Category: Writing Page 8 of 24

On Showgirls, And Marcus Aurelius, And How They Are Connected

I referred to the Monty Python Spanish Inquisition Sketch the other day (in this post), and that led me to think about its appearance in the film Sliding Doors. Hey, that’s how my mind works.

For those of you who haven’t seen this film (and I’ve only seen it once, at the time of its cinema release), John Hannah recites lines from the Spanish Inquisition sketch to a table of hysterically impressed friends, including Gwyneth Paltrow – in fact, his Python performance kind of forms part of his wooing of her character in the film. The people around the table are laughing a lot at this bit in the film, including women, which didn’t ring true for me, as I was the kind of spotty indoorsy teenager who’d learn Monty Python sketches off by heart, and as much as women like a laugh and like comedy, very few of them are particularly keen to hear you recite other people’s comedy material. Especially a sketch as reliant on visual aspects and incidental music as that one.

Anyway, as an aspect of the film in which we’re supposed to think Hannah’s character’s funny or likeable, it didn’t work for me. In a similar way, I once found myself watching Showgirls to see if it was as bad as it was said to be (it was), and about twenty minutes in (I think – it was just before the first ad break, and I switched it off then) there was a big song and dance number. The main character, played by Elizabeth Berkeley, watches this show on stage, and is utterly captivated by it. I, on the other hand, thought it was a pretty risible sequence featuring semi-naked people cavorting amidst model volcanoes.

I turned off the TV at this point, as it seemed pretty clear that the main character was going to be inspired to want to do this kind of dancing, and I would find myself laughing at it, and that would just be mean. Well, if I’m honest, I wouldn’t have minded a laugh, but as I was sharing a house at the time, I didn’t want anyone to come into the lounge and think I was watching it for the nipples instead of the giggles.

Hmm, those last three paragraphs make it sound as if I’m just having a go at other people to make my point (and I do have one), so let me share a similar confession about my own writing; some years ago, I wrote a novel (unpublished, and with hindsight that’s probably fair) called Fall From Grace. It was essentially a re-telling of the fall of Lucifer, set within a modern-day Evangelical Broadcasting Network – members of staff rebel against the existing regime, get kicked out, seek to take revenge, that sort of thing.

However, in order to make the rebels into underdogs, I needed the evangelical TV station to be successful, and try as I might I just couldn’t write the details of the broadcasts in a way that made this seem likely. Mainly because deep down I couldn’t see a way that, in modern-day England, such a venture would have enormous success – and as a result, the story pretty much asked the reader to take it on trust that, no, really, I promise you, it was very popular. Unfortunately, that creates a situation rather like this:

Reader: These religious broadcasts don’t strike me as that awe-inspiring.
Me: Well, they are. Trust me.
Reader: They wouldn’t convert me.
Me: Well, the people in the book are quite taken with them.
Reader: I don’t know why.
Me: Look, they’re really impressed. Take my word for it.
Reader: I suppose I have to, for the story to make sense.
Me: Yes, you do.
Reader: Hmph.

It doesn’t really matter if a story contains a minor element that doesn’t quite ring true, but if it’s a plot element or a catalyst or a personality trait which actually affects the direction of the story, there’s a more fundamental problem; like watching one of those fight scenes in films where the cuts are just so insanely fast that you can’t tell what’s going on until one person’s left standing and the others are on the ground, you end up just having to accept that it’s happened, even if you don’t know how or why, but of course it introduces a seed of disbelief into your mind, and much of the time stories require that disbelief, like the Brooklyn Bridge, to be well and truly suspended.

Otherwise, you end up just having to take other characters’ word for it; John Hannah’s character is funny, the show in Showgirls really is impressive, and in my personal example, millions of people do tune in every week to watch a religious TV show… and if you don’t believe what the story wants you to believe, or feel the reaction that you’re apparently expected to feel, you’ll be jerked right out of the experience of the story, and that’s never a good thing.

Looking at how this should be done, I watched the first episode of The West Wing again yesterday, and – possible spoilers ahoy – we don’t get to meet the President himself until very near the end of the episode. Instead of the viewer being told for the best part of an hour that he’s quick-witted, supportive of his staff, and articulate, we’re shown it – President Bartlet demonstrates this in a couple of minutes, and at the end of the scene (indeed the episode) you can see why his staff are so loyal to him. That, as Mr Punch would say, is the way to do it.

The Roman Emperor and philosopher Marcus Aurelius once said “Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one”, and I think the same applies to aspects of plot or character as detailed above. Is a character meant to be funny? Show them being funny, not other people telling them they’re funny. Is something in a story meant to be amazing or startling, and send people’s lives in a new direction? Then the story needs to show it being amazing or startling.

