The Road to Avatar

When one walks into a movie like Avatar, with all the advance hype and two camps, one of worshippers and one of haters, seemingly pitted against each other, one definitely wants to have a strong opinion of it. And as that nominal one I can tell you I certainly wanted to have a strong visceral reaction, one way or the other. I wanted to either hate it and let everyone know why and how wrong they were if they loved it or I wanted to love it and admit that the bashing is just so much senseless backlash. The last thing I wanted was to have the closing titles emerge to a feeling of overwhelming indifference and yet, here we are. While it's true I am rather stunned anyone could be very impressed with it I'm also a little stunned at anyone truly hating it. But all of this requires much more elaboration than that so let us begin.

Avatar is James Cameron's latest science fiction film after years away from the genre and his first sci-fi done in 3-D which, I must agree with Jim Emerson, looks simply like multi-planing and, for me at least, simply recesses into the background after the first fifteen or twenty minutes. I forgot it was even in 3-D enough of the time to make me question why anyone would or should go to the trouble of filming it in 3-D in the first place. I can honestly say that I believe a new viewer would be better off seeing the 2-D version and that James Cameron's movie would be better off without the needless P.T. Barnum hucksterism inherent in hyping a technical process as the main attraction to get asses in the seats, to quote Joel Silver.

As for the story it involves a security group of former Marines and assorted military types (think Blackwater), the corporation they work for, a far away moon named Pandora and that moon's indigenous people with whom the corporation has been trying, futilely, to negotiate in order to get mining rights to a precious ore. The indigenous people, the Na'vi, are also the subject of study by a group of scientists headed up by Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) who want peaceful relations with them. She runs the Avatar program which allows human users like Augustine and paraplegic Marine veteran Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) to mentally enter the bodies of the lab-grown Na'vi, bodies that have been made expressly for this purpose. The user goes to sleep and enters into the avatar, not in a dreamlike state but literally having their thoughts and movements transplanted to the avatar. This is done, presumably, for better relations with the Na'vi except that, one, the Na'vi know they're just avatars (they call them "dreamwalkers") and, two, the users headed up by Augustine seem to have no concern for going all the way with fitting into the Na'vi culture because they make sure their avatars wear safari shorts, tee-shirts and baseball caps. It's a bit like doing a movie about a group of people wanting to make peaceful relations with a village under Sharia law and making sure the women cover their head with a veil only to have them also wear mini-skirts, fishnets and spike heels.

And the first observation, that the Na'vi know the humans are just walking around in fake Na'vi bodies, is not a minor nitpick but a central flaw of the logic in the film. The idea of two cultures meeting and exchanging ideas revolves around just that, exchange, not pretending to look and act like the other one. But more importantly if the humans simply go as they are, in their own bodies (and why not since the Na'vi aren't fooled by the avatars), then they never have to fall into a stupor anytime they wake up. Allow me to explain: Because the humans only inhabit the avatars when they are asleep, the avatars are likewise comatose whenever the human users are awake. And so at several points in the movie, always of course when an important point is about to be made or physical danger is imminent, Jake Sully is awakened and his avatar collapses into a limp pile of jello. Now, what science team wishing to improve relations with another culture would devise a plan in which at any given moment all diplomatic progress could be halted or reversed because your avatar collapses into an immovable silent stupor?

But avatar comas aside I also question the very reality of a scenario such as the one devised here taking place in 2154.* 150 years into the future the human race can travel across light years of space in hibernation, transport millions of tons of heavy machinery, aircraft and military ordinance, grow alien bodies whole and then have the extraordinary ability to mentally link up to them and remotely use them while asleep but - BUT - they cannot mine an ore beneath the surface of the Na'vi village without all-out genocidal destruction. What? As famously described by Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood by using a milkshake analogy, men have possessed the ability to tunnel under and drain from an area far away from the starting point as far back as at least the 1920's but we're supposed to believe that 150 years into the future the only way this unobtainable ore (and yes, it is named unobtanium) can be had is by destroying a massive village that lays on top of it. I kept thinking, "Surely with their stunningly advanced technology they could just mine it out from a few hundred miles away and replace it with granite or some other solid substance that would maintain the support of the structures above it." That's not something we could do now, easily at least, but in 150 years?

In the end of course, the ore is nothing but a MacGuffin so I suppose it's more important to understand and discuss the characters and indeed it is. Problem is, there's not much to the characters. James Cameron provides no interesting or insightful dialogue from which to understand the characters on anything but a surface level. And as many others have already noted, Cameron relies heavily upon cliche in his dialogue. From "you're not in Kansas anymore" to "let's do this, people!" to at least four instances by my count where someone pumped their fist and said "Yeah!" or "Woooo-Hoooo" or "Whoa!" much of what the Avatar viewer must sit through in terms of character expression are truly cringe-worthy. Also, when the Na'vi ask Sully his name and he says, "Jake Sully" you just know they're going to call him by his full name for the whole movie, and not to disappoint, they do. As for the rest of the Na'vi dialogue, it is almost entirely extracted from fortune cookies or some heretofore unknown book entitled Chicken Soup for the Na'vi Soul in which every phrase that drops from their feline pie-holes is encrusted with pearls of wisdom. I'm afraid I must confess that my eyes rolled dozens of times during the showing I attended. And their method of greeting friends and loved ones, "I see you", is a bit too cloying for this viewer. If Dances with Wolves, it's closest cinematic relative, turned the Lakota Sioux into cuddly Native American plush dolls then Avatar ups the ante and turns the Na'vi into angelic tree elves who kill wild wolf-like creatures to save themselves or others from being eaten alive and then mourn the death of the animal they just killed. You know, the animal that just tried to kill them. Goddamn do they respect life!

But all of this is moot because Cameron is a visual storyteller so that's where the attention should be focused. And this is the area in which I seem to disagree with most people, even the film's detractors. I've read several reviews, Jim Emerson and Larry Aydlette excluded because they didn't seem very impressed with the look either, that say even if the film's story isn't that great at least it looks great. Well, not to me unfortunately. The Na'vi, after two hours and forty minutes, never looked like anything more than CGI creations, and this bothered me. Why? Because it was and is wholly unnecessary to use CGI in the first place. With the exception of their faces, skin color, tails and height, the Na'vi look like humans which means the facial features, tails and skin color could have easily been taken care of with the age-old Hollywood craft of makeup which would have instantly Made. Them. Real. And if one wants to use CGI then fine, use it to increase the height next to humans but this is only even apparent in the very few scenes in which the two species share the same space onscreen. So what we're left with is the fact that, to paraphrase Jeff Goldblum's famous declaration from Jurassic Park, James Cameron was so thrilled with the idea that he could create CGI Na'vi that he never stopped and asked himself if he should create CGI Na'vi. Really, if you've seen it, or hell, even if you haven't and have only seen the stills, ask yourself, "Wouldn't it look so much better with real actors being filmed with makeup instead of using barely updated versions of Jar Jar Binks?"

Despite all of this, Avatar does have several things going for it as well. For one, Stephen Lang is quite good as the former Marine Colonel Miles Quaritch despite being given nothing but standard issue dialogue to spout. When it comes to acting I'm always a little sensitive having spent years acting myself, so when I read statements like "the acting is terrible across the boards" I know this is not true and it irks me. No one in the film gives anything near a great performance but given the dialogue I'd say almost everyone acquits him or herself quite admirably. Lang is the best but even Weaver and Worthington are fairly good. Zoe Saldana, although never actually seen behind the deluge of CGI artwork, probably gives the most fully realized performance in the film, if not the most charismatic (again, that goes to Lang).

The action sequences are also a high point of the movie with Cameron handling them deftly and confidently. He manages to do so without resorting to any of the hackneyed gimmicks employed by most action directors today in which it is thought, for some unknown and bizarre reason, that making the action on the screen blurred and visually indecipherable makes it more exciting. Hacks like Michael Bay could learn a thing or two from James Cameron about how to handle an action sequence that keeps the audience engaged by, horrors(!), allowing them to see the action. Several times during the final battle sequence the camera follows the central figure from point A to point B without furiously cutting away and only twice did I notice any form of ramping and even then, when Jake battles Quaritch, it was quite graceful compared to the ramping jolts of a Zach Snyder.

