YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR
There are some who might quibble about the taxes we pay in Canada. But I just got my wallet back in the mail. Apparently if you drop a wallet in a mailbox, the post office sends it to the address that the wallet seems to belong to.
It is a very nice welcome note on our return home!
Monday, January 10, 2005
Thursday, January 06, 2005
THE DA VINCI CODE
A bad bad book. I'm a little surprised it has done as well. It is a cheesily written pot-boiler, with paper thin cartoonish characters. Its plot twist and turns get progressively sillier, until it becomes too hard to suspend one's disbelief over them. And of course, the worst is that it is hard to put down because you want to know what the Big Secret is.
Of course, if you have to, you can read this book very very fast, because there is not much there beyond the plot and the secrets.
What seems to be driving this book is its game of secrets and ciphers. But they're not really hard ciphers and the secrets are quite silly. The plot revolves around some documents that would "prove" that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and had offspring whose descendants are alive today. Naturally evil elements in the Catholic Church are ready to murder and steal to keep this information suppressed, because it would ... well, I don't really know what it would do. But everyone in the book seems very concerned about what it would do. I doubt any fundamentalists Christians would believe evidence they didn't like, and I doubt any mainstream Christians would find their spirituality altered by what may or may not have happened in Judea two thousand years ago. I mean, it's not exactly the Ark of the Covenant as a superweapon...
If you want to see this sort of thing done really well, read Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash or Cryptonomicon. There's the same mix of esoteric ancient knowledge and modern technology. But the ancient stuff is more clever, and the modern tech is more imaginative.
I suspect though that people like The Da Vinci Code because it makes them feel smart to read it. It's very easy to read, and not at all hard to understand, and yet if you enter into it, you feel like you are smart for understanding its mysteries. You feel like you've learned some big secrets. If the book had real secrets and clever ciphers, it would be much harder to read. I don't think they'll be making a movie of Snow Crash any time soon. I think the Da Vinci Code flick is already in the works, though.
A bad bad book. I'm a little surprised it has done as well. It is a cheesily written pot-boiler, with paper thin cartoonish characters. Its plot twist and turns get progressively sillier, until it becomes too hard to suspend one's disbelief over them. And of course, the worst is that it is hard to put down because you want to know what the Big Secret is.
Of course, if you have to, you can read this book very very fast, because there is not much there beyond the plot and the secrets.
What seems to be driving this book is its game of secrets and ciphers. But they're not really hard ciphers and the secrets are quite silly. The plot revolves around some documents that would "prove" that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and had offspring whose descendants are alive today. Naturally evil elements in the Catholic Church are ready to murder and steal to keep this information suppressed, because it would ... well, I don't really know what it would do. But everyone in the book seems very concerned about what it would do. I doubt any fundamentalists Christians would believe evidence they didn't like, and I doubt any mainstream Christians would find their spirituality altered by what may or may not have happened in Judea two thousand years ago. I mean, it's not exactly the Ark of the Covenant as a superweapon...
If you want to see this sort of thing done really well, read Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash or Cryptonomicon. There's the same mix of esoteric ancient knowledge and modern technology. But the ancient stuff is more clever, and the modern tech is more imaginative.
I suspect though that people like The Da Vinci Code because it makes them feel smart to read it. It's very easy to read, and not at all hard to understand, and yet if you enter into it, you feel like you are smart for understanding its mysteries. You feel like you've learned some big secrets. If the book had real secrets and clever ciphers, it would be much harder to read. I don't think they'll be making a movie of Snow Crash any time soon. I think the Da Vinci Code flick is already in the works, though.
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
ROGUE TAXIDERMY
The Minnesota Association of Rogue Taxidermists is actually only three rogue taxidermists. But they mount the most amazing griffins, winged cats, and prehistorical mammals. And such.
I particularly like the work of Sarina Brewer. I'm tempted to get myself a griffin, but I'm not sure I'd really want even part of a dead cat in my loft....
Weird stuff goes on in the heartland! (Of course, MN voted for Walter Mondale...)
The Minnesota Association of Rogue Taxidermists is actually only three rogue taxidermists. But they mount the most amazing griffins, winged cats, and prehistorical mammals. And such.
I particularly like the work of Sarina Brewer. I'm tempted to get myself a griffin, but I'm not sure I'd really want even part of a dead cat in my loft....
Weird stuff goes on in the heartland! (Of course, MN voted for Walter Mondale...)
GOOD WORK TODAY
Hacked my way through the last of the new reel (replacing the reel I chucked out), and now I'm blasting into the third act of Draft Three. It feels good. Much darker, scarier, more adult. Not sure what I've done to the budget, but the movie has to first of all work -- a nicely budgeted movie that doesn't work is worth nothing, while a movie that's a bit too expensive has hope at least. Anyway, I'm not an expert on budgets, and there is more than one way to skin a cat.
