YA in Tudor England!

Today I interviewed Katherine Longshore, author of the historical YA novel, GILT.

Welcome Katherine Longshore

Today I'm happy to host Young Adult author Katherine Longshore whose debut novel, Gilt, is set in Tudor England!

ABOUT THE BOOK

In the Tudor age, ambition, power and charismatic allure are essential and Catherine Howard has plenty of all three. Not to mention her loyal best friend, Kitty Tylney, to help cover her tracks. Kitty, the abandoned youngest daughter of minor aristocracy, owes everything to Cat—where she is, what she is, even who she is. Friend, flirt, and self-proclaimed Queen of Misrule, Cat reigns supreme in a loyal court of girls under the none-too-watchful eye of the Dowager Duchess of Norfolk.

When Cat worms her way into the heart of Henry VIII and becomes Queen of England, Kitty is thrown into the intoxicating Tudor Court. It's a world of glittering jewels and elegant costumes, of gossip and deception. As the Queen's right-hand-woman, Kitty goes from the girl nobody noticed to being caught between two men—the object of her affection and the object of her desire.

But the atmosphere of the court turns from dazzling to deadly, and Kitty is forced to learn the difference between trust and loyalty, love and lust, secrets and treason. And to accept the consequences when some lessons are learned too late.

BUY THE BOOK:
   IndieBound | Amazon | Barnes & Noble | Books-A-Million

BUY THE eBOOK:
    Amazon | Barnes & Noble

Gilt is on Facebook! 
Add to your Goodreads shelf! 

"A substantive, sobering historical read, with just a few heaving bodices."

   —Kirkus Reviews

 

"...royally riveting for the reader."
   —Booklist

 

"This is an enjoyable novel to recommend to girls interested in history, love, and betrayal."
   —VOYA

To see the interview and enter the book giveaway, click here. 

Get Lost in a Story: Corpes and Crystal Balls

Get Lost in a Story: Corpes and Crystal Balls: Today, I'm happy to welcome back author  Kari Lee Townsend Her latest novel, Corpse in the Crystal Bal l (book 2) Fortune Teller Mysteries...

Listed in Publishers Weekly!

I am excited that DEVIANTS made the list of "Galleys to Grab" for the upcoming BEA trade show/conference. 

The proof is below, but in case it's too small to read,  here's what it says, listed under Thrills, Chills and Fantasy:

Deviants by Maureen McGowan (Amazon Children’s Publishing). Book one of the Dust Chronicles is set in a post-apocalyptic world in which a 16-year-old orphan with mutated DNA must protect her younger brother.

It's all starting to feel real. Can't wait to reveal the cover art. :)

Agents and Free Books (not related)

Oh, blog. I am so sorry. How I have neglected you!

I admit. I've been cheating on you. I fear I am not well-suited to blog monogamy. (Blogmanog?)

If we are ever to heal our relationship, I must confess my sins: Today, I cheated in two places.

At Drunk Writer Talk, I blogged about the heavy burden of free books, even if they're digital.

And on the CLRWA blog, I compared searching for an agent to placing a want ad to fill a job post.

I will endeavor to be more faithful in the future, dear blog. :)

Style Over Substance

Thinking about last night's Oscars, I can't decide whether the sub-title should be:

Style Over Substance
Old People Rule! or
Behold the Power of Harvey Weinstein

I was a little underwhelmed with the Oscars last night and I'm a huge Oscar fan. Even the years that most people don't like it, I usually do. Maybe I was just distracted about other things -- like coming up with a new title for my new book and series -- so I only half watched.

I really enjoyed both The Artist and Hugo when I saw them, but neither were "best picture" kind of movies for me. And I really don't think The Artist would have gotten so much attention without the campaigning by the Weinsteins. I caught part of The Independent Spirit Awards on Saturday night and The Artist swept those too, so the Oscars felt like a re-run.

Hugo swept all the more arty and tech awards. That film for me was interesting in that it was the best use of 3-D that I've seen (maybe including Avatar?) and it was truly beautiful to watch... But the story didn't work for me. It wasn't tight enough. It didn't know whether it was a story about a kid or a story about an old man or a documentary on silent films. The last third or so of that movie seemed like Scorsese's self-indulgence. Him caring more about his interests than caring about the audience or about telling a good story...

And if we're only judging based on whether a movie was beautiful to watch, I'd vote for The Tree of Life, which was thought provoking as well as mesmerizingly beautiful to watch. But whatever. That film was never going to win. Too weird and not enough people saw it.

I think for me, some of my favorite movies this year weren't even nominated... Drive, Melancholia, Martha Marcy Mae Marlene... Hmmm... What else did I love? I need to start blogging about movies again so I don't forget.

