mistake of trying to do everything, while mainly focusing on the love story, but at the same time not developing Benjamin Button's character. It seemed they were too caught up with his physical defect to actually put some attention to who Benjamin was inside.

Benjamin Button's character is very stale, honestly. He is the same person inside, from the moment he's born to the day he dies, his body growing counter clockwise around his stationary self. That was a bit irritating. It is very apparent that the screenwriter also wrote "Forest Gump" because he shared the 'simple man' qualities, except less interesting, because his body is interesting enough to worry about what he's like.

Lot's of people complain about the Length of the film. I don't mind the length, it's the content. The story was a bit too clunky and faint. It seemed like it wanted to be one thing the first 10 minutes then something else the next 15 minutes then another thing the next 2 minutes... I wasn't sure what to think of it. And, as much as i thought of it the best connection I could think of with Benjamin's life and the backwards clock made by the blind clock maker, is just the concept of destiny, chance, and coincidence that the movie briefly touched upon just before his love of his life was struck by a car. (which i thought was a marvelous scene). But besides that I had no idea how those two stories are linked.

At first, the ending seemed anticlimactic the movie just kind of slowly ended. There was no climax in fact the ending was a montage and then a final shot of the backwards clock starting up again as it's being flooded (I try to ignore that last shot because i can't make any sense of it). At first I didn't like that ending, it really really bothered me. But after giving it some thought I kind of realized, if this movie was a life movie more than a love movie somehow, It made me realize it's not important how you die, it's important what you did in your life. And maybe this movie's finale gave a bad impression, but this movie has content interesting enough to make me like it. And this is why the movie to me was disappointing but not a bad movie.

And this weekend I'm going to give it another go and watch it a second time, now that I know what to expect and engage myself into the story as it is and give it a second try.

p.s. I'm going to be posting all my movie reviews on my Website's News page. I'll update every post I make here if I have a new entry on my site for you to go and see, but beside's that check out my website once a week to find my movie reviews if you think they're at all interesting reads.

p.p.s. five this

peace.

Hello everyone! I have the One Shot Comic Book Collab in my hands, and I have a picture to prove it.

These are the fellow arists who stuck together with me and conquered this beast. Thier art is found within the pages.

in order of pages: ('---' next to name means i have the info)

(cover)- Alex Warble
Julio C. Lopes
---Kevin Barrios (Buzzwerd)
---Jose Ortiz
---Chris Gianelloni
Diana Laino
---Dan Berry
---Nathan Malone
---Oscar Diaz
Luis Castanon
---Hans Van Harken
---Nathanial Milburn
---Michael Swain
Steven Bryant
---Alyssa Zevallos
---Tyler Naugle
Ola Olsen Lysgaard
Jarred Johnson
---Tyler Copes
Richard Sun
Corey Griffin
---Vincent Charrot
Joe Sparrow
---Ansel Matson Lies

Now, I never EVERYONE ON THIS LIST to pm me their mailing information! If you want your own issue, respond to this message accordingly. Please send me your detailed address so that your issue will reach your hands safely. title the PM "*YOUR FULL NAME* One Shot"

I'm happy this is done.

ps. i finished my street fighter collab part. ;3

I was talking to kevin Barrios (Buzzwerd) and asked him about my facial hair and he had this to say in all seriouseness....

Merry Christmas, One and all! (except jews, buddhists, and everyone outside the christian religion)

Hans here and announcing the release of the RWD's christmas 2008 submission. Watch it here!

below is a screen shot of my part.

Well a movie about the 'gay rights' movement. If you don't know the story, here's a plot summary:

"After moving to San Francisco, the middle-aged New Yorker, Harvey Milk, became a Gay Rights activist and city politician. On his third attempt, he was elected to San Francisco's Board of Supervisors in 1977, making him the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in the USA. The following year, both he and the city's mayor, George Moscone, were shot to death by former city supervisor, Dan White, who blamed his former colleagues for denying White's attempt to rescind his resignation from the board."

It was a good movie, and not because of the gay parts. lol. I thought it was an interesting story about a brave guy that fought for something he believed him for the sake of liberating 'his people' and many other people. And i don't mean brave as in coming out of the closet. This guy was sent death threats if he gave speeches, but he still got up and did it.

And what perfect timing for the recent Prop 8 surprise. Human rights. That's the subject this movie dwells on and the historical events dwelled upon. But, one thing I cannot come to comprehend is the reactions gays had. And this not only applies to gays, but everyone. This movie is but one example of how extremist, radical, impulsive, blind, thoughtless and cattle-like humans are. On the homophobe and gay side...

Yes, it's ridiculous to say that gays, if allowed to teach in schools, will influence children into becoming gay. Like, very well stated in the movie by Mr. Milk himself, "If that were true there would be lot more nuns right now" (keep in mind this is 1978 when catholic school nuns were more common).