Finally, the politics did not match any of my worst-case scenario expectations. I walked in thinking I was going to be seeing a mindless Hollywood anti-American screed and realized soon enough that its politics most resembled Aliens updated. Cameron's military group is a group of guns for hire working for the main villain which very much resembles the "Company" of Aliens. It's easy to build up an enemy in faceless corporate greed even as we all patronize corporations daily and reap the benefits of their success with our indulgent lifestyles (and I don't imagine Cameron lives in a grass hut using only windpower himself). Nothing earth-shattering going on here, just Cameron putting white and black hats on the characters and pointing the finger, as have so many sci-fi writers before him, at humanity and its abuse of nature. Sure, the ore could stand in for, and in Cameron's mind I'm sure it does, the oil in Iraq but the political message of the film is so incompetently handled (once or twice the word "terrorist" is used in case you're not getting it) and put on a backburner to the whole "we humans just don't understand and respect nature" routine that it's final result is one of impotence.

And so I exit Avatar with neither disgust nor adoration but an existential shrug of the shoulders. I truly don't mean to come off as flippant when I say that I genuinely don't know where the worship came from, or the hatred (not the pre-judging kind, I mean the kind after seeing the movie). I walked away from Avatar thinking it was an at times enjoyable, at times sluggish, and at all times mediocre sci-fi adventure. True, I am a bit more bewildered at the praise from some critics than the condemnations if only because anyone who has taken in their fair share of the world's cinematic treasures, which I would fully expect, nay, demand of a film critic, and still thinks Avatar is very impressive makes me wonder just how much they understand about film. Avatar is average, standard stuff. I wish I could say more, or less, but I'm afraid it didn't impact me either way with any substantial weight. I'd recommend Avatar only to hard-core sci-fi fans for a decent two and a half hours but would suggest seeing the 2-D version or just watching it on the home theater setup in a few months. For everyone else I'd steer clear. There simply isn't much to offer in the film and no way to describe it honestly except as a mildly successful entertainment for viewers not expecting much in the first place.

Luise Rainer, 100 Today

Luise Rainer was born on January 12, 1910. She turns 100 today. Living in London and still active she will celebrate her birthday, according to The Telegraph, "at the Arts Club in Mayfair with pals such as Sir Ian McKellen, Jarvis Astaire and Lord Taverne."

Luise Rainer's film career* is not one known to many non-cinephiles these days but to everyone who loves Hollywood movies of the thirties, she is a familiar face if only for the two films for which she won Oscars, The Great Ziegfeld and The Good Earth. She did only a handful more and nothing more impressive. She is perhaps most famous for being the first actor to win two Oscars as well as the first to win two in a row, just beating Spencer Tracy by one year before he would duplicate the feat.

Join Cinema Styles in wishing the lovely Miss Rainer a happy and healthy 100th birthday. Happy Birthday Luise!

Luise with her first Oscar, for The Great Ziegfeld, at the 1936 Oscars (held in 1937) with Paul Muni (winner for The Story of Louis Pasteur) and Frank Capra (winner for Mr. Deeds Goes to Town).

portrait, 1938

Original caption for above photo from the Los Angeles Examiner: "'This is the happiest moment of my life.' So said actress Luise Rainer, formerly of Vienna, when she became an American citizen. She is shown studying her new citizenship papers. After taking the oath of allegiance she jumped up and down and clapped her hands like a schoolgirl."

The Toy Wife, with Robert Young.

The Land Before CGI: 1941

Welcome to another edition of The Land Before CGI. In this edition, we'll be covering 1941, the infamous Steven Spielberg comedy that laid a big box office egg back in 1979. After its disappointing initial run it found success on network and cable television with the extended version. I'm personally not a fan of either but must admit the extended version is infinitely better. Netflix currently has the theatrical version which is so choppy and exits so many scenes before they finish you'll find yourself hitting the "eject" button almost before you begin. The extended version may not tickle anyone's funny bone either but at least it makes sense. It is the extended version that has become a mini-cult classic, mini in that it's not revered like so many low budgets cult-classics of the sixties but still has a faithful following. But this is The Land Before CGI so I'm not here to talk about the film's success or failure at the comedic level but at the miniature and full-scale effects level and there it succeeds mightily.

Special Effects creator and legend A. D. Flowers worked closely with Miniatures Supervisor Gregory Jein and fellow effects legend L.B. Abbott to achieve a seamless flow between live-action shots and miniatures, used interchangeably throughout. The alternate shots between real planes, close-ups of actors in mock-ups and models flying through elaborate miniaturized sets blend together so well that at times the viewer would be hard-pressed to point out where one ends and the other begins. It was in this period, the late seventies through the late eighties that miniature work reached its greatest heights before computer generated imagery would forever relegate it to the dustbin of cinematic history.

While the miniature sets and airplane shots are terrific it is the movie's final two set-pieces that raise the bar as high as they could be raised for such work, the Ferris Wheel sequence and the house by the sea sequence. Neither is particularly funny, mind you, but visually awesome they are indeed. The Ferris Wheel scene was done using a miniature set of an amusement park by the ocean and the house scene was shot using a full-scale gutted mock-up of a real goddamn house, falling over a cliff.

That's Eddie Deezen (with his dummy) and Murray Hamilton in the Ferris Wheel and on the sub giving the order to fire is the great Toshiro Mifune. I chose to start that scene not with the order to fire but a beat before where Deezen proclaims they are trapped, "like beavers," which may be one of the funniest lines in the movie for me (as well as almost everything that comes out of Slim Pickens' mouth).

Monday Morning Mumbles

First, the next Toerifc discussion will be a little earlier in the month than usual for the February selection because we want to get it in before the Film Preservation blogathon which begins on February 14th, hosted by Ferdy on Films and The Self-Styled Siren. After two months off Toerifc will return on Wednesday, February 10th at the usual time of 10 a.m E.S.T. with a discussion on Sam Fuller's White Dog (1982), hosted by Joseph Campanella at Cinema Fist. I'll have up promotional sidebar banners in a day or two. I look forward to seeing the movie and seeing you there for the discussion.

Second, some of you may have noticed the Cinema Styles Screening Room banner to the left in the sidebar. This is something I've been doing for a couple of months now and just started to advertise it. Basically, the software I have now makes it so easy to record and edit clips from movies that I find myself doing it whenever I watch them on my computer. If an ending is a favorite or a scene catches my eye I'll edit it and put it up, if only to return later to watch it again. And now you can too. As Cinema Styles pares down to reviews, essays and video posts (like The Land Before CGI and Opening Credits I Love), I'm putting up stills and video clips at Unexplained Cinema and Cinema Styles Screening Room (and the joke posts are now almost entirely reserved for Facebook). I hope you'll enjoy visiting them when you can.

 

Third, I watched The 400 Blows again the other day (and put up a post on it at Unexplained Cinema and a clip at The Screening Room) and was reminded how beautiful it is. It had been years since I'd seen it last and I think perhaps I'd forgotten too much about it. But mainly what struck me was the realization that I love, absolutely love, long takes. Not enough directors do it anymore. And I'm not necessarily talking about masterful long takes of complex scenes done without a single cut like the dynamite planting scene in Touch of Evil, although I love that too, but shots of someone going to a destination and the director having the patience, and guts, to simply show it in real time rather than cut it down to speed things up. There's something hypnotic about watching the banal unfold. Watch the clip to see what I mean. And now I must watch Stolen Kisses again immediately and you can be sure when I do you'll see a post or two, or three, up on it soon after. Cheers!

Straight, No Chaser? Those Hurtin' Basterds

 

I watched The Hurt Locker recently and started thinking about the nature of film and how writers and directors use different approaches to achieve various results.  In this case I was thinking of war movies and specifically the two most recent I have seen, The Hurt Locker and Inglourious Basterds.   I started to think about those cocktail party distinictions between the Documentary-Style war film and the Hollywood war film.  Basically, the Doc-Style film, The Hurt Locker, has a gritty verisimilitude, an uncomfortable relationship with reality that keeps the viewer off-balance while the Hollywood war film, Inglourious Basterds, goes for fantasy and mythos and uses the language of film to achieve something that in the real world does not exist.  These days most war films fall into The Hurt Locker column but for decades most war movies fell squarely into the Inglourious Basterds one.  

