Abel Ferrara interview up at Filmmaker Mag

Pretty cool interview with Abel Ferrara about his new movie, Mary, over here.
Not very much about the actual writing process, but the Bad Lieutenant writer/director and filmmaker behind the classic Driller Killer talks about the inspiration and ideas behind the film.

Gotta love this quote:

Filmmaker Magazine: What was your dream job as a kid?

Ferrara: Washing dishes in a hospital full of hot nurses. [laughs]

My $12 Gamble

When I talk with Cake Man about the hallowed experience of going to the movies, it’s fairly common to hear him say, “I’ll wait for it to come out on dvd.” The man is patient and treats his movie going experience as an investment. It is an investment, one of time and money, and these days you can’t be putting out too many dollars that are going to have regrets attached to them. It’s not a good time for gambling, but I just can’t help myself when it comes to my twelve dollar gambles.

Let’s face it, a movie shown on the big screen is going to be better than the same movie shown on the 26 inch tv in your living room. And it’s not just bigger picture and bigger sound. There’s just something about the ripped ticket, the big dim room, the popcorn under your feet that makes the movie going experience special. The experience gets better when you know you’re going to see something critics have called a good movie and it’s a movie you know you will enjoy. (Cake Man’s full body orgasm at Dark Knight) In my opinion, the experience is at its best when you go see a movie that you haven’t heard the critics talk about, you know it’s going to be right up your alley, and you end up being right. Unfortunately I was wrong when I took the gamble with Body of Lies and saw it on opening night.

The movie wasn’t bad, but I thought Ridley Scott was poised for something big. I kept hoping for Gladiator meets Black Hawk Down. How awesome would that be? There’s no way the Somalis would have shot down those choppers if Maximus was there. But anyway, we’re getting off topic. I don’t really want to review Body of Lies. I’ll just say that ultimately I was disappointed with the movie and surprised that just about all of the action in the movie was featured in the trailer. But I did enjoy both Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe, and the juxtaposition of the CIA family man/shot caller and the in too deep government agent. Unfortunately that wasn’t enough. Cake Man got the last laugh on this one.

In a year, Cake Man is going to spend less at the movies and over all enjoy the movies he sees more than I will. But whereas he will be content with the dvds that turn out to be pretty decent movies, I think I will have tested the theatres enough to come away with a few more great movie going experiences that I wasn’t expecting to go along with the ones that I was expecting. It’s worth it, because once they pull that movie from the theatre, more often than not that experience is gone forever.

Could you imagine seeing some of the your favorite movies that were before your time in movie theatres? I remember an old boss was telling me about how he got into a fight while watching Predator in theatres. I don’t know if I was more blown away that he got to watch Predator in movie theatres or that he was crazy enough to be fighting while vintage Arnold was blowing people away on the big screen. That got me to thinking. What are some of the movies that you wish you could go back and catch on the big screen? Also, what are some of your most precious theatre going experiences? The first that comes to mind for me is The Last Samurai. I know a lot of people hate on Tom Cruise, but sometimes you just got to drop it and appreciate a solid flick. Cake Man and I are due for a swap soon. I’m giving him The Last Samurai and he’s giving me Requiem for a something or another. Some movie about drugs. If you haven’t gotten a sense of my values: Katanas = awesome. Drugs = Not awesome. Somebody wielding a katana in the war against drugs would just be off the charts. But I’m rambling now.

What movies do you wish you could go back in time to see in theatres?

What are some of your most precious theatre going experiences?

What are you reading? Week 5: Goodbye Nick and Norah, hello Carl Hiaasen

Last week, I promised my final thoughts on Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist and perhaps some Ellroy. Well, I got my dose of Ellroy when I watched Street Kings on Saturday (I even started re-reading L.A. Confidential, but decided to table that reunion) and decided to try a new author: Carl Hiaasen. More on him later.

Nick and Norah is a relatively quick read. Since it's a YA novel, it's not a remarkably challenging book to read, either. Still, the authors (who took turns writing chapters, one focusing on Nick the other on Norah, rinse, repeat) manage to make the characters believable and interesting enough for any reader. My impetus to read the book came from seeing the movie, which, in retrospect is a stronger piece of entertainment with the book. If you don't want aspects of the film or book "spoiled," I'd suggest scrolling down past the Hiaasen book cover. Gone? OK.

