Just noticed that John Connolly is on the attendance list of FantasyCon. Dead excited as I first read his Charlie Parker PI novels while I was writing Mask. Helped me with finding the novella's voice (God, that sounds pretentious). Anyway, I really want to meet him.
Knowing my luck it'll turn out to be a different John Connolly.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Testing, testing
Okay, Gary Greenwood has taken pity on my total inability to understand anything to do with computers and has sent me instructions on how to get the comments working on my blog. So I'm about to post a comment to myself to see if it works.
Fingers crossed that I don't delete the internet.
Fingers crossed that I don't delete the internet.
Monday, August 28, 2006
Pub Philosophy
Went for a drink with friends the other day. Somehow or other the conversation turned to quantum physics. Well, it nearly always does when you go down the pub, doesn't it? Many's the punch-up I've seen down my local when tempers have flared over whether the Copenhagen interpretation is better than the transactional interpretation. Or whether Schrodinger's cat is dead or alive; a question made particularly tricky by the fact that, as a cat, it would have nine lives anyway. So although it may be scampering around the lab playing with a ball of superstrings it could well have left one of its lives behind in the box.
Anyway, this particular conversation led to me making a fumbling attempt to explain the basis of quantum physics through a description of the Double Slit experiment. This led into the problem of quantum physics being irreconciable with Einstein's Theory of Relativity. From there we ended up discussing the problem of what existed before the Big Bang. That is, something that existed outside of time and space. If we could solve such a riddle we would have the answer to the greatest mystery in the universe!
Needless to say we failed. We nearly had an answer but then we got distracted by trying to remember whose turn it was to buy the drinks.
So, stumped, we turned to an easier topic. Evolution. At least it would be an easier topic if I actually knew anything about it. So I just bandied around some knowledgeable sounding phrases such as natural selection.
"But," asked Katy, "why does nature select things that aren't useful? Look at pigeons -- they're just rats with wings."
"So are bats," I replied. "And they are useful because they inspired Batman to fight crime. So pigeons could do the same thing. Bruce Wayne could've become Pigeon Man -- 'Criminals are a cowardly and superstitious lot. I must strike fear in their hearts by flying over them and crapping on their heads.'"
At this point someone pointed out that nature doesn't actually choose which species will survive. It's all a matter of chance, like a huge lottery. Which seems a bit unfair as most animals don't have opposable thumbs and therefore can't use their scratchcards.
It was also pointed out that survival of the fittest didn't refer to athletic ability. So, contrary to my fears for humanity's future, joggers will not end up running the world. Well, I suppose as joggers they will be running the world. But they won't be ruling it.
That job is far more likely to fall to unhealthy types who spend far too much time in the pub, such as myself and my friends. Which, I'm sure you'll agree, is a reassuring thought. We are, after all, highly intelligent people.
You can tell by our level of conversation.
Anyway, this particular conversation led to me making a fumbling attempt to explain the basis of quantum physics through a description of the Double Slit experiment. This led into the problem of quantum physics being irreconciable with Einstein's Theory of Relativity. From there we ended up discussing the problem of what existed before the Big Bang. That is, something that existed outside of time and space. If we could solve such a riddle we would have the answer to the greatest mystery in the universe!
Needless to say we failed. We nearly had an answer but then we got distracted by trying to remember whose turn it was to buy the drinks.
So, stumped, we turned to an easier topic. Evolution. At least it would be an easier topic if I actually knew anything about it. So I just bandied around some knowledgeable sounding phrases such as natural selection.
"But," asked Katy, "why does nature select things that aren't useful? Look at pigeons -- they're just rats with wings."
"So are bats," I replied. "And they are useful because they inspired Batman to fight crime. So pigeons could do the same thing. Bruce Wayne could've become Pigeon Man -- 'Criminals are a cowardly and superstitious lot. I must strike fear in their hearts by flying over them and crapping on their heads.'"
