The fantasy genre is what got me interested in reading when I was a youngling. Like a lot of other genres it has it's good stories and it's bad stories, with the later being more common. One has to wade through the bad ones to find the good ones. Thankfully, my parents knew what a lot of the good ones were. I was exposed to Tolkien's writing at a young age, starting with The Hobbit. It read like a children's book compared to The Lord of the Rings, which I read when I was older. It was a prologue, establishing some of Tolkien's deeply developed world. Everything had a history, things that don't even come up in the books.
The depth of the world was the most fascinating thing. I began drawing world maps in school on large pieces of paper, inventing land masses, and names for all the little cities. It was very amusing. I got very good at drawing little squiggly lines at the edges of continents to represent water.
I've read a lot of David Edding's works as well - the entire Belgariad, and The Redemption of Althalus. The Belgariad was a pretty classic heroes journey type of story, with an insecure boy becoming a scorscerer king of Riva. Eddings built the story around a prophecy and a magical item. I read in some of Eddings development work that a lot of fantasy stories revolve around some small magical object with high value. It's an easy story centerpiece - everything falls in around it.
Fantasy code;
Magical object
Wizards/scorcerers/mages
knights
kingdoms
dragons
Monday, December 7, 2009
Sunday, December 6, 2009
J Horror
J Horror is so delightfully twisted and scary, it's no wonder American movies are ripping off Japanese film makers. American film makers even rip off the rip offs (The Grudge was a spin off of The Ring - they both came to the states). Where the United States goes towards gore and shock value (Saw, anyone?), the J Horror genre goes toward the psychological and aims to deeply disturb. It does this by keeping the viewer/reader off balance. Not knowing what to expect scares the crap out of me.
Another thing about most J Horror is that it doesn't involve the monsters American audiences are used to. It uses spirits of the dead - something people understand even less. People are hardwired to fear what they don't understand. Shocking someone with a gore-filled scene doesn't muck up someone's brain, stick with them, and affect their dreams that night like psychological horror does. I want horror movies to disturb me for at least a few days, and give me reoccurring nightmares for at least a week.
The first time I saw The Ring, my brain was a nervous mess by the end. It messed with my head and that is why I liked it.
Another thing about most J Horror is that it doesn't involve the monsters American audiences are used to. It uses spirits of the dead - something people understand even less. People are hardwired to fear what they don't understand. Shocking someone with a gore-filled scene doesn't muck up someone's brain, stick with them, and affect their dreams that night like psychological horror does. I want horror movies to disturb me for at least a few days, and give me reoccurring nightmares for at least a week.
The first time I saw The Ring, my brain was a nervous mess by the end. It messed with my head and that is why I liked it.
Harry Potter Wizarding Adventures
Sorcerer's Stone - This book reads more like a children's book than any book after it. It's the lightest and most naive of the books, which would seem appropriate. The movie has the same kind of tone - I saw a brief part of the first movie on TV the other day. I was amazed how young everyone looked, especially Harry. I didn't think it was the same actor at firts. After watching the movies after it in a Harry Potter marathon, the first movie was completely different in tone from the others. The book, too dealt with simpler themes - Harry's problems were fairly simple and ordinary in the first book. He worried about things a normal student would worry about - he had his dislikable teacher, Snape, and his rival, Malfoy. The first book was a little on the boring side to me, but I understand the first book of a long series isn't the most exciting one of any series. Sorcerer's Stone set up a world and the characters for the story to follow.
Chamber of Secrets - I found it darker than the first, but still a children's book. The characters are developing more, and JK is developing a more as a writer. At least until we get to the chapter's worth of review from the previous book. This is what kept reminding me the book is intended for children - Jk's need to review things that have happened in the last book. Alex always uses a certain voice when review comes up, and it is fairly silly. I didn't need the review, but a 12 year old might. Some one might forget Harry isn't an 'ordinary' boy and goes to a wizarding school called Hogwarts. Although JK does give us reviews and plot hand-outs (like Hermione saying "oh, maybe it's such and such doing this", and Ron goes "naaah", but it ends up being that person anyway), she can be very subtle. After seeing the movies (I haven't read past the fourth book myself, but I have seen the movies), I start to catch little details. Alex and I talked about the diary in the second book. We think it was Tom Riddle's first horcrux, since it preserved him in his youth. Moaning Mertle was likely the murder he committed to fracture his soul to create his first horcrux. It's fun thinking about the plot points JK doesn't fully explain (I don't know if she eventually does lay it all out, but this will do in the mean time).
