Archive for August, 2009
Monday, August 31st, 2009
Arkham at ‘im (two cross-platform thingies I like)
Just a quick post tonight. The monologues are coming along slowly but surely. I think I’ve realised what has to go and, as is often the case, it is because I am trying to do too much in the page count I have - but I think I’ve cracked a better way to structure (and have cut out some of the crapper gags) so that they shall be finished. Oh yes.
. . . . .
But, in the meantime, here’s a few new online extras I’ve spotted. The recently released Batman: Arkham Asylum game is definitely one of the reasons why I’m asking for an X-Box 360 for Xmas. I thought I was going to have to make do with reading people’s impressed-sounding tweets all weekend but then I saw this little informational site for the titular asylum:
It’s brilliant. So thorough. I wish I’d been there soon as, presumably, the build-up to the game’s release would have factored into its updates.
Similarly, you may have heard about the new Bruce Willis sci-fi actioner Surrogates coming later this year. I must admit that I thought ‘well, might be alright for a Saturday night’ - but there’s a fun little feature on the site to let you ‘choose your surrogate‘. Have a little play.
I find both of these interesting as the Arham site makes an effort to make the fantasy of Batman seem more plausible and realistic whereas Surrogates is taking us away from reality into the future. I think there’s a question about how these actually expand the story world - or is it just obligatory these days?
However, one has me even more hooked on buying a game for a console I don’t even own and the other has caught more attention for a film I wasn’t too fussed about. Do either of these do anything for you?
Oh, and in other news, I caught the giant spider-beast that has been stalking my flat for the last week. No need to burn down the flat now 
Sunday, August 30th, 2009
Vampires on a Bloody Sunday
Well, a cloudy Sunday anyway. I’m spending the day polishing the monologues for the Barbican show of They Only Come at Night: Visions for the end of October. But in the meantime, here’s a sneak preview from the Salford show starting next week.
Slung Low are busy assembling the set at the Lowry as I type and I really can’t wait to see the finished show. If you’re planning to go (and I hope you are) please book your tickets fast as several nights are close to selling out.
Hopefully see you there and hope the appearance of my monotone excuse for a voice in the soundtrack doesn’t ruin the experience for you
. . . . .
And just to prove that I do occasionally do something other than fret about writing, blog about it and then fret about blogging, me and the lovely Heather went out for a belated birthday dinner for our friends Rob and Vanessa last night (Rob produced my horror short ‘The Emaciated Man’) at a Mexican restaurant (where I ended up ordering a pizza 
)
As we were the first to arrive, here’s a rather cruel shot of Heather all on her lonely own.
Heh heh heh
Friday, August 28th, 2009
POLL: How do you like your Coens?
After a bit of a crappy day, I treated myself to watching Burn After Reading which I never saw at the cinema as I’d not heard great things. True to form, I really enjoyed it. I do like a spot of dark comedy, mind you but I thought they had a really light touch with its classy contrivances and mean spirit.
But I can see how it’s not everyone - and that’s pretty much an ethos for the Coens in general, isn’t it?
I sure as hell get annoyed when film buffs automatically adore a new Coen movie before its even out but I also think there are a lot of audiences who won’t even give them a go. I’m possibly a different Coen Bros. fan in that my favourites aren’t most peoples’.
(but do bear in mind that ‘favourite’ doesn’t necessarily mean ‘best’ before people start yelling at me )
But what do you think? Do you get tired of people banging on about the brothers odd? Or is the gap between Coen Brothers films a time when you rarely head to the cinema? Or somewhere in between?
Loading ...I’d love to know which your favourites are too. There’s probably also a rule somewhere that you HAVE to like a film that stars John Goodman. If there isn’t there should be! Happy friday, y’all.
Thursday, August 27th, 2009
Script Scaffolding (Or ‘what’s propping up your script… but also holding it down?’)
As I’ve mentioned in past posts, a feature film project of mine is currently being guniea-pigged by the Scriptfactory as they train their next generation of expert script developers.
Very exciting and useful for me but last Monday I was sitting in Notting Hill for what should have been a two hour meeting but stretched out to four and a half hours of my story treatment being… well, let’s just say there’s some work to be done
But my picture of a suicidal Norville Barnes above isn’t meant to represent me after the meeting but, for those who’ve seen The Hudsucker Proxy, the strange forces that unexpectedly effect what happens to Norville at the end of the film. For all the stuff I am now cutting (entire sub-plots, set-pieces, characters and a big re-think tonally) I think both me and my developer Brenda still have faith in the idea due to the core concept and central relationship between the two leads.
What I realised though was that the film still stands up as an idea without all of these things. When a film is in its early stages, it’s very easy to think up all sorts of cool ideas and bits and pieces and then try and lasso them all together with your premise and theme.
