"I'll just get my gear."

a couple reviews of Seagalogy Updated & Expanded Edition

tn_seagalpaintedThere have been a couple reviews of the new edition, so I thought I’d link to them. I have read that internet social media, for promotion, etc.

Crave Online compared my completist approach of analyzing Seagal movies to the way scholars study Shakespeare. Therefore, OUT FOR JUSTICE = King Lear, I believe. But what if I were to tell you that Steven Seagal never starred in a single movie? (ANONYMOUS 2: STEVEN SEAGAL IS ALSO ANONYMOUS coming soon.) I also like this review because it’s the only one that says the later DTV chapters are more interesting than the ones on the better known movies.

Flixist compared Seagalogy to a book about Celine Dion. Therefore, “My Heart Will Go On” = The Tempest. It was meant as a compliment though, there was a book that reviewer Hubert Vigilla thought was interesting even though it was about Celine Dion. They also were nice enough to do a week of Seagal-themed coverage, using quotes from the book and talking about Lightning Bolt, Songs From the Crystal Cave and stuff like that. They even dug up a commercial that I missed in the book, and were polite enough not to call attention to that fact.

Cool Ass Cinema raves, “Vern’s overpowering adoration for Seagal’s repertoire is at times perplexing!!!”

I don’t know how this works exactly but as of my latest Google search, on Amazon Hot New Releases – Movies (updated hourly), I guess Seagalogy is at #6, right below The Beast of Boggy Creek: The True Story of the Fouke Monster by Lyle Blackburn, and well above Dark Side of the Moon: How Optimus Prime’s Faith delivered Earth from an Eternal Prison by Miqiuel Banks. EAT A DICK, OPTIMUS PRIME!

Walking Shoe Store – Comfortable Walking Shoe doesn’t have a review of the book, but they do sell the Kindle version. I thought that was kind of weird. But as long as you’re walking around and you’re comfortable I guess you should be reading about Seagal movies.

Also thanks for the nice reviews on Amazon. I suspect one of them was the same Karlos that comments here. I appreciate it.

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 12th, 2012 at 2:53 am and is filed under Blog Post (short for weblog). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

47 Responses to “a couple reviews of Seagalogy Updated & Expanded Edition”

  1. I’m reading it currently, but taking my time, savoring it….

    it is really is awesome Vern, it’s your writing at the absolute top of your game

  2. I know soembody who read the book, and he adored it. He showed it to his teacher, who was blown away. The teacher is the typical film school teacher who loves the real good stuff and therefore would never guess a detailed scholar study could be made for such a maker of crap action movies like Segal. And he loved the book.

    So, Vern has academia respect and credit. And for a bad actor who makes crap action movies. Respect!

    The dude i’m talking about is a regular poster here, but i don’t want to name him, in case he’s embaraced to be seen in my company.

  3. It sure was by me, Vern. Glad you liked the review.

    I really do dig the hell out of the book and hope this new expanded edition brings in a ton of new readers and converts as many non-believers as possible.

    I also scored copies for friends and all of them have fallen in love with it, too.

    In a manly way.

  4. Rudolf Klein-Rogge

    April 12th, 2012 at 4:27 am

    My copy shipped today (along with Faccia a Faccia and the James Stewart Westerns Collection on digital veratile discs, should you folks care). The Updated edition will look nice next to the first Titan edition on my book shelf, and I’m very much looking forward to the new chapters!

  5. I got my copy last week, after two or three reasonably heated arguments with UPS that luckily did not end in wrist-snapping. I’m just finishing up this Joe Lansdale book and then I’m ready to dive back into the oil-slicked waters of serious Seagalogical studies. I’m just sorry I couldn’t get you another review in Smooth, Vern. The timing was just off. Next time.

  6. asimovlives – I’m not embarrased by you, since everybody here is tainted by your presence mate.

    (No but really, my teacher did LOVE the book. I even got him Vern’s “sequel” book for Christmas. Loved that too.)

  7. I guess the days when the kids on the first row brought apples to school is over?

  8. Just got around and ordered my copy of this Seagalogy “Extended Cut”, not only is it out of practical necessity ( the old copy I have of Seagalogy is a bit wornout), but of curiosity of the new content. I´ll be very interested to read Verns opinions concerning TRUE JUSTICE.
    And will hopefully stop me from getting chronologically confused about the show.

  9. Tainted by my presence… is that good?

  10. I just have one question to make about this movie: is it funny to read? If so, i’m going to Amazon right this minute.

