What the Oscars Can Teach You About Writing

Yes! I'm back! Blogging!

Sorry I've taken such a long hiatus. Promoting one book and drafting another has managed to suck out all my writing energy. But the Oscars are this Sunday, and how could I not write about them? This year is especially exciting since there's such a tight race for Best Picture. Will it be 12 Years a Slave, Gravity, American Hustle, or another dark horse?

via CBSNews.com

This has been called an exceptionally strong year for movies. The competition is tight. In another year, any of these 9 films could've walked away with Best Picture. For the second year in a row, I've managed to watch all 9 nominees, and I've walked away from each one with unexpected writing wisdom.

Don't be afraid to toy with convention
Movie: 12 Years a Slave
This could be the first movie about slavery since Gone with the Wind to win Best Picture. What's so powerful about 12YAS is that it turns the conventional slave narrative on its head. Epitomized in films like GWTW, slaves were usually depicted as happy to serve their kindly master and speaking in an uneducated "yes sir/no sir" fashion. Think Mammy and Scarlett. In 12YAS, we see slavery from the slaves' POV. They speak intelligently and are fully fleshed out characters with emotionally rich lives. The white characters are shown as cruel, sadistic, but also dealing with their own desperation, forced to live in a world they may not fully agree with. There is even a short scene with a former slave (Alfre Woodard) who went on to marry her master. These are depictions we haven't seen on film, and it makes 12YAS that much more special. As writers, dare to challenge the norm, dare to dig deeper behind classic archetypes.

Never make it easy on your protagonist
Movie: Gravity
To say Sandra Bullock's character has a rough go of it in space is an understatement. She spends 90 minutes barely surviving, scraping by from one set piece to another by the skin of her teeth. Alfonso Cuaron, the director, never makes things easy for his protagonist. She's either running low on oxygen or facing down space debris or narrowly escaping a fire. All by herself! Even until the very end, which I won't spoil, Ryan Stone had to struggle. That made her victories throughout the film all the more powerful. That made me root for her and get invested in the film. Never make it easy for your main character.

Unless you're writing non-fiction, you aren't beholden to the truth
Movie: American Hustle
To be honest, I didn't love this movie. I thought the story was all over the place, confusing, and in the end, I just didn't care about anyone. (How ironic that it's a frontrunner for Best Original Screenplay.) While the film is based on true events, David O. Russell didn't strive to make the movie accurate. He basically created his own story against the backdrop of true events. "Some of this actually happened" pops up on the screen at the very beginning. If you're writing a fact-based book, you're under no obligation to write it exactly as happened. You need to do what's best for the story, to make it as narratively compelling as possible. Even if that means casting a spunky 23-year-old Kentuckian as a 40-something Long Island housewife.

Dare to make your villains 3-dimensional
Movie: Captain Phillips
This could've been a standard thriller. They could've cast Liam Neeson as Captain Phillips and had him kick Somali ass. Taken meets I'm on a boat. What elevated Captain Phillips from genre thriller to Oscar-nominated film was that the writer dared to humanize the "bad guys." In the movie, the Somali pirates weren't cardboard villains out for money. They weren't depicted as angels thrown into this mess either. They did bad things, but they had real motivations. They were fueled by desperation and fear and pride and striving for a better life. You sympathized with them, even though you knew what they were doing was wrong.

Wow 'em with your ending
Movie: The Wolf of Wall Street
The above is paraphrasing from the great movie Adaptation when Robert McKee tells blocked screenwriter Charlie Kaufman that no matter what, you gotta wow 'em with your ending. The Wolf of Wall Street was a 3-hour movie about excess -- lots of excess. It dragged a little in certain parts. But that ending. Wow. That ending elevated the movie from good to great. People complained that the main character never got his comeuppance in the end. That was the point, and that's what made the movie so bold. In the final shot, Martin Scorcese literally turns the camera on us, a rapt audience. We may hate Jordan Belfort, but we all want to be him. It was a powerful ending that has stuck with me. So no matter the twists and turns your story takes, remember how important your ending is. It's your last impression on the reader.

There's no such thing as a stupid concept
Movie: Her
Her could've been a sketch on SNL. A man falls in love with Siri. It's a ridiculous concept. Yet through Spike Jonze's masterful script and direction, that idea became a brilliant, thought-provoking film which examined the nature of love and relationships. Jonze made it believable and relatable. Nobody was snickering after leaving this movie.

Have a healthy balance of plot and character
Movie: Philomena
This was the big surprise for me. What a fantastic movie. I didn't expect to love this movie as much as I did. Philomena is about a woman searching for her son who she was forced to give up for adoption 50 years ago. I thought I knew where this story was going, but I was so wrong. The writers threw in nifty twists to Philomena's search as she got to know her son. (And it's all a true story, which goes to show that sometimes it pays to hew close to the truth.) But at the same time, the movie was a wonderful character study of Philomena and journalist Martin Sixsmith. They clashed over religion and faith and grieving over the past throughout their journey. The movie deftly balanced the "search for son" plot with the character study. I've read too many books where it's either one or the other, but you can mix both to wonderful results.

Comic relief is a wonderful thing
Movie: Nebraska
It's a black-and-white movie about a son taking his senile father back to his bleak hometown to claim a Publisher's Clearing prize he didn't win. Yet despite the depressing premise, Nebraska was surprisingly funny. June Squibb, who played Woody's tart-tongued wife, was hysterical. She kept the movie from being a total drag. She infused the movie with levity at all the right moments. Nobody wants to read a downer of a story. Just as comedies need moments of gravity, most dramas need moments of comedy. (Though not all. 12YAS is laugh-free, save for Brad Pitt's terrible accent.)

Never underestimate telling a simple story
Movie: Dallas Buyers Club
There's nothing groundbreaking in the script for Dallas Buyers Club. It's a premise that's been done before: outspoken, fish-out-of-water person fights injustice and takes on evil, faceless corporations. DBC is basically Erin Brockovich, but with AIDS instead of hexavalent chromium. The script follows all the necessary beats. And that's not a bad thing. You don't always need to turn convention on its head or craft a complex plot. A good story is a good story. DBC knew what it was and did it well, and people have responded.

Honorable mention to two other screenplay nominees:
Before Midnight taught me that sequels don't have to be retreads (like Hangover 2, Home Alone 2). Existing characters can keep growing, keep maturing, keep learning about themselves.
Blue Jasmine taught me how to take familiar stories and make them your own. Woody Allen took A Streetcar Named Desire and updated it for the modern world, much like Emma was turned into Clueless.

Have fun watching the Oscars this Sunday! Let me know what your favorite of the bunch was and who you're rooting for. (I'm hoping Leo pulls out a win.)

Five Reasons to Love January

Happy New Year! I can't believe 2013 is here, and with it comes one of the most dreaded days of the year: January 2nd. The day millions of kids and adults return to school/work after a nice, long break. People HATE January. It's cold, long, not special, and we're all recovering from our holiday hangovers. I, however, LOVE this month. Yes, I'll miss the 4-month fall/holiday season with its foliage, pumpkin pie, turkey & stuffing, and cheesy Christmas songs. But there are reasons to love January, reasons why this month rocks!