Back in the forties and fifties Hollywood made almost as many war films as it made westerns but even when Hollywood was trying to play it in earnest, with films like The Sands of Iwo Jima, they still wore their patriotism on their sleeve and kept the physical horrors of war well hidden from the innocent audience.  There was the occasional film like Battleground to keep the Doc-Style fires burning but for the most part Hollywood went the other way.  By the sixties and seventies, with movies like Where Eagles Dare, The Guns of Navarone and Kelly's Heroes, the Hollywod war film became the standard and World War II - the greatest conflict in human history with over fifty million (some stats say 60) casualties, the first use of nuclear weapons on a civilian population and a wholesale and systematic genocide that shocked the world - became a backdrop for the latest action or heist plot.  While there were serious war films, like Battle of the Bulge or the biopic Patton, they still had a glossy technicolor finish that distinguished them from the gritty black and white of Battleground in the years before.  Some films like Tora, Tora, Tora even tried to overtly emulate a documentary style but still came off feeling like an action movie (at least its last 15 minutes), not a presentation on the horrors of war. 

Then by the late seventies Vietnam became a subject for war films and because the actual war had been seen in news footage during the sixties and seventies it seemed wrong to try and gloss it up for a movie version, as John Wayne had done with The Green Berets in 1969.  But somewhere between The Deer Hunter and Platoon, Rambo was born and suddenly Vietnam had the same Hollywood style action pics of old being made with it as a backdrop.  The Missing in Action movies would continue the trend.  It was in the nineties, with Saving Private Ryan in particular, that the gritty Doc-Style war film finally wound its way back to World War II but moreso found its new look with a decision director Steven Spielberg and DP Janusz Kaminski made to desaturate the colors for the film's in-the-field scenes and desaturation has been upon us ever since.  In fact, it has become so prevalent, achieving cliche status years ago, that most studios attempt to use it to repackage the past.  Below is the new DVD cover for Patton as well as the original cover.  The new cover takes the glorious technicolor of Patton and desaturates it in, I suppose, some sort of futile effort to fool the modern viewer into thinking that Patton has the same textures of the modern war films to which they have become accustomed.  That Inglourious Basterds nixed this approach and went back to the classic Hollywood style look seems downright revolutionary considering the now standard Doc-Style approach. 

But which is better?  Or is one better?  Or is it something to be taken on a case by case basis?  Most likely case by case as with most things in life.  I find I enjoy the Hollywood style more although at a younger age I would have certainly gone with the Doc-Style.  I can just see my younger self spouting nonsense about the gritty realism and the verisimilitude and how those older films, while great, didn't really give one the feel of war.  Well, yeah, I guess but cinema is an art form.  I'll never have the feel of war unless I go to war and listening to the stories of soldiers in interviews and seeing the horrific scenes in news photos and videos will bring the experience much closer to me than any movie so I turn to the cinema, as I always do, to give me something else.  I turn to the cinema for unique experiences that fall outside the range of the real.   I love The Bridge on the River Kwai precisely because it doesn't give me story of what it's like to be a prisoner of war under the Japanese, it gives me the story of a mentally unbalanced Colonel unwittingly helping the enemy and a slacker American soldier forced to go stop him.   There are certainly elements of realism throughout but that's not why I go to it.  I go to it for the story and the characters and how the war is used to support that story and those characters.  In many ways, Kwai is the best balance between both styles of war movies, giving us some realism and plenty of fantasy.  And it's here that my thoughts return to The Hurt Locker and Inglourious Basterds because they exist not in between, as Kwai does, but at opposite poles. 

I found The Hurt Locker to be an excellent example of Doc-Style war filmmaking but as Roderick Heath said to me an online conversation, I find it hard to have anything else but technical admiration for it.  It is intense, as they say, with one tension-building suspense scene after another.  The camera is hand held but not too shaky.  The shoot-out in the desert is brilliantly done.  But when they got to the end, and the heavy metal started playing and the lead character was back on duty I found myself profound unaffected on any real cinematic level.  Emotionally it worked as well as it could I suppose, and to it's credit it doesn't waste time trying to insincerely tug at the viewer's heartstrings.  It presents the situation as is (soldiers, death, bombs, diffusing, the end) and leaves it up to you to take or give whatever emotional response feels right.  But cinematically it felt too technically proficient and not artisically reaching enough. 

Should The Hurt Locker win Best Picture I will have no real qualms but given the choice between it and Inglourious Basterds I'll go with the basterds every time.  That movie, brilliantly using cinematic formalism to contrive a post-modern fantasy, felt alive to me and pulsating in every frame.  No shaky cam, no blurred action, no ramping, just steady shots following the characters in dialogue as their actions and words lead us to a fantastical conclusion that redefines both the Hollywood style war film as well as the Revenge Fantasy film, mixing Where Eagles Dare with Death Wish and then presenting the whole thing with the patience and confidence of a director not afraid to observe his characters and scenes until they are ready to exit on their own terms. 

I have several Doc-Style war films that I love but probably many more Hollywood style ones in the final analysis.  The Bridge on the River Kwai, falling in between as it does, will probably always be my favorite as well as many other 'tweeners, like Patton.   I may like the occasional straight up, no chaser serving of the gritty war drama, but in the end I think I prefer to have mine with a twist.

Sam Fuller's White Dog

Toerifc February is almost upon us.  On Wednesday the 10th Joseph Campanella will be hosting the discussion at his blog Cinema Fist and the film he has chosen is Sam Fuller's 1982 film White Dog.  Fair warning:  It is not on Netflix Instant Viewing, Amazon Video on Demand or i-tunes - You must get the DVD itself from Netflix, Blockbuster or your local rental store of choice.  Don't wait until the last minute.  Get the movie and enjoy it now. 

Here are the two sidebar banners.  You have your choice of angry, attacking dog or calm, pensive dog.  I chose angry, attacking dog to scare away solicitors from the site.  Link the picture to Toerifc where the date and time as well as the two banners will be displayed on the top selections post.  Thanks and see you there!

The Godless Girl (1928, d. Cecil B. DeMille)

I went into The Godless Girl with a bit of trepidation. After all, it was made in 1928 so I wasn't expecting to find a fair, even-handed assessment of the rejection of religion and belief in God, specifically Christianity. If anything, I was expecting to find the demonization of atheism and pretty much that's what I got, up to a point. The Godless Girl is to atheism what Reefer Madness is to marijuana, that is to say, a ridiculously wrong-headed portrayal of the subject at hand.* But two things mitigate this portrayal of atheism. One, the portrayal of Christianity is just as bad so the film seems oddly balanced, and two, this is a Cecil B. DeMille film, not a liturgical one. As to the first, it is a great irony that the way the good, religious types are portrayed in this film is exactly how a filmmaker today portrays religious types when he wants to ridicule them. All intolerant caricature and no depth. As to the second, that this is a Cecil B. DeMille film, the meaning there should be clear to any student of film history. DeMille wasn't interested in a theological dialectic, he was interested in spectacle. To put it another way, by reworking Clint Eastwood's famous line from Unforgiven: Religion's got nothing to do with it. This film is about atheism like Psycho is about a secretary stealing $40,000. Sure, that's a part of the story and it definitely gets things rolling but it's dropped faster than an "H" at the Doolittle family reunion and before you can say "'Enry 'Iggins" the story becomes a combination Romeo and Juliet/prison break movie.

Lina Basquette plays Judy, the Godless girl of the title, who holds Godless Society meetings at the high school she attends. The school wants her pamphlets for the club stopped and Bob (Tom Keene), president of the Student Body, volunteers for the task. It's during one of the Godless Society meetings that Bob shows up with hordes of religious students and all hell... oh, I'm not going to say it. A riot starts in the stairwell and in the incredible sequence that follows one of the members of the Godless Society falls to her death. After this Judy and Bob are sentenced on manslaughter charges and sent to juvenile prison along with "Bozo" (Eddie Quillan), the comic relief of the story and the character that caused the girl to fall after he was pushed into her.

The main thrust of the film, if you haven't guessed by now, is the burgeoning romance between Judy and Bob, separated by an electric fence at the juvenile prison (would it surprise you if I told you at one point Judy touches the electrified fence and crosses are burned into her hands? I didn't think so.). It's not long before the film becomes a tract against the inhumanity of juvenile prisons complete with the well-worn cliche (or was it fresh in 1928?) of the brutal guards being worse than the prisoners. This being a DeMille film there are more riots, jail breaks, nudity and a final prison fire that is a wonder to behold. Quite frankly, this is one hell of an entertainment. With the exception of an overlong introduction of the characters to the prison, the movie moves along swiftly and never loses the viewers' interest.

