Category: Uncategorized

The Hunger Games is immensely popular. The book is flying off shelves, and the movie broke all sorts of records. And of course, when something is popular, it’s generally fashionable to hate it. Case in point, many of the critical reviews of the film.

One review in particular, sent to me by a friend, had me a bit worried about the movie before I saw it. Now, in retrospect, I think the review is actually comically petty. It’s MovieBob at The Escapist’s review. In it, he rakes the film over the coals for some pretty minor infractions, many of which are actually criticisms of the source material (for instance, he says the name ‘Katniss’ pulled him out of the story — seriously?).

MovieBob is probably being completely honest with his review. But it seems to me that popular things are often held to a much higher standard from certain critics. For instance, if The Hunger Games was some independent film no one had ever heard of, I would bet money that MovieBob wouldn’t have grasped at quite so many straws to tear it down.

Now, I’m not immune to this. I’ve launched my share of criticisms at popular media. Twilight comes to mind. But, in my opinion, the criticisms of Twilight are vastly more fundamental than “Their names are weird” and “The visuals are lacking.”

So what did I think of the movie? Actually, I’m going to make a pretty horrifying comment for bibliophiles. I think The Hunger Games film might actually have been better than the book. While the book had some interesting themes and characters, it was dragged down, in my opinion (and it’s just my opinion) by Collins’s simple and sometimes lazy writing. The film doesn’t have the same issues. Aside from some minor laziness in the visual effects department, all the components of the film were very well done. Here are a few of my highlights:

Katniss (and Jennifer Lawrence) kicks ass

When I first read The Hunger Games, I wasn’t immediately on board the Katniss bandwagon. Sure, she’s loads better than, say, Bella Swan – it’s not even close – but I still felt that she was far too passive. Things happened to her, but she didn’t affect a lot of change. I grew to like her more in the second book, but I still would have liked to see more from her in the first.

The movie, on the other hand, has no such problems. Katniss isn’t any more active as far as the plot is concerned, but Jennifer Lawrence (one of my favorite young actresses, as I elucidated in my 2011 Oscars roundup) imbues her with such quiet strength that one can’t help to root for her. The most fantastic scene in the movie, in my opinion, occurs during the countdown to the games. Cinna is trying his best to reassure Katniss, who seems almost in shock as the announcer marks each passing second. A lesser movie, with a lesser actress, would have done something like the following.

Katniss: “CINNA I’M SO SCARED.”
Cinna: “It’s okay. *Hug*”
Katniss: “OKAY I’M READY, LET’S DO THIS!”

But that’s not what happens. Instead, Katniss doesn’t say much of anything. Instead, she just shakes. It’s noticeable, but subtle. And it’s completely realistic. The look on her face as she rises into the arena is pure acting perfection. Katniss is capable, strong — but she’s also terrified out of her mind. It made me feel the same emotions, and I’d already read the book.

The film doesn’t shy away from brutality — but it’s not cartoony, either

In NPR’s David Edelstein’s review of the film, he comments that “If the film’s director, Gary Ross, has any qualms about kids killing kids, he keeps them to himself. The murders on screen are fast and largely pain-free — you can hardly see who’s killing who.”

I must respectfully disagree. I understand the worry that the PG-13 rating drove the lack of violence, but I’m not entirely sure that’s true. The film did a fine job of evoking horror at the brutality of the Games. At the end, we see Kato, the most villainous of the children, and it’s clear he’s been completely broken and stripped of his soul by the experience. And while it’s true we never linger long on gore, Katniss’s shock, the desperation of those around her, along with the fantastic mood-setting music work much better.

The problem with using violence as a way to elicit a horrified response is that it rarely works. No film portrays this concept better, in my opinion, than The Passion of the Christ. The entire point of the movie was to make the audience weep at Christ’s torture. But the violence is so over-the-top that it feels like a Looney Tunes cartoon. He might as well have dropped a piano on Jesus’s head.

I, for one, am very glad Ross didn’t go this direction with the film. I think it’s actually more relatable that way.

The music is perfect

Not a whole lot that needs to be said. While I’m not sure the score works as a standalone piece, it was fantastic in the movie itself.

 

 Backstory is handled cleverly

One issue movie adaptations often have is trying to fit in a bunch of past history and technical details. The Hunger Games deals with this two ways.

The first is via flashback, mainly to two important events: Peeta giving Katniss his old bread, and Katniss’s father’s death. Both of these could have been done hamfistedly, of course, but I think Ross handles them well. The bread flashback is done in spurts as Katniss gets to know Peeta — we get a little more of the scene each time, and finally, in the end, we see why it’s relevant. The flashback to Katniss’s father (and her mother and sister, incidentally) come while she’s hallucinating from the tracker-jacker stings. It’s sort of a convenient way to do it, but it also makes sense. It’s not too jarring, and it sets up the Rue-Prim equivalence without Katniss having to say “OMG RUE YOU REMIND ME OF MY SISTER.”

As for the details about the games, I think the film does a brilliant job of telling us exactly what we need to know, and no more. Yes, there are some unanswered questions. That’s going to be the case for any speculative fiction (well, any good speculative fiction). But I had a good grasp of what was going on, as did my fellow moviegoers, none of whom had read the book.

In MovieBob’s most boneheaded criticism, he says the whole concept of the arena was confusing. That comment is inept to the point where I’m wondering if he even saw the same movie I did. The film makes it clear the arena is artificial, subject to the Game Maker’s whims. I’m not sure what else Bob thought the audience needed — perhaps he wanted President Snow to come out and deliver a “HERE ARE THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF THE ARENA” speech. I dunno.

Is the movie perfect? Nope.

For all I liked about The Hunger Games, there were some missteps, and even some places where I agree with MovieBob’s critique. The lack of focus on the actual hunger part of The Hunger Games is really mystifying. I suspect we’ll see a lot of tummy-rumbling and cake-gobbling in the deleted scenes, but the fact that Ross really thought none of that was necessary really confuses me.

Also, as I previously mentioned, the visuals were a let down. The effects were blended poorly, and it’s incredibly obvious when the backgrounds switch from a set to a green screen. In a specific example, Katniss’s “Girl on Fire” outfit is incredibly underwhelming. In the book, I imagined her being encircled by flames, something truly otherwordly. In the film, it’s little more than a little fiery cape, and I probably wouldn’t be very impressed if such a thing made an appearance at the Olympics.

But all in all, I came away incredibly impressed by the effort. It’ll be interesting to see if they can keep it up for Catching Fire, given that I was fairly disappointed in the book.

Quick update for you all. After getting some crap from some friends for not alerting people about the latest anthology I’m included in (which is simply because I haven’t gotten my hands on it yet!), I decided to check the previous one. Sure enough, that one’s out in paper for too. So, without further adieu:

Timeless

Timeless is an anthology celebrating eternal love … as well as some more complicated relationships. It includes my story, The Boy and the Nymph, a fairy tale about, well, a boy, and also a nymph. But, like, a fairy-tale nymph. Not the other meaning of that word.

It’s got some great and unexpected stories: “The Gate of Ethos,” about a newly-born demon and the human woman who messes with his head, and “The Trippet Stones,” where a time-traveling-spirit-sorta-it’s-hard-to-describe is forced to seduce the descendant of her former lover — as well as a bunch of others.

Ch-ch-check it out!

Amazon – Paperback
Amazon – Kindle
DRM-free from Cool Well Press

Dark Tales of Lost Civilizations

On the other side of the coin, Dark Tales of Lost Civilizations (or DaTaLoC, as I call it [I don’t actually call it that]) explores things that aren’t so eternal. My story for this one is entitled “We Are Not The Favored Children,” and it follows an Ancient Pueblo woman who sets out to find what might be the last hope for her people’s survival.

This one also includes a story by prolific and all-around awesome horror author Joe Lansdale, known for writing Bubba Ho-Tep as well as a ginormous list of shorts and novels. If you’re looking for something a little darker, definitely pick it up.

Amazon – Paper
Barnes & Noble – Paper

If you pick up either of the anthologies, I’d greatly appreciate dropping a review of it on Amazon, Barnes + Noble, Goodreads, or anywhere else. Good, bad, ugly — just so long as it’s honest!

Other Stuff


While the anthologies are definitely my biggest news, I do have other things a’brewing. My novel is, for all intents and purposes, finished. It will be off to beta readers by tomorrow, likely, so after I deal with another round of revisions from the feedback I get (mostly on the second half), I’ll be shooting it out to agents. Scary, but also exciting.

I also have some short stories in the works. There’s one I’m pretty proud of that I’m targeting for a specific market, but if that falls through, I might give it a go via self-publishing. I dunno. We’ll see. I’ve been wanting to jump into the Kindle market to at least give it a try.

Finally, I have a very short (100 words!) story that will be appearing in an upcoming flash fiction anthology entitled 100 RPM, edited by Caroline Smailes. It’s for charity y’all, so you know you have to check it out. I’ll let you know when that one hits (also a big shout out to my friend Teresa, who also made it into that one. Congrats!)

So the 2012 Oscar nominations hit today, and I’ll be writing up my complete list of predictions in the coming weeks. For now, I have a few thoughts:

• This was one of those hard years for casual moviegoers, where many of the big, critically acclaimed films were artsy movies that came out in December. That means that they’re hard to catch in theaters, and Netflix is a no-go because of the studio’s insane 1-2 month restriction. As a result, I’ve yet to see a lot of these (The Artist, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, The Descendants, etc.)
• While she won’t win, it’s good to see Melissa McCarthy nominated for Supporting Actress for her performance in Bridesmaids. To me, she exemplifies what a good Best Supporting nominee should have: she doesn’t necessarily steal the movie, or change its focus, but without her, it would have been significantly weaker.
• Jonah Hill is sort of the opposite. Yes, he did a very good job in Moneyball, and he absolutely proved he can do more than sit around and make dick jokes. However, compare his performance to last year’s Best Supporting Actor (Christian Bale in The Fighter) and it doesn’t quite seem up to the same level.
• Really? They stretched out the Animated category to five with the unmemorable-at-best Puss in Boots and Kung Fu Panda 2, but couldn’t have done the same last year for Tangled? Whatever. Rango wins this category easily.
• Rooney Mara should take the Best Actress trophy. Her performance was stunning.
• Speaking of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, I was surprised that Fincher didn’t get nominated for Best Director. While I wasn’t expecting a Best Movie nomination, I would definitely categorize the lack of Fincher as a ‘snub.’
• Also interesting to see both Tree of Life and Terrence Malik garner nominations. That’s a very love-it-or-hate-it movie, and I expected most critics to hate it.

I’ll be back in a couple of weeks after I track down the remaining movies.

One of the things that’s often thrown about with self-publishing is the unprecedented level of freedom and control authors have with their works. And sometimes it’s true. But if you think you can just assume that well-known companies like Amazon and Apple have your back … well … think again:

The nightmare scenario under this agreement? You create a great work of staggering literary genius that you think you can sell for 5 or 10 bucks per copy. You craft it carefully in iBooks Author. You submit it to Apple. They reject it. Under this license agreement […] they won’t sell it, and you can’t legally sell it elsewhere.

For those with a lack of experience in the publishing industry, I’ll go ahead and tell you: this is insane. It’s akin to Microsoft saying “If you write your novel with MSWord, you can only publish it via Microsoft Reader.” Wineman is correct when he calls this arrangement “unprecedented.” I can’t think of a single other case similar to this one.

Predictably, Apple evangelists have come out of the woodwork to decry that it’s only fair that you can’t sell your book anywhere else — after all, Apple’s product is freeeeee! And if they don’t enforce this rule to make sure you don’t, say, use iBooks Author to create a book and sell it on Kindle, then they’re helping their competition!

Bullshit.

First of all, the concept is ludicrous. Do they really think a large number of people are going to use iBA, and then not use iBooks? That’s absurd. Most people who use Apple products do so because they like Apple. Furthermore, if that’s really an issue, charge for the product. Do not justify whittling away an artist’s rights because you can’t bother coming up with a solid business plan.

It used to be that writers needed to worry about scammy publishers who wouldn’t pay, or agents that would demand money up front. And while those things are still concerns, the actions of Big, Presumably Non-Scammy Companies are becoming more and more worrisome.