At this point someone pointed out that nature doesn't actually choose which species will survive. It's all a matter of chance, like a huge lottery. Which seems a bit unfair as most animals don't have opposable thumbs and therefore can't use their scratchcards.
It was also pointed out that survival of the fittest didn't refer to athletic ability. So, contrary to my fears for humanity's future, joggers will not end up running the world. Well, I suppose as joggers they will be running the world. But they won't be ruling it.
That job is far more likely to fall to unhealthy types who spend far too much time in the pub, such as myself and my friends. Which, I'm sure you'll agree, is a reassuring thought. We are, after all, highly intelligent people.
You can tell by our level of conversation.
Sunday, August 27, 2006
No Comment
Apparently a few of you have tried leaving comments only to find my blog refuses to post them. Sorry about that.
I spoke to Katy and she said that when she set up the blog for me she had to use the word verification thingie 'cos otherwise the comments section was filled with more spam than a Monty Python sketch. Unfortunately it seems the spam filter is now refusing to allow any comments to get through regardless of whether they're spam or not.
Being the techno-dunce that I am I'm not sure how to fix this offhand. So until this is cleared up anyone who wants to contact me should either use my email or my message boards at Whispers of Wickedness or The Third Alternative.
I spoke to Katy and she said that when she set up the blog for me she had to use the word verification thingie 'cos otherwise the comments section was filled with more spam than a Monty Python sketch. Unfortunately it seems the spam filter is now refusing to allow any comments to get through regardless of whether they're spam or not.
Being the techno-dunce that I am I'm not sure how to fix this offhand. So until this is cleared up anyone who wants to contact me should either use my email or my message boards at Whispers of Wickedness or The Third Alternative.
Saturday, August 26, 2006
BFS Shortlists 2006
Just in case anyone's interested here's the shortlists for the BFS Awards. Nominees are listed in alphabetical order and when there's more than five nominees you know at least two of the runners-up have received an equal number of votes.
Best Novel
Ramsey Campbell, SECRET STORIES
Mark Chadbourn, THE HOUNDS OF AVALON
Hal Duncan, VELLUM: THE BOOK OF ALL HOURS 1
Neil Gaiman, ANANSI BOYS
George R. R. Martin, A FEAST FOR CROWS
Mark Morris, NOWHERE NEAR AN ANGEL
Best Novella
Guy Adams, DEADBEAT
Jeffrey Ford, THE COSMOLOGY OF THE WIDER WORLD
Joe Hill, VOLUNTARY COMMITTAL
Paul Kane, SIGNS OF LIFE
Paul Meloy, DYING IN THE ARMS OF JEAN HARLOW (THE
COMING OF THE AUTOSCOPES)
Sean Wright, DARK TALES OF SPACE AND TIME
Stuart Young, THE MASK BEHIND THE FACE
Best Anthology
Allen Ashley, THE ELASTIC BOOK OF NUMBERS
Peter Crowther, FOURBODINGS
Gary Fry, POE’S PROGENY
Stephen Jones, MAMMOTH BOOK OF BEST NEW HORROR 16
Stephen Jones, DON’T TURN OUT THE LIGHT
Best Collection
Leigh Brackett, SEA-KINGS OF MARS & OTHER WORLDLY STORIES
Simon Clark, HOTEL MIDNIGHT
Joe Hill, 20TH CENTURY GHOSTS
Andrew Hook, BEYOND EACH BLUE HORIZON
Tim Lees, THE LIFE TO COME
Stuart Young, THE MASK BEHIND THE FACE AND OTHER STORIES
Best Short Fiction
Ramsey Campbell, JUST BEHIND YOU
Joe Hill, BEST NEW HORROR
Paul Kane, HOMELAND
John Lucas, APPROACHING ZERO
Will McIntosh, SOFT APOCALYPSE
Marie O’Regan, CAN YOU SEE ME?
