Monday, June 27, 2011


The previous post was deleted because it was published in wrong blog. Obviously it should have been published in Need More Fiber. The error has been corrected now.

I don't know if I said it here, but I have realized that I suck at writing novels, at least at this point of my life. There is something I'm better at, and that is screenwriting. Movie scripts are shorter and I can use my strengths; creating characters and writing dialogue, better. My biggest problem with novels is that I have really learned to kill my darlings and use as few words as I can to say it. I just cannot fill in a novel. Perhaps I'll try again in some twenty years or so.
I am planning on changing my novel ideas into movie scripts.

Now, I was reading the Writers' Guild of America's list of 101 best screenplays... and there are both Godfather I and II. I don't get it. I would really like you to explain to me why it's supposed to be so great a movie? What's good with the script?

I find the movie boring and depressing, filled with angst, and... well... It HAS some great acting performances, I don't say anything about cinematography, editing, directing, lights and camera... I assume those are okay, but the SCRIPT IS INCREDIBLY DULL, BORING, UNINTERESTING...
I don't find any of the characters in any way interesting, I don't care one bit about any of them - or perhaps a little about daddy Corleone. I find Michael whiny and weak, and his wives are... pale. What I remember best from the movies was the horse's head and the girl blowing up in the car. I have seen all three movies. I saw them as an adult, just a few years ago, just to see what's the big deal with these movies, and I had to force myself sit by the television and keep watching.
I didn't laugh and cry, I yawned and murmured about being so stupid that I decided to see these movies. That's nine hours I'll never get back.
Perhaps there was metaphors, allegories, parabels and deep wisdom and what ever, but it was hidden so well I missed it. And what's the plot? What's the hook? What's the theme of these movies? A story of a spineless mafia boss who doesn't agree with the ideology, but is forced to take upon the responsibility, and the kills, mames and rapes crying all the way to the bank. I mean... what's the purpose with these movies? Mafiosos are people too? What? There are good reasons for people to do what they do? Huh? What? I don't get it.
So I really need you to tell me why this is supposed to be a good movie and a good movie script.

Best cast in movie history? Doubtful, but the actors cannot save a crappy movie.

"there is certainly no denying that The Godfather was a very well made film and innovative in some ways due to it's cinematography, editing and certain camera effects"
I have seen extremely well made movies with all the best editing, "cinematography" and camera effects, but those things don't make a crappy movie good.

"It is near flawless."
In what way? I can find dozens of flaws. The worst flaw being the crappy script, which for some reason has been voted as one of the 101 best movie scripts the last 100 years - by WRITERS.

" no one is more attractive than Al Pacino as Michael Corleone."
I can come up with 100 guys who are more attractive as Michael Corleone by Al Pacino. On the other hand, I'm not into that kind of guys. Nevertheless, an attractive main character doesn't make a movie script good.

"The only movies that can even hold close to The Godfather Part II are Raging Bull and Once Upon A Time In America.  Yes, I just listed three movies with De Niro.  That man is a legend, a genius, and a godsend.  The day he the day that true cinema dies.  Same goes for Scorsese."
Frankly, Scorsese is responsible for some of the worst movies in the movie history, like The Age of Innocence. The scenography is amazing, the costumes, make-up, lights and camera, absolutely delicious, but the script! The movie made me hate Daniel Day Lewis and think he must be one of the worst actors ever. The girls did their best to save the movie, but not even they could rescue it from Scorsese. Yuk.
But - if you think Scorsese and De Niro are "true cinema"... you think there was no cinema before 60's and there will be none after 2030's, probably even earlier. Your loss.

" a masterfully shot movie with tremendously powerful and unforgettable performances."
Probably masterfully shot. I don't know much about that. What I do know is that there are dozens of movies that are just as masterfully shot.
Unforgettable performances? Can't remember any of them. Marlon Brando had mouth full of tissue for some weird reason. I thought he was better in Streetcar Named Desire. Al Pacino was better in The Scent Of A Woman. Robert De Niro is lovely, I agree, but he isn't in the movie that long time. On the other hand, I assume he made some impression to me, as I find daddy Corleone most likable of all the characters in the movie.

