Author: latepaul

Categories
book reviews

The Time Traveller’s Wife

At the end of last year when I was in the full grip of my new found enthusiasm for writing, when my sister asked me what I wanted for Christmas I told her to buy me a book, but make it one she’d read and enjoyed. She bought me We Need to Talk About Kevin[1], The Kite Runner and The Time Traveller’s Wife. Last weekend I finished the later.

But it would be unfair to suggest that me taking six months to read this book was any kind of reflection on the quality of the writing. It has more to do with me trying to re-kindle that reading habit when there are slightly less taxing forms of entertainment competing for my time. In fact, having picked it up again after a couple of months, I finished the last half of the book in a couple of days. Of course I was partly avoiding a writing deadline…

Anyway, enough of stuff you don’t care about, how about the book? Well the central idea is simple yet effective – we follow the life of a woman and her husband who travels, involuntarily, in time. Hence her present could be his future or past leading to some interesting encounters. It’s an idea that was recently borrowed by Doctor Who writer Stephen Moffat for the episodes “Silence in the Library” and “Forest of the Dead”. Given this device one could label this SciFi but really it’s more about the relationship between the two and though there is some discussion about the mechanism involved[2], it’s much more about the effects, the emotional effects, than the mechanics of time travel.

I enjoyed the book and especially in that final half I was driven mainly by wanting to see how it ended. Given the nature of his condition we know about 2/3 of the way through how things will end for the main character but it’s still intriguing to see exactly how that plays out. Giving away the ending but still creating a sense of suspense as we head for it has to be a sign of good writing in itself.

If I had problems with the novel I think there were times when I had trouble identifying with the time traveller[3] as he had to be quite ruthless and violent in order to survive the consequences of his random excursions in time. Turning up naked in some random place and time is a problem and I can see how he might need to be an accomplished thief and skilled in fighting to cope with this. But these are consequences of a deliberate authorial decision so I feel like Audrey Niffennegger wanted me to feel some ambivalence towards Henry’s morality. Which is fine but it a) distanced him from me a little and b) jarred a little with the cultured, urbane, son of a musician and a singer who liked hanging out in a library, of the rest of the book.

Another problem for me was that the ending was sad. The actual ending, or coda perhaps, redeemed it somewhat but I still felt a little unsatisfied. I liked the relationship between Clare and Henry and so it was painful to see what happened to them. I like happy endings – so sue me!

I do think that that relationship, which is the core of the book, was well drawn. And particularly later in the book, the sense of happy domesticity which even extends to the necessary accomodations made for Henry’s condition is well described. I especially liked some of the sex, which felt real, intimate, casual in the sense of everyday and most of all bonding. It was definitely erotic but much more so it drew me into the depth of feeling at the heart of Clare and Henry’s marriage.

I’d definitely recommend it, especially if, unlike me, you’ve got the patience to let a book breathe a little.

8/10

[1]Later replaced by A Thousand Splendid Suns since I’d already read Kevin.

[2]Which was organic rather than technological, hence again lessening the SciFi feel.

[3]I realise the main character in the novel is, per the title, Clare, but as a bloke I can’t help trying to identify more with Henry.

Categories
Uncategorized

Flubbage

Sorry about the title. It’s not a reference to Flubber honest. It’s sort of inspired by “phlebotinum” mixed with a desperate desire not to entitle this “Random Musings #23916753″[1]

It’s also an attempt to not let a week go by without posting. A week would be tomorrow, but well there’s a rare event – Paul leaves the house for other than work or shopping – happening tomorrow and so I probably won’t be blogging then.

Actually I almost blogged at the weekend, until I realised that I was about to unload a load of personal angst on you all. Which is fine and everything (it IS my blog) but I sort of decided I was going to keep the ratio of personal to interesting low didn’t I? Then I thought I’d review something, but the only ‘something’ I could really review would have been Doctor Who and that was exactly the wrong kind of terrible to write about (bad but not enough to inspire me to be rude or funny). Still, recalling Dr Kermode’s wise words (3rd para) maybe I should make the effort anyway. Here goes:

It was crap. Brain in hand, looked a little too much like other small pink moist organ in hand. It was vaguely sexual in a not very pleasant way. Plot had enough holes to upset even me. Moral dilemma really forced. Nice music. Nice scenery (snowy bits). Nice, though pointless, chase scene.