Sean Wright, THE NUMBERIST
Best Artist
Clive Barker
Randy Broecker
Les Edwards
Dominic Harman
Richard Marchand
Robert Sammelin
Best Small Press
Andy Cox, TTA PRESS
Peter Crowther, PS PUBLISHING
Andrew Hook, ELASTIC PRESS
D. F. Lewis, NEMONYMOUS
Christopher Teague, PENDRAGON PRESS
Best Novel
Ramsey Campbell, SECRET STORIES
Mark Chadbourn, THE HOUNDS OF AVALON
Hal Duncan, VELLUM: THE BOOK OF ALL HOURS 1
Neil Gaiman, ANANSI BOYS
George R. R. Martin, A FEAST FOR CROWS
Mark Morris, NOWHERE NEAR AN ANGEL
Best Novella
Guy Adams, DEADBEAT
Jeffrey Ford, THE COSMOLOGY OF THE WIDER WORLD
Joe Hill, VOLUNTARY COMMITTAL
Paul Kane, SIGNS OF LIFE
Paul Meloy, DYING IN THE ARMS OF JEAN HARLOW (THE
COMING OF THE AUTOSCOPES)
Sean Wright, DARK TALES OF SPACE AND TIME
Stuart Young, THE MASK BEHIND THE FACE
Best Anthology
Allen Ashley, THE ELASTIC BOOK OF NUMBERS
Peter Crowther, FOURBODINGS
Gary Fry, POE’S PROGENY
Stephen Jones, MAMMOTH BOOK OF BEST NEW HORROR 16
Stephen Jones, DON’T TURN OUT THE LIGHT
Best Collection
Leigh Brackett, SEA-KINGS OF MARS & OTHER WORLDLY STORIES
Simon Clark, HOTEL MIDNIGHT
Joe Hill, 20TH CENTURY GHOSTS
Andrew Hook, BEYOND EACH BLUE HORIZON
Tim Lees, THE LIFE TO COME
Stuart Young, THE MASK BEHIND THE FACE AND OTHER STORIES
Best Short Fiction
Ramsey Campbell, JUST BEHIND YOU
Joe Hill, BEST NEW HORROR
Paul Kane, HOMELAND
John Lucas, APPROACHING ZERO
Will McIntosh, SOFT APOCALYPSE
Marie O’Regan, CAN YOU SEE ME?
Sean Wright, THE NUMBERIST
Best Artist
Clive Barker
Randy Broecker
Les Edwards
Dominic Harman
Richard Marchand
Robert Sammelin
Best Small Press
Andy Cox, TTA PRESS
Peter Crowther, PS PUBLISHING
Andrew Hook, ELASTIC PRESS
D. F. Lewis, NEMONYMOUS
Christopher Teague, PENDRAGON PRESS
Monday, August 21, 2006
Somebody Pinch Me
God knows how this has happened but somehow I've managed to make the shortlist for two categories in the British Fantasy Awards. I'm up for Best Novella and Best Collection. Both nominations are for works entitled The Mask Behind the Face.
I think I need a lie-down.
I think I need a lie-down.
Sunday, August 20, 2006
Ch-ch-ch-changes
Occasionally when a story is "good but not quite what I'm looking for" an editor will say that they will accept the story providing I'm willing to make one or two changes.
This actually happened with my very first acceptance, a story called 'Standing Tall.' The story revolved around macho ideas of heroism, the way bravery in one situation doesn't automatically guarantee bravery in another situation, and the way that even when we achieve a victory we still have to taste all the other defeats life throws at us. The editor didn't like the downbeat ending as he felt the protagonist didn't learn anything from his experience. This pissed me off as not only was the protagonist obviously aware of the story's moral but ultimately it didn't matter if he learned anything or not, the important thing was whether the reader learned anything. The reader is a real live human being, the protagonist is just a fictional character, someone who only exists on the page. So the character doesn't have to understand anything so long as he communicates ideas to the reader.
Not only that but by making me change my story the editor was actually a living embodiment of the story's theme about the way life grinds you down by forcing you to compromise about things you care for. Irony can be a real pain sometimes.