#1 - You Will Never Be More Motivated
We're so excited to make New Years resolutions. This will be the year we finally put our lives together. After a monthlong holiday gorgefest, it's time to get back on track. It's a clean slate! By February, of course, most of these resolutions will be broken. But in January, you will never be more organized, more motivated, more determined to improve yourself. It's the time of year when we come up with clear, defined goals, when our dreams seem the most attainable. Harness that positive energy. Ride it as far as you can, before you sink back into your old habits. Even if it's temporary, cherish that brief time when you are the most perfect version of yourself. And if you're able to create a new habit, even better!  (resolution tip: think small, then gradually expand)

#2 - The Best Movies Are in Theaters
After a year of popcorn flicks, January is when theaters are packed with awards contenders, the supposed cream of the crop. At no time else will you see your local multiplex filled with so many intriguing, complex, acclaimed films -- and a near lack of franchises and superhero spandex. Smaller films expand to take advantage of awards buzz. You have time to catch up on the onslaught of films released over Christmas. This January, acclaimed, thoughtful films like Django Unchained, Zero Dark Thirty, The Sessions, Silver Linings Playbook, and The Impossible will be crowding your multiplex.

#3 - Awards Season!
January is the crux of awards season. In the past (pre-2003), you had the Golden Globes in January, but you had to wait for the real action in February and March. Now, awards season is on an accelerated schedule. So if you're a movie buff, you have DGA nominations on the 3rd, Oscar nominations and the Critics Choice Awards on January 10th, the Golden Globes on the 13th, then the SAG Awards on the 27th. For those of you who enjoy awards season for red carpet, you have multiple opportunities for dress critiquing, sharpening your live tweeting skills for the Oscars in February. (Disclosure: I'm hoping that Argo wins Best Picture)

#4 -  Exciting Sporting Events
There's more than movies going on in January. The NFC and AFC football championships air, which usually promise excitement and surprises (more than the Oscars, frankly). They determine who will be playing in the super bowl. The NBA is in full force. And...that's all I know about sports.

#5 - Anything Can Happen
A year ago today, who had heard of Gangham Style, fun., or Gotye? Who had read Code Name Verity or The Fault in Our Stars? Who had expected Skyfall to be that good? Who had thought that Tom and Katie would split up and that Kim Kardashian would be pregnant with Kanye West's baby? This time next year, we could be discussing a movie/song/book that we can't even conceive of. There's an excitement in discovering something new and fresh, in those surprises that we never saw coming. As much as we try, we don't know what 2013 will bring.

Happy New Year!

My Favorite Non-Holiday Holiday Movies

I can't believe Christmas is only 1 week away. One of my favorite unofficial traditions of the holiday season is watching lots of movies on my couch, huddled under blankets while it snows outside. Well, it's supposed to snow, but apparently global warming has come early and Chicago will probably never see snow in December again :(

I love watching crappy Christmas movies and decent Christmas movies and animated specials, even the creepy stop-motion ones. But there are a few movies that I have to watch around this time, even though they have nothing to do with the holidays. Does that happen with you? Are these some movies that you can only watch a certain time of year? Some are obvious, like watching Independence Day around July 4th. But there are others that aren't so obvious. For me, this usually corresponds to when they were first released. I can only watch American Beauty in the fall, preferably September. I prefer watching Can't Hardly Wait and My Best Friend's Wedding in June. These aren't ironclad rules, just weird preferences.

So as the holidays wind down, allow me to share some of my favorite non-holiday movies to watch. (Note: When compiling this list, I realized that all of these movies were released in December. But still, they're perfect ones to watch on a gloomy Sunday afternoon on TBS whilst vegging on your couch.)

As Good As It Gets

(But skip everything James L Brooks made after that -- Spanglish and How Do You Know. And ignore the creepy age difference between Jack Nicholson and Helen Hunt.)

Jerry Maguire

(Tom Cruise has never been better, and Cameron Crowe is such a great writer. The dialogue is just beautiful in this film. I'm so happy he won an Oscar, albeit 4 years later)

The Royal Tenenbaums

(I love the look of this movie - so warm and fuzzy. There's so much detail. It's like a moving painting. But I'll admit this film isn't for everyone. Either you love it or hate it.)

Something's Gotta Give

(Every Nancy Meyers film is a non-holiday holiday movie: What Women Want, The Holiday, It's Complicated. And her films are total interior design porn. Just try and NOT salivate over Diane Keaton's beach house. Go on...I'm waiting...)

You've Got Mail

(How is this not a holiday movie? It just FEELS like one. Who wouldn't want to frolic in the Upper West Side? And sadly, Fox Books would probably be out of business today. F-O-X)

Ok, your turn. What are some of your favorite non-holiday films you love watching around this time?

Three Young Adult Authors Making It In Hollywood

In celebration of The Perks of Being a Wallflower the movie getting released this Friday, I'll be hosting a mini-theme week on the blog. I just finished reading the book and loved it. I think all writers can identify with Charlie, the titular Wallflower, and his random observations are ones I've thought about, too. (like realizing that people in old pictures felt the same way we do in the present) Even though Charlie writes in a semi-conversational style that's light on actual description, the characters he writes about still come off as real, fleshed-out people.

The author of Wallflower, Stephen Chbosky, has had an interesting trajectory. He went from independent filmmaker to published author to Hollywood screenwriter. While lots of authors become Hollywood sensations because of their books (John Grisham, Stephen King), most of them don't actually dabble in screenwriting. Chbosky carved out a successful career in mainstream film and TV before adapting Wallflower into a film. The book was released in 1999, then a few years later, he was hired to write the film version of Rent (whose characters would mesh nicely with Charlie's circle of friends in Wallflower), then a year after that, he co-created the CBS series Jericho. It probably did help that Chbosky had a background in film and a film agent, but still, it's rare to see a YA author make this kind of transition. Nowadays, Hollywood writers are jumping on the YA bandwagon. (e.g. Paul Weitz, Liz Tigelaar) It can be done, though. In fact, at least three other writers have made the jump from writing YA to writing for film and TV.

1) Rob Thomas
YA books: Slave Day, Doing Time, Satellite Down, Rats Saw God
Rob Thomas has always had a foothold in the teen world. Not to be confused with the lead singer of Matchbox 20, this Rob Thomas went from high school teacher to working at kid's news station Channel One. While there, he began writing Rats Saw God in his spare time, and eventually got an agent. He went on to write five books.
Hollywood connection. On the strength of his YA novels, Thomas was asked to be a staff writer for this new show on the WB called Dawson's Creek. Maybe you've heard of it? From there, he created the series Cupid and then six years later created another show about a teenage sleuth called Veronica Mars. Maybe you've heard of it? Then four years after that, he wrote the script for the reboot of this show called 90210. Maybe you've heard of it? Ok, I'll stop.

2) Jake Coburn
YA books: Prep, Lovesick
Prep, about privileged Upper East Side kids who form violent gangs, caught the eye of MTV films, which optioned the book and hired James Frey to write the screenplay. However, like most book options, nothing has come of it yet. Still, Coburn has managed to carve out a niche in the New York socialites genre.
Hollywood connection. Because of Prep, Coburn was recruited to write a pilot called The Stanton with Kevin Williamson (creator of Dawson's Creek). While that didn't go, he was hired to write for ABC drama Dirty Sexy Money, which revolved around a super rich family in New York City. When that got canceled, he went on to write for a CW drama about privileged Upper East Siders - Gossip Girl - where he's risen to co-producer.

3) Shauna Cross
YA books: Derby Girl
As an aspiring screenwriting in LA with no produced credits, Shauna Cross found a literary agent through a mutual friend who encouraged her to write about her experiences in the roller derby. That turned into the novel Derby Girl.
Hollywood connection. The book caught the eye of Drew Barrymore, who hired Cross to adapt her novel for her directional debut - Whip It, which was released in 2009. Cross next went on to adapt another, very different book - What to Expect when You're Expecting, which was released in June.

One thing to note is that all three writers lived in Los Angeles either when they sold their books or got their film/TV gigs. Unlike publishing, film and TV are industries where newbie writers need to be living in LA in order to be considered for jobs. Sure, if you're best-selling authors like James Frey or Michael Chabon, then you can probably take gigs and stay put where you are.

