By Jordan Dane
Everyone has heard the line – Write What You Know. When I first heard the line, the first thing that hit me was a question. What the hell did I know that would interest anybody, except my mother who is easy to please? Obviously I didn't listen to that advice. My debut book was about a woman cop, a far cry from my accountant/commodity energy trader occupation.
Lee Child wrote on an email loop I belonged to in 2008 (of debut thriller authors he mentored as part of the International Thriller Authors debut program) that he thought it should be – Write What You Fear – because books are about emotion. Raw emotions resonate with people. We can all relate to what makes us scared or what we can hate or love. That’s not as intimidating as “write what you know” and hope someone buys it. It doesn’t take special knowledge to write about emotions you feel. It only takes an ability to dig deep, write honestly and find words to express those feelings.
Lee’s words have stayed with me.
Lately I find myself thinking about death. It’s not a subject I know a lot about, but I sure know how it makes me feel. My book ON A DARK WING (Harlequin Teen, Jan 2012) stirred these thoughts in me when I had to envision what a conversation with the Grim Reaper might entail and imagine an afterlife and a role for the Angel of Death. A young girl deals with the grief and guilt she feels after the tragic death of her mother in the book. And this week, a blogger (who will be on a tour stop for the promo of my book) asked for an interview with Death. I’ll be the voice of Death on the day of the blog post when I comment, so followers can ask their own questions. Do I have any idea what I will write? Absolutely not, but I think it’s important to keep challenging myself as an author to delve into areas of my imagination, especially when it’s most difficult.
But there’s a reason I wanted to share why writing about Death and imagining an afterlife has been particularly challenging for me. In my own life, my brother-in-law Michael (my husband’s only brother) is losing his battle with cancer. He’s in hospice now and he’s been in my thoughts and prayers for months. I can’t even imagine what that finality is like for him or his sweet wife and their family.
Sometimes the fiction we write becomes all too real...or too personal.
My post won’t be long today, but I would like to hear from those willing to share. Whether you had a personal tie-in or not, what has been the most difficult scene you’ve written or read in a book? What challenges did you face in writing it? Or why did the scene you read stick with you? Readers and/or writers can respond to this. There are scenes in books that I’ve read long ago, that I can still imagine in my head because they touched something in me that has stayed.
Please share those scenes and books that have stayed with you.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
No worries
Marcia called me a little while ago. She wanted to make sure C.I. was okay with something. In the snapshot today, she's noting someone she doesn't like and giving him credit for what he's done despite her own personal opinion of him. Well the little coward backed down after the snapshot was up. Marcia called C.I. to tell her.
C.I. was about to start speaking (to college students, I think) and only had a few seconds. She asked Marcia what was wrong and when Marcia told her, she let loose a string of laughter. She assured Marcia that wasn't a problem and, of course, she should repost the snapshot as is.
So Marcia called me to check that out? (Rebecca and I have known C.I. forever. We all went to college together.)
I told Marcia it was not a problem and C.I. wasn't pretending when she laughed. I know her and you'll want to read tomorrow morning. I'm guessing that will be a full entry. Will it be blistering? Actually, no. As I'm reading the snapshot today, I think C.I. will actually have pity for the man.
But I'll tell you what I told Marcia in case anyone else is worried: We're talking about the woman who drank Don Henley under the table, okay?
Do you know how hard, back in the day, that was to do?
They were drinking straight vodka when the challenge was issued. (Actually, someone made an insult -- Joe Walsh? -- about women not being able to drink that much.) They didn't know what they were up against, One by one everyone crumbled except C.I. representing the women and Don Henley representing the men.
It was never a question who was going to win. Alcohol has very little effect on C.I. The only thing I've ever worried with regards to her drinking was that she'd get alcohol poisoning. (Because most of us would be drunk or passed out when she's really not even buzzed.)
What does that have to do with don't worry? Events after the all night drinking. No sleep on her part (I crashed myself) as she went through all the day's engagements including a photo session and TV interview without ever missing a beat. At one point, around 4:30 a.m., I noted her schedule for the day ahead and she laughed and said, "It's no big deal."
