NaNo snuck up on me this year. Between the two large projects at work that were requiring overtime, and the crazy schedule that forced my wife and I to come into work at 4:30am, I didn’t really have time to consider writing a novel. It wasn’t until I got an automated e-mail from the NaNo site that I remembered. I saw the e-mail and said, “Oh yeah, that’s coming up. Well I should think about doing it again.” And then I forgot because work drove everything from my mind.
When I had some down time I did bring it up to my wife. While most of my projects would wind down in mid October, she would still be doing follow up and would end up working from home. I didn’t want to end up with both of us needing to work in the home office at the same time. Work has to come first, and if I had to do my own NaNoWriMo in December, I would. But she assured me that we wouldn’t really be in the office at the same time and it would be great if I got back to actually writing again.
Well with that figured out, it was now Halloween. Um, Ok, so NaNo starts tomorrow – what do I write… Hello? Anyone? Any brain cell wanna chime in there?
This wasn’t writers block. This was just my brain stunned for a few hours. I knew what I had wanted to write for NaNo this year. There’s a fantasy adventure story I’ve been kicking around for over a year. Now would be a great time to power down a first draft.
There was one slight problem with this. NaNo falls in November. What have I been doing all October? Reading H.P. Lovecraft and watching horror movies. This means that I’ve got horror and supernatural fiction on the brain and in blood. I didn’t feel like writing a fantasy story. And one thing I’ve learned, if I end up forcing the writing it almost always comes out poor. Strike while the iron’s hot. So horror fiction it is.
While reading Mr. Lovecraft’s work, I was surprised how much of it has been borrowed and influenced most modern horror – and yet there are very few successful adaptations of his stories. Of course Lovecraft’s writing offers several limitations for adaptation. His style is stilted and hard to get into. His world view is bleak and unforgiving. His heroes can be very passive, hardly heroes at all. And his horror is created by generating dread, something that is very hard to do in a movie or television show.
But with the right amount of tweaking and fleshing out, you could make a solid series based on Lovecraft’s fiction. This was the kind of thing I’d been thinking about this October, how would someone create a movie series or television series based on Lovecraft’s stories. I came up with all kinds of ideas and actually got a little pumped to work on them.
Then my logical brain stepped in and said, “Hold on. Why are you doing this? Are you seriously thinking that you can create a whole television show or movie franchise idea based on Lovecraft? Seriously? Think about that for a moment.”
I did and my logical brain was right. Unless Hollywood goes through a major shift in perspective, Lovecraftian fiction is going to remain in books. Most mainstream viewers don’t want dread. They want solid scares and blood. Can’t say I blame them.
Ok, novels then, I can write Lovecraftian novels that are…
Yeah Mr. Logic stepped in again. “There are already a whole bunch of Lovecraft novels and fan fics out there. Maybe you’ve heard of the Cthulu Mythos?”
“Yeah, but this would be…”
“Different because you did it? No. It would be more of the same. And you don’t really want to waste time on more the same do you?
Logic brain wins again. I’ve fallen into this trap before. I become enamored with something and the fanboy in me starts creating what is basically fan fiction. It’s fun to write, but it isn’t satisfying in the end. What is satisfying is taking the inspiration of these works and working it through my brain and fuse it with my style and create something new. Not necessarily original, but something less than a “inspired by the works of…” type deal.
What did I end up writing? Well I’ll post part two of this blog this weekend and you can find out. Or if you want t sneak peek, head over to this website and check out the “Novel Info” tab.
As of this writing 9,088 words, or 45 pages.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Time to Start that Novel – NaNoWriMo 2009

After much consideration I decided to attempt National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) again this year. This means in the month of November I will write a novel. Sounds like a challenge, but I pulled it off last year with a solid first draft. Still haven’t gotten around to editing that puppy, but it did prove to me that power writing through a first draft is a great way to get things moving. And I need to get things moving.
Ever since I got the lovely little white box called the Wii, I’ve been slacking off. Now I can’t blame it all on that wonderful birthday present (thanks Chris!), it’s also the simple fact that I’ve been a lazy bastard. Sure I’ve done some short story polishing here and there, but nothing really came of it. The most writing I’ve been doing is this weekly blog and I’ve been slacking there a bit too.
So maybe NaNoWriMo is what I need. For those of you that are curious, I’ve got 30 days to write 50,000 words. That translates to roughly 175 pages. So really this is more of a novella sized work. Still this is a first draft and you can usually expect these kinds of things to change size after editing.
Last year I shot for 3,000 words each day I sat down and started working. 2008 had 5 weekends in it. This year I’ve only got 4. But I think the 3,000 word limit will work fine. This breaks down to me writing for four days a week till the end of the contest on the 30th which falls on a Monday.
I’ll be starting up tomorrow and I’ll also try and post some blogs with progress reports and some insight into what it’s like this time. I’ve already got a story idea and I’m eager to see where this one takes off too. I’ll go into a brief synopsis of the idea in my next blog.
Here’s the website if you wanna check it out: http://www.nanowrimo.org/
Have you attempted NaNoWriMo before? How did you fare? Sound interesting to you or do you think this is a hopeless task?
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Is this a horror movie? – Poltergeist
“Poltergeist” scared the hell out of me as a kid. I didn’t see it in the theater, but I did see it at a friends house. He was a horror fan, and I wasn’t quite into the genre yet. He felt this would be a good movie to start with, and so popped it in. I have to say that the scene where the investigator rips his face off was probably the most horrific thing I’d seen in a movie at that point.