Why I Fear for the Catching Fire Movie

I was worried about The Hunger Games movie living up to expectations and not trying to become the next Twilight. Luckily, the movie succeeded and has been a runaway smash. It was well-liked by critics and fans, and outgrossed every single Twilight and Harry Potter film. I was grateful that the film didn't shy away from the dark tone of the book. But just when I stopped worrying about The Hunger Games, I began to fear for Catching Fire.

With Catching Fire, Lionsgate, the producer, is trying to make a release date - not a good movie. Eight months before The Hunger Games was released, they had already staked out a release date for Catching Fire. November 22, 2013. The Twilight and Harry Potter sequels came out in quick succession, and Lionsgate wanted to follow that trajectory. I guess in our short-attention-span age, they worry that some other phenomenon will overshadow Hunger Games in the next two years and make Catching Fire a non-event. But then the director of the Hunger Games, Gary Ross, dropped out of Catching Fire, because he wouldn't have enough time to make that release date. The movie needs to begin shooting by the fall to make the November release date- so all writing, pre-production, costumes, etc have to be ready to go by then. Instead of pushing it back, Lionsgate frantically searched for another director.

Why is it so important to make this Thanksgiving release date? Because Harry Potter and Twilight once occupied it? Hunger Games came out in the middle of March and has earned close to $400 million. Obviously, release date doesn't matter to fans. But now, everyone on Catching Fire will be rushing. And when we rush, we tend to get sloppy. Catching Fire is a more complicated book. The story isn't as straightforward as The Hunger Games. Half of it is the Victory Tour, the other half is the Quarter Quell. You don't want to get sloppy adapting this book. Yes, you can create a shoddy film and it will still make piles of money. But that'll piss off your fans and keep them from Mockingjay. You don't want The Hunger Games to become the new Matrix trilogy.

First Matrix (1999) = awesome. Grossed $171M
Matrix Reloaded (May 2003)  = confusing, annoying, overall disliked. Grossed $281M
Matrix Revolutions (November 2003) = slightly better, but people had already given up. Grossed $134M

Because of the tight timing, they had a limited pool of available directors to draw from. So they went with Francis Lawrence. I'm not sure how I feel about this. Lawrence went from directing music videos to making films like I Am Legend, Constantine, and Water for Elephants. I liked I Am Legend, but I have heard bad things about the other two. It seems that Lawrence is great with visuals, but not with story or character. We need a director who can bring The Hunger Games to the next level, the way Alfonso Cuaron did with Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Catching Fire delves further into the main relationships and the mythology of Panem. You need a director who can handle those elements carefully. I'm not sure if Lawrence can pull that off. I don't care about the flashy action scenes as much as I do about the characters. Maybe he will surprise me. I'm holding out hope.

I must sound like those typical fanboys that criticize every decision made about their favorite franchises. I just don't get the obsession with trying to make an arbitrary release date. Whatever happens with Catching Fire, I'll still see it probably. I might not like it, but it's besides the point.

And I guess that's good enough for Lionsgate.

When Fact and Fiction Collide

All writers get their inspiration from real life. Even if you imagined your new WIP out of thin air, chances are, you can trace those thoughts to a real life trigger. Suzanne Collins got inspired to write The Hunger Games while channel surfing. As a fan of non-fiction, I love when the writer can take an actual event and turn it into a gripping story. They delve deeper and find hidden meaning in the facts. Here are some of my favorite examples of clever uses of fact in your fiction.

Six Degrees of Separation by John Guare (Broadway play)
plot: A black con-man charms his way into the homes of uber-wealthy Upper East Side couples, passing himself off as the son of Sidney Poitier.
How much actually happened? 75% Con man David Hampton did charm his way into high society homes in the early 80s. Some of his marks were Gary Sinise and Melanie Griffith. John Guare's friends also fell victim. They let Hampton stay in their guest bedroom, and they found him in bed with another man the next morning. (That exact scene made it into the play.)
Where fiction took over: Guare took this news item and turned it into a play that explored race, class, and the inter-connectedness of the world. Six Degrees revolved around fictional couple the Kittridges, who were profoundly effected by their night with Paul, even as they turn him into an anecdote they tell at parties.
Where fact and fiction diverged: In the play, Paul is eventually arrested and nobody knows what happened to him, or even what his real name was. In real life, Hampton went in and out of jail for the next twenty years, conning families from NY to Seattle before dying in 2003.

In Cold Blood by Truman Capote (novel)
plot: On an ordinary day in sleepy Holcomb, Kansas, the entire Clutter family is murdered without warning or reason. The book traces the investigation, capture, and ultimate execution of the two killers.
How much actually happened? 100% Capote transcribed conversations with dozens of people involved in the case, and the killers, too. Every word is true, he claimed.
Where fiction took over: All the events and conversations were fact, but Capote's brilliant, beautiful writing kept it from sounding like a news article.
Real-life inspiration: Capote first read about the murders in a 300-word blurb as he casually flipped through The New York Times one day. His desire to learn more, to understand who would do such a thing, prompted him to travel to Kansas and begin his research.

Mean Girls by Tina Fey (movie)
plot: New girl in school Cady Heron gets adopted by popular clique The Plastics and its evil, yet seductive leader Regina George, whom she both idolizes and plots to destroy.
How much actually happened? 10% The movie is based on a self-help book for mothers of teenage daughters called Queen Bees and Wannabes: Helping Your Daughters Survive Cliques, Gossip, Boyfriends, and Other Realities of Adolescence by Rosalind Wiseman. Fey took real-life examples from the book and wove it into her screenplay. The scene, for instance, where one of the Plastics explains to Cady the rules for eating at their lunch table, was transcribed almost verbatim.
Where fiction took over: The characters and plot are all made up, yet they are inspired by the factual examples laid forth in Wiseman's book.

What are some of your favorite non-fiction works or "based on a true story" works?

What's Old Is New Again (Or in 3-D)

This weekend will be a blast from the 90s past. In theaters is the re-release of Titanic in 3-D and American Reunion, the fourth movie in the American Pie series (not counting the directly to video sequels). I am particularly excited about American Reunion. The whole cast comes back together for the 10th high school reunion. The movie is obviously a cash grab and shamelessly banking on moviegoers' nostalgia. Well, it's totally working on me.

I was in college high school when the first American Pie film came out in 1999. I still laugh and cringe at the infamous pie scene. I know I'll be flooded with memories from that era while watching this one. The same thing happened with Scream 4 last year -- which despite it bombing at the box office was a good film. Also this week, the Farrelly Brothers announced a sequel to Dumb and Dumber, and Ah-nold said there might be another Twins movie. Who says Hollywood needs any original ideas?

It got me thinking about revisiting characters I love from books and movies. I wonder what they're up to, what happened after the last page/final credits.

What book or movie do you wish there'd be a sequel to?

For me, it's The Truman Show. That movie was fascinating, enjoyable, and freakishly ahead of its time. The ending feels complete but also open-ended. Every time I watch it, I'm always dying to know what happens after [SPOILER ALERT] Truman leaves the studio. How is he adjusting to life in the real world? Did he meet up with Sylvia? Did he ever see with Marlon or his mother again? I want more! Maybe with the way Hollywood is going, I might get my wish.

Dialogue vs Description

What's a good balance between dialogue and description in novels? (Note: Description here refers to all non-dialogue.) One of my insecurities as a writer is that I write too much dialogue and am light on description. I have a cut-to-the-chase style of writing. I picked it up from writing screenplays before transitioning to books. In scripts, it's suggested that you never have more than 3 lines of description at a time. It's a well-known fact that people in Hollywood don't like to read. Blocks of description turns them off. Also, scripts are used more as a blueprint for the director and actor. Description tells them what's happening, but they will use their own interpretation to create the tone and feel.