Nor is this. I could explain it in detail but it's in the snapshot if you read it and I'm sure she'll be noting those things tomorrow morning.
She'll come out smelling like a rose.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
C.I. was about to start speaking (to college students, I think) and only had a few seconds. She asked Marcia what was wrong and when Marcia told her, she let loose a string of laughter. She assured Marcia that wasn't a problem and, of course, she should repost the snapshot as is.
So Marcia called me to check that out? (Rebecca and I have known C.I. forever. We all went to college together.)
I told Marcia it was not a problem and C.I. wasn't pretending when she laughed. I know her and you'll want to read tomorrow morning. I'm guessing that will be a full entry. Will it be blistering? Actually, no. As I'm reading the snapshot today, I think C.I. will actually have pity for the man.
But I'll tell you what I told Marcia in case anyone else is worried: We're talking about the woman who drank Don Henley under the table, okay?
Do you know how hard, back in the day, that was to do?
They were drinking straight vodka when the challenge was issued. (Actually, someone made an insult -- Joe Walsh? -- about women not being able to drink that much.) They didn't know what they were up against, One by one everyone crumbled except C.I. representing the women and Don Henley representing the men.
It was never a question who was going to win. Alcohol has very little effect on C.I. The only thing I've ever worried with regards to her drinking was that she'd get alcohol poisoning. (Because most of us would be drunk or passed out when she's really not even buzzed.)
What does that have to do with don't worry? Events after the all night drinking. No sleep on her part (I crashed myself) as she went through all the day's engagements including a photo session and TV interview without ever missing a beat. At one point, around 4:30 a.m., I noted her schedule for the day ahead and she laughed and said, "It's no big deal."
Nor is this. I could explain it in detail but it's in the snapshot if you read it and I'm sure she'll be noting those things tomorrow morning.
She'll come out smelling like a rose.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
|
What Else I Watched This Month: November 2011
Because you can't review them all...
This is my monthly column to briefly discuss the films I watched (or rewatched) but didn't have the time or energy to write full reviews of. This month, I'll be talking about high school politics, classic Disney, and a pretty awful Marilyn Monroe impersonation, among other things.
Election (3.5 Stars)
It's funny how one's opinion of a film can change so much over time. I first saw Alexander Payne's Election about six years ago and found it perplexingly unappealing. Everyone loves this movie, I thought, and there's nothing about it that shouldn't appeal to me. I just thought it was executed poorly. It certainly wasn't a film I ever cared to revisit. But with The Descendants finally hitting theaters, my thoughts drifted to Payne's filmography, and bits and pieces of Election had me chuckling inside. Suddenly, I loved this movie, though I hadn't watched it since that first underwhelming viewing. I needed to see if my instinct was right—if I actually like this movie. As you can see by the rating, I do. It's a riot. Every character is brilliantly stereotypical. Most of them are ridiculously petty. Payne's direction is very energetic—probably the best of his career. I have some small issues with a few unresolved subplots, but on the whole, this is a very worthwhile effort that clearly gets better over time.
Catch Me If You Can (4 Stars)
It didn't take multiple viewings for me to love Steven Spielberg's 2002 caper film, Catch Me If You Can. It was a four-star movie the first time I saw it, and things haven't changed since. The globetrotting cat and mouse game between Leonardo DiCaprio's teenage con man and Tom Hanks' no-nonsense IRS agent is a highlight, but the film is greatly enhanced by Christopher Walken's terrific performance. Hollywood's go-to guy for playing zany, off-the-wall characters rolls it back here and really nails it. Then, there's Spielberg's direction, which is delightful. It's clear he's having a blast, and as a result, we do to.
