Today, Marc Scott Zicree related the description of story theory I’ve ever heard: “You start with a character with a problem. You continually throw shit at him in Act Two, until he is in the deepest shit possible.
“If it’s a tragedy, he doesn’t escape it.
“If it’s a happy ending, he or she figures out their problems and succeeds. That’s it.”
Were you looking for something more complicated?
Would-be professionals: take “writer” and put “director / actor / editor,” etc.
Matt Wallace’s Top 10 Points for Professional Writers
I’ve written before about video games as the future of entertainment. I have another post brewing in me about the difficulty of merging the active video game experience with the passive entertainment experience we’re already familiar with (primarily the printed or moving image).
I just read a preview for a new XBOX 360 game called Alan Wake. Read the preview here.
The game seems to offer a more matured story experience than what we’ve seen in the past, and that’s already a good sign as far as serious artists getting involved in the craft.
But what caught my eye are the mentions of product placement. Energizer batteries, for one, and an unnamed car company.
If this works, then I think we can expect to see a lot more of this in the future, and perhaps see much of the advertising dollars that have dwindled from television and print rush into this new medium.
Remember, no one was interested in California, new medicines, or that sticky gunk called “oil” until someone figured out how to make money from them. Right now, video games have only tapped the existing models of income used by books and movies: develop a product, and sell it to consumers.
But if the video game — a fixed form product — could tap into the advertising model that supports the constantly-renewing products like newspapers and television, the potential revenue could be staggering.
So last night — at 10 PM — I received a message saying Disconnect has been nominated for a Ray Bradbury award (given out at the Nebulas each year for “best dramatization”).
So that dropped my jaw.
Then I find out: in order to make it to the finalist’s list, I need enough nominations to make it to the top six.
So basically — I need a hand from my Science Fiction Writers of America friends.
Today is the LAST DAY for voting for the Ray Bradbury Award (as well as for the rest of the Nebulas).
If you are a member of SFWA, and haven’t yet voted (or are willing to change yours for an independent piece), consider placing a vote for “Stranger Things (Episode 5: “Disconnect”), Earl Newton (Writer/Director).” If you haven’t yet watched the episode, you can see it here for free: Disconnect (20 mins).
Click here to vote (you’ll need your SFWA username and password). LInk provided by a friendly (and supportive) SFWA member.
This is completely a last-minute discovery, but if it would actually happen, just being a finalist among films like District 9 and Avatar would open some doors here in Los Angeles.
If you do vote for it, let me know, so I can owe you huge favors in the future.
When you wonder why we see such a limited number of examples of “beauty” in mainstream culture, remember that it is not in the interest of big business to encourage niche audiences.
A good movie succeeds for its own reasons, but most bad movies tend to fail in the same ways. When the movie has an enormous budget, the actual creative mistakes become more clear: there can be no excuse of “we couldn’t afford it.”
Friend and composer Alistair Cooper turned me onto the 70-minute Phantom Menace, and having seen it, I think it’s a quintessential example of learning from a big-budget mistake. It should be required viewing for any storyteller.
You don’t have to have seen Phantom Menace to understand most of this, but it would help. It begins as an overview of the story and characters, and then delves deep into a beat-by-beat analysis of the film. Some of the later sections address specific character concerns (Qui-Gonn is a drunk), but there’s still enough important storytelling theory to make it worth anyone’s while.
(There are some “You Suck at Photoshop” author-as-character moments interspersed within the review, presumedly to break up the rhythm, so be ready for some weirdness. I can tell you the review is worth it. I also find it funny how the author has an excellent grasp of story structure and theory, and yet his own works ends with an awkward anticlimax. Nobody’s perfect.)
Part 1/7:
They really hit this on the head.
“Don’t you see? It’s a big iPhone! And you still have the option to pay a monthly service to AT&T, without the hassle of actually being able to make a phone call!”
Posting will be a little erratic for the next two weeks or so, as I get settled into a new living situation in Los Angeles. I’ve got a feature film I’m working to put together, as well as the Stranger Things DVD, so my time will be a bit sapped.
That said, expect more pieces coming soon. LA gives one a lot of food for thought.
From TED.com: Chimamanda Adichie discusses the danger of having only one story about a person or place.
The video and my comments after the jump.
adaptation apple creativity disconnect editing interview j.c. hutchins layman group marketing matt wallace mevio mur lafferty p.g. holyfield patrick mclean pure love real problems from fake people rejection sci-fi scott sigler screenwriting script secret project storytelling Stranger Things twitter
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck requires Flash Player 9 or better.