After watching the movie again this year, my wife turned to me and said, “You know, this isn’t really a horror film. It’s a family drama”. This reminded me of the second time I saw the film with my buddy back in the late 80’s. We didn’t like it because it wasn’t like “Creepshow” or “Nightmare on Elm Street”. And that is what most people think of when they think Horror. Well that and the countless “Saw” films that seem to be plaguing us.
Truth is, lots of things can be considered horror. I’ve covered a few opinions in this blog (including Stephen King’s look at the genre in “Dance Macabre”), but for me “Poltergeist” works with one of the most effective types of horror – the fear of the unknown.
The reason the movie still works and rises above some of its dated special effects is because of two key elements. The family is introduced in a way that makes them very familiar. They remind you of your neighbors or yourself. In fact the trailer goes out of its way to say how normal the house in “Poltergeist” is. “A normal town, with a normal neighborhood, and a normal house… except for one detail”. This normalcy does two things. It makes the family relatable and it shows that these aren’t super heroes, just average folks. Contrast this to “The Haunting” where the house is a towering mansion, or even “Dracula” where the heroes at least have Van Helsing and his key knowledge. Here, the family is on their own facing something they can not explain.
And that is the other key to “Poltergeist”, the forces at work in the house are powerful and unknowable. You can’t reason with them, because you can’t communicate with them. Some don’t seem to want to do more than move things around the house, and others seem bent on taking Carol Anne into their world. Logic is thrown out the window and there seems to be only two options – fight the unknown or run away. And the Freeling family would have run away if Carol Anne hadn’t gotten sucked into that brilliant vortex.
To add to the horror you’ve got the two forces summoned to combat it: science and magic. The ghost researchers are obviously the scientific weapon. They come in and try to figure out why’s and how’s. They feel logic and documentation can solve this mystery. Quickly they are assaulted at all sides and the weakest of their number is driven away from the house (after he hallucinates that he tears his own face off – I’d run away too). This unknown force can not be quantified and the researchers end up doing little more than catching some great evidence on tape. But they realize that they are overmatched and turn toward magic.
Enter Tangina, the short and shrill psychic who’s able to contact Carol Anne and even figure out where in the house the portals to the other world are. At first Tangina seems to be the solution and it makes sense: use magic to fight the unknown. Humans have been doing it since the dawn of man.
Notice one key thing – Tangina does not go into the portal herself and rescue Carol Anne. She’s prepared to do it, but instead it is the mother, Diane, who enters the unknown world and comes back with her daughter. This works with the main theme of the film, of facing the unknown. The family, who we have become connected to must face the danger by themselves and even if they have help of science and magic, they must make the sacrifices and take the risks.
Well it all turns out well, with Carol Anne being rescued and the worst of the horror just giving Diane a streak of white hair. Tangina even declares the house “clean”. But the movie isn’t done yet. In a final defiance – the forces go right back attempting to take Carol Anne again. Magic was not effective. The researchers are gone, so even the reassurance of science is nowhere to be found. Even dad is far away - just mom and the kids and house full of malicious forces. The horrors are unleashed one on top of the other and things go bad very quickly. But it is the family that fights and escapes. Notice that all the members of the family show up by the end of the film, even the teenage daughter who was staying with a friend manages to show up just as the house is destroying itself in it’s unknowable fury.
The last image ties the knot. The family is together, exhausted and shaken, but together. They check into a motel room and push the television out of the room in a moment of dark irony. As the credits roll, Jerry Goldsmith’s score goes into a lullaby, ironic and maybe over cute. But stay till the end when the demonic giggling kicks in. Nice ending.
“Poltergeist” has a lot of great things going for it. Personally I wouldn’t have shown as much of the ghosts ands the powers as they did in the film. Horror of the unknown works better when it’s intangible. And since it’s the effects that are dated, these things could have been avoided with a less “in your face” approach to the story (See the 1963 version of “The Haunting” for a good example). But aside from that its power lies in the set up and in the execution of the story. A family drama? Sure it is. The family as a whole faces the forces of the unknown and survives. But the horror of the unknown is the other key. “Poltergeist” wouldn’t be as effective without either part.
What do you think of “Poltergeist”, solid horror film or over-rated special effects movie? Would you call “Poltergeist” a horror film or does it straddle a line? Do you have a favorite haunted house film?
After watching the movie again this year, my wife turned to me and said, “You know, this isn’t really a horror film. It’s a family drama”. This reminded me of the second time I saw the film with my buddy back in the late 80’s. We didn’t like it because it wasn’t like “Creepshow” or “Nightmare on Elm Street”. And that is what most people think of when they think Horror. Well that and the countless “Saw” films that seem to be plaguing us.
Truth is, lots of things can be considered horror. I’ve covered a few opinions in this blog (including Stephen King’s look at the genre in “Dance Macabre”), but for me “Poltergeist” works with one of the most effective types of horror – the fear of the unknown.
The reason the movie still works and rises above some of its dated special effects is because of two key elements. The family is introduced in a way that makes them very familiar. They remind you of your neighbors or yourself. In fact the trailer goes out of its way to say how normal the house in “Poltergeist” is. “A normal town, with a normal neighborhood, and a normal house… except for one detail”. This normalcy does two things. It makes the family relatable and it shows that these aren’t super heroes, just average folks. Contrast this to “The Haunting” where the house is a towering mansion, or even “Dracula” where the heroes at least have Van Helsing and his key knowledge. Here, the family is on their own facing something they can not explain.