That’s all I can force myself to say, Kermode or no Kermode.

Anyhow. The remaining 23% of this flubbage is that I have at least re-visited my neglected LoveFilm DVD rental queue and added a few new releases and upcoming movies. Also added The Nines as suggested by friend of the blog lethebashar. Hopefully there’s something in that little lot that I can get my reviewing teeth into.

Oh and I got a package in the post today. I haven’t opened it yet, but it’s from my sister and is probably related to going-out-event (see above). It looks suspiciously like a book/books, which makes me think

a) I really ought to finish at least one of the three books she gave me for Christmas.[2]

b) Maybe the occasional book review wouldn’t hurt.

Anywhat, [3] I haven’t done any actual writing since last week’s moment of clarity, but then I have been working on something else. A rather ambitious project to do with resisting the passage of time. Seems not to be working, the final proof will come in a few hours I suspect.

Sorry if this seems a bit fillery but flubbage can be like that. Flubb, flubb, flubb.

See you next time.

[1]Even though, now that I look at it, that sort of looks like a better title. Oh well.

[2]At my suggestion, I asked for books because this crazy idea that I was going to write and reading’s important and…

[3]Makes a change from ‘anyhow’ don’t you think?

Categories
reviews

Studio 60 – a guilty pleasure that shouldn’t be

Three posts in one night is probably too much (especially if I end up not posting for a month or something) but I thought of this earlier and anyway I’d like to have something a visitor to the blog could relate to.

I’ve just watched an episode of Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip – which is what Aaron Sorkin did next after The West Wing. It’s a TV show about a TV show (a Saturday Night Live type sketch show) and it never really found enough of an audience to stay on the air. They let it play out the season meaning that if you watch the whole thing you get a sense of closure but clearly in many ways it was a flop.

I love it. And the title of this post is kind of unfair since there’s a lot there to love. It’s as well written as West Wing, more consistently probably in my view. And I think the reasons it never got the ratings probably aren’t what I would think of as its weaknesses. So why am I calling it a ‘guilty pleasure’ – a term usually used when something’s not great but you like it anyway?

Studio 60 is like The West Wing, very like The West Wing. So much so that it could be the West Wing does a TV show. Obviously the writing has the same tone and humour, given its from the same writer, but its not just that. It tackles many of the same themes – there’s a lot of politics in there, ostensibly because political sketches on the show with the show, but mostly, you feel, because that’s what Sorkin likes to write about. One of the stars is Bradley Whitford, Josh from TWW. It often has a slightly preachy, pompous tone. The episode I watched tonight had one the comedians take his parents on a tour of the theatre they use (the eponymous Studio 60) and tell them the history of place, and the history of broadcast TV in a very tour-guide kind of way. In a word, it’s often a bit too worthy. Which would be fine, except, an overly earnest tone, a sense of “this is real serious and important stuff” is understandable and forgiveable in a show about the government of the USA. That tone in a show about TV comedy is a little over the top.

Not only that but they sometimes re-use ideas and even lines from TWW. In an earlier ep, Whitford’s Danny Trip, Exec Producer, tells a roomful of writers that “This isn’t TV camp, it’s not important to us that everyone gets to play.” Replace “TV camp” with “government camp” and you have a line from a WW ep. Also, in tonight’s show, there’s a rather sentimental sub-plot about a mysterious old man who’s caught trying to steal a photo. Clearly not really a threat, they investigate and find out that he was a blacklisted writer from the 50s who got a single sketch on the show before his career was ended. The episode ends with Matt (current head writer) and Danny magnanimously not only offering him the photo, but allowing him to sit in the writers’ room and tell stories of the past.

Whilst not identical, this bears remarkable similarities to the WW episode where an old French lady “freaks out” on a tour when passing a particular painting in the Whitehouse. Turns out it was painted by her father, stolen by the Nazis and ended up as a gift to the US President. That show ends with the painting being made a gift to the old lady. It may not be precisely the same, but it hits all the same notes.

Add to this that there are a large number of references that parallel stuff in Sorkin’s own life. From the head writer who writes the show virtually single-handed (something he did in the WW’s early years), the relationship Matt has with the conservative evangelical Christian Harriet (again it mirrors a real relationship), drug problems and of course, one assumes, all the politics of the day to day dealings between the TV network and the show.

So, to put all this together, it is incredibly self-indulgent. It’s like he’s sharing his favourite in-jokes and re-writing his favourite parts of the West Wing. So why, after all this, do I still love it?