Prisoner of Azkaban - I remember the third book being my favorite - it still is. Once we get past JKs chapter or so of review, we finally start getting into the thick of it. There are more details to speculate over that connect to plots in later books. More characters come into the plot, and Harry gains another mentors. Throughout the first three books Harry is collecting mentors. Yes, I even consider Snape a mentor. And they all die eventually, but that's for later. It was between this book and Goblet of Fire when I started to think of Harry's story as a 'heroes journey' type of story. The hero is someone unlikely, and not looking to be a hero. Suddenly he's swept up into an unfamiliar world, at first he is reluctant. He collects mentors as he learns of the troubles ahead. The mentors eventually die so that the hero can realize his full potential. People haven't started dying yet.
Goblet of Fire - The shit hits the fan. Here the looming shadow of the Dark Lord returns, and the political story begins heating up. Most notibly, the language changes, and people start dying. This is something I really like about Harry Potter and how JK has written it. The first book was for 11 year olds, the second was for those same 11 year olds who were now 12 or 13, and so on. Goblet of Fire is a more mature than the previous books - it also didn't have as much of the review bits. By now I think JK expects people to know Harry isn't ordinary, and he used to live in a broom closet under the stairs. This is as far as I've read myself - I've only seen the 5th and the 6th books in movie form. Alex tells me the politics get pretty heavy in the Fifth book, and I can see that developing a little bit in the fourth book - I hate politics. I guess it's a little more interesting with wizards though.
On another note, I keep looking at the cover art. It's awesome. Thiel, my illustration teacher told us how badly the illustrator got screwed on that deal. Apparently her contract had no room for renegotiation if the book got big, so she gets paid roughly the same for the later books as she did for the first book. It's a cautionary tail to always build renegotiation into contracts.
Chamber of Secrets - I found it darker than the first, but still a children's book. The characters are developing more, and JK is developing a more as a writer. At least until we get to the chapter's worth of review from the previous book. This is what kept reminding me the book is intended for children - Jk's need to review things that have happened in the last book. Alex always uses a certain voice when review comes up, and it is fairly silly. I didn't need the review, but a 12 year old might. Some one might forget Harry isn't an 'ordinary' boy and goes to a wizarding school called Hogwarts. Although JK does give us reviews and plot hand-outs (like Hermione saying "oh, maybe it's such and such doing this", and Ron goes "naaah", but it ends up being that person anyway), she can be very subtle. After seeing the movies (I haven't read past the fourth book myself, but I have seen the movies), I start to catch little details. Alex and I talked about the diary in the second book. We think it was Tom Riddle's first horcrux, since it preserved him in his youth. Moaning Mertle was likely the murder he committed to fracture his soul to create his first horcrux. It's fun thinking about the plot points JK doesn't fully explain (I don't know if she eventually does lay it all out, but this will do in the mean time).
Prisoner of Azkaban - I remember the third book being my favorite - it still is. Once we get past JKs chapter or so of review, we finally start getting into the thick of it. There are more details to speculate over that connect to plots in later books. More characters come into the plot, and Harry gains another mentors. Throughout the first three books Harry is collecting mentors. Yes, I even consider Snape a mentor. And they all die eventually, but that's for later. It was between this book and Goblet of Fire when I started to think of Harry's story as a 'heroes journey' type of story. The hero is someone unlikely, and not looking to be a hero. Suddenly he's swept up into an unfamiliar world, at first he is reluctant. He collects mentors as he learns of the troubles ahead. The mentors eventually die so that the hero can realize his full potential. People haven't started dying yet.
