There I was this evening doing research, some people call it watching TV. Hard work either way. And there was a re-run of a Pie in the Sky episode and I was thinking about the feedback I'd had on Tec. The thing about Pie in the Sky is that, although the protagonist has an official police position, he's effectively no longer in the Force but does the odd (in all definitions) jobs that no one else wants to do.
As mentioned in the last post the biggest problem with Tec is that, as a private investigator (well, a PI's PA really), the protagonist is not really in a position to investigate important crimes, like murder. But it's necessary to make a show that's half decent.
And then it came to me. The solution.
It'll involve a page 1 re-write, the main characters remain pretty much intact and so does the crime but the protagonist's situation changes fairly dramatically. It'll work. It's good.
Trouble is that it's all happening at once.
I just received some necessary documents and instructions in regard to pitching for some audio story work for an existing TV property - I have until the end of September to come up with some story ideas. I'll have to do a ton of research, and the parameters on length and number of cast are quite restrictive, but I realised that this situation is perfect for using the 36 Dramatic Situations to pull out some unusual conflicts.
I have a meeting on the morrow with my Clones collaborator hopefully we'll move that along a bit. We've narrowed down the audition applications for Monsters and will be holding the auditions next weekend? (When I say "we" I mean the producer and director - they ran them past me for comment.)
As you may have heard Blake Snyder died unexpectedly a few days ago. Curiously I'd never read his book Save the Cat! though he does come under the heading of someone who's written and sold scripts in Hollywood so probably has something worthwhile to say. I've just finished going through Running but wasn't 100% sure where to go from there - my attention has been a bit dispersed - I thought what better test of the book than to see if it can help. So I bought it.
I'm just 10 pages in and I definitely learned one thing - the Save the Cat! thing - good.
The family sans moi is off to Edinburgh on Monday. I dunno, how many families have almost 12-year-old boys that come into the house singing "A paradox, a paradox, a most ingenious paradox"? Must be doing something right. The good thing about them going off, and the dog going into kennels (I'll be out for 11 hours each day) is that I'll have to time for writing.
Yippee.
What's on the turntable? "Hello" by Evanescence from "Fallen" - if you like Evanescence you should try Lacuna Coil
Friday, August 07, 2009
Thursday, August 06, 2009
Analysis
I sat down this lunchtime and worked my way through the notes on Tec provided by my readers, comparing notes - as it were.
One reason for using more than one reader is that they have different emphasis - which makes the times that they agree even more important; and when they disagree you have to be get even more analytical.
For example, the opening of Tec introduces the characters where the crime will take place, followed by the introduction of the protagonist - one reader liked it and other reader didn't. While I am not, as I've said, precious about the work I do have a clear idea as to how the story should go and a clear visualisation of the opening. So it will stay.
But the reader who liked the opening felt the future-crime-scene characters were not defined clearly enough, nor were the stakes high enough - which had bad effects later on. So, in reality, both readers were probably saying the same thing, just in a different way.
On the other hand, both pointed out the difficulty of having private investigators involved in the investigation of murders - however, as long as I can think of a reasonable justification, that doesn't have to be a major issue. One reader mentioned the TV series Vincent which did just that - now I'm wishing I'd watched it.
Having read both sets of responses in detail, the best description of Tec would be to describe it as "fuzzy" when it needs to be crystal clear.
Onwards and upwards.
What's on the turntable? "The Snow Goose" by Camel from "The Snow Goose". I am at work but with the help of Spotify I can listen to my favourite tracks. I am a total Spotify convert (http://www.spotify.com/) all the albums I'll never get around to buying (or replacing from my vinyls) they're here! And I can listen to them for free - with the occasional advert. Wonderful.
One reason for using more than one reader is that they have different emphasis - which makes the times that they agree even more important; and when they disagree you have to be get even more analytical.
For example, the opening of Tec introduces the characters where the crime will take place, followed by the introduction of the protagonist - one reader liked it and other reader didn't. While I am not, as I've said, precious about the work I do have a clear idea as to how the story should go and a clear visualisation of the opening. So it will stay.
But the reader who liked the opening felt the future-crime-scene characters were not defined clearly enough, nor were the stakes high enough - which had bad effects later on. So, in reality, both readers were probably saying the same thing, just in a different way.
On the other hand, both pointed out the difficulty of having private investigators involved in the investigation of murders - however, as long as I can think of a reasonable justification, that doesn't have to be a major issue. One reader mentioned the TV series Vincent which did just that - now I'm wishing I'd watched it.
Having read both sets of responses in detail, the best description of Tec would be to describe it as "fuzzy" when it needs to be crystal clear.
Onwards and upwards.
What's on the turntable? "The Snow Goose" by Camel from "The Snow Goose". I am at work but with the help of Spotify I can listen to my favourite tracks. I am a total Spotify convert (http://www.spotify.com/) all the albums I'll never get around to buying (or replacing from my vinyls) they're here! And I can listen to them for free - with the occasional advert. Wonderful.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Feedback loop
So I got the feedback on Tec from Philip Shelley and Jez Freedman. I had been pretty happy with what I wrote with Tec then I got Jez's comments and smote my hand across my brow as he pointed out huge plot holes.