In his (very good) screenwriting book Save The Cat, Blake Snyder stresses the importance of making the reader/viewer care about the main character as early as possible by having them do something funny, likable or heroic in the early scenes – by having them, as it were, ‘save the cat’ on page one, and I think he’s spot-on about this.

As is so often the case, I won’t pretend that I’m making a devastating insight about a requirement of writing here; however, I was quite pleased when all the above churned around inside my head, and I finally realised that all of the examples which sprang to my mind all point to one fundamental principle of writing: Show, Don’t Tell.

I Really Wish I Could Explain Why I Find This So Amusing, But… Well, See For Yourself

(Found in a number of places on the internet.)

Well, it makes me laugh.

And that’s why I shared it – because if there’s one thing this blog is all about, it’s spreading laughter and joy and love and peace and tea and biscuits. Oh, and it’s about writing. But that’s still one thing, if we use the Inquisitional numbering system.

Speaking of matters writerly, it seems that the CBBC Competition had over 700 entries. Crikey.

Still, I’m keeping my fingers crossed… though if I do get through, I won’t hurry to claim it’s a case of the cream rising to the top – after all, the scum also rises, as Hemingway nearly put it.

Still, we’ll see how things go, and of course if I get invited to the next stage (a workshop), I’ll be sure to talk about it in the usual self-hyping fashion here on the blog. Because if there’s one thing this blog is about, it’s… ah, you guessed it.

I Wouldn’t Normally Do This Kind Of Thing…

… by which I mean I don’t usually point out writing competitions which charge you to enter, but I thought this one might be of interest.

Manchester Metropolitan University are running the Manchester Writing Competition, which has an impressive first prize of £10,000.

The deadline is 7 August, the entry fee is £15, and entries are limited to 5000 words, but other than that restriction it’s pretty much a case of write what you like… something which longtime readers will know is one of the tenets of this blog.

I’m not entirely keen on the fact that you have to pay, but then again it’s a college, so they probably don’t have loads of cash to spare – though on the other hand being a college should also ensure they don’t do a midnight flit with all the dosh, what with having buildings and students and being fairly well-established and everything.

Anyway, hope this is of use – not sure if I’ll enter myself, but if you do, good luck!

Harrison Ford Appeared In The Episode Mystery Of The Blues, Though Those Bookends Weren’t Cut (Not Entirely Surprisingly)

As it was – notionally – Henry Jones Junior’s 110th Birthday yesterday, and following a recent re-watch of Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade, I thought I’d just mention a recentish Lucasfilm re-edit of existing material – less glaring than Greedo shooting first, granted, but still rather strange, to my mind.

The 1992-1996 TV series The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles wasn’t a wildly popular show – probably, I suspect, because it often came over as an uncomfortable mix of entertainment and historical fact; the young Jones meets a lot of historical figures (Lawrence of Arabia, Hemingway, Picasso and so on), and if you don’t know who they are or know their historical significance, it’s kind of reduced as a show.

Anyway, it was shown in various slots on UK TV, and I rather liked it, partly because episodes were often bookended by ‘present day’ (that is, early 1990s) encounters between people and an aged Indiana Jones, played by George Hall. As you can see from the picture accompanying this post, Jones in his 90s appeared to have lost an eye, which of course leads to the question of how, suggesting a story yet to be told.

And yet, rather inexplicably, Lucasfilm (presumably with the blessing of George Lucas – also pictured, he’s the one without the fedora) have edited out the ‘Old Indy’ aspects of the show for the DVD release. It’s not fatal to the story by any stretch of the imagination, though I rather liked the suggestive nature of the missing eye and facial scar (even as it does remove the suspense of the films, as we know that Jones will survive to a ripe old age), but it does strike me as rather symptomatic of a tendency to tinker which Lucas (and his pal Mr Spielberg) seems unable to resist.

Ultimately, the films etc are Lucas’s baby, and so I think that one has to concede that if he wants to add or delete stuff, then he’s free to do so; the usual excuse given is that it takes it closer to the original vision, though I must admit that if I was responsible for some of the most well-loved films of the last 50 years or so, I’d probably tend to leave well enough alone – however I suspect it’s the fate of creative types to only be able to see the flaws in their work, whilst if it finds an audience, they will probably focus on the merits.

I’m increasingly feeling that there is a tacit agreement between creators and their audience, though most of my feelings about this boil down to simple commandments (thou shalt not deus ex machina, thou shall know where thy story is going, that kind of thing) than to the exact nature of ‘entitlement’ within the relationship; as Neil Gaiman recently pointed out, the creator “is not your bitch”, and in the final analysis I suppose it’d best just to pretend there isn’t a new film or book or revamped version of the old one if you don’t like it. I know that’s easier said than done, and sometimes it’s bewildering how a creator themselves seems to lose sight of the aspects of their work which resonate with the audience, and indeed which made them popular (examples which spring readily to my mind would be the novel Hannibal, and Jewel’s album 0304). But – as Gaiman again points out – we’re talking about other human beings here, and they’re as prone to making errors of judgment as you and I.

