Nate of Polytropos, a fellow I've only met once but whom I seem to have a number of things in common besides simply blogging, follows through on the "ask 3 questions" meme, and wants to know:

1. The one time I met you at that blog-get-together-breakfast, you said that you'd love the chance to write Ultimate Doctor Strange. What are some of your particular ideas as to how do you would do, what would make it fun, etc.?

The joy of the Marvel Ultimates line is not just the chance to update the characters to the modern day, such as having Peter Parker be a molecular biology student rather than a simple chemist, but to insert into the origins of the character the seeds of what becomes the defining moments of their characters. Not to take anything away from the creators of these characters and stories originally, but when they were original in the 1960s, they were working on the installment plan, like a soap opera (which was actually the thing that set Marvel apart from other comics of the time, in that the stories did actually have some continuity from issue to issue), and like soap operas, the writers didn't necessarily have an end in mind, but just that next episode. Even so, some of the titles of that time did a good job of maintaining a theme across the comics, but given the chance to do it all again, a good writer can really explore what makes that story special.

For me, the Stephen Strange character is indicative of the modern dichotomy--a character trained in science but fatally flawed (in the original, his alcoholism destroys his career because he can't do surgery with his increasingly poor dexterity), who seeks redemption through faith. Unlike the rest of us, he doesn't have to rely on faith for long, as he observes true power through the mystical arts. But that's where a modern story could investigate something more--what if Strange's power actually derives solely from his faith, and if he begins to question it, than his mastery of the mystic arts is lost? And what about all those people from his previous life? How do they feel about a fallen but at one time respected surgeon coming back from a trip to Asia and taking up residence as a snake-oil salesman in Greenwich Village?

That's not to mention some of the ancilliary characters like Dormammu, his nemesis, and Clea, Dormammu's daughter, who becomes Strange's lover, apprentice, and eventual successor. Dormammu, of course, is just a stand-in for the adversary, which reinforces the science-faith story, but what does it mean to love the daughter of the devil?

My problem is I'd probably spend too much time on the set-up of all this, exploring Strange's life before he climbs the mountain, and that might not sit well with those who look to comics for action and mystical art.

2. What it your favorite scene from a Kurosawa movie, and why?

Does it make me a worse person to have to admit that I don't recall ever having seen a Kurosawa movie? My film education is horrendously spotty, unfortunately, as I not only am a product of a small town without much of a cinema and parents who didn't get cable television until I had left the nest. By then, my habits had already been set, and I've always preferred to read a book than watch the screen. While we lived in Washington state, we were part of a film club that helped me catch up on some classics (including La Dolce Vita, a film or two by those French directors, and identifying for me what has become my favorite film genre, the screwball).

3. Are you a coffee shop type person, a bar type person, or neither? What about your personality do you think accounts for your preference?

A non-smoking bar type person, I think, which for some people is an oxymoron, as their concept of a bar is one where they can expound between puffs on that cigarette. If I were British, I'd be a pub type person for sure. For one, I like alcohol in all its forms much better than the distillations of the coffee bean. Two, I'm much more of a night owl than a morning person, and a bar in the light of morning is probably one of the saddest places to be.