"Mix that in with an unflinching look at organized crime rising in the early 20th century of American culture, as well as more themes than you can shake a stick well as one of THE most memorable closing scenes that decides a character for LIFE..."
Why would anyone want to look unflinched at organized crime rising in the early 20th century of American culture? Godfather, Goodfellas and Scarface made mobsters "fashionable".  Every "gansta" says Scarface is their favorite movie and they act like him. These movies are idolising crime, that's what they do, with "unflinching look at organized crime". Bull.
"More themes than you can shake a stick at" is not a very good idea. Keep it simple. When people try to say thousand words with every screen of a movie, all we get is a confusing soup of boredom.
THE most memorable closing scenes that decides a character for LIFE. I can only remember the closing scene of Godfather I.

"To truly appreciate this film you need to watch it start to end in a dark room with no1 bugging you and break down the film scene by scene and take note of the camera work, acting and dialogue. Withing the first 30 minutes you realize why Marlin Brando was one of the greatest actors to ever live, then to watch Al Pacino be born as the next greatest actors of our generation in the restaurant scene moments later. Truly an amazing movie."
I saw it in a dark room with no-one bugging me and my idea of a good movie is not one where I CAN break down the film scene by scene and take note of the camera work etc. A good movie is one that makes me forget that it's actually people saying what they are paid to say, written by someone - in some cases a lot of someones - thought of hours, days, months, even years -  in world constructed just for the make-believe... when I start noticing scenography, acting, clothes, camera and lights, editing and such, it's because the script stinks to high heavens.

"Engrossing motion picture that features some of the finest editing, cinematography and performances ever. There is a wonderful theme of family that runs through this film and its later sequels. No one is truly judged. Love is unconditional. God is the one who truly judges."
Oh? I didn't see unconditional love. I saw unconditional love die, because people considered their obligation more valuable than unconditional love. I saw people being judged for petty things, judged and condemned to be killed, betrayed, left, degraded... punished in different ways. The people who we are supposed to believe are unconditionally loved are being judged for failing The Code put in place by someone else. People are being forced to follow someone else's rules, Michael, Sonny and Fredo, but also everyone connected in any way to the family. Daddy Corleone does care about the people, everyone of his "subjects", but Michael doesn't care...
I also didn't find the movie the least "engrossing".

""The Godfather" is a huge piece of film entertaining, involving sentiment, nostalgia, filial affection, pride, integrity, loyalty, corruption, honor, betrayal and crime"
It wasn't entertaining; I missed the sentiment; nostalgia, perhaps, for mafiosor; I'd say possessive "affection" instead of filial; pride for something not worth being proud of; not much integrity, loyalty or honor but corruption, betrayal and crime, yes.

"an exquisite Mafia epic"
A Mafia epic, sure. But, frankly, most epics are terribly boring and pompous. So also Godfather.

"their steadfast loyalty, love for blood relations, and code of ethics"
 With other words, sense of self-preservation, possessiveness and... er... I assume even questionable ethics are ethics.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Save The Cat

I read Save The Cat yesterday. It was interesting, but after having read mixed reviews of the book and having thought about the pantser/tinker issue, I suppose it would be best to use Save The Cat for the editing process, and not the writing process. I think it would be best to just sit down and write the 110 pages needed for a manuscript and THEN read Save the Cat, and check if the characters and the structure is right, and so on.