And that is the other key to “Poltergeist”, the forces at work in the house are powerful and unknowable. You can’t reason with them, because you can’t communicate with them. Some don’t seem to want to do more than move things around the house, and others seem bent on taking Carol Anne into their world. Logic is thrown out the window and there seems to be only two options – fight the unknown or run away. And the Freeling family would have run away if Carol Anne hadn’t gotten sucked into that brilliant vortex.
To add to the horror you’ve got the two forces summoned to combat it: science and magic. The ghost researchers are obviously the scientific weapon. They come in and try to figure out why’s and how’s. They feel logic and documentation can solve this mystery. Quickly they are assaulted at all sides and the weakest of their number is driven away from the house (after he hallucinates that he tears his own face off – I’d run away too). This unknown force can not be quantified and the researchers end up doing little more than catching some great evidence on tape. But they realize that they are overmatched and turn toward magic.
Enter Tangina, the short and shrill psychic who’s able to contact Carol Anne and even figure out where in the house the portals to the other world are. At first Tangina seems to be the solution and it makes sense: use magic to fight the unknown. Humans have been doing it since the dawn of man.
Notice one key thing – Tangina does not go into the portal herself and rescue Carol Anne. She’s prepared to do it, but instead it is the mother, Diane, who enters the unknown world and comes back with her daughter. This works with the main theme of the film, of facing the unknown. The family, who we have become connected to must face the danger by themselves and even if they have help of science and magic, they must make the sacrifices and take the risks.
Well it all turns out well, with Carol Anne being rescued and the worst of the horror just giving Diane a streak of white hair. Tangina even declares the house “clean”. But the movie isn’t done yet. In a final defiance – the forces go right back attempting to take Carol Anne again. Magic was not effective. The researchers are gone, so even the reassurance of science is nowhere to be found. Even dad is far away - just mom and the kids and house full of malicious forces. The horrors are unleashed one on top of the other and things go bad very quickly. But it is the family that fights and escapes. Notice that all the members of the family show up by the end of the film, even the teenage daughter who was staying with a friend manages to show up just as the house is destroying itself in it’s unknowable fury.
The last image ties the knot. The family is together, exhausted and shaken, but together. They check into a motel room and push the television out of the room in a moment of dark irony. As the credits roll, Jerry Goldsmith’s score goes into a lullaby, ironic and maybe over cute. But stay till the end when the demonic giggling kicks in. Nice ending.
“Poltergeist” has a lot of great things going for it. Personally I wouldn’t have shown as much of the ghosts ands the powers as they did in the film. Horror of the unknown works better when it’s intangible. And since it’s the effects that are dated, these things could have been avoided with a less “in your face” approach to the story (See the 1963 version of “The Haunting” for a good example). But aside from that its power lies in the set up and in the execution of the story. A family drama? Sure it is. The family as a whole faces the forces of the unknown and survives. But the horror of the unknown is the other key. “Poltergeist” wouldn’t be as effective without either part.
What do you think of “Poltergeist”, solid horror film or over-rated special effects movie? Would you call “Poltergeist” a horror film or does it straddle a line? Do you have a favorite haunted house film?
Monday, October 12, 2009
Dark Demented Noir – Lost Highway
David Lynch has been one of my favorite directors since the end of the 90’s. I remember seeing a scene from “The Elephant Man” when I was a kid. In it the nurse sees the unfortunate man, and his image terrifies her. It was filmed like a horror scene and it scared the hell out of me.
As a kid I also watched “Dune” because I loved “Star Wars” and my dad brought home anything sci-fi related. Needless to say The Baron terrified my sister and I found it to be the most disturbing sci-fi film I’d ever seen. I know others feel the same way for other reasons. :-)
I can’t remember if I saw “Lost Highway” before I got pulled back into David Lynch, or seeing that movie was the cause – but I do know I saw it and the film impacted me profoundly. It was surreal horror in a way I’d never seen before. Lynch had captured the feel of the nightmare, and in doing did something that I had rarely felt – he scared me.
Most of the time, horror movies are gross and don’t do much more than startle me. But there are the rare films that use atmosphere to build horror, and the first half of “Lost Highway” does it very well. I heard the first 40 minutes described as a pressure cooker, with you feeling certain that something horrible is going to happen, but you wait for the other shoe to drop.
Now if you haven’t seen the movie, I’ll tell you right now, most people leave the film immensely confused after the first viewing. The first forty minutes move very slowly, and many find them boring. The next hour or so seems to be a completely different movie and the final fifteen to twenty minutes are screw with your sense of narrative so much that confusion is the only resolution. To be honest this isn’t good story telling.
Now, this provides a bit of an issue, if Lynch doesn’t tell an effective story than “Lost Highway” fails as a movie right? Correct. But if Lynches goal wasn’t to tell a story but create an effective and horrifying atmosphere that creates mixes an uneasy and uncanny feeling in the viewer, then his goal is met. To be honest I don’t know what he was trying to do in this movie, and if I got a chance to ask Lynch, he wouldn’t tell me. His favorite reply to that question is “What do you think I was trying to do?” For him it’s more entertaining to hear what others make of his work.
So maybe he’s just a snobby guy who has a very good eye behind the camera and knows how to create nightmare visions on the screen. But he does this in such an effective way that many other filmmakers have used his techniques to great effect – and especially in horror films.