The book is hampered by its structure. Sure, it's cool that every other chapter focuses on Nick or Norah. It's -- dare I say it -- a novel approach to the writing of a book. But sometimes novelty interferes with quality. Unlike the movie, which is free to roam around and interact with many of the other, sometimes more interesting supporting characters, the book forces the reader to either reside in Nick or Norah's head. One of the funniest characters in the movie is Norah's boozer best friend, who is quickly written off in the book and never seen again, much to my dismay as I reached the last few chapters. Also, the movie moves toward a goal -- the mysterious, secret show of indie rock darlings Where's Fluffy?. In the book, the concert happens early on, and you're left wondering why this band is so cool. In the movie, you're strung along so capably by the characters' excitement that you find yourself almost believing how awesome this band could be. I'll save the movie's ultimate band-related plot twist, but needless to say, the film deals with the mythic nature of the band in a much more creative and pleasing way.

Now, I understand -- the book came first, so of course the film is able to talk the novel as a first draft and therefore improve upon it. I get it. Maybe if I'd read the book first, I would have had more qualms with the film. Somehow I doubt it, though. Also worth noting is that Norah is not nearly as sweet in the book as she is in the movie, where she's portrayed as awkward and shy. Which is an improvement. While I ended up liking Norah's character in the movie, I found the book's version to be more realistic and charming. She was more flawed and confused -- like a real teenager.

Would I have read the book had I not seen the movie? I don't think so. Do I regret reading the book? No way. It was well-written and, I think, an effective story for the kind of genre it's looking to be filed under. Strong dialogue, good scene-setting and two interesting leads make for a quality piece of work. But I liked the movie better. So sue me. At least I didn't title this post "A little more-a Nick and Norah."



Now, I'm about a third of the way done with Carl Hiaasen's Basket Case. Being a former journalist from Florida like the author, I've always felt an affinity toward Hiaasen, and he's been on my shortlist of writers that I want to check out. Now, I buy books in bulk. I bought Basket Case last December, thinking that I'd need a lot of reading material to survive being holed up in my mother's house for almost a week on vacation. I never got around to the book, but after finishing N&N on Saturday, I knew I wanted something crime-ish, but not as dour or deadly as an Ellroy, Connelly or Pelecanos book. Enter Hiaasen.

Two other, more clear reasons why Hiaseen is a good person for me to read now: he writes about South Florida. The protagonist of this book is a journalist. If you know anything about SILENT CITY, you know that a) it's set in Miami and b) stars a jaded journalist. So, like Connelly's Chasing the Dime, which I discussed here, Basket Case is not only a means of entertaining myself through a good story, but a great way to learn a thing or two from an author who's made a career out of writing about SoFla and about crime.

Basket Case's protagonist is Jack Tagger, a former star investigative reporter now relegated to the obituary section of his local daily. When Tagger stumbles upon the death of Johnny Stoma, famous ex-lead singer of punk rock legends The Slut Puppies, Tagger sees his ticket out of the doghouse and onto the front page. But when things start to smell a little fishy and Stoma's death doesn't exactly jibe with the police report screaming "accident," Tagger realizes he's in a little too deep.



If Pelecanos is literary crime fiction and Connelly redefines the procedural, Hiaasen finds a way to inject a believable and, admittedly, enjoyable dose of humor into the genre. Tagger is a cranky, unhappy and almost pathetic lead, but as a reader I don't tire of reading about him and in fact find myself drawn to him as a character. Hiaasen clearly knows the area and the inner workings of the newspaper, making everything he writes seem believable, cutting down on any "Wha? Huh?" moments that would otherwise disconnect the reader from the story.

I'll admit, though, that I find the musical references -- specifically, the band's name and the exaggerated characterizations of the music biz folk that flicker in and out of the book -- a little cringe-worthy, but aside from that, Basket Case has proven to be a breezy, enjoyable and just plain fun read. Too bad I'm not on a beach sipping a margarita. Can't win 'em all. Enough about me. What are you reading?