(Oh and I nearly forgot to mention that the show within the show, is awful. Not funny. It’s just not Sorkin’s type of humour at all, and that really shows.)

I love it because it’s warm-hearted. Everyone, upto and including the scary big network boss and bilionaire tycoon owner, is ultimately a good and decent person. Whilst this should be annoying it’s actually quite pleasant. You enjoy being with these people because you root for them.

I love it because the humour on the show itself (not the show within the show) is great. It’s all that great dialogue that Sorkin does so well.

I love it because the comedic chemistry between Whitford and Matthew Perry, who plays Matt, is just superb. They just work really well together, you totally believe this is a creative partnership responsible for some smart, clever movies and TV shows.

I love it because of Matthew Perry’s acting. I could describe how good it is in a number of ways. The most concise would be that I defy anyone to watch him for more than a couple of minutes and still remember who Chandler Bing is. And yet Matt Albie is just as perfectly formed a comic character.

I love it because the stuff that works, really works and it all gels together into this warm, funny, sometimes slighty too serious, sometimes slightly too sentimental, clever show.

Categories
writing

I’m only happy when I’m writing

Which is blatantly untrue but it’s a riff on a song and it’s a title and I have a hard time coming up with titles. And it’s sorta, kinda true.

So this will be shorter than it could’ve been because I’ve already told you half of it and I’ve certainly already told you I shouldn’t be focussing on personal stuff.

I’ve discovered, slightly to my own surprise, that I like to write. My new year’s resolution of the new writing regime lasted until nearly the end of Feb. This may not sound great but given I’m usually chomping down on whatever tasty treat I’ve officially given up by lunchtime Jan 2 it was huge. Also, as I said, I am lazy. So I exceeded my own expectations and that’s always nice.

And I did so in both the amount of time I lasted, and in the fact that I actually finished stuff. Three, or was it four short stories, actually got to the point of ‘the end’. True they mostly sucked beyond belief, even after editting, but they were complete. Not outlines, not opening and closing paragraphs with a bit of dialogue, but actual ideas carried through to execution.

So when I realised, about a month ago, that I hadn’t really written for about a month, I didn’t panic. I didn’t castigate myself for having given up and tell myself that this proves I am not a real writer. No, I just thought, well obviously I should get back to it, and I probably will, and based on recent evidence, will probably have another, longer, more productive period. After all over the past five years, I’ve gone from barely acknowledging the dream, to fitful attempts, classes and groups to this latest five month stretch of pretty consistent writing (my NYR was committing to a specific timetable, but I’d re-started writing back in October).

Unfortunately this lack of panic allowed my natural laziness to take over and I slipped back into bad old ways. Until I realised this last weekend the following, that during the earlier part of this year I was

* writing regularly

* finishing stuff

* watching less TV, but looking forward to and possibly enjoying more what I was watching

* eating better and actually cooking

* not drinking too heavily

Some of that (cooking?) may seem unrelated, but discipline breeds discipline, so someone once told me, and it seems to be true.

Anyway since stopping, and particularly since feeling relaxed about stopping, I’d

* hardly written anything, not even this blog

* gone back to watching any old crap, sometimes spending an evening surfing channels, recordings and never settling on any one thing, leaving me feeling unsatisfied

* eating junk food

* drinking too much a bit too often

So overall, despite the fact that it was hard work, I was actually happier when I was writing regularly.

Why did I stop again?

Categories
flubbage

Yeah, I had a blog once…

So last night, I came home from work inspired (sort of) to write in my blog. I was going to talk about how long it’s been since I’ve written[1] and probably I still will, but what happened was that I started reading my blog. I went back to last summer’s Harry Potter read-a-thon and read all the posts through to present from there. And you know what? it’s really inspired me.

To blog.

What I was going to (and still am intending to) blog about was how much I enjoyed writing writing. But what I realised is I really like blogging. I just like giving my opinion on stuff and you know what, on a good day, with a fair wind, I think I’m halfway decent at making it entertaining.

So if nothing else I want to re-re-re-re-RE-launch this blog. Which is to say I want to do a bunch of simple stuff to promote it (like actually having it in my sig for online stuff) and I want to try to update it more often.

Random thoughts so far on the new new new NEW Cheese Never Sleeps[2] –

* actually put it in my sig for the two places I post most online – AFO and SoF.