This made me dread the comments from Philip (because Philip was Script Editor on Waking the Dead for several years so he knows his police procedural).
It's not that either of them disliked it: both commented on how the concept was original and full of potential - and both commented on how far I had to travel to fulfill that potential.
When I get to this stage, which is pretty much where I was with Monsters a year and half ago, I like to sit down with the feedback and collate it - see what points are in agreement, and see whether I agree with them too.
Then the question is: how do I fix it? I have never been precious about my work. Writing and editing somewhere between 3 and 5 million words as a magazine editor cured me of that. So I can be pretty objective - once the faults have been pointed out (seeing them in the first place is a different issue).
I'm fairly analytical about it: isolate the key issues (some issues are of lesser importance because they'll be fixed automatically when the important stuff is fixed) and then see what additions and subtractions will have the desired effect.
Speaking of subtractions: I have been working my way through the Running feature script. Bearing in mind this was written in slightly over two weeks in April, it's not that bad - it does have some good stuff and the structure isn't too bad. But it does have sections of completely awful dialogue (made me cringe as I read it) and there is a sequence that just makes no sense at all. The character arcs need work - it's hardly surprising I lost touch with them writing so fast.
Meanwhile, on the subject of hating stuff...
I watched Chronicles of Riddick last night and I liked it. As I've said I take things for what they are, so it was fun (does that mean I enjoy myself more than people who feel they have to complain about anything that isn't "perfect"? I guess it does. Yay!) I loved the attention to detail in the set and costume design, it looked beautiful.
I have also been watching Desperate Romantics - that's fun too. Definitely not serious, but it is closer to the truth than I suspect most people realise.
What's on the turntable? "All Around My Hat" by Steel Eye Span from "All Around My Hat" - there's always room for electric folk rock.
This made me dread the comments from Philip (because Philip was Script Editor on Waking the Dead for several years so he knows his police procedural).
It's not that either of them disliked it: both commented on how the concept was original and full of potential - and both commented on how far I had to travel to fulfill that potential.
When I get to this stage, which is pretty much where I was with Monsters a year and half ago, I like to sit down with the feedback and collate it - see what points are in agreement, and see whether I agree with them too.
Then the question is: how do I fix it? I have never been precious about my work. Writing and editing somewhere between 3 and 5 million words as a magazine editor cured me of that. So I can be pretty objective - once the faults have been pointed out (seeing them in the first place is a different issue).
I'm fairly analytical about it: isolate the key issues (some issues are of lesser importance because they'll be fixed automatically when the important stuff is fixed) and then see what additions and subtractions will have the desired effect.
Speaking of subtractions: I have been working my way through the Running feature script. Bearing in mind this was written in slightly over two weeks in April, it's not that bad - it does have some good stuff and the structure isn't too bad. But it does have sections of completely awful dialogue (made me cringe as I read it) and there is a sequence that just makes no sense at all. The character arcs need work - it's hardly surprising I lost touch with them writing so fast.
Meanwhile, on the subject of hating stuff...
I watched Chronicles of Riddick last night and I liked it. As I've said I take things for what they are, so it was fun (does that mean I enjoy myself more than people who feel they have to complain about anything that isn't "perfect"? I guess it does. Yay!) I loved the attention to detail in the set and costume design, it looked beautiful.
I have also been watching Desperate Romantics - that's fun too. Definitely not serious, but it is closer to the truth than I suspect most people realise.
What's on the turntable? "All Around My Hat" by Steel Eye Span from "All Around My Hat" - there's always room for electric folk rock.
Monday, August 03, 2009
Good boy
I printed out Running and I'll start editing at lunch today.
The Daughter is having a meeting with her production team today - yes indeed, she has a team (did I say that already?) and now we have a DoP for the Monsters shoot. Yay!
More soon.
What's on the turntable? Some music from a game the Boy's been playing...
The Daughter is having a meeting with her production team today - yes indeed, she has a team (did I say that already?) and now we have a DoP for the Monsters shoot. Yay!
More soon.
What's on the turntable? Some music from a game the Boy's been playing...
Saturday, August 01, 2009
Hate?
There's something I don't understand: why do people say they hate art?
I don't mean Art with a capital "A", I mean any art: books, music, films, actors, TV and stuff.
I discuss this with the Teacher from time to time. The way people say they "hate" - for the sake of argument - the director Michael Bay.
Why?
They don't hate him at all, they don't know him. They don't like the film, okay, but they don't hate the director. It's a complete lie. It's as if they have to have their emotions turned up to 11 just to make sure people notice. Simply having an opinion is not enough, you have to have everybody around you agree.
(It's the same with music, people saying they "hate" Band X - it doesn't matter if you don't like their music, that's fine, that's your opinion - but you don't hate them. Hate is a very particular emotion.)
I find this strange. I'm very relaxed about things, why get all worked up over a personal opinion?
It's become popular to criticise Independence Day. I don't get it. It's a fun film, it was never meant to be anything else. Have people lost their ability to suspend their disbelief?