Insignificance (3 Stars)
What would happen if Marilyn Monroe, Albert Einstein, Joe DiMaggio, and Joseph McCarthy crossed paths? That's what Nicholas Roeg asks with Insignificance—a very obtuse and somewhat frustrating film that's forgiven its flaws on the strength of a fantastic end note. There's next to no narrative arc, and though the character development is there, it took a long while to really rope me in. I also thought some of the performances were weak, especially that of Theresa Russell, who plays The Actress (aka Monroe). But the film's final ten minutes are jaw-dropping for a number of reasons. Technically, the scene is spectacular. Beyond that, I think it makes some stunning points that might not make it four-star material, but do present enough food for thought about the fickle nature of celebrity as to make the film watchable, even recommendable.
The Lion King (4 Stars)
You all know the story. The lion cub Simba is destined for the throne, but a tragic accident shreds his confidence, sends him into exile, and almost destroys his kingdom until he makes a triumphant return as an adult to vanquish his evil uncle, Scar. And if you had any doubts that your love of this film is based solely on nostalgia, no need to worry. Simply put, this is the greatest Disney film ever, complete with sensational songs, beautiful animation, and a ton of heart.
This is my monthly column to briefly discuss the films I watched (or rewatched) but didn't have the time or energy to write full reviews of. This month, I'll be talking about high school politics, classic Disney, and a pretty awful Marilyn Monroe impersonation, among other things.
Election (3.5 Stars)
It's funny how one's opinion of a film can change so much over time. I first saw Alexander Payne's Election about six years ago and found it perplexingly unappealing. Everyone loves this movie, I thought, and there's nothing about it that shouldn't appeal to me. I just thought it was executed poorly. It certainly wasn't a film I ever cared to revisit. But with The Descendants finally hitting theaters, my thoughts drifted to Payne's filmography, and bits and pieces of Election had me chuckling inside. Suddenly, I loved this movie, though I hadn't watched it since that first underwhelming viewing. I needed to see if my instinct was right—if I actually like this movie. As you can see by the rating, I do. It's a riot. Every character is brilliantly stereotypical. Most of them are ridiculously petty. Payne's direction is very energetic—probably the best of his career. I have some small issues with a few unresolved subplots, but on the whole, this is a very worthwhile effort that clearly gets better over time.
Catch Me If You Can (4 Stars)
It didn't take multiple viewings for me to love Steven Spielberg's 2002 caper film, Catch Me If You Can. It was a four-star movie the first time I saw it, and things haven't changed since. The globetrotting cat and mouse game between Leonardo DiCaprio's teenage con man and Tom Hanks' no-nonsense IRS agent is a highlight, but the film is greatly enhanced by Christopher Walken's terrific performance. Hollywood's go-to guy for playing zany, off-the-wall characters rolls it back here and really nails it. Then, there's Spielberg's direction, which is delightful. It's clear he's having a blast, and as a result, we do to.
Insignificance (3 Stars)
What would happen if Marilyn Monroe, Albert Einstein, Joe DiMaggio, and Joseph McCarthy crossed paths? That's what Nicholas Roeg asks with Insignificance—a very obtuse and somewhat frustrating film that's forgiven its flaws on the strength of a fantastic end note. There's next to no narrative arc, and though the character development is there, it took a long while to really rope me in. I also thought some of the performances were weak, especially that of Theresa Russell, who plays The Actress (aka Monroe). But the film's final ten minutes are jaw-dropping for a number of reasons. Technically, the scene is spectacular. Beyond that, I think it makes some stunning points that might not make it four-star material, but do present enough food for thought about the fickle nature of celebrity as to make the film watchable, even recommendable.
The Lion King (4 Stars)
You all know the story. The lion cub Simba is destined for the throne, but a tragic accident shreds his confidence, sends him into exile, and almost destroys his kingdom until he makes a triumphant return as an adult to vanquish his evil uncle, Scar. And if you had any doubts that your love of this film is based solely on nostalgia, no need to worry. Simply put, this is the greatest Disney film ever, complete with sensational songs, beautiful animation, and a ton of heart.
dark red wedges and a dark red bow
Last Friday the Mr and I had a romantic dinner for two. It was a nice way to celebrate being in Australia for eight (eight!) years, even if we were a few days late! Late, late for a very important eight..? Anyway, this is what I wore on a hot-cold sun-never-really-rose kinda day; an Alannah Hill silk dress, black jacket via an op shop, vintage dark red semi circle bag, seamed stockings and dark red wedges from Rubi. Thanks to the Mr for patiently taking my photos! Yes, I used to take my own pics in laneways once upon a time, but carrying a tripod to a dinner date? I'm not there yet.