* post on other blogs – not in a blatant, pseudo-spam, hey-please-please-read-my-blog kind of way but I already read certain blogs on topics I’m interested in. Since I’m interested in reading about them I may well blog about them. So it’s not horribly impossible that these other bloggers might want to discuss the same types of stuff on my blog too.

* post mainly about non-personal stuff. Ruminating on my inner feelings about the lint I found in my sock this morning isn’t, it appears that fascinating to others. I’ve had over 5 years (5 YEARS!) of blogging behind me to build up a loyal following of, er, one regular reader. There is a fighting chance that people will read about stuff they’re already into – films, TV programs, books – see previous point. Maybe, once I’ve snared them, they may just become interested in what makes me tick. But until I do, I think it’s safe to say I’m just talking to M.

*so I’ll write reviews. I’ve discovered that whilst I hate some things about it, I actually do love to write. And of course I love fiction and I think/hope/dream that I’ve got some readable fiction in me. But what I really really love is writing reviews for stuff. I mean going on and on about my opinions – what’s not to love?[3]

* what’ll I review? Well anything I feel like. Probably not the Buffy re-watch thing. Not right now anyway. It’s just too huge a commitment and it’s still too close to the time that I discussed every single episode from every angle imaginable. There are always movies, books (if I ever finish any! lately that’s an issue) and other TV shows. Joss Whedon’s new one, Dollhouse, will arrive in the autumn and I’m sure I’ll want to comment. Last year, when I was pondering the last re-re-re-launch of the blog, I considered a gimmick: review everything I watch/read/view for a week or a month. I may do that for a laugh some time.

So anyway, that’s all on that for now. This is probably ridiculously long given that it basically just says the blog is back. And I’ve probably got another couple of posts in me tonight.

Now where’s the post button again…

[1]written written not written in my blog written.

[2]I think I’m keeping the name. Can’t think of a better one right now.

[3]OK, for me nothing, for the reader, lots, but I promise I’ll try to rein it in a little

Categories
Buffy Rewatch Season 1 writing

Monday Night is Blogging Night

…which is just my attempt at a title that captures a few topics, not a statement of intent.

Although it could be and it might not be such a bad idea. See, the thing I have feared has happened, as I think one of Job’s comforters said. That is, (re-)watching Buffy has become a bit of a chore because I feel like I can’t proceed until I’ve blogged about it. So we have…

 1. Watching Buffy with M.

I went over to see M. the other week and took my Buffy S1 DVDs with me. We watched the first 4 episodes together. I was nervous about this for a couple of reasons.

First, four is a lot when I needed to remember what I wanted to say about them in my blog. However that’s not too much of a problem. I know the episodes well enough.

Second, I was nervous that M. wouldn’t like them. I was very aware of the problems with the episodes. Not that there are many but I’ve been in this situation before – the ‘fan’ wanting to share my love for something only to get a ‘mmm that’s nice’ polite response.

I needn’t have worried. I’d forgotten that long before she’d met me M. had been a regular Buffy watcher. Not a fan the way I was, but certainly a fan the way I began. Someone who basically liked the show and wanted to fill in the gaps in eps she hadn’t seen.

So what did I think?

Welcome to the Hellmouth/The Harvest – this is where it really all started, for me. It was still cool, and I enjoyed as ever such favourite moments as Jesse’s line “I’m not ok on an epic scale” and Buffy’s ‘dawn’ gag on Luke. But what I really noticed was how trad horror-movie-esque the Master is. I mean I knew that he was and was so deliberately, he’s the scary organ music to Buffy’s energetic rock tune, but I guess I’d forgotten how much that’s true in the first couple of episodes. Even as soon as the next two it settles down a bit with the Master making jokes and such. 8/10

Witch – this was the episode I saw the promo for and decided not to continue watching Buffy (only to pick it up again much later). To this day I’m not really sure why except that for some reason I didn’t like the idea that the show was about things other than vampires! Of course now I love this ep because it’s got juicy Xander-Buffy-Willow triangularity in it. Aww so sweet. 8/10

Teacher’s Pet – I watched this with one eye on M. to see her groan at the monster (I mean giant praying mantis?) but she didn’t, she enjoyed it as I did. I like the opening dream sequence with Xander playing the hero. I like the teacher who dies and how he believes in Buffy. I like the fact the way that even though we are dealing with a giant praying mantis the actors sell the fear as real. That’s the thing about Buffy, it may make jokes, even self-referential ones, but it always attempts to play the emotional situation as real. 7/10