Lynch’s follow up to this movie, “Mulholland Drive” is a better film. The story makes a bit more sense, (once you piece it together after multiple viewings) and the style seems more assured and concise. The pacing is quicker and fits the mystery of the film.
But “Lost Highway” is primarily a horror film dressed as noir. Shadows and light play huge parts in the film. Lynch utilizes sound and music in such a way as to disorient and horrify the viewer. Early scenes seem to have eerie silence, or undulating rumbles as if the world is waiting to close over the main characters. The house of the characters is always in shadow and hallways seem to stretch into a dark oblivion.
Lights are used in ways that seem to be perfect. Flashing white-blue bursts signify power and a moment of change. Brilliant headlights bath nude bodies in the desert. And the red light of a jazz club illuminates the face of a man who feels suspicion and rage building inside him.
Haven’t seen it and curious? Let me tell you a bit about the premise of the first part of the film. A couple living in modern house seems to be having a strained relationship. There is no sign of understanding or passion between them. One day a video tape is left on their porch (movie was made in 96, so no DVDs). The tape shows a slow pan of the front of their house. The next day another tape arrives, showing the same thing, but after a burst of static, it now shows the inside of the house, from a very high angle, almost as if it was floating in the air. It moves down the hallway and into the bedroom right over the sleeping couple. They are so disturbed that they call the police, but the detectives are unable to find any evidence of a break in. Later on the couple is at a party, and the husband meets a small pale man with no eyebrows. The man claims to be in their house, “right now”. He hands his cell phone to the husband, who dials his home number, and the man answers, even though he’s standing right in front of him.
Seriously, it’s one of the most surreal and messed up phone calls in movie history. And that bit of the uncanny starts the unraveling of reality for all the characters, and only gets darker from here on in. If you are familiar with Lynch’s other work, “Twin Peaks”, “Blue Velvet” or “Wild At Heart”, you’ll know what to expect. But this film is darker, perhaps the darkest of his movies (although I still haven’t made up my mind about “Inland Empire” yet). But in my mind, it’s the closest we will get to a David Lynch horror film and that’s why it’s one of my favorites for Halloween viewing.
Seen “Lost Highway”? What did you think of it? David Lynch: skilled film maker or insane pretentious “arteest”? Can a movie or novel be successful if it only accomplishes mood, but fails in telling a cohesive story?
As a kid I also watched “Dune” because I loved “Star Wars” and my dad brought home anything sci-fi related. Needless to say The Baron terrified my sister and I found it to be the most disturbing sci-fi film I’d ever seen. I know others feel the same way for other reasons. :-)
I can’t remember if I saw “Lost Highway” before I got pulled back into David Lynch, or seeing that movie was the cause – but I do know I saw it and the film impacted me profoundly. It was surreal horror in a way I’d never seen before. Lynch had captured the feel of the nightmare, and in doing did something that I had rarely felt – he scared me.
Most of the time, horror movies are gross and don’t do much more than startle me. But there are the rare films that use atmosphere to build horror, and the first half of “Lost Highway” does it very well. I heard the first 40 minutes described as a pressure cooker, with you feeling certain that something horrible is going to happen, but you wait for the other shoe to drop.
Now if you haven’t seen the movie, I’ll tell you right now, most people leave the film immensely confused after the first viewing. The first forty minutes move very slowly, and many find them boring. The next hour or so seems to be a completely different movie and the final fifteen to twenty minutes are screw with your sense of narrative so much that confusion is the only resolution. To be honest this isn’t good story telling.
Now, this provides a bit of an issue, if Lynch doesn’t tell an effective story than “Lost Highway” fails as a movie right? Correct. But if Lynches goal wasn’t to tell a story but create an effective and horrifying atmosphere that creates mixes an uneasy and uncanny feeling in the viewer, then his goal is met. To be honest I don’t know what he was trying to do in this movie, and if I got a chance to ask Lynch, he wouldn’t tell me. His favorite reply to that question is “What do you think I was trying to do?” For him it’s more entertaining to hear what others make of his work.
So maybe he’s just a snobby guy who has a very good eye behind the camera and knows how to create nightmare visions on the screen. But he does this in such an effective way that many other filmmakers have used his techniques to great effect – and especially in horror films.
Lynch’s follow up to this movie, “Mulholland Drive” is a better film. The story makes a bit more sense, (once you piece it together after multiple viewings) and the style seems more assured and concise. The pacing is quicker and fits the mystery of the film.
But “Lost Highway” is primarily a horror film dressed as noir. Shadows and light play huge parts in the film. Lynch utilizes sound and music in such a way as to disorient and horrify the viewer. Early scenes seem to have eerie silence, or undulating rumbles as if the world is waiting to close over the main characters. The house of the characters is always in shadow and hallways seem to stretch into a dark oblivion.
Lights are used in ways that seem to be perfect. Flashing white-blue bursts signify power and a moment of change. Brilliant headlights bath nude bodies in the desert. And the red light of a jazz club illuminates the face of a man who feels suspicion and rage building inside him.