The story itself is rather banal, it's true, but the actors keep the story interesting regardless. Lena Basquette and Tom Keene do a fine job in the leads and, this being the tail-end of the silent era, keep the over-emotive pantomime to a minimum. Eddie Quillan provides comic relief without feeling obnoxious and in her short time onscreen, Mary Jane Irving, as the stairwell victim, gives a performance that evokes both terror and surrender in equal measure and ends up genuinely moving.

But the real star is Cecil B. DeMille. Watching this last silent film of his (but not his last fully silent as two short sound sequences were added to try and rescue it at the box office) one is reminded of how exciting a filmmaker DeMille was before the elephantine epics of the late forties and early fifties cemented his fame for successive generations who would grow up unfamiliar with the silent career of this master. From the stairwell riot and death to the prison break chase scene to the final raging fire and last second rescue this is a master class in how to make action sequences work and how to edit a two hour movie so it feels like an hour and a half. DeMille never regained the assuredness of his silent era works, and certainly not the vigor, and it's a shame that such a well-known filmmaker has so much of his best work unknown to the general populace, even among cinephiles. Hopefully that will change thanks to the restoration of this film by the UCLA Film and Television Archive.

The restoration of The Godless Girl allows cinephiles everywhere to witness the last great gasp of a director in the silent era before sound slowed him down. The print is beautiful, pristine and sharp, looking as good if not better than when it was originally shown in the theater. It has been given a new piano score as well, composed by Martin Marks that is both perfectly matched to the action and unobtrusive to the experience. I would like to thank the National Film Preservation Foundation for sending me the DVD of The Godless Girl, as well as other shorts and films I will highlight this week here and at Unexplained Cinema, and giving me this opportunity to take part in this fund-raising blogathon.

Easy Living (1937, d. Mitchell Leisen)

Saturday night my wife and I and the youngest took in Easy Living at the A.F.I. as a part of their tribute to Jean Arthur this February. Made in 1937 it was written by Preston Sturges who was still more than a couple of years away from directing his scripts and so directing duties fell to renowned Hollywood director Mitchell Leisen, director of such films as Death Takes a Holiday, To Each His Own and Captain Carey, U.S.A. among many, many others. And while the three of us enjoyed ourselves and the movie, it did leave me asking the question, "Can a comedy be too screwball?"

Apropos of the finest tradition of screwball comedy the plot is absurd in the extreme. Edward Arnold plays J.B. Ball, a wealthy banker whose son, John Ball, Jr., played by Ray Milland, doesn't want to be idly rich but instead work and earn his money so he stomps out on breakfast with his father after explaining this and we don't see him again until halfway through the movie excepting that in the meantime J.B.'s wife buys a $58,000 mink coat without asking and J.B. throws another of her coats out the window which lands on Mary's head (Jean Arthur) who tries to give it back but instead he buys her a fur hat and everyone thinks they're having an affair and then a hotel J.B.'s about to foreclose on puts her up as a guest thinking he won't foreclose if his mistress lives there and then she meets John working at the automat and he gets fired trying to give her free food and then somewhere, somehow, J.B.'s stocks crumble because Mary gets asked about steel and asks John and... (takes in deep breath)... Oh Christ, I don't know. Frankly, it's no more absurd than Libeled Lady or My Man Godfrey or The Awful Truth but it feels more absurd, or at least more frantic.

There's a breathlessness to the film that's expected from a screwball comedy but Mitchell Leisen makes the mistake of keeping the pitch at fever level from opening frame to last, not just in pace but in attitude. There's nary a moment in the film when the characters aren't yelling their lines and at least 50 percent of the film's total screentime involves pratfalls. I'm not kidding, at least half the movie involves long sequences of falls and foodfights and tumbles down stairs. Everyone falls all the time and when they're not falling, they're yelling about falling, or yelling that someone else yelled that they yelled about falling. You get the point. Yelling and falling. They're in ample supply throughout.

All the Preston Sturges trademarks are here, including a little sex, as well as character actors like William Demarest in a brief two minute role a couple of years before he would become a Sturges standby in the forties. What's not here is Preston Sturges the director, pulling on the reins tightly. Sturges movies were barely contained free-for-alls but they were contained. This one is just a free-for-all. Think about Sullivan's Travels or The Lady Eve and think about all the craziness that's broken up by all the non-craziness. In Sullivan's Travels there's the poolside scene, several moments on the bus, McCrea and Lake in Shantytown, at the diner and so on. Each wacky scene is broken up by three or four sedate scenes to draw the audience back into the story. But here there is one sedate scene that I recall, and only one. A brief scene in Mary's suite where she and John talk about life and work. For a couple of minutes. Then it's back to yelling and falling.

It seems strange to think Sturges would have made a difference as a director with the same script he himself wrote but bear with me. There are many scenes in the film that should be played sedately and aren't. There are scenes between J.B. and his wife Jenny (Mary Nash), in his office, or with his secretary in his office, that could've and should've been played straight but Leisen has them yell their lines throughout. I don't think Sturges would have made that choice and I think it was the direction of his scripts by people like Leisen that prompted Sturges to give a shot at directing himself. I believe Leisen was under the mistaken conclusion that for screwball to work it had to be played at the top of one's lungs. Sturges understood you have to pull it in so that the audience relaxes at which point you uncork the dam again and drown your audience in fits of laughter.

As for the acting, Jean Arthur walks away with the whole film, even though she appears in only roughly half of it (and Arnold's character the other half). Unlike Arnold and Milland and Nash, fine actors all who do fine work here as well, Arthur's character is the only one that doesn't yell very much and is given the time develop, at least a little bit, while everyone else bulges their eyes and busts their prats.

In the end, the three of us enjoyed it for what it was and certainly couldn't fault it on pacing or length. We had a nice night taking in a movie and a late dinner (pizza, for the curious) but I have a feeling the movie portion of our evening would have delighted us more had Mr. Sturges been behind the wheel. Maybe that's the mark of a great director, when all you can think about is how much better it would have been with him in charge. Leisen was a skilled and talented director no doubt, but the best director for a Sturges script, it turns out, is Sturges. Certainly something to talk about at least. Just don't yell.

Out on Shutter Island

Martin Scorsese's latest effort, Shutter Island, has people talking, mainly about the solution to the mystery introduced in the opening scenes, a solution some see coming while others don't, judging from conversations I've read online so far. I'd say the ending doesn't matter as much as the film itself but that the film itself isn't good enough to carry the weight of an ending that doesn't matter as much. And it's not because Scorsese does a bad job of directing, in fact, I'd say he does an excellent job. Robert Richardson does an superb job framing the shots Scorsese wants and Thelma Schoonmaker does her usual level best at editing it all together in a quickly paced but not frenetic fashion. The performances are solid as well with everyone from Leonardo DiCaprio and Mark Ruffalo, as the two Federal Marshalls investigating the mystery, to Ben Kingsley and Max Von Sydow, as doctors at the island psychiatric hospital, turning in good, strong work. The problem, I think, is in the screenplay. There's simply too much of it.

Brevity, the old adage says, is the soul of wit. I would argue that, in a roundabout way, it's the soul of mystery too. It's not because if a mystery takes too long the audience starts looking for solutions, that's a part of the fun. It's because in a mystery there isn't much in the way of character development or story. Dramas have story, mysteries have plotting. A drama, like The Godfather, is about a character, Michael, and his story. It can go on for hours and multiple movies because the point isn't to figure out a solution, or have one revealed, but to delve deep into Michael's soul, or lack thereof. In a mystery, like Witness for the Prosecution, the point isn't to learn all about Sir Wilfred Robarts, but see if he can solve the mystery, or have it revealed to him. So if the plotting in a mystery, along with the requisite red herrings, goes on too long it starts to feel like just so much padding. The mistake of Shutter Island is that it thinks it's a drama instead of a mystery. I have even read reviews and comments in which it is stated that perhaps Scorsese didn't even care if the solution is let out of the bag early. If so then that lends support to my theory that this movie is mistaking what it is and what it's supposed to be.