(Incidentally, that expression refers to catfish. And there is more than one way to skin a catfish, I gather, catfish being notoriously hard to skin. I guess I can find out more if I manage to get to New Orleans this spring.)
Hacked my way through the last of the new reel (replacing the reel I chucked out), and now I'm blasting into the third act of Draft Three. It feels good. Much darker, scarier, more adult. Not sure what I've done to the budget, but the movie has to first of all work -- a nicely budgeted movie that doesn't work is worth nothing, while a movie that's a bit too expensive has hope at least. Anyway, I'm not an expert on budgets, and there is more than one way to skin a cat.
(Incidentally, that expression refers to catfish. And there is more than one way to skin a catfish, I gather, catfish being notoriously hard to skin. I guess I can find out more if I manage to get to New Orleans this spring.)
ABOUT MYTHIC
A reader writes in that Mythic, a very fine script by Ehren Kruger, sounds like the awful Reign of Fire. Well, only in that they're both contemporary dragon scripts. Kruger spent a lot of effort creating a believable situation in which one dragon assaults an island that is cut off from all communication with the mainland -- which means also cut off from the Air Force. The fire chief has to fight it with the weapons and tools he has available, and he's got nothing bigger than hunting rifles. He also had a nice metaphor -- the dragon is, in a sense, Mother Earth's revenge for our drilling for oil. In Reign of Fire you have a post-apocalyptic world in which people fight dragons with explosive arrows and win -- even though supposedly the dragons already beat the Royal Air Force. Ridiculous. It was nice to see the beautifully CGI'd dragons, but the story had nothing unique about it. And it wasn't about anything beyond fighting dragons.
I still want to see Mythic. I hope someone makes it.
A reader writes in that Mythic, a very fine script by Ehren Kruger, sounds like the awful Reign of Fire. Well, only in that they're both contemporary dragon scripts. Kruger spent a lot of effort creating a believable situation in which one dragon assaults an island that is cut off from all communication with the mainland -- which means also cut off from the Air Force. The fire chief has to fight it with the weapons and tools he has available, and he's got nothing bigger than hunting rifles. He also had a nice metaphor -- the dragon is, in a sense, Mother Earth's revenge for our drilling for oil. In Reign of Fire you have a post-apocalyptic world in which people fight dragons with explosive arrows and win -- even though supposedly the dragons already beat the Royal Air Force. Ridiculous. It was nice to see the beautifully CGI'd dragons, but the story had nothing unique about it. And it wasn't about anything beyond fighting dragons.
I still want to see Mythic. I hope someone makes it.
Sunday, January 02, 2005
THIRD DRAFT CONTINUES
I'm working away at the third draft of Unseen. The second draft was easy, but more than anything it showed the shortcomings of the story. This draft is much harder. I'm always stopping to work things out on my little tin notebook. What started as a logical but rather farfetched narrative is getting denser, richer and less farfetched. But keeping it logical at the same time has proven tricky.
I dropped a whole reel (10 pages) out of the second act today: two of the least convincing sequences which, I'm happy to report, turned out to be unnecessary and replaceable. I'm getting better at chucking out stuff that doesn't quite work. I'm getting more critical of my writing as I go on, less willing to let lame stuff pass.
When you're writing on spec, a "draft" is just the writing that occurs between when you send it to someone for comments. In other words there's no such thing as a "draft" really. How much has to change before there's a draft? Back when people retyped things, the term must have meant more.
The concept of a "draft" is more meaningful, and therefore more problematic, in the professional world. Theoretically you are supposed to get paid for each draft, and theoretically producers get to give you notes only once per draft, as you move on to the second draft. Many producers balk at this and want there to be "revisions" of drafts. The WGC and WGA will always back the writer on this if it gets to that point. But on the other hand you don't want to turn in a draft that isn't good. Usually I resolve this problem by getting comments from other people so I can go and revise my draft before turning it in to the producer. But other writers seem content to revise endlessly on the same ticket. Producers love this devotion to the cause. Unfortunately it does not generate income. I'm not sure there's a real answer to this conundrum. You read about writers doing 20 drafts of something in Hollywood, and I doubt they're getting paid scale for each draft. But these are also writers who are getting paid six digits for opening up their laptops; so it works out pretty well for everybody. In TV it's not a problem, because everyone gets paid scale for their scripts, plus a very respectable story editing salary if they're rewriting on staff. It's the feature film world where everything's a little bit more messy...
I'm working away at the third draft of Unseen. The second draft was easy, but more than anything it showed the shortcomings of the story. This draft is much harder. I'm always stopping to work things out on my little tin notebook. What started as a logical but rather farfetched narrative is getting denser, richer and less farfetched. But keeping it logical at the same time has proven tricky.