Haven’t seen it and curious? Let me tell you a bit about the premise of the first part of the film. A couple living in modern house seems to be having a strained relationship. There is no sign of understanding or passion between them. One day a video tape is left on their porch (movie was made in 96, so no DVDs). The tape shows a slow pan of the front of their house. The next day another tape arrives, showing the same thing, but after a burst of static, it now shows the inside of the house, from a very high angle, almost as if it was floating in the air. It moves down the hallway and into the bedroom right over the sleeping couple. They are so disturbed that they call the police, but the detectives are unable to find any evidence of a break in. Later on the couple is at a party, and the husband meets a small pale man with no eyebrows. The man claims to be in their house, “right now”. He hands his cell phone to the husband, who dials his home number, and the man answers, even though he’s standing right in front of him.
Seriously, it’s one of the most surreal and messed up phone calls in movie history. And that bit of the uncanny starts the unraveling of reality for all the characters, and only gets darker from here on in. If you are familiar with Lynch’s other work, “Twin Peaks”, “Blue Velvet” or “Wild At Heart”, you’ll know what to expect. But this film is darker, perhaps the darkest of his movies (although I still haven’t made up my mind about “Inland Empire” yet). But in my mind, it’s the closest we will get to a David Lynch horror film and that’s why it’s one of my favorites for Halloween viewing.
Seen “Lost Highway”? What did you think of it? David Lynch: skilled film maker or insane pretentious “arteest”? Can a movie or novel be successful if it only accomplishes mood, but fails in telling a cohesive story?
Labels:
David Lynch,
Lost Highway,
Movies,
Storytelling
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
A Whole Book about Walking – The Long Walk
In some ways Stephen King is a polarizing figure among book readers and writers. Some feel he is completely commercial and writes to please the masses. Others find his work to be among the best of modern storytelling. I dislike extremes, but I have to admit, Stephen King is a very good writer. Nearly every book I’ve read by him, I’ve enjoyed on some level. Some of them are better than others, but most of them keep you reading until the end.
While King is known for his horror work, he’s written plenty of other things. Some of the best adaptation of King’s work to screen come from his non-horror offerings: “Stand by Me” (based of “The Body”), “The Shawshank Redemption”, and “The Green Mile”. In fact one of the books I recommend to King neophytes is “Different Seasons” a combination of four short stories that don’t really have much to do with the supernatural.
My sister recommended “The Long Walk” to me, saying it was another one of King’s different tales. I knew little about it, other than it was written by King when he was using the Richard Bachman pseudonym. The introduction to the book explains King’s view of Bachman and about the alter ego’s untimely death. King says of Bachman “…he’s not a very nice guy.”
What is very interesting about this book is that it shouldn’t work. It has two things going against it. First off, it’s bleak. There is very little humor here and what there is black as the depths of space and nearly as cold. The setting is harsh, grim future – a true dystopia. The tone is hard and unforgiving and it doesn’t let up, not even at the end.
The second strike against it is the subject matter. The basic plot is a publicized game. It seems to be the only game in this future U.S. One hundred teenage boys start walking from a point in Maine heading south. They can not stop, they can not drop below four miles per hour. If they do either, they are warned. After three warnings they are shot. The winner of the game is awarded a fabulous prize. All you have to do is survive.
That’s it. You start off with the main character and follow him all the way through The Long Walk until his end. There is nothing else going on, you don’t get to see anything outside of what the main character experiences, and so you don’t get much background as to why the game was created, how it is promoted and televised, and why anyone would want to participate in such a thing in the first place. You only know that it’s happening and that you are trapped with the main character as it happens.
The thing is, the book works very well. There are two key reasons for this. For me the most important element is the set up. If the first couple chapters don’t grab the reader then they are not going to stay with the book for the long haul. King creates an interesting character with Garraty Davis. He’s someone we can all relate to in a way. If you’ve ever been a teenager then you understand some of what Garraty is going though. You wanna seem smarter than you are. You feel invincible one level and very self conscious on another. You do things on impulse with much though for future consequences. You have something to prove but don’t know what it might be or who you want to prove it to. In a way he reminds me of some of the better drawn teen protagonists of Japanese animation or video games.
Most readers will understand Garraty and as King slowly feeds you more information about the game and what’s happening, your curiosity grows. Garraty obviously knows some things, but his mind isn’t focused on them, instead elements of the game and the dystopian future come out in conversation and internal monologue.
This is the second key to the book. There are elements that are hinted at from the beginning. Why is Garraty involved in the Long Walk? Who is “The Major” and why is he in charge of The Long Walk? Why do some of the boys act the way they do? Each of these points perks your interest and keeps you reading. Garraty finds some of these answers, the readers may have to glean others from Garraty’s reactions and dialogue. Some are never fully revealed. Then of course there are other questions that arise as the book unfolds.
King handles it all very well, and kept me reading even when I questioning the point of the book. It’s so grim and dower, and yet there was something going on at its core, a cold nugget of truth that seemed to elude me. The book made me think, and for most of us writers, if you can get your readers to interact with the book and think about after they’ve shut it – you’ve succeeded. I definitely recommend this for anyone in the mood for something a little different from King, and not afraid to take The Long Walk.
What did you think of “The Long Walk”? You think King is over-rated? Ever read a book that didn’t seem like it should work but because of the writer’s skill, it did?
While King is known for his horror work, he’s written plenty of other things. Some of the best adaptation of King’s work to screen come from his non-horror offerings: “Stand by Me” (based of “The Body”), “The Shawshank Redemption”, and “The Green Mile”. In fact one of the books I recommend to King neophytes is “Different Seasons” a combination of four short stories that don’t really have much to do with the supernatural.