(Everyone wants to know what it's like to walk in these outrageously high shoes, and the answer is completely fine – in fact, they are very comfortable. They kinda bounce!)
It was a fantastic meal and I will share pics of what we ate (eight?!) next time.
ALOHA OY
It's doubly upsetting that this awards-ready machined pablum could have come from Alexander Payne, who has made his entire career out of character studies of difficult, often totally unlikable characters, and finding the thing about them that makes them worthy of our consideration. In the eight years between 1996's Citizen Ruth and 2004's Sideways, he made four good-to-great features that found a perfect sweet spot between ironically mocking their protagonists and genuinely caring for them; the seven years since were punctuated only by his short contribution to Paris, je t'aime, the best of that film's segments and arguably the masterpiece of Payne's whole career. Since then, he has apparently forgotten entirely how to make a movie, although maybe part of it is that he couldn't survive the departure of his regular writing partner Jim Taylor (who stays on as producer), who is replaced with the relatively green Nat Faxon and Jim Rash to co-adapt Kaui Hart Hemmings's novel alongside Payne.
Whatever the case, The Descendants features as its lead a man with a horribly challenging decision to make: how is he going to dispose of his family's 35,000 acres of virgin Hawai'ian real estate. I am not going to go all class warfare on the movie or anything, but it takes quite a lot to put over the personal tragedy of a man of unimaginable luck and privilege, and it doesn't help that the movie seems wholly unaware that this might even be a difficulty. So anyway, Matt has that on his plate, and then his wife is injured in a boating accident and slips into a coma from which he learns, some weeks later, she will not be recovering. And if that wasn't enough, while he's trying to deal with his intractable, angry 17-year-old daughter Alexandra (Shailene Woodley), she reveals the unwelcome news that this whole time, Elizabeth King has been cheating on her husband.
From here we get a customarily Paynesian travel story: Matt, Alex, and 10-year-old Scottie (Amara Miller), as well as Alex's intensely mellow boyfriend Sid (Nick Krause) travel from here to there over the islands, first to inform all of Elizabeth's loved ones that the doctors are pulling the plug and it will only be a matter of days until she dies; eventually their path takes them as far as Brian Speer (Matthew Lillard), the man she was having the affair with, though Matt is not looking to have a confrontation so much as offer, in a very strained way, his offer of forgiveness to the man who cuckolded him. Meanwhile, he learns to be a better father, but not in such a way that's actually uplifting, being as it is that he bonds with his eldest over their joint stalking of Speer.
As I say, every Alexander Payne movie involves some measure of looking down on his characters, but he always pulls up at the last second and saves his films from dabbling in true misanthropy. Until now - perversely enough, it's the director's first movie with a protagonist who is basically an all-round okay guy that is also his most truly nasty piece of work, and I think that's even because Matt King is so nice: since unlike the self-centered whine snob of Sideways or the vicious teacher of Election, we don't see any reason for him to be called on his shit, the film has no problems making villains out of the people who do call him on his shit, or otherwise cause him pain or inconvenience, and since this is true of virtually the entire case, The Descendants isn't hurting for people that it pretty much straight up hates. Especially Elizabeth - one of the big showstopping scenes comes when Matt screams and rants at her comatose form, and there's no sense at all that we're meant to find him even slightly wrong for doing it, not even seconds later when he censures Alex for doing the same thing. At the end (NOT MUCH OF A SPOILER ALERT) when he stands by her bed and weeps his good byes, it plays less like he understands that she is truly a decent person and more that he is demonstrating, as he has been all movie, what a noble martyr he can be.