    And no, Vern shouldn’t take offense by what i said above. The best movie books i have read they have a lot of humour in it. I can’t conceive how a book about movies of filmmakers can’t be humorours about certain aspects.

  11. Again, the book is available for the Barnes and Noble’s Nook e-reader which you should all buy instead of the Kindle. Thanks.

  12. Also, there is giant billboard for True Justice up in the Chicagoland area.

  13. Uh oh Vern, Optimus has overtaken you. You must have pissed off some fans.

  14. There was a Nic Cage acting reference on Glee last night. Made me think of Vern. If they’d used the term “mega-acting,” it would have made me wonder if a writer reads Outlaw Vern.

  15. The new Fangoria has a letter until from Tarantino saying how great the recent Nick Cage interview was. He used the term “mega acting” in the article. It’s actually a featured pull quote in the issue. My roundabout way of saying Vern is infiltrating the genre film culture. He deserves it. My copy is shipping soon. Can’t wait.

  16. If Seagalogy is turned into an audio book, who should be the reader?

  17. Either Keith David or the guy who dubs Seagal’s voice when he doesn’t feel like showing up for his ADR sessions.

  18. I´d go for Danny Trejo.

  19. More importantly, who would you cast as Seagal if the book got adapted into a movie?

  20. audiobook: Yeah, that would be great if it was the guy that did the voiceovers in OUT OF REACH, and when he gets to that part he suddenly changes his tone and starts giving us all the inside dope on how that went down.

    Expendables 3: Man, I hope they do figure out how to get Seagal in an Expendables just so I can stop explaining why it hasn’t happened. I don’t expect the average person to know that Seagal and the producer previously sued each other and don’t want to work together again, but it gets annoying how many movie news sights report on this without ever stumbling upon that information.

  21. I compared Vern’s appreciation of and approach to reviewing remakes/reboots/sequels and such to serious Shakespeare studies long ago here.

    Crave Online can apologize for plagiarism & compensate me anytime this week. Monday I go to the lawyers.

  22. Knox Harrington

    April 12th, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    Do we really want to see Seagal in Expandables 3, though?

    The Expendable guys don’t really seem like Seagal’s kinda crowd. It’s kinda like asking Batman to join the Avengers.

    I understand that a lot of people want to see him in it so that he can also be acknowledged as one of the old action icons in the eyes of mainstream audiences, but he’s already an action icon.

  23. asimovlives – Yes its funny. It’s Vern. What you expect, a boring pretentious with vocabulary only found in AP English on Steroids? And yes, I laughed frequently.

    Oh and Vern made wikipedia!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagalogy

  24. Yeah, Seagal doesn’t really work and play well with others, in my opinion. He’d have to play the villain, and a. He already did that in MACHETE, and b. He’s not gonna do something that Van Damme just did.

  25. I could see Seagal in the Mickey Rourke role of the ol’ best friend/former Expendable who shows up in one or two scenes and delivers a cool speech, but apart from that doesn’t do much in the movie.

  26. Loving the new chapters, Vern. Excellent work as always.

  27. “Vern made wikipedia!”

    About time!

  28. Seagal in EXPEN-TROI-BLES would be just great, but like others here, I can only see him popping up in a small role.

    In my geek dreams, he is teaching the guys Aikido in a pre-opening credits sequence.

    He will ably assisted in this task by Al Leong and Bronson Lee.

    Later in the film, Randy Couture will have a flashback and bust out a move Seagal taught him during a fight in a burning temple in the rain against Triple H and Donnie Yen.

    If you’re reading this, Sly, call me.

  29. Rehydrated Dehydrated Pirate Paul

    April 13th, 2012 at 2:00 pm

    Talking of plagiarism:

    You know what, let’s have this one thread stay on topic. It’s SEAGALOGY: UPDATED EXPANDED EDITION, man. SEAGALOGY.

    Did SEAGALOGY go off on a tangent about THE EXPENDABLES? No, it’s fucking SEAGALOGY. We like it for its simplicity and single-mindedness. I believe we can pay it proper tribute by either writing about it or writing about other crap in the other places where it makes sense to write about that type of crap.

    All future posts about THE EXPENDABLES on this thread will be treated as you shitting on my grandmother’s grave in front of me.

    *Bows*

  30. Rehydrated Dehydrated Pirate Paul

    April 13th, 2012 at 2:13 pm

    Oh wait, new potpourri thread. Nevermind.