Still, that confusion does not produce a bad movie. Visually striking and expertly paced it is, in fact, a very good movie. But for a mystery to examine character like a drama the mystery has to subvert itself to the character. Take Vertigo for example. It's a classic example of a drama that explores the psychological depths of its protagonist, John "Scotty" Ferguson as played by Jimmy Stewart, by involving him in a mystery. He is involved in the mystery by simply following a woman (Kim Novak) around and eventually starting up a relationship with her. The mystery is merely a way into Scotty's obsessions, which is the real subject at hand much like Close Encounters of the Third Kind is about Roy Neary's (Richard Dreyfuss) quest for meaning in his life and finding his place in the universe. That drama's "way in" is alien visitation. But Shutter Island has no such mission for its main character and thus, in continuing on and on with excessive plotting, starts to drain the life out of all the good things that are there. Let's use Vertigo once again to go at this from a different angle.

Imagine Vertigo starting at the point where Scotty has his nervous breakdown after the woman he was following falls to her death at the mission tower. Further imagine the movie runs for two and half hours from that point on as Scotty tries to solve the mystery of this new woman, Judy, who seems like a ghost from his past. And all of the buildup before the breakdown of knowing Scotty and who he is and his search for a connection to another wanderer? All of that, all of what came before, will simply be told in flashback at the end for five minutes. If you've seen Shutter Island that will make sense to you and if not, sorry for the confusion.



Martin Scorsese knows direction like geese know migration - it's in his blood, in his genes, it's who he is. There's never a point in Shutter Island where the viewer feels there is an unsteady hand at the helm and Scorsese draws us in quickly and efficiently. His skill continues to hold us there for quite some time but soon, even with all of his talent, we start to see the same trees, the same footprints, the same broken twigs and realize we're going in circles. From the opening shot of a ferry emerging from the mist there is a heavy sense of a story and characters moving relentlessly towards a doomed inevitability. By the end we're relieved that the doom has finally arrived but only in the abstract. Only because it has taken so long to get there with little in the way of anything about the characters developing into anything more than pieces of a puzzle. It wants to be a drama and a mystery and spends so much time trying to meld the two it ends up being neither. In the end, I half-heartedly recommend it but only for those interested in seeing the technical virtuosity of a now seasoned master of the cinema. Outside of that, I'd say you're better off staying on the mainland.

Palm Book Journal

It's Blogger Interview Friday once again, dear readers. Celebrate! Not only because you get to discover another amazing blogger, but also because it's a freakin' Friday! Oh, the weekend smells so sweet.

For today, I didn't have to go far to find my featured Blog and Blogger. He practically lives in my backyard. Okay, I'm using hyperbole to inject humor. He basically lives north of me. Way, way north. But hey, same country, so that's close enough for me. Based on this interview, I'm thinking of featuring more homegrown talent. So, Marrion, if you know any awesome Filipino bloggers, let me know.

Let's kick this feature into high gear with a little about the Blog in question. Marrion, take it away:

I've been reading books since I was in High School but I have no such interest whatsoever before. But then a close friend has the same enthusiasm as I do. Especially when you have something to share about the book that you've read. Which is kind of exciting. I was hooked up, not knowing that I am starting to get with it. Knowing that I am not the only one who has this kind of passion in reading.

Palm Books Journal is a new blog that shares my own review to a specific given book. Back then, I made my own blog for movie review but it didn't turn out good. Instead, making a blog that involves books will be more different. In addition for the main purpose of this blog, it also includes recommendations, latest books and other stuff involving books.

I think I've found myself a kindred spirit in you, Marrion. I only really started taking an interest in reading in High School, too. So, I want to know more, and I'm sure our dear readers do to. Tell us about yourself...

The name is Marrion, a 21 years old book lover lived in Philippines. I'm friendly, approachable, spontaneous and long tempered. I am a vampire, which means I prefer to stay inside the house and doing mostly I preferred to help me relax -- Reading and watching movies.

Aside from books, I love to draw and sketch, long walks at night, eating a lot and doing the best at me -- writing. I am currently writing my own novel and hoping someday (fingers-cross) I would be able to publish it. I am also a fan of handicrafts, where I work myself to make a small sculptures and figurines.

Today, I am starting to collect books, especially when you've just open it. Good gracious! I love the sweet smell of the books pages. I'm guessing it won't be my last to love books! ^^

Beware the growing book collection, Marrion. Shelves are difficult to come by. Let's begin the interview proper, shall we?

I always like to start by asking the question: How long have you been blogging?

I've just started this month (January).

We have a brand spanking new blog, folks. It still has the new car smell. If you just started, why did you decide to blog?

There are two reasons: (1) I love the books I read, so I thought about sharing what would be my opinion to others who had the same interest as I do. (2) A friend suggested to use blogging for my passion, she too have a Book Blog. This result on making my very own Book Blog, but it is in the verge of progress.

I once had a friend who was a serial blogger. He'd start one blog, leave it, then start another. It was an addiction. Anyway, he was the one who got me into blogging. You have to introduce me to this friend of yours, Marrion. Maybe we can feature her. We all blog about books, that's why we met at Book Blogs Ning, but what books do you blog about and why?

The most famous genres of all times, YA (Young Adults). Anything, from fantasy adventure, paranormal romance, realistic fiction et cetera. It's obviously I am not a young adult anymore but I doesn't stop me for liking it. I've been there, as a teenager, I can relate to it every time. And it was fun to read as well. But I do have some interest on Middle Grade and few of Adult novels.

There's really something about YA that makes the genre so pleasing to read. What's your review style like?

The most used way of making a book review. The details will be included with the cover of the book. The summary will be attached as well via Goodreads information. The next will be my own honest review about it. Well, my opinion will be the highlights of the review, after all that was its main purpose. I only make my review in honesty and professionalism, either I do love the book or not. I want it to make it more interesting and worth time reading.

Sharing what we think about books is at the core of the Book Blogging community, I would think. So it's always nice to know you're injecting your reviews with your own thoughts. With that in mind, what advice can you give other bloggers about blogging?

Blogging is a fun and exciting hobby, and at the same it is hard work. Everything is started as small, but if you have the guts to pursue what you really wanted, it will give a great price for you. But don't go very easy when you have reached success, you must continue striving to make it more better. In time, downfall will put you through the test, but it will sends a message for you, your the only one will know what will it be. Still, you needed to keep in mind that, writing is so much fun to do, same as reading your favorite book!

What an inspiring sentiment, Marrion--one that you share with many of the Bloggers I've featured in this series. And this wouldn't be a feature if I didn't ask the ultimate question: If you can describe your blog in one word, what would it be and why?

Adventurous. It is a freedom of speech but with a mix of a sense of adventure.

One can never have too much adventure in life...oh wait, have you seen 127 Hours? Not yet? So, before we go and watch that movie, let's wrap up this feature with a neat, little bow. What can readers look forward to from your blog in the future?

There are rainfall of ideas I have in mind. Though I needed it one pace at a time. For now, I am focusing to improve my blog. Of course, someday, I'll have my own giveaways, author interviews and when I have enough followers, I'll be making my own reading challenges.

Keep the ideas coming, Marrion. I look forward to reading more of your blog in the future. And from the readers of Reads, Reviews, Recommends and myself, thank you so much for taking the time out of your day to answer some of my burning questions. Oh, and you have to tell me where you bought your copy of Delirium. I really want to read that book.


Dear readers, below is Marrion's blog button. One click and you'll find yourself pleasantly transported to Palm Book Journal.

Confessions of a Writer

I know I haven’t been posting about my writing lately on this blog. In fact, I haven’t been posting about writing, period. It’s been a crazy couple of months, and those closest to me know why. Certain decisions needed to be made, and now, I’m finally ready to start writing about said decisions on this blog. As you can see, dear reader, I have revamped the website. Gone are Story of the Week and Movies, Music, and More. And I’ve referred to Reads, Reviews, Recommends as Kate’s Blog.

I wanted the website to feature my writing prominently. I’ll get to the main reason for that in a second. First, the biggest of my decisions…

Almost two months ago, I decided to part ways with my agent.

“WHAT? Kate, say it isn’t so!” you might say, dear reader.

I understand your shock, horror, and utter dismay. I can even imagine your facial reaction because I’ve had my friends (well, those who I’ve spoken to in person) give me the same expression live and in living color. But I knew in my gut that it was the right thing to do. So, I started querying again. At the moment, this is how the stats stand:

IMPULSE = 4 fulls and 2 partials.

