Nick Bryan

BLOG

How To Review Stuff

by

Come on, this post was at least a 7...

As a brief scan of this blog will reveal, I write a lot of reviews. It has now reached the stage where I can formulate a review of a TV show (or other things, but often TV) in a very short space of time.

So, since it’s something I have been asked for advice on, I figured the art of reviewing warrants a blog post. How do I assess stuff? Is there a technique, or do I just splurge?

And yes, some of this will be specific to reviewing TV shows, as that is my area.

How much synopsis?

This is fundamental, and the main thing that annoys me when I read some online reviews: do we need an epic, blow-by-blow description of the entire story? Isn’t that what Wikipedia’s for? If your article is headed “recap”, fair enough, but if your “review” is a painstaking description of the story, with a few words of opinion at the end, that seems bad form.

Of course, do mention plot points when you have an opinion to give about them, but synopsis without opinion is like a sheep with no wool or meat – cold and unappetising. (Or something.)

How much spoiler?

Spoiler use, however, is more personal preference. For TV reviews, especially episodes which aren’t the very first, I tend to write for an audience who have already seen it. So, yes, full spoilers in effect, complete with a warning.

On the other hand, for books or films, the audience might be reading your review for purchasing recommendations. So I avoid spoilers, especially last-third ending spoilers, and when I do give them, they’re clearly labelled or really vague.

But to be honest, there’s not a “right” answer here. Still, worth thinking about before ploughing ahead gleefully.

How much moaning?

How negative to go is another big question, and I could easily do a whole post on this alone. One day, I still might. But in general: there is a lot of negativity on the internet, because, hell, it’s easy to be snide. I try not to review things I know I’ll hate, because I don’t think the rage of someone who would never have liked the show in the first place is useful.

Case in point: over the last few years, various internet people tried to cover The X Factor. We mostly did this, to be honest, because others were doing it and seemed to be getting attention. Many of these faded away, and the ones that did well and thrived were write-ups like Stuart Heritage’s Guardian pieces which, yes, were glib and jokey, but still genuinely enjoyed X Factor when it was getting things right.

Hence why me writing about The X Factor was pointless, but I let myself give often-negative reviews to Sky1’s Sinbad, because although it wasn’t a great show, it was in my wheelhouse – family-aimed fantasy drama, yes, I’ve reviewed that. I truly wanted Sinbad to be good, I’m always happy for decent shows in that genre, and I made sure to acknowledge when it had a strong week.

In short, decent reviewing should come from a place of wanting to be positive. Grumpy, well-known reviewin’ misanthropes like Yahtzee Croshaw of Zero Punctuation and Charlie Brooker may overplay minor annoyances for comic effect, but they also tell you emphatically when they’ve found something they like, and that’s a major reason they have credibility.

There are other things I could write about, like structuring your reviews (try to structure by point, storyline or theme, as opposed to banging through in story order), but I’ve covered my main issues, really. And now you too could become a well known reviewer of TV shows online! (We’re looking for people on The Digital Fix TV site if you want to have a go. Email me. Self-service ends.)

As ever, add your own advice below, or tell me I’m talking complete arse. And obviously, like all my reviews, the above is just my personal opinion. Now, I’m off to review Black Mirror.

#FridayFlash – “Gravestones”

by

For the first time on this new site – in fact, based on a glance at the archive, the first time in over six months – it’s time for a Friday story. No preamble, I’ll just get down to it.

You can see more stories by other writers on the Friday Flash website, or join in yourself. Any comments on the below always welcome.

Gravestones

My name is Sam and I hang around in the local graveyard.

And after a while, you memorise a few stones, not the bigger ones. I avoid them, they get enough attention.

Besides, the huge monuments are obviously someone rich, and we all know what it’s like to be rich. They cast a shadow over the smaller ones and I lie in the grass, not letting the shadow catch me. Sometimes I move to be sure. I’ve never met them, but I hate them.

The little ones, though – they’re more interesting. Why bother asking why Mr Richard Parker (1901-1966) wanted an angel over his dead body, yet Mrs Louisa Parker (1897-1988) chose flowers? I don’t even care if they were married.

But why choose a thin stone, like Miss Karen Stone (1930-1967), or a fat one like Mr John Cale (1944-1990)? Green and long, like Mr Henry Armstrong (1940-2003)? Does that mean they were tall or thin or fat or green themselves?

Obvious is boring, or just miserable, like Maisie Wilson (2004). I don’t want to imagine that. I want a world of people to think about, all rising and falling with their stones. Not talking to them, I don’t talk to gravestones, that would be silly, they wouldn’t reply. I get enough of that at school.

I come here because it’s interesting and you can get under their skin. It’s like people-watching, only they can’t see you. I tried to explain this to Anna once, but she just said it was boring. Not stupid or crazy or anything, just boring. I’d have preferred crazy.

After a while, I realised why huge wartime graveyards with hundreds of identical crosses (1894-1914) are so depressing – it’s because they’re so the same. All individuality sucked out, reducing all these people to nothing but the way they died. If I ever joined the army, I’d start a will before I went, just to stop that happening to me.