    Talk about the “Expendables” all you want. *shudders…*

  31. Paul – actually you’re wrong, the expanded edition does go off on a tangent about THE EXPENDABLES, to explain why Seagal turned it down, how this relates to MACHETE and the two ways in which he defeated the toughest member of the Expendables.

    Stu – You got a problem with Lee Christmas? I’m looking forward to SAFE – I always have hope for Boaz Yakin movies just because I love FRESH so much.

  32. Paul: http://www.outlawvern.com/2012/03/27/seagalogy-updated-and-expanded-edition/ is meant to be the new Potpourri thread-which Vern is referencing here with his remark to me. Do we need to start a civil war over this?

    Vern: No, Lee Christmas is fine, but “Luke Wright” fits the pun name pattern established by Hale Caesar and Toll Road more. The name seems wasted on a more staight seeming movie like SAFE. Of course the greatest pun action hero name doesn’t come from a movie, but a video game: Max Payne.

  33. Vern: So far, the section about Seagal getting his revenge on the Expendables through the roundabout method of teaching and face-kicking is my favorite part of the expanded edition. That whole chapter was really well-structured, in my opinion.

  34. Rehydrated Dehydrated Pirate Paul

    April 13th, 2012 at 5:48 pm

    Vern – I humbly apologise. Because if there’s one thing that hasn’t been the subject of enough discussion in these parts, it’s the “Expendables”.

    (And yes, I know I myself am guilty of this with my April Fool’s joke post. It doesn’t count if you’re SATIRISING the relentless hype machine, you silly silly people.)

    Stu – we don’t NEED to. But I am sitting on the computer at 1:30AM, in an unpleasant state of inebriation that was induced by cheap lager that smells of rancid piss, pretty much broke, with zero chance of getting action from anything resembling an actual human female tonight, and definitely in the mood for a little war. Fortunately I have an opening shot loaded, primed, and ready to fire. So here it is: Michael Bay’s “Armageddon” is such an underrated movie, don’t you think?

  35. Paul- I haven’t seen it, so it wouldn’t be fair for me to comment either way.:)

  36. No self-respecting movie geek should be without “Seagalogy”. It’s axiomatic.

    Like many an oldschool AICN talkbacker, I was somewhat confused when Vern popped up on the radar screen with his seminal 2002 review of Seagal’s statement of purpose/directorial debut “On Deadly Ground”. Was it (Vern’s review, not the movie) meant to be sarcastic or reverent? Damned if I knew, but it made for fine reading. It was funny, it was fresh, and it grabbed you by the lapels in a “How ya doin’, bud?… Good to see ya/haven’t seen ya in awhile!” kinda way, rather than a “How ya doin’, bud? I’m here to kick your bitch ass because you fucked my sister on Prom Night ten years ago!” kinda way.

    Anyway, it laid the groundwork for “Seagalogy”. End results matter most. And now we are blessed with an updated version. I couldn’t be happier. Lended my original copy of “Seagalogy” to three friends, who all enjoyed it. Gotta share the wealth.

    @Vern: One question re.the original version. There’s a disclaimer on the back cover that states: “This publication has not been prepared, approved, licensed or endorsed by Steven Seagal, Steven Seagal Enterprises, or any entity that created or produced any of the films or programs discussed in this book”. Did that come from Titan Books, or did Seagal and his legal team get all huffy, and THEY decided to be assholes about it? Altogether curious about that one.

  37. Rehydrated Dehydrated Pirate Paul

    April 15th, 2012 at 9:16 am

    OK… two things, very quickly.

    First: just saw “The Cabin in the Woods”.

    Is it as good as it’s hyped up to be?

    In short – no. It’s still pretty good though. For most of it it had me hooked, but the constant twists and turns don’t always work (lots and lots of this movie fails to make any kind of sense, even in the context of the movie world, which frustrated me to no end). I think second-rate Whedon is still better than first-rate most people, but still… I kinda hope this movie flops. I’ve seen enough “meta-horror” over the past couple of years, we don’t need more films like this. I don’t want to damn this movie because I definitely enjoyed it. I just think it thinks it’s so much smarter than it actually is. There are moments (the scene involving tequila springs to mind) which should be shocking, but aren’t, because they aren’t set up very well.

    so yeah.. “Cabin in the Woods” gets a cautious recommendation from me, but don’t go in with sky-high expectations.

    Secondly – my friend just saw “Battleships”, and the first thing he said to me about it was, “They seemed to play half of that film in slow-motion.” So from slow-mo to shakycam and back to slow-mo again; the cycle of overused action movie devices that spoil the movies they’re in when not properly applied is complete!

