Diana Dru Botsford

I’ve spoken lately at a variety of workshops and discussion groups about trends in Science Fiction (both on the screen and the printed page).   In doing so, I remembered a piece I wrote in my old writing blog a few years back that I undug, reread, and decided was worth bringing into the light of day yet again:

I had promised to discuss the characters of Ken Wharton’s DIVINE INTERVENTION and will do so in this entry. The timing is perfect as I’m knee deep into another book, THE SCIENCE OF SCIENCE FICTION WRITING by SF author and guru James Gunn.  And as much as I have enjoyed Gunn’s book, I am vehemently opposed to his opinion that characters should be relatively flat in science fiction so they don’t get in the way of the story. While I am it, I might as well begin throwing out my thoughts on TIME AND AGAIN by Clifford Simak, as the main character serves as a good counterpoint to DIVINE INTERVENTION’s relatively flat characters.

James Gunn believes that characters in science fiction are “by necessity less rounded and more typical.” He reasons that rounded characters might detract from the effectiveness of science fiction stories. He cites C.S. Lewis’ essay on Science Fiction stating that “the more unusual the scenes and events of his story are, the slighter, the more ordinary, the more typical his persons should be. Hence Gulliver is a commonplace little man and Alice a commonplace little girl. If they had been more remarkable they would have wrecked their books.”

If the only science fiction I had ever read was DIVINE INTERVENTION and TIME AND AGAIN, I would concur that flat characters are the norm. This does not, however, mean flat characters make for great science fiction. And though my first reaction to this reasoning is chalking it up to old versus new styles of science fiction, I can not help but think of some of the greatest science fiction books ever written that fully demonstrate strong, round characters. DUNE (Frank Herbert), 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA (Jules Verne), STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND (Robert Heinlein), FOUNDATION (Isaac Asimov), CITY AND THE STARS (Arthur C. Clarke) and THE SHIP WHO SANG (Anne McCaffrey) are all classic examples of rounded characters that go through tremendous arcs of growth during the course of their plotline.

Readers are humans. Humans are characters. Some of us may be rounder than others; some of us may be rather flat. In the end, however, we are all characters. When we read, we are first and foremost seeking identification with someone (usually the protagonist) who we can join as they journey through a storyline.  The reader consciously (or subconsciously) ‘sinks’ into the main character’s psyche in order to experience the story as it unfolds.

Science Fiction is speculation, true. But is it about the science or, as I perceive it, people’s reaction to the science? If it is the latter, the need for fully rounded characters reacting to the science becomes essential to good storytelling. Hugo award winner James Patrick Kelly, author of Think Like A Dinosaur, supports this argument in his essay “You and Your Characters.”*   He points out that “the science fiction character is the readers’ guide to the ideas of the story. If she doesn’t belong, nobody will trust her; if she isn’t real, no one will believe her.” And if no one believes your character, no one will believe the story. Asking your reader to suspend their disbelief is essential to the storytelling process.

C.S. Lewis’ mentions ALICE IN WONDERLAND as an example of an ordinary character needed in order to explore the non-ordinary: the fantastic world of Wonderland. I can say from personal experience that though this reasoning might have worked with readerships a hundred years ago, it most certainly does not work today. A (few) year(s) ago I was given the task of adapting the book to play form for a regional theatre’s family series. Considering a child’s short attention span (and these days, it would seem that all of humanity is short on this commodity), it was essential that the main character (Alice) offer the audience a means to identify with the story. A plain Alice that never changes, never grows, just wasn’t going to do that. I therefore expanded Alice’s character so that though she started out as a plain Jane who takes life too seriously.  She then learns during the course of her adventures to enjoy make believe, to not take herself so seriously. She learns to laugh. In other words, her character grows out of being flat and into a rounded, credible individual. And because of adding this dimensionality to the character, the other characters of Wonderland became more significant because of their effect upon her.