TASTE = 1 full and 2 partials.

‘TIL DEATH = 1 full.

How did this happen? Well, I started querying Impulse, and when one agent would reject it, I’d send another query for another novel. Simple as that. I’ve worked hard in writing the three novels featured on this site, and I wanted to give them all equal opportunities to get out there. So, I’m waiting on feedback from the agents who’ve requested my work.

While waiting, I started feeling pressured and a little angst. I thought that querying the second time around would be easier because I knew what the experience entailed. I was wrong because the writer’s common affliction of self-doubt crept into every waking moment. Which meant every rejection hit me hard. Almost like a physical blow.

With my emotions spiraling down a drain of self-pity and a feeling of smallness so profound I thought I would go crazy from it, an epiphany happened. In your darkest hour, you truly find the light, and I will admit here and today that I have found mine.

I told myself that if by the end of December of 2011 I don’t get an offer of representation, I will enter self-publishing. Hence the revamp of the website.

For so long, I resisted the idea of self-publishing my novels. For those still resisting, I used to know how you feel now. And I’m sure that your doubts are the same, if not, slightly similar to mine. (Enter self-doubt here)

Because of my initial fear of self-publishing, I told myself that I would take all the “ber” months to learn everything I can about the process: what I need to do, which companies I could use. Along with searching the Net and reading countless blog posts on the subject of self-publishing, I have been contacting self-published writers (those that don’t turn me away) and asking them questions. There’s something about commiseration that helps relieve your fears. At least, for me, I get courage from “if they can do it, then so can I!” Coming into the venture knowledgeable and with a plan certainly helps because most of what we are afraid of is the unknown. If you shed light on the darkness, the scary things our imaginations come up with seem less scary.

I didn’t come into this decision lightly, dear reader. Ultimately, I realized within me that I wanted to share my stories with the world. That’s why I love to write. If one person says he or she likes what I’ve written, then it’s job well done for me.

Then I asked myself: can the decision really be that simple?

Actually, yes.

And I knew it was the right decision because everything clicked into place. I stopped caring about rejections. I stopped being overly excited about requests, taking them in stride. Feeling happy when an agent is interested in my work, but not making it the end all be all of my day. I’ve actually started feeling excited to go to sleep at night just so I can wake up and open my inbox to see what it holds inside: good or bad, great or not so. Excited about it all.

So, dear reader, I would like to thank you for sticking with me this far. For sharing my ups and commiserating with my downs. I hope that you continue to check back and see if I’m still alive. *smiles* But seriously, I hope that you are excited. I sure am. I’m also scared, I’m not going to deny it.

Let’s take this journey together.

I want to be honest with what I’m going through when it comes to my writing. I want to share the experience with you.

Take a look around the site. Each section features a different novel with the first three chapters open for you to read. I intend to add a few more things when I have the time. I have lots of things in mind for this site. And don't ever forget to let me know what you think. I love hearing from all of you!

That’s it for now.

The Pen Is Mightier than the Writer by Ron Wyn

For this week's Guest Post, I'm handing over my blog to Ron Wyn. The title of his piece alone gives you an idea where this conversation is going. Or maybe not. You have to find out by reading what he has in store for you. I, on the other hand, will be off watching Transformers 3. Yes, it's already out in my country, and I have the reserved seats to prove it. Enjoy the post as I have and don't be shy about asking questions, Ron will be glad to answer them for you.

The Pen Is Mightier than the Writer
by Ron Wyn

Writing a preface is not necessarily an easy thing to do. You must entice your readers. You must make it interesting so that they will want to continue and read the rest of your book. In many ways, the preface is the book’s mission statement—and one of its major selling points. I don’t know how other authors do it, but I generally write my preface after the book has been finished. And let me tell you, it’s hard. You’ve just finished writing I-don’t-know-how-many pages and are completely saturated. You’re tired. You want to stay away from a computer screen for a while. But you have to move on. You have to squeeze that one last bit of inspiration into your work.

Let me tell you a funny story. It was late February. There I was, first draft in hand, trying to write the preface to my first book, irregular therapy. Although I was saturated and couldn’t wait to finish the entire thing, the view of the white snow contrasting with the beautiful, clear blue sky outside my window was truly inspiring. I sat down and wrote a few pages of what I thought was pretty good “wordsmithing.” Okay, done. Great. The icing on the cake. I read it out loud and liked what I heard. My preface was funny and concise and provided just enough information to tease the reader. Or so I thought.

Satisfied, I was now ready for the next stage. I sent my manuscript to a guy who evaluates books before they are out and checks for their potential. A few days later, he replied. He liked my book very much and thought it would sell, but he had a problem with the preface. In his own words,

“I found the book compelling and easy reading…the sex angle will bring lots of readers, and it feels honest…but there's less evident emotional growth, and unless you told me in response to my questionnaire I wouldn't have known that was the book's purpose. Thus my problem with the preface. It didn't really tell me what I could expect from the book nor why I should read it. To do so it must speak openly with me, the reader. Rather, it kind of wanders around…”

Needless to say, I was kind of disappointed. I mean, I felt great because I was actually getting overall positive feedback from an expert, but I had reached the point where I was just about ready to lay my brain aside and fly to Cancun for a few days. I really could not write another word. Enough already!

But I had no way out. If the preface needed changing, then the preface needed changing. I remained with that uneasy feeling for a couple of days, wondering what to do and waiting for inspiration to strike. How could I make it better? How could I address the issues pointed out by my evaluator? I thought and thought and thought. I changed a few words around. I added new ideas to try to address the missing issues. I tried and tried and tried, but felt I was going nowhere.

Finally, out of sheer disappointment, I ended up relaxing. I gave up trying. Just then, a funny thing happened. I spontaneously started writing about my frustration. I started writing about what the expert guy had said. I started writing about the entire process, just to get it all out of my system.

A few minutes later, after I had written enough to calm me down, I noticed I might have something there! I looked it over and thought the content was bold. I thought the wording was unique. It carried the same tone as the rest of the book—it was honest, fun, and straight to the point—and it addressed my concerns. (Well, it had to, since I was writing about my inability to write about them, and in doing so I was actually writing about them!) I decided to make it my preface. Well, that’s not entirely true. I didn’t decide anything. I must confess that, much like the rest of irregular therapy, I didn’t write the preface. It just came out. And it came out the way it should. Okay then. After writing those few pages, I realized that that had to be my preface. And this is what came out:

Truth Be Told

Let me take you on a true journey. A man’s journey through the rough seas of relationships. A journey that led him to realize that real change must come from within. A journey with themes so archetypical, so universal, that although it takes place mostly in exotic Brazil, it may as well have happened in your very own neighborhood.

Wait. Hold on. What a load of rubbish. Permission to speak freely...

Shortly before finishing this manuscript, I had it evaluated by a hotshot in the book business. He told me he found it easy reading and compelling. He told me the sex angle would bring lots of readers. He told me the book was nearly ready to go. But he also told me he had a problem with my preface. He told me it kind of wandered around and didn’t really tell him what he could expect from the book or why he should read it. Shit.

You know, I’ve been working on this thing for a couple of years. I’ve reviewed it so many times I’ve almost memorized it. Yeah, you don’t have to tell me. Such is a writer’s life. But the fact is I’m completely saturated and can’t wait to see it published. So when the guy suggested that I rewrite the damned preface, I al- most fell off my chair.

But the hotshot fella’s probably right. And after all, I didn’t pay good money to teach my grandma to suck eggs. So here I go.

Let’s see. Right. I suppose I could dish out the usual plethora of clichés found in prefaces and tell you this is a “coming-of-age book,” a captivating truth-told sexual romp, an honest if not a bit single-minded story of a cure, and blah, blah, blah. Yawn. Boring.

I could possibly try to make you feel some sympathy from the start and say it took me many lost years to get my emotional cards in order or that despite the relentless fun and not too troubling approach, I saw a number of hard-earned lessons, over years, and changed accordingly to display the virtues learning those lessons brought. Well, these things are certainly true for me. But you might not see my story this way, nor do I think you will much care.

I could play shrewd, aim for the masses, and reveal that in spite of the bumps along the way (or maybe because of them), I’ve managed to find my soul mate and, with secret formula in hand, I can show you by example how to attract your own twin flame. Tacky, tacky, tacky.