Still, I was desperate to be published and the editor obviously wasn't going to publish the story unless I changed the ending. So I wrestled long and hard with my conscience for all of two seconds and then I sat down and started to make the changes.
Meanwhile another one of my stories got accepted by another editor without me having to make any changes. This story, Daddy's Little Girl, actually saw print before 'Standing Tall' and so is my first "real" acceptance.
Since then I've had other editors ask me to make changes. Some have been very helpful and I've been grateful for the editors' input. Others have been plain stupid.
On one occasion an editor said he would accept a story if I made changes but then neglected to tell me what it was he wanted changed. Another editor told me an acceptance was a dead cert provided I made changes to a key scene. I made the changes; he read it and promptly rejected the story.
A common occurrence is for an editor to ask for a minor change, "If you just change that one line ... " But when I see which line they want changed I realise its removal will render the rest of the nonsensical. "But that's the bit where the detective reveals who the murderer is!" The flip side of this is when an editor deems an entire story unworkable because of such-and-such a scene, completely ignoring the fact that on this occasion the problem really can be solved by just snipping a single line.
Even big name writers run into this problem. Alfred Bester used to complain how his editor made him add an extra couple of paragraphs to the end of his short stories in order to spell out exactly what happened at the climax. Left to his own devices Bester would have trusted the readers to be intelligent enough to figure this out for themselves.
Although, as I said earlier, sometimes the editor's input can be beneficial. In Danse Macabre Stephen King mentions how his editor asked him to cut a scene from Salem's Lot. King decided this was a good idea as the scene was too similar to one he had already used in one of his short stories.
Deciding whether to fight an editor over changes in a story is something that each individual writer has to decide for themselves. And the decision may well vary under different circumstances e.g. depending on how much you want the sale. I'm a lot less likely to argue over a story that's going to appear in high paying, high profile mass market anthology than a story that's going in a small press mag with a readership that doesn't even make it into double figures.
Another thing to remember is that even if you do make changes that you're not happy with there's always a chance of getting the story reprinted in its original format at a later date.
There's even the chance that by the time the story sees print you'll find yourself agreeing with your editor after all. In which case you'll have to apologise for shovelling all that horse manure through his letterbox.
This actually happened with my very first acceptance, a story called 'Standing Tall.' The story revolved around macho ideas of heroism, the way bravery in one situation doesn't automatically guarantee bravery in another situation, and the way that even when we achieve a victory we still have to taste all the other defeats life throws at us. The editor didn't like the downbeat ending as he felt the protagonist didn't learn anything from his experience. This pissed me off as not only was the protagonist obviously aware of the story's moral but ultimately it didn't matter if he learned anything or not, the important thing was whether the reader learned anything. The reader is a real live human being, the protagonist is just a fictional character, someone who only exists on the page. So the character doesn't have to understand anything so long as he communicates ideas to the reader.
Not only that but by making me change my story the editor was actually a living embodiment of the story's theme about the way life grinds you down by forcing you to compromise about things you care for. Irony can be a real pain sometimes.
Still, I was desperate to be published and the editor obviously wasn't going to publish the story unless I changed the ending. So I wrestled long and hard with my conscience for all of two seconds and then I sat down and started to make the changes.
Meanwhile another one of my stories got accepted by another editor without me having to make any changes. This story, Daddy's Little Girl, actually saw print before 'Standing Tall' and so is my first "real" acceptance.
Since then I've had other editors ask me to make changes. Some have been very helpful and I've been grateful for the editors' input. Others have been plain stupid.
On one occasion an editor said he would accept a story if I made changes but then neglected to tell me what it was he wanted changed. Another editor told me an acceptance was a dead cert provided I made changes to a key scene. I made the changes; he read it and promptly rejected the story.
A common occurrence is for an editor to ask for a minor change, "If you just change that one line ... " But when I see which line they want changed I realise its removal will render the rest of the nonsensical. "But that's the bit where the detective reveals who the murderer is!" The flip side of this is when an editor deems an entire story unworkable because of such-and-such a scene, completely ignoring the fact that on this occasion the problem really can be solved by just snipping a single line.