DIVINE INTERVENTION’s characters are initially promising as round characters. My overall frustration, however, is that the promise(s) are never actualized. Drew Randall, the young boy who due to being deaf is equipped with technology that inadvertently leads him to communicate throughout the book with a techno-life form hybrid that he believes is God, is never allowed (by the author) to form new philosophies out of his discovery that ‘God’ is a life form and not omnipresent as he initially believed. His mother, Katrina, is established as also deaf and previously lost two children due to a plague on Mandala which causes her to be overly protective of her son. She never moves beyond this obsession even though her son proves his ability to survive through civil war and successful interspecies contact. The father, Paul, is a preacher of Science as religion because God wants his worshippers to always seek the truth. The discovery of Drew’s God being a scientific hybrid of another species and technology just further reinforces his beginning belief system. Not one of these main characters is truly affected by the events of the story.

The villains of DIVINE INTERVENTION are equally flat and frustrating. Mandala’s Prime Minister, Alexander Channing, is immediately established as being power hungry. Threatened by impending arrival of another colony ship from Earth, he immediately plots to kill everyone onboard rather than consider the possibilities of sharing power. An understandable and recognizable trait in a villain. But where is the reason for his motivation? And surely he must have some likeable or at least intriguing aspects of character in order to have become as powerful as he has on Mandala.

The author never gives us a peek into this side of the main villain’s character, leaving us with a complete case of predictability from the get-go. And when the character dies, it is barely mentioned in a simple sentence of “Channing was flushed out the airlock.” There is never any final verbal confrontation between our good and bad guys. Never a peek into the psychosis of a twisted mind and therefore never a care about whether the character lives or dies, fails or succeeds. For this reader, it was an incredibly dissatisfying ending to a dissatisfying character. To make matters worse, his main crony Croll is a cartoon cutout whose only passion in life is to beat people up. Been there, done that and the author should really have known better!

Without round characters, DIVINE INTERVENTION provides no reason to care about what the individuals go through. Instead the reader is kept at a distance from their responses to their experiences. Instead the plot serves as the character as it goes through its machinations. The story grows from a normal Earth Colony setup to a young civilization that must deal with civil war and the meaning of God. When the war ends, the combatants make peace, determined to get along in ways they never were able to before. Throughout the book, however, we are never given a glimpse into the affect of these struggles and therefore can not truly identify with the characters experiences, nor learn from them. And the plot itself is not remarkable enough to justify it being the only true round character.

On the flip side, the plot as character technique certainly applies to TIME AND AGAIN by Clifford Simak (another of my contract books). Simak’s style is so pastoral, his settings so deeply and emotionally defined, that Gunn’s argument applies well. Though none of the characters truly learn from their experiences, (with the possible exception of the main character: Ash Sutton), the exploration of what defines humanity versus other species expands greatly, chapter building upon chapter. To this reader it would seem that Simak intended that the reader be the character to grow through the experience. An enviable talent that I believe any writer should attempt to emulate through their storytelling. (More on this in another blog to come).

Ash Sutton’s character is magnificently detailed in terms of reaction and growth to the story as it unfolds. The reader is allowed deeply within the recesses of his mind, encouraged to share in his experiences, his doubts and most importantly his epiphanies. This gives TIME AND AGAIN the ultimate in success as a work of fiction because by having the reader join the main character in exploring profound issues of destiny, humanity and freedom, the reader comes away from an intimate experience of discovery that hopefully leaves an impressionable mark.

TIME AND AGAIN is only 235 pages long and I have to believe that this is why the technique works so well. I am not convinced that story as character could have been sustained in a longer work. There is little opportunity for the reader to ‘take a breath’ in this intense story, to sit back and let the morality play sink its implication in for deep effect. Still, I would have to rate this as one of Simak’s best, with CITY perhaps topping it by only a hair.

To be fair to James Gunn, he does close his section on characters in THE SCIENCE OF SCIENCE FICTION WRITING with an emphasis on how science fiction could be served well by rounder characters. Kinship with the characters, as Gunn points out, is what drives the reader forward, encouraging them to be committed to the storyline.

Considering the authors I’ve read the last few years (Allen Steele, Tobias Buckell, John Scalzi to name a few), as well as seen (particularly in television where the results of writing happen so much faster, e.g. BSG, Sarah Connor, Eureka), I’d say that in the end Gunn was right.  Well rounded characters drive the reader/viewer forward.  If we care, we turn the page.  We watch the next act.  The character’s experience becomes our experience.