I am incapable of writing long passages of description. That's why I like YA. Kids like having a good mix of white space on the page. They feel they aren't reading a textbook that way. Do you ever cringe when you turn a page and it's a block of description? I sometimes do. When I read, I want description that's long enough to just give me a sense of what's going on. I don't need painstaking detail about physical description, a play-by-play of the characters' thoughts, or a journalistic recounting of backstory. Make it succinct; my mind will fill in the rest. I always think to that scene in Pleasantville when the kids discover blank books. Reese Witherspoon vaguely describes what a book is about, and the pages fill in with text. I would rather reveal information via dialogue.

On the same token, I don't like dialogue that goes on and on. Writing dialogue is fun, but it also needs to have a point. It must move the story along. I tire of scenes with dialogue that goes nowhere. Pulp Fiction is a famously talky script, but it's all leading somewhere. Characters don't talk just for the sake of talking. Long stretches of dialogue reveal character and explore the movie's theme: what does it take to be a righteous man?

Recently, I read The Giver by Lois Lowry and loved it. I devoured it in two days. It's an award-winning book, and I was surprised at how dialogue-driven it was. Most of the description are action lines. As I kept reading, I realized that the writing style echoed the colorless, emotionless world of the story. Still, I got a very clear sense of the main character and place. When Lowry does switch to more description in the end, they are short and sweet. They tell us where we are and what Jonas is doing. She did an amazing job at conveying so much in a few lines.

Which do you tend to write more of: dialogue or description/action?

5 Ways the Golden Globes Can Help Your Writing

Today is one of my favorite days of the year, because today is...The Golden Globe Awards!!! (live on NBC at 8pm EST/7pm CST)

Yes, I am an awards junkie, and we are in the thick of awards season. The Golden Globes are my favorite awards show, more than the Oscars, for several reasons: they're fun and not stuffy, they celebrate movies and TV, they're the first show of the year, and they serve as a snapshot of where the top films and performances stand in the Oscar race. And there's pretty dresses, too! For those unfamiliar, the Golden Globe Awards are voted on by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, a group of 85 freelance journalists. The HFPA has no overlap with the Oscars and have drawn controversy for selling awards to the highest bidder and nominating stars from lousy movies so they can rub elbows with them. But despite this, the GG's remain very popular with viewers and Hollywood folk.

Even if you don't watch the show, there are some valuable lessons that writers can learn from the Globes' success:

1) Pack your show with stars. The HFPA loves nominating big stars, even in poorly-received movies. Last year, they nominated Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie for the critically-panned film The Tourist. George Clooney is nominated for four awards tonight, Ryan Gosling for two. Sure, they also nominate the lessen-known actors (like Jean Dujardin), but they'll also throw us a Kate Winslet. The HFPA is smart. They don't just nominate big stars to feel cool, but also to drive ratings. People will tune in to see their favorite celebrities. Likewise, write characters that people will want to read. Make them interesting and exciting and funny and dynamic. Surround them with vivid supporting characters. These are the stars of your book, and they will attract readers. We've all read books where the plot was so-so, but the characters kept us hooked.

2) Only give out awards viewers care about. Unlike the Oscars, the Globes don't drag out their show with technical awards like Best Sound Mixing or multiple montages. The Globes only give out best show/movie and acting awards, with a scant handful of writing/directing/score categories -- the categories viewers care about. They've cut the fat that bogs down most award shows, and as a result, the show is remarkably streamlined. Think of awards as plot points. Only include the most necessary parts in your novel. Keep the story moving. Don't pad; don't add fluff. Readers can tell, especially young readers.

3) Save room for comedy. While the Oscars rarely recognize comedic films, the Globes split the movie categories into drama and comedy/musical, guaranteeing funny films will be represented. Many awards-bait films aren't as widely-known to viewers as popular comedies; it's nice to have a movie like Bridesmaids thrown into the mix with The Artist and Shame, among others. Likewise, in your story, don't forget the funny. Comic relief is always welcome. Even if you are writing a serious book, it doesn't hurt to write a humorous moment or character here and there. Give readers a brief chuckle amongst the epicness and somberness. They'll appreciate it.

4) Let your characters know they aren't perfect. Ricky Gervais is the first host the Globes have ever had, and he is a marked difference from the genial Oscar hosts. He openly mocks celebrities in attendance, as well as the HFPA, bringing them down a peg. Many were outraged by his antics, but audiences seemed to like it, and the HFPA invited him back. Your characters can't float through the story infallible and unharmed. You need Ricky Gervais-esque characters or situations that will rough them up and point out their flaws. Make it uncomfortable for them.

5) Keep it entertaining. Handing out awards isn't the most important facet of the Golden Globes. It's more of an afterthought. NBC bills the Golden Globes as the party of the year, placing the emphasis on drunk celebrities, humorous acceptance speeches, and pretty dresses. They aren't stuffy like the Oscars. When writing your book, remember above all that it's meant to entertain. People read novels for pleasure. Even when they read serious, issue-driven books, they want to enjoy reading. So in the midst of your plotting, world building, and character mapping, make sure that you're creating something people actually will want to read. And if you have a character or two in a pretty dress, even better!


I will leave you with my pick for best dressed from last year's show.

And the worst...

Questioning Your Taste: Is it them or me?

In the spring of 2010, the low-budget comedy Tiny Furniture premiered at the South by Southwest Festival and was hailed as a brilliant, insightful, funny coming-of-age story. It won the top prize, and its writer-director-star, 24-year-old newbie Lena Dunham, was called a fresh new voice in comedy. Critics adored the film. Judd Apatow is now producing a TV series Dunham created, Girls, which premieres on HBO in April. After hearing all of this hype and adulation for Tiny Furniture, I decided to watch it one night, excited about what I was going to see.
And I hated it.

The movie wasn't awful, but it was slow, plotless, and not funny. I was so confused. How was this film being hailed as the new coming of comedy? Why was Hollywood going gaga for this film and for Lena Dunham? Was it them or was it me?


Taste is subjective, but nowadays, it seems that it's only subjective if your opinion matches general consensus. If you don't like it, then you are not smart enough. Or you just suck. We see it with Oscar season. Critics fall over each other to slather a film with praise, and then I see it and am unimpressed. I always second guess myself: maybe I just didn't get it, maybe I have lofty expectations. Recently, I saw The Descendants with George Clooney. It's a frontrunner in this year's Oscar race, directed by Alexander Payne who did the sublime Election and Sideways. My reaction at the movie's end was "Meh." I couldn't understand why critics were drooling over this. Just like I couldn't understand why they loved Sideways -- a movie which I found good, not great.

My pet peeve is when people criticize me for not liking something they did. Last month, I saw The Muppets. Again, I enjoyed the film, but I didn't LOVE it, putting me in the minority amongst my friends. And at a party, one of the guests called my morals and my soul into question because I only liked it. Judging by the way The Muppets has nosedived at the box office, I wasn't the only one. Just because I don't like or love something doesn't mean I'm a heartless snob. When it comes to art, people were not meant to be lemmings.

I used to be like them, though. I used to get up in arms when someone didn't like a movie or book that I loved. I took it personally a little. But now I've learned that we all have different opinions, and nobody should make you feel like yours aren't valid. The key is backing up your opinions. Many times, we don't think about why we like or don't like something. We go with our gut. Since I've gotten into writing, I now work to articulate my reasoning. All writers should do this. Next time you read a great book, think about why you liked it so much, and not just because everyone else liked it. This will help you in your writing to figure out what works.