Even big name writers run into this problem. Alfred Bester used to complain how his editor made him add an extra couple of paragraphs to the end of his short stories in order to spell out exactly what happened at the climax. Left to his own devices Bester would have trusted the readers to be intelligent enough to figure this out for themselves.
Although, as I said earlier, sometimes the editor's input can be beneficial. In Danse Macabre Stephen King mentions how his editor asked him to cut a scene from Salem's Lot. King decided this was a good idea as the scene was too similar to one he had already used in one of his short stories.
Deciding whether to fight an editor over changes in a story is something that each individual writer has to decide for themselves. And the decision may well vary under different circumstances e.g. depending on how much you want the sale. I'm a lot less likely to argue over a story that's going to appear in high paying, high profile mass market anthology than a story that's going in a small press mag with a readership that doesn't even make it into double figures.
Another thing to remember is that even if you do make changes that you're not happy with there's always a chance of getting the story reprinted in its original format at a later date.
There's even the chance that by the time the story sees print you'll find yourself agreeing with your editor after all. In which case you'll have to apologise for shovelling all that horse manure through his letterbox.
Saturday, August 19, 2006
It's Good But ...
Horrible as rejections are sometimes they can do you a favour. The editor may point out a flaw in the story which you can correct and which helps you sell the story elsewhere.
This is why writers live in dread of form rejections. They tell you nothing beyond the fact that your story has been rejected. There is no clue as to why. Unfortunately form rejections are a fact of life. Many editors, particularly those of professional markets, don't have the time to comment on each individual story. They're so swamped with submissions it's a miracle that they even have time to respond at all, let alone offer even the most cursory of critiques.
So I'm always pleased when an editor tells me why they rejected one of my stories. Not as pleased as if they'd accepted it but at least it stops me reaching for the sleeping pills.
Of course even that small amount of pleasure can evaporate when I see some of the reasons editors give for rejection.
I had one story rejected because the editor didn't like stories that featured teenagers.
Another time an editor rejected a story because he was worried it might offend Christians. Excuse me? I could understand if he thought it might offend Muslims but Christians? "Oh no, we've offended Christians! They've got us surrounded! They're going to -- Oh God no! They're going to turn the other cheek!"
The classic reason for rejection is "The story's good but it's not what I'm looking for." So they're looking for bad stories?
Unfortunately, although this comment is next to useless as constructive feedback it may well be the only valid comment that a person can make on any given story. Personally I've read tons of stories that are slickly written, well structured and contain profound truths about the human condition -- and which I enjoyed reading slightly less than having one of my testicles removed. It doesn't matter how "good" a story is, if it doesn't float the boat of the person reading it then, as far as that person is concerned, it might as well be complete hackwork. Sad but true.
I recently bumped into an editor friend of mine after he rejected one of my stories. I politely asked him what it was he hadn't liked about the story so I could decide if it was something that needed fixing before I submitted it elsewhere. "Oh," he replied, "the supernatural element was too strong. That wasn't what I was looking for in this anthology." This confused me slightly as not only had I underplayed the supernatural element but all the authors he had mentioned in the anthology's guidelines as an indication of the sort of thing he was looking for were Science Fiction/Horror/Fantasy authors.
Presumably there was something else about the story he didn't like. Maybe the pacing was off. Maybe the characters came across as caricatures. Maybe the jokes weren't funny enough. But for some reason (I'm guessing politeness) he decided to go with the supernatural excuse. But politeness doesn't give me anything to work with, anything I can fix.
Of course it may be that it really was the supernatural element that made him reject the story. What to me came across as a MacGuffin to kickstart the plot came across to him as something out of Rentaghost. So although the story was competently written this one matter of taste stopped him enjoying it.
In other words it was good but not what he was looking for.
Damn, I really need to start writing some bad stories.