Perhaps I could anticipate some criticism by posing as the conscientious writer and confessing that although my account may seem rather exploitative, especially from a woman’s point of view, it couldn’t be otherwise if it were to show my gradual emotional growth. Nah. Who am I to know what’s on a woman’s mind.

What if I appeal to your emotions by stating that through my troubled relationships, I’ve learned to respect and understand myself better, as well as others around me. Or that as a result of having had these experiences, I’m now able to see what was self- defeating and greedy and have been able to grow from and past it. Dear God. Too psychological.

Useless. I’m looking for something unique, something different, but the harder I try, the less comes to mind.

I hate to say it, but I feel I’ve run out of fuel. So much for telling you what you can expect from my book and why you should read it. Seems that this should be a simple enough task, but silly me. Trying to boldly write what no man has written before.

This is really getting on my nerves. And I’m going nowhere. Tell you what. If you don’t mind, I’ll just call it a day and you can go ahead and read the book. Deal?
…

I know you won’t be able to agree or disagree with me unless you read the entire book. But that’s why it’s called a teaser, right?

You know, inspiration is a funny thing. If it comes, it comes. If it doesn’t, it doesn’t. But when it comes, it is like a warm feeling, it is almost an enthusiasm. And it always, always surprises you. Inspiration comes when you surrender to your own nothingness. It takes you over and you only become aware of what has hit you after it is gone….

irregular therapy: one man’s struggle to find meaning, money and a soul mate is 256 pages long and can be purchased on my website, www.irregulartherapy.com, in several formats: paperback, ePub, Kindle, or PDF. It can also be found at major online outlets worldwide such as Amazon and Barnes and Noble.

Making the Commitment

It’s already November. Can you believe it, dear reader? The year is passing us by. Because of this realization, I began thinking about the beginning of the year and the commitments I’ve made. Since sharing the news that I am now with an agent, I would like to take Mondays as a chance to share with you a little about my journey up to this point in my writing career.

I discovered a knack for writing because of my second year high school English teacher. She had given us the assignment of writing a story. This was the first time I’d ever written anything. The only thing I remembered about that exercise was that I had written a love story. When my teacher read it, she said I had something. From then on, I started writing.

My life has taken many turns since then. I went to medical school in college. Then, having realized that curing the sick wasn’t really my thing, I walked into the Literature Department of the university and never looked back. This led me to become a teacher then a writing consultant. It’s just this year that I’d really decided to focus on my writing.

I believe you need to make a commitment when it comes to your passion. Don’t allow yourself to wake up one morning wondering what you did with your life. So many people realize this too late. And I don’t want that to happen to you, dear reader. I knew that to be a writer was what I really wanted. Nothing made me happier than to type out the stories of the characters in my head and sharing them with readers. So, come January of 2010, I committed myself to my writing.

First, I decided to write everyday, even if it was just a page or a chapter or a blog post. I committed to writing. Anything. I read in an essay once that to be successful at something, you need to put in your 10,000 hours. That’s what the Beatles and Bill Gates did. When I learned to play the piano, my teacher always told me to practice. I preferred pounding keys on a typewriter, and eventually, a computer rather than the black and white of a piano keyboard. Years later, I realized that practice is needed in everything that you do. If you want to be good at something, you have to do it everyday. And I haven’t looked back since. For the first time in years, I have written something everyday without missing a beat. No matter how stressed or exhausted my day had been. Even through the confinement of my mother in the hospital, I still wrote everyday. I’m not sure I’ve clocked in my full 10,000 hours yet, but I’m getting there, and I think, I won’t ever stop. It’s become a habit I’m thankful to have developed.

Second, setting goals. Not New Year’s resolutions, mind you. Actual goals that you want to single-mindedly achieve. When I was younger, I hated the question “What will you be in five years?” This is usually asked by guidance counselors or psychologists. I thought: how would I know what I’ll be in a week much less five years? It’s only since committing to my writing that I’ve realized how vital the answer to that question really is. So, I set goals. Attainable ones and sky’s the limit ones. The attainable ones: finish writing the novel, edit the novel, get an agent by the end of the year, and get a publisher by the end of the year, among other things. So far, I’m at the agent part and I’m working hard on editing to get to the publisher part. The sky’s the limit ones: become part of the New York Times Best Seller List, to see my characters on the silver screen, to be part of the Borders author interview series. There’s nothing wrong with reaching for the stars. It’s absolutely free and so much fun.

Once you have your goals, you have to set about fulfilling them. This is the hard part. It’s the actual work. It’s sitting in front of your computer and putting your novel together. It’s believing that you’ll make it even when the odds seem against you. When The Secret came out, it caused an international phenomenon. I haven’t read it, but I do know of it. And this is what I’ve learned: Think it. Say it. Do it. These three things actually comprise what The Secret is all about. Think of what you want: to be a writer. Say it: I am a writer. Do it: write everyday.

I’ll end my sharing there because I think there’s a lot to ruminate on already. Let the ideas settle in first. There will be more, dear reader, don’t worry. And please, don’t think I’m an expert. Far from it. I’m learning so many new things every day that I can’t call myself an expert on anything. I just want to share my experiences with you in the hopes of maybe, just maybe, being able to help out, even just a little. If you have any questions, feel free to ask them. I’ll answer them in a post. And if there’s anything about writing or the journey itself that you want me to post about, suggest it in the comments too, and I’ll get to it in the future.

Thank you very much for taking the time to read this post and I hope it was helpful. Have a great rest of the week.

Emlyn Chand

Reads, Reviews, Recommends is proud to host author Emlyn Chand for the first leg of her Farsighted book tour.

Alex Kosmitoras’s life has never been easy. The only other student who will talk to him is the school bully, his parents are dead-broke and insanely overprotective, and to complicate matters even more, he’s blind. Just when he thinks he’ll never have a shot at a normal life, a new girl from India moves into town. Simmi is smart, nice, and actually wants to be friends with Alex. Plus she smells like an Almond Joy bar. Yes, sophomore year might not be so bad after all.

Unfortunately, Alex is in store for another new arrival—an unexpected and often embarrassing ability to “see” the future. Try as he may, Alex is unable to ignore his visions, especially when they begin to suggest that Simmi is in danger. With the help of the mysterious psychic next door and new friends who come bearing gifts of their own, Alex must embark on a journey to change his future.

In this enthralling debut novel, Emlyn Chand creates a world in which friendship, perseverance, and a handful of psychic powers come together to fight against what appears to be the inevitable and all-too dangerous future. This is a book you won’t want to put down—even after you finish it!

Emlyn Chand has always loved to hear and tell stories, having emerged from the womb with a fountain pen grasped firmly in her left hand (true story). When she’s not writing, she runs a large book club in Ann Arbor and is the president of author PR firm, Novel Publicity. Emlyn loves to connect with readers and is available throughout the social media interweb. Visit www.emlynchand.com for more info. Don’t forget to say “hi” to her sun conure Ducky!

The Interview:

Welcome, Em, to Reads, Reviews, Recommends. You're certainly not a stranger to this blog. I've already interviewed you on blogging, and now, I'm very proud to have you over again, and this time, it's for your upcoming YA paranormal release Farsighted. We have much to talk about today, so I want to start by asking you why you've decided to self-publish Farsighted when you already have an agent?

Great question, Kate. I actually sat down to blog about this but instead of coming up with a succint answer, I wrote this giant analogy comparing self-published authors to Salem witches. How much further off-topic can you get? :-P

So anyway, let me explain that decision. About a year ago, I thought the only way to be a writer was to land an agent and get a traditional publishing contract, which is what a lot of aspiring writers think. Then in December of last year, I started my blog and, more importantly, became addicted to Twitter. Within a couple of weeks, I amassed a pretty large following. Just like that. A few months in, I realized I had a unique gift for social media and launched my book marketing business, Novel Publicity. One month after that, my business made enough to sustain me, and I was able to quit my lackluster day job. Since then, I've only been getting better at managing social media and using it to promote my clients' books and my own blog.

My star client, Terri Giuliano Long, reached 10,000 copies sold on her self-published manuscript because of all the work we put into marketing it. Success like this is practically unheard of, indie or not. What this showed me is that the publishing industry is not only changing - it's changed. I'm not really sure there is any benefit to being traditionally published anymore, especially if you're an author who has the know-how and financial/time resources to A) professionally edit your books, B) get a stellar cover designed, and C) market your work.