Onto The Artist. I loved this movie when I saw it. Truly delightful. But I saw it before all the award season buzz and so didn't really think about it critically and went in with low expectations. But I did enjoy my time in the theatre and fell in love with that little dog. :)

I think ultimately it was the lack of surprises that bothered me about the Oscars. The only possible "upset" was Jean Dejardins winning over Clooney, but since it was clear by that point that The Artist was going to sweep all the major awards, it didn't feel like an upset. A brief aside... I did love how the director of that movie spoke about his wife and the female star during his acceptance speech. Especially since she was kind of passed over in favor of Dejardins in all the awards for no reason that makes any sense to me... Not that I would have put her in the same league with the performances in the best actress category... (Streep, Close, Williams, Davies, Mara) but sitting side-by-side, I don't see why Dejardins' performance was acknowledged and not hers...

Anyway...

I did love seeing Christopher Plummer win an Oscar. (Go Canada) Cirque du Soleil is always impressive. (Go Canada again.)  Meryl Streep was so humble and gracious. And Octavia Spencer was thrilled to tears and so sweet. And I loved the Scorsese drinking game joke... (I want to be best friends with those women.) And I was moderately amused by Ben Stiller being the straight guy to Emma Stone. (That was fearless on her part. Not sure how well it went over but -- fearless!)

But other than that, I was kinda bored.

Roller Coaster Week

No one ever said publishing was for the faint of heart but boy, some weeks can be crazier than others. The highs! The lows...

Do you want the good news first or the bad? I'll start with bad...

Those of you who follow publishing news will no doubt have read that the big chain book stores in North America recently announced that they will no longer carry books produced by Amazon Publishing in their physical stores. That means they won't carry some upcoming celebrity memoirs, James Franco's new novel, Deepak Chopra's new book, #1 NYT Bestselling non-fiction author Tim Ferriss's new books... or my upcoming YA trilogy, Deviants.

Some will say that it serves Amazon right. That a retailer has no business being a publisher. Or that their business tactics of late have been bullying. While I agree that Amazon has been throwing its considerable weight around, I do think some of the reactions have been at tad hypocritical. Certainly some of the vitriol I've read in the blogosphere has been.

It's amusing how short people's memories seem to be about who's David and who's Goliath in the publishing business. It wasn't long ago that everyone in the industry was accusing the big chain stores, which many are now rallying behind, of being bullies with unreasonable demands about discounts and returns that publishers claimed would put them out of business. And everyone was up in arms about how the chains were putting the indie book stores out of business.

Let's fact it... it wasn't long ago that the publishing industry was excited about the little tech company from Seattle who was giving the industry another way to get books into the hands of readers.

(And I won't even talk about the fact that Amazon sells the books published by B&N's publisher--Sterling Books--or that B&N also has exclusive titles and editions.)

The monopoly accusations made by some authors make me shake my head too. It's been a few years since I studied economics but if memory serves, what Amazon is doing is called vertical integration, different from a monopoly, and since B&N is pretty much the only game in town in terms of physical book stores now (along with Indigo Books in Canada) who has the monopoly? What it seems to me is going on now, is that for decades the publishing industry has been an oligopoly (a few entities dominating an industry) and Amazon is daring to threaten that oligopoly, to change industry practices, and take a bigger piece of the market.

Sigh...

I love book stores. Big chain ones with their variety and coffee shops. Indies with their customer service and ambiance. And when my first books came out last year it was a thrill to see them on bookstore shelves. I do not want to see book stores go under. But who's going to be hurt by this move the brick and mortar stores are making? For the most part, it won't be Amazon--they've got deep pockets--it will be their authors. Sure, if this move keeps more big-name authors from moving away from the Big Six to Amazon Publishing the strategy might hurt Amazon too but if the dominating  brick & mortar retail chain is refusing to carry a publisher's books out-of-hand, regardless of each book's merit or commercial appeal, who is being the bully?

Putting my business-cap on, I think what it boils down to is that while any retailer has the right to choose what merchandise it wants to carry, and I get why they might not like the taste or feel of selling their competitors products, I don't understand why a retailer would want to force customers to go to their competitor to buy that product. A fan of Tim Ferriss, for example, who may have never bought anything at Amazon before, may now become their regular customer, if it's the only place he/she can find Ferriss's new book. If that customer has a positive shopping experience, well, that customer may decide to mostly shop at Amazon in the future.

Are bookstores simply trying to push Amazon into making their e-book titles available in Nook and Kobo formats? If so, I hope the gambit pays off because I'd like my books to be available to as many readers as possible in whatever format they prefer.

In my hopes and dreams, Amazon will make their books available across all digital platforms and the brick and mortar stores will reverse their decisions.


Whether any of these companies are acting out of smart business decisions or fear or spite, I feel like my getting into the debate risks drawing attention to what feels like pettiness--mud slinging and sandbox fights--and I like to stay out of that kind of thing when I can. But at the same time, as a newly contracted Amazon Publishing author, I couldn't keep silent. I figured friends and readers would be wondering how I feel about the whole thing.

And how do I feel? Like a kid whose parents are fighting. I just want them to stop.