More importantly, this is what storytelling should be about:  Touching the reader’s psyche and letting them know… no, you’re not alone.

=====
* You and Your Characters
by James Patrick Kelly
© 1991 by Davis Publications, First published in WRITING SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY, edited by Gardner Dozois, et. al., St. Martin’s Press
http://www.sfwa.org/writing/character.htm

Along with APOLLO making its way through the Film Festival circuit, the film will also get a special showing at the upcoming CONTEXT21 WRITERS’ CONFERENCE. BTW, if you’re within driving distance, the conference is well worth it. Personally, I think it’s the best there is to offer. All egos left at the door. Genuine conversations about the craft of writing. Real human beings discussing real, honest god issues involved with writing speculative fiction.

New trailer, btw - I continue to be in awe of the genius of Bryan Manning (writer/director)and Caleb Copeland (producer):

yeah… this is most definitely where my mind is.  Someone pass the ketchup.

End of semester… Finally. And along the way, I managed to write two book proposals and a sample scene for a prospective publisher.

I forgot how much I love to write.

Does that happen to you? Do you push aside your life’s loves for the inane distractions of day to day?

What motivated me to scribe again was a smack on the head by someone near and dear to me who rightly said:

You only go this way once.

Damn right. Life’s too short.

Yes, I still owe so many posts to this blog but… see that Twitter update from 28 days ago? It’s still my life for at least another week or so. In the meantime…

On Tuesday, June 17^th at 7:30pm, and in cooperation with the Springfield Little Theatre, filmmakers from Missouri State University will showcase four short films at the Landers Theatre including “…Or Not To Be,” “Nothing Rhymes with Orange,” “The Death of Alfred Bailey,” and “Apollo.” The filmmakers’ proceeds from the festival will benefit the Missouri State University’s Digital Film Production Scholarship Fund.

From outright comedy to drama to science fiction, each short highlights the multi-faceted cast & crew talents of the region. Three of the productions are based off award-winning scripts. “The Death of Alfred Bailey” placed in the Broadcast Educators Association (BEA) Media Arts Festival in Las Vegas earlier this year. “Nothing Rhymes with Orange” won for best screenplay at the Missouri Broadcast Educator’s annual competition. The science fiction drama “Apollo,” shot in part at the Landers Theatre, received honorable mention. All four productions were the result of student screenwriting and production work in the Media, Journalism and Film department at Missouri State University.

The Springfield Little Film Festival will also include a short video from The Moxie, Springfield’s downtown cinema devoted to independent and international films. The video highlights The Moxie’s September move to expanded surroundings at the Wilhoit Plaza on Jefferson and Pershing.

Tickets will be $8, General Admission. A moderated Q&A with the filmmakers follows the 2 hour screening. Tickets can be purchased at the Springfield Little Theatre Box Office, online at springfieldlittletheatre.org, or by calling (417) 869-1334.

The films are as follows (in order of screening).

The Death of Alfred Bailey (32 minutes): Comedy.
From the Award winning script by Haile E. Dunstan comes the ironic story of Alfred Bailey, who rethinks is ideas about life, (and death) after a chance meeting with the free spirited Nina.

Starring: Amy Miyamoto, Jake Magnuson, Jerry-Mac Johnston, Allen Marsh, Mason Magruder, Gwynne McCauley
Writer: Haeli Elizabeth Dunstan; Director: Arica Westadt; Producers: Christine Schwader, and Jonathan Stratman; Director of Photography: Marita Tyler; Production Design: Luke Richard and Katie Sale; Sound Design: Isaac Crawford.

++++++++++

NOTHING RHYMES WITH ORANGE (18 minutes):
Drama. Follow an old, orange couch into the homes of three very different women who face problems that free furniture just can’t solve.

Starring: Amy Miyamoto, Rachel Scott, Jonna Volz-Howes
Writer/Director: Rachel Skidmore; Producer: Ashli Hilton; Executive Producers: Mark Biggs, Vonda Yarberry; Director of Photography: Brant Malan; Sound Design: Dalton Jones, Jim Rea;
Original Music: Dave Williams; Production Designer: Jessica Brothers; Editors: Ashli Hilton, Rachel Skidmore.