It may be the sunshine outside, or the fact I have a cup of tea to hand, which is making me less snarly about this subject than usual; on the other hand, it may well be the fact that the excised Young Indiana Jones material has been lovingly compiled by some kind folks and placed on youtube in chunks such as this, and by sticking the letters ‘pwn’ before the web address, it’s possible to download the footage.

Um, you do know about that ‘pwn’ trick, right? If not, then I hope that me imparting that to you has made it feel like it was worth wading through the above rambling nonsense…

It’s Wednesday, It’s Just Past Five, It’s…

… a handful of minutes past the deadline for the BBC CBBC Writing Competition.

So, did any of you fine people enter? According to Royal Mail (yes, I know – hardly the most reliable of sources), my script was delivered this morning, and I know that Lawrence, Antonia and Dom have all entered too, so that’s at least four people. Any more?

Like many of the folks linked above, I rather enjoyed writing my script – which is called, at Mrs Soanes’s suggestion, The Secret Life Of A Bookworm – and was fairly pleased with how it turned out, even if, what with it being the first of a possible series, I had to get some exposition out of the way before I could get to the action. Still, I hope I did it pretty well, and I keep my fingers crossed about hearing back from the Beeb for the next stage, a workshop on Tuesday 28 July for the select(ed) few.

On the subject of hearing back, I see from the BBC Writersroom site that they intend to let people know if they’re through to the next round on Friday 10 July – that is, next Friday. Quite soon, then, but that’s certainly better than keeping people waiting.

And now this deadline is past, it’s on, on, ON to the next bit of writing! To the novel, and don’t spare the clauses*!

*Grammar, I mean, not Santa’s family.

Writer’s Blog (See What I Did There? Oh, My Ribs)

Just a brief but self-indulgent post to share how I’m doing with my entry for the BBC CBBC writing thingy.

I’m making fairly good progress with it, I think, and hope this weekend to sit down with Mrs Soanes and have a ‘table read’, as ’twere a proper script for screen or stage.

As I go along, I’m painfully aware of bits which need work (exposition, though a necessary evil, will need to be pruned – or, rather hacked right back with a metaphorical scythe), but I’m ploughing on, and reminding myself that the fun of redrafting lies ahead – as I keep saying to myself, “get it written, and then get it right” (a saying I’m sure I’ve nicked from someone else, but offhand I can’t recall who it might have been).

Whilst the script’s flaws are currently all too visible to me, one thing I’ve been quite pleased with is the interaction betwene the two main characters – though I’m painfully aware that dialogue can easily be overwritten and end up being more fun for the writer and actors than the audience, I think I’m doing an okay job of capturing the speech patterns of two young people – two girls, no less, as I’m always keen to try to refute the assertion that men can’t write female characters (I don’t believe it any more than I believe the reverse to be true).

Anyway, back to it – how’s everyone else doing? Has anyone sent theirs in yet? I know I’m cutting it fine-ish with the deadline being Wednesday, but I like to think mine won’t be the last entry to arrive at the BBC…

William Akers Is In London To Help You Spot Mistakes In Your Writing

I got an e-mail the other day from a chap called William Akers, asking if I’d mention his forthcoming talk on the blog. Given that Will’s a writer with actual produced films to his credit, PLUS the fact that he worked on Eerie, Indiana and Lois and Clark (two TV programmes I like), it would have been churlish to say no. And whilst I’m frequently childish, I like to think I’m not churlish. Well, if I can avoid it. anyway.

So: Will’s talk is called Fatal Errors New (and experienced!) Writers Make! and it’s being held at Met Film School (Ealing Studios, Ealing Green, London W5 5EP) on Thursday 2nd July between 6:30 and 8:30 p.m. Entry costs a mere £15, which you can pay on the door, though you need to book ahead of time by e-mailing beka[at]metfilm.co.uk. Let’s face it, you could easily spend that on a round of drinks (or a couple of coffees at London prices), so it’s quite the bargain.

You can find full details of the session here. Definitely worth going along if you can make it, I’d say (I’m already booked that night for a family event – pah).

Will is also the author of the attention-grabbingly-titled Your Screenplay Sucks!, pictured above, which you can read more about here, and buy from the usual places (and some of the more unusual ones too, I’d wager). Will also has a blog, which has solid advice on matters writing-related, such as the following on the idea of selling ‘an idea’ for a film:

Someone who has sold screenplays for lots of money can sell an idea, if they have a famous actor attached. Have you sold screenplays for lots of money? Have you got a famous actor attached?

If the answer to either question is “No,” then shut up already and write your script.

With that in mind, I’ll shut up and get back to writing. Hope that you can make it to the talk, though, it sounds like it’ll be useful – if you do, be sure to let me know all about it!