From an author's perspective, it sucks to hear that your books will not be in these big chain stores, and sucks even more to have that decision be based, not on your books' merit or commercial appeal but on who published them. (Yes, I know that authors with smaller publishers and self-published titles have been suffering this for years but those reasons made sense to me as they were about distribution logistics and return issues...)

Last week an editor of a book review site, Book Riot, described a dilemma she faced when she was about to give a book she'd loved a positive review--before realizing the book was from the Amazon Publishing ecosystem. Her post is interesting. She made me feel better and worse all at once... I knew having reviewers refuse to read my books, or be predisposed to hate them, and not having the books stocked in some brick and mortar stores were risks I was taking when I chose Amazon as my publisher. (Yes, they chose me but I also chose them).

I went into this with my eyes (mostly) open. And no matter who your publisher is, there's never any certainty that the big chains or indies will carry your books. No guarantee you'll get reviews, negative or positive. I knew there would be pros and cons to choosing Amazon as a publisher, and I still hope the benefits of my choosing Amazon Publishing will outweigh this newly revealed downside--they are, after all, good at getting books in front of the right readers--but it's impossible to even guess at this point. Time will tell. Right now, hearing this news simply sucks.

Did you forget I promised you good news, too?

The same week these worrying press releases came out, I also got some fantastic news!!!

I got a fabulous quote for Deviants from a #1 NYT Bestselling author! Woo hoo!

Quote to be revealed at a future date when I feel more like celebrating. :)

SCBWI vs. RWA Cage Match

What are the similarities and differences between these two writers' organizations' big national conferences?

I discuss today over at my group blog Drunk Writer Talk.

(Aside) The first manuscript I ever wrote was a romance, as was the second, which I abandoned before revising, having decided that romance wasn't my genre. And while I made that decision back in 2003, I've remained a member of RWA because I love the organization and the friends I've made there.

Now I have a new love... SCBWI. (end of aside)

In my post, I compare the two conferences.

Another difference I thought of after I posted is: free books.

At RWA's National conference you end up with at least 10 free books without even trying (you get them when you register and at each keynote) and by trying you can end up with boxes and boxes and boxes of free books. The big six (and smaller) publishers all host free book signings for their authors. Also the publishers give away at least one title (usually more than one book) for each all of the keynote speakers. (The books are on your chair when you go into the room.)

RWA also has a HUGE author signing open to the general public, where the books are donated by the publishers, and any published member attending the conference can sign. It's HUGE. Hundreds and hundreds of authors signing. And last summer, when it was held at the Marriott in Times Square, the line started hours in advance, trailed through the entire hotel, snaked around the driveway and down the street. It was my first time signing, with Cinderella: Ninja Warrior and Sleeping Beauty: Vampire Slayer, and I have to say it was quite a thrill. Quite a few of the younger teens who came up to ask me to sign books had clearly been given lists of authors they were allowed to talk to/buy from by their mothers. :) Not surprising given the range of authors signing, from well, me (with a young-skewing YA) to full-on erotica novels.

If my comparison had been scoring based on getting books, or opportunities for published authors to get their books into the hands of readers, RWA would win hands down. But from my perspective as an author and conference attendee, I'm not sure I could pick a clear winner.

While I love the free books I get at RWA... I often end up donating them to a library or hospital, or giving them away to friends, and I kind of liked not needing another suitcase to go home. :)

RWA Home Page

SCBWI Home Page

SCBWI Visual Highlights

SCBWI is the Society of Children's Books Writers and Illustrators. Try saying that three times fast. Or three times slowly for that matter. ;)

I've been to quite a few writers' conferences over the years, but this was my first SCBWI, and I had a fabulous and productive time.

I nearly filled a whole notebook with madly scribbled notes. The full day "intensive" on Marketing for Professional Writers was unbelievably overwhelming. My head was ready to explode by lunch. And that day ended with drinks with my agent and the impressive and witty Jon Fine from Amazon Publishing. Now it's time to sit back and prioritize. :)

For now, here are some of the fun highlights -- just the ones for which I have photographic evidence. :)

Here is the fabulous Mahtab Narsiman, moi and multi-talented Debbie Ridpath Ohi.

Photo taken by Debbie (on the right), also known as @inkyelbows

All of the speakers at this conference were unbelievably high quality, but one fun unscheduled treat was a short presentation by Henry Winkler who writes middle grade novels with SCBWI founder Lin Oliver.

Here's bad and fuzzy photo I obnoxiously took of him when I accidentally ended up standing beside him waiting for the elevator. I should have said hello and asked permission, but didn't want to pass up on the opportunity. My apologies to Henry. :)

After the conference, I did a little chill-axing at the MOMA before taking the train to Newark airport for my flight home. Didn't have nearly as much time there as I would have liked, but stopped for the best cup of hot chocolate I've ever had.