Writing groups -- they can be good for you

So your manuscript is done. Everyone (and by everyone, I mean, your friends and family) seems to like it. But after you make some calls and send some letters, all you're getting is crickets and tumbleweeds. Could your writing not be as good as Hemingway, as you first thought?

Murderati breaks it down. You may want to consider joining a writing group. Like any grouping of people, writers groups come with pros and cons. Here's what Murderati says makes for a good group:

1. Rules
This isn't a social hour, it's a work session. The group I belong to follows the basic guidelines set up by Clarion. You can read two good articles on this here (how to workshop) and here (insights into how to react when being critiqued).
2. Trust
Participants need to feel that everyone in the group has the same goal when they're reading and critiquing: to help each other write and tell the best stories possible. That's it.
Do I need to mention NO STEALING? I sure hope not.
3. Commitment
Participants have to be willing to read the good and the bad, and to treat each submission -- and each member -- with utter respect. No showing up without having read the submissions, no comments without considered rationale.
4. Confidentiality
Only gab or complain about participants in the group IN the group -- and rarely do that, if ever. Keep mum about other people's works-in-progress.
5. Similar levels of writing experience
It's uncomfortable and inappropriate to have writers with vastly different levels of experience in the same group. If you do, some participants become "experts" while others are peons. How can you possibly nourish the useful kind of democracy that promotes honest communication in that case? I don't think it can happen.

Meanwhile, PoeWar has a list of things you can do that will most definitely annoy fellow group members. A smattering:

10 Ways to Annoy the Hell out of your Writers’ Group

• Attend sporadically. Most writers’ groups have rules about attendance, but once you are there, what are they going to do? Do they seriously have the stones to kick you out? I think not. Writers are usually nice people — exploit that.
• Bring the whole novel. Most writers’ groups try to keep the length of the things they are discussing to a reasonable level. After all, most members have jobs or kids or classes. Some members even want to spend time on their own writing. They can’t be expected to read and critique hundred of pages a week… or can they? After all, the main reason the group exists is to serve your needs.
• Don’t worry about the genre. The science fiction writer’s group is the perfect place to present your nihilistic seventies romance. If anyone makes a fuss, tell them that they’re stifling you.
• Don’t waste a lot of time reading the other member’s work. Try to limit any review to the five minutes before the group meets. Make a show of marking up the paper with red lines or a highlighter. Just pick random passages to mark. There’s always something wrong with everything if you look hard enough.
• Keep an eye out for typos or spelling errors. Some writers think that a writers’ group should focus on character, plot, themes and other esoteric things. Stick to the basics. If you find a spelling error or a grammar error, focus solely on that. Make sure the discussion lasts twenty minutes at least. By discussion I mean you prattling on, interrupting other people whenever they try to take part.
• Keep other criticisms as vague as possible. Look for statements that sound intelligent but mean nothing. String them together for as long as you can. Sample Rant: You need this story to feel more real. It doesn’t speak to me yet. When I read it, it feels like a story. It’s as if someone wrote it down and expected me to read it and come away with some sort of impression. I shouldn’t have to know so much about the characters in order to get them. They should be a part of the page. The whole thing should function holistically and organically.
  

I know Cake Man touched on this before, way back in the pre-suckerman days, so I'll toss in my two cents. I find that being in a writers' group to be a great motivator. Knowing that I have a meeting coming up and should crank out some pages really helps me get in front of my computer and WRITE. Which is a good thing.

The tricky thing for me is, since I'm writing a novel, I'm going to have a lot more pages to present before I'm "finished." Pretty much everyone else is working on a specific screenplay, which probably won't clock in over 200 pages. But that's overly technical and something that is easily resolved. I find the feedback you get in the group to be very helpful. Obviously, like anything else, you have to parse through the notes and suggestions and decide "is this helpful?" Your initial instinct when dealing with harsh commentary is to toss it and chalk it up to the person not "understanding" what you're trying to do. But once you do that, you might as well stop coming to the meetings. The best part of a writers group is that you're getting an initial, ideally unfiltered reaction from a wide spectrum of readers. This is what you want. You want to see how Joe Regular Reader reacts to your material. Will they keep reading? What made them stop reading? Those are the things that are really invaluable.