  38. Amazing Larry: Titan put that on there to be safe. There was no trouble with Seagal. They publish alot of movie books, so I’m sure that’s pretty much their standard disclaimer. They actually have a legal department that goes over everything, and I don’t remember many requests to change anything except having to trim the amount of Songs From the Crystal Cave lyric quotes due to the copyright laws involving songwriting. I had more trouble with Yippee Ki-Yay Moviegoer because I wanted to use my review of Paparazzi, which (jokingly) argues that the whole movie is a semi-autobiographical tale about Mel Gibson murdering tabloid photographers during the filming of Lethal Weapon 2. So I couldn’t use that review, it turned out.

  39. Interesting that the big move Seagal taught the MMA guys was a kick, since he rarely uses kicks in his movies and kind of looks silly when he does.

  40. Rehydrated Dehydrated Pirate Paul

    April 18th, 2012 at 4:18 am

    Y’know, upon reflection and – I have to say – having read some other reviews of it, I think I underrated “Cabin in the Woods”. There’s LOTS of that film that works really well. I love the crazy morality of it and the central concept is great. I also loved the Japanese subplot.

    Trying to remain spoiler-free, my problems with the movie (which are fairly minor) are:

    – The security guard character. I think he undermines the scenes he’s in. I think it would have worked better if everybody there was on the same page, or at least if he’d grown to BE on the same page as them. In particular I think “Tequila” would have worked a lot better if he wasn’t there.
    – Has anybody else noticed that whenever Amy Acker and Joss Whedon work together, Acker seems to play a nerd or scientist who is the centre of moral ambiguities that don’t really get resolved, or even left ambiguous, in a satisfying way? Yes? Me too.
    – Everyone loves the ending. I like it, but… I’ve seen it done before. In some cases I’ve seen it done before, better. I love that they went in that direction but I’m not crazy about the execution.
    – Somebody seems to figure some things out without much prompting. There is technically a reason given for this, but it’s monumentally dumb (actually my least favorite part of the movie). I can’t believe this character comes up with these ideas as quickly as he or she does.
    – And finally, where the hell is Cthulu when you need him?

    So yeah… I liked this movie more and more after thinking about it afterwards, and also reading others’ comments on it. I take back what I said about hoping it flops and would definitely recommend it to anybody familiar with the tropes of horror movies who fancies something a little different.

  41. Rehydrated Dehydrated Pirate Paul

    April 18th, 2012 at 5:20 pm

    Ok, my pay is in and I have ordered my copy of Segalogy: Updated Edition through amazon.co.uk at £6.49. All I can say is that once Vern clarified there is a section about “The Expendables” in it, I knew I had to have it.

  42. Hey Vern, I was reading the new expanded edition and really found it interesting about the alternate Kill Switch version you watched. Where did you get it? Fans would love to see that.

  43. Derek – I don’t want to get the person who gave it to me in trouble. But he or she had access to it and knew I would appreciate it. I wish I could share it but the best thing I can do is write about it.

  44. Ah, understandable. Consider yourself very lucky….I always knew that the version I was watching was fucked with. Thanks for writing about it though.

  45. A moment of your attention, folks! It appears the wikipedia page for Seagalogy is in danger of being deleted. They claim there is insufficient proof that it meets the notability guidelines for wikipedia, and require much more citation to back up the (correct) claim that it is indeed notable. I’m gonna add the reviews here, but if you know of any more “notable” sources which would help, please let me know, or help fix the page yourself! In particular, it might help to find a citation that David Cross put it on his notable book list (that happened, right?) in (I think?) Time Magazine?

    Considering it is the first and only in-depth study of Seagal’s career, and, in fact, proposes an entire thesis to tie his work together artistically, I feel it is relevant and worth including, particularly due to the fact that it’s cited in several other Seagal articles (including the main one). Please help me keep this page alive!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagalogy

  46. I finally did something, that I wanted to do for years: Writing a better review of SEAGALOGY on German Amazon. I’m kinda ashamed of my first one, which was short and focused more on the funny aspects of it. I did mention how deep and respectful your reviews are, but in the end, it was more an “OMG, this is some funny shit!” review. Now that I bought the Kindle version of SEAGALOGY: UP & EX a while ago, I was able to write a better articulated one. Not sure if anybody will care, but at least I got this off my chest.

Leave a Reply





XHTML: You can use: <a href="" title=""> <img src=""> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <b> <i> <strike> <em> <strong>