This is why writers live in dread of form rejections. They tell you nothing beyond the fact that your story has been rejected. There is no clue as to why. Unfortunately form rejections are a fact of life. Many editors, particularly those of professional markets, don't have the time to comment on each individual story. They're so swamped with submissions it's a miracle that they even have time to respond at all, let alone offer even the most cursory of critiques.
So I'm always pleased when an editor tells me why they rejected one of my stories. Not as pleased as if they'd accepted it but at least it stops me reaching for the sleeping pills.
Of course even that small amount of pleasure can evaporate when I see some of the reasons editors give for rejection.
I had one story rejected because the editor didn't like stories that featured teenagers.
Another time an editor rejected a story because he was worried it might offend Christians. Excuse me? I could understand if he thought it might offend Muslims but Christians? "Oh no, we've offended Christians! They've got us surrounded! They're going to -- Oh God no! They're going to turn the other cheek!"
The classic reason for rejection is "The story's good but it's not what I'm looking for." So they're looking for bad stories?
Unfortunately, although this comment is next to useless as constructive feedback it may well be the only valid comment that a person can make on any given story. Personally I've read tons of stories that are slickly written, well structured and contain profound truths about the human condition -- and which I enjoyed reading slightly less than having one of my testicles removed. It doesn't matter how "good" a story is, if it doesn't float the boat of the person reading it then, as far as that person is concerned, it might as well be complete hackwork. Sad but true.
I recently bumped into an editor friend of mine after he rejected one of my stories. I politely asked him what it was he hadn't liked about the story so I could decide if it was something that needed fixing before I submitted it elsewhere. "Oh," he replied, "the supernatural element was too strong. That wasn't what I was looking for in this anthology." This confused me slightly as not only had I underplayed the supernatural element but all the authors he had mentioned in the anthology's guidelines as an indication of the sort of thing he was looking for were Science Fiction/Horror/Fantasy authors.
Presumably there was something else about the story he didn't like. Maybe the pacing was off. Maybe the characters came across as caricatures. Maybe the jokes weren't funny enough. But for some reason (I'm guessing politeness) he decided to go with the supernatural excuse. But politeness doesn't give me anything to work with, anything I can fix.
Of course it may be that it really was the supernatural element that made him reject the story. What to me came across as a MacGuffin to kickstart the plot came across to him as something out of Rentaghost. So although the story was competently written this one matter of taste stopped him enjoying it.
In other words it was good but not what he was looking for.
Damn, I really need to start writing some bad stories.
Friday, August 18, 2006
Coping With Rejection
At some point all writers receive a rejection letter. There is only one way to deal with this. Take a voodoo doll of the editor who rejected the story and stab it repeatedly in the crotch. It's very therapeutic. And you never know, one day the voodoo might just work.
But on a more practical level ...
One way to lessen the pain of rejection is to submit as many different stories to as many different markets as possible. It's a lot less distressing to have a story rejected if you know you've still got another dozen stories that could still be accepted elsewhere.
And as soon as a story gets rejected submit it to someone else. Many's the time I've had a story deemed unpublishable by one magazine only to immediately sell it to another magazine where it receives rave reviews.
Unfortunately I'm leaning more towards novellas and novelettes in my current writing. Not only do these tend to take longer to write, meaning I have less stories to submit, but the market for stories of that length is a little more limited. So I'm having trouble following my own advice.
Which means it's back to the voodoo doll.
But on a more practical level ...
One way to lessen the pain of rejection is to submit as many different stories to as many different markets as possible. It's a lot less distressing to have a story rejected if you know you've still got another dozen stories that could still be accepted elsewhere.
And as soon as a story gets rejected submit it to someone else. Many's the time I've had a story deemed unpublishable by one magazine only to immediately sell it to another magazine where it receives rave reviews.
Unfortunately I'm leaning more towards novellas and novelettes in my current writing. Not only do these tend to take longer to write, meaning I have less stories to submit, but the market for stories of that length is a little more limited. So I'm having trouble following my own advice.