I like lots of films that are supposedly "bad". I don't necessarily think they're great, but I'm willing to accept them for what they are and enjoy them on that basis. Sometimes a film is so bad I am forced to turn it off - like that silly Infected on the TV this evening: terrible plot, terrible dialogue - though the actors were making the best of it. But I don't hate anything to do with this movie, it was just poor.
Let's take the Matrix:Reloaded - the fight between Neo and the Agent Smiths is widely criticised for being pointless. One of the reasons why the two sequels are supposedly "rubbish". But the so-called pointlessness is the point. Neo can't beat them, that is the point. Neo becomes more effective and more Smiths turn up, until Neo realises - character development point - that he cannot fight them.
But it's fashionable to attack these films, so people do. Perhaps it's that some people cannot bear to have their own opinions.
Anyone know why people do this? Or should creators be hated for creating art that you don't personally like?
In other news
Today the Daughter, with the assistance of Director Chris, recorded her audition for the Welsh-accent-required movie - it was a short scene from the film itself. Not done in the best conditions: outdoors with pouring rain, and planes going over regularly. But we ended with a good take and her slight Welsh twang (she was channelling Eve Myles) worked well and only once crossed to Eire. (It didn't go East at all which was good.)
We also went to a falconry centre and flew two Eagle Owls, two Harris Hawks, a Barn Owl and a vulture. The vulture was great, a real character. They are incredibly light and we learned interesting facts about their care and flying them. This sort of thing is definitely not for people who are squeamish - food preparation involved cutting open chicks, and dead rats. And later holding bits of dead animal to bring the birds to the gauntlet.
The Teacher, Daughter and the Boy (and I) took it all in our stride. We were also appropriately dressed and genuinely interested, and asked (hopefully intelligent) questions.
Intelligence-wise I'd say the birds are slightly sub-dog. They have the same sort of food obsession as dogs, and they're clever enough to understand hand signals but not quite so good at handling the complex stuff. It was an excellent experience for the whole family, and you never know when something like this will be needed in a story.
What's on the turntable? "Orange Crush" by R.E.M. from the "Best of" compilation
I don't mean Art with a capital "A", I mean any art: books, music, films, actors, TV and stuff.
I discuss this with the Teacher from time to time. The way people say they "hate" - for the sake of argument - the director Michael Bay.
Why?
They don't hate him at all, they don't know him. They don't like the film, okay, but they don't hate the director. It's a complete lie. It's as if they have to have their emotions turned up to 11 just to make sure people notice. Simply having an opinion is not enough, you have to have everybody around you agree.
(It's the same with music, people saying they "hate" Band X - it doesn't matter if you don't like their music, that's fine, that's your opinion - but you don't hate them. Hate is a very particular emotion.)
I find this strange. I'm very relaxed about things, why get all worked up over a personal opinion?
It's become popular to criticise Independence Day. I don't get it. It's a fun film, it was never meant to be anything else. Have people lost their ability to suspend their disbelief?
I like lots of films that are supposedly "bad". I don't necessarily think they're great, but I'm willing to accept them for what they are and enjoy them on that basis. Sometimes a film is so bad I am forced to turn it off - like that silly Infected on the TV this evening: terrible plot, terrible dialogue - though the actors were making the best of it. But I don't hate anything to do with this movie, it was just poor.
Let's take the Matrix:Reloaded - the fight between Neo and the Agent Smiths is widely criticised for being pointless. One of the reasons why the two sequels are supposedly "rubbish". But the so-called pointlessness is the point. Neo can't beat them, that is the point. Neo becomes more effective and more Smiths turn up, until Neo realises - character development point - that he cannot fight them.
But it's fashionable to attack these films, so people do. Perhaps it's that some people cannot bear to have their own opinions.
Anyone know why people do this? Or should creators be hated for creating art that you don't personally like?
In other news
Today the Daughter, with the assistance of Director Chris, recorded her audition for the Welsh-accent-required movie - it was a short scene from the film itself. Not done in the best conditions: outdoors with pouring rain, and planes going over regularly. But we ended with a good take and her slight Welsh twang (she was channelling Eve Myles) worked well and only once crossed to Eire. (It didn't go East at all which was good.)
We also went to a falconry centre and flew two Eagle Owls, two Harris Hawks, a Barn Owl and a vulture. The vulture was great, a real character. They are incredibly light and we learned interesting facts about their care and flying them. This sort of thing is definitely not for people who are squeamish - food preparation involved cutting open chicks, and dead rats. And later holding bits of dead animal to bring the birds to the gauntlet.
The Teacher, Daughter and the Boy (and I) took it all in our stride. We were also appropriately dressed and genuinely interested, and asked (hopefully intelligent) questions.
Intelligence-wise I'd say the birds are slightly sub-dog. They have the same sort of food obsession as dogs, and they're clever enough to understand hand signals but not quite so good at handling the complex stuff. It was an excellent experience for the whole family, and you never know when something like this will be needed in a story.
What's on the turntable? "Orange Crush" by R.E.M. from the "Best of" compilation
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)