 2. Time and Writing

So, at the start of the year I came up with this timetable for myself re: writing. How ‘m I doing? Well so far since I started (barely 3 weeks). I’ve missed one evening (an hour) and one full weekend (five hours). I’m certainly not planning to try to do the catching up thing since that way lies madness and sweaty palms. I was thinking that I might incorporate my failure into my plan – to my already generous time-off quotient. What I could do is have one weekend a month where I plan not to do my usual writing. Two hours on saturday and three on sunday is not a lot really and let it seems to take up most of my weekend by the time you factor in some procrastination and faffing around.

Plus my usual habit of not setting my alarm and getting up when I feel like it shortens my day. My day still ‘ends’ pretty much at midnight because that’s when I tend to call M. for an end-of-day chat. So one thing I’m considering is setting my alarm for something suitably late but not midday for the weekends.

Actually it was pretty predictable that I’d not be writing this weekend as I re-built (from a software point of view) my Mythtv box. Leading to

3. MythTV Multirec

There was probably no real need to wipe my system and re-install except well, I kind of enjoyed it. I also fondly imagine it gives me a ‘cleaner’ system somehow. Anyway I’ve installed a new version of Mythtv that supports multiple recordings from the same multiplex.

What’s that mean? Well the Freeview signal is split into different frequencies that carry a multiplex – a collection of channels. When you ‘tune in’ to a channel you actually tune in the multiplex and just record/display the channel you’re interested in. What the clever MythTV developers have done is make it possible to record one, some or all of the channels in a multiplex using a single tuner. In other words using my dual-tuner tv-card I can now record several channels at once (providing they’re on no more than two multiplexes). Earlier tonight I successfully recorded 6 programs at once.

Actually I rarely need this, at least in that way. I’ve been running a MythTV box with 2 tuners for over 9 months now and I very rarely need more than 2 tuners. The reason I like it, and the reason – other than the enjoyment of doing it – to install multirec is that I can record back to back programs on the same channel and have an overlap (finish recording prog1 5 mins late and start prog2 5 mins early) and only use one tuner. Sounds trivial but it’s not. I record Mastermind and University Challenge which are back to back on BBC2. Since occasionally there’s something on another channel I want to record, I set it so Mastermind finishes at 8:30 and U.C. starts at 8:30. But if the timing’s not exact then I end up with the end of Mastermind chopped off early and a little bit of it at the start of the U.C. recording. Which is annoying. It would be even more so if I intended to archive them to DVD.

Anyway I installed it, re-installed the complete machine in fact, with a new version of Linux and everything. A weekend suitably ‘wasted’.

That’s probably way more than you wanted to read, so until next Monday…

Categories
Buffy Rewatch

Buffy – the Un-aired Pilot

OK, so this was where it really all started.

3rd May 1996 (according to the fuzzy titlecard) and Joss Whedon has re-visited his movie concept and made it into a pilot for a TV series. As with the movie, I spent a fair amount of time on the net defending this back in my full-on fan days. Unlike the movie, my opinion of it hasn’t faded over time.

So what this not is a ‘normal’ TV quality production. What it is is a 25 minute mini-episode in order to show off the idea to networks to see if they want to sign up to airing the show. In other words it’s a pilot in the Pulp Fiction sense[1] rather than the first-show-broadcast sense that sometime gets used. What this means, apart from being shorter, is that this is a little rough around the edges: the titles are not in that pseudo-gothic font we know and love, Nerf Herder’s theme is missing and replaced by some random grunge and the special effects are basically ‘place-markers’ – they give the idea of what’s intended without spending much money. For extra roughness, seeing as how this was never meant to make it to anyone’s eyes but network execs, the copy that finally made it out onto the net wasn’t particularly great. Looks like someone got hold of a VHS copy and possibly we had a couple of copy-of-copy generations before someone thought to capture it in digital form. The combination of VHS technology, NTSC TV format (which isn’t kind to colours) and repeated copying means what I watched tonight was blurry, fuzzy with strange mixed, washed out colours.

But that all can be, legitimately in my view, be excused. It was never meant for broadcast, so it’s unfair to compare it with broadcast quality production values. To assess its strengths and weaknesses we have to look at what, presumably, the network execs looked at: acting, casting, story, action, dialogue. Fortunately in all these areas the story gets much better.