I’ve thought about my own gravestone a lot since I started coming here. I think it would be small, I’d want it to be small. It would appear ordinary at first glance, but unfold amazing details if you took a proper look at it.

I have this dream, but I don’t know what the details would be yet. If I died tomorrow, I’m not sure what would happen.

Zero Dark Thirty – Some Dark Thoughtys

by

Jessica Chastain in Zero Dark Thirty - GOOD AT ACTING

I don’t often review films –not really my medium, and my opinions are usually in line with the consensus anyway. For example, I saw Django Unchained, thought it was fun and surprisingly emotional for Tarantino, much like everyone else.

But I recently experienced Zero Dark Thirty, and honestly, the reviews I’ve read didn’t entirely capture my opinion of it. So here I am, throwing my slightly contrary hat into the ring. Disagreements welcome.

Torture & Jessica Chastain’s Acting – Are Both Good?

Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t going to be a brutal flaying of the movie, I thought the first 50-60% were great. Despite the inevitability of the end, I enjoyed the search, the highs and lows, Jessica Chastain was as brilliant as everyone says in the lead role of Maya, and she’d totally deserve that Oscar.

I liked how we slowly warmed up to the character despite both her prickly nature and the few off-duty scenes. And as many have said before, there are some genuine ethical questions raised. We spend time with the CIA agents, seeing torture in action to gain crucial intel, and then Obama appears and starts declaring it shall never happen again. You can feel their dilemma, and feel guilty for sharing it at the same time – it’s intriguing work.

Oh, and the scenes on the ground in Pakistan, as Maya and her colleagues hunt down Bin Laden’s hideout, are stunning work considering they’re basically just some people driving around. It’s like a car chase, only realistic. As an investigation process movie, this part was brilliant.

Kneel Before The Almighty BUT

And now, the BUT.  The last hour or so of Zero Dark Thirty didn’t really work for me. The Maya character, who I was starting to really like, gets marginalised and most of the action shifts from espionage drama to bureaucracy, which means loads of men yelling at each other.

Yes, one of them was Captain Jack from Torchwood, but even that only made me giggle for a few seconds. The first chunk of the movie was exciting enough for me to forgive already knowing the ending, the second… less so. I basically sat there waiting for them to take that damn house.

When the raid finally happened, it was an exciting sequence, but by then I was already a little bored. I’ve heard anecdotal points about the film being on the verge of shooting when Bin Laden was killed, leading to extreme rewrites, and that could be one reason why the ending seemed odd.

Anyway. Lovely storytelling, good acting, still glad I saw it, but shame I emerged disillusioned with the climax. Have you seen Zero Dark Thirty? Do you agree with me, or am I talking gibber?

Take Three! – How Many Manuscript Restarts Is Too Many?

by

GOOD BETTER BEST NEVER LET IT REST

I am currently taking my third swing at the same novel idea. This one started as a short story during 2011, before I promoted it to novel status for NaNo 2012.And now, having written 25,000 words back then, I’m rewriting most of it yet again.

Three starts on the same story. My impatient younger self would’ve told me to give up and try something else by now. Does he have a point?

I’ve isolated three factors to blame for this third restart – oh yes, synchronicity. Let’s list them.

Editing – Almost Not Boring

Despite often struggling with editing, I’ve found it weirdly satisfying to usher this story into its better form. It helps that I’m not scrapping the previous version entirely (although I’m rewriting or refocusing almost all the text), thus avoiding blank page terror.

Of course, I could have forged on and written the newer version from where I’d reached, without bothering to change the beginning, if not for the second factor…

Sequence – Almost Not Necessary

I’m told learning to love editing is a big maturing step for a writer, and I’m getting there. For my next trick, I’d like to learn to write out of sequence. Currently, writing the last 75% of a draft whilst the first quarter contradicts it seems totally alien to me.I mean, why bother? I’m going to make so many changes, most stretching back to the start, so if I don’t sit down and edit those early scenes, I won’t know what to reference and will probably end up re-re-rewriting the later parts. I know a few writers who work out of order, and maybe one day I’ll understand them.

The Matrix – Can You Relate To A Spoon?

Finally, the influence of that Scarlett Thomas writing manual I reviewed a few weeks back. She had a lot to say about planning and structure, and it did get me thinking. I filled in the matrix she provided, mostly out of curiosity, and it did give me some new ideas. (If you’re curious, you can download it from her website here. Whether it’ll be much use without the context of the book, I’m not sure.)

In fact, even though I wasn’t entirely agreeing with her focus on “writing what you know”, it sums up many of the changes I’ve made. Making the lead character more relatable, grounding the whole thing more, hopefully holding my interest more.

So, all of those things happened, and now I’m on my third restart of the same novel. Will there be a fourth? Should there be a fourth? At what point do you give up? How many times have you restarted your projects? Did you do it for any of the same reasons? Am I trapped in an eternal loop? Thoughts welcome.