The one thing that keeps The Descendants above water, and only just, is George Clooney. This isn't exactly the kind of character he usually plays (Matt is far more sullen and miserable than the typical Clooney starring role), but it still feels like something he could do in his sleep, and there's absolutely no arguing that this is his most accomplished performance. Still, it is something he could do in his sleep, and that is what makes him a movie star - the things that he does in his sleep are what he's best at and what makes him worth watching. And this too is part of what makes Matt so likable, but it's not so annoying to be forced to like him thus; the writing and the acting are doing basically the same thing, I guess, but the acting does it better.
Beyond Clooney, there's simply not much to recommend it: not the relentlessly joy-sapped tone (for a dark comedy-drama in the About Schmidt mold, this is a perfectly un-funny movie) that suggests more than all the rest of it that Payne has lost his sharp touch. The whole movie is so damn solemn - Phedon Papamichael's cinematography manages to keep from overly sentimentalizing Hawai'i (and for this DP, that alone is an achievement), but otherwise feel exhausted and totally uninteresting, and the pacing stretches into oblivion, particularly in the middle - and while I admire that the film wants to show a picture of tropical life as a place where people actually go about the business of their lives, and it's wonderful to see a return of the tiny adult slice-of-life pictures that were far more common before Payne took his protracted break from filmmaking they are now, The Descendants would be far more satisfying if it was actually good at those things. I do not refuse to hold out hope that this is just Payne re-learning how to make a movie, but that doesn't do much to make me feel better about the tepid and mean-spirited thing we have before us.
5/10
BUCK ROGERS (1979) TV GUIDE Preview
BUCK ROGERS (1979) TV GUIDE Preview
A HEART FOR MILTON BY TRUDY BRASURE - GIVEAWAY WINNER
When Margaret Hale hastily rejected the wealthy industrialist's fervent marriage proposal, she could not have foreseen the events that would lead her to change her mind and open her heart. But was it too late now to let the handsome, brooding mill owner know? Set amidst the clamor of Victorian England's Industrial Revolution, this is a tale of hope, trial, and love's fulfillment. Based on the novel 'North and South' by Elizabeth Gaskell, this book weaves a change in the original plot to create a beautiful continuation of an enduring love story.
The giveaway
A Heart For Milton is the sequel to Elizabeth Gaskell's "North and South" by Trudy Brasure. The giveaway contest closing today has been running for two weeks and has been connected to the two entries from Margaret Hale Thornton's post honeymoon diary written by Trudy Brasure for the readers of FLY HIGH: part I and part II.
The winner has been chosen via random.org among the commenters of both diary pages (two comments, two chances to win) and will get the book directly from the author, Trudy Brasure , whom I want to thank heartily for being such a kind and generous guest. I loved her pieces and her answers to your questions as Margaret. .
And now, the name of the lucky winner. The signed copy of "A Heart for Milton" with a special dedication from the author goes to ...
Rachel!!!
DECEMBER 2011 MOVIE PREVIEW
So, I'm pretty close to done caring about the year - the big glut of Oscar-begging releases in December never appeals to me simply because my taste and the Academy's overlap so very little, and this year seems especially dire on that front. Even the films that "should" seem exciting just really aren't. On the other hand, 2012 is shaping up very pretty in a lot of ways, so pushing through the last month of a generally flat but never outright hateful year doesn't seem like that big of a deal.
2.12.2011
Something you don't see everyday- not one single new wide release. But of the tiny releases, one that I am especially thrilled to finally see is Shame, the sophomore effort from director Steve McQueen, whose debut Hunger was absolutely phenomenal and one of the best first features of the '00s. And hey, it even brings back Hunger star Michael Fassbender!
9.12.2011
Also, if this is what wide releases look like, they're welcome to keep them: New Year's Eve, which takes the Valentine's Day/Love Actually concept of a big cast of moderate stars in a bunch of little romcom plots and takes it well beyond the point that it should have stopped. Also The Sitter, an R-rated comedy with Jonah Hill that was apparently the best thing David Gordon Green could think to do after hitting what was apparently not a career low with Your Highness.