Which means it's back to the voodoo doll.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
Rejections
Had a story rejected yesterday. Kind of put a crimp in my day, especially as I wasn't exactly feeling on top of the world anyway.
I've noticed this before. My mood when I receive a rejection often influences my reaction to the rejection. If I'm having a good day and I receive a rejection telling me that I'm a talentless hack who has no business even attempting to write a story and I would do humanity a huge favour if I just killed myself I'll just shrug my shoulders and say, "Well, everyone's entitled to their opinion."
Other times I'm having a bad day and I'll receive a rejection telling me that although my story got bounced the editor has read all my books and loved them, thinks I'm one of the best writers around and that I may well even be the reincarnation of William Shakespeare and yet I'll still go on a murderous, axe-wielding rampage.
So if anyone's ever tempted to give me feedback on my stories you might want to check what kind of day I'm having first.
I've noticed this before. My mood when I receive a rejection often influences my reaction to the rejection. If I'm having a good day and I receive a rejection telling me that I'm a talentless hack who has no business even attempting to write a story and I would do humanity a huge favour if I just killed myself I'll just shrug my shoulders and say, "Well, everyone's entitled to their opinion."
Other times I'm having a bad day and I'll receive a rejection telling me that although my story got bounced the editor has read all my books and loved them, thinks I'm one of the best writers around and that I may well even be the reincarnation of William Shakespeare and yet I'll still go on a murderous, axe-wielding rampage.
So if anyone's ever tempted to give me feedback on my stories you might want to check what kind of day I'm having first.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Broken Lance
Watched Broken Lance yesterday. Western starring Spencer Tracy as the patriarchal cattle baron, Robert Wagner as the loyal youngest son and Richard Widmark as the resentful eldest son. When the set in his ways Tracy attempts to employ frontier justice in an increasingly civilized West the family tensions come to a head and tragedy beckons.
Tracy fills his role with charm, mule-headedness and righteous indignation. Widmark doesn't get many set-pieces but still manages to give his character a drawling amorality. And Wagner, well, he's better than in Hart to Hart.
Often compared to King Lear by film critics Broken Lance is an impressive drama with complex characters wrestling with conflicting emotions. On top of this it was pretty progressive for its day (1954). Tracy is in a loving marriage to an Indian, the clean-cut Wagner is a half-breed and Wagner's love interest is an intelligent, independent young woman who stands up to Tracy better than his own sons.
Yes, the film is a little dated and it sacrifices some of its complexity in its climax but it features a tight script and top notch acting. Worth watching if you get the chance.
Tracy fills his role with charm, mule-headedness and righteous indignation. Widmark doesn't get many set-pieces but still manages to give his character a drawling amorality. And Wagner, well, he's better than in Hart to Hart.
Often compared to King Lear by film critics Broken Lance is an impressive drama with complex characters wrestling with conflicting emotions. On top of this it was pretty progressive for its day (1954). Tracy is in a loving marriage to an Indian, the clean-cut Wagner is a half-breed and Wagner's love interest is an intelligent, independent young woman who stands up to Tracy better than his own sons.
Yes, the film is a little dated and it sacrifices some of its complexity in its climax but it features a tight script and top notch acting. Worth watching if you get the chance.
Sunday, August 13, 2006
Star Trekkin'
Caught a few minutes of an early episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation yesterday. It had not aged well. Fake-looking sets, unconvincing SFX, stilted dialogue -- it looked as corny as the original Star Trek must have looked when TNG first aired. Except without the novelty of being the first series to boldy go where no one has gone before.
Saturday, August 12, 2006
Salem's Lot
Watched Salem's Lot the other day -- the David Soul version. Bit disappointed. The main plot takes forever to get going and even when it does the old school vampirism looks pretty corny these days. Plus, I thought the town ended up overrun with vamps but in this version there's only about half a dozen of the fangy fiends.
On the plus side James Mason as Straker is classy as ever.
On the plus side James Mason as Straker is classy as ever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