I think it's interesting that Blake Snyder finds "Villains closing in" a difficult part of the manuscript. I think it's kind of natural. First you state the present and the reason why the present has to change. All stories are about change, so all movies are about change as well, so the status quo cannot stay, it has to change. Either because of inner reasons, which is what happens in a drama, or outer reasons, which is what happens in an action movie. (Put very loosely :-D )
Then you present how the main character starts changing, steps into act two, and the movie is all about play and games. This is where you put the jokes and such. It's like the phase in losing weight where you are full of motivation, you are losing weight, you get results, you are eager, willing and full of energy and do all kinds of things.
Then comes the midpoint, which is sort of a top (or low point, if that's how you want to play it) and after that everything changes. The week when no weight is lost, the week when you are full of resentment and resistance, you don't want to exercise, you don't want to watch what you are eating, you question your motivation, you wonder why you should lose weight in the first place, because you should be all fine what ever you are, and all the scary stories about heart attack and such are just boogie man stories, told to scare people to buy diet products. You're fine, you don't need to lose weight, you don't need to sacrifice and all that... You just don't care anymore, it's not worth it - and what happens is that the "villains" creep in. A week later you find out that you have eaten you back to where you started. You might even have a minor heart attack, something to scare you properly - perhaps someone dies because of obesity. That happens, you know. Humans are not created to weight over 100 kilos.
Then comes the mourning period, and it follows the stages of loss and grief. You cannot believe you spoiled your diet. You are angry at yourself for doing that. You are really sad because you failed. You are full of regret, fear of that you cannot make it all better again, you can't fix it, full of anxiety and despair.
Then, when you hit the rock bottom, you take yourself from the neck of your collar, and decide, for real this time, and keep the diet, and don't even look at the scales or mirror for half a year, not before someone tells you how much weight you have lost, how good you look, when you notice you have to buy new clothes, because your trousers keep falling off you... and you climb to the scales, heart shivering of fear, and see that you have reached the goal, you have lost the weight, and you didn't even think of it. The diet has become a lifestyle. You have a skinny lifestyle, not fat one, so you are skinny, active, healthy and happy. You won.
So we put in the closing picture, which shows happy, smiling and beautiful you walking down the same street the miserable, sad and fat you was walking in the opening picture.

Monday, June 20, 2011

I hate being so negative :-D

I get these ideas... well... nothing special in that. Everyone does.

Yesterday I was slouching on the couch, knitting myself a summer top (I have started it three times, and ripped it twice, because it was way too big. I won't rip it again.) and zapping. I like food programs, I see myself dressed in vintage clothes, you know, a bit pin-up girl style, talking about food with passion and knowledge and sensuality, like Nigella, Sophie, Leila and Jamie - a bit like Annabel, except with a nice voice.

Anyway, I also like to watch fashion. I like fashion. I think I could do a good job as a fashion designer - at least if I follow the fashion actively - and I believe I would do a better job as many stylists out there. I was watching the 10 best and worst dressed in rock, and I was amazed that they didn't mention Lil'Kim in the worst dressers list, and that they chose Sean Combs as the best dresser... never mind that...
I was also watching at Women on Top, and they were featuring Jodi Jones, the photographer. And she mentioned wanting to have a child, a daughter she could teach what she has learned of life and everything... and I saw a movie flash in front of my inner eyes, "Jodi's Son". What if she got a son? I have always wanted a son I could teach everything I have learned about life and all, and I picture him as an adult and still devoted to me, of course, I'm a bit of a Yiddishe Mama...

I have been writing too long at 750 words. I haven't been writing my BuNo, but I have been writing my June challenge at 750 words. It's typing 750 words on the page as quickly as possible, and that means it's just stream of conscience, with not much heads or tails. Not very good as literature, but - uh.

Also I was watching Heath Ledger's biography and someone said something about brotherhood... yes, there was an advertisement about the French weeks on some movie channel and France is about equality, freedom and brotherhood, and they were showing a clip of two men hugging each other, and together with Heath Ledger and Brokeback Mountain, and because I have been watching How I Met Your Mother lately - I had a marathon and I saw the last season in just a matter of days - and we have Barney Stinson and Bro Code, and all that melted together into a tv show of brothers. Then I naturally thought about Sisters, which is another tv series I loved.
The other tv series I love being Friends and HIMYM, which lead me to wonder why all the women in tv series are skinny and pretty. Mike and Molly was being attacked because people "didn't feel comfortable watching two fatties make out"... even though a lot of people in the Western world, especially in United States ARE "fatties. People just don't want to WATCH "ugly" people...