Thankfully, there are limited releases enough to make up for it: Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, which has a lot to live up to, but the talent to do it; Young Adult, with re-teams Diablo Cody and Jason Reitman in a pairing that is hopefully going to be good for both of them after the terrible things that happened when they parted ways; and hell, let's even throw in W.E. since even though I cannot imagine how a costume drama directed by Madonna can possibly be good, I am desperately curious.
16.12.2011
I didn't like Guy Ritchie's edgy steampunk Sherlock Holmes, and would ordinarily say that its sequel, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, seems like an awful idea, but I am still desperately hoping that it wins the weekend box office and I have to go see it. Because if it doesn't, then I'll have to go see Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked, which is undoubtedly the saddest thought that I've been plagued by all year, and coming up to it is like nearing the date of your death sentence.
Five days before its actual wide release, Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol makes an IMAX-exclusive run; nothing about the film seems like it can possibly be compelling (the franchise was never truly great to start with, and Tom Cruise just keeps getting older), but shit, live-action Brad Bird. That's me in the seats the second I can possibly get there.
Limited: Roman Polanksi's apparently just kinda OK adaptation of the much-loved play Carnage. So much for a post-Ghost Writer career renaissance.
21.12.2011
The pokiness of the month generally is resoundling answered with one of the fullest release weeks of the whole year, split between three days. Besides M:I-GP breaking big, there is also The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, which is undoubtedly going to improve on the middling Swedish original, though I am not certain that there is a masterpiece to be carved out of this material; nor am I thrilled that ordinarily-slow director David Fincher has cranked out a second movie in hardly more than a year. But the teaser trailer was one of the best things of 2011, so that's that.
Far, far more promising, by my lights, is The Adventures of Tintin, which is in one breath Steven Spielberg's first animated film, first mo-cap film,and first 3-D movie; and deep down inside, I think that the fact I am excited for those three things does not actually change the fact that I am not actually excited by Tintin itself, especially being that I am an American and thus have no real attachment to the character.
23.12.2011
Saddled with an uncertain release date in the middle of nowhere, We Bought a Zoo looks to bring Cameron Crowe back into the world, apparently by replacing tyrannical quirkiness with uncut schmaltz, but maybe the trailers are just desperate to attract a family audience.
25.12.2011
I'll tell you what says Christmas to me: a sci-fi horror thriller, like The Darkest Hour. Shit, can anything be more horrible than being the Christmas Day counter-programming?
The real players are two of the biggest likely Oscar players of the year, assuming they both don't suck: Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, the fourth feature by three-time Best Director nominee Stephen Daldry, whose best film was a tepidly charming British dramedy, and who's worst was The Reader, one of the absolute worst Best Picture nominees of all time. I am prepared to be let down. The actual wide release film is War Horse, the second Spielberg movie in four days. It is undoubtedly going to be so damn sentimental that it will hurt, but I'm more excited for this one than Tintin anyway; heck, I'm probably more excited for this than any other December film, which says more about the month than anything. But I have never been much averse to letting my emotions be ruthlessly played by Steven Spielberg.
28.12.2012
A lousy release date for a mini-budget indie, but I have it on good authority that Pariah is damn fine, and if the best it could get was a Hail Mary qualifying run, then so be it.
30.12.2012
And so the year ends with Meryl Streep playing a nice version of Margaret Thatcher in The Iron Lady.
Oh, and one of the most wildly praised films of the year released anywhere in the world is crapped out to make a desperate bid at the Oscars: Iranian director Asghar Farhadi's political firebomb A Separation. Hope y'all live in a tiny segment of either LA or New York if you want to see this presumptive masterwork! Also, fuck you, Sony Pictures Classics.
2.12.2011
Something you don't see everyday- not one single new wide release. But of the tiny releases, one that I am especially thrilled to finally see is Shame, the sophomore effort from director Steve McQueen, whose debut Hunger was absolutely phenomenal and one of the best first features of the '00s. And hey, it even brings back Hunger star Michael Fassbender!