++++++++++

…Or Not To Be (10 Minutes): Comedy.

A student sets out to create the best movie ever…to the chagrin of her crew.
Starring: Sarah Marples, Marita Tyler, Tony Carlin, Thomas Stubbs, Theresa Friedrick, Samantha Chitwood, Phillip Hartley, Christopher Marples
Writer/Director: Sarah Marples; Director of Photography: Marita Tyler; Costume and Make-Up: Theresa Friedrick; Sound Design: Thomas Stubbs and Samantha Chitwood; Editors: Marita Tyler, Drew Ertle, Samantha Chitwood, Sarah Marples

+++++++++++++

APOLLO (40 minutes): Science Fiction.
In a forgotten city where pollution clouds out the sky, Apollo Sylvan’s dreams haunt his search for sunrise in an abandon theater while his wife, Diana, trades herself for a chance to escape.

Starring: Kenny Kalinowski, Jonna Volz-Howes, Nathan Shelton.
Writer/Director: Bryan Manning; Producer: Caleb Copeland; Executive Producers: Diana Dru Botsford, Mark Biggs; Director of Photography: Clayton Fenwick Mason; Digital Effects: Blaine Morehead; Sound Design/Original Music: Jeffrey Brown; Production Designer: Jessica Brothers; Editors: Caleb Copeland, Bryan Manning.

Some new visuals, new music, great stuff. Enjoy!

My apologies for not posting in a bit — My husband went to California on business and brought me back the flu. More to come later this weekend. I’m currently putting together a new list of favorite fictional characters. This time, Byronic heroes.

I was drifting around the web yesterday and came across a great list of favorite fictional characters. I say great because I’d agreed with most if not all of the choices. I love Tony Stark (aka Iron Man). I’m a nut for Josh Lyman, of course. Thomas Covenant is by far my favorite Fantasy literature character…

But wait! I realized as I reviewed the list that these were all MALE characters. Sure, they’re terrific, but where the heck were the women? There are some extraordinary women characters in fiction — be it literature, television, film or comic books. If the abovementioned list wasn’t going to include them, then someone else needed to…

I decided to pick up the gauntlet myself and so I’ve put together the following list. Some of these choices may seem a bit odd but I should point out ahead of your reading this list that as a child in the 60’s, there wasn’t much in the way of strong female characters in any sort of fiction. Most of them would appear strong at first glance but as their stories progressed, they inevitably ended up wanting to put aside their adventures to marry and have kids.

Come on! Yes, kids are awesome (I have one). Yes, husbands can be nice (I have one of those, too). But life is more than just being defined by such roles. These particular characters proved that in spades as I’ve traveled through the last few decades. And no, it’s not a surprise that most of them come from the realm of SF/F. If I’ve missed one - comment and I’ll add her to the list! So here, without any further ado, is my own list of top ten favorite female characters going from #10 at the top to my #1 at the end:

Dahlia Malloy - (The Ri¢hes, Dmitry Lipkin)
Traveler (aka modern day American Gypsy or Grifter), scam artist, ex-con, mother of three, wife of one really mixed up husband, Minnie Driver’s Dahlia Malloy embodies the search for good amongst the greed and gluttony of modern day ‘Buffer’ society. If you’re not familiar with the series, the Buffers are us regular folk. Commercialism is our religion. As an outsider pretending to be a Buffer, Dahlia’s journey to avoid the land mines of life takes on a clarity we often lose as we claw our way through the day. Sure, she gets seduced by the carrots dangled in front of us — but then she catches herself. Her painful self-examination of what she’s been told to want from life versus what she might really want is as
complex and complicated as our own struggles with the meaning of life. What she really craves is a little bit of truth admist the lies of modern day Buffer life. Who doesn’t?