My sister recommended “The Long Walk” to me, saying it was another one of King’s different tales. I knew little about it, other than it was written by King when he was using the Richard Bachman pseudonym. The introduction to the book explains King’s view of Bachman and about the alter ego’s untimely death. King says of Bachman “…he’s not a very nice guy.”
What is very interesting about this book is that it shouldn’t work. It has two things going against it. First off, it’s bleak. There is very little humor here and what there is black as the depths of space and nearly as cold. The setting is harsh, grim future – a true dystopia. The tone is hard and unforgiving and it doesn’t let up, not even at the end.
The second strike against it is the subject matter. The basic plot is a publicized game. It seems to be the only game in this future U.S. One hundred teenage boys start walking from a point in Maine heading south. They can not stop, they can not drop below four miles per hour. If they do either, they are warned. After three warnings they are shot. The winner of the game is awarded a fabulous prize. All you have to do is survive.
That’s it. You start off with the main character and follow him all the way through The Long Walk until his end. There is nothing else going on, you don’t get to see anything outside of what the main character experiences, and so you don’t get much background as to why the game was created, how it is promoted and televised, and why anyone would want to participate in such a thing in the first place. You only know that it’s happening and that you are trapped with the main character as it happens.
The thing is, the book works very well. There are two key reasons for this. For me the most important element is the set up. If the first couple chapters don’t grab the reader then they are not going to stay with the book for the long haul. King creates an interesting character with Garraty Davis. He’s someone we can all relate to in a way. If you’ve ever been a teenager then you understand some of what Garraty is going though. You wanna seem smarter than you are. You feel invincible one level and very self conscious on another. You do things on impulse with much though for future consequences. You have something to prove but don’t know what it might be or who you want to prove it to. In a way he reminds me of some of the better drawn teen protagonists of Japanese animation or video games.
Most readers will understand Garraty and as King slowly feeds you more information about the game and what’s happening, your curiosity grows. Garraty obviously knows some things, but his mind isn’t focused on them, instead elements of the game and the dystopian future come out in conversation and internal monologue.
This is the second key to the book. There are elements that are hinted at from the beginning. Why is Garraty involved in the Long Walk? Who is “The Major” and why is he in charge of The Long Walk? Why do some of the boys act the way they do? Each of these points perks your interest and keeps you reading. Garraty finds some of these answers, the readers may have to glean others from Garraty’s reactions and dialogue. Some are never fully revealed. Then of course there are other questions that arise as the book unfolds.
King handles it all very well, and kept me reading even when I questioning the point of the book. It’s so grim and dower, and yet there was something going on at its core, a cold nugget of truth that seemed to elude me. The book made me think, and for most of us writers, if you can get your readers to interact with the book and think about after they’ve shut it – you’ve succeeded. I definitely recommend this for anyone in the mood for something a little different from King, and not afraid to take The Long Walk.
What did you think of “The Long Walk”? You think King is over-rated? Ever read a book that didn’t seem like it should work but because of the writer’s skill, it did?
Labels:
Novel Writing,
Stephen King,
Storytelling,
The Long Walk
Monday, September 28, 2009
Threads of the Story – Anansi Boys
I think I mentioned this when I did my blog about “Stardust”, but I really like Neil Gaiman’s concepts for his books. He obviously loves mythology about as much as I do, he seems fascinated with storytelling, and he had no problem mixing the surreal and the humorous together with fantasy and horror. All in all it should be the perfect mix. However all three of his previous novels, “Stardust”, “Neverwhere” and “American Gods” never quite clicked for me. In all three cases it was because of the protagonist. I never connected with the main character and instead kept wanting the book to be about the supporting cast (who were all amazingly colorful.
Well Gaiman bucked his trend in “Anansi Boys”. Not only does he create a leading character that pulled me in, but the entire story was a blast to read. Our hero is a typical sad sack character with the unfortunate name of Fat Charlie. The story starts with an explanation of why Fat Charlie is called Fat Charlie, even though he’s not fat.
The story goes like this, Fat Charlie was given the nickname by his father. We’re told that once his father gives anything a nick name – it sticks forever. So even though Charlie was a little pudgy kid that grew out of his husky state; he remained Fat Charlie to everyone he knew. This little story nugget establishes several key points right off the bat.
First off Fat Charlie didn’t get to pick his name, it was forced upon him. And pretty quickly we see that Fat Charlie has a lot of things in life forced on him. Sometimes he minds, sometimes he doesn’t, but there is nothing he can do about it. Life does things to Charlie and he reacts. And since life seems obsessed with giving him crap, Charlie’s always seems down on his luck or just surviving his existence.
Second we learn that Fat Charlie’s dad has no problem calling his son “fat”, and making sure that everyone else calls him “fat”. Right there you learn enough about the father to understand why Fat Charlie doesn’t like the man. But there is more to the story and it becomes apparent that Fat Charlie’s going to have to come to grips with his father.
The story continues along its merry way, introducing a mysterious sibling, a bit of magic involving spiders, and an ordinary lime that just might save the day. Because we like Charlie and feel bad for the guy (nothing seems to go his way no matter what he tries), the story carries you along, just waiting to see if Charlie is going to manage on the up side of things. Gaiman does a good job with the character and developing him over the course of the novel. Fat Charlie is not the same man at the end of the book, but after all his adventures – I’d be a little different too.