You know Dove's campaign for real beauty? People were saying that these women were UGLY and they didn't want to see "ugly women" like this on streets... You know this picture is retouched as well. The skin is made smooth, the teeth whiter and all the scars and stretch marks and other such blemishes are removed... yet there are people out there who have the guts to call these ladies UGLY. Especially when the person expressing the opinion looks like he should consider himself lucky if he got a girlfriend like this, because in that case the girl would have accepted a spouse below her level of attractiveness...
Frankly, I doubt the idiot has ever had a girl friend, so the only women he has are the ones he fantasises, and then, naturally, only "the best" is good enough.... but I didn't think HIMYM, Friends and Sisters were made for such guys. If Monica had stayed an overeater, it would not have made any difference in her character. Phoebe could have been fat, or at least "normal".
Like Renée Zellweger in Bridget Jones. Bridget Jones is supposed to be chubby, but her weight is under 60 kilos all the time in the diary... and to me - weighing some 100 kilos - that is an insult.

Reminds me of an idiot, who said he likes Jonathon Earl Bowser's art, because his girls are chubby, like normal women, and not skinny, like the media likes to show women today...

I WISH I was as chubby as that woman! Or chubby like Renée Zellweger playing Bridget Jones.

BTW, have you noticed, that when a man is chubby is not a question of a little bulge on the tummy... Unless you're Gerard Butler, of course.

So - I would like to ask writers all over the world, especially those writing romance novels and tv scripts, to make their heroines more "normal". Because, most women of the world are not actresses, and shouldn't need to compete with such beauty ideals, just as men looking like Gerard Butler in this photo (NORMAL) shouldn't (and most wouldn't) feel chubby. Jonathon's women are skinny, some with big boobs, some with smaller boobs, but none of them is chubby.

(Yes, of course I'd rather look Gerard Butler looking a little bit different, but as I am trying to lose weight and fighting my impulses and impatience, I know it's not easy to look like this:
yet, that's Gerard Butler's back two years ago, and I'm pretty sure he looks about the same in his latest movies. That's kind of his job. So, let the guy "hang out" every now and then, okay? It's not that he's ugly even when he's "chubby".

Anyway, back to being negative :-D
As I had the idea of screenplays, I went on looking for some help on how to write them, and as Quentin Tarantino learned to make movies by watching movies, I thought that I could learn to write screenplays by reading screenplays, so I went to Simply Scripts and stumbled over Babz Buzz, and  she was talking about Blake Snyder, who according to Babz was an angel. "Everything he did was positive".
And I love that quality in people. I don't have it. I'm always whining and grumping and complaining and criticising and ranting and... as you see. I love positive, happy, glad people, but even when I try to express this, I start whining about the unrealistic expectations on women's weight.


Here's about the role of The Board

Sunday, June 12, 2011

I am a ranting person

Looks like some people cheat. You can't write 750 words in 0 minutes or 2 minutes. The fastest typing speed ever was 216 words per minute, and I doubt even she could keep up with that kind of speed for any longer time. An average PROFESSIONAL typist writes some 60 words per minute, the best PROFESSIONAL typists reach 100-120 words per minute, and at that rate - a PROFESSIONAL typist writing a pre-written text - it would take 5-10 minutes.
So - someone writes the text first and then cuts and pastes it on 750 words... IF they even WRITE the text and not just copy it from somewhere - IF THEY copy and paste it, or if it is someone else doing it. No, that's counterproductive, and not what the site is there for.
That makes me wonder how strong some people's perfectionism and will to win is... 750 words is a very private place. No-one else but you can see what you write, how many words you write, your typing speed or any other such details. The only person you are decieving is you. YOU will lose the important information in the statistics, like typing speed and if you need to watch out for the adverbs ;-) It is a commitment, and copying and pasting a piece of prewritten text - whether it is yours or not - is cheating. And it is cheating you...