Which doesn’t work.
It might just be me but I don’t think so. Anyone trying to write has probably picked up several structural ‘rules’ from books or gurus giving us all the answers to writing. So, when I’m thinking of my idea, instantly the back of my brain is thinking ‘ooh and wouldn’t it be cool if this happened at the end/end of act two/mid-point moment of no return’ etc etc.
But, having done that, I now realise that I’m desperately trying to crowbar my central character arcs around these big moments which is the wrong way round. My characters need to drive the plot and create what happens to make sure it feels real. As much as I came away from the meeting petrified that I had no bloody clue what happens after Act One, I do have a much clearer idea of what the characters want to happen so just need to put obstacles in their path and see what happens.
We know that we’ll always end up having to cut our favourite line or scene, but I can’t stress enough how clearly I can now see the premise of my idea now that it is uncluttered by the ’script scaffolding’ I’ve wedged all around it. In terms of plot, I’m now back to square one and a blank page. But, without the scaffolding obscuring view, I hope that I’ll be able to see what actually belongs in the next draft that I will be handing in soon.
I may also have to do a post about how to take four and a half hours of criticism on the chin sometime…but I’m still trying to figure that one out myself 
Wednesday, August 19th, 2009
(Part Two and a half: Suddenly Sci-Fi)
(Hadn’t realised quite how massive my last post was so I’ve split it into two)
CONTAINS SPOILERS for The Forgotten and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
Changing the subject, The Forgotten annoyed a great deal of audiences by suddenly turning all sci-fi. I think the problem here was the set-up which sold itself on being ‘either I’m going mad or things can’t be as weird as they seem’. Unfortunately it turned out that things were that weird as they seemed. Oh. Julianne Moore was the only person who could remember her late son because he’d been taken by aliens who’d wiped everyone elses memory. Oh, indeed. That undermines the actual appeal of that story and serves as a Deus Ex Machina or ‘get-out from on high’.
Why use this as a twist at all? Perhaps the film would have been more effective or successful if it had sold itself as aliens are stealing our children and wiping our minds with the help of human conspirators - Julianne Moore wants to find her son, but who can she trust?’ kinda thing. I think Empire Magazine’s review summed up perfectly:
A good thriller is like a good striptease, tantalising the audience with gradual revelations that elicit an ever-growing sense of excitement before the final pay-off. Sadly, director Joseph Ruben’s latest is more akin to a striptease conducted by a prude, a bashful bluestocking who prances around fully clothed until the show is almost over, before perfunctorily disrobing after the audience has lost interest.
As for Indiana Jones and the Kindom of the Crystal Skull, there was a lot of griping about how aliens turned up out of the blue and ruined it. Firstly, God turns up at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Did that ruin it? Secondly, ahem…turned up out of the blue??? So that openng scene IN AREA 51 didn’t raise suspicions? Then halfway through when they find a crystal skull of SOMETHING THAT CLEARLY ISN’T HUMAN (and is also on all the posters) that didn’t raise any alarm bells?
Now granted, the ‘real’ legend of the Crystal Skulls might not be that well known, but what the Indiana Jones films have always been about is the old Maguffin of bored Indy looking for a ’special treasure’ which always turns out to be the adventure itself - eg. the Holy Grail he actually discovers in Last Crusade is really the bond with his father. Awww. Here though, the plot was so muddled, Indy going around in circles and explaining stuff to the audience in between set-pieces, that he didn’t really have a proper journey. There are myriad, myriad problems with Indy IV - but I assure you it wasn’t the aliens’ fault!
. . . . .
So why do people seriously dislike switching to sci-fi? I think there’s a good argument that when you’re sitting down to watch a film, you already have preconceptions of what you want/expect and the film should now tick all those boxes. I also think that sometimes switching to science fiction unexpectedly allows the film-makers a get out of jail free card. ‘Um…aliens did it’ isn’t good and just looks like you’re trying to fix plot holes with a sonic screwdriver.
But I also think, when it comes to twists, as with The Prestige, people get too hung up on revelations and forget the actual story they were following and I think THAT is why The Prestige and similar films are worth watching again. Now you know the ‘twist’ go back and see how it serves the plot - rather than dominating it.
That’s my two cents, anyway. Or is it? Ooooh, Perhaps that was the twist all along?*
*No. That’s actually what I think. How about you?