What you can't tell from this photo, was that it was hot in two ways... and spiked. I can't remember all the ingredients but the key ones (beyond hot chocolate) were tequila, chilli flakes and cinnamon. Yum. That's a stick of cinnamon sticking out. Talk about spicy. Burned going down, in many good ways. :)

I will talk more about the content of the conference both here and at Drunk Writer Talk soon.

My Book Deal!

This news has already been disseminated on some (most?) of my writers' loops and on Twitter and Facebook but for some bizarre reason I failed to blog about it.

I really have become a slacker blogger. I will get back to it. I will.

But for now.... For those of you who haven't heard...

I signed a three book deal with Amazon Publishing! (Imprint and details to be revealed at a later date.) And for those of you who don't read the publishing press... Yes, Amazon is now a publisher. And no, this isn't anything to do with their self-publishing. And yes, the books will be in both print and e-book form.

The deal is for a YA trilogy, that can best be described as a sci-fi thriller. Think Divergent (although that book didn't come out until after I wrote mine, so I definitely wasn't thinking Divergent... but if you liked Divergent, I think you'll like my new trilogy.)

Book one is called Deviant and will likely be released in the early fall of 2012. Books two and three are tentatively titled Shredder and Chosen.

The trilogy is set in a post-apocalyptic world and the heroine is a 16 year old girl who can kill with her eyes.

Here are a couple of tweets by my fabulous agent, Charlie Olsen, sent the day I could finally spill the beans. (I had to sit on the news for MONTHS.)

"Head-bursting action, dark post-apocalyptic world building, lip-biting sexual tension...Deviant's got it all!"

"#FF Hey. You.Yes, you! C'mere. You like action, yes? Romance? Scab-covered mutants that kill humans for fun? Follow @MaureenMcGowan"

Too bad he can't give me a cover quote!

Melancholia -- Oddly Beautiful

I will get to some slightly more accessible movies, I promise, but I wanted to say a few things about Lars Von Trier's Melancholia.

First, I've been a fan of Danish director Von Trier since Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark and Dogtown. I also saw a very bizarre documentary about him and one of his mentors at the festival one year. I wish I could remember the name of it, but I suppose it would be hard for people to find anyway.

He is one strange dude. But strange in a fascinating if unlikeable way. And his movies are often kind of like that, too. Strange and somewhat unlikeable. He definitely has a point of view and isn't afraid to express it. (Even to the point of that horrible quote he said at a press conference in Cannes this year that got him kicked out.)

But even given that the movie's strange and unlikeable, I really enjoyed Melancholia. It's about the end of the world and two sisters, one of whom is very seriously depressed. To the point she spends a good chunk of her lavish wedding reception hiding out in the bathtub. (and she married Eric from True Blood--that she wasn't joyous enough about that to get through her reception is proof enough of her serious mental illness. ;)

The depressed sister is played by Kirsten Dunst and I liked her in this more than I've liked her in anything since Interview With a Vampire--when she was about twelve. I really believed her character. Hard to play someone that severely depressed and not make it one note. Her sister is played by Charlotte Gainsbourg who is always fascinating in films. I find her real life, or the idea of it, fascinating enough, as she's the child of French singer/songwriter/icon Serge Gainsbourg and the sixties fashion icon Jane Birkin (yes, the Birkin bag was named after her mom.) Kiefer Sutherland plays her brother in law. And both Alexander and Stellan Skarsgaard are in it, playing father and son, in fact.

Anyway... the film is very surreal and has two parts. The first is essentially from the Kirsten Dunst character's POV and covers the night of her wedding reception. (The first five minutes at least are a scene of a long limo doing endless tiny adjustments trying to get around corners on a steep narrow road to take them to their reception. Symbolism...) The 2nd part is from the Charlotte Gainsbourg character's POV, but it's not quite that clean cut. The first part shows the disastrous wedding reception where the bride is an unbelievable mess. And that night they all spot a strange star in the sky no one's seen before.

Turns out it's not a star, but a planet that was previously undiscovered because it was hiding behind the sun. Don't quibble about the science. You kind of just have to go with it. Point is, this planet is moving toward the earth and may or may not destroy the world if it gets too close as it passes or actually hits. The second part is about the characters preparing for this disaster/possible doomsday.

The irony here, or von Trier's "message" is that the one who was already clinically depressed is the one who deals with this impending doom the best. And the cheeriest, most "together" character (Kiefer Sutherland's character who is the very wealthy husband of the Gainsbourg character) is the one who handles it the worst.

Since I think it's fair to assume that Mr. von Trier has struggled with a few mental illnesses himself, it's not hard to get his point here... Maybe the mentally ill among us are actually the most sane.

If you hate surrealism, or strange movies, and didn't like, for example, The Tree of Life, then you probably shouldn't see this one. But it's beautiful to look at, seriously beautiful, (the first ten or so minutes have no dialogue and are just a series of very surreal images), and the performances are astoundingly good (Dunst won best actress at Cannes or maybe Venice... or maybe both) so if this description hasn't turned you off.... go see it. And keep an open mind. :)

Another Olsen Kid -- Who Knew?