Writing practice: morning pages - at 750 words
the power of writing and morning pages
now, it should preferably be done by hand, as Julia Cameron, who - as far as I know - invented it, says, but then you really should type it from your handwritten notes into 750 words later...

On the other hand, a lot of writers handwrite, not type, but what are you doing in 750 words then? It is very technical, internet page, and, frankly, stealing your time you could use writing the "real thing"...

No. Cheating, I say.

And about the ranting; here's part of my 750 words of today:
Frankly, I haven't thought of that the Christians - or the fundamental evangelical Christians - are raising their children to obey blindly and believe the authorities without questions and verifying the information. Of course this thing about creationism and evolution become a big thing then; one authority claims one thing and the other totally opposite. The children need to be told which authority is correct, and as the school refuses to support the religious authority, the children would need to question his authority and verity of what he is saying, to be able to obey and listen the authority that is being supported by their parents and their government, that is the school... after all, they are being told to be good and obedient in school and do what the teachers say. It would not be acceptable to question the teacher, as that would be opposing an authority... so in reality it is the children who are between rock and a hard place.
Really sad. Considering that one would need to give a tiny allowment - or what it is called - that is, to acknowledge that science tells what and how, and religion who and why. These two are answering two different questions, and therefore cannot be contradicting each other.
It is really sick to believe the earth is just some thousands of years old, but when I asked a FEX about why the Bible MUST be literal truth, she answered, that if it wasn't NOTHING in it would be truth... 

It took me 17 minutes to write, and it is rated PG because of "sexual content". What? Where?

"Sexual content (Words like horny, aroused, hump): 25"
I use the word "love" once, "hard" once (between rock and hard place) and "creation" once or twice... but there is no reference to even "kiss", "hug" or "marry", not to talk about "harder" words. No euphemisms of love-making or genitals, at least none I know of. Not even "man" or "woman". So why is my language so "sexy"?

Here's the two first texts I wrote to 750 words: Spinsters and the vampire story - after those two my sexual word count was up to 100 or so. Huh?
Well, the vampire thing is littered with the word "love", and there are some mentions of sex, arousing and seduction, but the spinster story? What's sexual there?

This is really bothering me. Where is the list of sexual content words in linguistic analysis?

Saturday, June 4, 2011

This feminine tosh

V.S.Naipaul claims that no female can write as well as he does and that he can recognize if a man or a woman has written a piece immediately, because women are sentimental and have a narrow view of the world...

The Naipaul test
I got 7/10. I would very much like to know what Naipaul got :-D
BTW; I tried to use Naipaul's words to decide, and that made me mark his text as written by a female.

I wish authors would stop making such claims, how ever true they think they are. Makes me believe the guy hasn't read many female writers, which unfortunately is true when it comes to most men.

Esquire: 75 books a man should read - greatest work of literature ever written?
I have read two, started two, and read other books by the authors, but... only one is written by a woman.
So Jezebel compiled a list of 75 books a woman should read
I think I get 7 of those :-)

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

Juno begins...

I have something I think Tart might appreciate... Beauty and other pleasing things :-D It's my Tumblr account where I plan publishing images I find pleasing :-) Fairytale illustrations, more or less naked men and heels :-D

I have been thinking about what I'll write this June (for BuNo - I like to call it Juno) and I have been printing a lot of my digital notes and they are inspiring. I just wonder if any of those will ever grow to a full novel size, or get edited or get sent to a publisher or published or... *sigh*

Here's a little something I found today: Escaping the Inkwell
No time to look at it more now, but one day...