[Update: Brea linked here on her blog!]
I make no apologies for being a fanboy, as I have a lot of lead time doing it (high school, if you must know, when I started going to scifi cons) and have built up a substantial amount of momentum. That’s why I thought it was so cool that actress Brea Grant (Heroes, Halloween 2) knew who I was. I met her for the first time at the astronomy panel I moderated in Pasadena, and I was excited to find out she’d be at Comic Con.
She took a few friends and me to a party hosted by Wired.com (I may have more on that at a later date) and agreed to go on camera for like one minute and let me be a dork.
My thanks to her for being so cool. I had a lot of fun hanging with her and her brother (I got one of her CDs too; I traded a copy of my book for it). I hope they’ll be at Comic Con next year!
 |
| Brea at her booth at Comic Con 2009 |
And check her out in the movie Halloween 2, which comes out August 28.
August 17th, 2009 at 10:03 am
You wrote a book?
August 17th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Holy crap! I used to go to high school with Brea in Tyler, TX! I guess this is the surprise I get for not having cable for almost 4 years. Wow…
August 17th, 2009 at 10:06 am
You were a dork?
August 17th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Actually Phil, I think nerd would be more appropriate since dork refers to someone who sits in the bathtub biting bubbles(and I don’t mean Michaels chimp).
Ah, the old timey meanings of words which would actually get thru the censor here.
I love how many entertainers there are in this world who are real science oriented. Then of course, there are the less talented ones like McCarthy. Ah well, there goes that danged bell curve again.
GAry 7
August 17th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Oh! Will she be in the role of “Teen victim #4″ or “Teen victim #16″?
August 17th, 2009 at 10:43 am
@Gary Ansorge,
Could be worse. He could have described himself as a geek (circus performer who bites the heads off chickens). I make sure to correct everyone who calls me a “geek” that I’m more of a “nerd.” Of course, my wife’s usual reply to that correction is to call me a dork. I just can’t win!
August 17th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Which character was she in Heroes? I don’t remember. Unless she was in season 3, which I didn’t watch at all.
August 17th, 2009 at 11:24 am
She was the girl that could move so fast she couldn’t be seen, kinda like the Flash.
GAry 7
August 17th, 2009 at 11:42 am
You know everytime you quote how many people post here or some famous person reads this blog, I feel a little guilty for some of the things I have posted. Then a troll posts and somehow I don`t feel as guilty.
August 17th, 2009 at 11:47 am
“She was the girl that could move so fast she couldn’t be seen, kinda like the Flash.”
Which is why you can’t remember her
August 17th, 2009 at 11:53 am
She was in season 3 as the speedster. Probably the best thing about that season, if you ask me. And she’s got a large part in Haloween II(she’s in the commercials), and was in Friday Night Lights, and a few web productions. Very talented young actress.
August 17th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Tyler, Texas? Small world.
August 17th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
I glanced at name before I scrolled down to the video, straight away I thought it was about Dorothy from Golden Girls.
Googling the golden girls I see I got the wrong name but reread the article picturing Bea Arthur as I did, and your fanboy status suddenly seems a lot more creepy.
August 17th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Uhm, I’m sure the lovely Miss Grant is a completely delightful person with a very bright future. I personally dorked out on Phil Collins in 1982, so I don’t hold myself above the dork-out crowd.
Nevertheless, anyone want to start a pool on the eventual Tomoatometer Rating of Halloween 2?
If it’s above 60, I’ll pony up my own cash to see it in the theater. (For comparison, District 9 got a 94.) Otherwise, I’ll look forward to seeing her in future projects. Her fondness for the BABlog shows her to be a woman of distinction, and I have no doubt that robust projects will come her way.
August 17th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Oh, and from one year ago, you can vote on whether or not Brea Grant is sexy. Spoiler alert: she is!
August 17th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
She seems very nice and it was very cool of her to do that interview with you Phil. I’m glad you plugged the stuff she has coming up, because until now, I’d not heard of any of it.
I have seen her on Heroes, I’ve watched a couple shows on Hulu, but I must honestly admit, I’ve not really followed that TV show much; but for those of you that have never seen it, you can still go to Hulu and watch Heroes, or hit up Netflix, I believe they have the series on there as well (but don’t hold me to that, I can’t check here at the office).