If asked what kind of book this was, I’d find it hard to place. It’s almost like a fantasy tale told in modern times. There is magic, there are gods meddling in human affairs, there’s lost siblings, lost loves and murderous corporate a-holes. You get a little bit of everything. But the book is always entertaining and has quite a few laughs in it. I especially liked the bit about the lime. I’ll never look at that little green citrus the same way again.
So all in all, “Anansi Boys” was a great read and one I’d definitely recommend. It’s my favorite of Gaiman’s novels, and a good place to start if you haven’t read any of his short fiction (which I also recommend). It’s good to see him finally create a protagonist I could connect with and one that I wanted to follow on his journey. Gaiman has never lacked for imagination and skill with creating worlds and supporting characters. This time the whole package is very satisfying.
Have you read “Anansi Boys”? What did you think of it? What did you think of Gaiman’s other work? Do you have a favorite “down on their luck” protagonist?
Well Gaiman bucked his trend in “Anansi Boys”. Not only does he create a leading character that pulled me in, but the entire story was a blast to read. Our hero is a typical sad sack character with the unfortunate name of Fat Charlie. The story starts with an explanation of why Fat Charlie is called Fat Charlie, even though he’s not fat.
The story goes like this, Fat Charlie was given the nickname by his father. We’re told that once his father gives anything a nick name – it sticks forever. So even though Charlie was a little pudgy kid that grew out of his husky state; he remained Fat Charlie to everyone he knew. This little story nugget establishes several key points right off the bat.
First off Fat Charlie didn’t get to pick his name, it was forced upon him. And pretty quickly we see that Fat Charlie has a lot of things in life forced on him. Sometimes he minds, sometimes he doesn’t, but there is nothing he can do about it. Life does things to Charlie and he reacts. And since life seems obsessed with giving him crap, Charlie’s always seems down on his luck or just surviving his existence.
Second we learn that Fat Charlie’s dad has no problem calling his son “fat”, and making sure that everyone else calls him “fat”. Right there you learn enough about the father to understand why Fat Charlie doesn’t like the man. But there is more to the story and it becomes apparent that Fat Charlie’s going to have to come to grips with his father.
The story continues along its merry way, introducing a mysterious sibling, a bit of magic involving spiders, and an ordinary lime that just might save the day. Because we like Charlie and feel bad for the guy (nothing seems to go his way no matter what he tries), the story carries you along, just waiting to see if Charlie is going to manage on the up side of things. Gaiman does a good job with the character and developing him over the course of the novel. Fat Charlie is not the same man at the end of the book, but after all his adventures – I’d be a little different too.
If asked what kind of book this was, I’d find it hard to place. It’s almost like a fantasy tale told in modern times. There is magic, there are gods meddling in human affairs, there’s lost siblings, lost loves and murderous corporate a-holes. You get a little bit of everything. But the book is always entertaining and has quite a few laughs in it. I especially liked the bit about the lime. I’ll never look at that little green citrus the same way again.
So all in all, “Anansi Boys” was a great read and one I’d definitely recommend. It’s my favorite of Gaiman’s novels, and a good place to start if you haven’t read any of his short fiction (which I also recommend). It’s good to see him finally create a protagonist I could connect with and one that I wanted to follow on his journey. Gaiman has never lacked for imagination and skill with creating worlds and supporting characters. This time the whole package is very satisfying.
Have you read “Anansi Boys”? What did you think of it? What did you think of Gaiman’s other work? Do you have a favorite “down on their luck” protagonist?
Labels:
Anansi Boys,
Neil Gaiman,
Novel Writing,
Storytelling
Monday, September 21, 2009
You can’t go home again – X-files: I Want to Believe
I have an odd relationship with the X-files. When it first started out on TV I resisted it’s siren song. A co-worker was a huge fan and she kept trying to get me to watch it, but the commercials I saw just didn’t pull me in. My wife (girlfriend at the time) watched it infrequently and enjoyed what she saw, but I still didn’t care to see it.
I actually saw about half of one episode, (early season 3 episode with a young man who can control electricity). Coming in halfway and not getting set up, the whole thing seemed silly. I wrote off the show. And then a about halfway into the same season I caught the episode “Pusher”. The story was simple, a man has the power to persuade others just about anything he wants to. It’s not mind control per se, but it was a tool he could use very effectively – even convincing someone to take their own life. He ends up facing down Mulder and the episode was very effective. It was tense, the acting was good and the script was solid. I was hooked and continued to watch the series and pick up the VHS episodes.
I watched up until the movie, “Fight the Future” came out. I was seriously pumped for the film and found it disappointing. I picked up the show when it came back the next season, but missed a few key episodes. When I was able to watch again, I was lost in regards to the overarching story. I stopped watching and never really got back into it.
Eventually I revisited the series on DVD and found it just as entertaining as I remember, but with some elements that were so 90’s it hurt. Most of it had to do with the general feeling of paranoia and grimness that seemed to permeate the episodes (helped in great measure by the Vancouver locations). While the 80’s always seemed to be colorful and loud, the 90’s were dark, dirty and aggressive. Something the “X-files” seemed very much in tune with. Seen out of that light, it comes across a bit trendy at times. The core stories and acting are still very good, but some of the trappings are less appealing.
So I was surprised that the long rumored second X-files film was green lighted. In most cases nostalgia takes about 20 years to kick in completely. This means that X-files still had a few years to go before it could really jump on that bandwagon. The problem is that the stars and crew aren’t getting any younger and I suppose the idea was to strike while everyone was still willing and around to do it (and not make it look too silly with senior citizens chasing down UFOs).