The un-aired pilot story-wise is a cut-down version of “Welcome to the Hellmouth”, the first aired episode. As such, I’m not going to spend much time on it here. I will mention that the writing is up to the standard we’d expect from the show – it’s Joss after all – and there are some jokes and one-liners that are fun:

Buffy: Film Club

Xander: They spend their time deciding that every movie is an existential meditation on Freudian sexuality.

Buffy: Even “Muppets Take Manhattan”?

Xander: Especially “Muppets Take Manhattan”!

or

Buffy: (on discovering there’s more than one vampire) I don’t suppose you’d be sweeties and attack me one at a time?

Vampire: You watch too many movies.

Buffy: You can never (kicks him) watch too many (kick) movies!

Well said Buffy.

So the writing’s there and so I’m pleased to say is the acting. All the usual gang are there and all performing well. Nick Brendon in particular deserves praise I feel because this was his first acting job, and he’s great. And the casting – in terms of fitting the parts and the chemistry between them – is great. With one important exception: Willow.

Willow is played by a dumpy looking girl called Riff Regan.[2] I don’t want to be harsh – I am after all a dumpy looking boy – but she’s not up to the task, and she’s definitely not Alison Hannigan. I can see why they might have gone for her, she’s supposed to be geeky and she looks the part. She can actually act, despite what some say, but what she gives us is one-dimensional. She gives us shy, geeky, un-self-confident Willow but she never gives us more than that. Joss talks about Tony Head getting the part of Giles based on giving not just the stuffy English librarian, but the stuffy English librarian with a hint that there might be more going on underneath. There’s no underneath to Regan’s Willow. You get the feeling she’s going to always be a bit shy and diffident and that makes you feel a little sad for her.

By contrast Hanngian’s Willow’s shy geekiness is somehow and endearing and even from the first show there’s an edge underlying her lack of confidence. Oh but there’ll be plenty of time to expound on my love for Willow (which is great) as we go through the series.

Finally whilst we’re on acting I’ll quickly mention Stephen Tobolowsky as Principal Flutie. He’s excellent. He brings the funny, much as Stephen Root does in the movie. In fact, as we’ll see, all 5 Principals have been great in various ways.

Towards the end there’s a little action scene where Buffy rescues Willow from some vampires and we get to see fights done properly i.e. with some energy and something at stake. I was slightly surprised to realise that both Xander and Willow get to have a little slaying success of their own: Xander rather deftly passes Buffy a broom and Willow uses a cross to dispatch Darla. In the show itself it would be into the second series at least before we start to really see them have any ‘moves’ as it were. Perhaps this is the difference between making a pilot and a show – you need to show something of what the characters’ potential is straight away when you’re trying to get picked up, but once you are, you can relax and let them develop at a more leisurely pace.

So, to the same question I asked myself of the movie: if I’d seen this back in ’96, would it have convinced me to watch the TV series. I 95% certain the answer is yes. It’s funny and likeable and promises fantasy horror genre intrigue – just the kind of thing I’d enjoy. The 5% remains only because of what actually happened when I watched the actual show – but I’ll tell that story in its proper place.

7/10
[1] “Well, the way they make shows is, they make one show. That show’s called a pilot. Then they show that show to the people who make shows, and on the strength of that one show they decide if they’re going to make more shows. Some pilots get picked and become television programs. Some don’t, become nothing. She starred in one of the ones that became nothing.”

[2]sounds like a bloke from a 70s British cop show doesn’t it?

Categories
writing

Do I Like Writing?

Well it’s been 5 days since I started my new regime, end of the first week as it were. I kept to my hour of writing on Wednesday and Thursday, did my two hours yesterday and today I managed… two also, not the three required. I’ve only done half an hour of reading and that was today.

I started this because I wanted to “get serious about my writing.” I’m forty, single and don’t have many interests or close friends – and whilst all that is fine in one way, I guess I felt like I want to do something of some significance other than sit on my couch and watch TV. Anyway when I started to “get serious”, which really started back in October when I re-joined AFO, I had the impression that the major hurdle I had to overcome was lack of discipline. I was moaning the other day, on AFO, about how I never know whether to give up on something that seems not very good, or continue working on it. One of the replies I got was “You’re not lazy you just have a harsh internal critic.” The later may be true (actually I think it is, I think that’s what this post will be about) but the former’s not. I am lazy. I know this about myself.