Over Christmas break, I read Franny and Zooey by JD Salinger. Catcher in the Rye is one of my favorite books, and I also loved Nine Stories, so I was excited to read F&Z. And I hated it. I rarely hate books, but I hated this one. I was afraid to say that, because F&Z is such a classic, it must be me. But this is why I so disliked the novel: It was 200 pages of people having extremely long, rambling conversations that went nowhere -- a short story idea that Salinger strained to stretch into a full-length. Maybe this just isn't my type of book. I realize that I prefer plot-driven novels. But that doesn't make my opinion invalid or my taste "off." 

What books/movies/shows have you hated that everyone else loved? And if you have opinions about any of the movies and books mentioned, please share!

YOUNG ADULT the movie review

Last night,  I got to see a sneak preview of Young Adult, the new Charlize Theron comedy from the writer-director team behind Juno. There's been some buzz in the kidlitosphere, worry that Young Adult will portray people in our profession in a negative light - that we're writing about teens because we're immature, can't grow up. And that Charlize's character will grow up in the end, and choose to write adult novels to symbolize her maturity. NONE OF THAT HAPPENS.

Young Adult was a great movie. It's not what you expect. It's a dark comedy-drama, and it stays that way until the credits. Charlize Theron plays Mavis Gary, a rude, depressed thirty-something ghostwriter of a young adult series who decides to return to her hometown to win back her high school sweetheart Buddy (Patrick Wilson) - who happens to be married and a dad. When she isn't trying to seduce Buddy, she spends her time getting drunk with Matt, a high school classmate she never paid attention to. Her life peaked in high school, and she refuses to move on and grow up. She's an unlikable character, borderline pitiful, and she doesn't become a good person in the end. She does have an epiphany, but it's not what you expect, which I found refreshing. Mavis acted that way we wish we could act sometimes but never would. That may turn people off, but I appreciated that the filmmakers stuck to their guns and never veered into sentimental territory.

Through all this, I found the character fascinating to watch - a credit to the acting, writing, and directing. Charlize Theron is so good at playing bad, a trend she'll continue with Snow White and the Huntsman. The script was a step up from writer Diablo Cody's first film Juno. Unlike Juno, the characters were less verbose and witty, more natural sounding. She also used voiceover in a clever way. Director Jason Reitman gave the film a lived-in, unpolished feeling down to the omnipresence of chain stores, and he managed to wring humor from twisted characters and setups. He is now 4-for-4 with his films. If you haven't seen his first three films - Thank You For Smoking, Juno, and Up in the Air - netflix them now.

Young Adult does not discredit or disrespect young adult writers. It's not a commentary on authors or the genre - just Mavis, and she is an extreme example. She lives and acts like a teenager still, down to a messy room and drinking coke from the bottle first thing in the morning. Her young adult writing is a device the movie uses to explore the theme of growing up. She is stuck in the past, which is why she can't write about adults. Her YA series, which is getting canceled, is about catty girls at a prep school, very mid-2000s. Think The A-List, Private, Gossip Girl. The movie never makes the assumption that all YA writers are like this. It's only focusing on her arrested development.

Film and TV writers will identify more with Mavis than will YA authors. Most of them have left their small hometowns to make it big in NY/LA. They've gone on to try and be rich and famous while those they left behind got married, had kids, and live "boring" lives. However, the majority of YA authors I've read about and interact with are married with kids and live in the suburbs. Really, Young Adult is a semi-autobiographical movie about the screenwriter, Diablo Cody. Like Mavis Gary, Diablo lived in Minnesota, writes under a pseudonym (real name: Brooke Busey), moved to a big city (LA), made it big as a writer (hello, Oscar!), worked in the YA genre (she was hired to script a movie version of Sweet Valley High), is thirtysomething, was divorced, and was childless and unmarried until recently. (congrats on both!) She may have felt like a hotshot writer, but when she returned home and found her old classmates had less glamorous lives with a family in the burbs, did she have a pang of jealousy? The young adult publishing industry really seems like a cover for Hollywood, while allowing Cody to ruminate on growing up and not letting the past define you forever. And like I said, Mavis does not write adult novels in the end.

Overall, I loved Young Adult, and it's a shame movies like this are so rare. It has a strong shot of being nominated at the Golden Globes for Best Comedy and Best Actress - Comedy. Its box office prospects are decent. This is not a mainstream movie, so word-of-mouth may not reflect how the critics feel.

Young Adult opens December 16. Are you planning to see it?

Does YA Give You Body Dysmorphia

I recently finished a YA contemporary novel, a well-written coming-of-age story about a girl standing up for what she believes in and finding out who she is. I enjoyed the book, but the part that bugged me was her love interest: the blonde-haired, blue-eyed, preppy, built, cute boy. The most generic 'boy' stereotype across all media. And the girl protagonists in these stories usually believe they're dull-looking, yet still manage to attract the attention of the cute boy.

Why are these characters always so good-looking?

Our culture has a serious body image problem with no cure in sight. TV, movies, and magazines inundate us with impossible standards for male and female beauty: blonde, skinny, six packs, big boobs, long legs, no body hair, chiseled chin, etc. Women have it 100X worse than guys. In Hollywood, guys like Seth Rogen, Kevin James, and Woody Allen wind up with women like Katherine Heigl, Amber Valetta, and Diane Keaton. Guys can be schlubs, but women must always be stunning. Men have it rough, too. Every female-targeted romcom has the women ending up with some lockjawed, ripped dude. This has been going on forever. I know that. But why are books, especially YA novels, embracing these stereotypes, too?

TV and movies are visual media. They use hot actors to attract paying customers. Books don't need to use that trick. Readers don't pick up a book (with the exception of romance novels) because it's about attractive people. And if they start reading the book and find the main character isn't gorgeous, they don't automatically put it down. Teenagers are particularly insecure about their looks. I spent way too much time on my hair in high school; no wonder half of it's fallen out! Teens are bombarded all day by images of supposedly ideal body types. Why do we perpetuate those body types in YA books? Not all girls are attracted to the hot/dreamy guy, and not all guys are into the Heidi Montag look. If that were the case, then only supermodels would date. People have different ideas of what they find attractive. We should strive to write characters that have physical quirks to them - like actual teens. Let's not try to recreate a CW show. I'm sure readers will love your book even if the boy of your MC's dreams has unruly hair or a bony chest. And guy readers won't throw a book across the room if the girl love interest has blemishes or love handles. Don't save all odd body features for your side characters. I worry that many female protagonists in YA novels suffer from Laney Boggs syndrome: they think they're so ugly when it's glaringly obvious to the reader/whole world that they are total knockouts.

 
In Tina Fey's book Bossypants, she said that most successful shows centered around normal-looking, even slightly unattractive, casts. Friends was the exception. The casts of Cheers, The Office, Seinfeld, 30 Rock, and CSI among others are not filled with models. Whereas how many series with sexy casts got canceled?  *cough*Coupling*cough*

Believe it or not, there have been successful books with protagonists who don't fit the beauty mold. Skeeter Phelan of The Help was tall, lanky, flat-chested, and had embarrassingly frizzy hair. Katniss Everdeen had few discernible female features. She was kind of described as looking like Sandra Bullock in the first half of Miss Congeniality. Even down to the hairy legs. I know that readers love pining after the same guy/girl as the MC; that's part of the fun of reading a book. But you don't have to make them generically attractive. Create your own form of sexy. Leave the generic body types to Hollywood.

What do you think, readers? Is there a body image problem in YA?

Young Adult trailer!

