Pixar, right? They make good movies that are affecting and also make sense. Sort of a rare thing now.
Anyway, Pixar story artist Emma Coats has been basic story “rules”.
Now, I’ve mentioned before that there is really only one rule: Be interesting. However! Her advice is pretty good. I especially like #6 and #15, and I’ve recommended people do #10, #12, and #20 already. I should probably be better about #2 and #5.
But it’s good stuff.
Here’s an idea I didn’t really consider when I read and reviewed The Eye of the World: that it’s a meta-fictional take on the fantasy genre.
Aidan Moher linked to my writeup on Reddit and let’s just say the reception wasn’t warm. That’s cool by me; I’m not all that concerned with having everyone agree with me. And while some of the reactions were dumb…
Meta-fiction? Or is that being a savvy munchkin about the rules of your own setting? Or something else?
Obviously I haven’t read the whole series but I’m sure some of you have. What do you think? Comments on the blog are turned off due to spam, but you can reply by tweet, on Facebook, or join the conversations on LiveJournal.
1) Amazon changing its sales ranking algorithms again?
2) Why movies have so many explosions in them, in graph form.
3) This is an animal, not a monster.
4) Proof that anything is more dramatic with a movie soundtrack: Slinky on a treadmill. Video.
5) How fast food serving sizes have grown out of control, in infographic form.
6) 102 Awful Celebrity Portraits, Drawn By Their Fans.
7) Film producer Keith Calder on Scientology and what it feels like to finally stop biting your nails.
Bonus item: “What does Satanism mean to you?” Video
I started The Eye of the World weeks ago, but only just finished it this weekend. A lot of people love it, I know, but to be honest I found it a bit of a slog. However! I am keenly aware that it was incredibly popular at the time of its original release (1990) and continues to be so today after the author’s death.
It’s one of those series people complain about all the time; that’s a sure sign of success. But why was it a success?
I want to talk about what I liked, what I disliked, and what qualities it has that I believe made it popular.
ObDisclaimer: Saying: “These are the qualities that made this book a best-seller” is not the same as saying: “These are the only qualities that make a best-seller.” This may seem obvious, but this is the internet. What interests me here is the way this book is similar to mainstream bestsellers by people like Patterson, Koontz, etc.
Spoilers, obviously. Continue reading
The column rode out of the city, armor gleaming, lances high, banners snapping in the wind. An old tinker, resting on a stump at the side of the road, called out: “Mean you to ride to the Mountains of Dhoom?”
“We do! We should arrive there just as the leaves turn. We’re going to tap those kegs, do a little fishing… you know, guy time.”
Honest to God, I do not want to see something like “The Mountains of Dhoom” written on a fantasy map unless the protagonist has a time-share there, and they love to ride paddle boats on Lake Dheath and plan to take their toddler to pick wildflowers on Dhestruction Meadow.
Eye of the World is an old book, I know, and I’m sure these jokes have all been told before, but as dull as this thing is, “Dhoom” hit me pretty hard. I took it as a personal insult.
Anyway, I’m nearly finished with it and plan to write up a post about why I suspect it was so popular. Soonish.
In other news, I’m writing this Thursday night and setting it to publish Friday am. I’ll be off the web pretty much all day, this being my wife’s birthday and all. I’ll be making meals, cleaning up, and generally making things easy on her today, and that means I won’t have much time for posting and tweeting. See you Saturday.