And if I was lazy back in the good old days of trying to have a daily “quiet time” how much more so when I have, in fact, sat on a couch and watch TV for seven years? No, there’s definitely a problem there and so I expected it to be tough. I wanted to make the effort though and so I was prepared, when the urge came on me to do something more relaxing, to stick it out and keep writing.

I wasn’t prepared for the other thing. How to describe it? This crippling sense of the pointlessness of what I’m doing, the absolute certainty that what I’m producing is rubbish, the feeling of being stuck not able to go forward and not willing to just give up. I know it won’t come across as strongly as I feel it, but it’s almost a sense of panic, or fear. I’m at the end of my first week and I’ve felt it twice so far.

Strangely enough, one of my self-assigned tasks for today was to work through the first chapter of Creative Writing and that had a section on just this with sections called ‘Postpone Perfection’ and ‘Avoid Writer’s Block’. The impression I was left with is that it is normal to feel very down on your own work but that the important thing is to stick with it and improve it when you edit/re-write. That I sort of knew (maybe not how strong the dislike could be). However the section on writer’s block talked about how it could happen even when you’re doing a lot of writing and it could happen to a previously successful writer. The scenario described was of a writer who put himself under pressure because of his wife’s expectations. The end of the section, and the chapter, talked about how the most creative people are those who do it for the intrinsic rewards not the extrinsic ones. In other words writing because you love writing not because it will get you money, fame, applause etc.

That’s a tough one for me. I know I can beat the laziness, it’s just a matter of training myself to do it, sticking to the schedule until it becomes habit. But do I like writing? There’s definitely a large part of me that’s hungry for the approval of others and sees writing as a way to get it. For years I’ve talked myself out of “getting serious” precisely because I believed that if I really loved writing for the sake of writing I’d’ve done a lot more of it by now.

So do I like writing? And do I like it enough?

Well there have definitely been moments where I’ve come up with a phrase, or an idea that I like. And in fact all the things I’ve written that I “hated” I actually really like the idea – but I want the prose on paper to generate the same images I have in my head and it just doesn’t. But that’s fixable. I can improve something that already exists if I have something to work on. Stone soup sort of.

I think part of the problem is I’ve psyched myself out. Precisely because I’ve made it this big deal, this thing I’m doing in 2008, it’s become, well, a big deal. I need to enjoy it more. But I’m not going to quit, not yet. Tonight I confess, half an hour into my second one-and-a-half hour session I gave up. I compromised and read for half an hour instead.

I comfort myself with this: back in my evangelical days, on the way back from a conference I was moaning to a car-full of friends that I didn’t seem to feel the same passion that others felt about God, Christianity etc, and that it frustrated me because I knew I should. When I finally let someone else get a word in, my good friend Kate said, “Have you ever thought that maybe you are passionate, you just don’t show it the way others do? Surely the very fact that you’re frustrated shows you’re passion?”

Maybe my passion for writing is like that.

Categories
Buffy Rewatch

Buffy the Movie

So this was where it all started.

In 1992 the original movie of Buffy the Vampire Slayer was released. It was written by Joss Whedon, a TV writer who’d worked on Roseanne and would later go on to work on Toy Story.

It wasn’t very good.

But before we get to that, I’ve actually been here before. In 2001, at the height of my fandom, I bought the movie when it was released on DVD. I then wrote this review. It’s interesting how positive I was. To explain/excuse that I should say that it was written for/to the fan community, the received wisdom of whom was that the movie was rubbish and should not be considered as connected to the TV show, which we all loved of course.

Although some of my thoughts on the movie have changed, I don’t intend to write a full re-review as it were. In this blog, I’m largely interested in how things fit in with my own history as a fan.

I can remember hearing about the movie around the time it was released on what was probably Film ’93. Barry Norman thought it was an interesting concept but poorly executed I think. On the strength of that, as was my usual custom at the time, I didn’t make any effort to go see it. When I finally did see it, I was already a fan and happy to find good in it. Now having watched it again with a little of that distance I spoke of yesterday, what do I think?

The thing I think is best about it is still Kristy Swanson. If there’s a moment I liked or a joke I laughed at, she was usually responsible for it. Actually there were other funny moments from Stephen Root as the Principal, but that comedy seemed a little divorced from the film itself.