For those who don't follow movies obsessively like I do, Paramount is releasing a movie called Young Adult this December about a YA writer who hasn't grown out of her bratty teenage phase. She goes back to her hometown in the hopes of winning back her old high school boyfriend - who's now a husband and father. The movie has great auspices: Charlize Theron, Diablo Cody, Jason Reitman. But I'm not sold on it yet. Diablo Cody is currently scripting a movie version of Sweet Valley High, and I think that's where her perception of YA literature is coming from. I don't think she has any idea how much YA lit has developed since then. I still remain hopeful. Reitman has not directed a bad film yet (Thank You for Smoking, Juno, Up in the Air).

What do you think?



In other news, my writer's group read the first 6 chapters of my WIP and loved them! I've never gotten such a positive response from them. It was the inspiration I needed to continue plugging along with the second half of my book. Woohoo!

Cursing in YA

Kids love cursing. We want kids to read our books. Ergo, we should make our stories chock full of the seven dirty words. Right?

Well, that's up to you. Fantasy/sci-fi/dystopian novels generally have no cursing. It seems in scary, futuristic societies, people watch their language. And middle grade novels don't have any curse words because those readers are too young. Cursing seems to be an issue in contemporary YA. We want our books to feel real, and let's face it: real kids curse. But does that mean we need to use curse words in our books? 

The more serious your novel is, the more likely it is you will involve cursing. If you've written an issue-driven book about drugs, abuse, or violence, then chances are you will use dirty language to emphasize the scariness of a character, or the harsh reality of this world. But for regular, contemporary YA, I don't think cursing is needed unless it has a point. To this day, controversy surrounds teaching Catcher in the Rye in schools because Holden curses. Yet his cursing is viewed as a symbol of rebellion against the phony, upper-class society he inhabits.

Personally, I rarely curse, so I don't feel comfortable writing characters who drop f-bombs left and right. And when I read a YA book or watch a teen movie, I'm taken out of the story when the characters begin swearing excessively. Filmmakers like Quentin Tarantino and David Mamet LOVE swear words, but it's natural to their adult characters: mobsters, hitmen, gangsters, shady businessmen, angry power-crazed men. Some YA characters will curse more than others since it's part of their characters, like if they were lower-class or poor. But for a suburban teen, is it necessary?

To garner a PG-13 rating, a movie can only contain one f-word; any more, and it's instantly rated R. PG-rated films can only have maybe 1-3 s-words. G-rated films can't have anything filthy. When PG-13 movies cash in their f-bomb, they usually have a strong reason, i.e. the protagonist may be in a climactic fight. In She's All That, Laney Boggs shouts the infamous "Am I a bet? Am I a f--king bet?!" The f-word gives that line more power, makes it more jarring. For the most part, curse words are used sparingly, and that doesn't make audiences enjoy these movies any less. Luckily, books don't have that kind of censorship, but I think there should still be some responsibility on the author and editor's part not to take advantage and load up on swearing. Yes, kids swear, but that doesn't mean they won't enjoy a book with clean language. You don't need f--k and s--t to have your characters sound like real kids; you need them to have conflicting emotions and complexity.

I'll leave you with what my dad always said about swearing: The English language has hundreds of thousands of words. Why do you have to continually use the same 4 or 5?

What are your thoughts on cursing in YA? Do you have it in your story?

What I Learned This Summer

***Reminder. Tonight starts my 9k Weekend Writing Challenge. Keep up with my progress and give me a cyber kick in the pants if I'm falling behind on Twitter @FillupSeagull. You can also join the challenge. Details here.***

Who says you can't learn anything when school is out? I saw a bunch of movies this summer in lovely air-conditioned, popcorn-scented theaters across Chicago, and I learned some valuable lessons about writing that I would like to pass onto you, my casually loyal readers. Now that Summer 2011 is over (although technically it's not over until September 20th), let's look back at a summer box office filled with surprises:

Midnight in Paris = Just write!
This summer, Midnight in Paris became the highest-grossing film in writer/director Woody Allen's career. And you know how he's celebrating? By writing and directing his next film, which will be released in 2012. For the past 35 years, Woody Allen has made nearly one film a year, which is an unheard of rate. Some of his movies are hits, some are bombs. But no matter what, he keeps cranking them out. As writers, we must do the same. Always keep writing. Don't rest on your laurels. Don't wallow in your doubt. Not everything we write will be a masterpiece, but you have to write through the crap to reach the gold.

The Help, Bridesmaids = Stay true to yourself!
Both movies were humongous hits this summer, and as I said back in June, Bridesmaids, and now The Help, prove that not just teenage boys go to the movies. Both movies also featured behind the scenes talent who fought to get their vision on screen. Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo did not let Bridesmaids devolve into a trite, Kate Hudson-esque romcom. They fought to keep the raunchiness in there. They fought to let Wiig star. They fought to cast mostly unknown actresses. In the end, Bridesmaids shushed all doubters. Kathryn Stockett, writer of the novel The Help, said the movie could be made only if the studio let her childhood friend Tate Taylor write and direct. He had bought the movie rights to the book when it was an unpublished manuscript. (after 60 rejections!) Taylor had only one tiny independent film to his credit. He and Stockett also demanded that their close friend Octavia Spencer, the inspiration for Minnie, get to play the feisty character, too. Dreamworks, the studio, gave in and took a gamble, staying true to Taylor and Stockett's wishes. The Help has been #1 at the box office for 3 weeks running.

The Green Lantern, The Change-Up = Don't write what you think will sell!
Poor Ryan Reynolds. He was the punchline of the summer. Both of his starring films were huge bombs. A criticism of Lantern and Change-Up was that they seemed formulaic, chemically engineered to be hits, yet ultimately bland. The former had all the routine elements of a comic-book film: mythology, brand recognition, hero with inner demons, and lots of CGI. The latter came off as just another body-switch comedy that brought nothing new to the genre. They screamed "We want to make money!" which turned off audiences. When writing, don't write something just because you think it will sell. Write it because you want to. Most agents will tell you not to follow trends, and they are savvy enough to recognize a manuscript riddled with cliches.

Horrible Bosses, Bad Teacher = A great hook can go a long way!
I couldn't wait to see these R-rated comedies, and neither could millions of moviegoers. Horrible and Bad had fun, catchy titles that stood out on the marquee in a sea of sequels and nebulous titles (Super 8, I'm looking at you). The hook for Horrible Bosses - 3 men plot to kill each other's bosses - was the best of the summer. I didn't like Bosses, but the hook and title drew me in. When agents sift through thousands of queries a year, and readers scan thousands of books in stores and online, a sharp title and nifty hook can go a long way in making you stand out from the clutter. Don't just assume that your novel will speak for itself.

Transformers 3, Kung Fu Panda 2, Pirates 4, Cars 2, etc = Crap happens, get over it!
Yes, crappy movies still get made and they still make a lot of money. Crappy memoirs from "celebrities" still get published and still receive higher marketing budgets than 100 of your favorite YA books. Get over it.  There will always be lousy books and movies. This is a business after all. All you can do is focus on writing a good book. And if it has series potential, then even better.

What were your favorite movies of this summer? My favorites were Bad Teacher, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, and, despite the title, I loved Super 8.

Sparkfest! aka Thank You Amy, Lois, Caroline, Cecily, James, and Kody

I am participating in Sparkfest 2011, brought to you by The Writer Coaster. I couldn't participate in the Star Trek blogfest also happening since I have never watched the show. But I have seen Galaxy Quest. Does that count??

For this blogfest, Christine Tyler @ Writer Coaster asked us the following:

What book made you realize you were doomed to be a writer? 

What author set off that spark of inspiration for your current Work in Progress?

Or, Is there a book or author that changed your world view?