9.12.2011
Also, if this is what wide releases look like, they're welcome to keep them: New Year's Eve, which takes the Valentine's Day/Love Actually concept of a big cast of moderate stars in a bunch of little romcom plots and takes it well beyond the point that it should have stopped. Also The Sitter, an R-rated comedy with Jonah Hill that was apparently the best thing David Gordon Green could think to do after hitting what was apparently not a career low with Your Highness.
Thankfully, there are limited releases enough to make up for it: Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, which has a lot to live up to, but the talent to do it; Young Adult, with re-teams Diablo Cody and Jason Reitman in a pairing that is hopefully going to be good for both of them after the terrible things that happened when they parted ways; and hell, let's even throw in W.E. since even though I cannot imagine how a costume drama directed by Madonna can possibly be good, I am desperately curious.
16.12.2011
I didn't like Guy Ritchie's edgy steampunk Sherlock Holmes, and would ordinarily say that its sequel, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, seems like an awful idea, but I am still desperately hoping that it wins the weekend box office and I have to go see it. Because if it doesn't, then I'll have to go see Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked, which is undoubtedly the saddest thought that I've been plagued by all year, and coming up to it is like nearing the date of your death sentence.
Five days before its actual wide release, Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol makes an IMAX-exclusive run; nothing about the film seems like it can possibly be compelling (the franchise was never truly great to start with, and Tom Cruise just keeps getting older), but shit, live-action Brad Bird. That's me in the seats the second I can possibly get there.
Limited: Roman Polanksi's apparently just kinda OK adaptation of the much-loved play Carnage. So much for a post-Ghost Writer career renaissance.
21.12.2011
The pokiness of the month generally is resoundling answered with one of the fullest release weeks of the whole year, split between three days. Besides M:I-GP breaking big, there is also The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, which is undoubtedly going to improve on the middling Swedish original, though I am not certain that there is a masterpiece to be carved out of this material; nor am I thrilled that ordinarily-slow director David Fincher has cranked out a second movie in hardly more than a year. But the teaser trailer was one of the best things of 2011, so that's that.
Far, far more promising, by my lights, is The Adventures of Tintin, which is in one breath Steven Spielberg's first animated film, first mo-cap film,and first 3-D movie; and deep down inside, I think that the fact I am excited for those three things does not actually change the fact that I am not actually excited by Tintin itself, especially being that I am an American and thus have no real attachment to the character.
23.12.2011
Saddled with an uncertain release date in the middle of nowhere, We Bought a Zoo looks to bring Cameron Crowe back into the world, apparently by replacing tyrannical quirkiness with uncut schmaltz, but maybe the trailers are just desperate to attract a family audience.
25.12.2011
I'll tell you what says Christmas to me: a sci-fi horror thriller, like The Darkest Hour. Shit, can anything be more horrible than being the Christmas Day counter-programming?
The real players are two of the biggest likely Oscar players of the year, assuming they both don't suck: Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, the fourth feature by three-time Best Director nominee Stephen Daldry, whose best film was a tepidly charming British dramedy, and who's worst was The Reader, one of the absolute worst Best Picture nominees of all time. I am prepared to be let down. The actual wide release film is War Horse, the second Spielberg movie in four days. It is undoubtedly going to be so damn sentimental that it will hurt, but I'm more excited for this one than Tintin anyway; heck, I'm probably more excited for this than any other December film, which says more about the month than anything. But I have never been much averse to letting my emotions be ruthlessly played by Steven Spielberg.
28.12.2012
A lousy release date for a mini-budget indie, but I have it on good authority that Pariah is damn fine, and if the best it could get was a Hail Mary qualifying run, then so be it.
30.12.2012
And so the year ends with Meryl Streep playing a nice version of Margaret Thatcher in The Iron Lady.
Oh, and one of the most wildly praised films of the year released anywhere in the world is crapped out to make a desperate bid at the Oscars: Iranian director Asghar Farhadi's political firebomb A Separation. Hope y'all live in a tiny segment of either LA or New York if you want to see this presumptive masterwork! Also, fuck you, Sony Pictures Classics.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Elements of a great ending
By Joe Moore
We’ve had plenty of posts here at TKZ about story beginnings. As a matter of fact, we invite submissions and devote the month of March to critiquing the first page of your stories. Beginnings are so important because they set the hook and grab the reader.