But yes... yes it is indeed ridiculous to demand for 'human' rights by roaming the streets nude or topless, toppling trash cans and so on. Are you kidding me? If you want human rights, act like a human. Also, these gays were trying to show the world that being gay isn't a negative aspect of one's self. You really think walking nude, and wreaking havoc is the way to show that? No.

I shared sympathy for Harvey Milk's character. Because as he said, he wasn't fighting to get a job, he was fighting to get a life. To give all these gays he could a life. And he gave it all his might, and his effort. However, I couldn't have much sympathy for the majority of those gays acting like mad cattle. You might be who you are, but that doesn't mean you get the right of getting away with uncommon decency. Straight men in the celebration of love (Valentine's Day) don't strip naked by the truck loads to show how much they love sex. Essentially what i'm trying to say is how pissed it makes me seeing all these people fighting for something reasonable within these 'revolutions' they always loose touch of their meaning for whatever it might be they're fighting for. And react, instead of reason.

I guess, ever since i got to 'the liberal, individual Bay Area' I've realized many things:

It's not liberal. It's just segregation of millions of little clans (basically). You can be whatever you want (or join whatever clan you want) but as long as you don't step into any other's. So it's an illusion of individuality. It's like... 'groups of individuals'... which is a hilarious contradiction. the liberal aspect is just another illusion, because they aren't cool with people outside their clan, maybe casually cool, but i'm talking friendship. And this brings me to my point. Being so segregated into so many groups just makes a bunch of herds. and these cattle don't think for themselves, but react. The massive bodies... amoebas of people, the masses.

Ladies and gentlemen. There is no middle ground. Humanity is just an endless pendulum going from one extreme to the other... it sickens me.

So if there's anything i can ask... it's to listen, observe, think for yourself... and don't try to change other's opinions. Let them observe you and listen to you and take to consideration what they agree with from your words.

There is no good or bad in this world. No one does things consciously bad, they always see a benefit to one's self, in other words 'good'. The only people who do consciously bad things are psychopaths. The only thing there is in this world is your perspective. and everyone else's is different from one another and even those think they're doing good, too. Sometimes.

There is only one law:

Don't steal.

That applies to stealing a life, stealing someone's happiness, someone's virginity, someone's wife/husband, child, etc. etc. etc. And that can be summarized in one word...

Respect.

Merry Christmas,
-HVH

I doodled on my tankmen.

.
/* */

.
/* */

.
/* */

.
/* */

.
/* */

Visually, It saddens me that the colorful, vivid world of Gotham city was so downgraded in the new Batman movies.

Don't you remember the Gothic/Art Deco skyline crawling up to the sky with flickering lights. The Gargoyles, the alleys, the bridges... A city that really looked like it needed a big hand in Vigilante duties. A bold yet broken world, barely holding itself up from the terrible abnormal criminals that haunt its people. Cast in shadows, rain, snow or fog constantly...

Instead, Gotham city is now Chicago.

All of the visual charms of Gotham City, the character designs, imagination, and creativity of the world of Batman are gone.

Batman had this beautiful mixture of Pulp Fiction (and I don't mean the movie), Art Deco, Gothic Architecture, and old school sci fi.

Batman himself had the Bad ass of a cowboy, the slick and classy of James Bond, the poetic danger of Dracula, and the smarts and clever of the sherlock holmes. All these things, plus a disturbing past and psychology, and internal conflict.

Now, to me, these are incredible ingredients. And for nearly a century they have been slowly shaping to form the wonderful thing that is Batman. Why change it? I understand and admire seeing new things. I admire seeing Christopher Nolan's approach to the world. But there are certain aspects of batman that cannot be changed, for it makes it what it is. People claim that the reason why the new Batman movies are cool are because they are more realistic, and this works because batman doesn't have super powers. This all sounds good on the surface, but to me, there are numerous things in the core of the batman universe that make it fictional enough so that putting it in a real world setting won't work. The new batman movies are proof of that if you look at it deep enough.

I always thought Morgan Freeman's character in the new movies was basically pointless. people thought that it was cool to know where he gets his equipment from, and it is, but not important enough to entitle an entire character, basically an Alfred #2. When you try to explain so many things in a story it becomes sloppy, and it's pointless. What's most important is getting the basics focused. And Batman movies are just about Batman and his Rival, whoever that might be.

But The Dark Knight had too many protagonists, too many antagonists, protagonists turning into antagonists, making a big build up, cutting off their conclusion, switching from one to the other and back and not paying enough time or focus on the main character... so on and so forth. It started off good and just fell apart.

The New Batman lost every charm that batman ever had to me.

also, 'lol' at the pic below.