 

I thought about this for a while. I wish there was one moment, one writer that provided the spark for me to write. I've wanted to write ever since I was a kid, unlike every other author in the universe... :) It was a steady stream of movies, TV shows, and books that gave me the enthusiasm to pursue writing.  

Amy Heckerling - Clueless

I've watched tons of movies and am known as somewhat of a movie buff. Clueless, however, will always be my favorite movie. Even though it is loved the world over, I still feel that it's underrated. The screenplay is one of the best in modern movie times. It's true! If any aspiring screenwriters are reading this, Clueless is a paragon of voiceover usage, and its dialogue is flawless - revealing, true to character, doesn't try to be cutesy (cough *Juno* cough), and darn funny. I've watched this movie around 13242 times, and I can probably quote it start to finish for you, if you'd like. The spirit of Clueless hangs over everything I write, and I aspire to write something 1/26th as good as Heckerling's movie.

Caroline B. Cooney - The Face on the Milk Carton

Lois Duncan - Killing Mr. Griffin, I Know What You Did Last Summer

My comments section blew up when I posted about I Know What You Did Last Summer the book. For good reason. I was a couch potato in middle school, but when I did read for fun, I read Cooney's and Duncan's books. Their hooks drew me in - what if you received mysterious letters taunting you about a deadly secret, what if you saw your face on a missing child poster, what if some students plotted to kill their nasty English teacher. They made reading fun for me, and their twisty, suspenseful novels provided the spark for many of my early short stories. Even today, these books still hold up. 

Cecily von Ziegesar - Gossip Girl

On a 2004 flight from London to New York, I needed a book to read to pass the time. I had heard about this hot new young adult series and decided to give it a shot. It would be a fun read for the flight. And I was hooked. I read five books in this addictive series about spoiled New York teens. (I stopped when the plots got too ridiculous and repetitive) This series inspired me to write YA. I read it and thought, "Hey I can totally write something like this." It was sharp, snarky, risque, fresh -- a notable difference from the YA of my childhood. Gossip Girl seems passe now, its references to the Hilton sisters and brand-name labels a quaint reminder of Bush-era excess. But YA had grown up, and I wanted to ride the wave. 

James Frey - A Million Little Pieces

Say what you will about the veracity of the story, but this is a compelling, well-written book. I read A Million Little Pieces post-scandal, when I suddenly found myself unemployed and didn't know when I'd get back on my feet. It was fall 2007, and I was trying to make a career writing in television with no luck. The book gave me hope and reassured me that no matter what happens, it will be ok. I reexamined the type of writing I wanted to pursue after reading it, and a few weeks later, I began my first attempt at writing a novel.

Kody Keplinger - The DUFF
I'm just not that into paranormal romance. I have full respect for writers and readers of those books, but I am simply not one of them. My genre of choice is regular contemporary. It can difficult for me to find the kind of books out there that I want to write. The Duff restored my faith in the genre. I count is as my "I wish I wrote that" novel. It gave me hope that these issue-with-a-lowercase-i books can get published and find an audience - in TV terms, a Dawson Leery can survive in a world of Edward Cullens.

All of these authors inspire me in some way, their influence molding together to give me a swift kick in the butt with my writing. Who inspires you?

***p.s. Follow me on Twitter --> @FillupSeagull ***

I Fear for the Hunger Games movie

Note to Hollywood: The Hunger Games trilogy is NOT the new Twilight.

I loved the first Hunger Games book, and I'm not alone. And I'm not alone in anticipating the movie adaptation. But the more information I read about the movie, the more I worry that I'm going to be extremely unhappy with the finished product. It was fun to speculate on the director and cast. (I always imagined Lenny Kravitz as Cinna!) Yet I think the movie is getting too much exposure from the media, especially Entertainment Weekly. They've already had two covers dedicated to The Hunger Games - and the movie is still shooting! Photos from the set have trickled out to mainstream websites. It's beginning to feel like overkill. I know the movie biz has changed; fans are more invested in certain properties starting at the pre-production stage. (I don't get why people were so up in arms about a brunette being cast as Peeta. Could you not watch the film if he didn't have blond hair?) Some of us want to be surprised when we walk into theater, not know every detail of the script, story, special effects. I want small glimpses and teases, and I think The Hunger Games production is borderline guilty of oversharing.

Now, all that will be forgiven if the movie turns out to be incredible. The producers just have to remember that Hunger Games is not Twilight. I'm get the feeling that they are pushing the Katniss-Gale-Peeta love triangle. To me, that was one of the weakest parts of the trilogy. This is a series about war and man's cruelty towards each other; it's not about what boy Katniss wants to date. I am dreading the day when I see girls wearing Team Gale or Teem Peeta shirts. I get it. Twilight has been a huge success. The Hunger Games appeals to a similar audience. Lionsgate (the studio behind the movie) wants to make boatloads of money. Ergo, Hollywood is viewing Hunger Games as the new Twilight. Romance was a natural element in Twilight; it was the crux of the story. But in The Hunger Games, it's a subplot. In the first book, it's hardly developed. I don't want the director to pander to the Twilight crowd. I want them to make a thrilling, suspensful, cunning movie.

Hollywood has an obsession with franchises and pre-sold concepts. (you did hear that they're releasing a movie based on the board game Battleship starring Rihanna, right?) Now that Harry Potter and Twilight are ending, all eyes are turning to The Hunger Games to be the next big thing. I don't want the movie to carry such lofty expectations. Just because it's garnering heaps of advanced press doesn't mean it will be a blockbuster. It may not reach the heights of those two. Will that automatically make it a bomb? And just because Harry Potter and Twilight split the last books into two parts doesn't mean Mockingjay deserves the same treatment. Those books were split just to milk more money out of the series. I don't think Mockingjay has enough material to warrant two films. Let's be honest: the first half dragged. I wonder how they will make an entire movie out of it.

Do you think The Hunger Games movie is getting too much exposure? And do you want them to beef up the romance part?

***and now you can follow me on Twitter --> @FillupSeagull ***

Novel Film Blogfest - Day 2

This is part 2 for the Novel Films Blogfest hosted by Madeleine at Scribble and Edit . You can check out part 1 here.

For today's post, I am going to talk to you about a rare occurrence: sometimes, the movie is better then the book.

This doesn't happen often. Movies by their very nature are forced to condense and simplify in order to fit into a 2-hour time period and appeal to mass audiences. Books can delve into characters. They can take their sweet time revealing the story. It's a more personal medium than movies - you and your imagination vs. you and a theater full of strangers. Of all the books I've read that've been adapted into movies, I have always enjoyed the book more. Except once.

The Devil Wears Prada movie far exceeded the book. It hewed closely to the book's plot - smart, non girly-girl Andie Sachs (Anne Hathaway) gets a job working as assistant to Miranda Priestley (Meryl Streep), the demanding, crazy editor of fashion magazine Runway, and she must perform outrageous tasks to keep her boss happy. Both book and movie were huge hits; the movie single-handedly kept female-driven films afloat for a time.

So what made the movie better than the book?