Wednesday, August 19th, 2009
Twists vs. Revelations (Part Two: The Prestige)
CONTAINS SPOILERS for The Prestige, The Forgotten, and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
We’ve already had a bit of a discussion about The Prestige in the comments to my last post about twists so the actual topic of this post is focussing on when a film goes all a bit science fiction when you weren’t expecting it. This is from a review for The Prestige:
…I love a good science fiction story; just tell me in advance…
Wouldn’t be much of twist then, would it? But, while I don’t agree, I do appreciate that a number of audiences, who can be fairly wary of genre at the best of times, least of all when it marches unnannounced into a film you thought was about magicians.
But isn’t that the point of this film? It deliberately states in all its marketing that its going to trick you - and yet all the clue are there in the film, if not the opening scene, if not the trailer. If it were just a film about illusions, why would it feature Nikola Tesla instead of, perhaps, Harry Houdini?
I think the alienating factor in this film is that it is open to interpretation in some respects. I know that my writing - often my endings - are criticised for ambiguity as it doesn’t sit well. I think where audiences wanted a big reveal behind the scenes of the illusion, what they actually got - and what I consider to be the twist - is not how Borden (Christian Bale) and Angier (Hugh Jackman) accomplished their tricks, but how far they had gone in order to devote themselves to their art: to one trick. Not the gimmick - but the intent.
Borden and his twin destroyed their lives by living as one person, diminishing their existence. But Angier goes one step further, literally destroying himself on a nightly basis. Michael Caine’s character correctly guesses what Borden’s trick is the moment he sees it performed - but Angier can’t fathom that Borden’s outperformed him so actually creates the impossible in order to ‘win’.
I suspect that the annoyance for the audience was feeling that there was no way they could guess this twist. But that’s why I feel this film doesn’t have a ‘twist ending’ so much as a logical progression of reveals (what Tesla’s machine actually does is actually revealed earlier than the ending anyway). But the film was marketed on the idea that Christian Bale might just actually know magic. It’s revealed, as expected, that he does not. He’s employing a very old trick. And Angier falls for it so badly that he ends up setting Borden up for murder. For which he suffers. Beginning, middle and end, right? Pledge, Turn and Prestige, right? No? Oh, I don’t understand you people
Thursday, August 13th, 2009
Nearly Full Circle for TOCAN LIVE
I know narrative puzzle http://www.tocanlive.com has had a few mentions here of late, but I just wanted one final push before the final installment tomorrow.
I’ve enjoyed and learned so much running this ARG all week. But I was asked to do it to help promote ‘They Only Come at Night’ series of live vampire spectaculars by the fantastic Slung Low Theatre Company (and featuring music and sound by the very lovely Heather Fenoughty) which are going to be brilliant.
We can sometimes moan about how lazy and dim we can all be as an audience. But this week, I’ve really been reminded how amazingly bright and enthused audiences can be too. What’s impressed me most is the little community that formed, piecing things together that I would never have thought of. So to those who’ve been clicking through, thank you.
And to anyone who has patiently read my shameless plugging (for http://www.tocanlive.com) but hasn’t had a chance to log on, Please do.
And thanks for playing along. Normal service will resumed shortly
Thursday, August 13th, 2009
Twists vs. Revelations (Part One: The Village)
CONTAINS SPOILERS for The Village (and possible controversy)
These days, the second I read:
…with a twist you’ll never see coming…
on a movie poster, I already feel like the film is ruined a little bit. As I’ve discussed here in the post, the appeal of a lot of films is a clear and simple concept, the kind that makes you think ‘why didn’t I think of that?!?’ But if you throw the twist tag on it, you’re instantly looking to the end, rather than the journey.
Case in Point. Now I’m an M. Night Shyamalan apologist. I think people get far too hung up on twists and forget to watch the film. But having said that, I put off seeing The Village because, the second I heard the premise was a secluded 19th century village surrounded by monster-filled woods, I (and I’m sure I’m not alone) instantly thought:
- They’re not in the 19th Century
- There aren’t really any monsters.
But when I finally sat down on something other than my high horse, I discovered that this was probably the best journey M. Night has set any of his characters on. The twists are actually irrelevant to Ivy’s journey - she’s literally blind to them - all she needs is to find the means to save Lucius. While I can see certain complaints about him and his films, I honestly think this is M. Night’s most accomplised film as a director.
Not only are the set pieces simple and effective (a smear of red paint creates fear, Ivy holding out her hand as monsters approach) and features an incredible cinematography and soundtrack, but the fact that most of the audience were assuming the monsters weren’t real, were surely then flummoxed when the film also said the monsters weren’t real - only for a monster to then turn up, only for a further twist with who the monster really was.
Maybe it being set in the present day was a reveal too far? But then we’d have lost the effect that this was really a reaction to September 11th and being an (over?) protective parent. At it’s heart, I think this is an emotive and effective film that works with its twists - not because of them. Its almost like the twists let you off the hook, but I definitely remember being scared before we knew exactly who and what the monsters were.