Brea, if you happen to read this, thank you for doing that candid interview with Phil, you have a contagious smile that made my day today.
August 17th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Brea’s awesome, awfully bright & talented. Everyone who meets her says she’s cool as hell.
August 17th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
That explains a LOT: Phil watches Heroes past season one AND Halloween movies. It’s much like the magazines at check-out at the supermarket: x number of neurons destroyed (where x is NOT a small number) for every minute of indulgence.
August 17th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Phil has a celebrity crush! How sweet.
August 17th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
I love Brea Grant in Heroes, but will have to pass on Halloween 2!!
Slightly off topic, but has anyone been watching ‘Defying Gravity’ on ABC? What do you think of it? I love Sci-Fi, and think it’s not that bad.
August 18th, 2009 at 3:25 am
You didn’t ask her why this is the only science blog she reads.
August 18th, 2009 at 3:34 am
So, um, not to be too crude but what’s Brea’s stance on ‘embiggening’?
(Sorry couldn’t resist temptation there.)
@ 17. Marty Says:
Brea’s awesome, awfully bright & talented. Everyone who meets her says she’s cool as hell.
That first sentence I’m with you. But hell = cool!? Say what?
Brea’s hot though – definitely! I quite understand the BA’s crush! In fact, I think I share it.
August 18th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
Michael L, I just finished watching all the Defying Gravities through ep 4 last night.
The premise is definitely catchy, and is the sole reason I kept watching them. The odd love triangles (quadrangles? pentangles?) are almost a distraction, but I keep hoping they will tie in with the mysterious ‘beta’. I also find the monologue of Maddux a bit of a distraction also. The show is present tense, and he keeps speaking in past tense, that just bugs me. I keep catching bad science moments, but not terribly egregious, yet still annoying. A good example is when he is reeling in Zoe back to the airlock. The line is taut the entire time, and he keeps pulling her in at a steady rate. Why doesn’t he just give her a good tug, and let the inertia do the work? Also, the nano bot artificial gravity is a hard sell for me too. It just doesn’t pan out logically, and looks like a cheap way to avoid a high special effects bill. Also, why did she need a hypberbaric chamber? The suit she was in should have served perfectly, since it appeared to be able to maintain different internal pressures, with only a minor leak.
I plan on watching the rest of the series, how could I miss watching a interplanetary mission of this magnitude! I just hope things pick up a step or two. I doubt a second season would be viable at this point.
August 19th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Did she say ZOMBIES? Hmm … I’ll have to check that one out. She’s got a great cheerful personality; that’s pretty rare anywhere on the planet. (Says the mad scientist in grumpyland.)
August 25th, 2009 at 8:07 am
23. Revyloution Says:
The premise is definitely catchy, and is the sole reason I kept watching them. The odd love triangles (quadrangles? pentangles?) are almost a distraction, but I keep hoping they will tie in with the mysterious ‘beta’.
The description I noticed on SciFi Wire (yes, though the ‘channel’ is Syfy) was it was “Grey’s Anatomy in Space”… not a good sign for me.
I keep catching bad science moments, but not terribly egregious, yet still annoying. A good example is when he is reeling in Zoe back to the airlock. The line is taut the entire time, and he keeps pulling her in at a steady rate. Why doesn’t he just give her a good tug, and let the inertia do the work?
IIRC, they were concerned that ‘too hard a pull’ would cause the line or clip to ‘break’. Well, the contract goes to the lowest bidder….
Also, the nano bot artificial gravity is a hard sell for me too. It just doesn’t pan out logically, and looks like a cheap way to avoid a high special effects bill.
Yeah, and in one episode it started off showing ‘why their hair doesn’t float in zero-G’, with a magnetic hairspray… now, if someone took off their nano-bot clothes, doesn’t that mean they would immediately flip over, head down into the ‘floor’? Ouch!
I thought the failed pilot VIRTUALITY was much better…. and also suspect that the ‘secret’ to the Mars ‘flashbacks’, etc. may be related to the (U.S.) conclusion to Life On Mars…. they’re in a ‘virtual’ mission.
J/P=?