The book was a roman a clef by Lauren Weisberger, the former assistant to Anna Wintour, legendary editor of Vogue. It was pretty much 400 pages of the author saying "I'm so smart. These people in fashion are so stupid. Look how stupid they're being. Read about the ludicrous things they do and say. My boss is a crazy bitch. Why am I here?" The movie managed to convey the outlandishness of Runway magazine and Miranda Priestley, while also making us understand the world of fashion. In both book and movie, Andie, a wannabe serious journalist, is totally out of place at a fashion magazine. She guides the reader/audience through the ridiculous world of couture. In the book, she constantly demeans this world; her views never change. In the movie, she learns what the big deal is all about. She has a discussion with Nigel, Miranda's right-hand man, about how people at Runway think they're curing cancer or something. He tells her that some of the "greatest artists of the last century have walked these halls," that fashion is the best kind of art because "you live your life in it." I thought that was such a profound statement. (And for the record, I have very little fashion sense and most of my wardrobe cost under $10.) Up until that point, I had the same views on fashion as Andie. But then I got it. I understood why people were so enraptured with this world, why they would spend so much money on a shirt, why they dress for work like they're walking a runway. They get to be curators everyday. A scene or two before that, Andie gets eviscerated in a fashion meeting by Miranda for snickering over a life-or-death decision about which blue belt to use. In a brilliant minute-long monologue, Miranda tells her how the decisions made on the runway and at Runway affect every single person, down to bargain shoppers like herself.
The epic scene: http://www.hulu.com/watch/13046/the-devil-wears-prada-cerulean-sweater
(p.s. for you Lost fans, that's Charlotte Staples-Lewis in the beginning!)

In less than 5 minutes, the movie managed to give credence and respect to the fashion world - something the book refused to do.

Secondly, the movie humanized Miranda. We saw that she neglected her family in order to get ahead, and she wound up paying the price. Again, Meryl Streep has another great scene when Miranda learns she is getting a divorce. The scene is very true to her character -- not sappy, just blunt and calm. Miranda came off as demanding and mean just like in the book, but in the movie, she also was shown to be a very knowledgeable editor. We understand why she's at the top. In that cerulean sweater scene, as in another scene when she's at a meeting discussing the new issue, she comes off as smart and savvy. We may not like Miranda, but we sure respect her. The author of the book, probably with an ax to grind, portrayed her as one-dimensional, leaving out the respect part.

Finally, and most importantly, the movie centered around the struggle between your personal and professional life - a real issue with which many people can empathize. The book just wanted to make fun of the fashion world. There is a place for that type of expose. I won't sit here and tell you that the book was unreadable. It was a fun, light read. But the movie dug deeper. It took great pains to find out what makes these people tick. It dared to make us understand the lunacy of high fashion and empathize with a character as seemingly evil as Miranda Priestley. That's why in this special case, the movie was infinitely better than the book.

How about you, readers? Are there any movies out there that you thought were better than the book? And if you haven't seen The Devil Wears Prada, rent it!

Novel Film Blogfest - Day 1

I guess it's technically Night 1. Er...sorry for the delay with this post! I am blogging as part of Scribble and Edit's Novel Film Blogfest...

I warn you. My list of titles that I have both seen and read is not long. I established a rule a few years ago not to read the book after I see the movie. Election is one of my favorite movies. It's also one of the best movies of the past 20 years, but that's another blog post for another time. I had decided to read the book, since I loved the movie so much. And much to my dismay, the two are very dissimilar. The premise is the same, but not much else. The Tracy and Mr. M in the book didn't sound at all like Reese Witherspoon and Matthew Broderick. In short, I hated the book. I found it dull.

The best part about reading a book is using your imagination to fill in the gaps - visualizing a character in your head, picturing the setting. But a movie does that for you. Tracy in the book was not like Tracy in the movie, among other differences, and that made it difficult for me to enjoy the novel on its own terms. So from then on, I would not let myself go back and read books if I'd already seen the movie. Currently, I am actually breaking that rule. I picked up The First Wives Club at a thrift store en route to the beach because it was the only book they had that seemed interesting. Even though I'm picturing the actresses in the 3 main roles, I'm working hard to not think of the movie and remembering that the two are separate entities.

Without further ado, my small list of books and movies I have both read (and there's probably a few I may be forgetting):

The Devil Wears Prada
Along Came a Spider
Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants
The Time Machine
Pride and Prejudice (the Keira Knightley version)
The Bonfire of the Vanities
I Know What You Did Last Summer
Gossip Girl (this is a TV show)
The Rules of Attraction
The Help (I will see this movie when it comes out in 11 days)
Bringing Down the House (movie version: 21, not the Steve Martin/Queen Latifah movie)
In Cold Blood (movie: Capote)

I Read the Movie Part 2: Options

Welcome back for Part 2! As I discussed in Part 1, before your book is turned into a movie, coverage is written on it. Now, if you do receive a coveted Recommend from the reader, your book could be optioned!

But don't pop the champagne just yet.

Some books get turned into movies, but most do not. Well, many books get optioned, but most do not make it to production. An option is where a producer will purchase the rights to your book or script for a set period of time, and if he/she cannot get it produced during that period, then the rights revert back to you. It's like a leasing a car. Most options last a year, sometimes longer. If in that time the producer pulls together the resources to make the movie, then he will full-on buy the rights to your book. Option payments vary, but I've heard of them being as low as a couple thousand. If your book is bought, though, that goes for a minimum of six figures. (for major studios)

From what I've seen, every book that gets acquired will get published. In the film industry, the vast majority of scripts that get bought never get made. I'd say 90%. Why would a studio purchase 10 scripts and only produce 1 of them? The film industry looks at this as Research and Development. The same way companies spend millions on R&D, creating prototypes that never make it to shelves, so do producers buy or option scripts.

Most producers have options on multiple books/scripts at a time, increasing their odds to get at least one of them produced. Why lease and not buy? These producers do not have the funds to purchase your book rights, let alone produce the movie. They have to wait for financing, either from a larger movie studio (Disney, Paramount, Sony, WB) or from independent sources. When a movie studio "greenlights" a film, they are giving the producer the money to put the script into production. It can take YEARS to get to this point, and most projects never make it this far. Thus, if a producer options your book, it is by no means a guarantee that a movie will get made. Now, there are big-time producers with a discretionary fund. Think Jerry Bruckheimer. They can buy your book's rights without a greenlight because they have millions of dollars at their disposal. But it's still not guaranteed to get produced.

It's easier for books to get optioned, but harder to get produced. Movie studios are risk-averse; they want pre-existing properties or projects with a built-in audience. Hence the flood of remakes, sequels, and comic book movies at your local multiplex. A producer will option your book in the hopes that it's a bestseller, but if doesn't make much noise, then it loses incentive to get produced. Paramount and 20th Century Fox both had options on Twilight but passed.

Producers may option your book, but if your MC can't be played by a star, then it probably won't get made. Mega-successful books like Harry Potter and The Help are the exception because they didn't need starpower to sell tickets. But a producer usually needs a star or director attached to the project in order to get greenlit. It's tough for YA because our current talent pool is so limited. If you can't imagine your MC being played by Selena Gomez or Taylor Lautner, then it will be hard to convince a studio to pump millions of dollars into the movie.

Note: These rules also apply for turning books into TV series for the most part. Alloy Entertainment, the book packaging firm behind Gossip Girl and Pretty Little Liars, has its own production wing. They deal directly with networks to bring their books to the air. So if you sell a book series to them, then your odds increase significantly to get your book made into a series.

And if you are super-duper lucky enough to have your book produced, understand that once the studio buys the rights, what happens next is out of your hands - unless your last name is Rowling. I doubt Tom Wolfe expected Hollywood to turn his beloved novel Bonfire of the Vanities into one of the most reviled films of all time. And I'll bet when Susan Orlean sold the film rights to The Orchard Thief, she was not expecting Adaptation.

I'm sorry if these 2 posts seem negative. The film/TV industry can be very confusing, and I'd rather have writers be educated so they know what to expect if they're ever in this position. Books do get optioned and produced into movies all the time, so there is hope. But now you'll understand if nothing comes of it. It's not you. It's not your book. The film industry is a different beast from the publishing industry. So while we all fantasize about watching the movie/TV adaptation of a book we wrote, just focus on the writing part. It's the only part you can control.