I hereby vow **holds hand up** that I will blog at least once a week, more often if I can, until I've covered more of my TIFF films.

I thought I should start with some of the ones that have already hit theatres...

One I really liked:  Martha Marcy May Marlene. (It's easier to remember the title and order of the names after seeing the film...)

This is not an "easy" film but I was completely enthralled and mostly because of the performance by its lead, Elizabeth Olsen, pictured here with Sarah Paulson who's always interesting to watch.

I didn't know until after seeing the film that the actress was the younger sister of the Olsen twins and I'm glad I didn't know, because I might have been distracted thinking about it. But maybe not. She was pretty remarkable in a not very easy part. Time will tell whether or not her performance in her debut movie was fluke but I'm guessing not.

The real challenge of this part is that she has to play this young woman in several different states of mind. One is a lost teen searching for approval and a place in the world. One is a happy, eager new member of a cult, thinking she's finally found acceptance and love. One an obedient soldier in the cult, broken but steadfast. One a desperate escapee on the run. And finally a girl trying to adapt to the real world again and figuring out how to live with her sister and brother in law.

The timelines interweave. If memory serves (this is the problem with blogging more than 2 months later) we first see the escapee version of her character, then the girl trying to cope, then we flash back to when she first met the cult members etc. The tension continues to build as we see more and more of what this girl went through and understand why she's so messed up and acting in such a bizarre manner in the present.

The cult leader is played by John Hawkes from Deadwood and Winter's Bone. He was also fabulous in this. When I was a teen everyone was talking about cults... Maybe because the idealism in the 1970's and the disillusionment with "society" (remember antidisestablishmentarianism?) led more young people toward cults... But this film reminded me why being brainwashed haunted my twelve year old nightmares.

The ending of this movie will likely tick some viewers off. I saw it with a festival audience and even then a few people shouted at the screen at the very abrupt ending. But those people might not have been angry... more startled. That's all I'm going to say, except that with hindsight it was the perfect ending. The only other way they could have gone would be to add a big third act climax with a Hollywood ending... (think the hilarious last act of Adaptation after Charlie Kaufman goes to Robert McKee's Story seminar) but it's just not that kind of film. And we've seen enough at that point to deduce what's about to happen after the projector shuts off.

If you have any tolerance for "art films" this is one you should see. I think Elizabeth Olsen might end up nominated for some awards and might just be a new rising star who will make people think of Kate and Ashley as Elizabeth Olsen's older sisters rather than the other way around.

Ides of March

Dang, I am a bad blogger. I promised I'd get around to talking about some of the other TIFF films I saw last weekend. My how time flies.

While I haven't found time to blog in the past 10 days, I did manage to see three movies ;) . All films that were at TIFF, but I didn't pick to see there (mostly because I knew they were coming out right after the festival.) I think all three of the fest movies I saw post-fest were great: Drive, 50/50 and Moneyball. If I had to pick a favorite, I'd have to go with 50/50, (because it's the easiest to "like"), but if I had to pick the one I thought was "best" I'd go with Drive.

But back to The Ides of March.

This is a political film starring George Clooney and Ryan Gosling (sounds great, right?) and co-starring Paul Giamatti and Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Marisa Tomei and Evan Rachel Wood (sounds even better, right?). I mean stellar cast, stellar performances, interesting topic... It should have been a home run (to use a metaphor more suited to Moneyball).

But it wasn't home run for me. Don't get me wrong, it was very good. But I wanted to be blown away and I wasn't. I keep trying to put my finger on why.... I think it's because there's really nothing new or groundbreaking about this story. Call me cynical but it's not news to me that otherwise good people with strong values and ideals can do unethical and immoral things in pursuit of power. And in this case in order to get the democratic nomination for the US Presidency.

I feel as if Primary Colors already covered that ground and while this movie is more serious and dare-I-say smarter than Primary Colors, I'm not sure it was as entertaining.

I'm not saying don't go see it -- especially if you're a fan of either Clooney or Gosling -- but don't get your hopes up as high as mine were, because super-high expectations are hard to live up to. :)

Drive and 50/50, on the other hand, both lived up to my expectations. But I'll talk about those soon. :) I promise this time.

The Ones Coming Out Soon

After promising to post some reviews, I guess I should follow through. I've hit that evil just past the middle place in my current WIP and I've been spending a lot of time banging my head against the keyboard and haven't felt much like blogging.

But here's my take on a couple of films that are out or will be out soon.

Restless

I actually already talked about this one here.  According to imdb.com it was released in the US on September 16th. I don't think it's showing up here in Canada.

I give this a "maybe worth a rental" rating. I love Mia Wasikowska--think she's incredibly talented--but the screenplay didn't live up to her performance for me.