But what about endings? Are they as important as beginnings? After all, they occur after the big finale, the gripping climax, the roaring finish. In a way, we can think of endings as anticlimactic. And yet, they have an important function to perform in any story.
First, the ending should resolve anything that was not addressed during the climax. Once the conflict between the protagonist and antagonist is put to bed, what’s left must be brought together as a resolution in the ending. There must be closure to anything still hanging in the reader’s mind.
The ending also answers the story question. Since the story question usually deals with character growth or change, the ending must make sure the story question is answered.
Let’s say that the main character had to stand by and watch his family perish in a terrible accident that he inadvertently caused. The story question might be: will he ever forgive himself and have the courage to find love again and perhaps start a new family? The actual plot might deal with something totally different, but along the way he finds a new love interest. Once the climax occurs and the plot is resolved, the reader must discover the answer to the story question. It has to be made clear in the ending. In most stories, the main character takes a journey, whether it’s physical, mental or spiritual. How he completes the journey is the answer to the story question and must be resolved in the ending.
Another function of the ending is to bring some sense of normalcy back to the characters’ lives. It can be the restoring of how things were before the journey began or it can be the establishment of a new normal. Either way, it must be resolved in the ending. Our hero has found a new love and plans to start a new family. It’s his new normal and the reader must understand the changes that he went through to establish the new normal.
If the story contains a theme, message or moral, the ending is where it should be reinforced. Not every story has an underlying theme, but if it does, it must be clarified in the ending. This way the reader can close the book with the feeling that the theme or message was accomplished or confirmed. The main character(s) got it, and so did the reader. Even if the reader doesn’t agree with the message, it has to be confirmed in his or her mind what it was, and if it was completed.
The end resolution of the theme or message must be in sync with the story. For instance, if the theme is to accept a spiritual belief in the existence of a greater power in the universe, the plot and characters must touch upon or address the idea somewhere along the way so the end resolution confirms that they have changed their beliefs to support or at least admit to the theme.
The ending should also cause readers to feel the way the writer intended them to feel. Whatever the emotional response the reader should experience, the ending is where it’s confirmed. After all, the writer is the captain of the ship. He steers the story in a specific direction—a direction he wants the reader to go. The reader is a passenger along for the journey. It’s important that in the end, the ship dock at the right port. Worse case is that it doesn’t dock at all. That’s the result of a weak ending.
The ending is how you leave your reader. It’s the last impression. And it just might be the reason the reader wants to buy your next book. Or not.
Have you been disappointed with an ending to a book or a movie? Did you invest the time only to come away feeling betrayed? And what book or movie do you feel contained all the elements of a great ending and left you wanting more?
Real news
"US Census: One third of US population poor or near poor" (Debra Watson, WSWS):
One hundred million US residents—one third of the US population—live in households with perilously low incomes, according to a recent report from the US Census Bureau. The shocking figures were derived from the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), an alternate measure of poverty and income that was released in November.
That's really disturbing. OWS has taken up way too much press attention. All the outlets that have wasted so much time on OWS should be forced to spend one day on children living below poverty.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
One hundred million US residents—one third of the US population—live in households with perilously low incomes, according to a recent report from the US Census Bureau. The shocking figures were derived from the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), an alternate measure of poverty and income that was released in November.
The SPM has been under development by the Census Bureau, working with the National Academy of Sciences, since the mid-1990s. This is the first year it has been formally released. By law, it is not allowed to replace the official poverty level in determining funding levels for existing social programs.
Under the alternative measure the portion of the US population that is poor or near poor rises to 33 percent, up from 25 percent under the Census Bureau’s official measure.
In a comment to the New York Times, Trudi J. Renwick, the bureau’s chief poverty statistician, said, “These numbers are higher than we anticipated. There are more people struggling than the official numbers show.”
That's really disturbing. OWS has taken up way too much press attention. All the outlets that have wasted so much time on OWS should be forced to spend one day on children living below poverty.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
|