Goblet of Fire - The shit hits the fan. Here the looming shadow of the Dark Lord returns, and the political story begins heating up. Most notibly, the language changes, and people start dying. This is something I really like about Harry Potter and how JK has written it. The first book was for 11 year olds, the second was for those same 11 year olds who were now 12 or 13, and so on. Goblet of Fire is a more mature than the previous books - it also didn't have as much of the review bits. By now I think JK expects people to know Harry isn't ordinary, and he used to live in a broom closet under the stairs. This is as far as I've read myself - I've only seen the 5th and the 6th books in movie form. Alex tells me the politics get pretty heavy in the Fifth book, and I can see that developing a little bit in the fourth book - I hate politics. I guess it's a little more interesting with wizards though.
On another note, I keep looking at the cover art. It's awesome. Thiel, my illustration teacher told us how badly the illustrator got screwed on that deal. Apparently her contract had no room for renegotiation if the book got big, so she gets paid roughly the same for the later books as she did for the first book. It's a cautionary tail to always build renegotiation into contracts.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
On District 9
D-9 is one of the better movies I've seen in a long time. I can count it as one of my favorites. The story is artfully told with a mixture of a reality TV show angle and cinematic moments, blended together. Blending the filming methods creates a unique and involving experience.
The movie feels very real - it's entirely different from any 'aliens come to Earth' story I've seen or read before. I think this may be how people would react if non-hostile aliens visited Earth.
One thing I thought was interesting was how the main human character was a very unlikeable character. I disliked him from the beginning to the last scenes of the movie, and even then I wasn't sure what to think of him. After the movie I spent some time considering his motives. His actions were heroic in the end, but his motives were anything but. For the whole movie, the main human characters motive was saving his own humanity, and he was willing to sacrifice the alien Christopher to do it. Even if it was delayed, there was a transformation in his character that made him more likable in the last scenes of the movie. He genuinely wanted to save Christopher at his own expense, though it was with the promise that he'd have his humanity restored later.
D-9 was ended well. It left a few questions for the viewer to chew on, and offered some closure as well. Would the aliens return to take their people back, or to retaliate? Christopher might not want to retaliate, but I can understand why the aliens would want to, after hearing about what the humans did to the 1 million aliens over 20 years.
Jumping back to the beginning, I'm left with one more question. The mother ship had about 1 million aliens, complete with weapons and armor. What were their original intentions coming to Earth? There are a lot of things they could've been doing, but I still wonder.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Mythic Fiction
American Gods is my second exposure to the work of Neil Gaiman. First I read Graveyard. I didn't look too close at the author, so I didn't recognize Gaiman right away. Gaiman's style of modern myth is a very interesting to me. The thought that there are powers working in the background of the modern world is appealing.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Alex and Nick's Fantasy Elements
talking horse
Barbarian
trolls (with clubs)
treasure
goblins
king
wolves in the forest
heroes
darksome woods
misty mountains
icy bridge
epic human vs troll war
giant spiders
swords
wizard
facing the beast
quest
dwarf masons
killing a beast task set by father
frozen winds
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Vampires
This week, instead of Interview, I listened to the audio book of Richard Matheson's "I Am Legend". It is a vampire story with a completely different kind of vampire. These vampires have many resemblances to zombies in their behavior. There is only one 'talking' vampire through most of the book, and he poses as a main antagonist.
I Read the book after I saw the movie, after I saw it in a bookstore. I'm familiar with Hollywood's way of butchering literature into movies - turns out "I Am Legend" (as in the movie released in 2007) wasn't their first attempt. Before the 2007 take was "The Last Man on Earth" and "Omega Man". I haven't seen either, but I've heard Omega Man came closest to representing the book.
The 2007 film had about a 1-2% similarity with the book. Knowing Hollywood, I wasn't too suprised - I actually enjoyed the movie for what it was, even if the ending was completely different. I thought the book's ending made more sense for the title.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)