Anonymous

This was the one "second choice" I got this year. I'd chosen A Dangerous Method (which doesn't open until December) but wasn't that disappointed to get this screening instead. Both screenings were "day after the gala" showings so it's not like there was any red carpet action going on anyway.

This one releases Oct 28th, and if you haven't already seen the trailer (they've been showing it for MONTHS already) it's set in Elizabethan times (not QE2) and posits another theory for who actually wrote Shakespeare's plays, plus some interesting theories about the rightful heir to Elizabeth's throne.

At least this theory was a new one to me, although I certainly don't pretend to be all that informed about Shakespeare theories. I was definitely aware of the theories that Will could not have been the true author, since there's no historical evidence he was educated, never mind being able to write. The Shakespeare character in this movie (a minor role) was very funny and I enjoyed him a lot. I also like the young Earl of Oxford, played by Jamie Campbell Bower, who plays Arthur in the TV series Camelot. But I'm not certain I really bought Rhys Ifans (photo above) as his older self. I didn't immeditately recognize Ifans, so I don't think I was affected by other goofier parts he's played, but I just didn't buy him as a leading man. I honestly thought he was the villain in the first few scenes he was in and it took me a while to figure out who was who and what was going on. My overall reaction might have been different if I'd seen him differently from the start. (One reason to see again is to see if the screenwriter or actor or director missed an opportunity to make me like/identify with the protagonist...) I think the problem is that they make you think that Ben Jonson is the main character, but he's really not....

Talking about Ifans not really working for me and my issues with identifying a main character probably leads me to my overall reaction to this movie which is:  I'm not sure... I think I'm going to see it again when it comes out. My biggest problem had nothing to do with the movie (I don't think) but to do with the couple who were sharing my row near the front right side of the Elgin and destroying my concentration. Both of them had their phones out through the movie, frequently flashing in my eyes, in spite of my telling them to shut up and turn off their phones a number of times. People have suggested I should have called an usher (or one of the big burly men with night vision glasses) but I figured that would just cause more disruption for other people, and I'm not sure if the the big burly men care about phones shining in people's eyes as long as you're not filming.... Generally festival goers are better behaved than this pair, but it was a weekend screening and I don't think they were true "festival goers" if you know what I mean.

Anyway, it was brilliant to cast mother/daughter acting team of Vanessa Redgrave and Joely Richardson as the younger and older versions of Queen Elizabeth I and the obvious age difference between Richardson and Bower (who plays the young version of Oxford) made one major plot twist even more deliciously creepy.

I think this one is worth seeing on the big screen--it's beautiful if nothing else. Full of interesting conspiracy theories about an fascinating historical time. And like I said, I plan to see it a second time. But it didn't blow me away as much as I'd hoped.

Will post my review of The Ides of March some time over the weekend. :)

TIFF 11 Review

I am going to start posting reviews of all or most of the 32 films I saw... but for now, I thought I'd post an overall review of this year's festival. I know. Exciting, right?

Weather:  A

This is more important than you might think. The weather wasn't absolutely prefect, but while it was kind of hot and humid near the beginning (if you got stuck in a line in direct sunlight) and kind of nippy later in the week (waiting in a line at night), it didn't rain! (more than sprinkles) and was overall neither too hot nor too cold. Yay. With all the waiting in lines involved in the festival, this is key. A few of the days were downright gorgeous early fall days.

Ease of Festivalling:  B-

Yes, I made up a new verb. Sue me. I decided to fork out the big bucks to be a contributing member this year. While this didn't mean I got all my picks, I did get 29 out of 30.  The only one I didn't get was A Dangerous Method (got Anonymous instead) and based on what I've heard people say... it wasn't that great, anyway. Or at least not as great as everyone expected with the Fassbender, Mortensen, Cronenberg combination. Although rating on imdb is quite good I see...

All of my trips down to the box office went smoothly -- picking up book, dropping off picks, picking up tickets, buying a few single tickets, exchanging a ticket... That members and donors line is AWESOME.
On the other hand, I was annoyed that there were even more premium screenings this year. It was hard to pick films to see in the evenings the first weekend because so many of them were off limits for picks with passes and coupons. I think the festival should add some kind of pass or coupon booklet where you can pre-select a certain number of premium films... I don't like buying a Gala pass (hate seeing movies at Roy Thompson Hall) and found the Visa Screening Room disappointing, too, because you end up with no choice... But why not a 10 coupon book or 5 coupon book for premium screenings... In my perfect festival world, I'd have a 30 film pass where I could pick up to 5-10 premium screenings within my 30.