With all of that in mind, it didn't really make sense for me to seek traditional publication for Farsighted. I don't want to discount traditional publishing altogether, so I still will try to publish through my agent down the road. But, a condition of my signing with him was that I get the Farsighted series as my own. Who knows, I may never need to go traditional. I <3 the indie world dearly!

The world of publishing is changing everyday, but you have to admit that there are still writers out there who are hesitant about entering into indie publishing. You have the support of Novel Publicity backing your marketing push for Farsighted. For those who might not have the resources, what advise can you give them? Where can they start in terms of building a web presence?

That is the million dollar question and one I'm constantly trying to answer on the Novel Publicity Free Advice blog. One post in particular covers my best attempt at an answer, "Indie authors can succeed." It's a two-part post with a breakdown of what authors can and should do to get their books ready for publication and promote them before and after the fact. First you need to write the best book you can, then package it in a way that will appeal to readers making absolute sure it's professionally edited and has a compelling cover, start building a web presence through social media and create a site that represents you and your brand, learn more about your target audience and interact with them as much as possible, enter writing contests, sponsor reading contests, collaborate with other authors, diversify your efforts, be creative. And most importantly, never give up and don't lose yourself in the process. Sounds simple, right? ;-)

It does sound simple. But sometimes the processes can be daunting. I guess, taking things one step as a time helps. You mentioned branding in your previous answer. I believe that branding yourself is important in succeeding when publishing. So, what do you believe is your brand and how is it connected to Farsighted?

Well, in marketing your book, you’re really marketing yourself as an author. You need to make it clear to the reader what type of writer you are and what they can expect from you. Don’t send mixed signals or try to embody two competing concepts at once. If you look over my website, you should readily notice that I write for a young adult audience. I’ve designed the entire site around that; my blog style is also light and casual, like my fiction.

YA has evolved as a genre in recent years. It doesn't necessarily cater to teens anymore. More and more adults pick up YA novels. So, tell us a little about the genesis of Farsighted and why it would appeal to both young and young at heart readers?

Everything started with a single image—my face in these tacky oversized sunglasses reflecting out at me from the car’s side mirror. I was daydreaming while my husband drove us across Michigan for my sister’s wedding. Something about my image really struck me in an almost horrific way. I felt the glasses made me look blind but found it so weird that there was still a clear image within them; it seemed so contradictory. At the time, my book club was reading The Odyssey, which features the blind Theban prophet, Tieresias. I started thinking about what it would be like to have non-visual visions of the future and began forming a modern Tieresias in my mind. Lo and behold, Alex Kosmitoras was born.

I think the cross-demographic appeal of the Young Adult genre has to do with the relatability of the themes explored. Everyone who made it through teendom remembers that desperate desire to find themselves and to find friends who intrinsically understand them. Even when taking a situation so other-worldly—a blind psychic on a quest to prevent a murder—there is still so much the reader can relate to when considering how Alex views his situation and how he deals with it. This factor of relatability is also what makes books like Twilight, Hunger Games, and Harry Potter so haunting—how can a time and a place so unlike our own seem so familiar? It’s something about the genre. Something special.

I agree with you there, Em! Even if we're taken into the forests of Forks or the arena created by the Capital or Hogwarts, the themes and teen issues that are prevalent in these novels resonate among readers, young and old. So, tell us a little more about Alex. What are his motivations within Farsighted?

I think readers will identify with Alex and his desire to be accepted but to also remain independent. In high school, he’s the person on the periphery—always different, which is both a challenge and a mark of pride. He’s shaped by his own way of looking at the world too—his blindness. Of course, Alex has always been blind; he’s always known the world to be a certain way. But not everyone in the book understands that, and they have trouble talking about it with him. Alex has a tendency to overcompensate. He knows who he is and what he’s capable of, and he wants the world to know it too, so sometimes he overdoes things a bit. His primary motivation is to figure out how he can save Simmi—the first friend he’s made in a long time. He has to grapple with his powers and learn how to use them to accomplish this goal, but it’s not easy.

Alex is blind. That seems to be what makes his character different from other protagonists. There aren't many YA novels that feature a main character with a disability. Was it hard to write from the perspective of a blind person? What kind of research did you do to make sure that the novel would be authentic in terms of Alex's blindness?

Writing a blind character was hard, but I think writing any character is hard. It’s such a daunting task to create a-whole-nother person! It was especially challenging to write Alex’s story in first person point-of-view, because I couldn’t describe anything visually. Sometimes I would slip and add in a non-verbal gesture here or there—my beta readers loved finding those and nailing me on ‘em (thank you, beta readers). On the whole, I think this experience made me a much better writer. I had to create an entire world without my dominant sense. This meant I had to slow down and truly think about how a line of dialogue was being delivered, or how a quilted bedspread felt to the touch, or what a specific person’s skin smells like. It got easier as I went along. And, yes, you better believe I did research. I read books and online articles about how blind students go about their days. Early on, you’ll see how Alex’s school experience differs from what yours or mine might’ve been like—but it’s really more similar than it is different.

Let's shift gears a little and talk about marketing. What are your plans when it comes to marketing Farsighted?

Oh my gosh, I’m going crazy on this marketing campaign. I’m putting everything I’ve got into it—and remember, I own a book marketing company, so I’ve got a lot! I started with making a live action book trailer that embodied the book and will hopefully be a great advertisement (I really like it). I also worked with our graphic designer to create a cover and interior design for the novel that is visually interesting all around – no boring back cover and spine for Farsighted, oh no. I’ve been recruiting early reviewers from Novel Publicity’s blog tour program and from prominent YA blogs across the web. I plan to have between 100 and 200 reviewers cover Farsighted during its first month. I’m hiring three outside blog tour companies to run supplemental tours and get even more coverage. I’m doing advertising on key websites like Kindle Nation and Parajunkee. I’m also doing Pay-per-Click advertising on GoodReads, YouTube, and Facebook. I’m networking with other authors to plan cross-promotional activities, and then there’s my mainstay: social media.

Wow! I would say that you have a total media blitz in your hands. But if we were to think in terms of marketing 101, how would you simplify the process for those who might not have the funds or the support of a business? What are the things indie authors can do when marketing their own novel?

This is a question I intend to blog about with a great deal of transparency. As I go along, I will post updates as to what I’m doing and how it’s working. My story will either serve to empower or warn others who might want to go indie—depends on what happens with Farsighted. I already blog tons of social media advice on the Novel Publicity Free Advice Blog, and social media is a great place to start for authors whether or not they have any semblance of a workable budget. Another strategy that costs nothing is contacting bloggers, especially if you can find ones who are willing to review eBooks. Yes, both of these things will take tons and tons of time, but they’re so worth it!

As in everything that we do, especially us writers, everything does take time. Em, you're not just a writer. You are also a business woman, one who is conquering the social media world one social networking site at a time. What made you decide to start Novel Publicity beside just concentrating on your writing?

Novel Publicity almost happened by accident. I started writing blog-style content a couple of years back when I was recruited by the local paper as a “book expert” because of the large classics book group I run (almost 400 members now). They let me write about books, liked my stuff, and made me the lead columnist. After a year-and-a-half of that, I discovered WordPress and Twitter. Both utilities felt like they were just made for me! I decided to combine the two as a way of getting more interaction in the twittersphere and more content for my blog – and thus the twitterview was born (you can read all about twitterviews here). I ask you, what author doesn’t love free and highly visible promo? I don’t know of any! And thus, the twitterview took off hard and fast. Other writers began to look to me as a social media expert, and I began blogging how-to advice. One day I decided to learn more about monetizing my blog and saw that one way to make money was to sell products or services. I got the idea for helping authors with social media marketing and within one month, I launched Novel Publicity. A month after that, I was making more money with NP than I did with my day job, so I quit and became a full-time publicist. I work about 100 hours per week, but I just love what I do. My whole life is books—what could be better?

You're absolutely right, what could be better? On that note, let’s bring this interview to a close. As a writer and as a business woman, what are your final words for our dear readers?

Never give up on your dreams; you have them for a reason.

I just love that! Thank you so much for answering my hard hitting questions, Em. It was a pleasure having you visit my little slice of the Net. And dear readers, if you want a copy of Farsighted for review, make sure to stop by on October 31 for the official Review Request to be posted. It's certainly a great treat to have in your plastic pumpkin!