Turning Writing Into A Game – When Do I Win?

by

I will settle for the kettle.If you enjoy the nausea-inducing November writing challenge of NaNoWriMo, maybe you’ve found yourself wanting to find other ways to turn writing into a game. Myself and a friend, both living in the Nunhead region of London at the time, once attempted a second 50k writing challenge in the month of March, under the name “NunheadWriMo”.

You may laugh, but it kinda works with the abbreviation. Without a forum to motivate us, we pushed each other by exchanging trash talk on MSN. For those of you without a kindhearted friend to hurl verbal abuse, though, how can you keep “winning” at writing?

Well, if a daily target and willpower aren’t enough, here are some other incentive schemes.

Camp NaNoWriMo – If It Ain’t Broke, Start It Up Again

Sensing an appetite for NonNovNaNo, the NaNoWriMo people have started Camp NaNoWriMo, where you can link up with other like-minded people to support each other through a 50k push outside of November.

There’s also some hut-based system that I don’t really understand, because they love that camping metaphor. Hopefully next feature is a campfire to burn unwanted writing. But anyway, 1667 a day is quite a lot, so let’s check out less masochistic targets.

750words.com – When 500 Is Too Little, But 1000 Is Too Much

The idea here is that you do 750 words a day, come rain or shine, and the website at 750words.com keeps track of them for you. This is based on a similar exercise called “Morning Pages” where you churn out a few pages of typing every morning, simply to get the writing muscles working.

So your 750 words could be journal dream-writey stuff, or they could be the mid-length building blocks of your novel. Personally, I have to do a thousand a day before I can relax, but 750 is pleasantly unintimidating, I can see the appeal.

Word Count Game – I Can’t Help It, I Have To Beat My Friends

If you want both the doable word counts of 750words and the satisfying friend-killing of NaNo, I’ve recently started playing a word count game with my writing accomplices Alastair and Claire. The aim here is to reward consistency as much as word counts –do at least 250 words a day, and you get daily points for your unbroken run of productive days (1 on your first day, 2 on your second, etc), plus points each day for words written (250 words = 1 points, 500 words = 2 points, 1000 words = 3 points, 2000 words = 4 points).

So producing intermittent huge amounts actually gets you less points than building up a long chain of days. It’s an interesting game, and 250 is definitely an achievable amount – it’s pretty small, in fact – I have to stop myself from clocking out after doing it. Still, this is the method I’m currently using to make myself write – the prospect of “beating” my two friends. (Currently boosting my points for said game by writing about it, and winning by 12 points as of this post, so feeling good.)

If you want to join this game, there’s a spreadsheet obtainable here. We’ve made our own copy and shared it between the three of us, rather than joining the communal pile-on. You may wish to do the same with your friends.

Has turning your writing into a game worked for you? Is there another scheme that has proven useful? Or does this kinda stuff cheapen the artform somehow? Thoughts welcome.

Monkeys with Typewriters by Scarlett Thomas – Timely Book Review

by

Scarlett Thomas - Monkeys With Typewriters

Monkeys With Typewriters by Scarlett Thomas came out in October 2012, making this less untimely than most of my book reviews, and features the popular novelist and creative writing lecturer setting down, in a mere 400 pages (plus footnotes and appendices), her secrets to good writing.

There are, you may have noticed, a lot of books on writing out there. So, as someone who has already done a whole Masters on the subject, did I get anything extra out of Thomas’s contribution to the genre? Well, yes and no.

Part One: Shall I Kill Them And When?

Broadly, this book splits into two sections: one on how to structure a novel, another covering the nuts and bolts of writing it. The first of these is the more interesting – Thomas has a lot to say about story structure and plotting, her feelings on “basic plots”, etc.

You might get more out of this if you work in a genre similar to her – fictional novel, probably literary. For any story, though, if you’re struggling to crystallise your ideas into a story shape, this book provides a thorough exploration, including tables and the like.

There are sections where Thomas spends ages picking apart concepts, rather than ploughing ahead; I also don’t really agree with her about writing strictly “from experience” (and I’m not even a hard fantasy or sci-fi writer). Still, if you want to learn broad story shapes before playing with them, this is interesting foundation stuff, especially as my particular creative writing MA didn’t go into this material in such detail.

Part Two: How Do I Make Their Deaths Beautiful?

The second part, rattling through such piffling items as “sentences” and “characterisation”, isn’t quite as strong, and considering how fast we skip through such large ideas, I’m not sure Thomas is as interested in these aspects. The back half’s still worth a skim, and if you’ve never read any writing books/advice before, you’ll get more from it. But yes, for those of us who have reached the point of starting blogs about writing or doing an MA, a lot of this might sound familiar.

Still, Monkeys With Typewriters gave me a lot to think about in terms of broader plotting and working with themes, I may even try a few of her matrices. I don’t know if this is a single writing book to live by, exactly, but as a solid introduction, it’s intriguing.

Also, if you’re a huge fan of Scarlett Thomas and want an insight into her process, this book is obviously great. But if you fall into that category, you’ve probably already bought it.So, anyone else read this? Did it redefine your writing process?