Health:  B+

Okay, this is a pretty personal one, but also important. Back when I used to buy a 50 Film pass, I got a cold every year. I haven't become ill the last couple of years because a) I no longer try to go to 9:00 am screenings. That's just crazy. And b) I make sure I eat better than I used to and drink lots of water. But this year I got a monster zit on my nose, the likes of which I've never seen before... So not an A worthy health year. :)

Line Buzz: C

I noticed that now that everyone has a blackberry or iphone in line, no one talks anymore. Nor are they as likely to chatter with seatmates once seated in the theatre. I miss that. Although I do admit to checking my e-mail and reading on my kindle in lines and in my seat while waiting for screenings, too. Next year I vow to talk to more people (assuming I go again). I've met so many cool people at TIFF over the years and missed that this year. It's fun to hear what everyone else loved and compare notes on films you saw in common. Plus, I get kind of strange when I go 10 days without much human interaction. Scary really. And the big zit didn't help.

Overall Experience:  C+

The festival just isn't as exciting as it used to be. Maybe I'm getting jaded, but I think it has to do with the fact I couldn't pick any of the premium screenings and most of the "red carpet" events were deemed premium. Also, I somehow picked quite a few films this year that didn't have a Q&A, even though it was a first screening... and didn't have any of those great surprises when the director or actors show up at a next day screening. I miss that.

Films: B-

I will talk about each film later, but basically I didn't have many that totally blew me away. :( And talking to the few people I did talk to in lines (and eavesdropping) most people felt the same way. That it was kind of a m'eh year for films. Maybe that's why the People's Choice was a Lebanese musical... Although I do hope winning that award will mean the film gets a general release. I don't remember a time when the TIFF People's Choice award didn't go on to be a box office success...

More later. :)

A Great TIFF Day

So, I'm a little too bagged to blog properly... I will get caught up and talk about this year's films properly, but I did have a really great day today. It was a five ticket day. I can't say five film day, because one of them was a "Maverick" talk, not a film, but we did see a film clip as part of it...

My day started with Rampart, starring Woody Harrelson. I will post more about this film... Overall: great performances, interesting, too long. At least that's what I think was "wrong" with it for me.

Then I went to a talk between Indian-born, Canadian filmmaker, Deepa Mehta and Salman Rushdie. She is currently making a movie of his book Midnight's Children that will be out in October 2012. It was a pretty cool talk. I haven't read the book, but the talk made me really want to see the movie and tackle the book, too. Sounds like my cup of tea... No pun intended. Seriously. I did not intend that almost pun.

Then I saw a screening of Anonymous. Very good. I think I'll see this movie again when it comes out (soon). I was distracted by very annoying people sitting next to me who when they weren't talking to each other, one or the other of them had their phone out. That kind of behaviour is rare at TIFF and I wanted to kill them. But LOVED the film's theory on Shakespeare. Loved it.

Then came Pariah, which I understand was one of the darlings of Sundance last winter. And often those films don't do as well with a "real" audience vs. the industry audience at Sundance, but I loved it. I'll talk about this one later, too... But I was riveted. Touching coming of age story at its core. Stunning performance by the lead.

Then my last film of the day was Martha Marcy May Marlene. VERY interesting and tense. Loved it. Again, a stunning performance by the young lead (who happens to have very famous older twin sisters... named Olsen...) A non-hollywood ending that will make some people crazy (a few people swore aloud) and had me sitting stunned through the credits while the theatre cleared out. I have a new theory about the ending... Now can't wait for someone else to see it so I can discuss. :)

Sorry for the very vague references and incomplete reviews. I promise I will talk more about these films and post some pictures as soon as I get some sleep!

And it Begins

The 36th annual Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) opened yesterday, so my life for the next 10 days is gone. I have some time today and a bit later in the week where I gave myself a break, (theoretically to write. Ha!), but I'm seeing at least 33 films at this point.

Yesterday, the TIFF was all about U2, with the premiere of the documentary From the Sky Down, but alas, not for me.

That was a "premium" screening, so I couldn't select it with my 30 film pass and frankly I think that film is likely one of the main reasons it was next to impossible to get through on the web or the phone to get single tickets when they went on sale last Saturday.

But, I did have a good first night.

My first film was also a documentary, Into the Abyss by Werner Herzog. He got a (very long) standing ovation when he came on stage just to introduce the film, which shows how well he's respected. Interestingly, there was no standing ovation at the end. I did like the film -- actually, like might not be the right word. It's a hard film to "like". If you want to see an "easier" Herzog film that's playing around still I think, go see Cave of Forgotten Dreams. Mesmerizing.

The subject of Into the Abyss is a very young man who was executed in Texas last year for murders he committed when he was only 18. It's hard to like anyone in this film, and Herzog to his credit does not try to manipulate the audience opinions. Clearly Herzog himself is anti-death penalty, but he doesn't ask leading questions or try to tug at heart strings and gives the daughter and sister of two of the victims a lot of time on screen. And while I didn't like her, either... she's one of the most sympathetic people he interviews. Herzog also dedicated the film to her and all victims of violent crime.

The part of this film that will stay for me for a long time is the realization that this laughing, goofy, immature, uneducated, probably lower-than-average IQ kid we saw interviewed is now dead. Killed by lethal injection 8 days after the interview. And there's no question he was guilty of the crimes. But he was a human being and I suppose more than anything the film showed that he was human, not a monster. Herzog said that after: his crimes were monstrous. He wasn't.