I dropped a whole reel (10 pages) out of the second act today: two of the least convincing sequences which, I'm happy to report, turned out to be unnecessary and replaceable. I'm getting better at chucking out stuff that doesn't quite work. I'm getting more critical of my writing as I go on, less willing to let lame stuff pass.
When you're writing on spec, a "draft" is just the writing that occurs between when you send it to someone for comments. In other words there's no such thing as a "draft" really. How much has to change before there's a draft? Back when people retyped things, the term must have meant more.
The concept of a "draft" is more meaningful, and therefore more problematic, in the professional world. Theoretically you are supposed to get paid for each draft, and theoretically producers get to give you notes only once per draft, as you move on to the second draft. Many producers balk at this and want there to be "revisions" of drafts. The WGC and WGA will always back the writer on this if it gets to that point. But on the other hand you don't want to turn in a draft that isn't good. Usually I resolve this problem by getting comments from other people so I can go and revise my draft before turning it in to the producer. But other writers seem content to revise endlessly on the same ticket. Producers love this devotion to the cause. Unfortunately it does not generate income. I'm not sure there's a real answer to this conundrum. You read about writers doing 20 drafts of something in Hollywood, and I doubt they're getting paid scale for each draft. But these are also writers who are getting paid six digits for opening up their laptops; so it works out pretty well for everybody. In TV it's not a problem, because everyone gets paid scale for their scripts, plus a very respectable story editing salary if they're rewriting on staff. It's the feature film world where everything's a little bit more messy...
L'ANNEE PASSEE
This time last year, Lisa was very very pregnant and we were sitting in front of the fire wondering what the baby would be like. We knew she was a girl, but we had no idea what she'd be like. You can only tell so much from kicking!
Now Jesse Anne is almost a year old. She's taken a few steps on her own, and she's just started to try to say words. She has the most wonderful personality of any baby I've ever met. I wonder what someone so delighted to be alive will grow up into. I never thought I would be so lucky.
It has been a terrific year. It started in pain and stress professionally, but that got more or less put to bed. I had a great summer in South Africa, and now I'm working on a screenplay I'm delighted with. I've got interest in one of my TV pitches, and I've got another pitch all but polished. I've also got a book proposal I think will sell. Lisa's really learned how to work on a story with me. She has good ideas and good criticisms. (Some of them are great ideas.)
Lisa sold her book proposal ...
Hunter's had a terrific year at school and has really blossomed as a person, and my relationship with him is all I could have hoped for...
My marriage is all I ever wanted from a relationship: love and friendship and passion and a few other things that are none of your business ...
The Goddess has been good to us this year.
Thank you, Goddess!
I hope your last year has been as good, and if not, I hope this year will be.
This time last year, Lisa was very very pregnant and we were sitting in front of the fire wondering what the baby would be like. We knew she was a girl, but we had no idea what she'd be like. You can only tell so much from kicking!
Now Jesse Anne is almost a year old. She's taken a few steps on her own, and she's just started to try to say words. She has the most wonderful personality of any baby I've ever met. I wonder what someone so delighted to be alive will grow up into. I never thought I would be so lucky.
It has been a terrific year. It started in pain and stress professionally, but that got more or less put to bed. I had a great summer in South Africa, and now I'm working on a screenplay I'm delighted with. I've got interest in one of my TV pitches, and I've got another pitch all but polished. I've also got a book proposal I think will sell. Lisa's really learned how to work on a story with me. She has good ideas and good criticisms. (Some of them are great ideas.)
Lisa sold her book proposal ...
Hunter's had a terrific year at school and has really blossomed as a person, and my relationship with him is all I could have hoped for...
My marriage is all I ever wanted from a relationship: love and friendship and passion and a few other things that are none of your business ...
The Goddess has been good to us this year.
Thank you, Goddess!
I hope your last year has been as good, and if not, I hope this year will be.
HAPPY OUTCOMES
If you needed anything more to prove that people love happy endings, there's the article today about how 10 foreign tourists survived the tsunami on an island. Every day the death toll races up another ten thousand or so faceless Indonesians, but ten white people luck out on an island, and it's news. No doubt someone already has a movie of the week in the works.
We want happy endings for people like us. We want Saving Private Lynch. We want stories about a few people we can understand. The grand sweep of events, well, as one of the OJ jurors said about the DNA evidence, "That's hard." Hard to grasp.
If you needed anything more to prove that people love happy endings, there's the article today about how 10 foreign tourists survived the tsunami on an island. Every day the death toll races up another ten thousand or so faceless Indonesians, but ten white people luck out on an island, and it's news. No doubt someone already has a movie of the week in the works.
We want happy endings for people like us. We want Saving Private Lynch. We want stories about a few people we can understand. The grand sweep of events, well, as one of the OJ jurors said about the DNA evidence, "That's hard." Hard to grasp.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)