By Way Of Sharing: Some Writing Links

Merlin Mann on getting started (via John August)

Billy Mernit on why your first draft may well resemble food after it’s been digested and expelled (via David Lemon)

And Neil Gaiman’s advice to authors:
“How do you do it? You do it. You write. You finish what you write.”

And whilst I wouldn’t really recommend watching the film pictured here, its title can be seen as a prompt as much as a play on words. Oh, and it does mean I include a picture of Sherilyn Fenn, which may not be a bad thing.

How To Get Ahead In The Clouds, If Not Advertising

Many of you are more tech-savvy than I am, so you may know about this already, or indeed be using something similar if not better, but I thought it was worth sharing just in case…

There’s a fair amount of talk about ‘cloud computing’ at the moment, with a lot of businesses looking into (if not necessarily venturing into) using services over the internet, as opposed to running the locally; in practice, a lot of us do it on a daily basis – in fact, I’m pretty much doing it now, using Blogger’s setup over the internet as opposed to having blogging software of my own on my computer.

So a fair number of people – especially those who work for themselves, on the road or whatever – are looking into the idea that they don’t necessarily need to have a computer which can do loads of things, as they could access the various facilities over the internet instead. So, instead of having a PC or Mac with 500GB of memory, you can have far less capacity and access a number of services and programmes over the web. Well, that’s my typically basic understanding of it, anyway.

The reason I’m posting about it here is because – a year or so after it was made available – I’ve just discovered about Skydrive, which allows users of Windows Live to store up to 25 GB of files online for free. I’ve started using it as a virtual briefcase, as it were, shuffling documents from one place to another, but without the fuss of memory sticks or CDs or e-mail attachment limits. I think you can open up certain folders to other users and the like, but I haven’t played with any of those features yet.

I’m thinking, though, that this may be useful to some of you (as it is to me) as a way of backing-up scripts or other files. As I say, I’m no techy-type, but plonking a script ‘in the cloud’ could be a good way to avoid losing a long-laboured-over bit of work just because your computer has ‘a moment’ or dies altogether.

Anyway, thought I’d share this with you – I’m referring to the Windows version of it here, which may be useful if you have a Hotmail or Windows Live account, but I’m sure there are other items available on iGoogle and the like, and I know there are certainly services like this which you can pay a monthly fee for. So it might be worth you having a gander to see if there’s something of this nature which might be useful to you… assuming, as I say, that you’re not already doing this sort of thing already.

Oh Ho Ho, It’s Magic, Y’know? Never Believe It’s Not So

As it’s just over a fortnight before the CBBC Writing Opportunity closing date, I thought I’d just ramble a bit about – er, sorry, I mean share – the thought process behind my entry-to-be, which currently rejoices in the title of ‘Title to be decided’.

The target audience is 6-12 year olds, and so I set to thinking about what kind of thing would be suitable for them; my gut feeling was that whilst it needed to be something which would be relatable in terms of setting, making the focus of it about school or family life might make it a bit too close to reality. I’m probably showing my age here, but I was thinking in terms of the general tone of the programme Jonny Briggs (which is not about the actor from Coronation Street, it’s a TV show from the 80s).

That said, I liked the idea of one aspect of it being a bit strange and somehow fantastical, in case it be more like a mirror than a viewing-glass, as it were – and that Alice-ism isn’t entirely accidental; I read a quote from Bryan Fuller on Dan Owen’s blog about how he wanted to get Heroes

“back to the basic principle of ordinary people in an extraordinary world and how these characters are relatable to us and what we would do if we were in their situations, and really grounding it in that conceit”

… which doesn’t quite ring true to me (though I stopped watching it at the end of the first season), as I thought the hook of Heroes was that it was extraordinary people in an ordinary world: the old cliche of real-world superheroes (well, it’s a cliche in comics since the mid-1980s, anyway, slightly less in other media).

Anyway, I feel I want TTBD (as nobody’s calling it) to be real-world-grounded (so I don’t have to spend forever on the setup), and maybe have something a bit unusual happening to an ordinary character, so we see him or her react in a way we might react ourselves. In a way, I guess, this is a bit like those novels which are referred to as being ‘Magic Realism’, which (from my limited knowledge of such things) tend to feature the real world with a slight twist.

Mind you, as Gene Wolfe pointed out,”Magic realism is fantasy written by people who speak Spanish”, so perhaps I shouldn’t kid myself that there’s anything all fancy about my idea.

On the other hand, the CBBC Q&A tonight may well mean that I dump the notes that have resulted from the above, and end up having to start all over again and send in something a bit more rushed and unlikely to win… see what I did there ? I set up my excuses early.

Or, as writers like to call it, I foreshadowed a later event.

I only hope that’s not the full extent of my storytelling ability.

Page 8 of 24

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén