Monthly Archives: September 2012

That’s entertainment.

19 Wednesday Sep 2012

Posted by in Movies, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

This morning, I went for a walk with some friends and the subject of movies came up. Tonight, I reflect on our conversation…

I’ll try to explain a little more what we talk about when we talk about the satisfaction induced by a good movie.

 

TV series,  Movies,  Plays… That’s entertainment and we love that. Why? Why do we love going into a dark room filled with strangers to watch people we are not even acquainted to, make their show for us? And why are we pleased afterwards? (I talk here only of good quality time, ok?)

We are especially pleased when our expectations -most of which we are not fully aware as they generally lie in our unconscious- are met.

We are satisfied and content when the characters are consistent, clearly established for what they are (Hero, Romance, Nemesis -stands between the hero and his goal achievement-, reflection -supportive  to the outer motivation) and the plot carefully built and conducted.

We are satisfied and happy when we can anticipate what’s next, but not too much. We love surprises (well, good ones only).

We are satisfied when action is moving at a pace we can follow (not too fast and not sloppy).

We are satisfied when the dialogues are intelligent, funny, or memorable. (We, silverscreen and telly nerds, LOVE to quote our favourite heroes)

We are satisfied when we can adhere to the inner or outer motivations or the hero and  when the stakes seem plausible and rise until becoming unbearable. (and better, when the situation we once experimented, or someone we know has, obviously not the case when the world needs to be saved by Superman)

We are satisfied when we can adhere to the means the protagonists  choose to resolve their conflict(s) -driven by outer/inner motivation- and finally achieve their goals (even if it’s a little dirty secrets, look at the success of Dirty Harry or Dexter, he is a SK & mental, for Christ’s sake!).

We are satisfied to allow ourselves to grieve upon the difficulties they encounter and being  upset to see them almost (almost) ready to let go of the fight/quest/willing-to-change. We are satisfied when we see them being THAT close to drift from  their love/ goal/personal growth/saving of the world and  finally kick bottom to be up again & to regain the stamina to continue STRONGER.

We are satisfied when they WIN. Or justice is done, conflict is resolved, truth revealed, and happiness or healing on the way. Unless it is the thing to understand that is – AT LAST- understood.

We are supersatisfied when the twist ending (when there is one) is strong, astonishing and brilliant, (exactly the opposite of what we expect).

Because that’s how we, humans, are built. And that’s what we need.

All we need is hope. And all we hope for is that our needs are fulfilled. Magically, we have a powerful tool to obtain the results: we can pick a movie and be fulfilled with whatever we need to keep us going on with our life and our responsibilities ad duties : joy, happiness, motivation, beauty, motive for thinking, determination, hope, courage, passion, understanding, knowledge, a break in our daily routine, a brain-spa, a good laugh, a good thrill, a good fright…in 3 words : a good moment.

As we go to the theaters to make that magic possible, for most of us, what we crave above all is a damn good screenplay.

What is a screenplay? It’s the body of the movie (or of the TV series episode), the structure, the rules organising the whole thing and keeping from falling apart, or ending with that awkward feeling of discontent, frustration or anger, because your need or your expectation has not been fulfilled…

Yes, a story follows rules, it’s not just -so-stories (;-p Rudy K.)

Long story short:

The HERO has a CONFLICT to resolve (INNER or OUTER).

(Example : in Walk the Line, Johnny Cash has INNER CONFLICTS (lack of self-confidence and struggle to become himself/ his growing love for June/destructive behavior) and OUTER CONFLICTS (an abusive father who prefers his eldest son and despises his son JR (Johnny Cash) & big bro loves his lil’ bro JR/ Mother says nothing/ his wife and children vs. his touring the country and his affairs/ his dealer tracking him down) to overcome.)

He has a MOTIVATION :  INNER  and OUTER (tangible) to change the situation 

(Example : Walk the Line. INNER MOTIVATION : getting married/ then to win June’s love/ deal with his past/become himself, OUTER MOTIVATION : to break free from addictions/ come to terms with his father’s rejection/record songs.)

The HERO has GOALS to achieve and they sustain his MOTIVATION :

(Example : Walk the Line. Johnny Cash’s GOALS are  : to overcome his addictions/become a singer/tour with June, Elvis and Jerry Lee.)

The HERO must deal with an OPPONENT (NEMESIS character) or ADVERSITY, preventing him potentially to achieve his GOALS. ADVERSITY must be visible and identified (The CIA, the terrorists, the police, a disease : does not work , even if a collective danger/obstacle,  they must have a face, a name and they must confront the HERO individually in the end, disease can be personified by a disillusioned nurse or physician, or patient).

(Example : Walk the Line. MULTIPLE NEMESIS : Johnny Cash has to divorce his wife in order to be with June, his father must learn to respect him, the dealer must be well… dealt with, authorities must be convinced to let him play in prison)

The HERO can find help or support along his journey (REFLECTION character), even love (ROMANCE character).

(Example : Walk the Line. REFLECTION : Jerry lee, Perkins & Elvis. ROMANCE : his wife and then June)

In the end, the CONFLICT is pacified, the MOTIVATION is resolved (the hero has failed or succeeded at achieving his goal(s) , in every case, the HERO has gained personal growth, his journey is complete.

The end. That’s all folks! 

What movie is your favourite and why?

DNA for dummies or Genetics and the screenwriter.

14 Friday Sep 2012

Posted by in Entertainemt, Movies, TV Series, Writing

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

Is it just me? Or are you, dear reader,  bothered too,  when a nice piece -TV series or movie- does not play DNA by the rules?

Namely, the color eyes chart. Especially, when it’s clearly said/showed/brought to our knowledge that NO foul actions or adultery/messing around have EVER occurred in the life of Madam since she’s married*? So?

So how come that THIS happens :

“(Recessive*) Blue eyes father + (Recessive) Blue eyes mother = Dominant** Brown eyes child “? The off-springs should have (Recessive) blue eyes.

Unless… The father has transmitted one (Dominant) Brown to the bundle of joy to, UNBEKNOWNST to the screenwriter. Or props were not properly stocked and the person in charge lacked those colored eye lenses. Too bad…

Maybe it’s just me. I probably shouldn’t have been so much attentive as a student in 8th grade, I suppose. Or is it only because I was just better in genetics than in geology, and the knowledge has sunk in deeper and is still there? [I confess : I took my (sweet) revenge in excelling at genetics whereas I sucked at geology, AND I was being taunted by my biology teacher because my father IS a geologist. No kidding,”why my cousin has blue eyes and mine are only hazel ?” bore much more appeal than “feldspars KAlSi3O8 – NaAlSi3O8 – CaAl2Si2O8″. And honestly, the sole interest I have in stones is when they are square-shaped, small, sparkling, red or blue, mounted on a golden ring]

*(in “Downton Abbey”, Robert Crawley, Earl of Grantham, his wife  Cora, Countess both blue-eyed produce two brown-eyed daughters -Lady Mary and Lady Laura, or in the episode “The Hide”  of the series “Foyle’s War” the boy is also affected of the same heritage; and some others I do not recall right now). 

**Recessive means it takes two of them lads to be strong, dominant means it is stronger, even on its own. It’s not me, it’s the law of Genetics. It’s possible to have blue inherited eyes if one of your parents is brown-eyed and the other blue-eyed, provided at the upper level (grand-parents) one of them had blue eyes too and had transmitted the Recessive gene to the younger generation. It means that the recessive (i.e. non-dominant) is stored in the genetic patrimony and express itself oddly and randomly with another recessive gene. 

Just as the script (and therefore, the show) must not bear historical inaccuracies, nor errors (such as  continuity, plot holes, factual, visible crew, revealing, characters, police cars plates changing every other episodes…),  it must get the DNA heritage done properly, don’t you think?

Super Screenwriter explains it better than me :

Super Screenwriter is a genius ©Floreva 2012

How to feel guilty for the way you treat your characters and what to do about it

12 Wednesday Sep 2012

Posted by in Creating, Writing

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

 

Today’s subject may be a little unusual, but still, it makes sense to reflect upon when one is involved in the subject of writing, be it novel, drama, short-story, poetry, thriller (especially thriller!).

I’m writing about guilt. Author’s guilt. The experience of guilt about how the characters are lead through or thrown into various ventures by their author.  I mean, when the events are unpleasant or morally ticklish, of course.  If it was pleasant or virtuous,  there would be no sense of guilt afterwards. Nor during the writing itself, as the story unfolds and develops.

 

It sounds probably strange.

I remember when I was engulfed in this thriller, and a character had to die, because otherwise the story could not evolve. As the nice young policeman went on with his duty, he had to meet his fate. Because the sending of those Interpol agents depended on his being killed, and his murder being disguised as a car accident.  The visit of the Interpol agents in that seemingly falling-apart Russian plant would not take place and the whole story would just vanish into a non-existing world, a world where policemen never die, corruption never takes place, and everyone is playing by the rules, a world where pollution is just a word on a paper and not a palpable, quantifiable, ugly reality, a world where guns are not invented yet, where kids are never abandoned or cancer-stricken, a world where virtue is the golden rule governing every relationship, and where love is not a rogue reality but still a concept worth hoping for.

Such a world, alas, does not exist.

So the nice friendly policeman Sergueï had to go. I felt so bad about that. I considered : he might be just wounded… maybe? Although only a fictional character, I took interest in him, his shyness, his quietness, his willing to be more audacious to ask the bold Katrina out, his care to carry out his duty clean and sharp.

And I knew (synopsis, thank you), that his mate the Interpol agent had to disappear too. And the second Interpol agent had to remain prisoner until he got rescued.

And…I lost my sleep. Yep, for fictional characters I knew nothing about 3 month prior.

Why was that?

I tell you  what : it was guilt. I felt guilty to create characters only to trap them in a story they could never escape from. Mr Synopsis told me so : “Crush their hopes, weaken their fighting spirit, and throw them into the iron clad of an untouchable villain with high connections and protections.”

I talked about this feeling around me, with close persons. Turned out, I was too virtuous, I cared a great deal too much about non-existent things. And it’s right.

So, I stopped making knots in my brain and proceeded with further creation. And the development held a good surprise with the members of the forensics team sent to examine the shambled apartment of the hero (yes, a bomb exploded there).

So, for that guilt feeling, you know what to do? Here’s an advice.

Take it with you for a drink…

 

Listen to its plea carefully…

Then, drown it into a nice Irish coffee and confess your sin. Your absolution lies in your writing something worth reading.

 

Don’t feel guilty about the author’s guilt. You know the best part ?

Guilt, like sorrow, can swim, and therefore, never drowns. Never. You’re built with the feature or not. But more likely, with. (And it gets stickier with age).

 

 

Hey Guilt!

Yeah… you, Nasty  Guilt of the Author…

….Get lost.

 

Last minute update : a nice cuppa and a British series episode Black Books

10 Monday Sep 2012

Posted by in Life in style, TV Series

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

,

I just stumbled upon a nice post (http://blogofthecourtier.com/2012/09/07/one-is-never-enough/) regarding books and British series about a second bookshop keeper, who is rather misanthropist  than friendly to his customers. The post is well written and is about a British series I never have heard of before (how come? my series supply source must be audited somehow…) : “Black Books” (Channel 4, 2000-2004). The title in itself gives some clues about what to expect, only to twist your expectations and dip them into comedy (black comedy anyone?). And Mr Black wears…well…Black. Has black disheveled hair and is irascible to his potential customers. I let you imagine the results.

Photo  source : Wikipedia.

So as I read the article, my interest grew. Next thing, I found myself  searching the web, and watching patches of episodes on youtube. The series bears all the requirements to qualify to be eligible for the top-ten list (I’ll need to fix that and adjust  to a top-15 list, now, I suppose).

