Why the Avengers needs work and how us writers can learn from it

Okay, ranting because I went to the drive-ins last night, and can't believe how monumentally let down I was by The Avengers. First, let me say I saw and loved Thor. I saw and loved both Iron Man movies, and am a Robert Downey, jr. fan. I didn't see Captain America, and couldn't stand the idea of watching the second Hulk after the first pukefest called a movie. I think Stan Lee could have drawn the Hulk and done a better job with the first one. But anyway, basically and so as not to give away any spoilers, this is what the plot boils down to:


Loki, a.k.a. God of Chaos and general ornery dude-- along with a lightning-style sword and what amounted to Alien-like cicadas riding on freaking in-flight humpback whales--versus The Avengers. The whole gang wants a certain cube that amounts to a lot of power for anyone on Earth who has it. More than half of the stinking picture was a collage of about 5-10 minute bits about every single Avengers character. For any of you who know the least bit about writing, you're currently laughing your ass off because two major writing "rules" have been broken right off the bat. Rule #1: No point of view character established. There was absolutely no one in particular to focus on so honestly, I didn't give a crap if all of them died. The writer could have been smart and taken Natasha or Hawkeye or, imo, Nick Fury as the point of view character, and given *extremely* tiny bits about the rest. After all of these movies, we really don't know all that much about Natasha, Hawkeye, Nick...and truthfully, we know about the same after the movie. Rule #1 rant done. Rule...okay, really it's more Guideline #2: Isolate your character for maximum tension. That is, don't have your character with the huge supergang who will easily defeat the little, wimpy enemy. Have one character against the world, so to speak. With a story like this, I could see how that might be hard. The problem I have is that through most of the movie, I'm freaking ROOTING for Loki because he's the one who stands against the world. He's the underdog. (And really, some wicked part of me will always root for Loki...and I'm not the only one.) While I can see how isolating so many characters might be tough, isolating the flipping ANTAGONIST makes no sense at all. So...if they weren't going to do that, then they could have chosen a character to focus on (note I said *focus* and not *entirely use*), given some vulnerability to create tension or even given some personal stake in the whole thing. Instead, there is no tension because there is no true *conflict.* Conflict in any well written story consists of conflicting emotions while some outward event is taking place. Sometimes, even the outward event doesn't matter, depending on the story. 


Iron Man's conflict: I'm a man of peace who finds out I'm in the business of war profiteering, so I must face or change who I am.


Iron Man 2's conflicts: Everybody is completely safe until I discover otherwise, and I have to save myself as well as the world.


Thor's conflict: Get my big huge weapon (hammer) back from a modern Midgard (Earth) while being a god who no one on Midgard believes is a god and also facing my own weakness.


There are internal and an external struggles in these stories that raise them above the usual shallow, mindless violence. (I also happen to like that Thor followed the Norse myth cycle fairly accurately as well...and the casting is quite good.) I realize they probably wanted to keep with Stan Lee's Avenger stories, and I know they kept to the cartoons well, but this movie left me feeling more than a little disappointed. Visually, it also had problems, being too dark for the screen in some places. There were some things I outright couldn't see. All this money spent and they couldn't jack up the lighting? And it wasn't just my blind self. My husband said the same.


However, it was a double feature. While there were some flaws, I liked John Carter waaaaay more than The Avengers. Also, I couldn't help but laugh after noticing *at the very end of the movie* that Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad, Malcolm in the Middle) played a general. I'm convinced Bryan Cranston is a chameleon, not an actor. Maybe I'm Bryan Cranston and I just don't know it yet....   


Anyway, it's not a popular sentiment, it seems, but skip The Avengers and go for John Carter.

Grammar Rant...Ellipses

Okay, it's been more than three days since my last grammar rant.  I think I'm entitled to a new one.  This one is all about...ellipsis.  If you don't know what ellipsis are, well, you just saw a set of them.  They are the little dot-dot-dots.  Here's a link for anyone who doesn't understand their usage: Grammar Girl--Ellipsis  This rant is about ellipses at the end of sentences.  It seems that every writer I've encountered lately doesn't understand that when an ellipses is at the end of a sentence, you still punctuate that sentence as you normally would.


That is, the three dots are the ellipses.  If a sentence ends in an ellipses that is a question, it would be marked ...?  Exclamation point ...!  Period .... 


To clarify, three dots and a question mark, three dots and an exclamation point, three dots and a period.

Surgery Block...F*CK&$% really?

Why do writers feel the need to beat themselves up about writer's block by comparing themselves to surgeons, carpenters, plumbers, etc.?  As if it doesn't feel bad enough, some of us are SICK of hearing writers who say stupid crap like, Does a surgeon get surgery block?  Does a plumber get plumber's block?

My answer is YES!  They do.  The very definition of writer's block is that you either feel unable to do your job for some reason or that you don't feel up to the task.  Often those two can overlap.  My question is: why do writers think that carpenters wouldn't have a bad day now and again?  That's all that is.  The day when you have to scrap some wood.  The day when you have to call in sick.  The day when you're just "off" for some reason.  Every occupation has days that are really humming and then crap days.  The truth of the matter is that since those occupations often have scheduled times and days in which "normal" people work, you have to work through those mental blocks by either taking a "mental health day" or just slogging through somehow. 

Why does this bug me?  Two reasons: 1. To deny something problematic means that you will never find the solution. 2. Missed opportunities to use writer's block to your benefit.  Writer's block can be a symptom of a very specific problem.  That is, the reason why a writer might feel inadequate is if s/he doesn't have the required information.  More research needed.  If you ignore writer's block, then how are you supposed to gain that information and thus write something of even higher quality?

If self-doubt is bugging you for no real reason, that's different.  But sometimes, there are real stumbling blocks that need to be dealt with and they very often fall under the category of "more information needed."  Maybe you need to learn something about writing plot, characters, pacing, setting, dialogue...or how to crochet (since your character knows how and you don't)...or a million other things, really.

If you need to dig yourself out of the self-doubt cycle, here's a favorite quote and I hope it helps you as much as it has me (or more):

...sometimes when I was starting a new story and I could not get it going, I would sit in front of the fire and squeeze the peel of the little oranges into the edge of the flame and watch the sputter of blue that they made.  I would stand and look out over the roofs of Paris and think, "Do not worry.  You have always written before and you will write now.  All you have to do is write one true sentence.  Write the truest sentence that you know."  So finally I would write one true sentence, and then go on from there.  It was easy then because there was always one true sentence that I knew or had seen or had heard someone say.  If I started to write elaborately, or like something introducing or presenting something, I found that I could cut that scrollwork or ornament out and throw it away and start with the first true simple declarative sentence I had written.

-Ernest Hemingway, A Moveable Feast

Chryse the Writer

Apparently, this is the unofficial pre-release of the story collection I'm part of: Playing with Fire 

Excerpted at the very end is the first chapter of my forthcoming science fiction novel as well.  Should anyone wish to review the story collection, email me at: chrysewymer@yahoo.com and I'll make sure you get the smashwords freebie code.  I've already spoken with our editor about the grammar mistake *right in the blurb* and I guess she can't fix it until something or other is finalized, so I'm glad it's the unofficial pre-release rather than the official release. 

For the Writers - Planetary Hours

For the writers here, the favorable planetary hours for writing is Mercury, and for literary pursuits, The Moon.  I know the Moon isn't technically a planet, but its energies are calculated (I don't know why) as such.  So, visit the handy dandy web page Lunarium - Planetary Hours and make sure your correct time zone is selected.  Look for Mercury and Moon symbols, and those will be your most favorable times for writing.

I haven't tried this yet, but I'm looking forward to it.