Yeah, I'll read that.

Guess who's writing a memoir?

Alive and kicking from New York, it's Tina Fey's book deal!

Amid reports of particularly egregious bidding wars, Fey's rep has confirmed the Saturday Night Live cum 30 Rock cum Saturday Night Live star has continued in her quest for media domination and indeed signed a book deal.

Details are being kept under wraps, with no official word on subject matter, release date or the value of Fey's contract.

What has been confirmed is that Little, Brown & Company will release the would-be best-seller.

Last week both the New York Post and Observer reported that Fey was entertaining offers in the $5-6 million range and that the tome would not be a memoir, but "nonfiction humor," most likely a collection of humorous essays.

While Team Fey and her publisher are mum on the money, reps for both did confirm that the deal included a gift to the nonprofit group Books for Kids to help stock school libraries in New York City.

I'm not an avid viewer, but I've enjoyed the episodes I've caught here or there. It looks like Sarah Palin did some good...for someone.

Thoughts from a literary agent: Query Letter Don'ts

There are a few things Janet Reid doesn't want to see in your query letter:

1. Theme

I don't care what the theme of your work is. I care what the story is.

2. I love to write

I don't care. I only care about whether you can write well enough to tell a good compelling story.

3. I think my book will make a great movie.

I don't care. I only care whether it will make a good book.

4. It took me x+1 years to write.

I don't care. I only care if it's a good story.

Pretty basic stuff, I think.

Reid's blog is worth bookmarking. Also worth checking out: posts about things that annoy Reid, and her collection of query letter pitfalls.

The Writing Week part 41 -- CONTINUOUS!

In re-reading my comic book/action spec, I started finding little things that annoyed me within my writing, small things that, one their own and irregular, would pose no real problem. Taken together and done frequently, though, they could be quite problematic. Thus, I think it’s time to add two more villains to the League’s Rogues Gallery - Exclamation Point (!) and CONTINUOUS (with his sidekick, MOMENTS LATER).

Exclamation Point, CONTINUOUS, and MOMENTS LATER aren’t enormous problems, but they can provide quite formidable when they join forces in a script. (As point of reference, think of them not as the end-of-the-game boss in a 2-D screen-crawler fighter game circa 1995, but as an end-of-level boss. Once you learn their mannerisms and can time their attacks, you can take them down no problem.)

My worries with exclamation points resurfaced at an NYC Screenwriters Meetup last week. In preparation for the meeting, we had to read a script written by one of the Meetup members, and at the meeting, we all gave feedback. I won’t go into the script here, other than to say that it contained exclamation points! A lot of them! Almost every other line of dialogue had them! YAY!

They got pretty distracting. So, in re-reading my comic book spec this week (and my post-Apocalyptic one last night), I was on the lookout for those dreaded little buggers. I’ll admit, I had more of them in the dialogue than I would have thought. Of course, I tried to rationalize that, these being action scripts, they could allow for a lot of exclamation points. Even I didn’t buy that all the time. I wound up cutting most of them, but it brings up an interesting point. Have you heard of any rules for when to use exclamation points? When do you use them?

Next, I had to tackle CONTINUOUS and the ever meddling MOMENTS LATER. These guys (or gals) can be a real problem. I can’t remember where, but I recently heard someone say that a writer should hardly ever try to use continuous as all action is inherently so, and putting that in the slugg line is redundant. I tend to agree, but the habit I picked up in school of having to include some time after the location for each slugg line is a hard one to break. moments later can serve a purpose, but can almost always be cut just as easily as continuous, I believe. I found I was using those phrases when cutting between multiple scenes all obviously taking place at the same time. My first reaction was to swap them out for SIMULTANEOUS, an egregious error I soon remedied.

The conclusion I came to was that using CONTINUOUS and MOMENTS LATER, just like the dreaded Exclamation Point (!) can be unnecessary and, when done too often, make a script look amateurish. Don’t rely on keywords or punctuation to strike a chord or let the reader know what’s happening. Effective dialogue and concise, descriptive action should do this on its own.