Apart from the canned laughter which spoil the delivery of the lines (don’t they know by now how  exasperating and annoying it is, particularly when the lines are good and need no support to make us laugh?), the show is witty, funny, eccentric, lines are just brilliant and hilarious, actors are perfect and above all, if you are a book worm sneaking guilty pleasures (I mean, like browsing one entire hour among books) from time to time in a second hand book shop, you have probably experienced such book keepers and you’ll recognize the situations.

The girl working next door is also funny both in her ways, and in her name (provided you know a little useful day-to-day German ). She’s named Fran Katzenjammer.

In Germany (and I’ve lived there and enjoyed some outings with friends in pubs), when you’ve had too much beer the day before, the morning after is usually a Katzenjammer day, because of all the “cats screaming” (literal translation), meaning you’re severely hung over. It wouldn’t be so funny if she didn’t pop in the shop every other scene  into the bookshop with a bottle of wine and glasses, or if she didn’t go into Bernard Black’s kitchen to fetch those items to toast to Black’s mishaps with either his customers or his co-worker Manny (seen also in the funny film Saving Grace)

As for me, last timeI went in such a shop was in Vienna, 6 weeks ago. British second hand book shop, keeper buried in his book, chain-smoking at his desk, barely answering. The shelves were seemingly organised and piles of books jammed the areas,  disheveled newspaper stood on racks… It had a a real atmosphere per se.

So, you know they can really be like that.

And having a series revolving around this fact is utterly hilarious.

I’m returning on my techno-thriller (25 p to go now and it’s good, because all the previous proof-reading increments seem to have to been taken into account by the software Word, and I had to catch up) *sigh*.

Good day to you, readers and bloggers. Share a laugh : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ip9LXmPysk

Floreva

Thanks to William from the Blog of the Courtier. (http://blogofthecourtier.com)

A nice cuppa and a British series episode

09 Sunday Sep 2012

Posted by in Entertainemt, TV Series

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, ,

It’s been awhile since I last posted, as a fellow blogger & follower told me recently. Sorry, sorry, dear readers, it’s been a busy time, back on tracks and back to work. Plus I had to find something worth writing about & sharing with you.

And, no wonder, it’s TV series “addiction” I’ll write about today… Let me grab my preferred teabag, kettle is whistling…There… So…

…While discovering the much acclaimed (and being mesmerized by) Sherlock on Netflix  last month, I reflected on my TV & movie enthusiasm. And I came to the conclusion that I decidedly have a thing for most British stuff .

Particularly when it comes to TV series.

I loved them then ( 60’s & 70’s, 90’s), I love them now.

No doubt I’ll love them tomorrow.

Especially if the future series blend inventive narrative tricks with caustic characters and brilliant writing, and neat subtext (as Sherlock does, for instance).

And on whatever angle I approach them, I am never disappointed. Comedy, drama,  law, children ( remember Paddington, and Here comes the double decker ? ),  detective, period and history, they’re always a perfect match for me.

An complete list would prove annoying for you to read and useless (if not preposterous) for me to write down, so in respect for your time, I’ve shortlisted them to the 10  I would carry the DVD’s with me, should I be sent to the farthest corner on Earth (provided there’s a TV set, of course ;-p )

Mind you, choosing among all them has been difficult.

So the winners are :

The Avengers (from Honor Blackman’s time to Linda Thorson’s time), The Prisoner, Blackadder, Sherlock, Yes Minister, Wish me Luck, Foyle’s War, Absolutely fabulous (which comes “ex aequo” with French and Saunders and a Bit of Fry and Laurie, I’m afraid), Wire in the Blood, and The Last Enemy.

Now, I just can’t wait to watch A touch of Cloth, a spoof crime-police series airing on Sky 1. With John Hannah (who starred in McCallum and New street order, btw).

Interview in the Guardian here : http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/26/charlie-brooker-spoof-crime-drama-sky1

Trailer there : http://sky1.sky.com/sky1hd-shows/a-touch-of-cloth
http://on.fb.me/jXJXk5 (Like on Facebook)
http://bit.ly/mn7faJ (Follow on Twitter)

I’d be glad to read what your fave British series is, drop me a line!

I think I need a second cuppa now, cheers and good night.

F.