This exclusivity trend is starting to be a problem, and it’s not just Apple. Kindle’s recently introduced KDP Select program requires that they be the exclusive seller of the submitted book, whereas before they required only that you don’t sell your book cheaper anywhere else. KDP Select is essentially a book loaning program — there’s absolutely nothing that requires exclusivity. Amazon simply introduced it here, where it would be less of a disruption. I wouldn’t be surprised if they required the exclusivity for all Kindle Direct books in the near future.

So, self-publishers: keep your wits about you, and don’t assume just because you’re striking it out on your own that you’re protected from the shenanigans of corporations that don’t have your interest at heart. Remember Yog’s Law: “Money flows toward the author.” And remember that anyone asking for rights above-and-beyond “let us publish this” is essentially trying to take some of your cash.

UPDATE: Apple has changed (“clarified,” they say) their EULA to say that you’re only prohibited from selling the iBooks file you create with the iBook Author software — not the content itself. This is certainly a welcome “clarification,” though it’s still an absurd restriction. Going with the MSWord metaphor above, imagine if Microsoft said “You can write your novel in Word, but you’re not allowed to distribute the .doc file.” What a helpful piece of software that would be.

No, I’m not doing the totally-hip-and-cool A-Z Blogging Challenge (which I would link to, but I have no idea where it started). I just couldn’t think of a better title.

This post is going to be fairly short, and it’s going to be big on assertions and assumptions, cause that’s the way I’m feeling today. I’m channeling a lot of energy into my new job (Linux!), and into finishing the final, tricky scenes in To the Boundaries of Heaven.

That said, I’d like to talk a little about piracy, specifically book (though I may touch on piracy in other media as well). The topic has come up recently in several forums and blogs, as well as in my local writing group.

I think the most salient point I can make about piracy is the difference between an emotional response and an economic response. Most people who focus a lot of energy on fighting piracy have an emotional response: “These people are stealing my hard work!” That is a completely legitimate response, because it’s true. While “stealing” is not quite the right word, it certainly feels like the same thing. These people are enjoying the fruits of your labor (years of writing and editing!), and contributing nothing for it. Hell, I’m a big believer that piracy is free marketing, and even I get a little bit pissed off.

But emotional damage is not economic damage. Where I think a lot of parties, both individual artists and publishing/distribution companies, are getting off mark is the idea that their emotional interests and economic interests are 100% aligned. “My book is downloaded 1000 times a month from ThePirateBay, so if I stop those dirty pirates, I’ll see 1000 extra sales monthly!” Anyone with a smattering of common sense (and I absolutely hate the concept of common sense) can tell that this is a faulty argument. This makes as much sense as saying an author pricing an eBook at $.99 could multiply his profit by six figures simply by charging $1,000,000 for it. Many, if not most, illegal downloaders are downloading the material not because they’re highly interested in it, but because they’re highly interested in it at the price of $0. Raise the price to $.99, and they no longer care.

But let’s assume that perhaps 10% of pirates would buy your book if an illegitimate option were not available (I think that’s more than generous). Is spending a good chunk of your time and frustration chasing down 10% of a market that’s not all that interested in being your customer really a great business decision? Wouldn’t a better business decision be to just ignore this sector, and write another book for the people who ARE your customers? This is where emotional and economic decisions diverge. The author focusing on the emotional will track down every torrent, send out DMCA notices and nasty emails, try to seed the web with fake torrents, etc. The author focusing on the economic will say “screw it” and spend that time writing.

I don’t have the space to address the multitude of topics on this matter, but here’s some food for thought:

• Piracy is publicity. Even if it takes a bite out of your profits (which I disagree with), it’s still publicity. A pirate is just as likely as a buyer to tell his friends that a book rocked (or sucked!)
• Not all illegitimate downloads are a lost sale. In fact, very few are.
• DRM (Digital Rights Management, obtrusive software that makes it more difficult to pirate) does not work. At all. Pirates can get into the most locked-down DRM in a matter of weeks, usually a matter of hours, and disseminate a clean, DRM-free version to the pirate community. This means the only people that DRM affects is legitimate users. In fact, if your DRM is so bad that it makes the product hard to use, or removes expected features, it will likely drive people who would have bought your book to pirate it.
• You can not stop piracy. Ever. If a book can be read, if a song can be heard, it can be copied. At best, you can try to delay it, but that hardly ever works. Like death, piracy is inevitable. So why spend your time worrying about it?