Still, I couldn’t shake the feeling that this was a bad idea. The first X-files movie, while entertaining and part of the over-arching story never really captured my imagination (even on repeat viewings) as a solid film. It still felt like a television episode blown up for the big screen, but not quite measuring up. Star Trek had similar issues with it’s Next Generation films, especially “Generations” and “Insurrection”. The extra something needed to make them feel big screen worthy is missing.
I was afraid a second X-files film would fall into the same trap. And in a way it did. I know everyone was hoping for a success and possibly a string of movies with this being the genesis, but it ended up being something that disappointed the hardcore fans and didn’t generate enough interest for new comers. The plot does not revolve around some of the more sci-fi or monster elements. Instead it seems to be a simple serial killer investigation. Supernatural elements appear, but they don’t’ drive the case the way they would in the television series. It’s an interesting new direction, but at the same time it doesn’t feel like the X-files.
It’s been a few weeks since I saw the movie and I’ve had some time to think about it. What I think we ended up with was an epilogue of sorts. It was a summation of two people’s lives (and the acting is still solid with plenty of good moments for Mulder and Scully). They seem different from how I remember them (but I never saw the last few seasons), but it seems fitting in a way. They’ve evolved just as I have and this case brings up some pain for both of them. In a way it was interesting to see that dynamic work.
As I mentioned in my blog about the first season of the show, one of the reasons it works so well is that the characters of Mulder and Scully are well thought out and well matched. They create their own tension and support and to see it at work in a new story was the highlight of the film. But in the end I couldn’t help but feel that it was a bit hollow and a too late (or too early) to really capture what it needed to. There is a sadness to the film, but I think it also reflects on how I felt when it was over. Sometimes, you just can’t go back.
What did you think of the new X-files film? What did you think of the first film? Have you had the experience of a revisit to something you enjoyed in the past and were disappointed?
I actually saw about half of one episode, (early season 3 episode with a young man who can control electricity). Coming in halfway and not getting set up, the whole thing seemed silly. I wrote off the show. And then a about halfway into the same season I caught the episode “Pusher”. The story was simple, a man has the power to persuade others just about anything he wants to. It’s not mind control per se, but it was a tool he could use very effectively – even convincing someone to take their own life. He ends up facing down Mulder and the episode was very effective. It was tense, the acting was good and the script was solid. I was hooked and continued to watch the series and pick up the VHS episodes.
I watched up until the movie, “Fight the Future” came out. I was seriously pumped for the film and found it disappointing. I picked up the show when it came back the next season, but missed a few key episodes. When I was able to watch again, I was lost in regards to the overarching story. I stopped watching and never really got back into it.
Eventually I revisited the series on DVD and found it just as entertaining as I remember, but with some elements that were so 90’s it hurt. Most of it had to do with the general feeling of paranoia and grimness that seemed to permeate the episodes (helped in great measure by the Vancouver locations). While the 80’s always seemed to be colorful and loud, the 90’s were dark, dirty and aggressive. Something the “X-files” seemed very much in tune with. Seen out of that light, it comes across a bit trendy at times. The core stories and acting are still very good, but some of the trappings are less appealing.
So I was surprised that the long rumored second X-files film was green lighted. In most cases nostalgia takes about 20 years to kick in completely. This means that X-files still had a few years to go before it could really jump on that bandwagon. The problem is that the stars and crew aren’t getting any younger and I suppose the idea was to strike while everyone was still willing and around to do it (and not make it look too silly with senior citizens chasing down UFOs).
Still, I couldn’t shake the feeling that this was a bad idea. The first X-files movie, while entertaining and part of the over-arching story never really captured my imagination (even on repeat viewings) as a solid film. It still felt like a television episode blown up for the big screen, but not quite measuring up. Star Trek had similar issues with it’s Next Generation films, especially “Generations” and “Insurrection”. The extra something needed to make them feel big screen worthy is missing.
I was afraid a second X-files film would fall into the same trap. And in a way it did. I know everyone was hoping for a success and possibly a string of movies with this being the genesis, but it ended up being something that disappointed the hardcore fans and didn’t generate enough interest for new comers. The plot does not revolve around some of the more sci-fi or monster elements. Instead it seems to be a simple serial killer investigation. Supernatural elements appear, but they don’t’ drive the case the way they would in the television series. It’s an interesting new direction, but at the same time it doesn’t feel like the X-files.
It’s been a few weeks since I saw the movie and I’ve had some time to think about it. What I think we ended up with was an epilogue of sorts. It was a summation of two people’s lives (and the acting is still solid with plenty of good moments for Mulder and Scully). They seem different from how I remember them (but I never saw the last few seasons), but it seems fitting in a way. They’ve evolved just as I have and this case brings up some pain for both of them. In a way it was interesting to see that dynamic work.
As I mentioned in my blog about the first season of the show, one of the reasons it works so well is that the characters of Mulder and Scully are well thought out and well matched. They create their own tension and support and to see it at work in a new story was the highlight of the film. But in the end I couldn’t help but feel that it was a bit hollow and a too late (or too early) to really capture what it needed to. There is a sadness to the film, but I think it also reflects on how I felt when it was over. Sometimes, you just can’t go back.
What did you think of the new X-files film? What did you think of the first film? Have you had the experience of a revisit to something you enjoyed in the past and were disappointed?
Labels:
Film,
I Want to Believe,
Storytelling,
X-files
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