Maybe the problem lies in this film being marketed so heavily as a horror film when I don’t think it is. I think The Prestige got tarred with a similar mis-marketing brush and sometimes audiences don’t know how to react when a film heads in a different direction to the one that was sold to them. But as this post has gone on longer than I thought, I’ll save that for the next post.
In the meantime, do you have a favourite movie twist? Can a twist ruin a movie by being its defining feature? Is a revelation the same as a twist (I’ll argue it isn’t with The Prestige - but there are definitely some who disagree). If it’s a good twist, does it make you want to see the film again to see the clues? Or do you prefer watching these films post-twist so that you can concentrate on the characters?
As you can probably guess, I’m thinking of writing something with a twist. So your opinions are very welcome!
Monday, August 10th, 2009
Everyone loves Nosferatu
What’s that? TOCANLive, the new online narrative puzzle by Slung Low goes LIVE today? To promote and expand their THEY ONLY COME AT NIGHT series of vampire themed shows? Well, it’s a good job you told me! I hear you can follow cryptic clues all week that mean you can win free vampire comics or tickets to a live show at the Lowry if you piece it all together. Word is there’s more information here as well!
Yeah, I’d be a terrible salesman
But it seems that vampires sell themselves these days, judging by the influx of vampircal properties hitting TV and cinema (I’d like to quickly point out that Slung Low’s first vampire show happened back in 2007 - long before most of us had even heard of Twilight or True Blood )
Is post-millennial let down steering us audiences into a new acceptance and understanding of horror in which we cathartically exorcise our everyday anxieties into anthropomorphic monsters who dispose of those who break the rules while leaving the indentifiably chaste heroine to fight another day? Frankly, no. The cinema listings suggest the same old machete-wielders still dominate the big screen (literally with Leatherface, Freddy Krueger and Jason all being constantly remade - but that’s another blog post).
So what is it? In my opinion, it’s not the horror genre that’s expanding, it’s the tropes of horror sneaking off into other genres. It sounds pretty stupid but in terms of emotional journey, there’re a lot of similarities between Let the Right One In and Son of Rambow, regardless of what you think of either film.
Vampires as iconic pop-cultural figures are becoming much more archetypal: Despite looking like us, they’re probably much older than us, they live by their own rules or moral code (whether they’re good, bad, seeking redemption or somewhere in between) plus, due to expanded ‘lifetimes’, they are much more likely to have gained enemies or something in their past that haunts them. Humphrey Bogart would’ve been an ace vampire!
Case in point, I imagine that most of you reading this quite liked Buffy the Vampire Slayer - yet in 144 episodes (nerd alert ) I’d say that we could probably agree on the same half-dozen episodes that were actually intended to be properly scary. Why did you enjoy Buffy? Vote on as many options as you like…
Loading ...But I’m not sure that this is anything particularly new. More that vampires themselves are being used more as darker protagonists rather than antagonists or just shadow-dwelling nightmares. Which means they are not being used as much for horror - they’re being used for character.
So what do you think of vampires in storytelling? Are they good for human metaphors? Are they sexy bad boys and girls? They’re just cool because they look like people but can do more? (except sunbathe) How long will it be before the current vampire archetype becomes cliche and has to be re-invented again?
. . . . .
PS - Big thanks to my best bud Tom for the vampire painting above as featured in TOCANLive. Check out Tom’s amazing daily art blog here.
Sunday, August 9th, 2009
Final TOCAN Gesture
With Slung Low’s narrative puzzle http://www.tocanlive.com going live first thing tomorrow morning, I’ve just been nervously doing some final tweaks and changes to the story text - the biggest thing that needed fixing being that a main character’s surname changes halfway through - nice one, me
(Don’t know what I’m talking about? Check this blog post for more info)
I think everything is set to go so I just hope it does go as soon we click the button. If you haven’t done so already, I’d really appreciate your support if you wanted to sign up as a facebook fan of Slung Low’s They Only Came at Night and maybe select that you will be attending the event here.
But in the meantime, here’s a newspaper article I wrote for the story that we didn’t use in the end. As loyal blog readers, you get a sneak peak (kind of like a film maker trying to lure you to watch his film by showing you the deleted scenes first… Hmmn)
I will be blogging about it (amongst other things - don’t worry!) day by day next week as I will be virtually (heh) living on the internet for the next five days, checking everything is working, responding to readers (as well as hovering at the analytics page to see if anyone is actually logging on!)
Please do feel free to offer any queries or comments but, if you do stop by this week, I hope http://www.tocanlive.com provides as much fun to read as it was to write and that someone reading is the lucky winner of the tickets to the live show or the graphic novel.
And thank you for all the tweets and messages of encouragement. Cheers