It's probably clear by now that I'm against the death penalty, too and I try to keep this blog away from political or controversial issues, so I'll shut up now and talk about the next film. :)

I also saw the new Gus Van Sant film Restless last night. I'm slightly on the fence about this one, too. It's a more commercial film than a lot of his movies about teens, but I almost found it too commercial or too pat. I might have been influenced by a negative review I read in NOW magazine right before the movie started, but I think my beefs were slightly different than the reviewer's.

The film stars the fabulous Mia Wasikowska which is why I picked it. She really is such a fabulous young actress and she's very good in this. The male lead is the screen debut of Henry Hopper, who happens to be Dennis Hopper's son and for me, he was slightly less than fabulous. I don't know. I had trouble believing a few things he did/said. But generally the performances are very good and it had a very natural, voyeuristic feel. 

My issue was the screenplay which I thought was a tad unsubtle. I don't know. As I try to describe it, it all sounds kind of clever and tight... And this is (slightly) spoilerish... A boy trying to get over the deaths of his parents imagines that he's friends with a dead WWII kamikazi pilot and falls in love with a terminally ill girl. 


The non-cliche, best part of the story is that it's a really sweet romance. It's clear these two kids are made for each other in a way you rarely see in films. You rarely see two characters who so completely get each other and it's tragic watching them fall in love when you know it will end so soon.  I don't know. Maybe I liked it more on reflection. :)


I did wonder as I was watching, "How did the screenwriter get this made? It doesn't seem all that special. And how did he possibly get Gus Van Sant to direct?" Then it all became clear in the Q&A. The screenwriter is a long-time friend of Bryce Dallas Howard... Who produced the film, with the help of her father (Ron Howard) and father's best friend (Brian Grazer). Hmmm.. That's an idea if I want a screenplay made. I need to make friends with the kids of huge Hollywood producers. Must get on that. :) 


But to the writer's credit... I did really believe the relationship between these kids and that can't have been just the actors and the director. 

Here are some snaps taken last night.  The dude in the green pants is the writer and just look how pregnant Bryce Dallas Howard is! I had no idea

Fright Night -- UF or Horror?

I posted a review of sorts for Fright Night over at Drunk Writer Talk.

In a nutshell. Loved it. In the review I called it a horror movie... but now that we have the genre of Urban Fantasy in fiction, I'm wondering where the genre line lies in movies...

If you've seen Fright Night, is it horror or Urban Fantasy?

Do you think there are true Urban Fantasy movies?

My Zombie Apocalypse Team

There's a meme going around on Facebook right now where you go to your profile and form your Zombie Apocalypse Team from the first seven people listed on your friend list (FB randomly changes this list all the time...)

Mine was just too awesome not to share and comment on, and I couldn't get it all in the 500 characters you're allowed in a FB status update. :)

My Zombie Apocalypse Team:

Sidekick: Lisa McMann (HOW AWESOME IS THAT?? Lisa is the sidekick of my wildest dreams. I'd be lucky to be her sidekick. :)

Heavy Weapons: Amanda Coppedge Bosky (AWESOME! She knows about zombies. I've seen her reading the manual! For real! I'm Golden!!!)

The Idiot Who Survives: Kaylin McFarren (She's a tough cookie. And so not an idiot. Glad you survive, Kaylin. :)

Sniper: Kristen Millar (I'm glad I got at least one family member on my team. And my cousin's got good aim, I'll bet. :)

The One Who Loses It: Christine Enta (Oh, this is funny. Sorry Christine. But a chick lit writer is the one who loses it??? Oh, the stereotyping.)

The Brains: Loreth Anne White (and it gets better and better. Loreth writes suspense! LOVE my team. Loreth definitely has the knowledge and brains to save us! YAY!)

First To Die: Megan Crewe (Oh, no!!!!! Megan, I'm sure you'll die saving the rest of my awesome Zombie Apocalypse Team. :)


My Zombie Apocalypse Team rocks! We are going to kick a lot of zombie ass!

Book Giveaway!

Check out the review for Cinderella: Ninja Warrior on Brittany Rochelle's blog The Write Stuff.

And... there's a chance to win one of my books!



 

Good luck! :)

Interviewed at The Write Stuff

I have been such a bad blogger **flogs self**.

Today I was interviewed at The Write Stuff by the lovely Brittany Rochelle whom I was introduced to by good writer-friend Marilyn Brant.  Brittany asked some great questions, and I'm particularly happy with this interview, which I did back in June. I do believe I answered her questions while I was preparing my workshop for the RWA National conference in New York and the interview includes some good (if I do say so myself) advice for aspiring authors.

Check it out if you have a chance. Interview here.

Tomorrow (July 19) she's posting her review and hosting a giveaway.

How's everyone's summer going? Hot enough for you? ;)