Two things really stand out on watching it again. One is how static it is, especially in the action scenes. It’s more than needing to “do flippy things and kick each other a bit.” it’s the fact that the reality of any stake (pun unavoidable) or any threat is undermined. Not seeming to either run toward or away from the fight, or expend much effort in it, leaves a feeling that that character doesn’t care much about the outcome. And if they don’t why should I?

The second is the blase way in which everyone reacts to the discovery that vampires are real. Apart from Hilary Swank, whose screaming whilst scenery chewing was way over the top, everyone seems to treat the discovery as mildly annoying or irritating. Even where they say things as if they’re scared for their lives, the acting and delivery of the lines betrays that. Again they don’t really care, so I don’t. I think this comes from a misunderstanding of how to do comedy (he says as if he’s an expert!) – no matter how broad the joke, the actor should play the character’s reactions as real, because to them, within that fictional world it’s real – even if it’s ridiculous and funny to us. As the TV show later proved, you can have great emotional reality and humour side by side.

Anyway, the big question – for me at least – is if, in 1992/3, I’d seen this movie, would I have seen enough in it to want to check out the TV show 5 years later? I think the honest answer is no. I might still have watched but it would have been despite not because. I don’t think I would have thought “here’s a good concept done poorly” I think I would have just dismissed it as a bad movie. Not a bad movie with good parts, just bad.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the movie: 3/10.

Categories
Buffy Rewatch

Buffy Re-visited

I’ve been thinking about this for a long time, planning it in fact.

I’m going to re-watch all of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, in order, and possibly Angel. I think.

I started to think about it back in the early part of last year. From mid-2000 I’ve been a huge BtVS fan. I acquired the videos and later the DVDs and watched them over and over (often in preference to anything new on TV). I discussed each new episode on the internet endlessly with other fans. However when it ended I was not distraught. It had run its course, finished whilst it was still good enough not to tarnish its reputation (others would not agree). I remained, remain, a fan but there’s less to be fannish about. The internet discussions died down and the ones remaining tend to re-visit the same old ground.

Then last year, after some of the dust had settled from moving house, and after I had got over the initial initial excitement of setting up Mythtv, I began to realise I hadn’t watched an episode of Buffy for some time. I began to deliberately not do so i.e. not pick out a favourite ep when I was at a loose end what to watch.
I wanted to have a clear stretch – at least a year – so that I could, to some extent watch them with new eyes. Would they, I nervously wondered, stand up? I think the answer to that is yes for the really good episodes and perhaps less so for others. I was very forgiving of any mistakes when I was in full-on fan mode.

During October, when I had some time off work, I started copying my DVDs onto my Mythtv box. This means I can watch them without getting up to change the disc. In my mind this was all part of the preparation. As I was transcoding them down to smaller files this took 3 or 4 weeks to do them all, plus Angel. Then I got into writing again. Then it was Christmas.

And now, now that I have organised myself time-wise, I am actually going to do it. I think.

Why the hesitation? Well the idea was not just to re-watch them but to review them in my blog – like the Harry Potter re-read. The problem with that is that there are 144 episodes of Buffy and 110 of Angel. That’s 254 45minute episodes. At one a day that would take more than half a year. Of course in the old days I watched four in an evening sometimes. But I wasn’t trying to write anything about them, or about anything else come to that. And even if I accept that it’s a longer term project and maybe take a year or two over it – do I want my blog to be about that for so long? After all my worries about getting people to read is this a good strategy? 3-4 years ago it would have been, even now though there will be people who’d be interested, I’d be discussing things that have been done to death in many ways.

So what to do? Well I think my plan is to definitely watch all the episodes but not necessarily comment on them all. Or perhaps I will comment on groups together with a line or two about the less interesting ones, keeping the focus always on – what it’s like to re-visit them. My goal also is to update this blog a couple of times a week with only one being a Buffy review post.

Another question is what order to do them in. Sounds a silly question – but it’s very tempting to do them in ‘autobiographical’ order – the order I originally watched them in and the meaning that had to me (so my first ep was the first ep but after that I missed a few only later going back when I had them on video/DVD). It’s tempting but I don’t have the memory to get that order right, except for a few key points which I’ll highlight along the way.

Having got that off my chest, and therefore not ‘contaminating’ the reviews themselves with it, I’ll now go and watch the first – which is probably not what you think.