Warrant Officer Ellen Ripley (Alien, etc.)
Not only did Sigourney Weaver’s female-action heroine herald a breakthrough for tough women, the character’s journey repeatedly explored what gender is all about when you strip away the gloss, the glam and the frills. When the first film came out, I was a freshman at Boston University. While other impressionable Freshmen seemed up in arms about a gun-toting woman as the film’s hero, I remember being confused over all the brouhaha. I didn’t get it. I did (and still) adore the fact that here was a hero who you never forgot was a woman. Her strength didn’t come from being ‘butch’, it came from being true to herself. (Director Ridley Scott’s deft use of Ripley in her underwear at the end of the film is a terrific visual allegory for this sentiment). She cared about her fellow crewmates, recognized the value of life over company greed, and most importantly, listened to her inner instincts. Sure, those qualities can be assigned to male heroes as well but not with the honesty and grace with which Ripley fought to protect her own.

Dr. Jean Grey aka Marvel Girl/Phoenix (Marvel Comics’ X-Men)
Forget the films. As much as I loved the first two, Famke Janssen’s portrayal just didn’t do anything for me. Not like the comic book series. I was still in diapers when Jean (and the X-Men series) came to life in 1963 debut but by the time I hit my teens, Marvel Girl’s role had come to the forefront. I devoured each issue that explored her struggle to do the right thing, while her powers got the better of her. Somewhere in my hormone-crazed brain was a need to identify with a fictional character who not only had red hair like myself, but more importantly, was an allegory for the mixed-up feelings that teenage-hood provides. Jean remained a favorite character of mine through undergrad college and I seem to have a distant memory of crying my eyes out when she died. It’s amazing how a fictional character can be so real in our hearts and minds, huh?

Red Sonja
(Ace Books, David C. Smith and Richard L. Tierney , 1981 to 1983)
Yes - I know that Robert E Howard ‘originated’ the character as a gun-slinging warrior woman of Polish-Ukrainan origin in his story, The Shadow of the Vulture. Yes - I know about the Marvel comic book series. And please, don’t even mention the horrific 1985 film. Just the thought of it makes me cringe. So why is she in my top ten? The six novels penned by Smith and Tierney, that’s why. Finally, a strong warrior woman who did NOT want to put her sword down once she met the right man. Maybe that doesn’t sound like a big deal today but in the early ’80’s, it was an extraordinary concept. Women want men and babies, right? Nope, and they don’t need to be men-haters either. Smith and Tierney imbued in Sonja a thirst for adventure that was gender-less. Again, not a big deal by today’s standards but in the early ’80’s? Unthinkable.

Lessa, Benden Weyrwoman of the Ruatha Reaches
(Dragonriders of Pern, Anne McCaffrey)
As a young girl, Lessa had the smarts and survival instinct to camouflage her real identity when her hold was overtaken by a tyrannical, bloodthirsty maniac. Though short-tempered, the tenacity that kept her alive as a child also fueled her drive when she leapt into the past to save her world. A dangerous undertaking that she not only survived but without ever being portrayed as a martyr. That wasn’t what she was about — there was a task to do and she did it, never giving thought to the jeopardy she placed herself in. I know some women have trouble with this series and in particular this character — some protesting her lack of attention to her son, others objecting to the way her husband had to ‘re-train’ her to not use her psychic powers to control others. I’m afraid those issues go over my head as I can’t help but be fond of this character’s drive to protect her world.

Zoe Alleyne Washburne, (Firefly/Serenity, Joss Whedon)
Besides the fact that she’s a damned good shot, I can’t help but love Zoe’s no-nonsense approach to her life as ‘office wife’ to Captain Reynolds while nurturing her real life marriage to Wash. Sure, her husband had jealousy issues at times, but Zoe clearly balanced the two without question. There’s plenty to applaud Whedon for when it comes to his treatment of women characters, but for me, Zoe is a clear demonstration of how women CAN have strong partnerships/friendships with men without jeopardizing their marriages. I also vastly enjoyed (and envied!) her ability to stay calm in dangerous situations. Cool headed with a steady head and heart. The few times she did get pissed, Zoe was a force to be reckoned with! You have to wonder how much Gina Torres brought to the role and how much was thanks to Joss Whedon’s writing.

Press Secretary/Chief-of-Staff CJ Cregg
(The West Wing, Aaron Sorkin)
Loosely based on Dee Dee Myers, the first real-life woman White House Press Secretary, CJ’s patriotism always came before politics. Or a personal life. Her character served as a moral compass, a reminder to the rest of the President’s senior advisors of why they were there in the first place: to serve their country, not play proverbial football with the DNC/GOP’s eternal battle of wits. Smart, funny, sure. But it was CJ’s struggles to be heard admist the all-male inner circle without selling out her own core beliefs that made me admire her the most. Been there, done that and yes — struggle is definitely the word to reach for. I know there’s an element out there that thinks Sorkin wrote demeaning women. I’m afraid I’m not one of them — I stood in CJ’s shoes when I was an exec in the entertainment industry. One woman in a room of male suits is not easily taken serious. Allison Janney’s complex performance as CJ demonstrates how a woman can maintain her identity while succeeding at the highest and most competitive levels. But please, don’t think she was a saint. CJ could banter with the best of them — especially Josh Lyman. My favorite bit:

Josh Lyman: You know what, CJ? I really think I’m the best judge of what I mean, you paranoid Berkeley shiksa feminista… Wow, that was way too far.

C.J. Cregg: No. No. Well, I’ve got a staff meeting to go to and so do you, you elitist, Harvard, fascist, missed-the-dean’s-list-two-semesters-in-a-row Yankee jackass.

Josh Lyman: Feel better getting that off your chest there, C.J.?

C.J. Cregg: I’m a whole new woman.

Teenage Sleuth Veronica Mars (Veronica Mars, Rob Thomas)
When I first scratched out this list, a friend asked me why Veronica Mars made the top 10 but Buffy didn’t. I had two very specific reasons:

1) Buffy used her special powers, Veronica used her brain. Sure, they both had sharp tongues but while Buffy’s banter came out of a sense of bravado and superiority, Veronica’s insights provided genuine social commentary. While Buffy fought physical demons, Veronica fought not only her own personal demons but those of her classmates as well. She’d stop at nothing to get at the truth, not even caring if it affected how others perceived her.

2) Buffy whined. Veronica got even. When things got tough for Buffy, she’d sit around and moan about it. Veronica fueled her anger toward the elitist hateful peers in her school into working with her father at his private detective agency…

And yeah, the third reason I adore Veronica is the collaborative relationship she had with her dad. She ‘got’ how important her father was to her and no line said it better than when she compared her dad (Keith) to her absent drunk mom:

Keith: It’s just that I never want you to think your mom’s the villain in all this.

Veronica: Isn’t she?

Keith: No, it’s not that simple.

Veronica: Yeah, it is. The hero is the one that stays and the villain is the one that splits.

Keith: I don’t think that’s a healthy perspective.

Veronica: It’s healthier than me pining away everyday, praying she’ll come home.

Marguerida Alton (Marion Zimmer Bradley’s Darkover series)
The Darkover series is filled with strong women (Magda Lorne, Camilla n’ha Kyria, Cleindori Ardais) but the one that stands out the most for me is Marguerida. Though born on Darkover, she’s the classic ‘outsider’ as she spent most of her time off-planet unaware of her real heritage and her psychic powers. Thrust back into Darkoven society, she struggles to balance what she knows from her life amongst Terran intellects with the more tenuous facts of Darkover — a planet that relies on realms beyond the classic 5 senses. Alot of times, her temper gets the better of her and that in itself makes her more real. And therefore easy to relate to. I’ll admit that part of the reason I appreciate her character so strongly is because her father (Lew Alton) is my all time favorite Darkoven. Plus, she’s a redhead (hey, we take our role models where we can get them!). But that said, Marguerida’s stubbornness combined with her efforts to merge what’s best of both Terra and Darkover, makes her a repeatedly fascinating character for me. If you haven’t seen a pattern here yet, I’ll spell it out: I like stubborn, strong women who make up their own minds in their own time and place. (Side note: It’s too bad that as she grew old in the later novels, she became more placid).

And My #1 Favorite Fictional Female:
Lieutenant Commander Jadzia Dax (Star Trek: Deep Space 9)
Don’t everyone scream at once. If you’ve got a different choice for who you think is the best female fiction character, go make your own list. My reasons for Jadzia are as varied as her eight lives of experience. What a great concept for an alien. She’s experience so much as a joined Trill yet still takes delight in discovery, romantic pursuits, and most importantly, in friendship. Played by Terry Farrell,
the character took as much relish from a scientific anomaly as she did from defending her Klingon warrior friends while overtaking the Albino’s fortress. She had a ferocious appetite for life. A relaxed sense of humor. But it was her obvious sense of joy over new discoveries that I enjoyed about her the best. That and her fierce loyalty to her friends. Plus hey, marrying a Klingon is kinda cool, but no, becoming ‘Mrs. Worf’ didn’t subdue her. If anything, Jadzia became even feister once she married, taking great relish in arguing with her husband.

Runner Up’s:

Nashara from Tobias Buckell’s Ragamuffin

Abigail Bartlet from Aaron Sorkin’s West Wing

Killashandra Rhee from Anne McCaffrey’s Crystal Singer series

Friday from Robert Heinlein’s Friday (WHY hasn’t this been made into a film or tv series?)

Fred/Illyria from Joss Whedon’s Angel

Agent 355 from Brian Vaughn’s most excellent comic series: Y, Last Man

Dr. Temperance Brennan from Hart Hanson’s Bones (”Just because I have breasts doesn’t mean I have magical powers over infants.”)

Sarah Connor from the Sarah Connor Chronicles (A much more believable woman character than the films)

Det. Grace Hanadarko from Saving Grace with Holly Hunter (Talk about a tormented
character in need of redemption! Move over Starbuck)

Starbuck, President Roslin from the reimagined Battlestar Galactica

Leta from the Tom Baker version of Dr Who

Valeria, Queen of the Thieves from the 1st Conan film(written by Oliver Stone — what a great line: “Do you want to live forever?”)

Witness the amazing results of my students.

The film is entitled, APOLLO. The genre, Science Fiction. Though the external conflict surrounds a post-apocalyptic Earth where the sun no longer shines, the real story involves a couple’s struggles to reconnect.

Here’s the trailer - tell me what you think:

I am proud to say that I had a small hand in the creation of this piece of art as Executive Producer.

What better way to kick off the new and improved website than with a little touch of Eureka!

Thanks to the efforts of Eureka’s Executive Producer Jaime Paglia, Co-Exec Bruce Miller and staff writers Eric Wallace (the definite shining hero who made this all possible - check out his blog when you get a moment!) and Nick Wauters, I was able to bring a little bit of Hollywood to my screenwriting students.

On April 2nd, we each hunkered around our ‘puters to gleam a bit of wisdom from this team of whimsical writers. A great experience for all those involved. Its amazing how much of writing translates to whatever medium you work in. The talk about B story and how it needs to eventually connect to and shore up the A plot. They talked about daring to suck. They talked about doing most of your writing AWAY from the computer… in your head as you do other things so that when you sit down at the computer, it just spills out on to the page already thought out.

If you’re interested in listening to the audio file (thanks to an audio patch between my IPhone, a cheap PC microphone and Adobe Connect), I’ve uploaded it as a zipped MP3 file. Thanks to Brendan Schmidt (one of my students), I’ve also uploaded a page that’s not an actual literal transcript - more a piecing together of the different discussion threads explored during the chat.

Bonus: The Eureka gang posted pix of themselves ‘chatting’ on their blog, Eureka Unscripted. Look in their archives for ‘A LITTLE BIT OF “EUREKA” IN… SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI.’

For those not familiar with the series, think Northern Exposure meets X-Files. I show the pilot each semester in my Teleplay Writing class as an example of how pilots get made. As I usually show it in the first few weeks of the semester, inevitably two or three students always pick the series for their spec script. The third season of Eureka starts back up this July (this ‘waiting between seasons’ thing can make you crazy if you’re a fan of the show). Funny, witty, oftentimes poignant, Eureka is definitely one of the better series around right now. It’s not often you get a show that not only encourages you to think, but allows you to actually care about its characters.

Plus, who can’t admire a group of writers so willing to reach out to students all over?